2022 Baseball Hall of Fame - tracker

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by SAllen2556

The use of steroids was (and maybe still is) way more widespread than we'll ever know. It's pointless to try to figure out who did and who didn't. Why not just assume everyone did and take the best players from that era and put them in the hall of fame. Isn't that how hall of famers are typically determined, by how they compare to others of their own era?



Shouldn't Bonds and Clemens be in just because they were better than everyone else during their era?



Think back to the 80's and remember all the cocaine users in baseball: Willie Wilson, Gooden, Strawberry. Different era, different drugs. Amphetamines in the 70's were widespread.

Cheaters shouldn't be in the Hall. They lessen the accomplishments of all the players who played fair. They set a terrible example for everyone who looked up to them and they influenced countless teenagers to take steroids too. It is the most important factor anyone should consider when voting. Their actions should never be normalized.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[skelly423]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

Cheaters shouldn't be in the Hall. They lessen the accomplishments of all the players who played fair. They set a terrible example for everyone who looked up to them and they influenced countless teenagers to take steroids too. It is the most important factor anyone should consider when voting. Their actions should never be normalized.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I think there's an interesting conversation around the purpose of the Hall of Fame. If you subscribe to the idea that it's to honor the best and most virtuous of the players, your point is valid. That being said, there is a long list of guys racists, cheaters, abusers, and awful executives who should not be honored that are currently enshrined. (Anson, Landis, Yawkey, Perry, Ford, Puckett, Alomar, Piazza, Pudge, Selig)

If you think the purpose of the Hall of Fame is to tell the history of the game of baseball, warts and all, you simply can't tell that story without Bonds and Clemens (and Rose and Shoeless Joe).

For what my two cents are worth, the Hall has clearly failed to establish itself as a place honoring the virtuous. It should accept that, and try to tell the best, most complete history of the game. Bonds and Clemens belong in Cooperstown.

[SyrNy1960]

Originally Posted by skelly423

I think there's an interesting conversation around the purpose of the Hall of Fame. If you subscribe to the idea that it's to honor the best and most virtuous of the players, your point is valid. That being said, there is a long list of guys racists, cheaters, abusers, and awful executives who should not be honored that are currently enshrined. (Anson, Landis, Yawkey, Perry, Ford, Puckett, Alomar, Piazza, Pudge, Selig)

If you think the purpose of the Hall of Fame is to tell the history of the game of baseball, warts and all, you simply can't tell that story without Bonds and Clemens (and Rose and Shoeless Joe).

For what my two cents are worth, the Hall has clearly failed to establish itself as a place honoring the virtuous. It should accept that, and try to tell the best, most complete history of the game. Bonds and Clemens belong in Cooperstown.

Well said!!!!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

Cheaters shouldn't be in the Hall. They lessen the accomplishments of all the players who played fair. They set a terrible example for everyone who looked up to them and they influenced countless teenagers to take steroids too. It is the most important factor anyone should consider when voting. Their actions should never be normalized.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Would you put throwing illegal pitches in the same category of cheating or is that different? Genuine question, not arguing.

[skelly423]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Would you put throwing illegal pitches in the same category of cheating or is that different? Genuine question, not arguing.

How about guys with too much pine tar on their bats?

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Would you put throwing illegal pitches in the same category of cheating or is that different? Genuine question, not arguing.

I put throwing illegal pitches in the same category as corking a bat, steroids are different, IMO.

[skelly423]

Originally Posted by Jim65

I put throwing illegal pitches in the same category as corking a bat, steroids are different, IMO.

I am genuinely curious as to why you make this distinction. In all 3 cases, an unnatural foreign substance is added to try and gain an edge on the field of play. The choice was available for all players, and made by some.

[Dead-Ball-Hitter]

Here's one of Ortiz' best cards, his rookie year signature card... get 'em while they are hot. Wait, probably too late to buy one now...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Dead-Ball-Hitter

Here's one of Ortiz' best cards, his rookie year signature card... get 'em while they are hot. Wait, probably too late to buy one now...

