new HOF "impact/era" ballot

[ls7plus]

Does Mark McGwire make the HOF as a candidate on the new "impact/era" ballot recently introduced? Will all essentially be forgiven?

Tell us what you think!

Best wishes,

Larry

[rats60]

Since they voted the first week in December and McGwire didn't get in, I say no. If you are asking will he ever get in, I say look at Joe Jackson, 80 years and still waiting. I don't see the dopers getting in.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by rats60

Since they voted the first week in December and McGwire didn't get in, I say no. If you are asking will he ever get in, I say look at Joe Jackson, 80 years and still waiting. I don't see the dopers getting in.

I would say there is enough dopers already in to field a few full teams. If you are just talking steroids then there IMHO already enough to field at least one full team.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I would say there is enough dopers already in to field a few full teams. If you are just talking steroids then there IMHO already enough to field at least one full team.

I guess you know more than everyone else. I don't know of any. I just deal in facts, not rumors or speculation.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by rats60

I guess you know more than everyone else. I don't know of any. I just deal in facts, not rumors or speculation.

I guarantee you are also dealing is rumors and speculation. Unless the player was popped or admitted to usage we will never know for sure. I highly doubt any that did are going to say "yes I done that".

My speculation is based on several years of personal usage so I know what they really do. While I done them I thought they were the best things ever invented. Now because of over usage when I was much younger I am a broken down middle aged man who has a hard time walking down my steps in the morning.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I guarantee you are also dealing is rumors and speculation. Unless the player was popped or admitted to usage we will never know for sure. I highly doubt any that did are going to say "yes I done that".

My speculation is based on several years of personal usage so I know what they really do. While I done them I thought they were the best things ever invented. Now because of over usage when I was much younger I am a broken down middle aged man who has a hard time walking down my steps in the morning.

How is saying that I don't know any rumor or speculation? It is a fact!!!!!! Unless you can provide facts that I don't know, you are only speculating.

So, I am waiting for names and facts. If there is a full team according to you, that shouldn't be a problem.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Does Mark McGwire make the HOF as a candidate on the new "impact/era" ballot recently introduced? Will all essentially be forgiven?

Tell us what you think!

Best wishes,

Larry

I tend to think he won't, at least not for awhile. Bonds and Clemens will probably be the only known roid guys who get in any time soon, and they only because they were HOF'ers regardless if they retired at age 35 or juiced and put up their best seasons as they did.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Clemens, in his last four seasons in Boston when he should have been in his absolute prime (age 30-33), went 40-39 with a god awful ERA. This wasn't just a guy who had an off year. He had completely lost his dominance. I don't think you will find many Red Sox fans who believe his remarkable turnaround from that point is due to anything except PEDs.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Clemens, in his last four seasons in Boston when he should have been in his absolute prime (age 30-33), went 40-39 with a god awful ERA. This wasn't just a guy who had an off year. He had completely lost his dominance. I don't think you will find many Red Sox fans who believe his remarkable turnaround from that point is due to anything except PEDs.

I think the argument would be that he had 3 Cy Youngs, a 2nd and 3rd and a MVP Award before he started doping in Toronto. Even though he only had 192 wins, he had an ERA+ of 144 and a WAR of 81. That is much better than Bonds who only had 2 MVPs, 176 HRs and a WAR of 50 prior to doping in SF.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

I think the argument would be that he had 3 Cy Youngs, a 2nd and 3rd and a MVP Award before he started doping in Toronto. Even though he only had 192 wins, he had an ERA+ of 144 and a WAR of 81. That is much better than Bonds who only had 2 MVPs, 176 HRs and a WAR of 50 prior to doping in SF.

What year are you assuming Bonds started?

[HRBAKER]

That's precisely the thing Peter, we don't.
They forfeited all favorable conjecture IMO as well.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Clemens, in his last four seasons in Boston when he should have been in his absolute prime (age 30-33), went 40-39 with a god awful ERA. This wasn't just a guy who had an off year. He had completely lost his dominance. I don't think you will find many Red Sox fans who believe his remarkable turnaround from that point is due to anything except PEDs.

