Skip to main content

Fame game

This card always puzzled me. I don't know if my depth perception is off or if it's the way the card's cropped, but it looks like they cut around Santo's likeness and then pasted him in the forefront of a Cubs spring training scene. I realize this photo was likely taken in 1973 and photoshop wasn't around, but the photo just looks weird.

But that's not the reason why this card is here. It's here because the Hall of Fame Veterans Comittee on Tuesday announced their list of 10 candidates for the Hall from major leaguers whose careers began in 1943 or later. Santo's on that list. So is Gil Hodges, Joe Torre, Luis Tiant, Maury Wills, Tony Oliva, Jim Kaat, Dick Allen, Al Oliver and Vada Pinson. On December 8th, the committee will announce whether they've selected anyone from this list, or from the previous list of players whose careers started before 1943, for the Hall of Fame.

And that got me thinking: why go through all the hand-wringing? This debate never ends. Even someone like me, who has no vote, spends too many hours (yes, hours) debating whether these players, or other players, belong in the Hall. I try to balance my desire to see Dodgers like Hodges and Wills in the Hall with my elitist conscience that says, "it's SUPPOSED to be difficult to get in the Hall. Don't let any of these guys in and boot a few players who are already in out of there, too."

Frankly, I'm sick of the angst. It's all so pre-2004 Red Sox fan. Instead, why don't we do this? Let's consider the name for a minute. It's not the Hall of Achievement or Hall of Accomplishment or Hall of Really, Really Good Players. It's called the Hall of Fame. Fame. People who are famous.

So who's famous? I think if you ask a large group of people who have no interest in a certain chosen field if they've ever heard of someone in that chosen field and they say, "yes," then that defines a famous person. For instance, my wife and her friends have little interest in baseball, but they know who Roger Clemens is. So, by that standard, let's put Clemens in the Hall. Steroids? Forget about it. He's famous. Put him in the Hall of Fame.

Same for Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa. Almost any non-baseball fan has heard of those guys. Put them in the Hall. Pete Rose? That guy who gambles a lot? Yup, the non-baseball fans have heard of him. Put him in the Hall! Jose Canseco? Wasn't he on that reality show? You bet! In the Hall he goes!

Cheated on your wife, died prematurely, starred in a beer commercial? Yes, yes and yes? The Hall is waiting for you.

Wouldn't that make things so much easier? No stats, no intangibles, no "you can't compare eras."

But I guess that's not going to fly, huh?

OK, then, in that case I think the committee should pick Santo and Wills. And maybe the Hall should change its name.


Comments

--David said…
Long before Photoshop, there was the literal cut-and-paste. It was used from the very beginning of photography (yes, I took a class, sue me...). The advent of computers just made it easier to accomplish the tom-foolery, but it was always there. Want to see BAD photoshop in the media? try photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com! It's a riot!
night owl said…
That's good stuff. I know a few photographers, I'll have to show them that site.

I kind of knew about cut-and-paste. I just didn't know how often it was practiced. I know that Topps has done it, oh, shall we say, a few times. I've got a card or two saved for posts.
stusigpi said…
Many of those players were around long before I was a fan and I can tell you a lot about them. I know many will not agree, but I wouldn't have a problem with any of those guys getting in. Biggest crimes in Hall of Fame history are, thus far:

Shoeless, Rose, Rice, Lee Smith, Dale Murphy as much as I hated the braves then, Dawson.

Before anyone gets on my case about Murphy they need to ask themselves who were the power hitters of the early 80's. That's what I thought. Anyone that hit 300 before 1990 should get in. Bonus points if you hit half of those before 1986.