2015 Baseball Hall of Fame elections

[JosMin]

ive noticed a lot of people including bonds and Clemens but not sosa. IMO if you include bonds and Clemens, then you have to include sosa. you cant have a biased view of which PED users you like and which ones you don't. if you ignore PED's for one or more players than you have to ignore it for all players and in that case sosa's numbers warrant first ballot HOF. personally, i would leave sosa, Clemens, bonds, and all other known PED users off.

Because, comparatively speaking, Bonds and Clemens are considered two of the greatest players in the history of the sport, regardless of the steroid nonsense. Other than his peak from '98 to '03, and the gaudy home run total, Sosa was an above-average player. Not a Hall of Famer.

 

[JosMin]

Bryant got snubbed


Sent from My 1998 Palm Pilot Using Tapatalk

That's because they're still erecting his wing next to the room filled with Pete Rose's gambling vouchers, the Babe's hot dog casings and Hank Aaron's fifty bottles of greenies.

 

[TL1961]

The increase in power couldn't have anything to do with playing in a pitchers park at home and then moving into a hitter friendly park with closer fences later in his career? Tony Gwynn got a bit of a power surge toward the end of his career for a couple of seasons and much of it he credited to a conversation he had with Ted Williams in the off-season. We should just assume it was roids, right?

Well, he didn't just start hitting HR's at 35, he did have a few prior to that. But his highest HR total came at age 39, and his second highest at age 38. That is not normal. Nobody has a problem assuming Bonds and Sosa took steroids, but Biggio apparently is off limits.

I don't know that he took them, and I don't mean to be unfair. (Though his teammate and best buddy Bagwell is out of the HOF largely due to suspicion of steroid use. And there's another example of one guy in, and one guy out when the guy who was out was clearly the more dangerous hitter. )

I don't assume everyone took them, and it's unfair to point the finger at people randomly. But the biggest myth of the steroid era is that the only guys taking them were the league HR leaders. There's this thought out there that taking steroids makes you bash 50+HRs automatically, when in fact a lot of "little guys" took them. Guys who were fringe players admitted to taking them because it was the difference between minors and majors.

 

[TL1961]

ive noticed a lot of people including bonds and Clemens but not sosa. IMO if you include bonds and Clemens, then you have to include sosa. you cant have a biased view of which PED users you like and which ones you don't. if you ignore PED's for one or more players than you have to ignore it for all players and in that case sosa's numbers warrant first ballot HOF. personally, i would leave sosa, Clemens, bonds, and all other known PED users off.

It is VERY fair to assume all of their numbers without steroids would have been less. It is also very fair to speculate when they began taking them, and to look at Bonds and Clemens and see that they had already gotten to HOF status prior to that. The same is simply not true for Sosa, palmeiro, etc.

I personally think Bonds and Clemens are HOF'ers without the steroids, but don't weep for them being out due to their own cheating. If a voter holds it against a known cheater and doesn't vote him in, that's his right. Some voters try to determine the effect the roids had and whether a guy would "clear the bar" woithout them, while others take a stricter moral stand.

And before we hear Ty Cobb was mean, and so-and-so smoked pot, etc., nobody is claiming that everyone in is perfect, or that some shouldn't have been left out. How Gaylord Perry is considered a Hall of Famer I will never understand. But ignoring cheating going forward simply because of past mistakes isn't the answer.

 

[TL1961]

You just hit upon the real tragedy of the steroids era; it made everyone a suspect. Now no increase in power can ever be looked at it without at least the suspicion of PEDs. Just for the record I'm not making a judgement on that fact either way, just saying it is what it is.

I agree. It is absolutely a tragic effect of the era.

And some guys who were never suspected are also hurt, simply by the fact that the pinball numbers that came after them make their numbers pale in comparison. Fred McGriff, for example, is 7 HRs shy of the magic 500, but since that mark became anything but magic with seemingly everyone breaking it, McGriff's total looks paltry.
(Not saying he should definitely be in, but he is an example of a non-steroid guy whose HOF case was hurt by the steroid users.)

 

[brett05]

Well, he didn't just start hitting HR's at 35, he did have a few prior to that. But his highest HR total came at age 39, and his second highest at age 38. That is not normal. Nobody has a problem assuming Bonds and Sosa took steroids, but Biggio apparently is off limits.

