Steroids and Cooperstown ? (expansion, pitchers, stance, umpire)
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.
Those #'s could not only gain entry into the HOF, but maybe have a wing dedicated to them. I am not saying that these guys should get voted in but if not than lets wipe there #'s from the record books ! Wipe out Canseco's 462 hrs and Juan Gonzalez's 434 hrs, and Giambi's 409. Strip away there awards and give them to the runners up in each of those years. Let there teams go after them to get all that bonus money back due to there awards contract clauses' .
I'm ok putting just about all those guys in the HOF (no Juan Gon or Giambi), every eras players had an edge, whether it was doctoring a baseball or taking a handful of ritalin (or whatever it was back then). I think baseball should use the mistakes of the past to shape its future policy, but I don't think retroactive punishment serves any cause. Barry Bonds in particular was an HOF'er before his head blew up like a basketball, and 1000% should be recognized by the HOF. Baseball turned a blind eye, to go back and punish the users, that they basically created would be disingenious.
I'm ok putting just about all those guys in the HOF (no Juan Gon or Giambi), every eras players had an edge, whether it was doctoring a baseball or taking a handful of ritalin (or whatever it was back then). I think baseball should use the mistakes of the past to shape its future policy, but I don't think retroactive punishment serves any cause. Barry Bonds in particular was an HOF'er before his head blew up like a basketball, and 1000% should be recognized by the HOF. Baseball turned a blind eye, to go back and punish the users, that they basically created would be disingenious.
I get what your saying, If you ask me if McGwire was a hofamer I would tell you yes but not a first ballot or even a second. 583 hrs are impressive but there are milestones he just did not reach, like 2000 hits and his lifetime avg was in the .260 range. People were angry when Ripken didnt get 100 % of the vote but writers that vote tend to look at that .276 avg and compare it to other Hofamers.
It is possible that during every time frame there could have been some form of cheating but who knows. When it came to Bonds he was an all-star and then he all of a sudden bulked up. No one knows for sure the time frame when Arod or anyone else used.I wish it was tested for a long time ago.The penalty should have been a 1 year suspension first positive test. Lifetime ban on the second. As for the hall,I honestly can't answer who I think belongs.Based on numbers alone i'd have to say that Bonds and Arod are in.As for Canseco,think about this;should Rob Deer make the hall? He could pop the long ball but his average was frequently close to .200? So if he hypothetically hit 500 hr's but batted .215 would he belong? I don't think so.
Clemens to me is more of a sure thing (basing it on my criteria) as anyone on that list, save maybbbbe Bonds. Clemens was easily the best pitcher of my lifetime, better then Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, Nolan Ryan, whoever you want to throw in there from 1979ish on.
Also, I wouldn't put Canseco in either, but it has nothing to do with roids.
You can't remove things that actually happened from the record books. You just have to look at the record books for what they really are: A recorded history of what happened.
There's no place to draw the line. Maybe this guy failed a test, but the guy at the next locker managed to not fail while doing the same thing. Maybe that guy was on something, but maybe the guy pitching to him was on something too, maybe even something more "potent" than the guy he pitched to who took him deep. Maybe two guys took the same stuff but one guy worked out harder or didn't work out enough. Maybe one guy was tested two weeks after he and one of his teammates started cheating together, and the teammate was tested two weeks before they got their supplies. Too many maybes to start changing things that actually happened and turn them into things that didn't actually happen.
The game has always been filled with cheating, and because of that, with CHEATERS too. Leave the record books alone. If a guy fails a test and serves a suspension then keep him out of the Hall, but understand there are plenty of cheaters already in, so if you have a vote don't pat yourself on the back too hard. That's the only way to do it that makes sense.
And baseball turned a blind-eye and a deaf-ear to enough that they deserve some of the turmoil that comes there way. Why let them off the hook by allowing them to say, "Oh, remember that thing you thought happened? Look at the books again. It didn't happen after all."
I think eventually when the older HOF voters retire and are replaced with next generation of voters, we'll begin to see the cream of the crop get in, but I don't think you'll see Big Mac, Sosa or Thome in there. I think the 500 home run plateau at least for this generation of player wont be good enough.
You can't remove things that actually happened from the record books. You just have to look at the record books for what they really are: A recorded history of what happened.
There's no place to draw the line. Maybe this guy failed a test, but the guy at the next locker managed to not fail while doing the same thing. Maybe that guy was on something, but maybe the guy pitching to him was on something too, maybe even something more "potent" than the guy he pitched to who took him deep. Maybe two guys took the same stuff but one guy worked out harder or didn't work out enough. Maybe one guy was tested two weeks after he and one of his teammates started cheating together, and the teammate was tested two weeks before they got their supplies. Too many maybes to start changing things that actually happened and turn them into things that didn't actually happen.
