2010 HOF - Neyer says Alomar?

by tozer55 on Jan 14, 2009 7:42 PM EST

What in the world is Neyer talking about when he mentions Roberto "spit heard round the world" Alomar as a sure thing for the HOF in 2010.....ridiculous if you ask me. The man was classless (even if he did later appologize). If he makes it in before Mattingly then the HOF is a worthless honor...and the only honor that will ever matter to a player is getting a number retired...and Mattingly should counsider his number being retired by the Yanks the greatest honor ever. "We" can forgive a spitter and how that degraded the game but not Pete Rose who bet on his own team...to win?

Tweet Comment 20 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

forgot to include the link

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/hof09/columns/story?columnist=neyer_rob&id=3829454

and notice how Neyer never even mentions the spiting incident which is like not mentioning Pete Rose’s ban while talking his credentials for the HOF…shotty reporting

by tozer55 on Jan 14, 2009 7:47 PM EST reply actions

Alomar is indeed a Hall of Famer

I don’t think there’s any question about it.

You could make a very good case that he was the best defensive second baseman of all time and the guy was a helluva dangerous hitter.

Regardless of a very stupid act, he’s still a Hall of Famer.

by anaconda on Jan 14, 2009 8:06 PM EST reply actions

+1

I think its ridiculous to NOT consider him a hall of famer. He’s been consistently solid in both ends of the field. Not exactly a press-friendly guy, but hey, neither were many others who are in the HOF.

by steelersfan86 on Jan 25, 2009 3:31 PM EST up reply actions

Its not a popularity contest

its how good of a player he was, and RA proved to be a very good one. That said, I think Pete Rose should be inducted into the HOF, as for suspected steroid users? no.

by steelersfan86 on Jan 25, 2009 3:33 PM EST up reply actions

and Rose?

I assume you’d be ok with Rose being in too?

by tozer55 on Jan 14, 2009 9:15 PM EST reply actions

Don’t make this some kind of moral issue. Rose knew the consequences of betting on baseball and he did it anyways. He can only blame himself for that one.

It’s ludicrous for you to say Alomar is not a Hall of Famer because of something stupid he did in the heat of battle. Of course it was a terrible thing – but he got suspended for it and lost a lot of respect around the game for what he did. He paid a price and I think keeping him out of the Hall is far too extreme.

Besides, if you kept everyone out of the Hall because of bad behavior – the Hall would be missing a lot of great players (or owners):

Ty Cobb – intentionally spiking opponents, jumping into the stands and fighting with fans, all the racial stuff, etc, etc.

Juan Marichal – tried to decapitate an opponent with a bat (and wasn’t wearing a helmet)

George Steinbrenner – paid big money to a gambler to dig up dirt on Dave Winfield

Manny Ramirez – do I have to elaborate?

The list goes on and on.

Nobody said these guys were angels. But every one of them deserves to be in the Hall for their contribution to the game. He’s certainly an asshole, but Manny is a first-ballot Hall of Famer and I think eventually The Boss will get in there, too.

George wasn’t always the frail old man that he is now. He was one major SOB during his heyday.

by anaconda on Jan 15, 2009 12:40 AM EST up reply actions

whole-heartely agree with anaconda

The Jayfiss Report ...one fan's rants

by NumberSeven on Jan 15, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions

you speak as if

spitting at people is a criminal offense like you know… (alledgedly) fixing baseball games.

If you only remember Roberto from his Mets days, then of course you might have negative opinions about him, but fact remains that he’s probably one of the best 2B not named Roger Hornsby.

by RollingWave on Jan 15, 2009 3:44 AM EST up reply actions

Moral Standards

My position is that they should all be evaluated on the merits of their baseball careers (despite what the HOF charter says), McGwire, Rose, Alomar, etc. Under that standard I would put in Rose, Shoeless Joe, McGwire and Alomar. I just don’t feel qualified to compare moral qualities across generations and widely varying circumstances.

That said, if I did apply my own moral compass, Rose would be at the bottom of the list. He violated a rule that is posted in every clubhouse in baseball and then lied about it for 20 years. He still shows no remorse or understanding that what he did was wrong. Alomar’s spitting is not even in the same category. I find McGwire and Shoeless Joe to be the most interesting and complicated cases.

by stusviews on Jan 15, 2009 8:00 AM EST reply actions

If the hall of fame was about morals, we’d have to remove the racists, misogynists, drunkards, cheaters (gaylord perry;s spitball), etc. etc.

If Roberto Alomar is NOT a Hall of Famer, then I don’t know who is…

by 3460kuri on Jan 15, 2009 9:54 AM EST reply actions

Good point ...

You’d probably not have much of a Hall … The early players were anything but choir boys. As for judging players based on what they do on the field, I’d say this … Rose was wearing the uniform. He was actively involved in the game—and had more opportunity to impact a game from his position than when he was a player.

There’s no question Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame. None. There’s no question Rose should be the game’s greatest ambassador. But real life intervened, and instead of being everyone’s hero, he’s not looked at as a tragic figure in American sports. I feel bad for him, but I feel worse for the game he disrespected. Rose made the mistake of thinking he was bigger than the game. That’s one bet he never should have made.