I don't know that he took them, and I don't mean to be unfair. (Though his teammate and best buddy Bagwell is out of the HOF largely due to suspicion of steroid use. And there's another example of one guy in, and one guy out when the guy who was out was clearly the more dangerous hitter. )

I don't assume everyone took them, and it's unfair to point the finger at people randomly. But the biggest myth of the steroid era is that the only guys taking them were the league HR leaders. There's this thought out there that taking steroids makes you bash 50+HRs automatically, when in fact a lot of "little guys" took them. Guys who were fringe players admitted to taking them because it was the difference between minors and majors.

For Biggio I see him more as a change in approach. As he got older and lost his wheels he changed his approach which led to an increase in power.

Everyone tells the story that the best home run hitter in our era was Ichiro. That was not the most beneficial for the team, but in batting practice he was the showman.

 

[brett05]

It is VERY fair to assume all of their numbers without steroids would have been less. It is also very fair to speculate when they began taking them, and to look at Bonds and Clemens and see that they had already gotten to HOF status prior to that. The same is simply not true for Sosa, palmeiro, etc.

I personally think Bonds and Clemens are HOF'ers without the steroids, but don't weep for them being out due to their own cheating. If a voter holds it against a known cheater and doesn't vote him in, that's his right. Some voters try to determine the effect the roids had and whether a guy would "clear the bar" woithout them, while others take a stricter moral stand.

And before we hear Ty Cobb was mean, and so-and-so smoked pot, etc., nobody is claiming that everyone in is perfect, or that some shouldn't have been left out. How Gaylord Perry is considered a Hall of Famer I will never understand. But ignoring cheating going forward simply because of past mistakes isn't the answer.

FWIW, there was no cheating until the Players Union agreed to testing and punishment.

 

[brett05]

I agree. It is absolutely a tragic effect of the era.

And some guys who were never suspected are also hurt, simply by the fact that the pinball numbers that came after them make their numbers pale in comparison. Fred McGriff, for example, is 7 HRs shy of the magic 500, but since that mark became anything but magic with seemingly everyone breaking it, McGriff's total looks paltry.
(Not saying he should definitely be in, but he is an example of a non-steroid guy whose HOF case was hurt by the steroid users.)

How do we know Fred didn't take roids?

 

[Parade_Rain]

Well, he didn't just start hitting HR's at 35, he did have a few prior to that. But his highest HR total came at age 39, and his second highest at age 38. That is not normal. Nobody has a problem assuming Bonds and Sosa took steroids, but Biggio apparently is off limits.

I don't know that he took them, and I don't mean to be unfair. (Though his teammate and best buddy Bagwell is out of the HOF largely due to suspicion of steroid use. And there's another example of one guy in, and one guy out when the guy who was out was clearly the more dangerous hitter. )

I don't assume everyone took them, and it's unfair to point the finger at people randomly. But the biggest myth of the steroid era is that the only guys taking them were the league HR leaders. There's this thought out there that taking steroids makes you bash 50+HRs automatically, when in fact a lot of "little guys" took them. Guys who were fringe players admitted to taking them because it was the difference between minors and majors.

Are you going to leave out all those guys from the 60's and 70's for taking greenies, too? Spare me the lesson on roid use, Dad. I'm well aware of how much usage there was. Biggio had over 3,000 hits. How many pros (even those long lasting bad ones) have hit 3000 or more?

 

[SilenceS]

Steroids did not make Sammy Sosa hit all of those 609 homeruns. Ralphy Palmerio had one of the sweetest swings the game has ever seen. Steroids did not make his swing that way. Some people think of steroids as this liquid gold to becoming and athlete. It helps in certain areas, but it does not put the bat on the ball. It does not control the zone. Also, all these hitters on steroids were playing against a ton of pitchers on steroids as well. People need to get over the steroid era.

 

[2323]

Does anyone feel this resentment towards PED users is really more about the sportswriters senses of self loathing because in the 90s they were all into the HRs and the guys hitting them. Same with Selig. But now these guys feel guilty for embracing it in some cases and not being against it more in other cases. So they're making this as much about themselves and certain players are collateral damage as a result of their stupid, self righteous process of self discovery.

But my question is, is steroid use going to keep Selig out of the hall of fame?...I mean you know, since it's such an issue. He was the one who was in the position to both do the most and also turn a blind eye because the HRs were benefitting his sport.

The 1994 work stoppage was about money. Then when fan backlash was costing them money, the tainted HR/steroid money didn't seem so tainted. Years later when Selig had his religious awakening and wanted to seem like he's tough on steroids, do you think he once offered to give that tainted steroid money back? C'mon! The guy was complicit.

 

[2323]

How do we know that there isn't someone who's already in that used? And if it comes to be known, then what?

