It is not under 300 feet.

Not everyone. Some people thought they were legit - an anomaly of TWO superhuman hitters appearing at the same time. Stuff like that happens in sports and the rarity makes it that much more interesting. Hindsight is 20-20, but at the point where it was ONLY McGwire and Sosa, we, as baseball fans, enjoyed it - how could you not? Then Bonds one-up'd them. That's when my eyebrows raised a bit. I would argue that if no HR records were broken by the steroid guys, we would forgive the pitchers such as Clemens, and he would get voted in, simply because he didn't invalidate any power numbers.

As far as Bonds, McGwire and Sosa not getting in the hall - the big difference between their brand of cheating and what guys in the past did (amphetamines, booze, gambling, etc.) is that they invalidated some sacred numbers, and numbers are what baseball is all about: 714, 61 - if you give one of those two numbers to someone my age, they respond with 'Ruth' and 'Maris'. Impossible to think of anything else.

Message needed to be sent
 

This day was needed to help send a message to all of America's youth and currently pro athletes - "Don't do it, its not right, and it will not be tolerated."

Had Clemens and Bonds got in, it would have sent a terribly wrong message to all our kids of today.

Now that the message has been sent, perhaps they will get into the Hall in another year. We'll see.

p.s. I will always toot my horn for Roger Maris and Bo Jackson - I can give many reasons they should be in the Hall. Fewer reasons they should not.

I figured Morris would at least jump up to 70-72% range, then get in next year. Now I'm not 100% sure with Glavine, Maddux and Thomas on the ballot. There may be too many names on the ballot for him to get in next year. Morris might finish just short in his last season, even with the usual push and while I disagree with him not being in, I could definitely see it happening due to a crowded ballot.

I'm shocked Piazza got so many votes, just shows what little evidence voters are basing their steroid judgement on as if the Mitchell report caught every player using. A 62nd round draft pick as the all-time HR leader for catchers (but he had the 20th most games played at the position)doesn't raise eyebrows?

Biggio has some questionable seasons in there too, a huge jump in homers at age 27 in 1993, then a career high in HR's at age 39? plus being teammates with the accused by some Bagwell, Luis Gonzalez and Ken Caminiti all in 1993? Also with the 93 Astros, Chris Donnells, named in Mitchell report.

Some voters are just blind to their own reasoning, not voting for players accused but assuming others are clean just because a half-assed report didn't name them, as if there were only two people dealing steroids in the 90's and if they didn't know you, you couldn't get them. Apparently baseball writers are also judges and the jury(not talking about stats here either)

What exactly is that supposed to mean? Are you trying to say, that they would be viewed in a better light had they not broken those records? If Bonds, Mcgwire and Sosa finished with 60 in those seasons, or if Bonds finished his career with 713, then steroids wouldn't have been that big of a deal? That their actions would somehow have been less of an embarassment to the game?

I'm just busting your balls. To an extent. I don't think the final numbers really have to do much with anything. Maris hit 61 without steroids, albeit in more games than it took Ruth to hit 60. Mac, Sosa and Bonds each passed that record with them. Same for the all time records. Ruth set it against a bunch of white guys. Aaron against a more diverse, yet more watered down field, with more games in a season.. Bonds against and even more diverse(yet even more watered down) field, and even more games in a season, while on steroids. Point is, we know all the facts behind these numbers and that won't change. Neither set of numbers, diminishes the others.. Personally, I think it would've been worse had they NOT passed those numbers..

if the "HOF" thinks current players arent doing HGH now (since there is no test) and once there is a test for HGH they wont find another PED to improve their game, then they arent paying attention.

Its about being the best and doing everything to get an advantage. Jeter faking getting hit by a pitch, trying to get a little more pine tar on your bat, spitting on your next pitch, downing a can of red bull before your next at bat.

Its time to judge the players numbers - if you want to go back into the HOF and pick at players for doing drugs, or "cheeting" and kicking guys out for it , there will be not many left in your museum

David, you've read things into my post that weren't there. Busting my balls is okay, but bust them over something I said.

Yes, the power numbers are sacred. You mentioned the problems surrounding Maris' breaking of Ruth's record, which resulted in an '*' in the record books - just another illustration of how important these numbers are to baseball fans.

No, if the numbers had been lower, it would NOT have made steroids acceptable. Many (most?) board members think Bonds should be in the HOF anyway. If he had not broken the two HR records, I think even more people would be in favor of allowing him (and the others) in. It's just my opinion, but I'm sticking with it.

