Baseball's Hall of Fame-or Hall of Shame? Paperback – June 16, 2009

The author provides very good objective criteria that ball players should meet to be voted into the Hall Of Fame.Certain benchmarks have previously been established. Such as 500 home runs,3000 hits, 300 wins. He raises the question as to whether the player, who may have had a long career, was actually considered to have been dominant and great. Or whether the totals came from longevity. He argues that the players career totals must be thought of in the context of the era he played in. Here are the authors Hall Of Fame Questions:1. In his prime, was the player ever considered to be,for at least 3 years,either the best player in baseball or the best player in his league?2. For the better part of a decade, was the player considered to be among the five or six best players in baseball?3. Could a valid case be made for the player being one of the ten best players in his position in baseball history?4. For the better part of a decade, was the player considered to be the best player in the game at his position? In his league?5. How did the player fare in the annual voting for the MVP or Cy Young Award? Did he ever win either award? If not, how often did he finish in the top 10?6. How often was the player selected to the All-Star team?7. How often did the player lead his league in some major offensive or pitching statistical category?8. Was the player a major contributor to his team's success? Did he do little things to help his team win? Did he play mostly on winning teams? Was he a team Leader? Was he a good defensive player? Is there any evidence to suggest the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?Good questions. The author discusses the qualifications of past electees by their playing position as well as many potential future members. He also discusses the effects of steroids and other enhancement drugs. His lists players he feels are deserving to be inducted as well as those who, in his mind, are in the HOF but should not be. A fine provocative read.

As many others have pointed out, the methodology of this book to deem who is deserving for the Hall of Fame is antiquated. It's not particularly well written, as far as I'm concerned, as the author normally only gives about a page per player and sometimes as little as a paragraph. It's the kind of book that I would have devoured when I was 11 years old and still learning the game, but as an adult with decades of knowledge behind me, it is a disappointment. There is entirely too much subjective thought, and the author foolishly goes after Bill James on a couple of occasions, misreading what James wrote in his book The Politics of Glory. I recently re-read James' book and while it is dated (James has since moved forward with his own statistical analysis), it is still light years ahead of Cohen's book (who is hanging on to RBIs and wins as key statistics). I would have expected this book to have been written in 1979, not 2009.

In order to have a book that is anything but subjective, you need some objectivity and a real basis for your views. At least in part, this book fails. First, it rarely makes use of any modern stats-no WHIP, no good fielding data, no Wins Produced. Second, the author consistently makes statements like "X was (or was not) one of the top five pitchers (hitters) for the year." Says who? Based on what? The issue is not whether you agree with the author. The issue is reliability of the data. I was quite disappointed. And, stylistically, the book was no thrill either. Too many sentences read the same way with the names changed. I waanted to like this book. I enjoyed the Bill James book on the same topic. But i found this book pretty dull.

A good book about the Baseball Hall of Fame. Interesting facts and stats, especially on the 19th century players that little may be known about. Author does a great job bringing some questionable inductees to light. But, also falls short in comparison. Author will praise some players accomplishments and call the same accomplishments by another player "borderline". Example is number of all star appearances by players...sometimes 4/5 appearances is a great accomplishment and other times it is mediocre, depending on the player.

While it is interesting to have an analysis of all the players in the Hall of Fame, the analysis is superficial and simply rehashes statistics. It is not of the quality of Bill James or Jay Jaffe.