I will give you this much: defensively, one could make the argument that Jeter is overrated - or at least, his excellence stems much more from offensive capabilities and performances than defensive. I don't necessarily agree with that, but I might concede it. Though you'd also be crazy to ignore his clutch, historic defensive plays - "The Tag" - but whatever, let's put that aside.

The fact remains Jeter DID have all of those at-bats, and Larkin didn't. Jeter has performed over a longer stretch, so his stats are better... and that is exactly what gets a player into the Hall, not conjecture and speculation. We can talk all day about players with great potential that didn't have the longevity, or careers cut short, or whatever; those players don't get into the Hall.

And the ring argument is completely valid. Jeter and Posada are both elite position players. Pettitte has staggering post-season statistics. And Rivera is the greatest closer of all time. They're all Hall of Famers, part of a dynasty team. "Overvalued because they played on teams with incredible talent"? They ARE the incredible talent. They ARE the Hall of Famers. Some of the others may be fringe HOF'ers, like Bernie, but you yourself are citing the textbook definition of what HOF players are. There is absolutely no argument to make against them being in the Hall.

You have every right to argue who you think should be in the Hall. But don't throw out weak, illogical, and clearly subjective arguments and claim objectivity.