21 replies to this topic

[JonathanMitchell]

Another post from my site: MLBdirt.com
http://mlbdirt.com/2... ... ll-worthy/

[BSLChrisStoner]

ESPN / Keith Law chat: http://espn.go.com/s...chat/_/id/41712

Jason (St Louis)
The no on Palmeiro is because he was a consistent stat builder and not a hof, not because he used peds right?

Klaw
Correct. Really never among the best players in his league.

I'm puzzled by how anyone can look at Palmeiro's numbers, and make the argument that he was not one of the best players in the league. He had 11 seasons with a WAR above 4. He had 10 seasons with a wOBA above .390. From '91 through '02, he had 10 seasons with an OPS above .900.

Somehow he was an underrated player throughout his career. Without that sound byte in-front of Congress, he clearly was going to the HOF.

[GaryArmida]

Palmiero is the one guy who I generally get stumped on. With the HOF, I do believe in the the #'s so he's got those. Yet, last year, I made my 10 player ballot and he was number 11. I don't take PED's into account--I had McGwire on the ballot. Last year, my ballot went like this:

Blyleven, Raines, Bagwell, McGriff, Alomar, Larkin, McGwire, Edgar Martinez, Larry Walker, and Allan Trammell.

I know the Trammell one gets the argument, but I still think he belongs, ahead of Palmiero despite the statistics.

If I were to do a ballot this year, Palmiero would be in my top 10.

[Oriole85]

I eliminate all steroid users, where there is reasonable evidence to exclude them. So yes that excludes Raffy. However, I put in Bagwell, no real evidence to suggest he used them so I don't make assumptions.

[BSLChrisStoner]

CSN Baltimore: http://www.csnbaltim...380&feedID=6704

[weams]

Na. He did the finger wag. He won't get in any more than McGwire or Bonds.

[weams]

While not named to as a steroid user by any investigation, Bagwell has been linked to several legal investigations involving steroid and HGH use.

For instance, former Bagwell teammate Jason Grimsley admitted to HGH and steroid use after his house was raided by government officials. Numerous other former teammates of Bagwell were named in the Mitchell Report. And let's not forget former Bagwell teammates Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens. I'm sure if Justice would have gone to an editor with that evidence, and told said editor that there were numerous whispers about Bagwell's alleged use of steroids, said editor would have given him the go-ahead to look into it.

In fact, I'm pretty confident he would have been given the go-ahead, especially seeing as how the Chron actually attempted to investigate Clemens and the Astros at one time. The Chron went so far as to attempt the hiring of an investigative reporter, but upper management refused. See page 281 of Jeff Pearlman's The Rocket That Fell To Earth. Yet I'm sure Justice, the star columnist and reporter, would have been allowed to investigate this on his own time.

If he had so wanted. And I don't think he wanted to.



There are many reasons, including a Balco type of Gym connection, to accuse Bagwell of PED use. Again, he got visibly smaller and stopped hitting HR's after testing was permitted by his union.

[Can_of_corn]

ESPN / Keith Law chat: http://espn.go.com/s...chat/_/id/41712

Jason (St Louis)
The no on Palmeiro is because he was a consistent stat builder and not a hof, not because he used peds right?

Klaw
Correct. Really never among the best players in his league.

I'm puzzled by how anyone can look at Palmeiro's numbers, and make the argument that he was not one of the best players in the league. He had 11 seasons with a WAR above 4. He had 10 seasons with a wOBA above .390. From '91 through '02, he had 10 seasons with an OPS above .900.

Somehow he was an underrated player throughout his career. Without that sound byte in-front of Congress, he clearly was going to the HOF.

Four time All Star, one top 5 finish in MVP voting (5th in 99).

He was never dominant, he just played a long time in an era of high offensive production.

I am a small hall guy and he doesn't get in my hall.

[SportsGuy]

Of course he should be...so should Big Mac, Clemens, Bonds, etc...

The whole steroid stuff is nothing but a hypocritical argument that is nothing more than media driven bs.

There has ALWAYS been some form of cheating in baseball. They have always been competitive advantages.

Tom House, former ML pitcher and current authority on pitching mechanics, stated that back in the 60 and 70s, steroids were everywhere in MLB.

We know guys like Aaron and Mays used greenies.

We joke about how Gaylord Perry cheated all the time, yet he got in with no problem.

[Roll Tide]

Its absurd that Palmeiro isnt there. He was the better Oriole hitter while he was here.

[mweb08]

ESPN / Keith Law chat: http://espn.go.com/s...chat/_/id/41712

Jason (St Louis)
The no on Palmeiro is because he was a consistent stat builder and not a hof, not because he used peds right?

Klaw
Correct. Really never among the best players in his league.

