You’re out of your mind!

Bagwell should have been in on the first ballot.

Without a world series, neither of those guys belong in the Hall of Fame.
***

You know, you're right. In fact, let's kick out Ty Cobb, Ted Williams, Ernie Banks, Billy Williams, Rod Carew, Juan Marichal, Nap Lajoie, Don Sutton, Robin Yount, Carlton Fisk, Tony Gwynn and Carl Yastrzemski. Plus about 75 others. None of them ever won a title. Oh, and tell Ken Griffey, Jr. he's not eligible, either.

It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Championships. That statement is asinine.

This is the worst post I've read in a while. Go sit in timeout and think about what you did wrong.

I'm afraid not. All of the other players in the Hall of Fame fit into a couple of categories that I'm afraid our "Killer B's" do not.

Either they've won titles, or they played in a time when their stats and other contributions to the game were uncharacteristic of the time.

Ted Williams hit .400 at one point. That's 4 successful ABs out of ten. He never got a ring. I'm ok with him being in. Lumping him in with the other guys that were thrown around in a previous post isn't even close to fair.

I'm truly on the fence with Ken Griffey Jr. I know that sounds insane, but his career, played right in the thick of steroid-era baseball, will be marred by not getting at least one ring. He deserved one. I wish like <hell he'd gotten one. I think he played the game the way I'd want my own kid to play it. He did not, however, reach the peak in the MLB even once, so I wonder if I'd vote for him.

Did they ever et Blylevyn in? I know a ton of folks in LA have been <!----><!---->

The one thing that HOF voters all agree on when it comes to choosing who gets in and who doesn't: Was that player considered the best at his postion at any point during their career?

At no time should titles won be a factor in determining HOF status. Ever.

"They were very, very good players, but not great. Hakeem Olajuwon would have been the same way for me in the NBA, had he not won at least one ring. He did, and when the Hall calls for him, I hope he gets in."

Hakeem didn't need a ring. He's one of the top centers of all time regardless.

"I'm truly on the fence with Ken Griffey Jr."

Then, I know no other way to say this; you are stark, raving mad. MAD. A lunatic. There's simply no other explanation I can think of. Winning a world series is equal parts teamwork, chance and streakiness. To say you're seriously considering disregarding an entire 22 year career that saw 630 homers, 1,836 RBI, 1,662 runs, thirteen All-Star selections, ten Gold Gloves, seven Silver Sluggers and an MVP award because his TEAM wasn't good and streaky enough at the right time to win a ring is absolute, sheer and utter lunacy of the highest, indescribable order.

It shouldn't matter in the NBA, but even then you can at least make SOME argument for it mattering in the NBA, since one great player CAN carry a team on his back straight to a championship (Jordan, Kobe, Olajuwan, etc.) It simply isn't that way in baseball, and it never will be. One superstar player cannot win one by himself; if he could, Ted Williams would have had several.

Everybody has an opinion and some actually have merit.

Call me anything you want (you do anyway), but lay off the killer Bs.

********************************************************

First of all, I don't call you anything. I rarely comment on your postings. Secondly, I didn't say anything bad about the Killer B's. Feel free to ignore me, so you don't have to read what I say!