Ripken, Gwynn won't be unanimous selections

Yes. But he was overrated.

 

No player will be a unanimous selection. Why? Because when that happens, that player could say he's baseball's best player. That won't happen.
Also please remember this: Jesus had 12 disciple. Eleven went with him, one went against him. If Jesus can't get a unanimous decision, you know a man can't.

 

He didn't need a curveball. He was pretty straight and acurate from what I've been told.

 

I can see why statistically people would say Ripken was overrated, but there should be more to it than that. Ripken was an iconic player of the era he played in, and for that reason would get my vote if I had one.

 

I just explained the logic. If you can't understand it, then you need not say anything more.

Outing alert: Dyepack is Leonard F-ing Nimoy

 

so what you're saying is he was great, but rated too highly, or, well, overrated

and christ, can't believe i'm 100 percent in agreement with shot and columbo on ripken -- or anything, really

 

of course, also love the flawed argument of basement dwellers who are screaming that this guy is grandstanding. he was asked his opinion by baltimore and gave it. if he was asked and refused to answer, the same people in their mother's basement would be screaming about him being a hypocrite.

i don't necessarily agree with the guy, but i respect his right to an opinion and don't think he should be thrown out of voting. if everyone agreed with you, what fun would that be? i love a little dissent. if i thought everyone i disagreed with was an idiot and had nothing to contribute, i'd have as many friends as douchepack -- none.

 

Just for posterity.

 

I don't understand, in an era rife with steroid abuse and use of other day-to-day enhancers -- and considering a large number of those players that have gotten caught by drug tests aren't body-builder big or showed a tremendous career-numbers, Brady Anderson-esque spike -- we just assume Ripken was clean.
Because he's a nice guy.
McGwire and Palmeiro seemed like nice guys, too.
Maybe Cal was clean. I'd like to hope so.
But a guy plays 2,632 straight games -- and 8,243 innings at one point -- withstanding every ache and pain, in an era of players later admitting to relying on pharmaceuticals to get by, and nobody raises an eyebrow?

So some Hall of Fame voter doesn't want to give Cal the benefit of the doubt.
I've got no problem with that.

 

I think there were plenty of eyebrows raised about the streak, although few were steroid-related. There was also considerable criticism during the streak, too.

Ripken played with a broken nose in 1996, don't forget, and numerous other maladies during the streak. There was a bright spotlight on him from about 1987 on, and it ramped up even higher from 1995-98. His durability -- and sometimes his luck -- in keeping the streak alive has been well-documented.

Hard for me not to give him the benefit of the doubt on that one. It wasn't like nobody was noticing the streak for the two decades while he was playing.