Photo

Joe Morgan's letter to the HOF


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#21 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 22 November 2017 - 12:19 PM

Ultimately, I go back and forth on the issue. I do think that guys like Bonds and Clemens were the best players of their era and deserve recognizition. I also have a hard time arguing with Morgan if he and others he represented took no short cuts and played the game within the rules and wants no part of these cheaters in the HOF


And you would be a fool to think they did just this.

Also, steroids were legal in baseball. Bonds and clemens were, in theory, not doing anything wrong.

Also, they never tested positive.

#22 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 22 November 2017 - 12:20 PM

Who are you to say that


Should Gaylord Perry be in the HOF?

#23 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,680 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 23 November 2017 - 11:29 AM

Jeff Passan on giving up his ballot, Joe Morgan's supreme hypocrisy, and the Hall of Fame's letter

 

https://sports.yahoo...-144738128.html


@DJ_McCann

#24 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 24 November 2017 - 07:36 AM

Such a good article....but Passan shouldn’t be giving up
His vote this year.

He should vote for all the guys the hall is trying to keep
Out..not to mention the guys that people are too dumb to include on their ballots, like Mussina.

#25 You Play to Win the Game

You Play to Win the Game

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 57,269 posts
  • LocationMaryland

Posted 24 November 2017 - 08:11 AM

And you would be a fool to think they did just this.

Also, steroids were legal in baseball. Bonds and clemens were, in theory, not doing anything wrong.

Also, they never tested positive.

That argument doesn't fly at all. There's no theoretical doing something not wrong when it's very clearly illegal. Does MLB need to also institute rules against domestic violence, speeding, shoplifting, and all of the other various laws that state certain behaviors are illegal?

 

That said, I'm over this and I think the fact that it's all out there is enough of an asterisk to me. Go ahead and put them in, and let the fans of the game decide if they respect/honor that or not. But they belong in the Hall.


“We have a shot at a wild card right now. But it is not a probability that we're going to win a wild card.” -2022 Trade Deadline

"It's liftoff from here" - after selling on 2022

"We're on a slight upward arc" - Winter Meetings 2022

"I think it's really hard to sit there and chart a course and say, 'We're likely to win the division.'" - Winter Meetings 2022

Mike Elias


#26 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 24 November 2017 - 08:49 AM

You are reaching there.

It wasn’t against the rules of the game to take steroids. Hell, they were out in the open all the time. Baseball allowed it.

And now, people want to say they don’t belong because of something baseball allowed? Nah, that’s dumb.

Competitive advantages happen in all sports and have always been there. Anyone would be foolish to think otherwise. It’s why Passan’s article is so good. Even Roch hammered the letter.

You want to argue that Bonds isn’t a top 3 player ever because of steroids? Ok that’s fine. But not having them in the HOF is a joke.

#27 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 24 November 2017 - 09:12 AM

That argument doesn't fly at all. There's no theoretical doing something not wrong when it's very clearly illegal. Does MLB need to also institute rules against domestic violence, speeding, shoplifting, and all of the other various laws that state certain behaviors are illegal?

That said, I'm over this and I think the fact that it's all out there is enough of an asterisk to me. Go ahead and put them in, and let the fans of the game decide if they respect/honor that or not. But they belong in the Hall.

Right about the first part. Second part I feel like there should be recognizition for steroid guys at the HOF. You don't pretend they didn't exist. I want people to know how insane Bonds numbers were while he was juicing in his late 30s and early 40s. However, I can't sit here and tell the ones in the HOF that never cheated the game and their peers how to feel about these guys who did cheat the game and their peers.

#28 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 148,690 posts

Posted 24 November 2017 - 09:57 AM

And you would be a fool to think they did just this.

Also, steroids were legal in baseball. Bonds and Clemens were, in theory, not doing anything wrong.

Also, they never tested positive.

 

Steroids have been banned in baseball since '91.

There is no world, where what Bonds and Clemens were doing... was not wrong.

