POLL: IN or OUT: YES or NO
Just a simple YES or NO answer, please. Try not to expand on you answer. I'm just trying to gauge exactly how 'we' stand on this.
Q: Should Barry Bonds and/or Roger Clemens be Inducted into the HOF? |
No and no.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Who is this Cemens of whom you speak?
|
Cemens in, Clemens out.
|
Clemens - YES
Bonds - YES |
Quote:
|
Both NO (Out).
|
I said yes and yes.
|
Yes and yes. It's absurd that these guys -- easily in the top 5 of all time pitchers and batters, respectively -- are out and a ton of far far lesser lights are in.
|
Quote:
Too many marginal players in, and Bonds and Clemens were among the greatest players ever. They've already been punished by having to wait at least ten years. Lifetime ban is too harsh. |
Quote:
Sarie - my tipeng has nevurr bin the besst |
Quote:
|
2 No's for me
They chose their fate |
Quote:
|
Bonds-yes
Clemens-YES Neither cheater more than whoever your favorite player is.:D |
That's the easiest way to excuse lying and cheating, assume or assert that everyone did it.
|
no
no |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
It's the same old tired debate, but the same people who get all sanctimonious about roids still revere guys who popped amphetamines like Aaron and Mays.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I think it's interesting that the "yes" votes are tracking in tandem with the BBWAA.
|
Clemens-NO, Bonds-NO
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Look, I don't condone cheating and personally hate it. But I also hate the incredibly mediocre players that are getting into the Hall in the place of the tainted superstars. Trammell and Morris were fine players but debatable for entry. I guess it's just my general disdain for the HOF. |
Quote:
Then Jackson should be punished for stealing money but let's assume he did participate in throwing the series, despite his stats saying otherwise, we are comparing a player's indiscretion over 8 games compared to those who cheated over several hundred games. Maybe it is time for us to accept that there are really very few superstars in the game who are not cheating but that should not mean we look the other way for the guys who did cheat to become superstars. Bonds was HOF material before he used. I don't think we should be acknowledging his (or anyone else's) accomplishments knowing he broke the rules to achieve them. Greg |
Quote:
I'm not understanding the greenies argument at all. You can still take the modern equivalent of greenies and play right now so long as you have a prescription. You can't take HGH or anabolic steroids at all, prescription or not. It's not an apt comparison. |
Quote:
At the end of the day these guys decided to do what they did, they were already greats. Those of us who think no didn't make them do it. They have already enjoyed all of the good things that flowed from it, the adulation, the fame, the contracts and the mockery of the record books. Now they are left to deal with the baggage. I am certain they will get in. |
Quote:
|
Here are two weird ideas:
1.)The ONLY voting will be done by current Hall-of-Famers. and / or 2.) Elect Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, etc., but only INDUCT Them POSTHUMOUSLY! |
No on both.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Why is it safe to assume that? If Mantle used them, he used them before he wasn't allowed to. If Aaron and Mays used them, what do you point to in support of them using greenies at the end of their careers?
|
Quote:
|
both out
It isn't so much the fact that they were using steroids, but what bothers me more is that they continued to lie about it and never admitted to what they were doing. If they had just told the truth I would be more inclined to give them a yes vote.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
For this particular instance, I really believe you can believe in the MAN more than the STATS. Isn't that refreshing? . |
Holding nose, yes.
Their stats are beyond question and they represented an era of baseball that was a part of the story. |
Quote:
Lots of players have an outlying big year later in their careers and Hank had a pair of flukey high ISO years, (surrounded by years that were normal, so that seems unlikely that he only did greenies every other year?) Plus using only one player is also fallacious. Bonds, Mac, Sosa, Palmeiro ...etc all posted long runs of their best numbers wayy late, they had double peaks. Since baseball mandated testing did you know thee is no longer a peak at 28 like before? Now , on average so of course individuals may differ, players are peaking right away and declining by 28. |
I was only responding to this:
No players had their best seasons after 35 until the roid era I wasn't making a point about the effect of greenies. |
Quote:
|
No and No.
