This guy moved the Dodgers out of Brooklyn... and baseball has been on the West Coast for 50 years.. and NOW they vote him in? an owner that's called a 'visionary' of course, by the LA Dodgers' shill Tommy LaSorda. How about that this owner crippled baseball in New York City -- when it was the center of the baseball universe, and led to the RESIGNATION of Jackie Robinson who would NOT go to the NY Giants (by trade) nor to the west coast, where he even STARRED for UCLA, as a college-educated man in the 1940s. He's still called Walter F*cking O'Malley in Brooklyn -- and always will be. He should NOT be a Hall of Famer, because there's NO greatness in this -- MLB should have started a franchise out west... and not allowed the Brooklyn Dodgers to become something less, than what they were... and abandon the best fans EVER in MLB history, like that.
2007-12-03 06:33:47 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
Seems to me, a reward for putting the $$$ over the MLB fans... (what else is new, by 2008's standards)...
2007-12-03 06:34:27 · update #1
Walter O'Malley deserves NO credit for Jackie Robinson.. that falls 100% onto Branch Rickey -- who ran his OWN organization, A to Z.
2007-12-03 06:52:11 · update #2
This is wrong considering what he did to Brooklyn in 1957.
The Dodgers belonged to the community and he up and moved them to LA with no regard for the community. They had, at that time, the most loyal fanbase in MLB.
Baseball would have expanded to California in the 1960's.
I personally don't feel any owners should be in the HOF, least of all this one.
2007-12-03 09:01:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Walter O'Malley's being a stable guy or undesirable guy relies upon on no remember in case you reside in Brooklyn or la; he's the two the guy who took baseball out of Brooklyn or unfolded the West Coast to baseball. and there is not any question that the Dodgers have been an awesome group for the period of the Nineteen Fifties and Nineteen Sixties, while he replaced into president and proprietor, prevailing 8 NL pennants and four international sequence. And Gil Hodges easily has a enormously susceptible argument for the HoF except you provide him a selection of of managerial greater credit. finding on the Baseball Reference internet site, he has no comparable gamers enshrined; his 10 closest in similarity scores are Norm money, George Foster, Tino Martinez, Jack Clark, Boog Powell, Joe Adcock, Rocky Colavito, Lee could, Willie Horton, and Roy Sievers. All are corridor-of-the-Very-stable varieties. See the link under.
2016-09-30 12:47:36 · answer #2 · answered by thieme 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He didn't exactly cripple baseball in NY. In fact, another argument in his favor is that his actions indirectly led to baseball expansion. When Bill Shea and Branch Rickey announced that since baseball wouldn't make an expansion NL team in NY to replace the Giants and Dodgers, they were forming their own league, MLB knuckled under and expanded in both the NL and AL. Combine that with him helping break the color barrier and bringing Major League Baseball to the west coast, and you have a man who, perhaps more than any non-player, changed the face of the modern game.
2007-12-03 06:55:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I agree. First, in principle, I don't believe most owners deserve to be in. They are not the game in spite of what some of them like to think.
And yes, baseball expanding was good--but other teams moved before the Dodgers. The Dodgers managed to break a lot of hearts in their move; I don't call that worthy on honoring.
2007-12-03 07:46:45 · answer #4 · answered by Bucky 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are looking at it from a narrow prospective. It is about what is good for baseball and not just New York. He participated in braking the color barrier and most certainly was a visionary when he opened up baseball for the entire country. He deserves to be in.
2007-12-03 06:42:29 · answer #5 · answered by Frizzer 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Jackie Robinson didn't resign, he retired...
Jackie retired after the 1956 season because he didn't want to play for the rival Giants, although he stated his health as the reason for retirement.
It wasn't until 1957-1958 that they became the L.A. Dodgers
2007-12-03 11:56:57 · answer #6 · answered by Nicole 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Of course you hate him, but it is significant that he moved baseball across the country.
Watching that documentary on HBO, it seems like if he would have got the stadium site that he wanted, he would have stayed. NOt the first or last time that this will happen.
2007-12-03 06:46:23 · answer #7 · answered by Carnac 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The HOF is BS!
2007-12-03 07:34:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