His last 4 seasons in Boston he was 8th in MLB in fWAR ,29th in ERA with 3.77 and 16th in MLB in FIP with 3.69, he was still a really good pitcher. Tho, it's fairly obvious that around 96-97 he began PED's because from age 34-41 he was one of the 3 or 4 best pitchers in baseball which just doesn't happen .Player's don't have two peaks to their careers.

That is much better than Bonds who only had 2 MVPs, 176 HRs and a WAR of 50 prior to doping in SF.

wut? Most evidence points to Bonds starting ,at the earliest, around 1996 (statistically the big change appears around 1998/1999) but giving you the benefit of the doubt of 1996, between 1986-1996 Bonds had posted 81.8 WAR, 334 HR, 380 SB, a slash line of .288/.404/.548 , following a normal decline Bonds was going to be a 500 HR club member and post over 100 career WAR ,still making him a first ballot HOF type.

I condemn his PED use as much as anyone, but he was easily the best player of his generation and an easy HOF'er before using (which, makes it even more pathetic) but is why he and Clemens will get voted in either this year or next.

[dgo71]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

That's precisely the thing Peter, we don't.
They forfeited all favorable conjecture IMO as well.

+1
The argument that they'd be HOFers regardless is based purely on speculation, since nobody knows when they began using. Seems steroids became rampant in the 80s with McGwire but everyone seems to assume Bonds and Clemens began in mid- to-late 90s?

And as to the comment about these players never admitting they used, that's exactly what McGwire did when he began coaching. So since he was mentioned in the OP, no, I don't think he should ever get in. Without power he was below average in almost every facet of the game, and his power stats are tarnished.

To the original question about the impact the new committee will have though, I unfortunately believe the new system was developed specifically to admit players from the PED era. It's no coincidence the dividing line for the modern players starts at 1988, nor that Big Mac was included on the first ballot under the new system.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I thought Bonds' girlfriend who ratted him out says he started using in response to the McGwire/Sosa season which was 1998. And I agree, up to that point the only player who might have had an argument that he was better was Griffey, and I think Bonds wins that argument. But, according to the GF, he was jealous of all the media attention on the home runs, and figured with the same PEDs he could do the same or better.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

I think the argument would be that he had 3 Cy Youngs, a 2nd and 3rd and a MVP Award before he started doping in Toronto. Even though he only had 192 wins, he had an ERA+ of 144 and a WAR of 81. That is much better than Bonds who only had 2 MVPs, 176 HRs and a WAR of 50 prior to doping in SF.

And it should have been 4 Cy Youngs. 1990 he was 21-6 1.93, and they give it to Bob Welch whose ERA was as I recall a full run higher.

[hysell]

Ok, I saw a show with Willie McCovey on it & he doesn"t back B.BONDS like W.MAYS does, say ,"he has never seen a drug/pill make a Baseball player?" I don"t care if your Superman or the Hulk,if you cant play or even hit the ball,how good can you be?Here is the fact in this sport, your a real good player if you fail 70% of the time?So if so easy to do?WHY are you or me not playing MLB baseball & you can put those great {NOT} HOFer voters on this LONGGGG list, also in the HOF?It"s a sport,these guys give up there bodys to play these sports?HOW many steroids & drugs are in our food ,right now? Do you think a turkey can reach 25 to 30 pounds in just under a years time?PLEASE,Robert.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by hysell

Ok, I saw a show with Willie McCovey on it & he doesn"t back B.BONDS like W.MAYS does, say ,"he has never seen a drug/pill make a Baseball player?" I don"t care if your Superman or the Hulk,if you cant play or even hit the ball,how good can you be?Here is the fact in this sport, your a real good player if you fail 70% of the time?So if so easy to do?WHY are you or me not playing MLB baseball & you can put those great {NOT} HOFer voters on this LONGGGG list, also in the HOF?It"s a sport,these guys give up there bodys to play these sports?HOW many steroids & drugs are in our food ,right now? Do you think a turkey can reach 25 to 30 pounds in just under a years time?PLEASE,Robert.

