First Hall of Famer with a PED suspension?

[packs]

I brought up McGwire and Sosa in response to someone who suggested they get in first. It’s my opinion that McGwire and Sosa started the PED free fall. Bonds doesn’t hit 73 until after all the attention they got. The Mitchel Report comes into existence after. Balco is after. My opinions are in relation to modern PED use and the modern understanding of PEDs not greenies or any other antiquated method that’s not really in conversation today. That’s my opinion. You don’t have to share it and I’m at peace with that.

[nwobhm]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The point I always get vilified for, the same guys who think steroids should be punishable by death worship Mays, Aaron, and a whole generation of players who popped greenies. Yes I know there are differences, but even so...

….why do people believe that 50’s & 60’s players didn’t have access to steroids. Steroids have been around a long time….1930’s.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Jim65

The first I remember hearing steroids and baseball was Lenny Dykstra showing up in spring all bulked up 1989 or 1990. Everyone knew and just laughed it off. He was probably the biggest reason MLB banned steroids in 1991.

Hmmmm.... wasn't Canseco even before that? I remember Canseco flexing his muscles in the outflield as Boston fans screamed steroids and I thought it was even earlier but maybe not.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Hmmmm.... wasn't Canseco even before that? I remember Canseco flexing his muscles in the outflield as Boston fans screamed steroids and I thought it was even earlier but maybe not.

Might have been, I was talking about first I remember hearing about it. Lenny claimed in his book that he and Canseco were doing steroids before everyone else.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by nwobhm

….why do people believe that 50’s & 60’s players didn’t have access to steroids. Steroids have been around a long time….1930’s.

Is there an evidentiary basis of steroids being common in baseball in the 1930’s, 1950’s or 1960’s? What is the source for its usage during this period?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Might have been, I was talking about first I remember hearing about it. Lenny claimed in his book that he and Canseco were doing steroids before everyone else.

Whenever it was, it was a surreal, unforgettable scene.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by nwobhm

….why do people believe that 50’s & 60’s players didn’t have access to steroids. Steroids have been around a long time….1930’s.

Of course steroids were available but how does that prove that players actually took them? We know what players who take steroids look like, what players from the 1950's and 1960's had that look of being bulked up?

[Seven]

I've been refraining from responding, because I have what is deemed to be a little more of a controversial opinion on the matter, when it comes to Performance Enhancing Users getting into the Hall of Fame. To answer the original question, I think Alex Rodriguez ends up being the first one to get in, with an official PED suspension. He's rehabilitated his image enough, and he's involved with the game still as he's apart of media coverage.

Frankly guys like McGwire, Sosa, Palmerio, Bonds, Clemens, and Rodriguez, should all be in. Steroids, HGH, etc, are not magical drugs. There have been countless players that have taken PED's and their performance did not improve. You have to have more than a modicum of skill for them to be effective. Otherwise players like David Segui, or Jason Grimsley or Jeremy Giambi would've become world beaters.

Furthermore, if you're of the opinion that one instance of PED usage automatically eliminates you from induction to the Hall of Fame, than half of the Hall would not be members. You cannot say "well Amphetamines' usage is okay, but Anabolic Steroids are not." A PED is a PED

Gossage, Mantle, Koufax, Mays, Aaron, Schmidt, and Stargell at one point, used some sort of substance whether it was a steroid, an amphetamine or straight up abusing Painkillers in the case of Koufax. Pud Galvin, and Babe Ruth used Animal Testosterone at various points in their life. Even if it was one instance, why are any of those above acceptable?

I don't think it's a case of "whataboutism" the owners certainly had no problem with Bonds roiding up and launching baseballs into the stratosphere, because it allowed them to line their pockets with more money. I certainly enjoyed watching him do it. If you want to put an asterisk next to their numbers, then by all means do so. But the Baseball Hall of Fame is a museum that recognizes the history and greatness of the game, scars included. The contributions of these men, to the game of baseball were important, they happened, and they should be recognized, and if it's with an asterisk, so be it.

It's a little ridiculous to me that the player with the most MVP's, and a slew of offensive records, along with the pitcher with the most Cy Youngs, are both not in the Hall of Fame. I'll end my rant here. Thank you for reading.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Seven

I've been refraining from responding, because I have what is deemed to be a little more of a controversial opinion on the matter, when it comes to Performance Enhancing Users getting into the Hall of Fame. To answer the original question, I think Alex Rodriguez ends up being the first one to get in, with an official PED suspension. He's rehabilitated his image enough, and he's involved with the game still as he's apart of media coverage.



Frankly guys like McGwire, Sosa, Palmerio, Bonds, Clemens, and Rodriguez, should all be in. Steroids, HGH, etc, are not magical drugs. There have been countless players that have taken PED's and their performance did not improve. You have to have more than a modicum of skill for them to be effective. Otherwise players like David Segui, or Jason Grimsley or Jeremy Giambi would've become world beaters.



