U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Baseball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-11-2013, 07:10 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
40,840 posts, read 18,553,245 times
Reputation: 18653

Advertisements

Hall of Famers glad Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens denied - ESPN

Hall of Famers Applaud Shutout
Quote:
"If they let these guys in ever -- at any point -- it's a big black eye for the Hall and for baseball," (Goose) Gossage said in a phone interview with The Associated Press. "It's like telling our kids you can cheat, you can do whatever you want, and it's not going to matter."
Gossage, MOD CUT thinks the record book should be overhauled, taking away the accomplishments of players like Bonds, Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro and Mark McGwire -- who has admitted using steroids and human growth hormone during his playing days.
Quote:
"I'm kind of glad that nobody got in this year," (Al) Kaline said. "I feel honored to be in the Hall of Fame. And I would've felt a little uneasy sitting up there on the stage, listening to some of these new guys talk about how great they were."
Quote:
"Wow! Baseball writers make a statement," (Dennis)Eckersley wrote on Twitter. "Feels right."
Quote:
Curt Schilling made a good point. Everyone was guilty. Either you used PEDs, or you did nothing to stop their use. This generation got rich. Seems there was a price to pay.
.. Mike Schmidt

The article features four prosecutors and but Juan for the defense....
Quote:
"I think that they have been unfair to guys who were never found guilty of anything," Marichal said. "Their stats define them as immortals. That's the reality and that cannot be denied."

Last edited by NewToCA; 01-13-2013 at 03:33 PM.. Reason: too long for copyright article
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-12-2013, 01:18 AM
 
Location: Springfield, Ohio
12,193 posts, read 10,409,482 times
Reputation: 11208
Marichel was a Giant, right? I kid, I kid.
Gossage is pretty mouthy for a guy whose worthiness is borderline at best...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2013, 10:09 AM
 
Location: Long Island,New York
8,163 posts, read 13,179,597 times
Reputation: 2488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural510 View Post
Marichel was a Giant, right? I kid, I kid.
Gossage is pretty mouthy for a guy whose worthiness is borderline at best...
Gossage was definitely not borderline. You have to remember that during his time especially in the 70's, there were VERY FEW 1 inning saves like today. You have to take into consideration how the game has changed to accurately judge. He should have been voted in much earlier but his attitude stalled voters, not his performance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2013, 10:18 AM
 
Location: Long Island,New York
8,163 posts, read 13,179,597 times
Reputation: 2488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
I would say no, it should not work like a court of law. Our system of justice was designed to include numerous checks and balances which make it difficult to get a conviction. It was made this way deliberately with the idea of not wanting a system where it would be easy to jail someone who was not guilty. In that what is at stake is an individual's freedom or incarceration, the thinking behind this is justified.

With the HoF we are not talking about anything so consequential, it is a matter of someone being awarded an occupation related honor, or not be awarded that honor. Here if there is a system failure and an injustice results, the consequence is...someone didn't get an honor that he probably should have received.

Further, in the particular case before us, these are not honors bestowed or withheld for great public service, they are honors for excellence in a public entertainment venue.

So, no, we certainly have no need to emulate the dynamic of our criminal justice system in deciding whether or not someone rates a private, occupational related award.
You're reading into my analogy a little bit too literal. Let me make it easier. My estimate is that Bonds started using somewhere around the time he left Pittsburgh, which is when his physique showed drastic changes. Now if he played the same amount of years after Pitt and hit 20HR's, 80RBI's, and batted .275 per year, which are good numbers but are not superstar stats, would he be in the hall? That's why I think he should be in. As a person most know that he is not the nicest guy but the HOF is supposed to be based on the on field performance, nothing else. With Clemens it is a little harder to judge when he specifically started to use, if at all. I was a fan of his performance but also not of the individual. So here is my question...do we count out any guy that ever used no matter when they started or do we judge based on our opinion of what there stats would have been if they never used? I know it's tough, kind of like giving records to individuals with tainted careers; but what do we do?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2013, 10:40 AM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
40,840 posts, read 18,553,245 times
Reputation: 18653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancet71 View Post
You're reading into my analogy a little bit too literal. Let me make it easier. My estimate is that Bonds started using somewhere around the time he left Pittsburgh, which is when his physique showed drastic changes. Now if he played the same amount of years after Pitt and hit 20HR's, 80RBI's, and batted .275 per year, which are good numbers but are not superstar stats, would he be in the hall? That's why I think he should be in. As a person most know that he is not the nicest guy but the HOF is supposed to be based on the on field performance, nothing else. With Clemens it is a little harder to judge when he specifically started to use, if at all. I was a fan of his performance but also not of the individual. So here is my question...do we count out any guy that ever used no matter when they started or do we judge based on our opinion of what there stats would have been if they never used? I know it's tough, kind of like giving records to individuals with tainted careers; but what do we do?
What does the above have to do with whether or not we should employ courtroom standards to judgments about whether or not some body in the entertainment industry was using artificial aids to fool the public about his abilities?

