IMO they embarrassed the league and just continued to do so. Yes they were elite and special talents. For me anyone that cheated including guys that apologized for it shouldn't get in. It sends just a horrible message to any kid aspiring to be a pro. You can cheat just don't get caught. But if you do get caught but it makes you really good and if you can manage to break records doing it then your sure to get in to the hall of fame. I could care less if Pettite apologized. He shouldn't be considered either. Cheating is cheating and shouldn't be rewarded. If their willing to even consider either of these guys Pete Rose should have his plaque hanging and it should have been for years. Different scenarios yes but Pete didn't cheat as a player he gambled and gambled against his team at times as a manager. If the league is willing to separate or ignore the years these guys cheated they sure as hell should be able to look past Rose' past as well. Obviously, we don't agree on it but it's how I feel plain and simple.
The problem is that there are guys in the HOF right now who cheated. There are guys in the HOF right now who juiced. There are guys playing in the league right now juicing and getting away with it. This is an issue that MLB should be responsible for but willfully condoned after the last lockout.
The writers voting for the HOF should not be playing judge and jury for these guys with circumstantial evidence picking and choosing based on reputation and character more so than hard facts. Maybe they should have been doing their job better and doing some real investigative work when these guys were tearing it up rather than cheerleading from the sidelines.
Vote in the best players. Don't play guessing games. Educate the public that during this era ALL stats are questionable.
IMO they embarrassed the league and just continued to do so. Yes they were elite and special talents. For me anyone that cheated including guys that apologized for it shouldn't get in. It sends just a horrible message to any kid aspiring to be a pro. You can cheat just don't get caught. But if you do get caught but it makes you really good and if you can manage to break records doing it then your sure to get in to the hall of fame. I could care less if Pettite apologized. He shouldn't be considered either. Cheating is cheating and shouldn't be rewarded. If their willing to even consider either of these guys Pete Rose should have his plaque hanging and it should have been for years. Different scenarios yes but Pete didn't cheat as a player he gambled and gambled against his team at times as a manager. If the league is willing to separate or ignore the years these guys cheated they sure as hell should be able to look past Rose' past as well. Obviously, we don't agree on it but it's how I feel plain and simple.
There is no proof of that. Not saying it didnt happen, but there has never been any real evidence of it.
He himself has admitted to betting on baseball including his teams games but claims he never bet against his team.
Dan Schlereth, anyone? He's recovering from injury which would appear to be why the Tigers non-tendered him, so I'd want a medical report, but if he's on track with his recovery he looks to be a useful arm at face value. I haven't explored his underlying stats though... Another (potetially good) lefty in the pen would be helpful especially if there's truth to Oliver's desire to play in Texas (or retire).
As far as starters go, I imagine Anthopolous is looking for a RHP with options. With Wilson gone, I'm less confident about Arencibia getting traded, unless the Jays fully expect to have d'Arnaud up with the big club right from the start. But an Arencibia/Oliver package for Ogando would surely fit the bill...(and would likely mean Happ becomes the swingman).
There is no proof of that. Not saying it didnt happen, but there has never been any real evidence of it.
He himself has admitted to betting on baseball including his teams games but claims he never bet against his team.
Very true. But I believe that's the big thing that's suppose to be keeping him out.
The problem is that there are guys in the HOF right now who cheated. There are guys in the HOF right now who juiced. There are guys playing in the league right now juicing and getting away with it. This is an issue that MLB should be responsible for but willfully condoned after the last lockout.
The writers voting for the HOF should not be playing judge and jury for these guys with circumstantial evidence picking and choosing based on reputation and character more so than hard facts. Maybe they should have been doing their job better and doing some real investigative work when these guys were tearing it up rather than cheerleading from the sidelines.
Vote in the best players. Don't play guessing games. Educate the public that during this era ALL stats are questionable.
I think the fact that there are guys in the hall that have cheated is a poor excuse to let guys in now. It's like saying we don't want you to cheat but we'll reward you for any successes resulting from it forever because clearly we've done it in the past so we couldn't possibly change it in the future.
I'm sorry, I just fail to see how a player who has over 700 homeruns, 500 stolen bases, a career .OBP of .444, terrific defense, and a 168 career WAR, does not make the hall-of-fame.
Same with Clemens and his 300+ wins and 4,000+ strike-outs.
Even if you hate steroids with a passion to the point where you think players should be thrown in jail and have their name erased from major league history, there is no way any sane, rational person can subscribe to any theory where taking steroids is the reason that either two of those players accomplished all of those hall-of-fame feats.
Steroids, or magic pills in that case, should not be grounds for their absence from the hall-of-fame.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dredeye
I think the fact that there are guys in the hall that have cheated is a poor excuse to let guys in now. It's like saying we don't want you to cheat but we'll reward you for any successes resulting from it forever because clearly we've done it in the past so we couldn't possibly change it in the future.
The point is that if you are going to be tough on steroids, you need to be tough all users of steroid, including those already in the hall-of-fame. Since this is not the case, as players are in the hall-of-fame that have taken steroids, it makes no logical sense to now arbitarily draw a line and discriminate against other players, including two of the games greatest.
