The Scoundrel HOF

[bn2cardz]

So are they the best player that also happen to be scoundrels? Or is this the biggest scoundrel of their era?

If it is the biggest scoundrel without any care for on the field play than here are mine:

Marty Bergen

César Cedeño

Ugueth Urbina

[frankbmd]

I think we may have a closer, in more ways than one.

[Bocabirdman]

Let us nor forget Orlando Cepeda and his suitcase of weed.

[Jayworld]

Charles Risberg
Barry Bonds
Ryan Braun

[slipk1068]

From what I have read, Dave Kingman and Joe DiMaggio are/were not nice guys.

edit: Lenny Dykstra

[wolf441]

Hal Chase
Ben Chapman
Joey Belle

[jdeptula]

3 Black Sox:

Chick Gandil
Eddie Cicotte
Lefty Williams

I watched Eight Men Out the Other Day

[slipk1068]

Charles Comiskey has to be a first ballot scoundrel. No way Cicotte should be nominated.

[iwantitiwinit]

Arod
Arod
Arod

[EvilKing00]

Anson
Cobb
Canseco
Marty Bergen

[Jim65]

Joe Niekro
Juan Marichal
Joe Jackson

[Northviewcats]

If you take into consideration players that were talented enough to make the Hall of Fame but their inner demons got in the way I would nominate:

Dwight Gooden
Darryl Strawberry
Hank Thompson

Denny McLain has also been mentioned. What he did to the retirement fund at Peet Packing Company was pretty low.

[rats60]

Instead of repeats, guys not listed yet

Speaker
Hornsby
All yet unlisted PED guys.

Let's list some more PED guys.

[The Nasty Nati]

Definitely Ty Cobb #1, then #2 Pete Rose, and assuming we are talking about "potential" HOFers #3 Barry Bonds.

I'm still hesitant to splurge money on a T206 Cobb because the guy was just a horrible person. I understand he lived in a different era, but he was extremely racist...much respect to Boss Schmidt, a guy who would literally knock Cobb out when he would make racist remarks and harassments.

[ALR-bishop]

Canseco
Rose (taxes)
Milton Bradley ( not the game)

Honorable mentions

Ed Bouche
Tawny Kittaen ( for assault of Chuck Finley)

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

Marty Bergen

Amazingly, I had never heard the story of Marty Bergen before. What a psycho!

Hard to believe he only has one vote so far. Since we're only allowed to nominate three scoundrels, I will do the next best thing.

I second your nomination of Marty Bergen.

What he did makes PED use, throwing games, or betting on baseball seem relatively minor, by comparison.

Best regards,

Eric

[Kenny Cole]

I'll go back to the early days for some new names

Jim Devlin
George Hall
Pat Tebeau

[Peter_Spaeth]

ARod Bonds Boggs.

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Amazingly, I had never heard the story of Marty Bergen before. What a psycho!

Hard to believe he only has one vote so far. Since we're only allowed to nominate three scoundrels, I will do the next best thing.

I second your nomination of Marty Bergen.

What he did makes PED use, throwing games, or betting on baseball seem relatively minor, by comparison.

Best regards,

Eric

Well I am glad I am not alone in believing slaughtering your 3 year old son, 6 year old daughter, and your spouse with an ax is a worse offense than using PEDs or being rude to fans.

[earlywynnfan]

I'm going to rebel here!!! Keeping it to three choices is arbitrary and constricting. Weren't the original HOF voters allowed 5 picks?? I'm adding two more:

Mel Hall -- I hope there's a special place in Hell for pedophiles
The Robison brothers -- syndicate baseball!!

Ken

[Runscott]

I'll go with baseball-related scoundrels. My nominations are based on my extreme dislike for liars - these four epitomize lying and betrayal of their fans, and will always head up my own personal 'scoundrel' hall of fame, regardless of the results of Frank's poll (which is very interesting).

I had to choose four, as they are almost tied (in my mind, at least). There are others whose PED use was certainly as bad, but these were the poster boys in terms of their brazen public denial. Braun is #1 because he sacrificed a man who was simply doing his job. McGwire's pansy-like behavior in court deserves special mention - apparently when the steroids wore off, his balls shrunk. Rodriguez was/is just plain stupid - to me, easily the dumbest of the entire bunch. Barry Bonds doesn't make my list, because he at least spared us the constant stupid public denials. We knew he was lying, he knew we knew. The others tried much harder to fool us.

1. Braun
2. Rodriguez
3. McGwire
4. Clemens

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I'll go with baseball-related scoundrels. My nominations are based on my extreme dislike for liars - these four epitomize lying and betrayal of their fans, and will always head up my own personal 'scoundrel' hall of fame, regardless of the results of Frank's poll (which is very interesting).

I had to choose four, as they are almost tied (in my mind, at least). There are others whose PED use was certainly as bad, but these were the poster boys in terms of their brazen public denial. Braun is #1 because he sacrificed a man who was simply doing his job.

