Marvin Miller's last chance

Just ask any of his longtime drudges about what a wonderful, personable guy George was.

He made a great buy, and was smart enough to sustain heavy investment to build the brand in a town which (until recently) has always been willing to pay for it. But his shortcomings have always been
considerable, serious and obvious to most-anyone not a glazed-eyed Yankee fanboi -- or someone in
position to make serious personal coin due to the fact the Yanks exist.

You can be a great businessman without being an asshole. Really . . . you can.

 

Future Expansion Era Committee eligibles:

Dec., 2013 (1990-92 retirees) - Dwight Evans, Keith Hernandez, Fred Lynn, Dave Parker, Willie Randolph, Rick Reuschel, Dan Quisenberry

Dec., 2016 (1993-95 retirees) - Tom Henke, Don Mattingly, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Lance Parrish, Frank Tanana, Lou Whitaker

Dec., 2019 (1996-98 retirees) -Brett Butler, Joe Carter, Cecil Fielder, Lee Smith, Dave Stieb, Alan Trammell

Dec., 2022 (1999-01 retirees) -Harold Baines, Albert Belle, Jose Canseco, Will Clark, Orel Hershiser, Mark McGwire, Bret Saberhagen, John Wetteland


italics indicates player is currently eligible for BBWAA election

This is on top of the host of other good candidates the Expansion Committee didn't even consider this time: Bobby Grich, Reggie Smith, Graig Nettles, Buddy Bell, Sal Bando, Darrell Evans, Bobby Bonds, Cesar Cedeno, Gene Tenace, Bert Campaneris, Thurman Munson, Luis Tiant, or Jim Kaat!

 

Should Scott Boras be in the HOF?

He also has revolutionized certain aspects of the business of baseball, most notably the draft.

There is no doubt that Marvin Miller dramatically changed the industry, but did those changes affect the "game"? Who did they benefit?

I'm not saying Miller shouldn't be in. Just playing devil's advocate.

 

No Miller.
No Boras.

Ask a Pirate or a Yankee fan if Miller and free agency affected the game.

 

Other than maybe Jim Kaat, there is not one player in that collection who deserves to be anywhere near Cooperstown, except as a visitor

 

He affected the sport, if you can make a distinction between that and the game (i.e. the game as played on the field on a daily basis). See that 19-page Hot Stove League thread we have going? Thank Marvin Miller for that.

It's a better sport now. And, more importantly, a much more humane one to the employees who we actually pay to watch.

 

OK, then how bout Boras?

 

Boras just took advantage of what Miller did. He didn't revolutionize anything. So no.

 

Well, baseball changed about five rules because of Boras loopholes.

He's pretty much the reason that draft picks get paid so much. Their bonuses were pretty flat from 1965 to about 1990, and then Boras got involved.

Anyway, I agree that Miller caused a dramatic change in the way the sport operates and I'd have zero problem with him in the HOF. My point is just that I don't think the changes he made really benefited anyone but the players.

 

and at that time those players were completely being taken advantage of. What the owners were doing was a disgrace, so to compare Boras and Miller is insulting. Without Boras, players are still doing just fine, without Miller not so much.

 

.

EVERYONE in baseball (owners, executives, managers and players) is making more money and the product is ultimately better because the players union has consistently pushed for greater off-field competition between clubs. Baseball was a flat-lining $50 million industry in 1965 and today it's a $7 billion industry. It's not a coincidence. Competition breeds innovation and growth.