 |
 |
UPPER MANAGEMENT
Fantasy Sports Neighborhood
|
| Welcome |
|
|
Welcome to THE UPPER MANAGEMENT. Fantasy Sports Neighborhood.
You are currently viewing the UM as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features.
The UM opened August 17th, 2007 as a handpicked 150 members who were asked to join for their smarts and community involvement. But the word got out that the UM neighborhood is not just your average start up community .... Members begun jumping in from word of mouth .. and now the UM stands at almost 300 members and over 30,000 posts and growing!
The site has it's very own Texas Holdem table which has members playing against each other 24/7! .. MLB Gameday audio only for the community. A live chat room, fantasy leagues with the winner landing up to 100 dollars in prizes. We also have our own FREE Baseball draft kit for our UM members, as well as an upcomming Football draft kit. We also run our own monthly MILB prospect list. But most importantly .. The UM has grown into a community of sports friends. So jump in and, join the UM today! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shafferbctd
Joined: 11 Feb 2008
Posts: 184
|
 Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:33 pm Post subject: Will Maddox be Unanimous? |
  |
|
I had the great pleasure of watching (on television) Greg Maddox pitch what may have been his last game at Wrigley Field. Although he lost the game, he clearly showed why he is one of the most successful pitchers of all time (mound presence, control, etc.) and received a much deserved standing ovation from the crowd when he was lifted in the fifth inning. No question he is a first ballot Hall of Famer.
There has never been a unanimous ballot for anyone entering the Hall of Fame, not Ruth, Aaron, Mays or Mantle. Will Maddox be the first? Will he top the mark for the top two, Tom Seaver at 98.84% of the ballots cast, Nolan Ryan at 98.79% of the ballots cast?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Delbert6
Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 1474
Location: Maine
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No,
I think its impossible for anyone to achieve it,,,
Think about it, every year, there are always the handful of mundane writers who make it a point to vote for some dipshit who doesn't even deserve to be on the ballott in the first place,,,,
_________________
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bizplayboy
Website Admin
Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Posts: 4569
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Delbert6 wrote: |
No,
I think its impossible for anyone to achieve it,,,
Think about it, every year, there are always the handful of mundane writers who make it a point to vote for some dipshit who doesn't even deserve to be on the ballott in the first place,,,, |
Yeah .. As much as he deserves it, so did Cal Ripkin a few others ... I think giving him a unanimous vote would go against some of these writers opinion of keeping the Baseball purity. kind of like why most HOF players dont get all perfect score when clearly everyone knows they should be in the HOF.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q-Burt
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 65
Location: South Carolina
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I figured that Roger Clemens would be known as the best pitcher or our era. But with the steriods allegations, this makes me think Greg Maddux is the dominant pitcher of our time instead of Clemens. He should be a unanimous vote in.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDstoverMSU
Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 407
Location: E.Lansing, MI
|
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Clemens was a great pitcher, but the best pitchers of our era IMO were Pedro and Maddux. The run Pedro put together from 97-03 was beyond dominate. He just owned everyone and the only other run of our era that was as good if not better was Greg Maddux from '92-'98.
_________________
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derek Jeter 02
Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 626
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 9:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NDstoverMSU wrote: |
| Clemens was a great pitcher, but the best pitchers of our era IMO were Pedro and Maddux. The run Pedro put together from 97-03 was beyond dominate. He just owned everyone and the only other run of our era that was as good if not better was Greg Maddux from '92-'98. |
Roger Clemens is a steroid offender so he will not go down as the best of his time. But before this all happened, everyone i know thought he was the best of our time and maybe ever.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDstoverMSU
Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 407
Location: E.Lansing, MI
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 10:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Derek Jeter 02 wrote: |
| NDstoverMSU wrote: |
| Clemens was a great pitcher, but the best pitchers of our era IMO were Pedro and Maddux. The run Pedro put together from 97-03 was beyond dominate. He just owned everyone and the only other run of our era that was as good if not better was Greg Maddux from '92-'98. |
Roger Clemens is a steroid offender so he will not go down as the best of his time. But before this all happened, everyone i know thought he was the best of our time and maybe ever. |
Even before the steroid issue I could never give Roger Clemens even the smallest amount of consideration for best ever.
It will be interesting to see in a few years to see if Greg Maddux could be a unanimous pick for the Cooperstown. It probably wont happen like mentioned above though it would be cool if he was.
_________________
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commish
Assistant Admin
Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Posts: 1683
Location: Brooklyn, NY
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ou guys are all right and it makes me laugh how some of those names you guys mentioned were not unanimous....there is a line btwn keeping the purity and history of the game and just being plain retarded. Forget about the fact that Ruth or whomever was never unanimous....give me one good reason why Maddux should not be unanimous? he has the awards, he has 350 wins which is almost unheard of in this era of baseball and may not ever happen again.
What good reason does any retarded writer have to not put Maddux's name on a ballot? because someone 80 years ago didnt get in 100% for whatever reason? come on now
_________________
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