Just stop and think how great baseball really is - have you ever, EVER heard of or read a discussion - or criticism - of who was or wasn't elected to the FOOTBALL or BASKETBALL Halls of Fame?

For the most part. That's exactly what I thought you meant the first time. The wording in my response may have been a bit sarcastically extreme, but at it's core, what you just said, is exactly what I meant.. Maybe I was wrong in wording it that steroids would've been more acceptable, but you pretty much just backed up that the PLAYERS who used them would be..

ESPN just posted a great article.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/hof13/story/_...b-hall-fame-be

Am I the only one that thinks Frank Thomas was a "monster" hitter?

Certainly for the first half of his career. He was headed for truly elite status, but his second half was not nearly as productive, I believe he missed a year due to injuries and while he still had some good seasons after that, it wasn't at the same level.

I'm one of the keep 'em all out people. I equate amphetamine / greenies more like a stronger form of coffee. I've never seen any kind of stat where after amphetamines were banned, some kind of baseball statistic such as strikeouts, home runs, batting average suddenly went down. So that tells me that the effect of these on the "numbers" in baseball was negligible. (If someone does have some stats on these, please correct me.) However, steroids was completely different. All of the numbers went up, way, way up, and since they have been banned, no one has approached 60 home runs again. That shows that the effect of steroids on the game was huge, and if you used it, you shouldn't get rewarded for it by being inducted into the Hall of Fame. This is not about being a likeable person or not (e.g., Cobb), but just that if you were on 'roids, your numbers were not genuine.

I really thought Biggio would get in. I didn't think he was associated w/ steroids or had that kind of body type. Maybe next year. I am also hoping that Morris is able to get in next year although it looks tough. I think next year Maddux and Glavine make it in, but the Big Hurt is left off.

Okay, so crucify me.

Well, at least I don't have to devote any financial resources toward a Jack Morris or Mike Piazza card. I can now apply all those HUGE savings toward my upcoming Deacon White purchase!!! ;)

How is Frank Thomas going to get in next year if Mike Piazza didn't?

Well, at least I received four votes,.

It also sent a message saying that the best players aren't good enough to get in. How does a 3k hitter not get in for example...Hall is a joke. They need to change the balloting system.

That's 3 more than Aaron Sele got. :)

Hof
 

This article sums it up for me...I agree with Stark.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/hof13/story/_...b-hall-fame-be

Hank

The HOF had a contingency plan in place in case of the shutout. I personally like the idea. It will be a fun weekend for this pre-war guy.

"As part of the Induction Weekend ceremony Sunday, July 28, at the Clark Sports Center in Cooperstown, N.Y., in which three Pre-Integration Committee electees – umpire Hank O’Day, New York Yankees owner Jacob Ruppert and 19th-century player Deacon White – will be inducted, the Hall of Fame will recognize 12 individuals previously counted among its roster of members who never had a formal induction due to wartime restrictions. They are BBWAA electees Lou Gehrig (1939) and Rogers Hornsby (1942), along with the entire class of 1945 selected by the Committee on Old Timers: Roger Bresnahan, Dan Brouthers, Fred Clarke, Jimmy Collins, Ed Delahanty, Hugh Duffy, Hughie Jennings, King Kelly, Jim O’Rourke and Wilbert Robinson."

Piazza didn't get in because he has always been surrounded with PED speculation. Frank Thomas has never been associated with PEDs and he continues to be one of the criminally overlooked players of all time. The guy was a monster. Back to back MVPs with 3 additional top 3 finishes. He hit 40 homers 5 times, drove in 100 runs 8 years in a row and 11 times in his career.

Absolutely a HOFer.

Too good to be true
 

I think the voters thought (wrongly) that if a player has amazing stats like the Big Hurt or mr. Piazza, then it's simply too good to be true, so they must have used steroids!

Ridiculous that Biggio didn't get in. He did get caught drinking and driving once. Perhaps that's why he was snubbed! The ESPN article nailed it.

It was the first ballot thing. He'll get in next year. I think Piazza's low numbers were due to first ballot as well. I think he'll get over 70% next year(and possibly get in)

Not one shred of evidence against either. Speculation can easily be started about most players from their era...how do you draw that imaginary line?

Positionally, Piazza is so much better than Frank Thomas. Piazza is arguably the greatest hitting catcher of all time.