Whoa, Braun didn't "sacrifice" anybody. Saying this shows a casual ignorance of the facts in this case, something a lot of people discussing this on the internet are guilty of because they took what ESPN, or Yahoo Sports printed in an article, and accepted it as fact without questioning the veracity of the information being presented (this is not in any way a knock on you personally, Scott). When the story broke, it was that "Braun is fighting a PED suspension." Then it was "Braun is fighting a suspension not for PEDs, but use of a banned substance." Then, it was "Braun took a banned substance to combat a STD." The sports media were in such a frenzy to break the story that they didn't care if there was a shred of truth in what they were printing. Hell, the whole story only broke because somebody decided that Braun's right to a confidential appeals process was less important than ratings for ESPN. What does that tell you about T.J. Quinn et all in the "Outside The Lines" reporting crew? Yahoo Sports wasn't much better. Jeff Passan, the idiot at Yahoo Sports with the hard on for Braun, has printed more BS than anybody I've ever seen. He wrote a story that Braun contacted three players, Matt Kemp, Troy Tulowitzki, and Joey Votto, asking them for public support, because, according to Passan, Braun said Dino Laurenzi Jr, the collector, was an anti-semitic Cubs fan. The very next day, both Tulowitzki and Votto went on record as saying that the conversations never happened, that the story was a complete fabrication. Votto even offered to make his phone records public to prove that there was no conversation. ESPN piggybacked the story, and when I contacted one of the writers at ESPN covering the story (I forget who, I'll have to look), he basically said "we're not responsible, as we're just printing a story done by Yahoo, and the responsibility falls to them. What a joke.

He lied about cheating, absolutely, and why he did it doesn't matter. As soon as he lied, he should have been suspended. Period. I don't know a single Brewers fan, myself included, who was not miffed when Braun lied about what he did. That he took a substance not on the approved list to expedite healing of a calf muscle injury that had been bothering him all year might have been misguided more than anything, but it was still breaking the rules, and lying to cover it up not only made matters worse, but it reflected poorly on the whole organization. But the fact remains that if the collector had done his job properly, there wouldn't be anything more to the story. But he didn't, and nothing Braun said in his press conference was either untrue, or below the belt. The handling of his sample was questionable, and it did raise valid concerns in the mind of his defense team. The guy had been collecting samples since testing began in MLB, and as somebody that routinely tested Brewer players at Miller Park, he knew where every Fed Ex location between the stadium and his home was located, including one that was open 24 hours, and just five minutes from the park. The last sample collection that day was made at 4:45 pm, and he left the ballpark a little after 5 pm. Laurenzi Jr could have dropped the samples at the 24 hour Fed Ex, as he was required to do per the joint agreement, and been on his way home. Instead he took Braun's sample, and the sample of three other teammates, to his house, where they remained out in the open for nearly two full days (44 hours). They were not secured. They were not refrigerated. And Braun's name was still affixed to the biological sample. The reason why it is vitally important for the collector to do his job properly is to make sure that the sample is not compromised, that there is no degradation of the sample, and that Braun's name is no longer connected to it. As soon as it is received by Fed Ex, a number is attached to the sample, and only the lab, which I believe is in Montreal, knows who the sample belongs to from that point. That didn't happen. The sample was left in a Tupperware container, on the counter top in his basement office, which he said was "sufficiently cool". When the sample was received by the lab, it was noted as intact. But therein lies the problem. A veteran collector, if he wanted to, would know how to mess with the pack if that was his intent (I know this for a fact because the wife of one of my best friends in college worked for a testing lab, and she is well versed in the protocol involved with drug testing). I'm not saying that happened here, and in fact, I am almost certain that it did not. But the fact that there was any chance it could have been immediately calls into question the integrity of the whole process, and that is why Braun's defense team had him say what he did.

Here's a transcript of the Ryan Braun press conference immediately after his suspension was overturned:

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/140333483.html

Here is what Braun said, the thing that everybody has been saying is Braun throwing the collector "under the bus."

"Why he didn’t bring it in, I don’t know. On the day that he did finally bring it in, FedEx opened at 7:30. Why didn’t he bring it in until 1:30? I can’t answer that question. Why was there zero documentation? What could have possibly happened to it during that 44-hour period? There were a lot of things that we learned about the collector, about the collection process, about the way that the entire thing worked that made us very concerned and very suspicious about what could have actually happened.

If you gave a urine sample at work, your livelihood, and the collector, instead of dropping it off where he was supposed to, took it home for two days, leaving it out in the open, not documenting what happened to the sample, and then waited 6 hours until after the drop off facility opened to finally take it in on Monday afternoon, would you be suspicious? What possible reason could the collector have for not doing his job as he was trained, and instructed to do? Look at Braun's verbiage in the same statement:

It states in the Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment program that all samples shall be taken immediately to FedEx on the day they’re collected absent unusual circumstances.

Has Dino Laurenzi Jr ever presented the reason why he didn't take the samples to Fed Ex? Was there an emergency?