Your turkey info is way off. We have a turkey facility here and it is 75 days give or take 2 or 3 from hatch to a 15 lb turkey in the bag ready to cook. That # blew my mind.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by hysell

Ok, I saw a show with Willie McCovey on it & he doesn"t back B.BONDS like W.MAYS does, say ,"he has never seen a drug/pill make a Baseball player?" I don"t care if your Superman or the Hulk,if you cant play or even hit the ball,how good can you be?Here is the fact in this sport, your a real good player if you fail 70% of the time?So if so easy to do?WHY are you or me not playing MLB baseball & you can put those great {NOT} HOFer voters on this LONGGGG list, also in the HOF?It"s a sport,these guys give up there bodys to play these sports?HOW many steroids & drugs are in our food ,right now? Do you think a turkey can reach 25 to 30 pounds in just under a years time?PLEASE,Robert.

just because you and Mr Mays are bad at science doesn't mean the rest of us are. It is a scientific fact that PED's improve performance due to their ability to increase recovery rates.

[nebboy]

I'm on Bonds side - go ahead and say what you want!!!!!!!
I watched him as a rookie and early years in Pittsburgh and I could always see him as a great player. On the personal side he's a GOOD father nothing to do with baseball but means something to me. I enjoyed many, many games he played and saw greatness. Ego and Following Willy Mays example never did a thing for him or with the press. But the press can keep their words and stories some where up their *#%s (I'm tied of them thinking we should agree with that dribbling.) He played the game at profound levels just when we the people needed it. (((( and we sucked it up)))) we all watched every minute.
He needs and has a place in the hall!

Go ahead and rip me but I'd vote for him...
My names John Hannsen and I willing to say what is Un - politically correct.

[hysell]

Ok,Nick, so your science is better than ours,so you MUST know WHO used & WHEN they use & when is YOUR book coming out on these facts, so I can buy it? Don"t need dume HOF voters,we have you?When did you play in the MLB & when are you going into the HOF,if your science says it"s so easy?Yes the PEDS sure did help his eye sight,when he is walking 200+ times a year & 1 time with the bases loaded,now that"s something you don"t see every year!The Turkey thing I may have been off on,but you guys get my point! But, Bill I did said 25 to 30 pounds,but maybe I should have said 20 to 25 pounds?15 pounds ,would be a good turkey in the wild & yes I do know your talking about farms?Like I said the HOF voting is a joke?Robert.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by hysell

Ok,Nick, so your science is better than ours,so you MUST know WHO used & WHEN they use & when is YOUR book coming out on these facts, so I can buy it? Don"t need dume HOF voters,we have you?When did you play in the MLB & when are you going into the HOF,if your science says it"s so easy?Yes the PEDS sure did help his eye sight,when he is walking 200+ times a year & 1 time with the bases loaded,now that"s something you don"t see every year!The Turkey thing I may have been off on,but you guys get my point! But, Bill I did said 25 to 30 pounds,but maybe I should have said 20 to 25 pounds?15 pounds ,would be a good turkey in the wild & yes I do know your talking about farms?Like I said the HOF voting is a joke?Robert.

appeal to ignorance logical fallacy....

and yes, of the HOF eligible types I can say pretty confidently who did or didn't use long term (no way to tell if someone dabbled) nobody has a better or equal peak in their career after age 32 as they did between ages 24-38, never in the history of baseball had that occurred...... until the mid 90's. so either you think that 20+ people magically all broke statistical precedent at exactly the same time, or the is causation in the correlation.