Furthermore, if you're of the opinion that one instance of PED usage automatically eliminates you from induction to the Hall of Fame, than half of the Hall would not be members. You cannot say "well Amphetamines' usage is okay, but Anabolic Steroids are not." A PED is a PED



Gossage, Mantle, Koufax, Mays, Aaron, Schmidt, and Stargell at one point, used some sort of substance whether it was a steroid, an amphetamine or straight up abusing Painkillers in the case of Koufax. Pud Galvin, and Babe Ruth used Animal Testosterone at various points in their life. Even if it was one instance, why are any of those above acceptable?



I don't think it's a case of "whataboutism" the owners certainly had no problem with Bonds roiding up and launching baseballs into the stratosphere, because it allowed them to line their pockets with more money. I certainly enjoyed watching him do it. If you want to put an asterisk next to their numbers, then by all means do so. But the Baseball Hall of Fame is a museum that recognizes the history and greatness of the game, scars included. The contributions of these men, to the game of baseball were important, they happened, and they should be recognized, and if it's with an asterisk, so be it.



It's a little ridiculous to me that the player with the most MVP's, and a slew of offensive records, along with the pitcher with the most Cy Youngs, are both not in the Hall of Fame. I'll end my rant here. Thank you for reading.

I second your opinion. Well said.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[todeen]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Of course steroids were available but how does that prove that players actually took them? We know what players who take steroids look like, what players from the 1950's and 1960's had that look of being bulked up?

A person can take steroids without bulking up. If that was the case every asthma kid would be shredded. The combination of steroids and modern weight room training is what has created the "ripped" and bulged look. 50s and 60s players trained differently and it resulted in a different physique.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[nwobhm]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Of course steroids were available but how does that prove that players actually took them? We know what players who take steroids look like, what players from the 1950's and 1960's had that look of being bulked up?

We know what steroid users look like that use it specifically to maintain an extra 25lbs of muscle mass and little more. There are other nuances that can be identified visually to the experienced….but most would be oblivious.

If a person has an injury that kept them from the gym for 6 months a steroid cycle would allow them to get 6 months of atrophy back in a few weeks. No one would notice.

Think of steroids as a recovery tool.

[steve B]

PEDs were an open book even pre-1900.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...l%20testicles.

"Galvin, however, is also known for being the first Major Leaguer ever to publicly admit using performance-enhancing drugs.

During the 1889 season, Galvin openly used the Brown-Séquard elixir, an injectable substance derived from testosterone from animal testicles. It wasn’t the same as an anabolic steroid (which had not been invented yet), but is considered a steroid precursor."

Back then the press was apparently ok with it.

Babe Ruths "bad hot dogs" episode is possibly related to a shot of a similar elixir made from sheep testicles (which was by many accounts both wildly ineffective and unsafe. ) Yes, there's claims of other adult illnesses, so far removed it's difficult to tell.

I don't think we can put all the blame on the first generation to try things that were actually effective. Sort of. I doubt I could hit a real fastball even if I got several times stronger... It would probably make a good ballplayer better.

Someone I knew who had been around PEDs in different sports said they weren't what made you stronger, but did let anyone train 7 days a week instead of a more traditional day "on" day "off" program.
Most of it helped heal minor injuries much faster.

[rand1com]

Originally Posted by jabiloxi

I think McGwire and Sosa will get in 1st. It would be great to see. They basically saved baseball in 1998 and have been treated like villains since the Steroid scandal. Such a shame.

Never do those two cheaters get in the HOF.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by jayshum

I don't see the writers voting in A Rod and given what happened with Bonds and Clemens with the veteran's committee, that seems unlikely for A Rod as well.

I think ARod has a decent chance to get elected by the writers. I don't see any steroid user ever get in by the Veterans committee. Former players who were cheated by steroid users make up a lot of the membership of the Veterans committees. Less than 4 votes for Bonds and Clemens while they were at 65%+ on the writers ballots.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

I think ARod has a decent chance to get elected by the writers. I don't see any steroid user ever get in by the Veterans committee. Former players who were cheated by steroid users make up a lot of the membership of the Veterans committees. Less than 4 votes for Bonds and Clemens while they were at 65%+ on the writers ballots.

I think they were afraid of Frank Thomas.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by rats60

I think ARod has a decent chance to get elected by the writers. I don't see any steroid user ever get in by the Veterans committee. Former players who were cheated by steroid users make up a lot of the membership of the Veterans committees. Less than 4 votes for Bonds and Clemens while they were at 65%+ on the writers ballots.

While the opinion of new BBWAA voters toward PED usage may be different from writers that lived through it, ARod was at 35% his first 2 years on the ballot so he has a lot of votes he needs to pick up in the next 8 years to get voted in. Also, I have read many writers who indicate that they distinguish between the time before and after testing was implemented and whether a player was suspended or failed a test. While that can change over time, it also doesn't help ARod.