 

[TL1961]

Are you going to leave out all those guys from the 60's and 70's for taking greenies, too? Spare me the lesson on roid use, Dad. I'm well aware of how much usage there was. Biggio had over 3,000 hits. How many pros (even those long lasting bad ones) have hit 3000 or more?

If you feel a guy should be in for getting 3000 hits, I certainly won't argue that. A player has to be darn good for a long time to accomplish that, I admit.

I am not strongly opposed to Biggio being in. I have underappreciated his extra base hits, for starters. I just think it's odd that you can watch a team for years, and see the guy who was not their best player (pretty much at any time in his career) go into the hall, while others don't.

And I will spare you the lesson on roids. You don't need to be a dick about it.

But please explain in detail how those greenies were such a boost to players' production. Everyone who wants to ignore steroids brings up greenies, as if their effects were similar. I'd like to know how they were.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Steroids did not make Sammy Sosa hit all of those 609 homeruns. Ralphy Palmerio had one of the sweetest swings the game has ever seen. Steroids did not make his swing that way. Some people think of steroids as this liquid gold to becoming and athlete. It helps in certain areas, but it does not put the bat on the ball. It does not control the zone. Also, all these hitters on steroids were playing against a ton of pitchers on steroids as well. People need to get over the steroid era.

I have terribly mixed feelings on the steroid era. On one hand I don't like how it divided players willing to enhance their careers from PEDs from those who were not. I absolutely feely badly for the latter group. Some overcame it and some did not. Salaries became out of whack with 35 years olds reviving their careers while younger players not using had solid numbers that paled in comparison and were hurt by this financially. That's not fair but in reality few things are. On the other hand there is no reasonable measuring stick to decide who goes in the HoF and who doesn't other than their numbers. Everything else is totally subjective and based on a variety of factors from actually admission of use, to names coming up in secret reports that were leaked and just plain old rumors and suspicions. At one point I was a bit of a zealot on HoF inductions for this era saying no one should get in but that was anger talking, not logic. Numbers are numbers and those should be the deciding factors. There is an ethics guideline for voters and in some cases, lying before Congress comes to mind, I think it's fair for a voter to invoke it if his conscience demands it. Of course there are some miserable characters in the HoF long before PEDs so maybe you have to look at that too. In the end being elected to the HoF is an honor while the HoF itself is a museum. I can see some standards in place for the honor but those standards have to be even and fair and not based on conjecture and suspicion. As far as the museum the years of the "steroid era" existed and they're documented already. It's part of the game whether someone likes it or not and the whole I'm tired of talking or even hearing about it. No one can change the past.

 

[TL1961]

Does anyone feel this resentment towards PED users is really more about the sportswriters senses of self loathing because in the 90s they were all into the HRs and the guys hitting them. Same with Selig. But now these guys feel guilty for embracing it in some cases and not being against it more in other cases. So they're making this as much about themselves and certain players are collateral damage as a result of their stupid, self righteous process of self discovery.

But my question is, is steroid use going to keep Selig out of the hall of fame?...I mean you know, since it's such an issue. He was the one who was in the position to both do the most and also turn a blind eye because the HRs were benefitting his sport.

The 1994 work stoppage was about money. Then when fan backlash was costing them money, the tainted HR/steroid money didn't seem so tainted. Years later when Selig had his religious awakening and wanted to seem like he's tough on steroids, do you think he once offered to give that tainted steroid money back? C'mon! The guy was complicit.

Very true. The writers weren't exactly Woodward and Bernstein when it came to steroids. A guy here in St. Louis, Bernie Miklasz, would openly ridicule any fan who questioned Mark McGwire's fake numbers after he was caught with Andro in his locker. Andro was not illegal, so Bernie would scream "It's a dietary supplement!". He and others willfully went along on McGwire's 70 HR ride. But the minute Bonds passed 70, steroids mattered in St. Louis. That is a perfect example of fans being OK with it as long as it is their guy. (And for the record, I was never one to defend Sosa's "accidental" use of a corked bat.)

And, yes, Selig went along for the ride. And he will be enshrined, and instead of being criticized for turning a blind eye, he will get credit for baseball's tough policies.

As for whether a PED user is already in, I don't know who it would be, but I think it's very possible there is one. But if that is a mistake, we shouldn't compound it by ignoring use by others.

It simply isn't fair to non users who come up short of the Hall to vote in known users with somewhat better numbers. Forget the moral aspect. I am simply stating that rewarding a PED user with 560 HR's vs. not rewarding a Non user with 490 is hard to justify.

There is simply no way of being certain what any player's accomplishments would be if he had not used PED's. There is speculation, and there is no avoiding it.

