OT: No One Elected to the Hall?

[z28jd]

Originally Posted by novakjr

I think we're gonna see a big induction next year. Maddux, Glavine and Thomas all go in 1st ballot. Biggio and Piazza get in next year as well(I think they were both 1st ballot sanbagged), Bagwell may go in(so that he and Biggio go in together).. I think Morris has pretty much peaked. I don't think he gets in next year.

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)

[EvilKing00]

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

[Tom Hufford]

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?

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by z28jd

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?

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.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

Regarding Bonds, he was the only 400 400 man in baseball history before season's end 1998, as well as had 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 eventually Clemens do not 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.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by Robextend

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."

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by HOF Auto Rookies

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.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by Robextend

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

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by Robextend

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

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.

[Bugsy]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

Had Ryan Braun's pee not been mishandled

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

[EvilKing00]

Originally Posted by Robextend

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.

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

[HRBAKER]

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.

[EvilKing00]

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

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by EvilKing00

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

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.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by EvilKing00

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

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.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by EvilKing00

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

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.

[dgo71]

Originally Posted by z28jd

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.

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.

[dgo71]

Originally Posted by insidethewrapper

I didn't know steroids improved your eyesight and eye-hand coordination. You still have to hit the ball. Besides, it wasn't ever against any rules back then. Nothing was in place. I'm not saying it was right , but it wasn't against the rules. The best of that era should still get into the HOF.

Gaylord Perry actually cheated against the rules and he is in !
Players use Ritalin to concentrate better, and eye surgery to see better. Didn't Tiger Woods have lasik to improve to 20/10 eyesight. Doesn't this give these players an advantage making contact with the ball ! Why is it OK to improve by these means and not others ?

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.

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

They're the ones who decided they needed to cheat to compete. Now they are just paying the piper.

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.