Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
dsc123

Baseball HOF Vote; Nobody Gets In.

59 posts in this topic

I get the steroid stuff.  Not so much the bacne.

But Biggio? Come on!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

Biggio was a compiler, he was 3-4 good seasons and a number of marginal seasons.  .281 career batting average.363 career on base Percentage is not HOF material imo.  Only guy that should have got in imo was Piazza, but even his stats are on the edge.

Clemons, Bonds, Bagwell aren't going to make it because of Steroids.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by newtogolf

Biggio was a compiler, he was 3-4 good seasons and a number of marginal seasons.  .281 career batting average.363 career on base Percentage is not HOF material imo.  Only guy that should have got in imo was Piazza, but even his stats are on the edge.

Clemons, Bonds, Bagwell aren't going to make it because of Steroids.

Totally agree regarding Piazza.  But there is that stupid "rule" that a lot of writers follow for some odd reason about not electing guys on their first ballot.

And WTF Jack Morris?  (Yeah, I know, his ERA is high)  So what?  He's awesome!  He should get in based on his WS performances alone!

Was Bagwell ever linked to steroids?  I don't remember.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by newtogolf

Biggio was a compiler, he was 3-4 good seasons and a number of marginal seasons.  .281 career batting average.363 career on base Percentage is not HOF material imo.  Only guy that should have got in imo was Piazza, but even his stats are on the edge.

Clemons, Bonds, Bagwell aren't going to make it because of Steroids.

I am probably biased because he went to my high school (which is close to you, so shouldn't you be biased too?).  But a lot of people say he is one of the top 10 all time 2b.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Totally agree regarding Piazza.  But there is that stupid "rule" that a lot of writers follow for some odd reason about not electing guys on their first ballot.

And WTF Jack Morris?  (Yeah, I know, his ERA is high)  So what?  He's awesome!  He should get in based on his WS performances alone!

Was Bagwell ever linked to steroids?  I don't remember.

I think Piazza might have trouble because he is suspected of juicing based on his bacne.   I think Bagwell is suspected.

Jack Morris is one of the most divisive guys out there, for whatever reason.  Some people say he was never a guy that was feared or that you worried about facing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by dsc123

I think Piazza might have trouble because he is suspected of juicing based on his bacne.   I think Bagwell is suspected.

Jack Morris is one of the most divisive guys out there, for whatever reason.  Some people say he was never a guy that was feared or that you worried about facing.

Bagwell probably suspected on his size alone.  lol.

Well, some consolation to Cooperstown, there are a few people getting in this year, just no modern players.  EDIT:  these guys ...

Three people will be inducted into the Hall of Fame on July 28. In December a special panel that looks at people no longer eligible for the regular ballot voted in Jacob Ruppert, the New York Yankees owner who bought Babe Ruth in 1919; former umpire Hank O'Day; and Deacon White, a catcher in the 19th century.

Hey, Aaron Sele got one vote!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Baseball writers and their holier than thou attitude really screwed it up today in my "humble" opinion. Im not a baseball purist or whatever you wanna call it but Bonds and Clemons were both 1st Ballot HOF'ers before the juice. For them to get 30 something % of the vote is just dumb. When Mcgwire and Sosa had that season that basically saved baseball, everyone knew something was up. But Baseball stood by and reaped the benefits of renewed interest in the sport. But now we're gonna take a stand?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it any surprise the Juicers didn't get in? It shouldn't be if Pete Rose isn't in. His transgressions had nothing to do with his playing performance yet he's not in there, so as long as that blatant omission isn't rectified, the Juicers (or even suspect Juicers) should never be in.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No question there's a ton of hypocrisy in baseball and among the press.  Baseball after the strike couldn't get people into the stands until McGwire, Sosa and Bonds went after the single season HR records.  No one questioned their size, strength or steroid use then.  The newspapers and Selig presented them as MLB's saviors and did so for years.  It was only when Bonds closed in on Babe Ruth's HR record did anyone make a stink about the record setting pace of HR's that were being hit.

If baseball hasn't changed the record books it's not up to the baseball writers to impart their own justice.  Bonds, McGwire, Sosa and Clemons all have HOF worthy numbers so unless Selig removes their stats and accomplishments from MLB history the writers should vote them in imo.

Originally Posted by RonTheSavage

Baseball writers and their holier than thou attitude really screwed it up today in my "humble" opinion. Im not a baseball purist or whatever you wanna call it but Bonds and Clemons were both 1st Ballot HOF'ers before the juice. For them to get 30 something % of the vote is just dumb. When Mcgwire and Sosa had that season that basically saved baseball, everyone knew something was up. But Baseball stood by and reaped the benefits of renewed interest in the sport. But now we're gonna take a stand?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Yet Bud Selig will keep his job as long as he chooses to.

Sorry I forgot, he is not the commissioner, just the owners mouthpiece.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

A couple of points that may or may not shape the discussion.

  • The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum is a museum operated by private interests, not Major League Baseball.  So MLB does not control eligibility criteria.  MLB banned Pete Rose for life, and the HOF then made a rule that nobody on the MLB Ban list is eligible.

  • None of the juicers have been banned by MLB.

