2018 Wall of Fame

zambonir 2018-02-27 19:30:20 UTC #1

No fan vote this year for obvious/sad reasons.

What stood out to me though, was this:

The Phillies are also celebrating another baseball legend on Toyota Wall of Fame Night: Pat Gillick, who will be named the first executive inductee into the Wall of Fame.

A bit of a loophole really, as Owens certainly isn't on there for his managing

VoteForKalas 2018-03-02 01:26:28 UTC #2

This may be unpopular, but I think putting Halladay on the WOF when he only played here for ~3 years is a real stretch.

Gillick is one can make a case for - I think he continues to get too much credit, he inherited almost all the talent that won the WS and then oversaw both as GM and President the collapse of the Phillies due to willful ignorance and incompetence. He consistently defended Amaro who was a terrible GM and never stood up to Giles/Monty to demand the organization plan for the future and rebuild.

I think the Phillies at this point have driven home the clear message: the WOF is purely a PR enterprise. They were going to put Pete Rose on last season for goodness sake, tells us all we need to know.

zambonir 2018-03-02 02:12:08 UTC #3

Yup, but that was already obvious. I would just accept it and stop caring!

And you're not wrong about Roy either but they changed the rule for Thome also knowing it was going to open the door for Halladay and Lee and Lidge. He was gonna get it anyway, so it's hard to deny him the memorial. In the free agency era it's also really hard to only have homegrown players, and only homegrown players are likely to play somewhere for 5+ distinguished years.

The real question is going to be number retirement, since he's also going to Cooperstown eventually. This may actually be a clever way for the team to avoid that, since it would certainly be a debate, and based on his Phillies career alone it would be crazy to have his number on the outfield wall when Rollins, Utley and Howard may not all get there (so long as the BBHOF rule is in place).

Personally, I think it is all subjective and silly so I have no problem with putting guys on the Wall based on very small samples and memorable moments. That's what Pete provided (putting aside the character issue), that's what Thome provided (symbolism as much as winning/production) and Halladay and Lee were two of the most memorable players on several of the most memorable teams - even though, in the end, they won nothing and were not here long.

VoteForKalas 2018-03-02 13:38:31 UTC #4

I agree it is obvious, but I'm not going to stop caring.

Character matters and should matter. Context also should matter.

Rose is an absolute scumbag and serial liar. He should never be celebrated by the Phillies much less put on their WOF. That is deeply embarrassing. Yes, he was part of the great 1980 team, but his actions and behavior since have long over shadowed such glory unfortunately in my mind.

Thome is not only a total class act, but does have important Phillies history on his side. Prior to his arrival via FA, the Phillies were the dregs of MLB. They'd had 2 winning season in 16 years. They had a deserved rep for not caring about winning and being cheap, fielding teams that had a chance to only play out the string and fill the owner's pockets. The new stadium opens, Thome signs and a new era was born that eventually led to the run from 2007-2011.

I see Halladay as a class act as well, but his place in Phillies history is a stretch imo. He came onto a dominant team after they had already won a WS. There was no new era, in fact the move to bring him in helped kill that era imo because it helped locking the Phillies into not facing reality and rebuilding sooner.

bkeich 2018-03-02 15:36:44 UTC #5

There are two ways to look at things like the Wall of Fame:

Players that played for a long time and excelled. The vast majority should come from this.

Players that played for a short time and did incredible things. Roy Halladay's Phillies career falls in this category and I think it does justify WOF enshrinement. He pitched a perfect game, a very rare act. More impressively, he pitched the single most dominating postseason game in league history. There have only been 2 no hitters in the postseason, and while I did not see the first one it is hard to believe it was more impressive than Halladay's. Roy could have gone 15 innings that day and still been a no hitter IMHO. They werent even close to getting a real hit off him, maybe a dribbler would have happened, but that was about it, the Reds were completely baffled by him that day.

Those two things combined with solid seasons and a Cy Young (and another 2nd place finish) to me justify his enshrinement, even if it was a short career with the Phils (4 years),

zambonir 2018-03-02 18:23:31 UTC #6

Yup, that's the thing about Roy for me. The symbolic power of his individual achievements was bigger than Thome's (I'm not sure you can actually reward Thome for ownership's decision to pay Thome, or for the fact that a good team was ready to coalesce around him). And those 2010 and 2011 teams were probably the best teams of the era (too bad it's not soccer).

And Rose presents a similar symbolic narrative to Thome. He got to town and a team that couldn't win it all finally won it all. May be total BS but sports is about stories. The ethics, and his actual stats, are something else, but at least it's all moot now.

VoteForKalas 2018-03-03 17:01:52 UTC #7

Bkeich, good points about Roy's individual achievements as a Phillies. I can agree that makes a case for legitimate place on the WOF.

Zambonir, bottom line for me: if the whole purpose of the WOF is pushing bs public relations stories, that is a real shame. It could be a really cool and authentic way to celebrate real Phillies history.

zambonir 2018-03-03 17:27:58 UTC #8

Heh, well, in a way, that's the one thing I like about Rose as a sports icon. We know exactly who he is. Great player, beloved by his teammates (some of whom were probably no better behaved, as far as the thing that brought him down this time), garbage person. Nobody was being fooled by BS or PR when it came to him. We don't really know this with the same sort of clarity about a lot of other greats (many of whom are also not good people).

If the WoF was a truly meaningful thing there would be a real selection process. Putting it to either fan votes or insider decisions (and both groups were happy to pick Rose) makes it what it is. But I suspect that except for the Yankees this is the case for most teams. The Phillies actually remain selective compared to some. I remember going to 2010 NLCS and seeing the Giants Wall, which had only existed since 2008 (when the park opened) and had like 40 people on it, including Jeff Brantley and JT Snow. I mean, Shawn Estes got in a a couple of years ago! Their requirement is five years for all-stars and nine otherwise. Mickey Morandini needs a campaign manager.