Bill Buckner

[jhop18]

Bill Buckner deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. Everyone remembers him for the 1986 game 6 boot in the 9th, but it did not cost them the World series. Buckner was the reason the Sox were even at the World Series and it was game 6. They still had one more game to play. The Red Sox pitching blew a large lead. Buckner shouldn't of even been in the game because of his ankles. Bukner won many gold gloves and hit about 2800 hits. In my mind a shoe in Hall of famer, but one measely error ends any hope and dreams of every kid and the dream of Buckner's.

[Baseball Guru]

1st off, welcome to the site:wave1:

2nd, IMO, I dont think that error cost him a shot in the HOF, but rather his "ok" career did..

He never won a GG that I am aware of, yes he has a little over 2700 hits, but he played 22 years.. His average is under .280, he had less than 200 hr's, had a little over 1200 rbi's, his obp% is only .321 and there are no players (understandably) in the HOF with those kind of #'s from his position..

I think Keith Hernandez, who has similar stats and played about 500 less games and does have 1 GG's and a MVP on his resume, deserves to be in more-so than Buckner...

Buckner has only finished in the top 10 in MVP voting 2 times in his career and both times he was exactly 10th in hte voting....

Now I think he gets a raw deal with that 86 World Series when it comes to fans and media and his place in history and I agree that he should not have been in the game at that point in time but IMO that incident did not cost his his place in the HOF...

JMO:)

[jhop18]

You do make a strong argument, but the web site The Baseball Page sums it up perfectly by saying:

"Destined to be remembered as the goat of the 1986 World Series, Bill Buckner deserves a better fate. He collected more hits in his career than all but roughly 50 players in baseball history, he won a batting title, and he played in four decades. Overlooking the fact that his infamous miscue occurred when Game Six of the 1986 Fall Classic was tied, fans somehow ignored the several other mishaps that befell the Red Sox earlier in the inning. Buckner retired less than four years later, bitter that his legacy was forever tarnished."

I don't know, but if Buckner didn't boot that ball then even you right now might also believe he's a good shot at the prized Hall of Fame.

[Tigers#1]

You've got dominant players left and right who didn't make the hall. I don't think Buckner even deserved to be on the ballot.

[Obri]

Although I was of course aware of his MVP award, the second thing I always remember about Bill Buckner was him scaling the outfield wall for Aaron's 715th home run. He wanted that bad. :D

[jhop18]

On that note Hank Aaron was the most underrated players of all time. He got the frickin' ome run record nd yet no one really considers him as the best player ever, everyone say it's the Babe, but wait who's first for all time homeruns, Aaron. They say Bonds. STEROIDS!!! Bonds is on the juice. Go Aaron he is my favorite player of all time.

[treasurecoast1]

You do make a strong argument, but the web site The Baseball Page sums it up perfectly by saying:

"Destined to be remembered as the goat of the 1986 World Series, Bill Buckner deserves a better fate. He collected more hits in his career than all but roughly 50 players in baseball history, he won a batting title, and he played in four decades. Overlooking the fact that his infamous miscue occurred when Game Six of the 1986 Fall Classic was tied, fans somehow ignored the several other mishaps that befell the Red Sox earlier in the inning. Buckner retired less than four years later, bitter that his legacy was forever tarnished."

I don't know, but if Buckner didn't boot that ball then even you right now might also believe he's a good shot at the prized Hall of Fame.

Buckner would not have gone into the HOF unless he had gotten 3,000 hits. He hung on to age 41, when he stunk.

It's this simple for me: There are SO MANY guys better than Buckner NOT in the HOF that it begs the question of "Why Bill Buckner?"

Why Buckner and not . . .

Jim Rice
Dwight Evans
Ron Santo
Stan Hack
Darrell Evans
Graig Nettles
Don Mattingly
Will Clark
Al Oliver
Joe Torre
Tony Oliva
Vada Pinson
Fred Lynn
Reggie Smith
Dom DiMaggio
Heine Groh
Bobby Grich
Joe Gordon
Lou Whitaker
Alan Trammell
Lance Parrish
Rusty Staub
Jimmy Wynn
Bert Blyleven
Tommy John
Jim Kaat
Dave McNally
Mike Cuellar
Bill Freehan
Elston Howard
Jose Canseco
Andre Dawson

I would argue that each and every player on that list had a better career than Buckner. So why Buckner? Why Billy Buckshot before any of these guys?

[jhop18]

Buckner would not have gone into the HOF unless he had gotten 3,000 hits. He hung on to age 41, when he stunk.

It's this simple for me: There are SO MANY guys better than Buckner NOT in the HOF that it begs the question of "Why Bill Buckner?"

Why Buckner and not . . .

Jim Rice
Dwight Evans
Ron Santo
Stan Hack
Darrell Evans
Graig Nettles
Don Mattingly
Will Clark
Al Oliver
Joe Torre
Tony Oliva
Vada Pinson
Fred Lynn
Reggie Smith
Dom DiMaggio
Heine Groh
Bobby Grich
Joe Gordon
Lou Whitaker
Alan Trammell
Lance Parrish
Rusty Staub
Jimmy Wynn
Bert Blyleven
Tommy John
Jim Kaat
Dave McNally
Mike Cuellar
Bill Freehan
Elston Howard
Jose Canseco
Andre Dawson

I would argue that each and every player on that list had a better career than Buckner. So why Buckner? Why Billy Buckshot before any of these guys?

JOSE CANSECO umm earth to you, :lmao: , but didn't he just admit to steroids??? There are a few on the list that may deserve to be in the HOF over Buckner, but there are a lot of guys on this list who DO NOT!!! JOSE CANSECO, the cheater, don't make me laugh. :lmao:

[treasurecoast1]

JOSE CANSECO umm earth to you, :lmao: , but didn't he just admit to steroids??? There are a few on the list that may deserve to be in the HOF over Buckner, but there are a lot of guys on this list who DO NOT!!! JOSE CANSECO, the cheater, don't make me laugh. :lmao:

Jose Canseco was the best player in baseball from 1988-90, before Barry Bonds stepped forward. He's become a parody of himself, and his career fell short of the HOF as he went from a 40-40 man to a DH. But Canseco reached a peak that Buckner never even came close to. Canseco won an MVP award and deserved it. Canseco was ROY in 1986 and deserved it. Canseco was a truly great player for a number of years; Buckner never was a great player; he was a good player who hung on and had a long career.

The steroid issue is one where steroids will eventually be seen as a condition of the time. The revelations are such that it seems that steroids were SO WIDELY USED that it was a condition of the game. You played MLB in the 60s, you took greenies; in the 90s, you took steroids. When EVERYBODY (or most players) take steroids (and it may well prove that most players WERE roiding), then steriods, however wrong, however illegal or immoral, become a condition of the time.

My point about Buckner, though, is that if THAT MANY players are better than him, but NOT in the HOF, why should he be?