The HOF voters obviously sent a message with Piazza's case, a big guy, why would Thomas not go through the same thing?

Completely agree, Piazza seems very suspicious.

Regarding Bonds, he was the only 400 400 man in baseball history before season's end 1998. He had also won 8 GG and 3 MVPs, all prior to when Game of Shadows (which should not be taken as fact) alleged he started using. I'm not a Bonds lover, but think it will be absurd if he and Clemens do not eventually make the Hall.

How do you really know when Bonds took his first steroid? Maybe he started in the late 80's...maybe early 90's? The fact that he took at all brings his whole career into question.

You could go the other way and say how do you know if he took any. Remember people tend to forget that he never got "caught."

Without a doubt you are right...you would be in the extreme vast minority becasue of the overhwleming circumstantial evidence, but you are right.

True lol

Where do you draw the line as it relates to circumstantial evidence? I'm sure there's a measure of circumstantial evidence against just about anyone who played in the era. Pujols at one point was linked, I believe to a Dr or trainer? (can't remember) that was a PED dealer. I think the Mitchell report only scratched the surface of the problem, so are all the guys who were implicated in that excluded from the hall, while other guys who simply got away with it allowed in?

Are all guys who tested or will test positive one time be forever excluded- A Rod? Had Ryan Braun's pee not been mishandled, would he forever be excluded? If someone rats out a player that's already been inducted, does he get thrown out? I don't know the answers, but do think this is going to damage the hall's (and its voting methods/criteria) image, because this will all be very polarizing for years to come.

Tons of current players are on synthetic testosterone now, which is out of their system within 24 hours. MLB just tested Braun at the "wrong" time. I would bet anything that a significant percentage of MLBers are regularly using. I don't know how Hall voters are going to handle this down the road.

Just read this...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...mlb/index.html

though we all know bonds did it - he never failed a test

They all enjoyed the fruits of their labors, the cheering, the adulation, the money. Being denied entrance to the Hall of Fame seems a small price to pay to me for their choice. They made a choice, they are now dealing with the fallout. Not being voted in doesn't mean Bonds isn't the all-time HR leader, it just means that a lot of folks and most of the voters don't regard it as legitimate. Baseball has a huge mess on their hands, that is their just desserts for turning their head and trading legitimacy for increased crowds and revenue. All hands and I mean all are dirty, unfortunately for the players there is a mechanism for people to express their displeasure. Sanctimonious, maybe but certainly understandable and I agree with voting no one in. I don't agree because you can't prove anything that you have to act like it never happened.

so if they dont let these guys in.....who from the PED - era will they let in?

That's hearsay for you to say, "we all know he did it" when he has proven his innocence thus far. Not saying he didn't, I believe he did and don't care.

I think that eventually the truly dominant players, the ones who were most likely on their way before they decided they needed to cheat will get in, Bonds and Clemens - maybe ARoid, not McGwire or Palmeiro. I just think it will take a good long time so that the stigma will always be attached to their place.

Others about whom there is suspicion but maybe less damning will take a little longer than normal just as a way of saying and identifying them with the era.

That's hearsay for you to say, "we all know he did it" when he has proven his innocence thus far. Not saying he didn't, I believe he did and don't care.

Neither Piazza nor Biggio ever failed a test, were named on any reports or linked to anyone who distributed steroids. Everything about them came from unfounded rumors started by people who made the same assumptions you are making. I'm all for punishing the guilty, but not the guilty by association.

Wow, every cliche defense of steroids in one concise post.

Steroids don't make you hit the ball -
Yes, steroids do actually improve your vision, and thus your hand-eye coordination. But let's not forget that added strength also improves bat speed, which is pretty important in hitting. Palmeiro had the bat speed of a little leaguer at the start of the season he got his 3000th, then all of a sudden he's whipping it through the zone. Magic? It boggles my mind that people don't want to admit that "performance enhancing" drugs enhance your performance! There must be SOME reason guys take them, right? I doubt it's only because they want their "boys" to shrink and take 10 years off their lives.

Not against the rules -
I didn't know baseball had to implement a rule for players to know they shouldn't do it. I don't think baseball has a rule in place for pulling out a gun and shooting a guy trying to steal second, so it must be OK. That'll teach you Juan Pierre! Was it not enough that the U.S. government made steroids ILLEGAL? I think U.S. law trumps the baseball rulebook.

