First Hall of Famer with a PED suspension?

[jayshum]

So far, no one who has been suspended for PEDs has been voted into the Hall of Fame. Some writers say they will not vote for anyone who was suspended.
Who will be the first player with a PED suspension to get voted into the Hall of Fame?

[butchie_t]

With any luck at all......none of them, ever.

[BobC]

Interesting question. Though I have no idea myself, and am not going to hazard a guess, I've always thought Mark McGwire may likely be the first baseball player who, though never formally suspended for steroid use by MLB, had admitted to using what were at one time legal, over-the-counter supplements/steroids that were later banned. He seemed to be one of those that was somewhat honest and forthright when asked, does not have a bad history with baseball writers and others in the sport, and was well enough liked and respected to have also spent over a decade as an MLB coach after retiring as a player, primarily as a hitting coach, for various MLB teams as well.

When he first came up to the majors, McGwire was ROY and led MLB in HRs, and supposedly didn't start with the supplements/steroids till a couple years or so after his rookie season. And based on the notions/beliefs of many that during these times upwards of half, or more, of all MLB players were taking some form of steroids or supplements, at some point one has to think that maybe it will not be held so much against the better players of this specific time period who have HOF aspirations, as they were acting like most every other MLB player was at the time, but still exceedingly much better than the rest of them. Whether as fans and onlookers who hated/accepted it or not, steroid use was prevalent in MLB, and MLB choose to look the other way for quite a long time. It comes across as almost a retroactive punishment for something that originally wasn't considered wrong. So after a period of time, I can eventually see some acceptance of these steroid era superstars, however begrudgingly, and have always thought McGwire may be the one to lead the way to HOF induction due to his overall acceptance and likability with everyone out there. Time will tell.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by BobC

Interesting question. Though I have no idea myself, and am not going to hazard a guess, I've always thought Mark McGwire may likely be the first baseball player who, though never formally suspended for steroid use by MLB, had admitted to using what were at one time legal, over-the-counter supplements/steroids that were later banned. He seemed to be one of those that was somewhat honest and forthright when asked, does not have a bad history with baseball writers and others in the sport, and was well enough liked and respected to have also spent over a decade as an MLB coach after retiring as a player, primarily as a hitting coach, for various MLB teams as well.

When he first came up to the majors, McGwire was ROY and led MLB in HRs, and supposedly didn't start with the supplements/steroids till a couple years or so after his rookie season. And based on the notions/beliefs of many that during these times upwards of half, or more, of all MLB players were taking some form of steroids or supplements, at some point one has to think that maybe it will not be held so much against the better players of this specific time period who have HOF aspirations, as they were acting like most every other MLB player was at the time, but still exceedingly much better than the rest of them. Whether as fans and onlookers who hated/accepted it or not, steroid use was prevalent in MLB, and MLB choose to look the other way for quite a long time. It comes across as almost a retroactive punishment for something that originally wasn't considered wrong. So after a period of time, I can eventually see some acceptance of these steroid era superstars, however begrudgingly, and have always thought McGwire may be the one to lead the way to HOF induction due to his overall acceptance and likability with everyone out there. Time will tell.

I guess some would argue that Ortiz tested positive and was voted in, but there is some uncertainty about his test since it was part of the initial survey testing. I thought about including guys that never had a positive test or suspension in the poll, but I decided not to since I have read comments from a lot of writers who vote and distinguish between before and after the start of testing for how they decide who they will vote for. McGwire, Clemens, Bonds and Sosa are all in the pre-testing group but who most are pretty sure were using PEDs. Then there are the guys who are already in that people are suspicious of like Piazza, Bagwell and Pudge.

I don't think anyone currently on the ballot that has a positive test gets voted in by the writers but I do think Tatis has a chance if he puts up a great career and doesn't get suspended again so that's who I voted for.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by jayshum

I guess some would argue that Ortiz tested positive and was voted in, but there is some uncertainty about his test since it was part of the initial survey testing. I thought about including guys that never had a positive test or suspension in the poll, but I decided not to since I have read comments from a lot of writers who vote and distinguish between before and after the start of testing for how they decide who they will vote for. McGwire, Clemens, Bonds and Sosa are all in the pre-testing group but who most are pretty sure were using PEDs. Then there are the guys who are already in that people are suspicious of like Piazza, Bagwell and Pudge.

I don't think anyone currently on the ballot that has a positive test gets voted in by the writers but I do think Tatis has a chance if he puts up a great career and doesn't get suspended again so that's who I voted for.

I know Jay, very confusing, and not sure exactly what everyone with a HOF vote may or may not be thinking. McGwire openly admitted using Androstenedione, when it was not yet formally banned, and at the time was still an over-the-counter supplement that any one of us could easily, and legally, go and buy at a lot of different retail outlets. Plus, many of the other players you mentioned, like Bonds and Clemens, were not personally liked very much at all by sportswriters, other players, and most fans, unlike McGwire is/was. Most people think of McGwire as a much better overall person, which I believe means a lot for HOF induction in regard to PED users!

Sosa is kind of a conundrum as I always thought of him as pretty well liked as well. But unlike McGwire, when his attorney went before Congress in 2005 to testify for him, he stated he had never taken any illegal PEDs during his playing career and was clean. And then later on in 2009 the story was leaked and first reported in the New York Times that Sosa was included on a list of players that had actually tested positive for using PEDs back in 2003. So in other words, he had actually lied to Congress. I'm guessing that, and the fact he hasn't been involved with MLB since finally retiring in 2009, as well as no longer living in the U.S. since, has worked against him.