[hysell]

Ok , correct me if I'm wrong , I know NICK will ! Didn"t B.Bonds have 20/10 eye vision , like Ted Williams & I think { ? } Wade boggs did ? I know a few others may have had that kind of eye sight , also ? PS how is my gapes on this message ! Think this helps you a lot in any sports & makes you a better player , than most ? Robert.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by hysell

Ok , correct me if I'm wrong , I know NICK will ! Didn"t B.Bonds have 20/10 eye vision , like Ted Williams & I think { ? } Wade boggs did ? I know a few others may have had that kind of eye sight , also ? PS how is my gapes on this message ! Think this helps you a lot in any sports & makes you a better player , than most ? Robert.

sure, but how did he suddenly become a better hitter between age 35-41 than he was in the rest of his career when nobody had ever done that before?

roids and HGH (hgh ,btw, not only helps build muscle it improves vision)


p.s. the word is "gaps" and you sound like you need some sort of mental health care

[hysell]

Nick , your dead wrong about peak season after age 32 ? Look at Babe Ruth's season"s after age 32 , which would have been before the start of 1927 ! let"s see 1928 he had 54 HRS 142 RBIS .323 BA . In 1929 he had 46 HRS 154 RBIS .345 BA . In 1930 49 HRS 153 RBIS .359 BA . In 1931 46 HRS 163 RBIS .373 BA . 1932 41 HRS 137 RBIS .341 BA , ok he did slip off in 1933 ? But still was a good year ! At 34 HRS 103 RBIS .301 BA ! He was born on FEB 2nk 1895 ! You might want to check on some of TY Cobb"s stats after age 32 & also Honus Wagner , He won 5 of his 8 career BA"s titles after age 32 ? And you are a Braves fan ? What about Hank Aaron, he was born on FEB 5th , 1934 , so was already 32 before the 1966 season started & I as a Aaron fan, know he had a few nice years after age 32 , with 44 HRS in 1969 at age 35 , with 38 HRS in 1970 at age 36 & with his career high of 47 HRS in 1971 at age 37 , also hit 40 HRS at age 39 in 1973 ! Shame on you ! So what were these guys on ? ROBERT .PS Nick I can also correct people , like your Ages 24-38 > 32 ? 38 age is bigger than 32 is it not ! So your not perfect either ?

[hysell]

Nick ? What about your { Braves } CF Andrew Jones stat"s at the end of 2006 ? His stat"s fell through the floor & also his fielding went bad ? 51 HRS in 2005 & 41 HRS in 2006 , than he never hit 30 HRS in any season , after wards ? I'v always thought he was juicing it up & he was done , player wise by age 31 ? He also got bigger , when he got older ? Your thoughts on him ? Robert.

[ls7plus]

With reference to the many posts above re when Bonds started, it was rather common knowledge in the very early 2000's that he had announced his intention to do so to a select, inner circle of fellow MLB'ers following the 1998 season, after all the hoopla McGwire and Sosa received in '98. He had some injuries at first (the artificial additives strengthen the muscles, but not the connective tissue), but eventually he and Balco got things straightened out. One hell of a smart hitter, though--used to watch all of his games on the major league pass and never, ever saw him fooled on a pitch!

Best,

Larry

[Peter_Spaeth]

There can be no serious question Bonds used at least after 1998 and that it significantly improved his power numbers.

There is also no serious question he was an elite player prior to that.

How one assesses that in terms of HOF, it's a matter of personal belief. I would put him in, and what's more, I still have a hard time putting roids in one box and speed in another although I understand roids have more of a demonstrable effect on performance.

Nick didn't Ted Williams have something close to a second peak very late? From memory I thought he had dropped off a bit post-Korean War but came back to have a couple of phenomenal seasons including a .388 right at the end? Or was it too short to qualify, or not deep enough beyond the BA?

