The Graffe's Celebrity Death Pool

[Delores Mulva]

...ie. to ensure that players/managers don't throw/lose games.

It's more than that, although anti-corruption is certainly the foundation of the policy. Team personnel are never supposed to let on that they feel that they may lose a specific future game. They can be vague and talk about how it will be a tough season, etc. but they can't go out before a game and say "yeah, we're not winning that". Pete Rose didn't bet on every game; he confirmed that he wouldn't bet on the team when certain players (presumably pitchers he thought sucked) were going to play. What information is he giving to the bookies when he bets on his team some times, but doesn't other times?

His records as a player are really unparalleled.

It's not the Hall of Stats. The steroid era players know all about that. The players in the Hall are supposed to represent the best baseball has ever seen, both in terms of statistics and the values on the field which MLB wants players to exemplify. Pete Rose fell short on the latter. I'm sure with time all but the people with hardline views like myself will forgive him. But I think that to do so is to forget all the reasons why the anti-betting policies are in place and reduce it to "black sox bad".

[Bonlainy]

Does he belong in the HoF?

There are a lot of shady players who were and are in baseball, and some of them are in the HoF, with lesser stats then Rose. Hell yes he deserves to be in, his accomplishments are amazing and speak for themselves, plus he added a lot of intangibles that made the teams better. Yes he bet on the game, and his own team, but, to me, that doesn't erase what he did on the field.

[PPatty]

But the simple fact is that there is no evidence that Pete Rose ever bet AGAINST the Reds while he was managing them. Betting on his own team would only have provided further incentive to Rose to do everything he could to WIN

This is also a black and white view, though. If you bet on the team you're managing, it creates an incentive to emphasize short-term results rather than making decisions with the big picture in mind. Think using aces rather than resting them in meaningless games near the end of the season, or running the bases aggressively to cover the spread or nail a prop bet.

I'm not saying Pete Rose did any of that, by the way, nor am I saying that he doesn't belong in Cooperstown. But there are reasons, beyond merely the W-L column, to oppose participants gambling on their own games.

Anyway, he actually he is a HoFer already, now that I think about it:

Pete Rose made history in WWE: How he became a WWE Hall of Famer (msn.com)

[PPatty]

Son, I'm just gonna tell you this one time: You want to keep working here, stay off the drugs.

John Amos, actor in groundbreaking TV roles, dies at 84 (msn.com)

[Delores Mulva]

Hell yes he deserves to be in, his accomplishments are amazing and speak for themselves....

I brought this up with my buddy, and he mentioned something that I hadn't considered. Pete Rose's accomplishments are in the Hall of Fame:

Picture of the display case honoring Pete Rose's hitting record.

But Pete Rose isn't. His accomplishment rose to the level of the Hall, but he did not.

[Zarbonius]

Pete Rose didn't bet on every game; he confirmed that he wouldn't bet on the team when certain players (presumably pitchers he thought sucked) were going to play. What information is he giving to the bookies when he bets on his team some times, but doesn't other times?

So, sort of an insider trading/betting scenario (deliberate or accidental)? Sure, that's a reasonable concern. Do you really think that concern is enough to bar him from the Hall of Fame though?

The players in the Hall are supposed to represent the best baseball has ever seen, both in terms of statistics and the values on the field which MLB wants players to exemplify.

That's.. I mean, that's demonstrably false? The Hall has a bunch of absolute bastards in it, both on and off the field.

This is also a black and white view, though. If you bet on the team you're managing, it creates an incentive to emphasize short-term results rather than making decisions with the big picture in mind. Think using aces rather than resting them in meaningless games near the end of the season, or running the bases aggressively to cover the spread or nail a prop bet.

Sure, and if it's detrimental to the team's success, he should be fired by the GM. But I can't see how you make that argument with a straight face, given your position on the Clayton Kershaw potential perfect game controversy a couple of years ago.

EDIT - you've got a really good point with the proliferation of prop bets in recent years. That wasn't a thing back when Rose was betting, so it's moot for his case specifically, but that could lead to some significant fuckery if the manager had placed money on a particular prop bet.

[PPatty]

I can't see how you make that argument with a straight face, given your position on the Clayton Kershaw potential perfect game controversy a couple of years ago.

Chasing history (e.g., a legacy achievement such as a perfect game) is the opposite of chasing short-term results (a bet).

[Delores Mulva]

Do you really think that concern is enough to bar him from the Hall of Fame though?

Yes. He knew the rules and broke them anyways. Nobody is owed a spot in the Hall of Fame.

That's.. I mean, that's demonstrably false? The Hall has a bunch of absolute bastards in it, both on and off the field.