The game has always been filled with cheating, and because of that, with CHEATERS too. Leave the record books alone. If a guy fails a test and serves a suspension then keep him out of the Hall, but understand there are plenty of cheaters already in, so if you have a vote don't pat yourself on the back too hard. That's the only way to do it that makes sense.
And baseball turned a blind-eye and a deaf-ear to enough that they deserve some of the turmoil that comes there way. Why let them off the hook by allowing them to say, "Oh, remember that thing you thought happened? Look at the books again. It didn't happen after all."
How do you deal with the guys in the HOF who cheated in a different way?
Quote:
During the Pittsburgh drug trials in the mid-1980s, outfielder John Milner testified that Willie Mays introduced him to a liquid amphetamine known as "red juice." More than a decade later, Tony Gwynn spoke of rampant amphetamine use in the game, and David Wells referred to greenies in his book, "Perfect I'm Not: Boomer on Beer, Brawls, Backaches, and Baseball."
Gaylord Perry is in the HOF for being a really good cheater...he doctored nearly every pitch.
Quote:
The baseball almanac references several quotes by Gaylord. “I’d always have it (grease) in at least two places, in case the umpires would ask me to wipe one off. I never wanted to be caught out there with anything though, it wouldn’t be professional.”
Quote:
Hall of Famer Mike Schmidt, arguably the greatest third basemen in the history of baseball, dropped a bombshell a few years back, by coming clean on the use of amphetamines, during the 1970’s and 1980’s.
Quote:
During a drug trafficking trial back in 1985, names like Willie Stargell, Willie Mays, Dave Parker, Bill Madlock and Dale Berra were all mentioned as players who used greenies.
So you have Mays, Stargell, Schmidt, Perry and plenty of other guys in the HOF who used other things that were later banned. Steroids were just part of the era, the pitchers used them too and the resulting numbers wont be any different than the inflated pitching numbers of 1968 (due to expansion and the high mound) or the inflated hitting numbers of the 1930s (due to the lively ball and new ballparks designed around HRs.), the numbers in baseball only matter somewhat, as the era is what is most important. Pedro (who was better than Clemens) dominated his era better than anyone, but his stats look inferior to Walter Johnson or Pete Alexander because he played in an era where the league leader had 73 HRs instead of 5 HRs.
After all, would anyone say that Maris was a better home run hitter than Ruth? Would anyone say that Hack Wilson was a better run producer than Ted Williams? Would anyone say that Hugh Duffy was the best hitter of all time? Would Prince Hal Newhouser be a Hall-Of-Famer if there were any decent hitters around during WWII?
To keep Bonds, A-Rod, McGwire, Clemens, Palmiero and the rest out of the HOF simply because they were the ones who were caught would be foolish. There are plenty of guys in the Hall who cheated and got away with it. Those guys were all legends who defined something about their era and who dominated their peers, which is the true measure of greatness. For all we know, Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken, Craig Biggio, Mike Piazza and Greg Maddux were all on some unknown drug for health and concentration that just hasn't been discovered by the authorities yet...
I'm ok putting just about all those guys in the HOF (no Juan Gon or Giambi), every eras players had an edge, whether it was doctoring a baseball or taking a handful of ritalin (or whatever it was back then). I think baseball should use the mistakes of the past to shape its future policy, but I don't think retroactive punishment serves any cause. Barry Bonds in particular was an HOF'er before his head blew up like a basketball, and 1000% should be recognized by the HOF. Baseball turned a blind eye, to go back and punish the users, that they basically created would be disingenious.
I agree 100%. Unfortunately, there is no way to punish everyone guilty because they obviously won't all come forward/admit fault.
Bud Selig is the biggest crook of them all. He acts like an innocent bystander and victim of the disgracing players. Baseball recovered from the '94 catastrophe, home runs fill seats, and all is well. Players have the responsibility to follow rules and do what's right, but of course many will look for the competitive edge, fair or not, legal or not. No batter is going to call strike 3 on himself.
As a former NCAA athlete, I can tell you first hand the governing body in a sport absolutely can effectively minimize banned substances, if it chooses to. In the NCAA, the drug testing policy is as strict as appears possible and the other key is penalties are harsh. For example, at least when I played, first offense, suspension of 1 calendar year (which is 25% of your career), 2nd offense, your career is over, banned. The current MLB penalties are a joke.....the equivalent to an NCAA player of about $1.50 and 1 missed practice. No wonder reported steroid use in the NCAA is 2%.
Personally, I enjoy the game for what it is today and try not to compare records etc to the players of old. To me, it's apples and bowling balls for many reasons, but in my eyes if anything, the players of old (20's-60's) have the edge. ...but that deserves its own thread.
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.
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.
