Zinger on the editor's note, Repoz. I submitted this news item as well. It's about time MLB honored Buck. It's just too bad he's not alive to see it. Poz is going to come up with a tearjerker for this story.

So Joe's saying the reason some players aren't elected to the HOF is because the public thinks they should be?

Yeah, I'm sensing some sort of editorial mistake somewhere there.

Good. I didn't think MLB had enough awards that no one was aware of or cared about. However, I am still waiting for the Fleetwood Walker Award, given annually to the most underrated player of color; the Jaret Wright Trophy, awarded to those rookies whose fine World Series performance is presumed to the beginning of the end; and the Daffy, to be held by the player with the worst nickname in baseball for a period of at least three and no more than ten seasons.

Never has the phrase "too little, too late" been more apropos.

That's not nearly as confusing as McCarver expressing shock at Ortiz squaring for a bunt because Ortiz hates OBP.

This is so weak. An award given every three years (at most) for a vague contribution to the sport. Nominations accepted by mail only, please.

If mlb believes the negro league committee screwed up, this is indeed too little too late.

Another reason why Blyleven should be voted into the Hall before it's too late.

Just elect him to the Hall, FFS.

No one speaks English quite like Joe Morgan. I'm of the belief that it is not even necessary anymore to attribute quotes to him; just by reading the quote, I can imagine Joe speaking, and of course the subsequent universal confusion. (BTW, nice play on words for the editors note: misCONCEPCION.

This isn't nearly good enough. Try again, MLB, and don't come back until you get it right.

I completely disagree, with 5,9,11.

I'm not defending the selections made by the committee, but it seems eminently reasonable to not elect Buck O'Neil. Their is no hall of fame "category" for ambassador. If you add up all his contributions it was likely hall of fame worthy, but in no particular category was he qualified. Their is, as far as I can tell no precedent for someone like that. Maybe that there is no precedent is a strong case in and of itself, but I can't fault that hall for this one.

How did Veeck get in? He was essentially an ambassador for the game and broke the color barrier in the AL. Buck was a great ambassador for the game, and the first black coach.

That baseball thing is pretty okay, but Repoz is the reason I read this site.

A couple of points:

1) MLB does not run the Hall of Fame. It has a lot of influence, to be sure, but the Hall is an independent institution. For once, it's really not Selig's fault.

2) I would vote to put O'Neill in the Hall. That said, this may ultimately be a better solution. If Buck gets elected, in 10 years he might be just another plaque. This is unique, this is special, and every time it's awarded, they're going to talk about Buck and remind everyone of what he did, and what he contributed to the game.

I'm good with this.

Its funny, but the local KC media are treating this like Buck is now a Hall of Famer, which, to my understanding, is still not true.

I have never really understood the argument for Buck O'Neil in the Hall of Fame. A kind, gentle soul who did a tremendous job of keeping the memory of the Negro Leagues alive. But serving as a historical reminder of the beauty and perhaps greatness of the Negro Leagues - to me - doesn't seem like something that warrants the Hall of Fame.

As a player, he was Mark Grace; a fairly high BA and good fielding 1B, but limited power made him good but not great. Probably not one of the top 10 NeL 1Bs and certainly not the best player not enshrined. As a coach, he was in MLB briefly on unsucceful teams. No one has ever been enshrined for their role as a coach and I doubt any received any added consideration for that role. As a manager, his job in the NeL after Jackie R was probably as difficult a job as any manager could have. But he didn't build a dynastic team or even win more than a handful. As a scout, I'm note sure, but think that his most notable signee was Oscar Gamble, a fine player, but no star himself; O'Neil was no Paul Kirchell.

I think the only meaningful difference between Buck O'Neil and Lefty O'Doul is the color of their skin. Both were good, but not great players with short peaks. Both were involved as springboards for the success of those around them, from Billy Williams for O'Neil to the DiMaggio boys for O'Doul. I'm not sure that the story telling of the departed NeL is more meritorious than O'Doul's work in bringing baseball to Asia and helping in the founding of the leagues in Japan.

Had Buck O'Neil died before the Ken Burns documentary, there would be no one lobbying for his induction. Is being available to tell stories a logical basis for induction? Remember what a fine person he was. Remember his love for baseball. But the Hall?

How did Veeck get in?

As owner. You can argue that he wasn't a good choice as owner, but he fit into a pre-existing niche really easily whereas O'Neil's argument centered on lifetime achievement. I'm not saying he shouldn't be elected if he doesn't easily fit into a pre-existing niche, but one should recognize that it becomes that much harder to elect him in for that reason.

As a scout, I'm note sure, but think that his most notable signee was Oscar Gamble, a fine player, but no star himself

I'm pretty sure he signed Billy Williams. And Lou Brock. He might've had a hand in getting the Cubs Ernie Banks (he coached Banks in the Negro Leagues and then scouted for the Cubs, but I don't know when he began scouting for the Cubs).

I think the only meaningful difference between Buck O'Neil and Lefty O'Doul is the color of their skin.

There's also: 1) what continent they did their best work in. North America for Buck O'Neil, and Asia for Lefty O'Doul; 2) use of media. O'Neil was both more recent and because of Ken Burns's "Baseball" more nationally famous. O'Doul was regionally well-known on the west coast and famous in Japan, but was never really the national figure Buck O'Neill was.

I don't have any real strong feelings for/against O'Neill in the Hall (I lean against because I do place a certain importance on precedent for induction).

dlf, there is a section of the Hall that is supposed to be reserved for owners, umpires, and other contributors, and the last category is where Buck falls.

I don't believe anyone thinks Buck's playing career is why he should be inducted, but it's all the other things he has done. He is the real reason any Negro League players are in the Hall to begin with, as he lobbied the powers that be and forced everyone to take another look at these marvelous players.

In the early days of the Hall, Landis wanted to enshrine a player who'd been killed in WWI. It ultimately didn't happen, but I can see his point.

IMO, the Hall of Fame should be a celebration of baseball. It's the Hall of Fame, after all, and Buck O'Neil was famous despite being only a decent player, decent scout, and decent coach. He kept the spark of the Negro Leagues going. dlf makes a good point regarding the influence Burns' documentary had. Without "Ken Burns' Baseball", whither Buck O'Neil? But without Buck O'Neil, whither the history of the Negro Leagues? Sure, some of it would still be there, but it would be lesser without O'Neil's storytelling, and his willingness to tell stories, and his pro-active efforts to tell the stories.

Decent player, decent coach, decent scout, decent man, a great historian, and a great ambassador for the game. What's not to like?

(And for the record, I've always been in favor of O'Doul, as well.)

I think Buck O'Neill should be the first winner of the Lefty O'Doul Award, which would be like the Spink Award, only given to people whose overall contributions to the game are difficult to pigeonhole but advance the knowledge and/or enjoyment of baseball. Other potential winners include Max Patkin, Bill James and Sean Forman.

1) MLB does not run the Hall of Fame. It has a lot of influence, to be sure, but the Hall is an independent institution. For once, it's really not Selig's fault.

Except check out the people who do run the Hall. They are all MLB men.

While I agree there isn't much precedent for an O'Neil-like selection, there is some. Veeck qualifies to a degree, and certainly Henry Chadwick and Sol White.

Except check out the people who do run the Hall. They are all MLB men.

I can forgive you for thinking that the Hall's president, Dale Petroskey, is an MLB guy, but in fact he's a former Republican Party apparatchik, whose job prior to moving to the Hall was dumbing down the National Geographic Society.