NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk

View Poll Results: Shound Barry Bonds and/or Roger Clemens be inducted into the HOF?
Bonds - in 78 50.00%
Bonds - OUT 78 50.00%
Cemens - in 76 48.72%
Clemens - OUT 77 49.36%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 156. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 01-05-2018, 01:52 PM
dgo71 dgo71 is offline
Derek 0u3ll3tt3
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy View Post
It's a poll of opinion, not a vote for enshtinement and your opinion is in the minority.
Which clearly equates to "wrong" in your mind. It'd be nice if the world was that black and white.

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
First a guy says cheating is cheating then he says when a person cheated matters. Okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy View Post
If you're referring to me, I didn't say that, nor did I imply that.
Seems like you absolutely implied this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy View Post
No, my basis is that Bonds was a HOFer before he started using steroids. From what I know, Bonds didn't start using steroids until after the '98 season. You don't think he already put up HOF numbers by then? What if MLB could somehow discredit all Bonds stats after the '98 season? Would you think he deserves to be in then?
So let me understand. I asked if you felt making mistakes in the past meant you were forced to continue making them going forward. You said no, that your reasoning for admitting Bonds was what is quoted above, that he was a "HOFer before he started using." But "cheating is cheating", right? Later you say this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy View Post
I believe if you're going to let one cheater into the HOF, then you have to let them all in - Manny, McGwire, Sosa, etc. On the other hand, if they want to banish all the cheaters, then I'm also OK with them keeping the PED users out. Eirher way, it should just be fair. Let the cheaters in or keep them out. Doesn't matter to me, but be consistent. And IMO, as I've already said, cheating is cheating, it doesn't matter the extent of it.
So which is it? Was Bonds a HOFer before he cheated, or are you in fact OK with repeating mistakes indefinitely because mistakes were made, by a completely different group of people, 25 years ago? For someone who references consistency so often you seem to have a hard time being consistent with your own reasoning.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 01-05-2018, 02:25 PM
vintagetoppsguy's Avatar
vintagetoppsguy vintagetoppsguy is offline
D@v!d J@m3s
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Richmond, TX
Posts: 4,746
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dgo71 View Post
Which clearly equates to "wrong" in your mind. It'd be nice if the world was that black and white.





Seems like you absolutely implied this:



So let me understand. I asked if you felt making mistakes in the past meant you were forced to continue making them going forward. You said no, that your reasoning for admitting Bonds was what is quoted above, that he was a "HOFer before he started using." But "cheating is cheating", right? Later you say this:



So which is it? Was Bonds a HOFer before he cheated, or are you in fact OK with repeating mistakes indefinitely because mistakes were made, by a completely different group of people, 25 years ago? For someone who references consistency so often you seem to have a hard time being consistent with your own reasoning.
I said I was finished with you. You reason like a two year old Yes, you're right and the majority is wrong. Happy now?
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 01-05-2018, 02:43 PM
dgo71 dgo71 is offline
Derek 0u3ll3tt3
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy View Post
I said I was finished with you. You reason like a two year old Yes, you're right and the majority is wrong. Happy now?
If this is the best you can do I'll be quite happy with my reasoning abilities.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 01-05-2018, 02:46 PM
clydepepper's Avatar
clydepepper clydepepper is offline
Raymond Culpepper
Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Columbus, GA
Posts: 4,388
Default

To think I started this thread asking for a simple YES or NO response...



Fat Chance!
-
__________________
.
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on others lives" - Jackie Robinson


MY BIG CONCERNS ABOUT AMERICA:

Internally- We spend too much time assuring our rights without learning the responsibilities that should accompany them.
Externally - No matter how much we claim to take the higher moral ground, we have neither respected nor attempted to understand other cultures.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 01-06-2018, 02:04 AM
tjb1952tjb's Avatar
tjb1952tjb tjb1952tjb is offline
Tim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southern California
Posts: 596
Default

Double NO
__________________
Tim
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 01-06-2018, 02:10 PM
TUM301 TUM301 is offline
H Murphy
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: western Mass
Posts: 690
Default

Ck the latest results, can`t get much closer and yes, enjoying the debate.
__________________
H Murphy Collection https://www.flickr.com/photos/154296763@N05/
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 01-07-2018, 09:39 PM
rats60's Avatar
rats60 rats60 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy View Post
If you're referring to me, I didn't say that, nor did I imply that.

When I say cheating is cheating, I mean if you'll cheat at the little things, you'll cheat at the big things to. If you'll steal a little item, you'll steal a big item too. If you tell a little lie, you'll tell a big lie too. You get the point.

