THE Hall of Fame this year and next:

[sportscardpete]

I think Bonds is in. Clemens, not sure.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Never understood the pass Ortiz gets. I guess being lovable forgives a lot of sins.

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Never understood the pass Ortiz gets. I guess being lovable forgives a lot of sins.

Bud Selig, who's career was built on the backs of steroid users, is in.

Anybody who played in that era, before testing, and whose career numbers are worthy, should be in. Likewise for those players who never tested positive after testing was implemented.

I don't understand how people accept the double-standard with Selig in the Hall and Clemens and Bonds not being in.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

Bud Selig, who's career was built on the backs of steroid users, is in.

Anybody who played in that era, before testing, and whose career numbers are worthy, should be in. Likewise for those players who never tested positive after testing was implemented.

I don't understand how people accept the double-standard with Selig in the Hall and Clemens and Bonds not being in.

Easy. Two wrongs don't make a right. Should everyone with better stats than Harold Baines or Tommy McCarthy be elected to the HOF?

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by rats60

Easy. Two wrongs don't make a right. Should everyone with better stats than Harold Baines or Tommy McCarthy be elected to the HOF?

This is nothing about "two wrongs," this is about the criteria for enshrinement and a double standard for Selig vs. Bonds and Clemens. And I'm not sure how that can reasonably be a jumping off point to connect it to Baines or any other Hall of Famer who people think don't belong.

[riggs336]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

Bud Selig, who's career was built on the backs of steroid users, is in.

Anybody who played in that era, before testing, and whose career numbers are worthy, should be in. Likewise for those players who never tested positive after testing was implemented.

I don't understand how people accept the double-standard with Selig in the Hall and Clemens and Bonds not being in.

I totally agree. I was a Clemens fan and not a fan of Bonds, but both should be in the Hall based on their early careers at least.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by riggs336

I totally agree. I was a Clemens fan and not a fan of Bonds, but both should be in the Hall based on their early careers at least.

That's not a good argument. You want to say your Moser card should get a PSA 7 because that's what it was before it was doctored, but it doesn't work that way. Bonds and Clemens' careers were fraudulently altered, so they don't get a grade.

And Bud Selig needs to be booted from the Hall, that man is much more of a disgrace to the game than any player, because he knew what was going on with steroids and condoned it.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

That's not a good argument. You want to say your Moser card should get a PSA 7 because that's what it was before it was doctored, but it doesn't work that way. Bonds and Clemens' careers were fraudulently altered, so they don't get a grade.

And Bud Selig needs to be booted from the Hall, that man is much more of a disgrace to the game than any player, because he knew what was going on with steroids and condoned it.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Suppose it was undisputed that Clemens didn't start until after he won his 300th game, or Bonds until after his 600th home run. Careers still altered? You see where the logic of this is going I assume

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Suppose it was undisputed that Clemens didn't start until after he won his 300th game, or Bonds until after his 600th home run. Careers still altered? You see where the logic of this is going I assume

The analogy still holds I think all the way to the fringes. I am sure you could list examples where it is arguable whether or not a card should be considered altered.

But the reality for Bonds and Clemens is the alteration was blatant and significant. PED use distorted their skills over several years and as a result most of the major awards they received are undeserved and their career numbers are fake.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Redleg25]

The fact that Gil Hodges isn't in is a travesty

[Harliduck]

Originally Posted by Redleg25

The fact that Gil Hodges isn't in is a travesty

1000% agree. I simply don't understand. Total travesty...

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by Redleg25

The fact that Gil Hodges isn't in is a travesty

I was watching the MLB Network announcement *TY Facebook as my cable system no longer carries MLB* and Gil Hodges is as of today, the ONLY person no longer on the ballot who has garnered 50 percent or more of the writers votes and not be inducted.

I think if he had lived a normal life span and managed another decade or so, he'd have been in around 1980.

Rich

[toledo_mudhen]

Originally Posted by Redleg25

The fact that Gil Hodges isn't in is a travesty

Have thought the same thing for many years - WTF - How is he not in?

What am I missing?

[Chris-Counts]

No new HOFers = another big fail for the Hall of Fame. I despise this country club mentality that keeps so many great players outside Cooperstown. There are a couple dozen guys that should have been in years ago. Once MLB put Selig in, the HOF shredded whatever credibility it had. Which shouldn't be too much of a surprise, since the entire concept of the Hall of Fame is based on the lie that Abner Doubleday invented baseball in Cooperstown. It was nothing but a real estate scheme, combined with an attempt to deny the debt baseball owned to older sports like cricket and rounders. It's as if baseball magically sprouted up in a cow pasture in upstate New York.

I agree Selig needs to get the boot. He was a disgrace to the game.

[campyfan39]

Gil Hodges and Curt Schilling should be in and no doubters IMO

I also agree with the poster who said Bud Selig should not be in.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

Bud Selig, who's career was built on the backs of steroid users, is in.