"Baseball is the background music of my life." -George Will

by Ronster22 on Jan 16, 2009 9:44 AM EST up reply actions

Someone needs to..

establish what they think a hall of famer is. the website just lists the minimum requirements. Obviously most of the voters and baseball fans seem to take into account more than just a players abilities on the field – i think it’s safe to say we all except some character from our hall of famers – personally i think a case for Rose and Alomar is easier to make than for McGwire and these with question marks in regards to the steroid era.

I think we as fans should sort of clarify what we think a hall of famer is, of course everyone on here can make a case for why or why not Alomar or any of the others should or shouldn’t be in the hall.

by trailblazerk5 on Jan 15, 2009 10:32 AM EST reply actions

it is a moral issue

a moral issue is one that is decided by the people… not something outside the people…if we say we love baseball (a moral basis) then we can’t be hipocrits when it comes to Rose and Shoeless Joe…and I would be in favor of admitting Rose because what he did, did not hurt baseball as much as we’d like to think it did…the lying maybe did more so but he’s not banned because he lied

….but Alomar’s actions on the other hand should be a part of his history and that’s all I was trying to say…to not include it in the story is rewriting history and that’s poor reporting…and I’m still not sold on Alomar as a HOF and neither is the one voter I know. Granted they are only one voter but they vote on impression and the spitting ordeal is the lasting impression of Alomar just like McGwire’s testimony before congress will keep him out.

And just to be clear what’s the difference then “if” I’m advocating we let em all in…Alomar is not Pete Rose, the quality of play and status in baseball make that pretty clear. If Alomar gets in with his spitting issue, then certainly Mattingly as a class act (without some could) should get in much easier than he is.

by tozer55 on Jan 15, 2009 11:28 AM EST reply actions

Your saying that “moral character” should be a tie-breaker for borderline hall candidates? Don Mattingly wasn’t good enough for a long enough period of time to make the Hall of Fame. Plain and simple.

Don Sutton and Gaylord Perry cheated by doctoring and scuffing baseballs. They’re both in the Hall of Fame, but Mark McGwire, who cheated by taking steroids, isn’t and probably won’t ever be. How can we say one kind of cheating is acceptable but another is not.

Ty Cobb jumped into the stands and assaulted a disabled fan who had called him a Nig***. He’s in the Hall of Fame, but Roberto Alomar, who assaulted an umpire by spitting on him, shouldn’t be? Who commited the worse crime?

There are players in the Hall of Fame who did all sorts of bad things in their personal lives. It’s not the Hall of Fame of Nice Guys, so we should stop isoloating certain players for certain transgressions, while giving others a free pass.

by 3460kuri on Jan 15, 2009 12:57 PM EST up reply actions

yes to Alomar

It’s the Hall of Fame, not heaven.

by long time listener on Jan 15, 2009 3:04 PM EST reply actions

lol

by steelersfan86 on Jan 25, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions

i in fact did not say that, I said it was only a factor for voters

you seem to be saying you’d be fine with McGwire and Rose and I would be too…I’m of the opinion and have been all along that Alomar’s numbers and “moral quality” aren’t good enough…BUT if they are (in voters minds) Mattingly is just as worthy as Alomar is…thus I DO NOT believe Alomar should be as much of a lock as Neyer says he is. Its wrong not to consider all the factors is my only point.

by tozer55 on Jan 15, 2009 3:53 PM EST reply actions

You have to look at Alomar’s career based on the position he played. You could make a good argument that he was the Ozzie Smith of second basemen.

His defense wasn’t just good – he was unbelievable. I grew up watching Ryne Sandberg win nine Gold Gloves for the Cubs and Alomar was better because he made so many plays that Sandberg couldn’t make.

Alomar’s credentials very much rival both Sandberg and Joe Morgan:

Sandberg: 285 BA, 2,386 Hits, 282 HR (10x All Star, MVP, no rings)

Morgan: .271 BA, 2,517 Hits, 268 HR (10x All Star, two MVPs, two rings)

Alomar: .300 BA, 2,724 Hits, 210 HR (12x All Star, 10 Gold Gloves, two rings)

You’re gonna tell me that Alomar doesn’t deserve to be in Cooperstown because he once spit on someone?

Please.

by anaconda on Jan 15, 2009 4:42 PM EST up reply actions

Hes a HOFamer

I never miss a chance to bash Joe Morgan. If Roberto Alomar doesn’t get into the HOF just because he decided to hawk a loogie at someone. The Joe Morgan should be taken out for being a lousy commentator

by sdhman11 on Jan 15, 2009 5:01 PM EST up reply actions

and

Sandberg and Morgan are unquestionally the best 2Bs of the modern era, really in all honesty, if there is one guy I MIGHT take over Alomar as a all time fantasy 2B, it’s Roger Hornsby.

Alomar had a lot more hits, similar HR, and only marginally worse rate (on top of 470+ steals) over a far longer career than Don Mattingly despite playing in one of the harder positions.

He’s not only a hall of famer, but clearly amoung the upper half of the hall of fame.

Moral standards for baseball HOF is pretty silly unless it’s some sort of capital offesnse,

This also draws to the steroid issue, since we are most likely going to put in guys that did take roids or some kind of enhancer that we didn’t knew about in (and I would bet my bottom money that we already did put quiet a few in) banning people who’s stats are ridiculasly qualified (like Bonds/ Clemens/ McGwire) is simply silly.

by RollingWave on Jan 16, 2009 2:28 AM EST up reply actions