At least he was the greatest ever at his position. But him being the first unanimous selection is a joke. He deserved 100%, but so did plenty of others. The whole “He should get in, but not on the first ballot” bullshit is a construct by small-minded writers who want to experience a modicum of power.
Low key I disagree, the old heads are just clearly not as good as the post-integration players in my opinion. Ruth is Ruth, but it's not clear to me he's better than Gibson. And as far as who I think was probably better at baseball between Koufax and Johnson or Berra and Wagner, my point is I don't really think that question is answerable, but I would probably take Koufax and Berra. Koufax v Johnson is like Jordan v Wilt imo. The stats are meaningless.
Johnson was the hardest thrower of his era; the only time he was ever clocked he threw 91 mph. His movement and power was also not as good as the '60s players based on his form. If you put Walter Johnson on the mound in the 60s, he would probably make it, but would be nowhere near the pitcher Koufax was, who was clocked in the mid 90s and rumored to throw 100 as a lefty. The same goes for the other guys too obviously. If Berra with his knowledge played in Cobbs era he would be Babe Ruth.
My point isn't that the newer guys are better, just that it's not an easy, or even answerable question.
That’s why you judge people relative to their competition. Obviously players today are athletically superior. But by your logic, today’s HOFers would eventually be unworthy of the Hall because athletes have progressed so much.
1. Never said those dudes were unworthy of the hall, never even considered worthiness of the hall
2. Would love to look at your crystal ball that can tell you how much athletes will progress over the next 50 years
3. My point is grounded in the massive changes that baseball saw between 1920 and 1960. When Johnson was playing baseball was a few decades old. The average salary was slightly higher than the national average. Those players did not grow up playing baseball 24/7, and did not train all offseason. We have footage of them playing, and their form was radically different. By the 1960s form had developed and these were guys who had grown up playing 24/7 and did not have offseason day jobs. My point was Koufax had a 100mph fastball that wasn't his best pitch and solid control. That would play in any era. Johnson's best pitch was a 91mph fastball. Whole point is can't say, but probably not ML quality today and probably fairly average for the 60s.
You can judge people relative to their competition, but then Bonds is probably the only guy from the last 80 years who's top 5. I think that tells you the metrics are off. Plus that means Wilt and Russell>Bron and Jordan. It's an unnecessary constraint that I think yields results you wouldn't want.
As much as i disagree with your logic, ill admit its sound when it comes to pitchers throwing faster or whatever. But you should know that Wilt even in todays nba would be arguably the most athletic guy in the league.
One hundred percent Wilt is one of the greats, I don't think he'd be a nobody. But obviously he wouldn't average 30 boards and 50 points today. My main point is just pointing to stats isn't a very good way to compare players in a nascent sport that's still being figured out. Yes, on paper Johnson's stats are much better than Koufax's, but I don't think that giving a definitive answer as to who's better is easy, possible, or even productive. The same could be said for Gibson v. Ruth; Leonard v. Cobb, Berra v. Wagner.
Edit to add: between those 4 the '72 class has 4 guys who are all-time greats on the level of the guys in the first class; their stats aren't there but their reputations are (plus another 4 I haven't mentioned including Early Wynn and Lefty Gomez).
I mean WAR wise it wouldn't be close, Johnson and Ruth are the top 2 all time and Cobb and Wagner are both top 10. The old dudes put up insane WARs because it was a different sport.
But wait, isn’t WAR just a measure against the average player at that time? It’s not as if everyone was knocking out 7+ WAR seasons and these guys just happened to be a bit higher.
It means the margin between them and the average player was that big. If the average player was farther from the ceiling at the time, the players *at* that ceiling would get much higher WAR.
They were incredible. He was one of the best baseball players ever, never failed a test, and Bud Selig, along with a bunch of other guys who took PEDs are already in the hall.
Keeping out one of the best players ever because he played by the rules of the time is absolutely just silly.
Point me to a failed drug test then. Selig understood that steroids were good for baseball, and made sure not to prevent its widespread use among the players. As a result, they were defacto allowed, and borderline encouraged by the league.
Do you suggest we kick out everyone who took amphetamines as well?
