411 replies to this topic

[RShack]

Not sad or true. 

 

Bagwell isn't in yet because of PED suspicion, but he'll get in. Probably next year. That's all. 

 

Biggio got in last year, he played his entire career in the "wrong city".

 

Oh, I know he'll get in... but, let's face it, if he was a MFY he'd be in by now... just like if Biggio was a MFY he would have been Jeter...  

 

In other words, being an Astro doesn't kill your chances, but it sure doesn't help any, simply because people don't notice nearly as much... same thing for some other cities too... at least historically anyway...

[Pedro Cerrano]

Derek Jeter playing for the Cincinnati Reds for 18 years.  Is he Barry Larkin?

[RShack]

It's just absurd.

 

What are the odds NOBODY in the Hall used steroids?  Are Bonds and Clemens having it held against them because they happened the play in an era where there was finally rigorous testing and investigations?

 

How is it any different than guys who used greenies back in the day?

 

Greenies are a completely different level of enhancement... all they do is let you be more of who you already are... they don't change who you are... they don't let you do things you couldn't do without them... greenies would not have made Jay Gibbons look like he belonged...

 

The 2 things are the same only in an abstract argument and nowhere else...

 

But we've been thru this already several times...

[Pedro Cerrano]

Ok, well, the fact is they both were taken to enhance performance, which is what the issue is.

 

And you don't have the first clue about how much steroids helped someone like Bonds.  Nobody does.  He's being penalized because of the era he played in.

[SBTarheel]

It's just absurd.

 

What are the odds NOBODY in the Hall used steroids?  Are Bonds and Clemens having it held against them because they happened the play in an era where there was finally rigorous testing and investigations?

 

How is it any different than guys who used greenies back in the day?

 

It's a huge double standard, and it doesn't help that Bonds and Clemens were both pricks.  I am sure that some writers aren't voting for them because of that and are using roids as a scapegoat.

 

The whole thing makes me mad.

Bonds and Clemens are the "best" users out there, A rod too..

 

and they're assholes, that doesn't help.

 

But this isn't the "hall of nice dudes". Whatever, we have assholes on here that are damn good posters, it's part of the game. 

[Mackus]

I would vote for the HOF as if steroids and PEDs did not matter.  That means both guys that tested positive and were suspended, guys that were suspected, and guys with no stink at all get voted in if I think they are good enough.

 

I wouldn't distinguish between guys who failed tests and were suspended and guys who were merely suspected.  But if another voter does, I can respect that separation.  I wouldn't consider being caught doping to mean a player is effectively ineligible for the HOF, but I won't argue too much with someone who does thing that.  I do have a problem with deciding who was suspected of use and who wasn't.  I'm not sure it's fair to draw a line between guys in the Mitchell Report (or the list of players who tested positive but weren't suspended during the pilot phase of the testing program) and guys who never failed tests but were suspected by many or any (Bagwell, Piazza).

 

I also have a problem with voters who try to judge which players would have been good enough without steroids (Bonds, Clemens) and guys who may have fallen short if they hadn't had the advantages of all the juice (McGwire, Sosa).  Because how can you judge that with any consistency or accuracy?

[RShack]

Ok, well, the fact is they both were taken to enhance performance, which is what the issue is.

 

And you don't have the first clue about how much steroids helped someone like Bonds.  Nobody does.  He's being penalized because of the era he played in.

 

Well, I do know that Bonds became downright super-human with a bat... I know because I used mlb.tv to watch his AB's during his later years, and if the ball was anywhere near hittable, he hit it out... if there was a stat for dingers-per-hittable-pitch, he would have left everybody behind by several miles... it was truly amazing to watch...

 

Without roids, he was HOF anyway... but with them, he was from another planet.   Greenies don't do that....

[SBTarheel]

Oh, I know he'll get in... but, let's face it, if he was a MFY he'd be in by now... just like if Biggio was a MFY he would have been Jeter...  

 

In other words, being an Astro doesn't kill your chances, but it sure doesn't help any, simply because people don't notice nearly as much... same thing for some other cities too... at least historically anyway...

Oh stop. 

[Pedro Cerrano]

So your evidence of how his performance was enhanced is "dingers per hittable pitch".

Ok.

[Mackus]

Greenies are a completely different level of enhancement... all they do is let you be more of who you already are... they don't change who you are... they don't let you do things you couldn't do without them... greenies would not have made Jay Gibbons look like he belonged...

 

The 2 things are the same only in an abstract argument and nowhere else...

 

But we've been thru this already several times...

 

Maybe they are a different level of enhancement, but they are still artificial enhancements.

 

And even if all they aide is energy and recovery, that's super significant.  Baseball is a grind, guys who can avoid wearing down, or continue playing well as they wind down, are better than those who cannot.  If someone who sucks once they tire out is taking illegal amphetamines to avoid tiring out, that's performance enhancement.

