Congratulations to Harold Baines on his Hall of Fame induction. The committee that voted him had a hard decision and while I may disagree with it, I am happy for the guy and his family.
Harold Baines belongs in the Hall of Very Very Good. Not the HOF. I remember a few years ago when Cory Giger brought up a point about Andrew McCutchen on his radio show. It was after the 2015 season and Giger asked if Cutch continued putting up the numbers he had been, would he be in the HOF? Cory pointed out that Cutch would end up with about 2500 hits and possibly 350 home runs.
It seemed during that time the HOF voters only considered players with 3000 hits or 500 home runs. Would a player like McCutchen, who was constantly in the top five for MVP voting and widely considered one of the best players in the game be considered for the HOF?
The point is kind of moot since McCutchen’s play has declined a bit. But it is still an interesting question. Can someone who is regularly one of the best players, but does not have those big numbers be in the HOF? My answer would be yes.
However, Harold Baines is not one of those guys. He never finished higher than 9th in the MVP voting. He only led one category during his career (slugging percentage in 1984). I realize this does not mean much, but I remember his baseball cards being worth slightly more than commons. You can probably get a Baines rookie card for $10. Does that really sound like a Hall of Fame caliber player?
Again, Harold Baines was a very good player, who had a very long and productive career. By all accounts, he was a fantastic guy. However, he is just not HOF-worthy. At least not in my opinion.
Is the baseball Hall of Fame even worth discussing at this point? The best players aren’t in, players like Baines ARE in. In my opinion it’s lost any meaning it once had.
It definitely is losing some of it’s luster.