Should these 3 players be in the HOF

[t206hof]

Yes on Rose. Never on the other two.

[BeanTown]

I say Rose for sure based on achievements while playing fair. The other two had amazing stats and became a bi product of the norm back in that ERA. Maybe a separate room at the HOF is needed, and we could also add Joe Jackson and a few others in there. So yes to all 3 for me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

There's no good answer.

[icurnmedic]

All three are all time greats no matter how you choose.

Rose induction would open other conversations about others , namely Jackson.

Bonds and Clemens , were, as stated above, HOF before they used PED's. If you don't think they were playing against other PED users, whom may or may not be in the HOF, then I don't think there is a ounce of sense in you, but that may be just me.

That being said , I get both sides of the argument.
And as always some pretty good insight on the Net54.

[rats60]

Rose should be elected 50 years after Joe Jackson gets elected. Their crimes were similar, their punishments should be similar.

The other two never. They cheated to accumulate their statistics, so they are meaningless. They are not Hall of Famers.

[Kingcobb]

Yes to all 3. What Bonds did 2001 is incredible even using steroids. By the way not a Bonds fan.

[MR RAREBACK]

Yes
I would add
Sammy Sosa and
Albert belle

[SyrNy1960]

Originally Posted by MR RAREBACK

Yes
I would add
Sammy Sosa and
Albert belle

And Manny Ramirez?

[trambo]

No to Rose and maybe to the others.

You can't bet on baseball when you're playing or managing baseball. Doing so overshadows any accolades done on the field. As for the other two, I'm glad they're both not in but if you decide that the PEDs taken aren't that big of a deal, there are quite a few others (Sosa, McGwire, Palmiero, etc) which should also get the nod.

[G1911]

No on Rose. Yes on Bonds and Clemens.

I don't really care if steroid guys are in or out, but the rule needs to be consistent. It is a corrupt joke that Ortiz, who failed a test, is in and these guys are out. The evidence against Clemens, unless I am forgetting something, is only 1 man's word, filled with inconsistency and conflicting claims made at different times, against his own. Keep them out or let them in, just don't let in the ones you like and blame the rest. There is no logical argument why Ortiz should be allowed in and everyone else banished except that people like him anyways. Cut the politics and privilege and at least try to make the Hall reasonable.

[darwinbulldog]

No to Rose who was filling out lineup cards and making pitching change decisions in games that he had money riding on. Yes to Bonds and Clemens who, like most of their opponents and most of the great players before them, were probably using the best performance-enhancing substances available at the time (and who were the two best players since Babe Ruth).

[Beercan collector]

Originally Posted by 3arod13

And Manny Ramirez?

And Rafael Palmeiro
I don’t believe he belongs in the Hall of Fame But .. 569 home runs , over 3000 hits , A ridiculous amount of RBIs , tied for number eight all time extra-base hits , Also a great fielding first baseman (Three straight gold gloves and number 4 all time turning double plays at first base ) he seems to be the first one completely forgotten because of steroids

[JustinD]

For me, unquestionably.

It’s the hall of hame and these players hold some of the most hallowed records in baseball. It is demeaning to call it the hall of fame and not include the most famed of historical players.

That said, the writers are the most holiest of thou in existence and I hold little belief that until each has been many years dead that it happens if ever.

[Bigdaddy]

No for Rose, and I'm a Reds fan. As of now, he can't even be on a ballot because he's banned from baseball. Personally though, I believe he committed the one crime that should get you banned for life - betting on the game, and specifically games he was involved in. What would be interesting to see is if Pete was reinstated, then he would be eligible to be on the ballot and then the voters would decide. As it stands, the voters have yet to weigh in.

As far as Barry and Roger, they were on the ballot but the voters kept them out (their prerogative). But I just can't square that up with Selig being voted in. As someone pointed out above, he was the commish during the whole steroids era, enabling it by turning a blind eye.

Bottom line, No on Rose, Yes on Barry and Roger.

PS, if anyone has seen recent photos of Rose, he is not looking so well.

[bmattioli]

Rose Definity the other two Roid players NEVER..

[refz]

I would like to see the 3 of these guys in, regardless of my opinion on the matter. They made the game exciting, posted hall numbers but blew it by being scumbags… err caught!!! I don’t see this happening anytime soon. That being said we are all in for a treat for the HOF to keep letting in the “Ben McDonalds & Mariano Duncan’s” as of lately.😉

[The Detroit Collector]

Yes to all three.
My prediction is Bonds and Clemons would be first.
Rose would be after he passes.

[z28jd]

Originally Posted by 3arod13

And Manny Ramirez?

I say yes to Bonds and Clemens because you already have people in who used during their era. No one in their right mind thinks Ivan Rodriguez wasn't guilty. The man wouldn't even deny it himself, plus he showed more than anyone once testing kicked in and he came back to spring looking like a bobblehead. Plus he was called out by Canseco, plus he destroyed the games caught record while playing in the Texas heat and you don't think a drug that helps muscle recovery was involved? Yet he got in first ballot. Piazza admitted to using eight things that are illegal now in his book, conveniently none were steroids, yet he took everything else. Selig is in and he ran the era knowing what was going on. Baseball wasn't against it. Your favorite player was probably guilty of something, just like the guys from the 60s and 70s were all guilty of something that isn't allowed today.

I think you look at the era compared to itself and knock points off for it, such as McGwire. He's very fringe for me right now, but I wouldn't put him in due to knocking his stats to compensate for the drug use. Bonds and Clemens are an easy yes. I don't know how people vote for Andy Pettitte. He's very fringe with stats and flat out admitted doing steroids in two different years, yet he still gets votes to stay on the ballot.

I quote your question because this is where I draw the line. People who failed after testing started should not be allowed in, though I do have an asterisk that I would consider. That's a definite no for Ramirez because he failed multiple times.

The asterisk is Rafael Palmeiro. He failed, but I believe he was set up. The reason for that is very simple. He had everything he needed already. He had 3,000 hits, he had 500 homers, he announced he was retiring, he was playing on a team with no World Series hope near the end of the season. Who is just going to randomly do steroids in his position when he knows he's going to be tested? The answer is no one.

Palmeiro called out Miguel Tejada for what happened and then Tejada ends up getting caught with steroids and everything else to go with it.

As for Rose, I think he deserved a ban, but not lifetime. I'd put him in the HOF now. It's been long enough.

I also know I think different than other people about steroids. I see people willing to put in Todd Helton, who is a habitual drunk driver, yet they won't vote in Bonds or Clemens. Can you honestly tell me that a person doing steroids is worse than someone who is perfectly fine with taking the life of everyone on the road into his hands every time he drives his truck drunk, including the time he left the scene of an accident? If you think it is, you are probably a drunk driver yourself, so you're willing to defend it, and then I don't care about your worthless opinion.

Helton has no business being in the Hall of Fame, but of course he will go in next year because he got so close this year. Just remember one thing in case you have plans for Cooperstown in 2024. He's going to be on the road and celebrating that weekend...

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by t206hof

Yes on Rose. Never on the other two.

Ditto