With testing not beginning until '03, it's fine to say that the game turned a blind eye.... but that's not the same as saying the players weren't cheating.

It might be too much to ignore the era as a whole.  And a HOF which doesn't have a 7x MVP, or a 7x Cy Young is incomplete....   they'd be in my HOF. 

But there has to be skepticism for the entire era, and the numbers which were produced.

Bonds a perfect example for that. He had already had an awesome career. 3x MVP, 8 Gold Gloves through the '98 season. Had already had 7 season with an OPS over 1.000.

Then he starts taking steroids, and his body drastically changes. Leading to 4 Super Human years of 2001-04 at ages 36-39.
It's simply flies in the face of common sense to believe that the roids weren't having an effect. Not only allowing him to hold off Father Time, but to have the 4 best years of his career in his late 30s!  That's crazy.

So look at him for what he was....  a great player. A HOF talent without steroids, that has career numbers he would not have obtained without using roids... which were officially banned from his Age 26 season on.



#29 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 24 November 2017 - 09:59 AM

I have no more skepticism about that era than any other era.

The only reason we know more about this vs other eras are advances in medicine, media, social media, etc...

Doesn’t make the players of 40+ years ago less guilty..just means they cheated in the right era.

#30 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 148,690 posts

Posted 24 November 2017 - 10:10 AM

I have no more skepticism about that era than any other era.

The only reason we know more about this vs other eras are advances in medicine, media, social media, etc...

Doesn’t make the players of 40+ years ago less guilty..just means they cheated in the right era.


You've brought up greenies a lot, and I think it's a logical discussion point. I don't know how long amphetamines have been banned. 
They allowed players to be better than they were (though didn't change body composition like roids).

If you know of guys who redlined greenies, who were drinking from the greenies laced coffee... and you are skeptical of their numbers... that's fine imo.

But... it's the steroid era which has the crazy arcade numbers...  that's why for me (plus having lived through it, and been such a fan during that time) it makes me question what I saw.

 



#31 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 24 November 2017 - 10:10 AM

Rather than say baseball turned a blind eye to using steroids, I'd say they actually encouraged it.

#32 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 148,690 posts

Posted 24 November 2017 - 10:15 AM

Rather than say baseball turned a blind eye to using steroids, I'd say they actually encouraged it.


There is a lot of merit there.  Attendance, ratings with McGwire and Sosa...   pushing Canseco and McGwire from '88 on...  not testing until '03.  Reports of team docs helping.

Was still on the books as illegal since '91. 

So either from MLB being blind, or actually encouraging usage....  we wind-up with an era of inflated stats. That to me is the shame of the era.



#33 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 24 November 2017 - 10:22 AM

The inflated stats are also due to juiced balls (we just saw how big of an impact that can have), smaller parks, moneyball, improved training methods and supplements (legal and illegal), more dedication to training, and greenies.

Chipper Jones said that banning greenies would have a bigger effect than banning steroids.

I don't know that steroids or greenies themselves had that much of an impact on the stats other than in that they were better than they used to be. I'm not sure that the usage went up all that much, but the effectiveness did and players trained smarter and harder, which amplified that improvement in the PEDs.

#34 SportsGuy

SportsGuy

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,979 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 24 November 2017 - 10:29 AM


You've brought up greenies a lot, and I think it's a logical discussion point. I don't know how long amphetamines have been banned.
They allowed players to be better than they were (though didn't change body composition like roids).

If you know of guys who redlined greenies, who were drinking from the greenies laced coffee... and you are skeptical of their numbers... that's fine imo.

But... it's the steroid era which has the crazy arcade numbers... that's why for me (plus having lived through it, and been such a fan during that time) it makes me question what I saw.


Are Babe Ruth’s numbers inflated because he has a lot less travel, no blacks or Latinos, etc...?

There is also some talk/evidence he used some kind of steroid from an elephant testicle.

