Why the heck was Bowie Kuhn elected to the Baseball HOF?

Question

The guy was a total idiot to had fought free agency when he was commissioner. A man of truly limited vision and a stooge for old baseball club owners who vindictively punished Charlie Finley.

On the other hand Marvin Miller made baseball interesting in the off season and promoted the welfare of the players, hes left out. Thats truly weird.

Answer 1

The fact that Kuhn is in and not Miller is a joke and a disgrace. It's backdoor dealing crap like this that makes the HOF a sham.

Answer 2

I totally agree with you. When I heard on XM that O'Malley and Kuhn were in I wondered, "Where is Miller?" Miller only got 3 votes. He did soooo much for the players - he is the sole reason for free agency and the salaries the players command today.

Kuhn was a stodgy baseball man, through and through. The owners practically fired him to bring in Ueberoth because Kuhn was killing the game. The fact that he was elected is proof of the old boys club in baseball. Its a travesty. But Chipmaker has a great point - look at the election committee.

By the way if you heven't read it already, I highly recommend Lords of the Realm - its a great book about the owners, commisioners, Miller, the Union and how baseball became the economic game it is today - great read!

Answer 3

Some of the most knowledgeable responders in the baseball section have responded to your question above me and I respect their point of view. However, I am going to take a different point of view than most. Although I do agree that Kuhn should not have made it just as I believe that no commissioner should be given consideration because their actions should not be considered good or bad but rather carrying out the desires of the owners. The same can be said for Marvin Miller. His intentions were never to accomplish anything that was directed at making the game better but rather to improve the conditions for the players by initiating a collective bargaining agreement. If in the process of doing that there was some residual benefit for the game than so be it. Since Miller had no direct input involving the game itself, unless we want to give him credit for the work stoppages he initiated, I can not see any reason for him to be included in the HOF.

Answer 4

It's disappointing, but not at all surprising. It seems to me that all commissioners will be inducted, regardless of how badly they did during their reign. Whether it was punishing Finley, taking a hard stance against the players' union that ultimately led to arbitration and free agency, or simply acting the stooge for the owners, Kuhn did nothing of real value during his term.

I knew Miller wouldn't get in, despite the fact that today's players owe him so much. I can't think of anyone who has been more important outside the lines over the past 50 years, but still he's snubbed.

Answer 5

I have to agree with the anti-Kuhn faction. There is no way that idiot should have even been on the ballot. He is quite possibly the worst commissioner that the game has ever had and did more damage for the players than anything else. Second choice for idiot commissioner --- Buddy Boy Selig.

Answer 6

They were on opposite sides, Marvin Miller's job was to look out for the benefit of the players. Kuhn's job was to satisfy the Owners; make the "majority" of the owners approve of him. He did his job well, he did what he was there to do, the Commissioner that ticks off the majority of the Owners is fired, ask Faye Vincent!

Answer 7

Consider the electorate.

Two HOF players (Killebrew and Irvin).

Three writers, one employed by MLB.com.

Seven past and present owners and GMs, including former Wal-mart CEO David Glass, currently owner of the Royals -- think he would ever, ever, EVER vote for a union man like Miller?

Nah. This 12-man committee was composed to (a) bypass Miller and (b) induct Kuhn and some other ownership goombahs. (Miller himself said something to the effect of (b), quoted in one of today's stories.)

Making the basic assumption that the two players voted in favor of Miller, and noting he received only three votes, only ONE OTHER ELECTOR named Miller. That's just pathetic, that so many thought there were four worthier names on the ballot. I could stretch to one, maybe two other names before Miller (though not without squinting hard, because to me Miller was far and away the arch candidate), but four? Nonsense. These votes fulfilled agendas.

No one was unanimous, though, continuing an entertaining Hall tradition.

Answer 8

Barry Bonds Tim Raines Jeff Bagwell Fred McGriff Alan Trammel Curt Schilling Roger Clemens Sammy Sosa Jeff Conine (No, he for sure would not should be interior the hall of repute).

Answer 9

I don't think he was a bad commissioner, certainly was better than Selig.

Answer 10

Better than Selig, but still a bum, and not hall worthy