Anybody who played in that era, before testing, and whose career numbers are worthy, should be in. Likewise for those players who never tested positive after testing was implemented.

I don't understand how people accept the double-standard with Selig in the Hall and Clemens and Bonds not being in.

Well Selig doesn't belong, so I'm at least consistent! He did more damage to baseball than any modern executive.

[jjp3rd]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Never understood the pass Ortiz gets. I guess being lovable forgives a lot of sins.

Me neither...he was nothing in MN, got to Boston, took the juice and voila!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by jjp3rd

Me neither...he was nothing in MN, got to Boston, took the juice and voila!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If it wasn’t for mandatory testing, then this would be a possible thing.

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by jjp3rd

Me neither...he was nothing in MN, got to Boston, took the juice and voila!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess it's easier to try and rewrite history and wildly speculate rather than look at the facts. This is from Puckett's Pond, so it's from a Twins perspective:

"Ortiz flew through the Twins’ minor league system, hitting almost everything on the way, before making his major league debut at the end of 1997, hitting .327 and one home run in 49 at-bats. In 1998, Ortiz wanted to be the team’s starting first basemen, but manager Tom Kelly had other plans.

Kelly was a good manager for the team, but he valued defense and avoiding strikeouts, and Ortiz wasn’t amazing at either of those parts of his game. Because of this, Ortiz was forced to sit for almost half of the season, only producing a .277 batting average, nine homers, and 46 RBI in 86 games.

Despite his strong hitting, he had to fight for playing time with Doug Mientkiewicz, as Mientkiewicz was a better defender. He was forced to spend 1999 in the minors, where he destroyed Triple-A pitching and greatly outperforming the players in the majors.

Ortiz improved every season, and by 2002, he was a twenty-six year-old who had just hit .272, 20 home runs, and 75 RBI. He was expected to get a large raise over the next offseason, but the Twins were worried about paying him despite his .266 BA, 58 homers, and 238 RBI, and that he was a playoff hero just entering his prime."

[Shoelessseb]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Never understood the pass Ortiz gets. I guess being lovable forgives a lot of sins.

Exactly. As a Yankees fan it’s pissing me off

[vintagewhitesox]

Originally Posted by sportscardpete

I think Bonds is in. Clemens, not sure.

I'm with you on this one. I think Bonds gets in. at least he should.
so should clemens.

[Harliduck]

Originally Posted by vintagewhitesox

I'm with you on this one. I think Bonds gets in. at least he should.
so should clemens.

I agree. I hate those guys, hate that era full of cheaters, hate that some iconic records were broke. I still LOVE baseball, and I recognize that era will be historically remembered like many other eras and taken in that vein. With that said, I am TIRED of players with crooked numbers not being in the HOF. I think Rose, Bonds, Clemens, eventually Arod...they just need to be in. When I look at the back of a baseball card and see Bonds stats compared to Barry Larkin, it's just not right. I consider myself a purist, but the old argument that there are already a bunch of a$$holes in the HOF is true. They were the greatest players of that era, and with everyone juiced they still stood out (and without would have still made it, which is frustrating).

Just my .02$

[bbcard1]

If you have an organization where Harold Baines, Rabbit Maranville and Lloyd Waner are in but Pete Rose, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens are not...well it's kind of counterintuitive to what the Hall of Fame is supposed to be.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

If you have an organization where Harold Baines, Rabbit Maranville and Lloyd Waner are in but Pete Rose, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens are not...well it's kind of counterintuitive to what the Hall of Fame is supposed to be.

Not really. In 1936 Shoeless Joe Jackson received 2 votes for the Hall of Fame. In 1937 he received 0. It is pretty clear from the beginning that character was a major component of election to the Hall of Fame.

[OldOriole]

Originally Posted by rats60

Not really. In 1936 Shoeless Joe Jackson received 2 votes for the Hall of Fame. In 1937 he received 0. It is pretty clear from the beginning that character was a major component of election to the Hall of Fame.

Well said.

There's no way I would every be able to vote for someone who knowingly cheated by taking a banned substance to better their game. They knew it was against the rules, then denied using, only to paint themselves into a corner. The sad part is they didn't need to do it - they were already amazing players. Couldn't control their egos.

[insidethewrapper]

I never understood why some drugs are OK and others are not OK to enhance performance. More than 10% of the players use medication for Attention Deficit Disorder, this greatly helps their attention and concentration at the plate. How about eye surgury etc. which has increased better vision to 20/10 etc. These are Ok because they are legal. Tommy John surgery is becoming routine to increase speed etc. It's all a bunch of crap. Put the best players in the Hall ( Rose, Bonds, Clemens, Arod ). I have no problems with these 4 guys. Tons of players took steroids but they were not as good as these guys.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by sportscardpete

I think Bonds is in. Clemens, not sure.

Curious why you think Bonds would get in but not Clemens. Their vote totals are usually almost the same each year so it looks like most voters either are a yes or no on both of them with very little splitting their votes.