You may be looking at a different way of parsing "values" than I intended when I said it.

[Zarbonius]

Yes. He knew the rules and broke them anyways.

Lol. I mean, there are a bunch of rule-breakers in the Hall as well (pitchers who were spit-ballers, scuffers, etc). They broke the rules of the game itself, and they were enshrined. I won't even talk about the history of sign-stealing, corked bats, pine tar, drug use, etc among Hall of Famers (see how nice I am)?

So what makes this specific rule-breaking so much more special?

Nobody is owed a spot in the Hall of Fame.

...is a cool-sounding quote that you can say as you dramatically walk away in slow motion from an explosion, while simultaneously putting your sunglasses on.

But, uh... nobody said that anyone is "owed a spot" in the Hall, so.... what are you on about, exactly?

You may be looking at a different way of parsing "values" than I intended when I said it.

It looks like you may have lost the follow-up sentence that explains what you actually meant by "values" (probably due to some posting malfunction or something). Feel free to either edit the original post to include that missing sentence, or just make a new one if you'd rather, as I'm curious what you *did* mean by "values"...

[Zarbonius]

Chasing history (e.g., a legacy achievement such as a perfect game) is the opposite of chasing short-term results (a bet).

Ha, unless he had a prop bet on Kershaw pitching a perfect game.

(or conversely, one on him pitching fewer than 8 innings)

[Nerkahia]

Charlie Hustle and the matter of Pete Rose is a four episode documentary on HBO Max that I would highly recommend by the way. I thought it was very unbiased and pretty thorough. I learned a few details I didn't remember.

[Merrick ap'Milandra]

The players in the Hall are supposed to represent the best baseball has ever seen, both in terms of statistics and the values on the field which MLB wants players to exemplify. Pete Rose fell short on the latter.

That's the first time anyone has ever explained it to me in a way that made me think he should actually NOT be in the hall of fame.

I was always under the impression that it WAS the "hall of stats" and by that measuring stick, he should be in it.

I now think he shouldn't.

[Zarbonius]

That's the first time anyone has ever explained it to me in a way that made me think he should actually NOT be in the hall of fame.

I was always under the impression that it WAS the "hall of stats" and by that measuring stick, he should be in it.

I now think he shouldn't.

Merrick, what Delores said makes literally NO sense.

The players in the Hall are supposed to represent the best baseball has ever seen, both in terms of statistics and the values on the field which MLB wants players to exemplify.

Since Rose clearly qualifies on the basis of stats, you can ONLY be talking about the 2nd clause of Delores' quote: "and the values on the field which MLB wants players to exemplify."

First, Rose's nickname was literally "Charlie Hustle". For a game that preaches the importance of running out every ground ball, of giving 100% on EVERY play (even in the all-star game), Pete Rose was the literal incarnation of those values. Disagree with that, and thereby show me that you never, ever saw him play.

Second, Delores' rationale for excluding him from the Hall is based ENTIRELY on his actions OFF the field.


So, I have absolutely no idea what you could possibly mean when you say THAT quote was the one that convinced you. I must have missed the psychic network linkup you guys share, because nothing he said makes any literal sense, and he seems unwilling to clarify.

[Bonlainy]

Merrick, what Delores said makes literally NO sense.


Since Rose clearly qualifies on the basis of stats, you can ONLY be talking about the 2nd clause of Delores' quote: "and the values on the field which MLB wants players to exemplify."

So, I have absolutely no idea what you could possibly mean when you say THAT quote was the one that convinced you. I must have missed the psychic network linkup you guys share, because nothing he said makes any literal sense, and he seems unwilling to clarify.

The other thing Delores is unaware of, or ignoring, are names like Ty Cobb, one of the dirtiest players ever and a huge racist. He was also one of the most talented, and is in the HoF. Tris Speaker and Cap Anson (as well as Cobb) were supposedly KKK members, and in the HoF. To me that is where your argument for on and off the field fails, because that's only a few names that could be mentioned that had a shady past.

[PPatty]

The other thing Delores is unaware of, or ignoring, are names like Ty Cobb, one of the dirtiest players ever and a huge racist. He was also one of the most talented, and is in the HoF. Tris Speaker and Cap Anson (as well as Cobb) were supposedly KKK members, and in the HoF.

Anson, Cobb and Speaker were inducted before the Hall of Fame added "character" to its criteria in 1945.

[Zarbonius]

Anson, Cobb and Speaker were inducted before the Hall of Fame added "character" to its criteria in 1945.