[hysell]

Larry, the thing that got me watching Barry, was in those years he led league in walks & by a mile? He might get 1 or 2 real good pitches to hit & often did damage with them ? And he often hit behind Jeff Kent & had not much of a hitter behind him to protect his ab"s ? Robert .

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

With reference to the many posts above re when Bonds started, it was rather common knowledge in the very early 2000's that he had announced his intention to do so to a select, inner circle of fellow MLB'ers following the 1998 season, after all the hoopla McGwire and Sosa received in '98. He had some injuries at first (the artificial additives strengthen the muscles, but not the connective tissue), but eventually he and Balco got things straightened out. One hell of a smart hitter, though--used to watch all of his games on the major league pass and never, ever saw him fooled on a pitch!

Best,

Larry

His girl friend said the same thing about timing. All the attention McGwire and Sosa got apparently really pissed him off because he felt (correctly) that he was by far the better player.

[hysell]

Pete you are correct on Teddy baseball , even if you counted the war years! & I also believe Joe {D} ,the Yankee Clipper , also had 3 to 4 fine years at age 32 or older? Sure are a lot of players? For it NEVER , EVER happen in baseball history & this is just some hitters? Would bet, this would also be true for pitchers , also! But they didn"t use WAR stats back then !Robert.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by hysell

Pete you are correct on Teddy baseball , even if you counted the war years! & I also believe Joe {D} ,the Yankee Clipper , also had 3 to 4 fine years at age 32 or older? Sure are a lot of players? For it NEVER , EVER happen in baseball history & this is just some hitters? Would bet, this would also be true for pitchers , also! But they didn"t use WAR stats back then !Robert.

Nick isn't saying guys didn't have good years late, he is saying until recently they did not go into a typical age-related decline, then revive.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

There can be no serious question Bonds used at least after 1998 and that it significantly improved his power numbers.

There is also no serious question he was an elite player prior to that.

How one assesses that in terms of HOF, it's a matter of personal belief. I would put him in, and what's more, I still have a hard time putting roids in one box and speed in another although I understand roids have more of a demonstrable effect on performance.

Nick didn't Ted Williams have something close to a second peak very late? From memory I thought he had dropped off a bit post-Korean War but came back to have a couple of phenomenal seasons including a .388 right at the end? Or was it too short to qualify, or not deep enough beyond the BA?

Ted hit .388 in 1957 and was the second time he should have won the MVP and they gave it to a Yankee instead.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by rats60

How is saying that I don't know any rumor or speculation? It is a fact!!!!!! Unless you can provide facts that I don't know, you are only speculating.

So, I am waiting for names and facts. If there is a full team according to you, that shouldn't be a problem.

There's only one HOF member that openly admitted to anabolic doping.

That was Pud Galvin in 1889.

Yep, doping is that old and was known in the pros well before the so called "steroid era". The difference is, in the mid century weight training was completely disavowed. Plenty of people could have used, thus why I think these "era" arguments are all conjecture.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Actually looking at it now Ted had great seasons right after the Korean War. It was his seasons right before the war that were a little subpar, for him. It's incredible he missed close to FIVE seasons, not to mention almost another full one due to injury, yet amassed the totals he did.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Actually looking at it now Ted had great seasons right after the Korean War. It was his seasons right before the war that were a little subpar, for him. It's incredible he missed close to FIVE seasons, not to mention almost another full one due to injury, yet amassed the totals he did.

You couldn't expect anything less form the greatest offensive player in the history of the game. He was Babe Ruth and John Wayne rolled into one amazing human.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Nick isn't saying guys didn't have good years late, he is saying until recently they did not go into a typical age-related decline, then revive.

This!

Guys have up and down years, that's the nature of the game. But before the "roid era" no players had their peak years, then started to decline then suddenly posted a second run of peak years (that in some cases were even better than their prime years between age 26-30) the classic "second peak" that seems to be a serious red flag for PED's.

