Pedroia did have existing knee issues, which I’m sure didn’t help. For what it’s worth, Pedroia didn’t seem to think the slide was dirty.

Maybe it’s my Red Sox tinted glasses, but if I squint, I see an injury shortened career that may have had enough peak without the benefit of longevity. Think Kirby Puckett (he had a shorter career but similar WAR).

Pedroia is 37 now.

Yes, thank you, corrected above.

Kinsler, Utley, Rollins, Pedroia are all similar players with good arguments. Pedroia being the best of the bunch in my opinion.

It's very unlikely Pedroia would have played another 5 years. If he did could he have put up Sandberg type of numbers? Probably not. I feel like thats the bottom line of what it would have taken to get in.

That being said, was Pedroia better then Bobby Doerr who is in? I have heard this argument from Boston fans in the past. I'd say no where close.

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

It’s an interesting comparison.

By WAR, they’re close…with a fraction of one WAR separating them (BBR version).

Doerr had about 1,250 more PA. Both were effectively done by age 33, with Doerr getting an earlier start.

Doerr had a .288/.362/.461 line with a .823 OPS and 115 OPS+

Pedroia had a 299/.365/.439 line with an .805 OPS and 113 OPS+

So, I’d probably give Doerr and edge, but it’s not THAT far off.

Of note, WAR is a counting stat…so when I see Kinsler with 2.2 more WAR than Pedroia, but with 1,500 plus more plate appearances, that doesn’t scream “better” to me. A look at their raw numbers, rate stats, etc seems to back that up.

Fun fact, Pedroia beat out Kinsler at SS when both where at ASU, causing the latter to transfer to Mizzou.

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

I agree. While they both had injury-shortened careers, Doerr also lost a year and change due to the war. He was drafted in August 1944 and didn't return until 1946.

The fact that Doerr debuted at 19 and was a major league regular is super impressive.

That is an interesting one…I hadn’t heard that. Thanks for sharing!

Fun fact - I played in a father-son fantasy football league with Pedroia 2 years ago. We did a live draft so I got to hang with him for a few hours. He had just had knee surgery and was popping pills every half hour. He took Tom Brady.

I can't argue with his stats and yeah he could swing the bat gorgeously. Maybe it was just his attitude once the scandal broke, dunno.

"I HAVE NEVER USED STEROIDS. PERIOD. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY IT ANY CLEARER THAN THAT. NEVER"

- RAFAEL PALMEIRO


Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

That must have been a fun league.

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

I think he still claims his failed test was the result of Tejada injecting him with what Tejada told him was a B12 shot. On the other hand, Canseco was unequivocal about him using all along. On the other hand consider THAT source.

BTW didn't Sheffield have a similar excuse for HIS failed test, that Bonds had injected him and lied to him about what it was?

Yeah him and Juan González where definitely clean.

Those early 90 Ranger teams where fun to watch.
Canseco ruined them.

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

Loved the batting stance of Gonzalez who I think modeled it after Franco with the bat cocked over the head. Saw him very early in his career in a Fenway day game. They announce him and I'm thinking who? Then he just crushes one over the Monster, and I'm thinking, well this kid got all of that one. Next time up, he does the exact same thing, and this time I'm thinking what a swing, he may be the real deal. And he was, until he wasn't. I guess he has only himself to blame for taking a bad path, but man what a waste.

Hell yes they were! Ivan, Gonzo, Franco, Raffy, Will Clark, Rusty Greer (very underrated OFer)...then you get Nolan Ryan, Kenny Rogers and Kevin Brown as pitchers at various points...come on!

Raffy is 100% a HOFer by the numbers (Ive come full circle on PEDs and if roid guys are in and Selig is in then dont pick and choose between them...all or none)

Gonzo IMO is a HOFer but Im a Rangers fan so

PS: Honestly if I could bet money I would bet Cal Ripken Jr was a PED user (I think that's Thomas Boswell's mystery HOF player he has not IDed) and what we need to get past this is a HOFer that was a user...like say Ripken if he in fact did...to come out and admit it and that would end this HOF hang up...just a thought.

Julio Franco, not a HOF in my books but I think he could have gotten to 3k hits and in the hall had he not spent so much time in Japan.

Still like him more then Baines.
Franco vs Baines
43.6 war 38.7 war

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

Plus Tom Henke and those glasses.