|
Quote:
Sure, there are lesser lights in the BBHOF. That fact has nothing to do with Barry Bonds or Roger Clemons. Pete Rose outshines all those lesser lights. For how little of Pete's HOF career did he actually bet on MLB? Whatever little space of time it was, it was enough for the powers that be to throw him out of the game forever. The Black Sox were involved in throwing a best of nine World Series. Just one lousy World Series. Just---and it cost them their careers---the rest of their lives. I think that was much, much, much harsher. Barry and Roger made among the biggest boo coo during their careers. They got to keep all that. They got to play MLB as long as they wanted, pretty much. And you've got the nerve to cry the blues, and carry their torch, and demand their enshrinement. A final thought. Not often mentioned about Barry and Roger, and all "the others", were the many, many, many young guys who thought long and hard about whether they should start taking performance-enhancing drugs to increase their own power, and increase their own chances of making it into the major leagues. For a few of those wannabes, the drugs did more for them than they'd bargained for, and they died young. 'Nuf said. ----Brian Powell |
Brian how do you feel about Gaylord Perry?
Or Whitey Ford who was notorious for scuffing baseballs? Suppose Aaron and Mays and Schmidt took greenies after taking them without a script became a federal crime? Your thoughts on that? Another issue I have with the steroid /HGH disqualification is that it is inevitable guys who used are going to be voted in because they were more discreet, or perhaps better liked so trainers and such didn't rat them out. I would bet anything it's happened several times already if not more. |
Quote:
The highest paid players, or rather the players who are willing to spend the most on them, have the best masking agents. Even then, 16.5 inch forearms or a size 9 head are blatantly obvious. |
Hell no on both. And never ever too.
|
In
In |
Quote:
A BIG PART OF BASEBALL IS SHEER ENTERTAINMENT, AND I SUPPOSE FOR THAT REASON, GAYLORD PERRY AND HIS WET ANTICS NEVER BOTHERED ME. THE FANS JUST SEEMED TO HAVE A BIG KICK OUT OF PERRY MAKING MOST OF THE BATTERS LOOK BAD. TO ME AT LEAST, IT WAS LIKE "4 AGAINST ONE IN DODGEBALL"; GAYLORD HAD FOUR UMPIRES WITH THE UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL CHANCE TO NAIL 'EM, AND THEY NEVER DID. THE MAN HAD A WHOLE LOT MORE IN HIS REPERTOIRE GOING FOR HIM, THAN JUST THE GOOBER BALL. AT SOME POINT, THE PSYCHOLOGICAL TORMENT OF THE THOUGHT OF GAYLORD USING HIS TRICK PITCH MUST HAVE HAD AN EFFECT UPON THE BATTERS. FURTHERMORE, THE WAY HE SEEMED TO COME BACK FROM THE DEAD SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE COURSE OF HIS CAREER. HE WAS GETTING ALONG SO-SO WITH THE GIANTS FOR SEVERAL YEARS UNTIL BREAKING OUT BIG IN 1966. AFTER SEVERAL GOOD YEARS, DOWN HE WENT. THEN, GOING TO CLEVELAND, HE WAS ON TOP AGAIN, HAVING A WHALE OF A '74 UNTIL SOMETHING SET HIM BACK LATE IN THE SEASON. AFTER A DOWNWARD TREND, HE WINDS UP IN SAN DIEGO, AND THEN BLOSSOMS YET AGAIN. PERRY WAS AMAZING. WHITEY FORD AND ELSTON HOWARD WERE CRAFTY; NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. I GUESS IT WAS CHEATING, TO AN EXTENT. BUT THEN I FOUND THIS BIT ON PRE-WAR