Notice how Papi didn't know where he was supposed to sign these.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Notice how Papi didn't know where he was supposed to sign these.

He did an excellent job of disguising the identity of the signer though.

[GasHouseGang]

I finally found a player that everyone can agree was always a "good boy" and deserves to be in the hall. Not the greatest hitter in the game, but always ran down the balls in the outfield with the best of them.

[Fred]

This whole PED thing is a bit crazy. Look at the number of HOF eligible 500HR hitters not enshrined. 500HRs used to be the bar to reach to be enshrined.

Bonds (762 - Last year: 2007)
Sosa (609 - 2007)
McGwire (583 - 2001)
Palmeiro (569 - 2005)
Ramirez (555 - 2011)
Sheffield (509 - 2009)

Perhaps the voters are considering the players that "denied" the accusations of PEDs. On that list, the only one that admitted to using PEDs is McGwire, well at least until they were caught.

Clemens (354W - 2007) is somewhat similar in that he reached the 300W plateau but he also claimed he never used PEDs and was caught and continued to deny it. Maybe, just maybe the voters are looking at that.

The last year for Bonds, Sosa and Clemens was 2007. That would have been one hell of a HOF class to enshrine, but none are in.

We'll see what happens with A-Rod and Ortiz. I think being likable helps so Ortiz may stand a better chance than A-Rod, even though A-Rod clearly had the best offensive numbers (3K hits, 2K Runs, 2K RBIs and almost 700HRs).

PEDs and gambling. What a mess...

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Fred

This whole PED thing is a bit crazy. Look at the number of HOF eligible 500HR hitters not enshrined. 500HRs used to be the bar to reach to be enshrined.



Bonds (762 - Last year: 2007)

Sosa (609 - 2007)

McGwire (583 - 2001)

Palmeiro (569 - 2005)

Ramirez (555 - 2011)

Sheffield (509 - 2009)



Perhaps the voters are considering the players that "denied" the accusations of PEDs. On that list, the only one that admitted to using PEDs is McGwire, well at least until they were caught.



Clemens (354W - 2007) is somewhat similar in that he reached the 300W plateau but he also claimed he never used PEDs and was caught and continued to deny it. Maybe, just maybe the voters are looking at that.



The last year for Bonds, Sosa and Clemens was 2007. That would have been one hell of a HOF class to enshrine, but none are in.



We'll see what happens with A-Rod and Ortiz. I think being likable helps so Ortiz may stand a better chance than A-Rod, even though A-Rod clearly had the best offensive numbers (3K hits, 2K Runs, 2K RBIs and almost 700HRs).



PEDs and gambling. What a mess...

That's the whole point of it, isn't it? Frank Robinson had 586 home runs. He was a great player and a tremendous slugger. Now if you didn't know better you'd think he was comparable to Rafael friggin Palmeiro.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Dead-Ball-Hitter]

50% of the ballots published. So Far:

Ortiz 83.7%
Bonds 78.1%
Clemens 77.0%

Let's go Big Papi... Love to sell your signed cards for some $$... Daddy needs a new pair of Red Hindu's!

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by Dead-Ball-Hitter

50% of the ballots published. So Far:



Ortiz 83.7%

Bonds 78.1%

Clemens 77.0%



Let's go Big Papi... Love to sell your signed cards for some $$... Daddy needs a new pair of Red Hindu's!

Last year both Bonds and Clemens dropped by over 11% from public tally to the final. Ortiz is making it very close, but if the private votes have the same trend he will just miss.

[Dead-Ball-Hitter]

Voters can place up to 10 votes:

Nick Canepa, San Diego Tribune, voted for..... no one!
Michael Hunt submits a blank ballot (again)!
Dan Shaughnessy, grumpiest writer in BBWAA, votes for Jeff Kent only
Steve Simmons votes only for Andruw Jones and Curt (take me off the ballot) Shilling
Mark Purdy, Mercury News, votes only for Billy Wagner


Interesting....

