Dick Allen Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Bonds was probably on a HOF track before he started bulking up. I could understand his election, plus his numbers, even when giving the juice some credit were beyond amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 26, 2012 -> 08:50 AM) Bonds was probably on a HOF track before he started bulking up. I could understand his election, plus his numbers, even when giving the juice some credit were beyond amazing. In 2004, he had a 1.422 OPS, with a .609 on-base %. If he got 5 plate appearances a game, he would usually reach base at least 3 times, that's ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 4, 2012 -> 09:21 PM) As anti as I am about them getting in, I would like to see a display of the steroid era or even expanded to notorious players. Don't ignore it, acknowledge it. Mention the players and their accomplishments. It would be an exhibit, but the players would not be HoF members. Would the pro Rose and Bond find that acceptable? I always thought the media gets a pass, well because obviously they're the ones telling the story. There were so many obvious signs that something was going down and for the most part it was just ignored or missed, either option is poor journalism IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Vote for no one? You can't even vote for Tim Raines or Jack Morris? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 Well, to be fair, Jack Morris isn't worthy of being in the Hall of Fame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 26, 2012 -> 09:50 AM) Bonds was probably on a HOF track before he started bulking up. I could understand his election, plus his numbers, even when giving the juice some credit were beyond amazing. The thing I'll always say...how do we know he wasn't on something to help him with recovery/workouts, maybe even just in the offseason, all the way back to the 1980's? His body might have exploded when he got on "The really hard stuff", but no one can prove to me that he was clean when he was on that HOF path from college on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 26, 2012 -> 03:38 PM) The thing I'll always say...how do we know he wasn't on something to help him with recovery/workouts, maybe even just in the offseason, all the way back to the 1980's? His body might have exploded when he got on "The really hard stuff", but no one can prove to me that he was clean when he was on that HOF path from college on. The same thing can be said about every eligible player. There's no proof that any of them were clean. It's not like baseball cared to test them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 26, 2012 Share Posted December 26, 2012 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 26, 2012 -> 05:10 PM) The same thing can be said about every eligible player. There's no proof that any of them were clean. It's not like baseball cared to test them. But I can say..."Once a cheater...always a cheater". And that not really that unreasonable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Dec 26, 2012 -> 09:33 AM) I always thought the media gets a pass, well because obviously they're the ones telling the story. There were so many obvious signs that something was going down and for the most part it was just ignored or missed, either option is poor journalism IMO. Interesting. That article on the previous page had a line in it saying that he was "angry it US so long to shine a light on it." (Emphasis mine) Yet, he didn't express anger at the media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 31, 2012 Author Share Posted December 31, 2012 A different spin on the "morality" clause. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/phillie...ame-voting.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted December 31, 2012 Share Posted December 31, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2012 -> 08:30 AM) A different spin on the "morality" clause. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/phillie...ame-voting.html Wow. Great article. The conclusion is 180 degrees against what I think should happen but what a great argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOXOBAMA Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 My ballot would've Bonds, Piazza, Clemens, and Raines making the HOF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 (edited) Wednesday is going to be an embarrassing day for the Hall I think. Based on some of the exit polling, it's highly unlikely anyone gets in this year. They're going to have to do one of two things with the voting right away: 1) Let the writers vote for anyone on the ballot (unlimited instead of 10) or 2) Stop letting them vote. You can't have all of these slam dunk choices finish with 50-60%, while adding Maddux, Glavine, Thomas, Kent, and Mussina next year. The process is broken, and it has to change right away. Edited January 7, 2013 by flavum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 7, 2013 Author Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 12:45 PM) Wednesday is going to be an embarrassing day for the Hall I think. Based on some of the exit polling, it's highly unlikely anyone gets in this year. They're going to have to do one of two things with the voting right away: 1) Let the writers vote for anyone on the ballot (unlimited instead of 10) 2) Stop letting them vote. You can't have all of these slam dunk choices finish with 50-60% every year, while adding Maddux, Glavine, Thomas, Kent, and Mussina next year. The process is broken, and it has to change right away. There needs to be an embarrassment. Baseball