GREAT, ROGERS HORNSBY. HE WROTE AN ARTICLE ENTITLED, "YOU'VE GOT TO CHEAT TO WIN". AMONG THE WORDS ROGERS WROTE WERE THESE, "WHEN I PLAYED SECOND BASE, I USED TO TRIP, KICK, ELBOW, OR SPIKE ANYONE I COULD." HAROLD FRIEND, WHO WROTE THE PIECE ON GAYLORD PERRY AS A CHEATER, AND FOUND THE ARTICLE BY HORNSBY, AND QUOTED THE ABOVE, MADE THE FOLLOWING COMMENT AFTER ROGERS' ADMISSION: "HE IS NOT ALONE." GOING BACK TO THE OP, TO WRAP THIS UP. I USED THIS PRIME EXAMPLE IN MY BOOK, NEVER CHEAPER BY THE DOZEN, ON THE STEROID USERS. I BELIEVE WHAT REALLY GOT ATHLETES THINKING ABOUT DOING THEM WORLDWIDE WAS "BIG BEN" JOHNSON, THE CANADIAN SPRINTER, IN THE 1988 OLYMPICS. I SAW THEM ON TV. BEN JOHNSON WAS A STREAMLINED HERCULES. I HAD NEVER SEEN SUCH A MUSCULAR SPRINTER. HE PUT OUR CARL LEWIS AWAY WITH EASE IN THE 100 METERS FINAL, SETTING A WORLD RECORD. HOWEVER, WHEN TEST TIME CAME AFTERWARDS, HE TESTED VERY POSITIVE. HIS GOLD MEDAL WAS STRIPPED, AND HE WAS SENT BACK TO CANADA IN DISGRACE. TO TRY TO BE SUCCINCT, BASEBALL BECOMES A GAME OF GAUDY NUMBERS. BIG MAC, BARRY BONDS, AND I AM RATHER CERTAIN SAMMY SOSA (AND OTHERS) TAINTED, TARNISHED, AND BLEW AWAY THE HALLOWED NUMBERS OF BASEBALL'S GREATS. THEY DID SO WITH STEROIDS, PERIOD. THIS KIND OF CHEATING IS A CONSTANT SUPER VA-VOOM TO WHAT ABILITY THOSE DUDES ALREADY HAD. YOU CANNOT COMPARE WHAT THOSE DIRTY CHEATING RATS DID TO PERRY'S SOMETIME SLOBBER BALL, OR ELLIE'S SCUFFING UP A BALL SO FORD WOULD MAKE IT DO A DIPSIE-DOODLE TO THE BATTER. AGAIN, IF THE UMPIRES SAW ELLIE OR WHITEY OBVIOUSLY DO IT, THEY WOULD HAVE GIVEN THEM A WET ONE---TO THE SHOWERS! WHEREAS, WITH SAY BIG MAC, HE SAYS RIGHT BEFORE '98 THAT HE'S GOING FOR MARIS'S RECORD, AND FIRST GAME, HE HITS A TOWERING BLAST THAT LEAVES EVERYBODY SHAKEN, AND HE'S ON THE FRONT PAGE OF THE USA TODAY SPORTS SECTION. I WAS NOT FOLLOWING BASEBALL, BUT EVEN I NOTICED IN THE PHOTO HOW MARK NOW LOOKED LIKE HERCULES. I READ THE ARTICLE. SAID HE WAS TAKING SOMETHING FOR HIS AILING BACK. THAT STUCK IN MY MIND, POSITIVELY AT FIRST. EVENTUALLY, I BECAME POSITIVE THAT WHATEVER HE WAS TAKING FOR HIS BAD BACK WAS NOT ONLY HELPING HIS BACK, BUT HELPING HIS ENTIRE BODY, GIVING HIM SUPER STRENGTH. INSTEAD OF ALL THOSE FLY OUTS, THERE WERE ALL THESE "SEE YAs". IT JUST WAS NOT RIGHT. BARRY SAW ALL THIS, AND WHAT IT DID FOR BIG MAC AND SLAMMIN SAMMY, AND DECIDED, "HEY, I'M GONNA GET SOME OF THAT, TOO!" HE DID. THE REST IS HISTORY, EXCEPT FOR THE HORROR STORIES THAT CONTINUE TO COME OUT ABOUT THE YOUTH WHO ALSO WATCHED WITH INTRIGUE AND INTEREST, AND DECIDED THEY WERE GOING TO GET SOME "STUFF" TO MAKE THEM GROW BIGGER AND STRONGER, TOO. GAYLORD, ELSTON, AND WHITEY WERE PLAYING PATTYCAKE, COMPARED TO MARK MCGWIRE, SAMMY SOSA, BARRY BONDS, AND ROGER CLEMONS (AMONG OTHERS). I AM CERTAIN I WON'T CONVINCE YOU, BUT YOU ASKED A GOOD QUESTION. HAPPY NEW YEAR, MY FELLOW COLLECTOR. TAKE CARE. ---BRIAN POWELL |
Brian, thanks for the response, but I think you've put yourself on a slippery slope, when you say (as I understand you) your objection to cheating depends on what you perceive as the degree of impact. And unless I missed it you didn't address greenies which, I repeat, were illegal to use without a prescription after 1970 or so. I infer you think they were more like pat-a-cake too?