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

Jose is a lot of things but I don't think he's been shown to be wrong about ANY of the guys he's accused of being steroid users.

https://forum.orioleshangout.com/for...y-on-steroids/

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

Was he lying about Ordonez? The post doesn't say, or even imply, anything of the sort.

Also, Canseco didn't mention Ordozen publicly or accuse him.

Oh I'm not questioning his credibility. I guarantee he has allot of insight and truths. I think his motives/ actions have been handled cowardly and his integrity/ timing has always been questionable .

Just thought that was an interesting, Canseco debate to read through.

Also, i think Mags is guilty. You open a case against Canseco for extortion only to drop the charges once the FBI is ready to pursue them. If he was innocent he would have wanted the charges to be pursued.



Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

None. There are no known steroid users in the HOF. Failed test = Never HOF for Palmeiro.

Not sure what Selig has to do with it other than he tried for a decade to get testing before the union agreed to it.

Just presumed steroid users like Piazza & Bagwell.
Didn't Caminiti claim that at least 50% of the league used anabolic steroids in 01?
Does cocaine help enhance one's performance? Raines & Jenkins admitted to openly using during games.
Ted Williams, Mike Schmidt & Chipper Jones admitted to using greenies before and during games. Mays reportedly took liquid amphetamines while with the Mets. Sounds fairly similar to McGwire's Andro use. Which wasnt banned at the time.
Selig banned Greenies in 05. So amphetamines, a known performance enhancer was commonly available in baseball since the end of WW2. How many immortals where users during this time? It's hard to believe it was a small number.
What about adderal or ritalin?
Tanozolol, which Palmeiro tested positive for was comonly found in beef for years qnd still runs rampant in Mexico. He has never admitted to using and wasn't charged with perjury after testing positive because they couldn't prove that he maliciously took it.
I have no doubt he was a user, but I also believe there is definitely abusers in the hall.
That being said, its hard to blame any of the abusers for their actions. The window of opportunity they have to make money is so small. Of course there will be boundary pushers.

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

Palmeiro tested positive some time after testifying so by itself it wouldn't have undermined his testimony, right?

The anti-steroid guys always argue amphetamines were different because they were not banned and because they didn't change the body (or variations on that theme).

I'm not saying he's a HOFer but Wes Ferrell might get a second look in a post-Ohtani world. What he was able to do with the bat was pretty incredible too. He was a monster in 1935. Led the league in wins and hit 347 with 7 homers and a 960 OPS.

And at least a dozen more.

And there will be a confirmed one soon when David Ortiz goes in.

His integrity is questionable. His motives have been horrible. But, again, anybody he's falsely accused? That's what I was responding to - the idea that an accusation is false because it came from Canseco. I'd argue the opposite is far more likely - that it's TRUE because it came from him.

Ok...rats60... as they say there is some ocean front property in Arizona for you to buy.

I guess you are trying to make the argument that you are innocent until proven guilty which I can appreciate...but realistically lets be honest here...probably at least 5-10 guys in the HOF used roids/PEDs and Selig as an owner and commish turned a blind eye for the sake of baseball.

And once Ortiz, Manny and A-Rod get in...who all actually tested positive post rule change will help my point and I will have a bigger argument for Raffy

My personal schoolboy idol Ivan Rodriguez I would bet used PEDs (named by Jose) as well as Piazza and several other HOFers (Tom House said Hank Aaron did by the way so stick that in your pipe and smoke it) and like I said if one is in all are in...

so a good question is should Jose Canseco be in the HOF???...based on 1. performance and 2 whistle blower status????

I wouldn’t call him a “whistle blower” - he was more “The Godfather of steroid use in baseball who got mad when nobody wanted him when he thought he could still play and lashed out”.

Do you have any evidence that Piazza or Bagwell used steroids? Accusations without evidence are worthless.

Caminiti can claim whatever he wants, but without names and evidence, his claims aren't believable.

None of the rest are steroids and are irrelevant to my post. Also, using something allowed by MLB is not the same as using something banned.

If you have any evidence, present it. I don't believe baseless claims. I am not buying your Arizona land because it is also a baseless claim.

Manny is at 28% in the HOF voting. He isn't ever getting in. ARod never tested positive, but I don't see him ever getting in. Ortiz was rumored to have tested positive, he will be an interesting case. Even if he slides in, it will do nothing for the case of someone who did test positive, peaked at 13% and fell off the ballot after the 4th year.

It's a hugely difficult, and inevitably somewhat arbitrary, line drawing problem. But yes Ortiz is going to mess up any effort to explain the way the line has been drawn.