 

If steroid users are eliminated for using steroids, amphetamine users should also be ineligible for using amphetamines.  I think distinguishing between the two is hypocritical. 

 

It will be interesting to see what happens with the voting if any clear HOF player in the near future was suspended for amphetamines - and only amphetamines - with no other stink on them.  My guess is they are treated just the same as if they had been caught using steroids and HGH, and they should be.

[RShack]

So your evidence of how his performance was enhanced is "dingers per hittable pitch".

Ok.

 

Yep, sure is... and if you had watched it, you'd say so too... 

 

Seeing him do that changed my opinion of him... before, I just thought he was an asshole... but seeing it made me think he was one *very amazing* asshole...  and when he did this, when he was better at it than he ever had been before, was when 35-39 years old and wearing bigger shoes and hats every year...

[Mackus]

If only any of us had seen Barry Bonds play, then we'd get it...

[mweb08]

For what it's worth, my ballot:

 

Bonds

Clemens

Bagwell

Piazza

Schilling

Raines

Mussina

Griffey

Martinez

McGwire

 

Stop copying the guy that only cares about WAR.

[RShack]

Maybe they are a different level of enhancement, but they are still artificial enhancements.

 

And even if all they aide is energy and recovery, that's super significant.  Baseball is a grind, guys who can avoid wearing down, or continue playing well as they wind down, are better than those who cannot.  If someone who sucks once they tire out is taking illegal amphetamines to avoid tiring out, that's performance enhancement.

 

If steroid users are eliminated for using steroids, amphetamine users should also be ineligible for using amphetamines.  I think distinguishing between the two is hypocritical. 

 

It will be interesting to see what happens with the voting if any clear HOF player in the near future was suspended for amphetamines - and only amphetamines - with no other stink on them.  My guess is they are treated just the same as if they had been caught using steroids and HGH, and they should be.

 

I think it mainly came up because they started using "PEDs" as the label for the topic instead of just saying "Steroids" when what everybody got (rightly) bothered about was just steroids, not greenies...  that's what caused the problem... that umbrella label is what made them seem the same when they're not the same...

[Mike in STL]

He's slowly turning in Skip Bayless and Stephen A Smith.

 

Which is sad.

Slowly? He's been a New Yorker blowhard long before Skip Bayless

[Icterus galbula]

Did you hear Marty Noble on MLB Radio yesterday?

 

He said he told Craig Biggio last year at the Hall that he never voted for him because he heard from a reliable source he was a user..

 

Bowden implied the other night (without naming names) that he's heard that someone who has gone in recently was absolutely a user. 

 

So again, since no one can be 100% sure without a failed test a la Raffy, then vote them in they deserve it. 

 

Like Pedro said above, how the hell am I going to take my Son to a Hall of Fame museum without Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. Come on! 

 

I saw a couple years ago someone basically mentioned Andre Dawson as one without naming Andre Dawson. "Outfielder from the 80s who had biggest HR year and MVP later on his career" or something like that.

[RShack]

If only any of us had seen Barry Bonds play, then we'd get it...

 

Dunno if you get mlb.tv but maybe you can go back and watch...  you don';t need to watch him play, just watch his AB's...

 

Look, you can ridicule all you want, but that doesn't change anything... during his late-30's stretch, game after game he was lucky to get even one hittable pitch... and if he got one, he just didn't miss it...  the degree to which he just didn't miss was downright spooky... the fact that you don't have a stat for it doesn't mean it's not true... it *is* true...

 

EDIT: well, maybe you do have a stat for it... when he was 39, he walked 232 times, K'd just 41 times, and his 135 hits were enough for his BA to be .362,  and 1/3 of his hits were homers... in total, that means when he got a rare hittable pitch, he didn't miss... (a lot of his outs were him being PO'd about walking all the time and swinging at something he probably shouldn't have...)

[Mackus]

I think it mainly came up because they started using "PEDs" as the label for the topic instead of just saying "Steroids" when what everybody got (rightly) bothered about was just steroids, not greenies...  that's what caused the problem... that umbrella label is what made them seem the same when they're not the same...

 

They're not identical nor the same scale, but they are either both cheating or they are both not.

[SBTarheel]

I'm a fan of Russo's knowledge, the guy REALLY knows his shit. I like the schtick, the yelling, the passion etc..

 

He and I share a birthday as well. Total plus!

 

But yeah, he's wrong on this issue for sure. 

[Mackus]

Dunno if you get mlb.tv but maybe you can go back and watch...  you don';t need to watch him play, just watch his AB's...

 

Look, you can ridicule all you want, but that doesn't change anything... during his late-30's stretch, game after game he was lucky to get even one hittable pitch... and if he got one, he just didn't miss it...  the degree to which he just didn't miss was downright spooky... the fact that you don't have a stat for it doesn't mean it's not true... it *is* true...

 

You're talking about something nobody else is discussing again.