Andy Pettitte will retire at the end of the season

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Changing his tune on "The Rocket" won't help him with the writers much IMO.
Not a HOFer without that incident anyway IMO, very good pitcher on some extremely good teams. Who knows though, the "halo effect" might get him in.

I think that if he gets in, it tells us a lot about how the voters feel about the entire PED thing;i.e-"NO" to the liars, "YES" to those who come clean QUICKLY. On the other hand, maybe it opens a door for guys like Palmeiro who were passive liars, unlike Clemens, Rodriguez,etc.

It will be interesting to see how this situation plays out, but we won't know for years.

[z28jd]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I think that if he gets in, it tells us a lot about how the voters feel about the entire PED thing;i.e-"NO" to the liars, "YES" to those who come clean QUICKLY. On the other hand, maybe it opens a door for guys like Palmeiro who were passive liars, unlike Clemens, Rodriguez,etc.

It will be interesting to see how this situation plays out, but we won't know for years.

What do you consider coming clean quickly, because I think people seem to forget what Pettitte actually did. He admitted to using it once the Mitchell report came out and said he never used it any other time than 2002 for an elbow injury.

Then two months later it was announced that in an affidavit he said he also did it in 2004, which is contrary to what he said earlier. That to me isn't coming clean, it's admitting to what was out there and hoping nothing else came out.

That makes me not believe that he only did it twice, maybe he did, but how does anyone know when he lied about it.

No way he makes it. A borderline candidate won't get in with a checkered past.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by z28jd

What do you consider coming clean quickly, because I think people seem to forget what Pettitte actually did. He admitted to using it once the Mitchell report came out and said he never used it any other time than 2002 for an elbow injury.

Then two months later it was announced that in an affidavit he said he also did it in 2004, which is contrary to what he said earlier. That to me isn't coming clean, it's admitting to what was out there and hoping nothing else came out.

That makes me not believe that he only did it twice, maybe he did, but how does anyone know when he lied about it.

No way he makes it. A borderline candidate won't get in with a checkered past.

Agree with this, I find it very hard to believe any of these guys "who only did it once." Plus with his flip-flopping on the Clemens saga, I think his candidacy is a done deal already. Add to the fact that he was on the margins w/o the PED usage(s) and the Clemens fiasco, not a HOFer. However by all accounts he seems like a nice guy.

[BigJJ]

To me, the saddest thing is that the players union fought for players not to be adequately tested - they thought Not adequately testing the players was in the players' best interest. so the few users at the time could not be caught. How stupid and awful of the players union. What pieces of garbage.

And MLB did not deem steroid usage a priority, relative to other considerations in negotiations. Also stupid and awful.

The two created a system whereby those who did not do steroids were at a big disadvantage relative to those who did.

The worst part is all the kids who then took steroids all the way up the chain. How many lives destroyed because the players union heads and MLB did not enforce a clean game.

The players to me are the least culpable.

Many gave their spirit up - some MLBers their lives up - to support their families and standard of living - by taking substances known to be severely adverse to health.

But the head of the players union and MLB execs have not faced one earthly ramification for their mal-action.

If I were a voting member of the HOF, I don't know if I could vote for a player who crossed certain lines. are such lines certain steroids, but not other substances? what about amphetamines? we know a lot of players may have used and we might want them very much in the Hall. what about corked bats? again very much may want in the Hall.

So far we have said no players who gambled on baseball in the Hall. and we have perhaps said non-muscle-building banned drug users are ok, as well as perhaps cork - all arguable. Steroids we haven't quite worked out. I haven't quite worked it out.

But the one thing I feel is that the heads of the union and MLB during this time should never be admitted. They are the most culpable. They are the ones who broke the rules most clearly - to care for the players - and to care for the game - respectively.

[BigJJ]

For a pitcher to get in the Hall, I think batters must have had the feeling of 'no matter what I do, I may not have a chance in the world of touching the ball'. even if it was just for several years that batters felt that way.

Koufax had that span, Morris had that span, Rivera made it almost the length of his career.

When these pitchers were at their height, batters just thought 'oh boy, please let me get lucky up here'.

[D. Bergin]

Yankee fan here:

I say no, but there's no shame in that. There's lot's of excellent pitchers not in the HOF.

Also, regarding general stats throughout his career. Anybody who has watched Andy pitch on a regular basis, knows he has always pitched to the scoreboard.

We all saw his ERA plummet when he went to Houston.

In a close game Andy would battle with guys on base and was known for getting himself out of lots of jams. However, if Yanks had a big lead, Andy was a lot more aggressive and had no problem surrendering home runs and hits in general if it meant getting his team off the field quicker.

When it came to surrendering a lead however, he always knew if was time to batten down the hatches and stem the bleeding himself, instead of leaving it for the bullpen.