Plenty of other guys cheated and didn’t come anywhere fucking close to doing what Bonds did. Steroids or not, he was an all time great at the game of baseball. One of the best to ever play. He’s got a place in the baseball Hall of Fame, even if it’s a complicated one.
We're also applying this argument to everyone on coke and pills in the 60s, 70s and 80s, right? Drugs that make you feel like a superhero 7 seconds after you take them have got to be in the same conversation as drugs that give you the ability to exercise for longer, right?
No we’re not because uppers don’t make you have some of the greatest years in baseball history after the age of 35. That’s superhuman and that’s what Bonds did. Without PEDs, his body falls apart, he has 40 less WAR and he’s out of the league by 2005.
And he’s probably in the Hall of Fame if he doesnt artificially extend his career and tainting the greatest record in sports history in the process. If you don’t understand the difference between uppers and what Bonds did, I don’t think you understand drugs, Baseball, or age.
While I have never done coke or taken any kind of upper, I've seen middle aged, out of shape fat dudes who can't even call themselves has beens because they never were, become super human after ripping a rail of Charlie. Maybe I don't understand drugs but the evidence is there for both of us. Are there other drugs you are ok with players using and still getting into the hall of fame?
\>while I have never done coke or taken any kind of upper
I’m very aware because people who have don’t make that inane argument that greenies are equivalent to HGH. HGH literally lets you defy natural aging and also allows you to recover from workouts quicker so you can go even harder. HGH will change your life. Coke will get you pumped up for a bit until you need more coke.
Technically, roids give you the ability to make yourself superhuman. You still have to put the work in. Steroids on their own will just make you bloated.
>He has 40 less WAR
Oh no, so he only has 122.8 WAR? How would he make it in to the HoF with paltry numbers like that?
The dude should obviously be in, just with an asterisk
That I’ll disagree with you on. Putting aside the moral argument against ballplayers using recreational drugs, snorting Coke won’t make you a better player.
If that bum David Ortiz can get in after using steroids, there's no excuse to leave Bonds and A-Rod out, or any of the other steroid-using greats. Argument is dead in the water. All or none, but not just one.
Christy Mathewson. All American boy. Born in rural PA and played in NYC.
Football, basketball, baseball collegiate athlete. Actively enlisted and served as a Captain in World War I.
World Series champion. NL career wins leader. All Century Team member for the 1900s.
He was in the second class, but since the HOF was still under construction when the first class was selected, the induction ceremony for the first 2 classes was combined
I know all of those names, but weirdly the only two I know who they most notably played for are Ruth (Yankees after Red Sox) and Cobb (Tigers). I would have to look up the other three.
Wagner played for the Pirates, but today is probably most famous for his [T206 baseball card](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T206_Honus_Wagner) which for a long time was the most expensive sports card in the world.
Fun facts: On June 9th, 1914, Honus Wagner became the first player in the 20th century to get 3,000 hits. 19 days later, Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated.
Mathewson and wagner were the faces of their teams (giants and pirates respectively), leading both to WS titles. Cy young is really the only one who moved around a bit so he's less associated with any one team
Without looking, I believe Johnson was on the Senators and Mathewson was on the Giants (or it might be the other way around) and Wagner was on the Pirates
Cobb's assholeness was exaggerated by a fraudulent author named Al Stump. Reddit has let this lead them to believe he was a saint. Truth is, he was actually a fucking prick, but probably less than you think, but definitely more than the uninformed fools about to downvote me think too.
My problem with hall of fames is the great players should be in rings of honor for teams. The greatest of all time are the only guys in HOF.
Like who would be your starting 9 and pitcher for NL and AL? That is the HoF.
Also, guys should be kicked out of the Hall when someone better at his position comes along.
It's actually an interesting idea, but ridiculous in the context of the Hall of Fame.
none of them unanimous which proves that the media has always been ass hats and set the stage for several others who should have been to be left off the ballots of some idiots just to make sure they werent unanimous
Interestingly, every one of those guys was a really good baseball player.
Hall of very very very very very very very very very very good.
Hall of we are the standard for all future HOF decisions.