I'm not saying that's the only way to determine roid users either as many of them used simply to stay in MLB or to maintain enough production to be starters. But the simple fact of the matter is that in the history of the game nobody was a better player from 35-41 than they were from 26-30. Then magically a bunch of guys were, and all during the same era.


P.S. you can't just use batting average for this either as it is an incomplete measure of a hitter's production. It tells us nothing about walks nor the type of hits he got.

[packs]

I can't tell from their posts but is that guy suggesting Bonds didn't use PEDs?

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by packs

I can't tell from their posts but is that guy suggesting Bonds didn't use PEDs?

I think he's suggesting that since there was no smoking gun he ,and the other big names involved, shouldn't be punished by the HOF voters. My counter was that there IS a smoking gun and that is the statistical evidence.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Actually looking at it now Ted had great seasons right after the Korean War. It was his seasons right before the war that were a little subpar, for him. It's incredible he missed close to FIVE seasons, not to mention almost another full one due to injury, yet amassed the totals he did.

I always figured that his service in the Korean War gave his shattered elbow sustained by running into the wall after a drive hit by Ralph Kiner in the All-Star game (1950?) a real chance to heal--IMHO, based objectively on runs created versus league average runs created per 27 outs, the best ever (the Babe, while a close second in this category, has to be accorded the title of the best player ever when given credit for his ample pitching achievements).

Best wishes always,

Larry

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

I think he's suggesting that since there was no smoking gun he ,and the other big names involved, shouldn't be punished by the HOF voters. My counter was that there IS a smoking gun and that is the statistical evidence.

If that is what it takes then David Ortiz must have a smoking ICBM. He couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat in Minnesota. Heck he couldn't even make the stating line up of a mediocre team. Then goes to the Roid Sox and becomes a legend.

Crazily him and Pedro are the only 2 players I believe that done PEDs that bother me. Even weirder my 3 favorite players are Red Sox legends.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

There can be no serious question Bonds used at least after 1998 and that it significantly improved his power numbers.

There is also no serious question he was an elite player prior to that.

How one assesses that in terms of HOF, it's a matter of personal belief. I would put him in, and what's more, I still have a hard time putting roids in one box and speed in another although I understand roids have more of a demonstrable effect on performance.

Nick didn't Ted Williams have something close to a second peak very late? From memory I thought he had dropped off a bit post-Korean War but came back to have a couple of phenomenal seasons including a .388 right at the end? Or was it too short to qualify, or not deep enough beyond the BA?

Pete, Ted hit .316 in 1960, after turning 42 in August of that year, with an incredible 29 homers in just 310 at bats! Teddy F___ing Ballgame!! A pinched nerve in his neck in 1959 (he has stated that he couldn't really turn his head around in his stance to the point he was used to to see the pitch!) accounted for his only bad year, 1959.

As you know, best always,

Larry

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by hysell

Larry, the thing that got me watching Barry, was in those years he led league in walks & by a mile? He might get 1 or 2 real good pitches to hit & often did damage with them ? And he often hit behind Jeff Kent & had not much of a hitter behind him to protect his ab"s ? Robert .

I agree completely, Robert. As Ted Williams used to say, "when you get your pitch, don't take it, don't swing and miss it, AND DON'T FOUL IT OFF!" And Barry sure didn't! You are absolutely right about the enormous number of walks Barry drew, which are a tremendous factor in creating runs, as seen in Bill James' formula for same. Also, look at the career records of those skilled in both power and drawing walks for some jaw-dropping runs scored totals.

Best regards,

Larry

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Nick didn't Ted Williams have something close to a second peak very late? From memory I thought he had dropped off a bit post-Korean War but came back to have a couple of phenomenal seasons including a .388 right at the end? Or was it too short to qualify, or not deep enough beyond the BA?

actually, he didn't have a second peak as much as he just stayed really awesome for a long time. If you look at his couple of "down" years in the middle, they are as a result of small sample sizes due to war service. But even then his power numbers fell off post Korea as he hit more than 30 homers only once after 1951