Miller, Steinbrenner better picks than Gillick for Hall?

December 08, 2010

Gillick best choice

Juan Carlos Rodriguez

Sun Sentinel

Neither Marvin Miller nor George Steinbrenner was a better choice for the Hall of Fame.

Were they as deserving as Pat Gillick? Absolutely. This discussion is not about the merits of Gillick's candidacy as a longtime general manager. His record as one of the game's preeminent team architects is well founded. Why the Veterans Committee did not give Miller or Steinbrenner the necessary votes is the issue.

Miller was one vote short of election, prompting former baseball Commissioner Fay Vincent to call it a travesty. Both Miller and Steinbrenner were seminal figures in baseball history. Steinbrenner was on the ballot for the first time and likely will get in eventually, but Miller has been denied Hall entry five times.

Baseball players have Miller to thank for their sizeable helping of a multibillion-dollar pie. Miller accused the Hall of trying to rewrite history instead of recording it. Tough to argue with him.

jcrodriguez@tribune.com

All three belong

Dave van Dyck

Chicago Tribune

Neither Marvin Miller nor George Steinbrenner would be a better choice than Pat Gillick.

Is he better known that the oversized personalities of the other two? No. But Gillick possessed a magic wand that could turn franchises into winners. If the question becomes, "Should Miller or Steinbrenner be in the Hall of Fame?" the answer would be yes. Both deserve to be in, and both could have been voted in this past week. The committee was not limited to one choice.

The debate about whether Miller really belongs in a Hall that recognizes "contributions to the game" seems to be non-ending and, in its own way, entertaining. Yes, Miller belongs in and so does Steinbrenner, but neither should be considered more deserving than Gillick.

dvandyck@tribune.com

Honoring the architect

Steve Gould

Baltimore Sun

I understand the arguments for putting George Steinbrenner and Marvin Miller in the Hall of Fame before Pat Gillick, but I don't see how you can go wrong enshrining the architect of three World Series-winning teams.

The man was at the top of his game for years, including as recently as 2008, when he guided the Phillies to a world championship. And the Series-winning Blue Jays teams he put together in 1992 and 1993 were monsters. Growing up around Baltimore, I hated those Toronto teams because their talent level seemed unfair.

Speaking of Baltimore, I doubt you'll find anyone here who would oppose Gillick's entry into the Hall. The Orioles not only haven't made the playoffs since he left their front office in 1998, they haven't even had a winning season. It might not be a direct, one-to-one correlation, but it's no coincidence, either.

sgould@tribune.com

Miller most deserving

Kevin Baxter

Los Angeles Times

As executive director of the players' union, Marvin Miller championed the rights of the players and won huge salary increases — and George Steinbrenner was eager to pay them. Both transformed and revolutionized the game and are more deserving than Pat Gillick of a spot in the Hall.

But it is Miller's impact that has been more positive and more sweeping, leaving he and Jackie Robinson as perhaps the most important figures in baseball in the last half of the 20th Century,

Miller pioneered the changes that saw baseball's minimum wage grow from $6,000 to more than $414,000 a year, and clubs' annual revenue jumped from $50 million a season in his first year to more than $7 billion last season.

Miller's enshrinement is long overdue.

kbaxter@tribune.com

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.