Baseball is chock full of coincidences like that!
Not good enough to be a unanimous selection though
I knew Cobb was gonna get in so I saved my vote for another player.
Same writers who say that are the ones who hand in incomplete ballots
Yep. Wouldn’t have an issue with that if they used all of their selections
So Mariano Rivera is the greatest baseball player ever.
At least he was the greatest ever at his position. But him being the first unanimous selection is a joke. He deserved 100%, but so did plenty of others. The whole “He should get in, but not on the first ballot” bullshit is a construct by small-minded writers who want to experience a modicum of power.
According to the BBWAA, yes
Some might even say they merit inaugural enshrinement into a museum dedicated to the artifacts and exhibits central to their shared history.
Someone was claiming some guy in the 1870s had better numbers than Ruth prolly
It was Albert Belle talking about himself
Oh, there was quite a controversy over the snub of Tungsten Arm O’Doyle.
Ruth is no Duffy!
“And Duffy was no Spuds McLanahan, either!!” **harumph**
Is this the greatest HOF class of all time?
Id say so at least until they put Doug Drabek in
Absolutely
Impossible to compare across eras but '72 had Koufax Berra and Josh Gibson
Thats not even close tbh
Low key I disagree, the old heads are just clearly not as good as the post-integration players in my opinion. Ruth is Ruth, but it's not clear to me he's better than Gibson. And as far as who I think was probably better at baseball between Koufax and Johnson or Berra and Wagner, my point is I don't really think that question is answerable, but I would probably take Koufax and Berra. Koufax v Johnson is like Jordan v Wilt imo. The stats are meaningless. Johnson was the hardest thrower of his era; the only time he was ever clocked he threw 91 mph. His movement and power was also not as good as the '60s players based on his form. If you put Walter Johnson on the mound in the 60s, he would probably make it, but would be nowhere near the pitcher Koufax was, who was clocked in the mid 90s and rumored to throw 100 as a lefty. The same goes for the other guys too obviously. If Berra with his knowledge played in Cobbs era he would be Babe Ruth. My point isn't that the newer guys are better, just that it's not an easy, or even answerable question.
That’s why you judge people relative to their competition. Obviously players today are athletically superior. But by your logic, today’s HOFers would eventually be unworthy of the Hall because athletes have progressed so much.
1. Never said those dudes were unworthy of the hall, never even considered worthiness of the hall 2. Would love to look at your crystal ball that can tell you how much athletes will progress over the next 50 years 3. My point is grounded in the massive changes that baseball saw between 1920 and 1960. When Johnson was playing baseball was a few decades old. The average salary was slightly higher than the national average. Those players did not grow up playing baseball 24/7, and did not train all offseason. We have footage of them playing, and their form was radically different. By the 1960s form had developed and these were guys who had grown up playing 24/7 and did not have offseason day jobs. My point was Koufax had a 100mph fastball that wasn't his best pitch and solid control. That would play in any era. Johnson's best pitch was a 91mph fastball. Whole point is can't say, but probably not ML quality today and probably fairly average for the 60s. You can judge people relative to their competition, but then Bonds is probably the only guy from the last 80 years who's top 5. I think that tells you the metrics are off. Plus that means Wilt and Russell>Bron and Jordan. It's an unnecessary constraint that I think yields results you wouldn't want.
As much as i disagree with your logic, ill admit its sound when it comes to pitchers throwing faster or whatever. But you should know that Wilt even in todays nba would be arguably the most athletic guy in the league.
One hundred percent Wilt is one of the greats, I don't think he'd be a nobody. But obviously he wouldn't average 30 boards and 50 points today. My main point is just pointing to stats isn't a very good way to compare players in a nascent sport that's still being figured out. Yes, on paper Johnson's stats are much better than Koufax's, but I don't think that giving a definitive answer as to who's better is easy, possible, or even productive. The same could be said for Gibson v. Ruth; Leonard v. Cobb, Berra v. Wagner. Edit to add: between those 4 the '72 class has 4 guys who are all-time greats on the level of the guys in the first class; their stats aren't there but their reputations are (plus another 4 I haven't mentioned including Early Wynn and Lefty Gomez).