Sure, but it's not like Anson, Cobb and Speaker are the only players with questionable character in the Hall. Players like Whitey Ford and Gaylord Perry were brazenly doctoring the ball in-game, well after the character clause was added. We can look at all the Hall players who took amphetamines or were alcoholics or wife-beaters as well; sticking our fingers in our ears and pretending they don't exist just because they are inconvenient to our argument is dishonest at best.

EDIT - conversely, using the character clause to exclude someone like Curt Schilling, based on his politics (and on him apparently becoming an asshole) AFTER finishing his playing career, is... weird?

[Tinthalas Tigris]

Sure, but it's not like Anson, Cobb and Speaker are the only players with questionable character in the Hall. Players like Whitey Ford and Gaylord Perry were brazenly doctoring the ball in-game, well after the character clause was added. We can look at all the Hall players who took amphetamines or were alcoholics or wife-beaters as well; sticking our fingers in our ears and pretending they don't exist just because they are inconvenient to our argument is dishonest at best.

EDIT - conversely, using the character clause to exclude someone like Curt Schilling, based on his politics (and on him apparently becoming an asshole) AFTER finishing his playing career, is... weird?

I've been thinking about this general argument for many things lately. Both on and off "the field."

Two completely different forms of entertainment, and two completely different means of medium as well as use or lack of a team.

Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Do we remove Michael both times he's made it, because the allegations and settlements against him?

I've thought about this one as something of most extreme in interpretive biases. I've been dealing with some things at work, in our neighborhood, at my kids' schools, and a couple organizations that I am a part of. They're typical run of the mill social or administrative issues, mostly, but they're things that I feel could be resolved without needing to be resolved; a single individual has instigated them, in most cases. Their remediation is practiced, and ends up typically with just a slap on the hand. Each of the issues as vaguely as i gave them in the examples above, have all, *mostly,* panned out, and all have had very different results, and remediations of their own.

These tremendously isolated vortexes of judgement all have one similar themes of, "what would the right thing to do, be?"

It seems to me, simply, that Pete Rose could be awarded into the Hall of Fame, as *he created a whole shit-ton of fame,* and he could have an asterisk on his character arcs and explanations for it. I don't believe Pete Rose would ever deny that he bet on sportsball. Not now, anyhow. And I'm sure his estate simply has a right to say, "no comment."

But I do believe Pete Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame, as he met or exceeded the qualification requirements, by tremendous amounts, and simply give mention to what caused such great contraversy, and provide the exhibit an explanation of how betting on played/managed/involved sports league is seen in this institution that wants to honor the greats.

Make everybody fuckin' happy.

[Zarbonius]

Thanks, Tinthalas. You make a good point about the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, and you've got me reframing this a bit from a wider view.



So, rather than just attacking Delores' stance, I think it's only fair that I explain my reasoning behind wanting Pete Rose (and others) in the Hall of Fame.


I think idolization is a problem in society today (and yesterday, but also still today). Whether it's sports stars, musicians, actors, billionaires - the problem is the same. For many kids, if someone is Famous, that means they are someone to pattern their lives after. That's... a problem... for a lot of (obvious) reasons.

And it's just not true. Not at all. A lot of stars are terrible, terrible people on a personal level (and thankfully their awful behaviour is starting to become more widely known than it was in the past).


That being said, these people are undeniably important from a cultural standpoint. You can't deny that they exist. You can't pretend that they didn't have some significant influence on their sphere of society.


So acknowledge them. Recognize their achievements. But when you induct them into their respective Halls and Museums, you should acknowledge them as people; all of their greatness in their own fields, and all of their awfulness (or decency) as human beings. Write their FULL biography, not just a highlight reel of their best moments and most momentous achievements.

Put Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame, and MAKE AN EXHIBIT on his gambling, explaining who he was as a person, not just as a ball-player. Both his greatness, and his flaws.


That's what the Hall should be. That's what it should show. A true, complete picture of the game, and the men who played it - warts and all.


So that's why I think Pete Rose should be in it. As a complex person, with both strengths and weaknesses; character traits that both drove him to achieve greatness and also led to his downfall. Any true fan of the game should want to see that; not just a page of statistics and a plaque.

[PPatty]

A few days before the rematch of the World Series he helped win, Fernando throws his last screwball:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/oth...63/ar-AA1sKEJ8

[Bonlainy]

Teri Garr, legend from Young Frankenstein, Mr. Mom, Tootsie and other movies. She was always one of my favorites.

https://www.newser.com/story/358613/comic-actor-teri-garr-dies-at-79.html?utm_source=breakingnews&utm_medium=email&u tm_campaign=20241029&utm_content=22638658215323885 501&lctg=777119028