  • Since the HOF controls induction (MLB can only directly influence via the ban list), whether or not MLB changed its official record books is not determinative of whether writers (or players) should vote for a player.  The HOF instructs writers as follows:

Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

So regardless of what MLB does, writers are required to consider the integrity, sportsmanship, and character of the players. Personally, I think its hard to argue that someone who injected themselves with illegal drugs to enhance their performance demonstrated integrity, sportsmanship, or character.

Keeping juicers out is not vigilantism by the voters.  It would be vigilantism to vote them in.  I think if you are for letting the juicers in, your point should be that the HOF needs to change the eligibility criteria, not that MLB or the writers need to act differently.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Is it any surprise the Juicers didn't get in? It shouldn't be if Pete Rose isn't in. His transgressions had nothing to do with his playing performance yet he's not in there, so as long as that blatant omission isn't rectified, the Juicers (or even suspect Juicers) should never be in.

I would rather see Rose get in before any of the "juicers".

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Rose should never get in.  He violated the #1 rule, gambling.  It is cheating just as much as steroids.

Guys like Schilling should get in.  He definitely didn't juice with that belly.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Rose should never get in.  He violated the #1 rule, gambling.  It is cheating just as much as steroids.

Guys like Schilling should get in.  He definitely didn't juice with that belly.

Schilling barely won 200 games. His claim to fame is a fake bloody sock. Not even close to a HOFer.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Rose should never get in.  He violated the #1 rule, gambling.  It is cheating just as much as steroids.

He didn't 'cheat' 4,256 hits.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by zipazoid

He didn't 'cheat' 4,256 hits.

There is definitely a strong case for Rose to get in as a player, just as Joe Torre belongs in as a manager - both had 2 separate careers and excelled in one of them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

There is definitely a strong case for Rose to get in as a player, just as Joe Torre belongs in as a manager - both had 2 separate careers and excelled in one of them.

didnt torre win an mvp award? and there is no case for rose. he is barred by the rules.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

To my knowledge neither Bonds or Clemons were found guilty by a court of law to have used steroids nor has either ever failed a drug test.  Do I think they used steroids, yes of course, but the justice system in our country is innocent until PROVEN guilty.

On that basis I believe the juicers that did not fail a drug test or have evidence presented in court that proved they used steroids should be given the benefit of the doubt by those voting and their entry into the HOF should be based on their contributions to the game and their stats.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • Of the six military guys I asked about it, five felt it was exactly the kind of thing they fought to protect and had no problem with it. The sixth said he thought it was disrespectful but said so is killing people and blowing shit up and the military does that itself. Have you polled enough of the military to see whether it was seen as disrespectful by the majority?
    • Of course the outrage is after the fact.  As it is with most things.  Are you stating you would have to personally witness something as it happens to be outraged or disagree with it?   I don't believe it is something that can be "proved" either.  I don't think it needs to be.  If the majority of the military feels it is disrespectful, than I tend to agree with that.
    • My house is dumb as a brick.  And 2x4 posts.  And drywall.  And paint.
    • No. Liking the entirety of your country, your government, etc. is not a binary state. You don't even like everything about your wife. Or children. Or golf. @Gunther, never one to disappoint with that crap. More below… You never give people enough credit. Guess what? You can support a person's right to protest while completely disagreeing with whatever they're protesting. It isn't. But your constant attempts to pigeonhole do more to divide than they do to gain understanding, find common ground, and discuss things intelligently. I'll call it like I see it - you're intellectually lazy when it comes to anything political. That's why I think you pigeonhole everything into "liberal" and "correct" (in your opinion). And hey, I tend to vote Republican. We're probably more alike than you imagine, politically… except that I try to look at things separately, when I do take the time to consider it, while you seem to want to just pigeonhole and spout. Others have said it, but you can't "prove" that it's disrespectful. It's just your opinion. And anyone else's. At the risk of making a post that's not "on topic" enough that I'd moderate it if it weren't my own post (though mods are and always have been free to moderate my posts as they see fit)… my thoughts on the matter include: I don't think it's disrespectful to sit. I think you should probably have a reason to sit, because if you garner attention for sitting you'd better have an answer as to why, not just "I don't know, stuff sucks here right now." He seems to have had a reason, so okay. Sitting is no different, IMO, than burning a flag. Protesting in front of Capitol Hill. If a "regular person" sits, nobody will care. A few people might say "what a jerk" in their minds, but they're not going to care if he has an issue. They will if a celebrity sits, so he used the fame to get his point across. I'm not entirely sure what he was protesting, so I don't know if I agree or disagree with him. I know people who support gay marriage but who oppose welfare. Or the opposite. IMO, things are rarely so clearly divided along party lines. I know military people who think what he did was terrible, and others who think it was a great expression of the freedom their fighting and work has allowed for. As usual, since it's politics, I don't give it a whole ton of thought. But what little thoughts I've given it are right there.
    • As a lower trajectory hitter, on most days I allow for 2-5 yards of rollout when selecting a club, and then take an extra club on top of it.  I also do not use a urethane ball so I am bound to get some extra roll on the green, but I do get some needed roll on my drives. 
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. NavyGolfer16
      NavyGolfer16
      (26 years old)
    2. sessionh
      sessionh
      (38 years old)
    3. VicMac
      VicMac
      (68 years old)
  • Blog Entries