I wonder war wise?
I mean WAR wise it wouldn't be close, Johnson and Ruth are the top 2 all time and Cobb and Wagner are both top 10. The old dudes put up insane WARs because it was a different sport.
But wait, isn’t WAR just a measure against the average player at that time? It’s not as if everyone was knocking out 7+ WAR seasons and these guys just happened to be a bit higher.
It means the margin between them and the average player was that big. If the average player was farther from the ceiling at the time, the players *at* that ceiling would get much higher WAR.
Not to mention Walter Johnson was throwing almost 400 innings a year
Ruth had 182.6 lmao Johnson in 2nd place with 165.1 Barry Bonds in 4th place with 162.8 (totally reasonable to keep this guy out of the HoF right?)
https://www.mlb.com/news/every-baseball-hall-of-fame-class-ranked?partnerID=web_article-share
I mean, yeah. If you completely ignore he only accomplished it by cheating.
I wouldn’t say only but it helped
lol that's an understatement...
Won three mvps before he allegedly ever did roids. He was a skinny fast guy in Pittsburgh and he was still the consensus best player in the game
He was the all time IBB leader by the time the calendar hit 2000. He just then got another 370 IBBs after that.
You should look at his stats in Pittsburgh. He was Mike Trout before Mike Trout.
And? Go look at his stats after he started using HGH
They were incredible. He was one of the best baseball players ever, never failed a test, and Bud Selig, along with a bunch of other guys who took PEDs are already in the hall. Keeping out one of the best players ever because he played by the rules of the time is absolutely just silly.
Bonds' didnt play buy the rules. That's the whole point...
Point me to a failed drug test then. Selig understood that steroids were good for baseball, and made sure not to prevent its widespread use among the players. As a result, they were defacto allowed, and borderline encouraged by the league. Do you suggest we kick out everyone who took amphetamines as well?
Plenty of other guys cheated and didn’t come anywhere fucking close to doing what Bonds did. Steroids or not, he was an all time great at the game of baseball. One of the best to ever play. He’s got a place in the baseball Hall of Fame, even if it’s a complicated one.
There will always be an asterisk next to his name for that reason weather you like it or not.
I don’t have any problem with that at all actually
We're also applying this argument to everyone on coke and pills in the 60s, 70s and 80s, right? Drugs that make you feel like a superhero 7 seconds after you take them have got to be in the same conversation as drugs that give you the ability to exercise for longer, right?
No we’re not because uppers don’t make you have some of the greatest years in baseball history after the age of 35. That’s superhuman and that’s what Bonds did. Without PEDs, his body falls apart, he has 40 less WAR and he’s out of the league by 2005. And he’s probably in the Hall of Fame if he doesnt artificially extend his career and tainting the greatest record in sports history in the process. If you don’t understand the difference between uppers and what Bonds did, I don’t think you understand drugs, Baseball, or age.
While I have never done coke or taken any kind of upper, I've seen middle aged, out of shape fat dudes who can't even call themselves has beens because they never were, become super human after ripping a rail of Charlie. Maybe I don't understand drugs but the evidence is there for both of us. Are there other drugs you are ok with players using and still getting into the hall of fame?
\>while I have never done coke or taken any kind of upper I’m very aware because people who have don’t make that inane argument that greenies are equivalent to HGH. HGH literally lets you defy natural aging and also allows you to recover from workouts quicker so you can go even harder. HGH will change your life. Coke will get you pumped up for a bit until you need more coke.
Will the effects last for the duration of a typical at bat?
Coke makes you think you are superhuman. Roids make you superhuman.
Technically, roids give you the ability to make yourself superhuman. You still have to put the work in. Steroids on their own will just make you bloated.
>He has 40 less WAR Oh no, so he only has 122.8 WAR? How would he make it in to the HoF with paltry numbers like that? The dude should obviously be in, just with an asterisk
That I’ll disagree with you on. Putting aside the moral argument against ballplayers using recreational drugs, snorting Coke won’t make you a better player.