Not sure if snorting coke helps enhance performance, but apparently using LSD helps you to throw a no-hitter!

As for Ortiz... I agree. When he gets in, it will blur the lines for all of those others currently sitting on the fence. Given enough time, I would bet Arod, McGwire, Bonds, Clemens, Sheffield and maybe even Palmeiro will make their ways into the Hall.

Not saying that's what I want... I just think it's inevitable, as the current prevailing sentiment weakens and the decision-makers begin to pass away or age out.

If Ortiz was not someone people loved, I think we would see a different atmospheric surrounding his vote.

Accusations are just that, until proven. But they usually have some truths. Below is actual admittance.

So, androstenedione, the same PED McGwire openly endorsed, was used by Piazza. He openly discussed using it in 2011 and 2013. His claim was Andro didn't do anthony for him. He wasn't hitting the ball any farther then he did previously so he stopped. But thats admission. Was Andro a banned substance yet, No. Was it a PED yes. McGwire has never been proven to take any steroids other then Andro which at the time was available everywhere. You could get andro500 at Walmart. So McGwire shouldn't have the steroid tag because he used it when it was banned?

http://www.metstoday.com/8374/12-13-...mits-peds-use/

Caminiti had demons but he had no known vendetta against baseball's fraternity like Canseco. He did name Bagwell, one of his closest friends, to Verducci as a user he knowingly ingested. He also named Luis Gonzalez, Mo Vaughn, Man Ram & Andy Pettite ( who admitted use). He defended players as well, saying Biggio, Gwynn and Hoffman had no desire. His claims that you are staying at irrelevant, opened the flood doors on the rampant use in MLB.

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/30/s...lubhouses.html

Canseco jumped on that narratives coattail to profitize for his book. That was obvious. Motives between the 2 players should be in question, that's why Cansecos integrity comes into play, but his credibility still remains. He was a known user that wanted all other users to go down on the sinking ship with him. Both have accused players who we now know took steroids positively. Maybe the forms weren't illegal yet because the technology wasnt presnt to make that informative desicision, much like many other substances that weren't banned for decades. Yes they used something allowed by baseball. But it doesn't mean they didnt use PEDs. McGwire is deserving to go in based n your argument, MLB didn't have it banned yet and McG said he stopped taking it once it was banned.

One can easily make the argument it's MLBs fault for not regulating substances/ PEDs fron the onset. If a player tests or gets caught taking/ doing anything not natural they get suspended. MLB has obviously turned a blind eye to the situation. It took cans outcries to make the situations relevant. Much like rosin and sunscreen. Something pitcher's and catchers have been encouraged to do for decades. But the public court of appeal demanded change. So MLB trys to act innocent and fix problems they basically encouraged.

You don't think MLB should have said something when Ted Williams, Jerry Coleman and other fighter pilots returned fromWW2 with the mighty power of greenies? It took MLB more then 50 years to ban them, a now known banned substance. And yes Amphetamines are drugs, PEDs, that affet ones performance, giving the user enhanced focus, and alertness.





Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

Not sure if you have ever dabbled in white lines or not to know how it affects you. But yes they drastically enhance ones energy, focus and awareness = PED.

This quote from Dan Naulty to George Mitchell in his report says it all:
"I was a full blown cheater and I knew it," Naulty said. "You didn't need a written rule. I was violating clear principals that were laid down within the rules. Whether they were explicitly stated that I shouldn't use speed or testosterone didn't need to be stated. I understood I was violating mainly implicit principals.
"I have no idea how many guys were using testosterone. But I would assume anybody that was had some sort of conviction that this was against the rules. Look, my fastball went from 87 to 96! There's got to be some sort of violation in that. It was not by natural cause. To say it wasn't cheating to me was . . . it's just a fallacy. There's just no way you could say that's not cheating. It was a total disadvantage to play clean."

Even if it wasn't banned at the time, players knew they where cheating.

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

What was it that Ortiz tested positive for?

Tom House said Henry Aaron used PEDs? Please provide a link. In Aaron’s autobiography he said he tried greenies once and felt so weird that it scared him and he never tried them again.

From Verducci'd SI article on the matter about Bagwell.

