Before you answer this, have a look at the stats he put up and ask yourself this question: Would anyone who's really trying to throw a game put up those kind of numbers? Here's his batting stats from the 1919 World Series:
Joe Jackson: 32AB, 12 hits, 3 doubles, 1hr, 5 runs, 6 rbi's and a batting average of .375
His stats were much higher then the rest of the team.
You can check out the rest of his teams stats here:
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/ws/yr1919ws.shtml
2007-03-14 13:59:13 · 21 answers · asked by HULK RULES!! 7 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Joe Jackson, Pete Rose, Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire just to name a few of the high profile media celebrities that we continually question, may all be determined by how Barry Bonds is dealt with in the near future.
Let's face it, the precedent will be set based on how Barry Bonds is handled by baseball and the baseball writers association. All this will take place when Bonds becomes eligible for Cooperstown. Unless he is convicted of a felony in the steroid issue and possible perjury charge he will be eligible for the hall. It will then depend of the integrity of the baseball writers association.
As it stands none of these players should be elected into the hall of fame. The reality of it is that in their own special ways, they all cheated the game of baseball.
To all of you Joe Jackson supporters, you are all leaving out the single most important fact of all. HE TOOK THE MONEY!!
2007-03-14 15:22:36 · answer #1 · answered by Yankee Dude 6 · 5⤊ 4⤋
Yes, he should. His stats clearly prove that he was not trying to throw the '19 Series. He was also tried and ACQUITTED in a court of law.
But all the facts meant little to Commisioner Landis, who was nothing more than a power-mad freak.
As badly as the game treated Shoeless Joe, it would be only right to put him in the Hall of Fame. I personally feel the game owes it to him.
2007-03-18 11:20:53 · answer #2 · answered by frenchy62 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, Joe Jackson should not be inducted into the Hall of Fame. He purposely played to lose in the 1919 WS.
If I were to argue for Joe Jackson, I wouldn't argue his 1919 WS totals, but I would point out his lifetime stats.
Career Totals
.356 Lifetime batting average (3rd on all-time list)
873 Runs
1772 Hits (Higher hits/game than all time leader Pete Rose)
BUT, I share the same viewpoint as MLB's first commisioner Kennesaw Landis,
"Regardless of the verdict of juries, no player that throws a ball game, no player that entertains proposals or promises to throw a game, no player that sits in a conference with a bunch of crooked players and gamblers where the ways and means of throwing games are discussed, and does not promptly tell his club about it, will ever play professional baseball." - Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis
It was later voted that Banned players could not be elected into the Hall of Fame as well.
2007-03-15 03:58:53 · answer #3 · answered by Will B 2 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Well,this question has been debated for years,but according to the book EIGHT MEN OUT,Jackson DID accept money from the gamblers and he DID confess to it.Its clear that he did have second thoughts about taking the money,but its hard for me to overlook the fact that he still took it.Yes,he was probaly one of the greatest hitters ever,but I would think that its unlikely that he will ever get in the Hall of Fame.I do think his team mate Buck Weaver was falsely accused.Weaver never took any money and he played just as well as Jackson.I would like to see Weavers name cleared more than Jacksons.I would have to agree with baseballs stance on gambling.It does bring into question the integrity of the game so much more than steroids.Pete Rose should be kept from the Hall,first for gambling,then for lying about it for 10 years.
2007-03-22 00:26:18 · answer #4 · answered by mikecubbie69 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Pete Rose had 4,256 hits,played on 7 divisional winners, 6 pennant winners,and 3 World Championship winners. He also played in more winning games than any player ever and he is banned for the same reason as Shoeless Joe so I would say no way!
2007-03-15 11:18:56 · answer #5 · answered by G.W. loves winter! 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ive always believed he was innocent. Charles Comiskey was a drunk and didnt want to be bothered with facts. Kennesaw Mountain Landis was interested only in sweeping out any and all party to the event, whether they were involved or not. The main focus should have been on 1B Chick Gandill.
2007-03-18 05:40:46 · answer #6 · answered by JBC 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes but people forget that that series went what 7 or 9 games? With the fixers collecting on each game, it makes more fiscal sense to string it out to the final game. The blacksox were favored so heavily that they could turn it on and off as they pleased. we will never know who was doing what in a game as situational as baseball.
2007-03-14 14:34:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I agree 100%. He shouldn't have been banned. If I was the commissioner, I would put him in. I would also like to add, Shoeless Joe hit .356 in his career. He is a Hall of Famer in my book.
2007-03-14 14:14:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes;he was a victim of the times he didn't throw the series. Pete Rose's lifetime ban should be upheld he broke the cardinal rule of baseball, he lied about it for years and still has not shown an ounce of remorse. Barry Bonds should be in the Hall and will, Steriods were not banned by baseball until recently, there's no proof he took steriods after the ban.
2007-03-14 16:03:10 · answer #9 · answered by tesorotx 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I think he should be. I mean, how could they think he threw the World Series? Its obvious to say he did good in the series. With those stats, he should've stayed in
2007-03-15 11:26:55 · answer #10 · answered by Michael N (and lou gehrig fan) 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