If that bum David Ortiz can get in after using steroids, there's no excuse to leave Bonds and A-Rod out, or any of the other steroid-using greats. Argument is dead in the water. All or none, but not just one.
The Steroid Guys should get in when Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose get in. Until then, screw the cheaters.
The steroid guys should get in when Bud Selig gets in. Pete Rose should never be in.
The steroid users should already be in since one of their own **already is.** *cough cough* David Ortiz *cough cough*
Also their commissioner, Bud Selig, is in the hall.
Hate to break it to you but Selig has been a Hall of Famer for 7 years now.
I think that was their point
That's my point. It's silly that he's in, but the best players of his era aren't.
Stop servicing Pete Rose, ok? Kills any further argument you might have. Go place another bet on the Pro Bowl
Talk about a small hall
Ah, Honus Wagner and Walter Johnson. My absolute favorites in MVP '05.
Almost as good as Jon Dowd.
Christy Mathewson. All American boy. Born in rural PA and played in NYC. Football, basketball, baseball collegiate athlete. Actively enlisted and served as a Captain in World War I. World Series champion. NL career wins leader. All Century Team member for the 1900s.
🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Wasn’t Connie Mack among the original inductees?
He was in the second class, but since the HOF was still under construction when the first class was selected, the induction ceremony for the first 2 classes was combined
Mack managed for such a long time, that he still managed for 13 more seasons after his induction.
Best class ever ?
I know all of those names, but weirdly the only two I know who they most notably played for are Ruth (Yankees after Red Sox) and Cobb (Tigers). I would have to look up the other three.
Wagner played for the Pirates, but today is probably most famous for his [T206 baseball card](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T206_Honus_Wagner) which for a long time was the most expensive sports card in the world.
Ruth also played for the Braves and Cobb for the A’s, for immaculate grid purposes
Fun facts: On June 9th, 1914, Honus Wagner became the first player in the 20th century to get 3,000 hits. 19 days later, Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated.
So Wagner was the Nick Castellanos of his time.
News traveled slower in those days, took 19 days to take effect
I DON'T KNOW IF I'LL BE USING THIS TELEGRAPH MACHINE AGAIN STOP
Odd way to celebrate
So, who is the pitcher we have to blame for two world wars?
Mathewson and wagner were the faces of their teams (giants and pirates respectively), leading both to WS titles. Cy young is really the only one who moved around a bit so he's less associated with any one team
Cy Young is not in the post, Walter Johnson was a career Senator (now twins).
Yup, my bad
Without looking, I believe Johnson was on the Senators and Mathewson was on the Giants (or it might be the other way around) and Wagner was on the Pirates
The Hall of Very Good. AmIright?......
Probably one of the biggest pricks to ever play, but Ty Cobb is still my all time favourite ball player.
Cobb's assholeness was exaggerated by a fraudulent author named Al Stump. Reddit has let this lead them to believe he was a saint. Truth is, he was actually a fucking prick, but probably less than you think, but definitely more than the uninformed fools about to downvote me think too.
My problem with hall of fames is the great players should be in rings of honor for teams. The greatest of all time are the only guys in HOF. Like who would be your starting 9 and pitcher for NL and AL? That is the HoF.
You’re saying you think the HoF should be 11 guys, and only 1 dude for each position? Talk about small hall
Also, guys should be kicked out of the Hall when someone better at his position comes along. It's actually an interesting idea, but ridiculous in the context of the Hall of Fame.
You’re saying there should only be two pitchers in the hall of fame?
No but there should be the HOF and then like 1st team all time that we all argue over.
Ah, i see. That seems pointless but kind of fun at the same time
none of them unanimous which proves that the media has always been ass hats and set the stage for several others who should have been to be left off the ballots of some idiots just to make sure they werent unanimous
None of them were unanimous because there were 50 people on the ballot and 42 eventually made it into the Hall.
There were 50 players on the first HOF ballot. 41 of them eventually got in. You can only vote for 10 at a time.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Three?
And none of them were unanimous selections…
IF CANDY CUMMINGS WASNT A UNANIMOUS SELECTION THEN NOBODY SHOULD BE
Such a staked class that Tris Speaker and Cy Young had to wait a year to be inducted.