« Home | Theo-cracy » | The conclusion » | Michalobes, indeed » | Brave Old World » | ESPNough Already » | Theo & Me » | Singing a New Tune » | Cappy Doodle Dandy » | The Archi Cianfrocco Files II » | The Archi Cianfrocco Files » 

Tuesday, August 10, 2004 

The immortal Edgar

Now that Edgar has retired, the national debate has begun as to whether he is Hall material or not. I'll be the first to start any debate, and I will say he does belong in the hall. It's not his fault that a position was created that he excelled at. So he's a really good hitter, who hit for average (.312) and power (305 homers and counting) and was a run producer (2,000+ RBI's). Not stellar numbers, but comparable to a lot of guys who are in the Hall. Him not winning a championship really doesn't hurt him that much. He never won an MVP either. But he was one of the top hitters in the league for what, 15 years. And all I hear about when voting comes along is "Was he the best player at his postion during his playing days?" (A reason that Thurman Munson will never make the Hall). So, he was probably the best DH of his time, and since DH is a position, then he should be considered.

Me personally, I don't agree with the DH rule. But then again, I'm not Bud Selig. But as with Theo, I am better looking than Bud. But if the Hall is going to induct closers, then they should induct DH's. The closer was established, as we know it, not so long ago. Guys like Eck wouldn't be getting in if it wasn't for him closing out so many games. Guys like Rivera would be regular relievers, who are just as important to a team as the lead off hitter, but wouldn't sniff the Hall. But because of the position of closer, Rivera will be a first ballot HOFer.

Now this might make no sense, but looking at it black and white it does. DH's only play half the game. Yet starting pitchers play every 5th day. DH's play 162 games a year, and ususally have as much influence on a game as the cleanup hitter. Starting pitchers play in 35 games a year, if they are lucky. I know that you can't win a game without a pitcher (batters would probably go nuts hitting off of a tee or self hitting), but a player is a player, no matter what position he plays. And I don't think that he should be penalized for being one of the best pure hitters of his era.

you know what i like about eddie? well there are alot of things, but one of them is that he isn't afraid to say how good looking he is. people get all shy and humble but we all know they're phonies...eddie's a friggin stud and he should say so...

by the way, i like the argument of "he was the best player at his position"...i guess eddie's adorable and persuasive.

You know Paul, love starts at home. If you can't love yourself, who can you love? Really? Apparently some love themselves more than others, but who am I to judge? I'm just a stud tryin' to get by with a wink and a smile.

There is the argument which says that if one does not believe in the existence of something, then they ought to abstain from it altogether. Like, if you don't believe in the two-party system then don't vote at all; voting within the system only ensures its continuation. So, if the DH position shouldn't exist, then ought we not to vote a DH in, regardless? How else will the position be abolished?

Post a Comment