|
In NASCAR, the old saying says "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying". In NASCAR, if you are caught cheating, your wins are taken away and your records disappear. Did that happen in baseball? Nope. MLB reaped all the benefits of the home runs of the steroid era. There was no way they would disqualify McGwire, Sosa, or Bonds. Later on, MLB decides to be all holy and taint steroid users. If MLB had any cajones, they would have nipped it in the 1990's. They didn't, so all results are official. Since Bonds and Clemens have OFFICIAL numbers that rank among the best ever, I see no reason not to include them, especially when the ringmaster himself (Selig) is in for no great performance of his own.
|
Wow. This thing is practically split right down the middle.
|
Quote:
Doesn't it seem to be that way with everything these days? |
Quote:
When I think of steroids, and their degree of impact, as you aptly put it, their impact would be total. Once the ROID users were fully loaded, so to speak, EVERY time they came to bat, they were ready to power the ball way farther than they would have been able to at their best pre-ROID level. That is simply an illegal, disturbing advantage that is flat-out cheating. It doesn't matter that MLB had not deemed the drugs illegal during those years. All too often MLB moves at glacier speed to clean up its act, take appropriate action, and in the end, do the right thing. Naturally, my thinking of "doing the right thing" will frequently not coincide with someone else. Be that as it may, the damage to MLB baseball and its reputation and records is essentially irreversible. Perhaps MLB's hierarchy is waiting for its fans to cease caring and give in to apathy. So much of their lame-brained inaction stems from a deep-seeded fear any decision will cause a deep drop in revenue. Perhaps they feel this lengthening ensuing period of years of leaving the record books alone, and thus rewarding the ROIDS with the home run records, is the right thing to do. After all, they broke the records. They fail to understand, and accept the fact that more than ever today, people want to know the story behind the story, what really went down, the true cause and effect. Tis true, my equating slobber and scuff ball tricks to patty cake might be a slippery slope, but remember, all the umpires were watching, as well as the opposing team's dugout, as well as the fans. At any time, the umps could have seen something, called time, and lowered the boom. I found it quite entertaining, and yes, they were taking a slippery slope chance of having the boom lowered upon them. Be that as it may, come on, man, when the ass-terROIDS became the game face of baseball with their loaded bodies and mind-boggling home run and slugging percentage numbers, no one could do a thing for years. 'Twas those boomers that believed they could lower the boom on MLB pitching and get away with it. My, haven't their bodies shrunk today? It is amazing they're still alive. Too late to say, but I'm getting verbose again. Tis a hot stove league topic that will stay stoked 24/7 year-round. Nobody is really happy about the whole thing, either. --- Brian Powell |
There are no great answers here, particularly as I think doing whatever it takes to get an edge always has been and always will be part of sports, and I think it perhaps is unfair to ostracize those who got caught because there probably are equal numbers who used more discreetly.