I think in today's Sabremetric heavy world, those type of pitchers are under-appreciated. Jack Morris is obviously another who falls into this category. His overall stats are not great when looked at as a whole, but for some reason he's always winning games, keeping his team in the game no matter what the score, and coming through big.........in big games, like a big game pitcher is supposed to do.

[Exhibitman]

Hall of Very, Very Good aka Don Sutton, but w/o the 300 wins. I'd not vote for him absent the PEDs; they make it a slam dunk no for me.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Hall of Very, Very Good aka Don Sutton, but w/o the 300 wins. I'd not vote for him absent the PEDs; they make it a slam dunk no for me.

I wouldn't vote for him either, but as you point out, the voters took Sutton, and, even worse, Phil Niekro. Regardless of his level of honesty regarding PEDs, I still think it will be interesting to see how the voters react to his career. They've 'spoken' regarding far better players who didn't show a shred of honesty.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I wouldn't vote for him either, but as you point out, the voters took Sutton, and, even worse, Phil Niekro. Regardless of his level of honesty regarding PEDs, I still think it will be interesting to see how the voters react to his career. They've 'spoken' regarding far better players who didn't show a shred of honesty.

Don't forget Gaylord Perry, too.

[thetruthisoutthere]

I've been a Yankees fan for 50 years, but I will always be objective when it comes to the Hall Of Fame.

He's borderline, and I don't think he will get it.

Great career though and I'm glad he was on the Yankees for the majority of his career.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

Don't forget Gaylord Perry, too.

Sutton, Niekro and Blyleven all belong in the 'Hall of very good' - Gaylord Perry is above them (in my opinion), but not hall-worthy.

It's all just opinion, so hopefully no one gets bent out of shape. I just feel that the HOF should be more exclusive, but it is what it is: the "Hall of Very Good and Better, or Very Popular with the Sportswriters" or the HOVGBVPS

[RCMcKenzie]

I would describe him as a very rich man's Erik Bedard, but I'm just a bitter Astro's fan that is hacked that he went back to NY.

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Hall of Very, Very Good aka Don Sutton, but w/o the 300 wins. I'd not vote for him absent the PEDs; they make it a slam dunk no for me.

Adam,
Don Sutton= 324 wins, 58 shutouts is definitely HOF worthy... C'mon
Blyleven is a HOF'er, no doubt

FWIW, I would put Jack Morris in the HOF. He was the pitcher of the 1980's.
The guy was an absolute winner as well.

[ibuysportsephemera]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Yankee fan here:

I say no, but there's no shame in that. There's lot's of excellent pitchers not in the HOF.

Also, regarding general stats throughout his career. Anybody who has watched Andy pitch on a regular basis, knows he has always pitched to the scoreboard.

We all saw his ERA plummet when he went to Houston.

In a close game Andy would battle with guys on base and was known for getting himself out of lots of jams. However, if Yanks had a big lead, Andy was a lot more aggressive and had no problem surrendering home runs and hits in general if it meant getting his team off the field quicker.

When it came to surrendering a lead however, he always knew if was time to batten down the hatches and stem the bleeding himself, instead of leaving it for the bullpen.

I think in today's Sabremetric heavy world, those type of pitchers are under-appreciated. Jack Morris is obviously another who falls into this category. His overall stats are not great when looked at as a whole, but for some reason he's always winning games, keeping his team in the game no matter what the score, and coming through big.........in big games, like a big game pitcher is supposed to do.

Mets fan but I appreciated Pettitte for the reasons that Dave mentioned. I don't think he gets in...the stats aren't there.

Jeff

[Jim65]

Close but not a HOF'er, but when Andre Dawson and Bert Blyleven made it, nothing ever surprises me anymore.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

We all saw his ERA plummet when he went to Houston.

He had three seasons in Houston,, ERA 3.90, 2.39, 4.20

Plummet? I would not say so.

[RichardSimon]

This thread is a good example of why the game of baseball is still great.
I know roids, money, long term contracts, etc. but it is still a great game of mostly marvelous athletes.
I am a football fan (Jets, ugh) don't get me wrong, but do the merits of football players get this kind of stuff written about them.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

He had three seasons in Houston,, ERA 3.90, 2.39, 4.20

Plummet? I would not say so.

Well, it was only 2 full seasons, and one of those numbers really stands out. His only other comparable year with the Yankees would have been 1997.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Well, it was only 2 full seasons, and one of those numbers really stands out. His only other comparable year with the Yankees would have been 1997.

True but his ERA soared nearly two runs a game in his second full year in the NL when they started to figure him out.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I think that if he gets in, it tells us a lot about how the voters feel about the entire PED thing;i.e-"NO" to the liars, "YES" to those who come clean QUICKLY. On the other hand, maybe it opens a door for guys like Palmeiro who were passive liars, unlike Clemens, Rodriguez,etc.

It will be interesting to see how this situation plays out, but we won't know for years.

I don't think Pettitte came clean until after the Mitchell Report outed him.