|
Yeah, as much as I hate the Ansons, Chapmans (both of them), Bonds, and Francos of this world, one of the prime things I enjoy about my OOTP world is that none of the BS in the real one matters, or even exists, if I don't let it.
My usual compromise is to try and avoid having these types at my club, but even then it's not a hard-and-fast rule. I kind of like the idea of Dixie Walker or Ben Chapman being stuck at a club with a bunch of minority guys and being able to do nada about it. That's how the real world should be, in my book. Live and let live.
Another interesting (if perhaps unrelated) dilemma is, do the questionable types up for consideration with the Vets Committee for HoF entry this year deserve their plaque?
Again, I am no fan of these guys, but nor do I like revisionist history. Better to remember it and learn from it, I reckon. How can you exclude these guys when Rogers Hornsby, Anson, and any number of other dodgy mofos are safely ensconced? I don't think you should.
I definitely think Rose should get in. Bonds, Sheffield, Clemens (allegedly) cheated in ways that helped produce the stats now forming the basis for their HoF eligibility. Which muddies the water. I think even without the cheating, each of them - plus A-Rod - would have got in. Any writer who shares that view should vote them in. It's not a popularity contest, like the ASG.
G
|