[Here are some facts about Bagwell: he hired a bodybuilder (later hired by Luis Gonzalez) in 1995 to make him "as big as I can," flexibility be damned; took the steroid precursor andro (as well as supplements such as creatine, HMB, zinc, etc.), underwent a massive body change; maintained a bodybuilder weightlifting regimen; called the whistle-blowing in 2002 by Caminiti "a shame" and the one in 2005 by Jose Canseco "very disappointing . . . whether it's true or not;" promulgated the red herring that drugs don't help baseball players ("Hand-eye coordination is something you can't get from a bottle," he said of his andro use); and as recently as 2010 in an ESPN interview openly endorsed steroid use by anyone from a fringe player ("I have no problem with that") to superstars such as Bonds and McGwire ("I know you took it but it doesn't matter") as well as the HGH use by an injured Andy Pettitte ("That's not a performance enhancer").]

Again no denial of use. If you didnt use, wouldnt you deny the accusations?

Here is the full article

https://www.si.com/mlb/2013/01/08/ha...-roger-clemens

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

I don't remember there being very much proof that Buck Weaver took money to throw a World Series he hit 324 in. But he is still banned, no?

When did proof become more important than belief in baseball?

He also went from 29 homers in 160 games at age 34 to 40 homers in 120 games at age 39.

His totals fluctuated throughout his career. Some years as low as the 20s, back as far as the 1950s, many of course in the 40s. If you're suggesting Aaron's career arc suggests he used, you need a better analysis than that.

His career arc suggests that he would put up his best home run % at the age of 39?!!? In an era when players were basically never even good at that age?

He wasn’t banned for rigging games, he was banned for knowing others were rigging games and keeping his mouth shut as it happened, of which there was some evidence.

Aaron's home runs, in the friendly Atlanta park:

1966: 44, led league
1967: 39, led league
1968: 29
1969: 44
1970: 38
1971: 47
1972: 34
1973: 40
1974: 20

Highlighting his age 34 season in 1968 (the year of the pitcher, at that) as a baseline to then discredit later years does not make sense, it was a down year for him, which happens in every long-term players career. Why don't we use his age 32, 33 or 35 seasons?

Perhaps Aaron used something that gave an unfair advantage, but this is not a good or fair argument, it's cherry picking his worst and best rates, ignoring the plethora of seasons close to his best rate, and then pretending the cherry picked lower number is his "normal" somehow by which to discredit the higher figure.

You haven't analyzed his career you've juxtaposted two cherry picked seasons.

The age 34 season isn't really even relevant to the point you are now making.

At age 38 Jeter had his best season in several years. And?

Didn't Aaron, Davey Johnson and Darrell Evans all have 40+ HRs in 73? All on the Braves together? Basically career years for both the latter. NOT CLAIMING AARON TOOK STEROIDS. NOT TRYING TO SPREAD FALSE INFORMATIO .

But the reality is PED's, steroids included, have been used by various athletes in all major sports by the early 60s at the latest. Look at the Russians in the 50s but Olympic athletes weren't even tested for steroids until the mid 70s. That's a long time for players to experiment with substances that weren't banned yet.



Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

Nelson Cruz will probably end his career right behind Bonds for HRs after 35.

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

Johnson and Evans were 30 and 26.

Aaron also hit 34 the year before and 47 the year before that so it wasn't so out of line.

If not for his late start we might be looking at HOF worthy numbers for his career.

Dale Murphy should be in.

Roy Face deserves in before he dies

What's the mathematical argument for Face? An ERA 9% better than the league in less than 1,500 innings. 18-1 relief decisions in a single year is not a career achievement.

As someone who watched Aaron closely in these years, there was no PED use that explained his home run arc. His minor fluctuations were throughout his entire career and he was extremely consistent. The 29 HRs in 1968 were in the year of the pitcher when everyone's totals were down. He put up 47 in 1971 in a home run friendly ballpark but hitting 44 or so was the norm for him. In 1973, Evans and Davey Johnson were kids, they weren't 40 years old. The bad information in this thread concerning Aaron is astounding.

Johnson's season was a real aberration but tainting Aaron by association really seems a stretch.

Thank you Ricky and Peter for standing up. Those who saw Aaron and knew a lick about the detail of hitting in MLB, appreciated him and why he stood up to the eye test. His career consistency, for me, answers all the stat-slanting of those who don't know.
Thank you.
Ben

Thank you for the correction.

I'm not suggesting Aaron used. Sorry if it came off that way. I do feel it would be ignorant to assume no player in the Hall ever cheated. Plenty have been speculated to have cheated.

Where their players using PEDs that never got caught? Absolutely.