I'm sorry, I just fail to see how a player who has over 700 homeruns, 500 stolen bases, a career .OBP of .444, terrific defense, and a 168 career WAR, does not make the hall-of-fame.
Same with Clemens and his 300+ wins and 4,000+ strike-outs.
Even if you hate steroids with a passion to the point where you think players should be thrown in jail and have their name erased from major league history, there is no way any sane, rational person can subscribe to any theory where taking steroids is the reason that either two of those players accomplished all of those hall-of-fame feats.
Steroids, or magic pills in that case, should not be grounds for their absence from the hall-of-fame.
The point is that if you are going to be tough on steroids, you need to be tough all users of steroid, including those already in the hall-of-fame. Since this is not the case, as players are in the hall-of-fame that have taken steroids, it makes no logical sense to now arbitarily draw a line and discriminate against other players, including two of the games greatest.
I have no problem with them removing players from the hall that are known to have used steroids. Please don't question my character or call me irrational. I haven't question your personality in any way. I don't respect cheaters and don't believe they should be rewarded for having done it. Yes Bonds was insane good before he started to cheat. Problem for me is that he did cheat. It also makes perfect sense that they stop adding people that have been proven to be cheaters now. The league is taking a much different and harsher stance on ped's now and that should take place across the board. Again it's my opinion and I'm not declaring it right or wrong just as I haven't said your is right or wrong. It's my opinion on the matter and nothing more.
I think the fact that there are guys in the hall that have cheated is a poor excuse to let guys in now. It's like saying we don't want you to cheat but we'll reward you for any successes resulting from it forever because clearly we've done it in the past so we couldn't possibly change it in the future.
So how do we decide then? Do we just guess who juiced and who didn't? Are the writers who vote supposed to just decide for themselves? What about if they just don't like a guy? Where do we draw the line? If MLB wants to do something about it then they should. It's not the job of HOF voters to pass moral judgments.
So how do we decide then? Do we just guess who juiced and who didn't? Are the writers who vote supposed to just decide for themselves? What about if they just don't like a guy? Where do we draw the line? If MLB wants to do something about it then they should. It's not the job of HOF voters to pass moral judgments.
well let me give you an example.
Pettite has admitted to using steroids. He should never be put on the ballot so he doesn't have to be voted on. If they are proven to have cheated they don't get a chance to get in. Seems pretty clear. Anyway, I'm done discussing cheaters and will get back to the jays.
Someone asks a difficult question, you reply with an example that has little to do with the question asked and then act as if you have some kind of moral high ground and back out of the conversation.
There are often multiple conversations taking place at the same time. Just because one post is listed immediately following another does't mean that it is a response.
Someone asks a difficult question, you reply with an example that has little to do with the question asked and then act as if you have some kind of moral high ground and back out of the conversation.
Legit.
What on earth are you talking about? Two pages of discussion is enough for me on pmd's. I didn't say now we must all stop. I feel one way and some feel another. I have no problem with that at all. I'll check what your talking about in regards to the question I avoided.
I just re read the post I'm sure your referring to and answered the question.
What on earth are you talking about? Two pages of discussion is enough for me on pmd's. I didn't say now we must all stop. I feel one way and some feel another. I have no problem with that at all. I'll check what your talking about in regards to the question I avoided.
How do we decide who used steroids or not and subsequently who should be black balled?
How do we decide who used steroids or not and subsequently who should be black balled?
mlb has been able to figure it out. When guys admit to have been cheating. When guys are brought in front of a grand jury for lying to a federal court about not having taken pmd's are pretty good indicators. Really there are many factors. I believe Pettite even said that Clemens got him into using pmd's if I remember correctly. There are many ways to figure this stuff out.
mlb has been able to figure it out. When guys admit to have been cheating. When guys are brought in front of a grand jury for lying to a federal court about not having taken pmd's are pretty good indicators. Really there are many factors. I believe Pettite even said that Clemens got him into using pmd's if I remember correctly. There are many ways to figure this stuff out.
So, admitting to usage, being caught using and being accused of using are roughly equal in your mind?
So, admitting to usage, being caught using and being accused of using are roughly equal in your mind?
That's exactly what I said didn't I.
I'll add this is why I was saying I'm done with this conversation. It's just gonna keep spinning and getting nowhere. Feel free to add more words for me.
How do we decide who used steroids or not and subsequently who should be black balled?
So my first instinct is to say that if it has been established beyond a reasonable doubt - with or without a specific positive test - or has been admitted to, then from my perspective you don't get in Cooperstown, full stop. Yes, even if your accomplishments would otherwise make you a first-ballot gimme. You cheat, you don't belong in the hall...
I'd say for Clemens and Bonds both, it's been established beyond a reasonable doubt, so by that standard they lose their chance at the Hall.
But what would that mean for Shoeless Joe Jackson and his teammates? In some ways baseball's darkest chapters are also some of its most rich stories. Perhaps there's something to be said for infamy belonging in the Hall of Fame as well.
I think, as long as their write ups in the Hall made it clear their careers are under a cloud because they cheated, I'd be open to considering it. They're in, their feats are acknowledged, but so are their warts - and thus their legacy will always be tainted.
