Would you vote for him? Why/ Why not? Do you think he will make it?
2007-12-27 15:54:26 · 11 answers · asked by Eric 2 in Sports ➔ Baseball
I definitely would vote for him.
The probable reason he's not in is that he fell just short of 300 wins. But most of his career he played for terrible, terrible teams. If he played for better teams he certainly would have over 300 wins.
2007-12-28 00:51:23 · answer #1 · answered by bencas9900 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately I only got to see him pitch later in his career and by then homers use to fly out of the park left and right. I think more homers have been hit off him then any other pitcher. He had a long and good career but I think the Hall should only be reserved for players that are great. So is Bert Blyleven great? Probably not. I would have an easier time voting for Jack Morris because he was an outstanding big game pitcher even though he did not necessarily put up great career numbers.
2007-12-27 17:27:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you look at the numbers of Blyleven and Tommy John they are about the same and neither are in the HOF. It is a subjective vote and not an objective vote for the HOF, and the voters are not under any obligation to reveal how they casted their vote. It could be that Blyleven blew them off for an interview or would not sit down with them for an article at some point in the past, or they just might not like him. In my opinion both are borderline and I would be happy either way.
2007-12-28 00:37:37 · answer #3 · answered by Frizzer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If I could I would vote for him - he's not one of the all-time greats, but he was one of the best pitchers during his era. Of the 10 pitchers most similar to him (according to Baseball Reference), 8 are in the Hall.
Why he isn't already? Two reasons: one, he never pitched for a major market team (at least, not until he was at the end of his career and over the hill) and two, because he was kind of a jerk during his playing days and the reporters who covered him remember that.
2007-12-27 16:59:05 · answer #4 · answered by JerH1 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He only won 20 games 1 time, only made 2 all-star teams, and only finished in the top 5 for the Cy Young 3 times. His career win% is only .534. He was maybe top 10 in his own era.
.
2007-12-27 20:44:54 · answer #5 · answered by Kris 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think, with the rash of pitchers who were clearly HOFers while he was playing, he may have paled in comparison in the umph department.
When he retired, I believe he was 5th all time in K's and if 300 wins is the benchmark for an easy choice, 287 has to be a 'strong consideration', especially given the lousy teams he played for.
He should be in.
2007-12-27 16:10:20 · answer #6 · answered by brettj666 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
there is absolutely no reason other than the arrogance of the writers/voters that blyleven is not in the hall of fame. jack morris too.
2007-12-27 16:55:45 · answer #7 · answered by jonas 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Near-criminal underappreciation of his performance in his own time and sadly continuing to this day.
I've been a Bert For The Hall supporter since the day he retired, if not before.
2007-12-27 16:01:49 · answer #8 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
For the same reason former Oakland A's announcer Bill King isnt! Neither of them were appreciated while active! I just hope Bert doesnt die before being inducted...
2007-12-27 17:09:31 · answer #9 · answered by mnw1989 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
1 writer -- good analysis, good copy, interesting guy.
2 or more writers -- retarded gossipy old women who hold grudges and can't be trusted to tell the difference between a corpse and a sprinter.
2007-12-27 18:17:09 · answer #10 · answered by Sarrafzedehkhoee 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