Sent from my SM-A716U1 using Tapatalk

I'm still shaky on this burden of proof that seems to exist for some people (David Ortiz / Jeff Bagwell / Mike Piazza) but not others. Roger Clemens didn't exactly get "caught" cheating but is there a question about whether he was? How about Barry Bonds? Do you need a deposition to know he cheated?

Why the wishy-washy attitude toward guys like Bagwell, Piazza, Ivan Rodriguez and David Ortiz? In my opinion it is quite obvious they all cheated the same way McGwire and Sosa did.

I don't think Ortiz is obvious the way McGwire, Bonds and Sosa were. Ortiz was never cut... even as a young player, he was a bit plump. And he still looks the same as he did when playing. McGwire, Sosa, Bonds.... they physically changed and if you look at McGwire now, he looks like he shrunk. Bonds' hat sizes increased two sizes. That's not normal. Did Ortiz' stats improve from his time in Minnesota as a young player? Yes, but how much of that was maturation as a player and being given a chance to play full-time? He apparently tested positive for something, but who knows what it was? There were a lot of substances were on the list but were meaningless... and his numbers continued to improve after that test and more stringent testing was put into place. Meanwhile BALCO swirled around McGwire, Bonds and Sosa... I forget the deal with Clemens but didn't someone report that he was sticking needles in his butt (I could be confusing that with someone else)?

But if he did not take money or do anything to actually throw a game then why, there was no such rule in place when that happened? He was retroactively banned by Landis, who was basically paid off by the owner's to be their hit man. In fact, there was actually no law on the books that made throwing a baseball game a criminal activity at the time either. The Black Sox trial was for alledgedly cheating others out of money they would have gotten had they won the series. If I remember correctly, I believe White Sox teammate Shano Collins was listed as the injured party in the trial, or one of them at least.

And if you are going to retroactively ban someone for one rule, then shouldn't the same be true for all rules? In which case, shouldn't the rule be retroactively applied to anyone taking amphetamines before they were banned then? And since it is basically a known fact that virtually all ballplayers back in the 50's and 60's were taking, or at least tried, greenies/amphetamines, there is an even more compelling case for most of the HOFers from back then to be banned from baseball permanently as well. I believe the current rule is three strikes for PEDs and you're out forever, right?

And before even one of you jumps on here to say you can't prove anyone did greenies because they didn't test for amphetamines back then, go look up all the stories and admissions. I believe Mays even admitted to going to his doctor for a prescription to help him get through the season, and conveniently said he didn't know what was in the pills he got though so he could always feign ignorance of knowingly taking amphtamines. I believe you could find enough evidence and support to permanently ban quite a few HOFers if that rule against PEDs were retroactively applied, like the gambling rule apparently was against Weaver.

Clemens' old trainer accused him of cheating but there was no "proof". So, why is he guilty because a guy said so but others aren't? Ortiz failed a test in 2003. He then later claimed that when he finds out why he failed the test, he'd share the information publicly. But he of course never did that. Timing seems suspicious though, doesn't it? In 2003 Ortiz was more or less nobody. In 2004 he makes his first All Star team. Hmmmm......

Ivan Rodriguez though, to me, is the most obvious case. All you have to do is look at a photo of him in his Texas prime and compare it to the little guy who ended up on the Yankees later on.

Though it shouldn't matter, clemens and bonds are a-holes- and that DOES resonate.

.

Want to hear another coincidence? Pudge turned 32 in 2004, the same year MLB institutes testing. He then goes the next 7 years without putting up an OPS over 100, which is technically not even replacement level talent.

When I first saw that I had the same reaction, but then I took a deeper dive into Pinson's stats. As good as Clemente? Of course not. Very underrated, though? Indeed.

I love Pinson and would love to see him inducted some day. Very underrated, and playing for small-market Cincy didn't help either.

But there's no universe in which he was as good as Clemente.

Wow, a catcher who had below league average offense after turning 32? Sounds like, we’ll…95% of catchers ever. :)

Not saying he didn’t use…but this guessing is dumb. We should just elect on merit for anyone who didn’t fail a test once the league got serious about testing.

Ortiz allegedly failed a test that was to set a baseline for if future testing would happen. This was leaked by the NY media….and no confirmation has ever happened, and no other names were released or leaked.

And it’s not like you take steroids and then you’re good for a decade…you know once testing started the HR hitters were “randomly” tested more than the 150 utility infielders.

Ortiz was pretty good in 2003 - 31 HR, 101 RBI, .288. If you look at his career, he was playing more and getting better up to 2003. And after that positive result .... for what? .... he was tested pretty stringently and regularly and he continued to produce at ever greater levels.