As a separate question.....You have advanced a frequently seen argument, that Bonds and Clemens would have been HoFers even if they had not used PEDs. The counter to that, also frequently seen, is that they did use PEDs, they were cheaters, and the HoF is about honoring the honorable, not rewarding those who failed to respect their sport enough to play it cleanly.

I noted earlier, no one knows what to do, lots of people are offering ideas, none of them truly satisfactory because no proposed solution makes this all go away.

My thinking has evolved to...."Does it really matter at this point?" Even if Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, Giambi, McGwire et all should be voted in, it will not wind up being an honor, it will wind up being a controversy. On induction day the focus of the media will not be on "Today we honor these all time greats", it will be on the accusations of cheating. Speculation will be on whether or not the player being inducted is going to confess to his steroid use, whether he should, or will apologize for it in his speech, whether the crowds will boo or cheer, whether or not protesters will disrupt the ceremony...like that.

It won't be "Welcome to the Hall Mark/Barry/Roger.."...it will be "Today we held our noses and inducted...."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2013, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM
13,293 posts, read 12,789,297 times
Reputation: 6636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancet71 View Post
the HOF is supposed to be based on the on field performance, nothing else.
Not true

BBWAA | Baseball Hall of Fame
Quote:
5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2013, 04:12 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
4,847 posts, read 6,356,456 times
Reputation: 5792
I've been reading a book called Cooperstown Confidential by Zev Chafets. It examines the integrity and character and how the press kept a lot of things hidden about players of past generations from Ty Cobb to Joe DiMaggio. Another topic covered briefly is writers using their status as a HoF voter to uphold grudges against players who weren't friendly toward the media.

The beat writers lack character and integrity, at times, when it comes to HoF voting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2013, 05:51 PM
 
Location: Long Island,New York
8,163 posts, read 13,179,597 times
Reputation: 2488
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok View Post
All that you quoted is related to the players performance and conduct while wearing a unform and contributing to the team; just like I said. sorry I didn't elaborate. Integrity is definitely the only thing in question now; but based on this, should Fergie Jenkins still be in the hall? There are many others with outside incidents which could hurt their legacies too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2013, 06:00 PM
 
Location: Long Island,New York
8,163 posts, read 13,179,597 times
Reputation: 2488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
What does the above have to do with whether or not we should employ courtroom standards to judgments about whether or not some body in the entertainment industry was using artificial aids to fool the public about his abilities?

As a separate question.....You have advanced a frequently seen argument, that Bonds and Clemens would have been HoFers even if they had not used PEDs. The counter to that, also frequently seen, is that they did use PEDs, they were cheaters, and the HoF is about honoring the honorable, not rewarding those who failed to respect their sport enough to play it cleanly.

I noted earlier, no one knows what to do, lots of people are offering ideas, none of them truly satisfactory because no proposed solution makes this all go away.

My thinking has evolved to...."Does it really matter at this point?" Even if Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, Giambi, McGwire et all should be voted in, it will not wind up being an honor, it will wind up being a controversy. On induction day the focus of the media will not be on "Today we honor these all time greats", it will be on the accusations of cheating. Speculation will be on whether or not the player being inducted is going to confess to his steroid use, whether he should, or will apologize for it in his speech, whether the crowds will boo or cheer, whether or not protesters will disrupt the ceremony...like that.

It won't be "Welcome to the Hall Mark/Barry/Roger.."...it will be "Today we held our noses and inducted...."
I'll break down my agreements and disagreements with you. On the court room issue, we can claim that anyone who played in the mid 80's to mid 90's used steroids and maybe for a vast majority it would be true, maybe not. So we do have to mentally analyze the player and determine if they used. Alot of people claim Piazza used, but we have no proof of that. So should we just say that he is a product of the generation and automatically exclude him because alot of people used or should we assume his inocence because we have no proof? That would be an INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY or court room (as you say) mentality. In this example, it would be appropriate.
When it comes to the second part, i'm also on the fence. I have been weighing this one for a long time. When I take a guy like Bonds and estimate his stats, I can only assume even though it seems obvious that his numbers would have been good enough that he would have made it; but like you already stated, he did cheat and that does throw out his credibility and shows his lack of integrity. Personally I think he was a wife abusing a**hole that could play the game at a very high level and I do think the HOF vote and current inductees should all be in question. But what makes a guy worthy? Do numbers make a guy worthy? If they play for a team we hate, do we automatically not vote for them because we are biased? There are too many variables involved that honestly, i don't think the vote is ever fair either way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2013, 04:42 PM
Status: "Smacking fundies." (set 9 hours ago)
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
25,773 posts, read 13,399,507 times
Reputation: 11666
The none-elected outcome feels right to me. Biggio won't be the first great player to wait until the 2nd or 5th (etc.) go-round before election. But he WILL be elected.

I'm glad Bonds, Clemens and Sosa were denied. I think they should continue to be denied until they fall off the ballot. And that point, I'd love to see a new addition to the Hall - The Asterisk Room. Stick those three (and other known cheats) in there. No ceremony. Just their plaque with their numbers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Baseball
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top