[skelly423]

Originally Posted by Dead-Ball-Hitter

Voters can place up to 10 votes:

Nick Canepa, San Diego Tribune, voted for..... no one!
Michael Hunt submits a blank ballot (again)
Dan Shaughnessy, grumpiest writer in BBWAA, votes for Jeff Kent only
Steve Simmons votes only for Andruw Jones and Curt (take me off the ballot) Shilling
Mark Purdy, Mercury News, votes only for Billy Wagner


Interesting....

Steve Simmons is a well known troll in Canadian media. He isn't qualified to vote for American Idol, much less the Hall of Fame. If they want to clean up the Hall of Fame, maybe they should start with better vetting of the voters.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by Dead-Ball-Hitter

Voters can place up to 10 votes:

Nick Canepa, San Diego Tribune, voted for..... no one!
Michael Hunt submits a blank ballot (again)!
Dan Shaughnessy, grumpiest writer in BBWAA, votes for Jeff Kent only
Steve Simmons votes only for Andruw Jones and Curt (take me off the ballot) Shilling
Mark Purdy, Mercury News, votes only for Billy Wagner


Interesting....

Shaughnessy is the hack to end all hacks. The Globe should be embarrassed to employ him. I'm pretty sure the other writers that work there are...

This is what happens when we turn the HOF ballot into the morality police. Who did what? When? Who was clean? A Boy Scout?

Shaughnessy votes for Kent because he "knows" he's clean. I mean, we can't know. Pretending we can is absurd.

Not for nothing, but Kent had a 107 career OPS+ heading into his age 29 season...when he became teammates with a guy named Bonds. For the rest of his career, his OPS+ was 128 and he hit 299 of his 377 career home runs.

I'm in no way implying that Kent used PEDs...I have no idea. I'm just saying that saying "THIS is the guy I can vote for in good conscience" is pretty dumb.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

Cheaters shouldn't be in the Hall. They lessen the accomplishments of all the players who played fair. They set a terrible example for everyone who looked up to them and they influenced countless teenagers to take steroids too. It is the most important factor anyone should consider when voting. Their actions should never be normalized.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

So do you think all the Astros players who cheated should have been ruled ineligible and permanently banned from the HOF?

[abothebear]

Originally Posted by BobC

So do you think all the Astros players who cheated should have been ruled ineligible and permanently banned from the HOF?

Maybe. It would have been better if MLB took real action and stripped them of the WS. Then it would be easier to deal with players about their Hall of Fame potential, having been penalized in an appropriate way. Same with the roiders, if MLB did real testing and had real punishments (not just suspensions, but statistical judgments, like removing HRs). Bonds would probably be in if MLB tested, he was guilty, and they took away 150 home runs. I have some sympathy for the Joe Jackson case for the Hall because he was banned from the game for his actions. He paid a price that affected his career performance (since his career was over). I also still see the case against him, throwing games is a foundational blow to the spirit of the game. I consider the kind of steroid use alleged by the biggest stars of the game - significantly distorting aging curves, salary economics, and the sacred record books - to also be a foundational blow to the spirit of the game, so if I was voting, I don't think I'd vote them in even if they were appropriately tested, caught, and punished. But it would make it easier to sort through these things if they had.

[abothebear]

What do y'all think about this... there are at least two kinds of cheating, cheating within the game, and cheating without (and brought within). Fixing games is taking cheating outside of the field of play and bringing it in. Fixing an at-bat for your buddy on the other team by telling him what pitch is coming, within the field of play. Performance-enhancing drugs like steroids are done outside the field of play and brought in. Doctoring a baseball, stealing signs, taking LSD (maybe), all within the field of play. If you can get away with it, more power to you. If you get caught, you get tossed. The Astros crossed a line by stealing signs outside the field of play (using video technology from outside) and bringing it in.

These two kinds are substantially different, and the consequences should be different. That doesn't mean one can't judge a within-the-game cheater, or a strong case can't be made against chronic ball-doctorers or the like, but I don't think those cases are well-argued when they equivocate one type of cheating with the other.