I just don't understand how someone can say Bonds doesn't deserve to be in the HOF for cheating, when others have cheated too. What is your measuring stick? When does the cheating become a bannable offense? So, it's OK to cheat and throw a spitball, used a corked bat or whatever and get into the HOF, but it's not ok to cheat and use performance enhancing drugs and get into the Hall? What kind of stupid crap is that? Both are cheating, both have the same intent which is to get an advantage. So a spitball is OK, but steroids are a bannable offense? Gotcha. Where's the middle ground? Where's the gray area? In Packs world, where is the baseball cheating line drawn between a bannable offense and a slap on the wrist?
Jenrry Mejía is currently banned for life for using steroids and would be ineligible for the HOF if he had 10 years service. Steve Howe was banned in 1992 for life for violating MLB's drug policy. If it wasn't for the player's union blocking drug testing, Bonds and Clemens and others may have been banned too. The writers are just enforcing MLB's drug policy. These guys broke the rules and hid behind the player's union. Now they are getting what they deserve. Using a spit ball or corked bat gets you a few games. Your comparison is like saying shoplifting and murder deserve the same penalty. They don't.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 01-08-2018, 01:10 AM
the 'stache's Avatar
the 'stache the 'stache is offline
Bill Gregory
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
Posts: 3,701
Default

Wow, with my votes, it's 50/50 split down the middle on Bonds and Clemens.

I voted yes on both. Don't get me wrong. I hate cheating in the game I love. And both men cheated. Steroids have no place in baseball.

But, not voting them in creates a maelstrom, of sorts. We know past generations of baseball players have used things that enhanced their play. Willie Mays spoke of "greenies". Are stimulants the same as steroids? No. But how do we draw the line? And, if we ban players from the Hall who used steroids, do we then have to go back and re-evaluate all the players before, and the evidence that they used things that gave them a competitive advantage? Because, that's what we're ultimately talking about, right? The sanctity of the game.

We don't know for sure when they started using, do we? I've heard people point to when Bonds joined the Giants. Well, he was already well on his way to the Hall of Fame before he went to San Francisco. He had 50 WAR in seven years, and at age 28. Two MVP Awards, an MVP runner up, three Silver Slugger Awards, three Gold Gloves. Bonds had a 147 OPS +, 176 home runs, 251 stolen bases. His 162 game average over those last three years in Pittsburgh are nothing short of spectacular: .301 AVG, 113 runs, 36 doubles, 34 home runs, 122 RBI, 49 stolen bases, 120 walks. His slash line was .424/.566/.990. A 177 OPS + over that span. 26.7 WAR in three seasons. He had a 1.080 OPS the year before he became a Giant. My way of looking at it: the steroids prolonged his career, absolutely. But the guy was already playing at a level of the immortals.

Clemens? By the start of his age 29 season, he'd won three Cy Young Awards, and an MVP. He'd led the league in FIP five of the last six seasons. Between 1986 and 1992 he had a 160 ERA +. Unless he started on the steroids early, which I don't think he did, Clemens was a sensational pitcher and Hall of Fame-worthy before he turned 30. Like Bonds, I think the drugs prolonged his career.

Steroids don't make Hall of Famers out of average baseball players. You can either hit a curve ball, or you can't. You can either hit the corners, or you can't. The whole "vote them in, don't vote them in" is more about the stigma that attaches itself to the sport, and has a hell of a lot less to do with these individuals. If they get voted in, it somehow sullies the sport. But the all-time hit king is already excluded. The all-time home run king is, essentially, excluded. A seven-time Cy Young Award winner is being kept out.

Five guys have hit sixty home runs in a season. Only Ruth is in Cooperstown.

Put them in. Mention on their plaques that they used steroids, and let the individual determine how that changes their perception. But Bonds and Clemens are both arguably among the ten best players ever for their positions.
__________________
Building these sets: T206, 1953 Bowman Color, 1975 Topps.

Great transactions with: piedmont150, Cardboard Junkie, z28jd, t206blogcom, tinkertoeverstochance, trobba, Texxxx, marcdelpercio, t206hound, zachs, tolstoi, IronHorse 2130, AndyG09, BBT206, jtschantz, lug-nut, leaflover, Abravefan11, mpemulis, btcarfagno, BlueSky, and Frankbmd.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 01-08-2018, 08:27 AM
vintagetoppsguy's Avatar
vintagetoppsguy vintagetoppsguy is offline
D@v!d J@m3s
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Richmond, TX
Posts: 4,746
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
Your comparison is like saying shoplifting and murder deserve the same penalty. They don't.
No, that's how you're reading it and quit putting words in my mouth. Your example has the same consequences for two different crimes.

If you want to use a shoplifting comparison, then I would say it's like stealing a $.03 piece of bubble gum or a $1000 piece of jewelry. In my opinion, there's no difference. A thief is a thief. If you'll steal something little, you'll steal something big. The consequences may be different, but it's still stealing.

Last edited by vintagetoppsguy; 01-08-2018 at 08:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 01-08-2018, 10:00 AM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,942
Default

Bonds is now out. Now I'm in the majority.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PSA vs SGC Poll Buythatcard Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 16 05-19-2010 12:39 PM
What would you do? - poll Leon Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 33 05-06-2010 07:30 PM
NEW POLL! Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 6 07-10-2008 04:02 PM
New Poll Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 54 12-21-2006 08:03 PM
New Poll Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 23 10-09-2005 08:30 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:57 AM.


ebay GSB