Where is the line drawn? Why is this era persecuted but others aren’t?

It’s just dumb. If you want to say you don’t think Bonds hits 750+ homers without roids, fine. But that doesn’t mean he’s not a HOFer.

#35 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 148,690 posts

Posted 24 November 2017 - 10:30 AM

The inflated stats are also due to juiced balls (we just saw how big of an impact that can have), smaller parks, moneyball, improved training methods and supplements (legal and illegal), more dedication to training, and greenies.

 


I do agree with this.  I think that is all factually true.

However, when MLB got serious about getting roids out of the game.... the corresponding drop in numbers, was clear.  On eye test alone, the game changed.

This ('17) was the first year that looked more like the past... now the balls were said to be juiced.... I wondered if roids had found their way back in to the game in significant numbers, past the current testing abilities.



#36 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 24 November 2017 - 10:31 AM

MLB made a big effort to remove greenies at that time though.
  • BSLChrisStoner likes this

#37 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 148,690 posts

Posted 24 November 2017 - 10:32 AM

Are Babe Ruth’s numbers inflated because he has a lot less travel, no blacks or Latinos, etc...?

There is also some talk/evidence he used some kind of steroid from an elephant testicle.

Where is the line drawn? Why is this era persecuted but others aren’t?

It’s just dumb. If you want to say you don’t think Bonds hits 750+ homers without roids, fine. But that doesn’t mean he’s not a HOFer.


Ruth's numbers are what they are for the era he played.  Discussing the lack of travel, or diversity in the game (or comparison of people playing baseball then vs. today) would all make sense in trying to discuss just how good Ruth would be today.

Already said Bonds would be in my HOF....  but his numbers are a joke, and as a fan I feel ripped off that I have significant doubt about the numbers of the entire era.



#38 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,680 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 24 November 2017 - 02:13 PM


You've brought up greenies a lot, and I think it's a logical discussion point. I don't know how long amphetamines have been banned.
They allowed players to be better than they were (though didn't change body composition like roids).

If you know of guys who redlined greenies, who were drinking from the greenies laced coffee... and you are skeptical of their numbers... that's fine imo.

But... it's the steroid era which has the crazy arcade numbers... that's why for me (plus having lived through it, and been such a fan during that time) it makes me question what I saw.


Amphetamines were made a controlled substance in 1970, and MLB began testing for them at the same time as the other PED testing.
@DJ_McCann

#39 tennOsfan

tennOsfan

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,356 posts
  • LocationJonesborough, TN

Posted 25 November 2017 - 08:17 PM

As long as Ty Cobb is in the hall, they can take all their "character" and "integrity" and shove it. If Cobb is still in, anyone can be in.

 

What does that mean? Are you saying Cobb had abnormally low character and integrity for his era? He didn't, actually, Charles Leerhsen"s Ty Cobb: A Terrible Beauty. It's a very well written and more importantly, well researched, book that all baseball fans should read. Particularly ones who want to disparage the man. He wasn't perfect, but he wasn't far from the mean of his time.



#40 tennOsfan

tennOsfan

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,356 posts
  • LocationJonesborough, TN

Posted 25 November 2017 - 08:22 PM

I agree with Morgan's thesis and do not find him to be overly sanctimonious. The Hall is a revered institution, and its members should appreciate it as such.

 

Yes, some members "cheated" in a literal sense. Gaylord Perry flaunted the rules, but in reality, what he did took a great deal of skill. Not just anyone can successfully throw a spitter. Some used greenies, but what did they really do for those players that would've been different from drinking energy drinks?

 

Steroids completely altered the reality of the game. Muscle-bound men posted numbers unheard of in other eras, and they improved their performances at ages where they should've been bowing out. Look at Clemens' numbers going from a really good pitcher most of his career to an all-time great by his late 30s and 40s. Those guys cheapened the history of the game. Barry Bonds deserves zero honor for what he did. Hank Aaron should be the all-time home run leader, not him.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=  width=