I'm puzzled by how anyone can look at Palmeiro's numbers, and make the argument that he was not one of the best players in the league. He had 11 seasons with a WAR above 4. He had 10 seasons with a wOBA above .390. From '91 through '02, he had 10 seasons with an OPS above .900.

Somehow he was an underrated player throughout his career. Without that sound byte in-front of Congress, he clearly was going to the HOF.

Four time All Star, one top 5 finish in MVP voting (5th in 99).

He was never dominant, he just played a long time in an era of high offensive production.

I am a small hall guy and he doesn't get in my hall.

I don't really get why people take this small hall stance given we already have 75 years of voting to establish the standards. Obviously there are some mistakes, but weed those out and you have a set standard. Why should the standard be much higher for players now than in the past?

Palmeiro meets the current standard. And he was dominant in '93 with a 7.4 WAR and also had two other 6+ WAR seasons and a season where he was second in OPS+.

[JonathanMitchell]

Even as a small-hall guy I would include Palmeiro. He had enough peak to go with great longetivity of good-to-great seasons that he easily belongs. I think people use the lack of peak as a means for other reasons they won't vote for him and don't want to get coupled in with those reasons. Either that or they simply follow anything Keith Law says.

[Can_of_corn]

Even as a small-hall guy I would include Palmeiro. He had enough peak to go with great longetivity of good-to-great seasons that he easily belongs. I think people use the lack of peak as a means for other reasons they won't vote for him and don't want to get coupled in with those reasons. Either that or they simply follow anything Keith Law says.

So are you calling me a closet anti-PED guy, an anti-viagra guy or a KLaw sheep?

Being really good for a long time doesn't make you great in my book. Feel free to disagree.

I have to admit I won't rage if Raffy gets in like I did for Rice or will do if Morris gets in.

[mweb08]

Even as a small-hall guy I would include Palmeiro. He had enough peak to go with great longetivity of good-to-great seasons that he easily belongs. I think people use the lack of peak as a means for other reasons they won't vote for him and don't want to get coupled in with those reasons. Either that or they simply follow anything Keith Law says.

So are you calling me a closet anti-PED guy, an anti-viagra guy or a KLaw sheep?

Being really good for a long time doesn't make you great in my book. Feel free to disagree.

I have to admit I won't rage if Raffy gets in like I did for Rice or will do if Morris gets in.

How about Eddie Murray?

[Can_of_corn]

Murray would make my hall but he certainly wouldn't be an "inner circle" guy.

Six top 5 MVP finishes show how he compared to his contemporaries.

Higher peak (80-85 he never finished below 6th in MVP voting), his counting numbers (which I don't lend much credence to) happened primarily in a lower offensive era.

He did hang around too long.

Hall of Fame is about fame. Murray was the best switch hitter of his generation and was considered dominant in his time in a way Palmeiro never was.

[mweb08]

Murray would make my hall but he certainly wouldn't be an "inner circle" guy.

Six top 5 MVP finishes show how he compared to his contemporaries.

Higher peak (80-85 he never finished below 6th in MVP voting), his counting numbers (which I don't lend much credence to) happened primarily in a lower offensive era.

He did hang around too long.

Hall of Fame is about fame. Murray was the best switch hitter of his generation and was considered dominant in his time in a way Palmeiro never was.

The Hall of Fame is not about fame. It's about the best players. If it were about fame, I guess Raffy's congress appearance makes him a better candidate.

Other than relying on the writers MVP votes, their primes/peaks were not that different in terms of WAR or OPS+ and for career value, their WAR's are almost the same.

[Can_of_corn]

No it is not the hall of best players. Perception matter, context matters. Murray was held to a level of regard that Palmeiro wasn't.

Of course ability makes up the bulk of the argument but it is not the sole determining factor.

In my opinion Murray gets a boost and Palmerio takes a hit from the factors outside the raw numbers. In my estimation it is enough to put the one in and leave the other out.

[mweb08]

No it is not the hall of best players. Perception matter, context matters. Murray was held to a level of regard that Palmeiro wasn't.

Of course ability makes up the bulk of the argument but it is not the sole determining factor.

In my opinion Murray gets a boost and Palmerio takes a hit from the factors outside the raw numbers. In my estimation it is enough to put the one in and leave the other out.

Alright, well I'll stop having a debate with someone who thinks the word fame matters before my head explodes.

[Can_of_corn]

So you think instead of voting there should just be a predetermined WAR cutoff number?

That sounds like what you are advocating.

Koufax only had a career WAR of 54.5 is he the cutoff?

[mweb08]

So you think instead of voting there should just be a predetermined WAR cutoff number?

That sounds like what you are advocating.

Koufax only had a career WAR of 54.5 is he the cutoff?

Not at all what I'm advocating.

I'm advocating putting the best players in and being consistent.