The Twins were trying to turn Ortiz into a singles hitter who didn't strike out, and it didn't help that he fractured his wrist a couple times and then his mom died just as he was starting to break out. When he got to Boston, Pedro and Manny told him to forget about hitting singles and swing for the fences.

How is Pinson underrated? Seems to me your classic very good player which is how he is thought of.


Hall of Fame Statistics





Black Ink
Batting - 18 (153), AverageHOFer ≈ 27

Gray Ink
Batting - 135 (158), AverageHOFer ≈ 144

Hall of Fame Monitor
Batting - 95 (194), LikelyHOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards
Batting - 36 (215), AverageHOFer ≈ 50

JAWS
Center Field (20th):
54.1 career WAR| 40.0 7yr-peak WAR| 47.0 JAWS| 3.6 WAR/162
Average HOF CF (out of 19):
71.9 career WAR | 44.8 7yr-peak WAR | 58.3 JAWS | 5.4 WAR/162

Bobby Mathews

The HOF should create a "pioneers or early years" section for the fans. There are a few players that should be in there and Ross Barnes is at the top of the list. Bobby Mathews is another player that could be considered a "pioneer". He started the same year as Ross Barnes but lasted a bit longer. If he'd won 3 more games in his career, he'd already be enshrined.

My 82 year old mother would tell you that those three letters stand for "well that's fantastic"

I didn’t say he should be banned, I said that the reason cited for his banning was factually wrong. He was banned for guilty knowledge and effectively helping cover it up, not throwing the series himself.

Whether he should have been for that is a legitimate question. I think that a player can reasonably be banned for doing something that common sense should tell you is very wrong, even if there is not a specific rule. For example, I don’t believe MLB has a rule specifically saying you can be banned for assault with a deadly weapon or attempted homicide, but I think Juan Marichal could reasonably have been banned for life for trying to smash John Roseboro’s head open with a bat.

Likening covering up the biggest scandal in sports history that ruined public trust in the game to every player that has taken a greenie, amphetamine, or sought an unfair advantage (which is probably almost every player in history) is not reasonable. The obvious difference here is that seeking an unfair competitive advantage is a different kind of bad thing from covering up the throwing of the World Series, trying to win vs. covering up trying to lose. Weaver can be defended on the reasonable ground that the line should be drawn at direct participation and not guilty knowledge. This is a better argument, and one I don’t necessarily disagree with.

You can get elected as a pioneer or early years selection...that committee last had an election in 2016 and no one got in (top vote-getters were Doc Adams, Bill Dahlen, and Harry Stovey). The last people to get in via this committee were Hank O'Day, Jake Ruppert, and Deacon White in the 2013 election (results announced in 2012). The next scheduled meeting of the committee is this December.

One problem is that they cover a very broad range of years. There are four different veterans committees and the one called Early Baseball currently covers 1871-1949. So in the last election, Bucky Walters and Marty Marion were on the ballot along with pioneers and actual early players (I don't think of Marty Marion as an early player). The first hurdle is getting on the ballot and it is much harder when you are competing against people over such a wide range of years. This to me is four eras (pioneer/pre-league, organized 19th century, dead ball, pre-integration live ball). The other three committees are much more focused (for example, the Golden Days committee covers 1950-1969).

The other problem is that after this year's election, they are not meeting again for another ten years! So basically if Adams, Barnes, Creighton, Dahlen, Ferrell, Magee, Mathews, etc. don't make it this time they are not getting in for a long time (unless the HOF changes its rules).

You sure about that? How do you explain the second prime of Clemens' career then? He didn't fail a test either. Was he cheating? Obviously.

Am I sure Ortiz or Clemens did or didn’t cheat? Of course not…none of us are.

Is it LESS likely that they used after testing became widespread? Yes, although obviously the testing isn’t infallible.

It’s impossible to know who used what when and what effect it had. We can know someone used something at a point in time if they test positive. We can see evidence that they used (Mitchell report, accusations from Clemen’s trainer). But approaches like “leaked test results” and “backne” are less reliable.

The worst part is that I believe this committee still requires a decade of Major League Baseball service to be selected, and thus Creighton who died before it existed cannot ever be considered in the current system. Barnes only played 9 years and thus cannot be considered either. Marty Marion can be considered by the committee for pioneers, but not the two actual pioneers who clearly merit induction.

Never forget.