Gaylord Perry-
The old standby for every steroid defender. Perry pitched in a different era when emery boards and vaseline were considered cute. He got grandfathered so to speak. Did he cheat? Hell yes he did. But for whatever reason there has always been a certain amount of inconsistency in the way people viewed what he did and the negative stigma of steroids. In either event, two (or twenty) wrongs don't make a right. Perry's induction doesn't pave the way for enshrining other cheaters.

Ritalin/amphetamines/eye surgery/etc. -
Quite simply, to compare a medical procedure like eye surgery to steroids is about as apples and oranges as you can get. That's like saying if a guy hits the gym 5 days a week, he has an unfair advantage over the guy who goes 3 times a week. There are shades of gray, and the effects any of these things has on ones performance compared to what steroids can do is miles apart.

Absolutely! They cheated to gain fame and megamillion dollar contracts, and now we're all supposed to feel sorry for them and bestow on them the highest honor an athlete can have? No thanks. They didn't mind sullying the game and their reputations for the lure of big money and adulation, they shouldn't be rewarded now after betraying the fans that cheered them on through their tainted careers.

Well, there was one player on the ballot that I KNOW was clean - he wouldn't, and still doesn't, even touch drinks with caffeine in them - DALE MURPHY. His vote total went up 4.1% over his 2012 vote - the highest rise of anyone on the ballot - but too little, too late.

Take steroids = get stronger, body changes
Tommy John Surgery = arm stronger, body changes

How many people have voluntarily gone through Tommy John Surgery.

I completely agree and it sucks. This issue will not stop with Bonds/Clemens. It will continue for a long time.. Manny, A-Rod.. Braun.. who knows how many more McNamees will eventually try to rat out some of the "clean" guys. Another thing that really bothers me also is that there are/were a lot of other weasels involved in a lot of dirt that don't seem to ever get criticized.. and many probably are in fact ones entrusted with the HOF vote.

5-6 years ago my wife, girlfriend at the time, was an associate at a law firm, which was hired by MLB during the Mitchell Investigation. She and her boss interviewed several people, including an MLB team owner, president, GM, and several others- Dr's/training staff/clubhouse staff, etc. A partner at their firm Christmas party told me he was taking calls daily from various media members offering him large $$$ to leak report info and names from the list. He said some were 6 figure offers, and though he didn't name a reporter or network, seemed to intimate ESPN was one. This made and still makes me sick. Eventually, as we all know confidential grand jury testimony was leaked (I think by a court clerk).. then names seemingly came out 1-2 at a time over the course of weeks/months.. maximizing media coverage.

Now I watch creepy guys like Pedro Gomez, who stalked Bonds for 2 years+ get on his high horse over why he won't vote for Bonds/Clemens/etc and keep picturing him or someone in his profession offering other people huge chunks of money for illegal information. Are these guys in the media really the best judges? (please pardon me if any of you are Pedro fans, but I got very sick of he and his camera crew sitting or standing 10 feet from my season seats every freaking night).

First, Mr. Biggio deserved enough votes to get in...

Next, I think that with the passage of time, the writers' bitterness toward that generation of PED users will soften a bit. Some of what was done was acceptable at the time, but is deemed wrong from today's perspective. With that waning of bitterness a few more folks will get the votes.

I think that Jake is right about Tim Wakefield, I think it's likely that he didn't use PED's.

Way back there where it was mentioned that Rose and Jackson get in... BS on that. Anyone even remotely thinking there's merit in that would benefit from reading The Fix is In, by Daniel Ginsberg, an exceptionally enlightening baseball book. If a fella's belly hurts, reckon he needs an appendectomy? Maybe an average fella shouldn't decide that, maybe he should get the enlightened, educated opinion of a doctor. And, reading The Fix is In is the way to have that similar, knowledgeable perspective. Rose should get in whenever he buys an admission ticket, and for that day only, as a patron... Joe's deceased, he doesn't get in at all.

Take steroids = entire body gets stronger and the body physically changes (also known as cheating)
TJ Surgery = the arm "heals" but the rest of your body doesn't change (also known as correcting a medical condition)
Comparing the two is assinine.

A line that separates for me is whether or not something is illegal. Tommy John surgery is legal, while taking steroids to improve athletic performance is illegal.

A footnote is that no one who had Tommy John surgery is in the Hall of Fame either. Including Tommy John.

+++

Well said

+1

Agree
 

+1