Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

FRPLG · 07-18-2005, 11:53 AM

It makes me mad that guys like Palmeiro and Monk get knocked for being very good for a very long time instead of the best for a couple years. If you look at just about every player in both the NFL and MLB HoFs most of the guys were best were the best player of their time for two or three seasons at most(if at all). Outside of the few dominate players like Ruth and Jim Brown there aren;t a lot of people who were the "best" for long periods of time. So when guys are clearly one of the top two or three for a long period of time it is ridiculous to say they weren't dominate enough to get in.

07-18-2005, 11:53 AM	#5
FRPLG MVP Join Date: May 2004 Age: 46 Posts: 10,164	Re: Palmeiro, Art Monk of the MLB? It makes me mad that guys like Palmeiro and Monk get knocked for being very good for a very long time instead of the best for a couple years. If you look at just about every player in both the NFL and MLB HoFs most of the guys were best were the best player of their time for two or three seasons at most(if at all). Outside of the few dominate players like Ruth and Jim Brown there aren;t a lot of people who were the "best" for long periods of time. So when guys are clearly one of the top two or three for a long period of time it is ridiculous to say they weren't dominate enough to get in.