It may not be entirely defensible, but I would say yes to Bonds and Clemens because they were top tier near certain HOFers before they (allegedly) used, or at least before the popular perception is of when they started. There are other guys whose numbers make them easy candidates but I don't care so much if they never get in, e.g. Sosa and Palmeiro. Maybe it's inconsistent. |
Amphetamines and scuffing a baseball or even using a spitter has nothing in common with steroids in my opinion. Steroids and HGH alter your body. They allow a player like Brady Anderson to hit 50 homers over night. A greenie isn't going to do that for anybody. Throwing a spitter doesn't give a guy a new arm either. Using HGH or steroids is in a different category for me.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Time is fleeting, and it brings along a new crop of people to the BBWA, among who will cast their ballots each year, or whenever. Last I paid attention, things were inching higher for the juiced bad boys. Some say it will prove they're really OK, and enshrinement will be an end that justified their means. It certainly won't change my mind, and many others, one bit. If you're pleased as punch if that day arrives, well, you won't be alone, either. As you intimated, I think we have gridlock. ---Brian Powell |
Quote:
http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/my...l-fly-farther/ |
Quote:
|
Yes and yes.
|
Quote:
Sure helped Sammy Sosa hit 66 in '98 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
There is a certain kind of cheating that is the issue with the two candidates. Altered equipment isn't really under consideration.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
So Brett and Perry belong in the HOF even though they cheated, but not Clemens and Bonds? How do you decide which cheaters get in and which cheaters are left out? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Did you follow the Clemens case? He was on trial specifically for perjury. That's the hardest thing in the justice world to prove, since it's pretty hard to prove what someone knew when they said or did something. Being found "not guilty" of perjury is nowhere close to the same thing as being found "innocent" of using steroids. You really think all that evidence was just circumstancial? Just a big misunderstanding, right? OK...I choose to believe that where there's smoke there's fire, and Clemens and Bonds were layered in smoke. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
So let's say for a minute that all cheating is equal. Is your basis for enshrining Clemens and Bonds that mistakes have already been made, so we need to keep making them? You asked me what cheaters are in and which are out. I say the ones who are in are in, unless they drastically change the line of thinking and start removing plaques. And I'd be ok with that btw. But the ones who are not in, should stay out. I don't see the sense in continually permitting cheaters to reap the rewards of receiving the highest honor the game can give. They chose To cheat and should have to now live with the repurcussions of that choice. So my question to you would be, where does it end? Does 3x cheater Manny Ramirez need a plaque before people start to think the whole thing is ridiculous? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
As far as Clemens goes, I'm not even going down that road. It's ridiculous to assume he did them when he never failed a test and he was acquitted of perjury charges. |
Quote:
And not that when he started makes much difference to me, how does anyone claim to know when he started using? He might've started in A-ball for anyone knows. As for Clemens, I don't assume he took them, I'm confident he did. It's ridiculous to me that anyone could be naive enough to think he didn't. Some things are pretty apparent even if a jury of "peers" can't prove you lied about it. He got better as he got older, there was enough incriminating evidence for an indictment, Pettitte even said Clemens admitted using HGH (even if he halfass backpedalled on that)...he was in the Mitchell Report for crying out loud. But yeah, I'm sure he was totally clean. Please. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Edited to add: Contrary to what's been written in this thread, there are a lot of players that have gotten better with age. And not only baseball, other sports too. Sports like basketball and football where the game takes more of a toll on your body. One more edit: So what if his name was in the Mitchell report. Half the names in the report I've never heard of. I guess it didn't help them much, huh? And if you want to use the Mitchell report as your standard, do we assume that anyone not named in the report is innocent? Come on! |
Niekro, Spahn, and Randy Johnson all put up most of their numbers after 30, if I recall, and into their 40s were still very productive.
Just checked on Randy's 4 straight Cy Youngs -- 35-38. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:12 AM. |