So in my mind, maybe once the "public" can forgive and look past McGwire's use of PEDs and give him an honest chance for HOF induction, I think he'll get in. And then sometime after that, the others mentioned may finally start to be given a chance for their own HOF induction.

However, had A-Rod not split from JLo, I would amend my guess and say that A-Rod would likely be the first of the known PED users to get into the HOF. Not because of his baseball record and achievements, but because he was with JLo. All the women out there love JLo, and the men who would be voting for who gets into the HOF probably wouldn't have liked having to sleep on the couch all the time, and/or having wives/girlfriends with constant headaches.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by BobC

I know Jay, very confusing, and not sure exactly what everyone with a HOF vote may or may not be thinking. McGwire openly admitted using Androstenedione, when it was not yet formally banned, and at the time was still an over-the-counter supplement that any one of us could easily, and legally, go and buy at a lot of different retail outlets. Plus, many of the other players you mentioned, like Bonds and Clemens, were not personally liked very much at all by sportswriters, other players, and most fans, unlike McGwire is/was. Most people think of McGwire as a much better overall person, which I believe means a lot for HOF induction in regard to PED users!

Sosa is kind of a conundrum as I always thought of him as pretty well liked as well. But unlike McGwire, when his attorney went before Congress in 2005 to testify for him, he stated he had never taken any illegal PEDs during his playing career and was clean. And then later on in 2009 the story was leaked and first reported in the New York Times that Sosa was included on a list of players that had actually tested positive for using PEDs back in 2003. So in other words, he had actually lied to Congress. I'm guessing that, and the fact he hasn't been involved with MLB since finally retiring in 2009, as well as no longer living in the U.S. since, has worked against him.

So in my mind, maybe once the "public" can forgive and look past McGwire's use of PEDs and give him an honest chance for HOF induction, I think he'll get in. And then sometime after that, the others mentioned may finally start to be given a chance for their own HOF induction.

However, had A-Rod not split from JLo, I would amend my guess and say that A-Rod would likely be the first of the known PED users to get into the HOF. Not because of his baseball record and achievements, but because he was with JLo. All the women out there love JLo, and the men who would be voting for who gets into the HOF probably wouldn't have liked having to sleep on the couch all the time, and/or having wives/girlfriends with constant headaches.

I never thought much about the possible JLo effect on voting for A Rod. I do think that him announcing games on ESPN is helping him with his image even though I think he's a terrible announcer and I can't stand listening to him. I still think he doesn't get voted in by the writers because of the length of his suspension and how long he was apparently using PEDs for.

[BobC]

.

[mrreality68]

I selected other because I believe it will be none of them

[Peter_Spaeth]

A Rod maybe.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by BobC

Interesting question. Though I have no idea myself, and am not going to hazard a guess, I've always thought Mark McGwire may likely be the first baseball player who, though never formally suspended for steroid use by MLB, had admitted to using what were at one time legal, over-the-counter supplements/steroids that were later banned. He seemed to be one of those that was somewhat honest and forthright when asked, does not have a bad history with baseball writers and others in the sport, and was well enough liked and respected to have also spent over a decade as an MLB coach after retiring as a player, primarily as a hitting coach, for various MLB teams as well.

When he first came up to the majors, McGwire was ROY and led MLB in HRs, and supposedly didn't start with the supplements/steroids till a couple years or so after his rookie season. And based on the notions/beliefs of many that during these times upwards of half, or more, of all MLB players were taking some form of steroids or supplements, at some point one has to think that maybe it will not be held so much against the better players of this specific time period who have HOF aspirations, as they were acting like most every other MLB player was at the time, but still exceedingly much better than the rest of them. Whether as fans and onlookers who hated/accepted it or not, steroid use was prevalent in MLB, and MLB choose to look the other way for quite a long time. It comes across as almost a retroactive punishment for something that originally wasn't considered wrong. So after a period of time, I can eventually see some acceptance of these steroid era superstars, however begrudgingly, and have always thought McGwire may be the one to lead the way to HOF induction due to his overall acceptance and likability with everyone out there. Time will tell.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

A Rod maybe.

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.

[G1911]

Whenever a player as popular as Ortiz is with the writers comes around, gets suspended for steroids, and the writers decide to chuck out their informal rule to vote in the guy they like.

[Peter_Spaeth]

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.

Well, you're projecting Tatis 25 or so years from now. A lot can change in that many years, and maybe 10. 15, 20 years from now, but before Tatis could be eligible if his career even pans out, things will be different. I think if that happens, ARod is the most likely to break the barrier, as he isn't I don't think as hated as Bonds and Clemens.

[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.

[Jim65]

These players all have big problems. Some have multiple steroids violations (Manny, Braun, ARod, Cano) Some are just not HOF players (Colon, Tejada, Cruz) voters can't get past Palmeiro's arrogant finger pointing, and Tatis is way too far away to judge.

I feel that since a known cheater is already in (Ortiz) and younger sportswriters coming in, the attitudes about steroids will likely change in the future, so I voted ARod.

[todeen]

I support inclusion of PED users. If Bud Selig can be included in the hall for his work as Commissioner, overseeing the PED era, and profiting from it, than it is complete hypocrisy to exclude the players that earned him his wealth. He represented the owners who wanted the PED money to continue to roll in. Not until public opinion changed, and profits were endangered, did MLB advocate for a steroid policy.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk