The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum is a place every baseball fan should visit. The emphasis of the building is on the latter with the former being an end of tour brief stop in the most dull part of the exhibit.
I treat the plaque room, and membership in it, as a sorta tiered place. For players who were stars when I was youn…
The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum is a place every baseball fan should visit. The emphasis of the building is on the latter with the former being an end of tour brief stop in the most dull part of the exhibit.
I treat the plaque room, and membership in it, as a sorta tiered place. For players who were stars when I was young, it is a little bit of nostalgia towards my time of hero worship long since gone. Remembering how 10 year old me felt about Reggie hitting 3 homers or seeing Tom Terrific's drop and drive or Brock's daring on the base paths. Childhood's stars are something special.
For players who were stars when I was an adult, it is pretty dull. I've learned that players are people with, far too often, feet of clay just like the rest of us and no longer come even close to worshiping them for their exploits. I also have formed my own ability to ascertain value without as much reliance on outside voices. I don't want or need the BBWAA or Vets' Comm to tell me about Puckett vs. Mattingly or Morris vs. Steib. My opinion on Barry Bonds or Harold Baines won't budge an inch because of any discussion around Lake Glimmerglass.
But for players who played long before I was alive, induction and the debates around it are a great way to organize history. I would know nothing about Jack Glasscock but for the discussion about whether he should be included. My knowledge of the ABCs - Anson, Brouthers, Connor - is because they were selected. And that is true of players of much more recent vintage too like Robin Roberts or Richie Ashburn.
What I guess I'm saying is that I don't follow the BBWAA choices at all or the modern era VCs either. But I do continue to use the induction debates and history to help guide my study of those from prior years. So (a) the Museum is - by far - the best part of the NBHoFaM and (b) HoF part is still interesting to me as a way to organize my thinking about older generations.
The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum is a place every baseball fan should visit. The emphasis of the building is on the latter with the former being an end of tour brief stop in the most dull part of the exhibit.
I treat the plaque room, and membership in it, as a sorta tiered place. For players who were stars when I was young, it is a little bit of nostalgia towards my time of hero worship long since gone. Remembering how 10 year old me felt about Reggie hitting 3 homers or seeing Tom Terrific's drop and drive or Brock's daring on the base paths. Childhood's stars are something special.
For players who were stars when I was an adult, it is pretty dull. I've learned that players are people with, far too often, feet of clay just like the rest of us and no longer come even close to worshiping them for their exploits. I also have formed my own ability to ascertain value without as much reliance on outside voices. I don't want or need the BBWAA or Vets' Comm to tell me about Puckett vs. Mattingly or Morris vs. Steib. My opinion on Barry Bonds or Harold Baines won't budge an inch because of any discussion around Lake Glimmerglass.
But for players who played long before I was alive, induction and the debates around it are a great way to organize history. I would know nothing about Jack Glasscock but for the discussion about whether he should be included. My knowledge of the ABCs - Anson, Brouthers, Connor - is because they were selected. And that is true of players of much more recent vintage too like Robin Roberts or Richie Ashburn.
What I guess I'm saying is that I don't follow the BBWAA choices at all or the modern era VCs either. But I do continue to use the induction debates and history to help guide my study of those from prior years. So (a) the Museum is - by far - the best part of the NBHoFaM and (b) HoF part is still interesting to me as a way to organize my thinking about older generations.