I do not know for fact that Fred McGriff never used PED's. (I am no big McGriff fan, BTW. But he is a good example) Take a look at Fred McGriff's body over his career. Or Ken Griffey Jr. Then do the same for Sosa and Bonds and McGwire. Tell me if you see similarities. I don't.

As I posted yesterday, Costas summed it up like this, when discussing speculation. "We aren't throwing a guy in jail or depriving him of his livelihood. We are withholding an honor."

 

[brett05]

I do not know for fact that Fred McGriff never used PED's. (I am no big McGriff fan, BTW. But he is a good example) Take a look at Fred McGriff's body over his career. Or Ken Griffey Jr. Then do the same for Sosa and Bonds and McGwire. Tell me if you see similarities. I don't.

The only way you know for a fact is if you are Fred McGriff. I can sit here and take roids all I want and will never look any different if I don't do anything with the drug in my system. You have no idea if McGriff, Griffey, Thomas, Maddux, etc, etc, etc took any PED's what affect it had nor if who they were going against didn't take them as well.

As for greenies, it provided energy to perform. Like nozdoz for college kids to pull all nighters.

 

[Parade_Rain]

I don't know that he took them, and I don't mean to be unfair. (Though his teammate and best buddy Bagwell is out of the HOF largely due to suspicion of steroid use. And there's another example of one guy in, and one guy out when the guy who was out was clearly the more dangerous hitter. )

"His best buddy Bagwell" is out of the HoF so far due to the lack of HR total. Bagwell had a bit more of an uppercut than most players, so he got on top of the ball and hit more sinking flies than ones that carried.

 

[Parade_Rain]

The only way you know for a fact is if you are Fred McGriff. I can sit here and take roids all I want and will never look any different if I don't do anything with the drug in my system. You have no idea if McGriff, Griffey, Thomas, Maddux, etc, etc, etc took any PED's what affect it had nor if who they were going against didn't take them as well.

As for greenies, it provided energy to perform. Like nozdoz for college kids to pull all nighters.

Greenies provide improved concentration.

Amphetamine usage in baseball is not just limited to Chris Davis, nor is it a small/non-issue. In 2012, 119 therapeutic use exemptions were granted, with 116 of them belonging to those who use medication to treat attention deficit disorder. This number of ADD medication therapeutic use exemptions rose to 119 in 2013. As the former link states, this is roughly 10% of Major League Baseball players that are prescribed and given exemptions for attention deficit disorder, a shockingly high number. National Institute of Medical Health research (albeit from 2006) finds that roughly 4.4% of adults eighteen to forty-four in the United States have some form of ADD/ADHD. Perhaps the first thought raised after this statistic is that Major League Baseball is not representative of the population at large, having more than double that number being ‘diagnosed’ with ADD. I do not mean to demean those who have the disease, as it is a very serious medical issue to deal with, but the overrepresentation of those with the disease has to raise some eyebrows.

http://beisbols.org/2014/09/12/wave-amphetamine-usage-mlb/

 

[Parade_Rain]

If you feel a guy should be in for getting 3000 hits, I certainly won't argue that. A player has to be darn good for a long time to accomplish that, I admit.

I am not strongly opposed to Biggio being in. I have underappreciated his extra base hits, for starters. I just think it's odd that you can watch a team for years, and see the guy who was not their best player (pretty much at any time in his career) go into the hall, while others don't.

He went from playing C to 2B to CF. How many people are athletic enough to make those changes? We aren't talking about corner positions. Up the middle is truly elite.

And I will spare you the lesson on roids. You don't need to be a dick about it.

I'm never a dick. Extremely dry and sarcastically humorous, yes.

But please explain in detail how those greenies were such a boost to players' production. Everyone who wants to ignore steroids brings up greenies, as if their effects were similar. I'd like to know how they were.

Amphetamines first of all have been illegal without a prescription since 1970. Amphetamines are part of the group of drugs used to treat ADD, thus they increase a player's concentration skills. So not only are they dangerous to use, they provide a player an advantage at game time against the opponent. They don't belong in the game and are worse than steroids. Look in my response to Brett discussing amphetamines. It's still all over baseball.

 

[TL1961]

The only way you know for a fact is if you are Fred McGriff. I can sit here and take roids all I want and will never look any different if I don't do anything with the drug in my system. You have no idea if McGriff, Griffey, Thomas, Maddux, etc, etc, etc took any PED's what affect it had nor if who they were going against didn't take them as well.

As for greenies, it provided energy to perform. Like nozdoz for college kids to pull all nighters.

I know. I said that.