Here's Laurenzi's statement:

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/76...yan-braun-case

"Given the lateness of the hour that I completed my collections, there was no FedEx office located within 50 miles of Miller Park that would ship packages that day or Sunday. Therefore, the earliest that the specimens could be shipped was Monday, October 3. In that circumstance, CDT has instructed collectors since I began in 2005 that they should safeguard the samples in their homes until FedEx is able to immediately ship the sample to the laboratory, rather than having the samples sit for one day or more at a local FedEx office. The protocol has been in place since 2005 when I started with CDT and there have been other occasions when I have had to store samples in my home for at least one day, all without incident.

Well, he said he took it home, as CDT instructed him. Funny, however, that is not what the JDA outlines as proper procedure:

XI. PROCEDURES AFTER COLLECTION

E. If the specimen is not immediately prepared for shipment, the Collector shall
ensure that it is appropriately safeguarded during temporary storage.

1. The Collector must keep the chain of custody intact.

2. The Collector must store the samples in a cool and secure location.


F. When all of the specimens have been collected at the collection site, the
Collector shall take the specimens in the appropriate packaging to a FedEx
Customer Service Center for shipment. The specimens cannot be placed in a FedEx Drop Box location.

That the Fed Ex locations could not ship on a Saturday is irrelevant. There was a Fed Ex location open until 7 pm, 5 miles from Miller Park, at Fed Ex Plaza in downtown Milwaukee on East Wisconsin Avenue, that accepted packages, including secured biological packs from MLB. He had 2 hours to drive 5 miles, and drop the container off at the secured facility as was required by his job. Yet he didn't do what was required.

That is why Braun said what he did in his press conference. And, by the way, that is a big part of why Braun and his team won the appeal of suspension, which had never happened before. And, that is also why MLB revamped the JDA with more stringent guidelines for collectors, in part.

Ryan Braun didn't "throw anybody under the bus." He didn't assail Laurenzi Jr, didn't sabotage his career. In fact, Braun and his fiancee met with Dino Laurenzi Jr and his wife, and had dinner with them. If everything is good between them, perhaps it's time to stop rehashing old memes that have been proven wildly inaccurate.

Please.

By the way, while ESPN and Yahoo Sports were doing everything they could to smear Ryan Braun's reputation (which actually DID happen, unlike the accusations about Braun's throwing Laurenzi Jr under the bus), they casually ignored all the things that Braun does to help the people of Milwaukee. The countless hours that Braun and his fiance (now wife) Larissa Frasier have given to charitable causes...that doesn't jive well with their "Ryan Braun is the devil" agenda.

[PM770]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

If you gave a urine sample at work, your livelihood, and the collector, instead of dropping it off where he was supposed to, took it home for two days, leaving it out in the open, not documenting what happened to the sample, and then waited 6 hours until after the drop off facility opened to finally take it in on Monday afternoon, would you be suspicious?

If I had taken the PED - which we now know Braun did - what would I have to be suspicious of?

He tested positive for a drug he was taking. I don't understand how there could be any true "suspicion" for foul play.

I understand trying to get out of the 50 game suspension and using the legal means he did, but this was dishonesty at least.

And saying "....things that we learned about the collector" is impugning his character, not matter how subtly.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Whoa, Braun didn't "sacrifice" anybody. Saying this shows a casual ignorance of the facts in this case, something a lot of people discussing this on the internet are guilty of because they took what ESPN, or Yahoo Sports printed in an article, and accepted it as fact without questioning the veracity of the information being presented (this is not in any way a knock on you personally, Scott).

That's a mouthful, Bill.

I did not need to, or desire to, do the research that you did, and the fact that I didn't, does not invalidate my statement. He was guilty, period, and he tried to push the focus onto someone who was NOT guilty. It was like getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar and arguing that your Mother was wearing the wrong pair of glasses when she saw you.

[Section103]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

Well I am glad I am not alone in believing slaughtering your 3 year old son, 6 year old daughter, and your spouse with an ax is a worse offense than using PEDs or being rude to fans.

The instance is, of course, worse than anything else listed here. But to me, the situation is far more sad and tragic than it is scandalous. The guy was very clearly not in his right mind and very far from it. We don't treat mental illness well today. I can only imagine how poorly it was handled then. I do fault the guy for not taking his meds (that's his responsibility) but somebody should have stepped in and institutionalized this guy way before anything like this happened. Its a failure on so many fronts.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Section103

The instance is, of course, worse than anything else listed here. But to me, the situation is far more sad and tragic than it is scandalous. The guy was very clearly not in his right mind and very far from it. We don't treat mental illness well today. I can only imagine how poorly it was handled then. I do fault the guy for not taking his meds (that's his responsibility) but somebody should have stepped in and institutionalized this guy way before anything like this happened. Its a failure on so many fronts.

What meds were available in the 1890s?

[Section103]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What meds were available in the 1890s?

Im no expert, to say the least, but bromides were what was prescribed for Bergen if we are to believe Wikipedia.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Section103

Im no expert, to say the least, but bromides were what was prescribed for Bergen if we are to believe Wikipedia.

Ah the good old days. I bet Burkett wrote a lot of those prescriptions in the day.