In article <1993Apr15.093231.5148@news.yale.edu>,  (Steve Tomassi) writes: |>  |>      Hi, baseball fans! So what do you say? Don't you think he deserves it? |> I |>   |> mean, heck, if Dave Winfield (ho-hum) is seriously being considered for it, |> as |>  |> is Lee Smith (ha), then why don't we give Dave Kingman a chance? Or Darrell |>  |> Evans! Yeah, yeah! After the Hall of Fame takes in them, it can take in |> Eddie |>  |> Murray and Jeff Reardon.  I am trying to think how to respond to this without involving personal feeling or perceptions and I can not without having stats to back up my points. However, I think you approached this the wrong way. I believe all of the people mentioned here deserve the hall of fame more than Dave Kingman does. I feel they were all much better players. I am not saying I fell they deserve to go but that they would deserve it more.   IMHO  Dave Kingman - definately not. They guy only had a couple of years were he could hit with atleast a respectable averag. The rest of his career I do not think he was very feared by pitchers. I also do not think he did a lot for the game. I mean really I am a Met fan - he was a Met for part of his career and I still would not back him for the Hall of Fame.  Dave Winfield - I think so. He is feared by pitchers, he has had several season where he hit for a respectable average and his production numbers are (in my opinion - without stats) better than Kingman's (probably by quite a bit). I also perceive him to be a leader, maybe not as much as some other people but none the less a leader. I think he has made substantial contributions to the game of baseball and to society. Examples of this are some of the charitable things he has done (I know some of this from when he was with the Yankees). I think he the type of player that kids can look up to and while this is definately not the only criteria for the Hall of Fame I think it deserves some consideration.  Lee Smith - Maybe, I would have to see his stats again but he definately would deserve to go before the likes of Kingman.  Darrell Evans - No.  Eddie Murray - Maybe, He has had a very good career, he is a leader (although a silent one), he is a good role model. Are the stats good enough? I am not sure - but I would once again believe they are much better than Kingman's both the average as well as the power numbers (but not as good as Winfield's). Just think, Eddie did not have as much publicity for most of his great years.  Jeff Reardon - My guess is no, but it kind of depends on his numbers. Off the top of my head I would take Lee Smith first.  |>  |>      Well, in any case, I am sick and tired (mostly sick) of everybody |> giving |>  |> Hall of Fame consideration to players that are by today's standards, |> marginal. |>  |> Honestly, Ozzie Smith and Robin Yount don't belong there. They're both |>  |> shortstops that just hung around for a long time. Big deal. |>   Well, I strongly disagree here. Both of these guys deserve it for sure. I talked about leadership above, both of these guys are leaders and have been instumental in leading their teams to the post season. Robin does have very good offensive numbers both average and power and Ozzie has okay numbers offensively. The difference with Ozzie is that if you gave him a home run for every run he saved by making an incredible play at shortstop - he would have shattered Aaron's home run mark by now. How many of those great plays saved games? How many of those great plays motivated his team to rally and win a game? While I believe both of these guys have numbers, baseball is about more than numbers (or at least winning at baseball is about more than numbers). Both of these guys are proven stars and belong in the Hall of Fame. As does George Brett who also belongs in this class of player.  |>      Let's be a little more selective, huh? Stop handing out these honors |> so |>  |> liberally. Save them for the guys who really deserve it. Face it, if |> something |>  |> isn't done, there will be little prestige in the Hall of Fame anymore. When |>  |> certain individuals believe that Steve Garvey or Jack Morris are potential |>  |> candidates, the absurdity is apparent. Gee, can these guys even compare to |>  |> the more likely future Hall of Famers like Kirby Puckett or Nolan Ryan? |>   Steve Garvey - I am not sure, probably not but I guess I could see someone making a case for him.   Jack Morris - Once again not my first choice but I can see why someone might bring up his name.  Kirby Puckett - Probably. The only reason I do not say definately is he still has time left in his career. If he continues doing what he has been then my probably will turn into a definately.  Nolan Ryan - Is there really any doubt? I think I heard something about him having some 53 records (maybe they were not all good - I don't know I did not hear any of them just the number). He has the numbers, he has the contributions to the game and community and he is a great role model. I would not say that he is the best pitcher to ever pitch the game (probably not even top 20) but he would be the first pitcher I would put in the Hall of Fame because of his accomplishments (no-hitters, strikeouts, respectable numbers - even with some weaker teams) you can go on and on. I really hope he gets ALL the possible votes.  So in summing up I have 3 groups, those that belong, those that probably do but I am not sure and those that I lean towards saying don't belong at least not without my seeing stats and possibly hearing reasons why they should go.  Yes -  Winfield, Yount, Brett(not in your mail), O. Smith, Puckett and Ryan Maybe - Murray and L. Smith No - Reardon, Garvey, Morris, Evans and definately Kingman  As I said I do not have the stats around so I do not have numbers to back this up - these are entirely my opinions based on my perceptions.