deserves it for trying to ignore what happened over the last 20-30 years and pretending it never happened. There are guys I want to see get in, but I am OK with them missing out if it forces baseball to give some public guidance here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 12:47 PM) There needs to be an embarrassment. Baseball deserves it for trying to ignore what happened over the last 20-30 years and pretending it never happened. There are guys I want to see get in, but I am OK with them missing out if it forces baseball to give some public guidance here. Is the Hall of Fame a baseball entity or run by the NBWA. I love how people think baseball is supposed to be so pure while every other sport does little to monitor the things baseball gets black eyes for. The NHL, NBA or NFL are not held to a standard near MLB when it comes to drug testing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 7, 2013 Author Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 01:06 PM) Is the Hall of Fame a baseball entity or run by the NBWA. I love how people think baseball is supposed to be so pure while every other sport does little to monitor the things baseball gets black eyes for. The NHL, NBA or NFL are not held to a standard near MLB when it comes to drug testing. Honestly I don't care about the other sports nearly as much as I care about baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 02:06 PM) Is the Hall of Fame a baseball entity or run by the NBWA. I love how people think baseball is supposed to be so pure while every other sport does little to monitor the things baseball gets black eyes for. The NHL, NBA or NFL are not held to a standard near MLB when it comes to drug testing. The National baseball Hall of Fame and Museum is an independent entity. It contracts with the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) to obtain membership votes. They set their own rules, so the bans on admission of people banned by baseball is their choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 12:47 PM) There needs to be an embarrassment. Baseball deserves it for trying to ignore what happened over the last 20-30 years and pretending it never happened. There are guys I want to see get in, but I am OK with them missing out if it forces baseball to give some public guidance here. Yeah, it's one of those things where they just have to let the best players in and let the people make up their own minds. It's common sense that even if they put in players that weren't caught, some of them will get in. Say Piazza, Bagwell, and Biggio get in in a few years. Then the list of 104 comes out down the line and one or more of them were on the list. How do you kick guys out of the Hall? And it's very possible there are players already in the Hall that took the modern PEDs anyway. It's just a mess. The Hall voting process will have to change in the next couple years for sure, because it should be about the players getting in and not about who voted for whom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 7, 2013 Author Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 01:41 PM) Yeah, it's one of those things where they just have to let the best players in and let the people make up their own minds. It's common sense that even if they put in players that weren't caught, some of them will get in. Say Piazza, Bagwell, and Biggio get in in a few years. Then the list of 104 comes out down the line and one or more of them were on the list. How do you kick guys out of the Hall? And it's very possible there are players already in the Hall that took the modern PEDs anyway. It's just a mess. The Hall voting process will have to change in the next couple years for sure, because it should be about the players getting in and not about who voted for whom. That whole post is up for debate. There is an ethics part of the Hall of Fame process. Why should that be ignored? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 01:44 PM) That whole post is up for debate. There is an ethics part of the Hall of Fame process. Why should that be ignored? The "character clause" is there, but even though I don't personally equate spitballs/corked bats/amphetamines with anabolic steroids, the Hall already has players that are less than great people in there. Even though I like the Hall debates, this isn't life and death, and the Hall of Fame isn't some Heaven on Earth either. It's just a museum. So I think they should just let the best players of each era in, and let the people make up their minds. If that means putting Joe Jackson and Pete Rose in too, fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 01:44 PM) That whole post is up for debate. There is an ethics part of the Hall of Fame process. Why should that be ignored? Don Drysdale & Gaylord Perry openly cheated, yet ethics were ignored with their election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 04:24 PM) Don Drysdale & Gaylord Perry openly cheated, yet ethics were ignored with their election. The voters change with time, so IMO, the voters have a right to change how they evaluate things with time. There's no absolute standard for admission into the HOF anyway. It's a judgment call about how big what they were caught doing was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 7, 2013 Author Share Posted January 7, 2013 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 03:24 PM) Don Drysdale & Gaylord Perry openly cheated, yet ethics were ignored with their election. I don't know Drysdale, but I probably wouldn't have voted for Perry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 8, 2013 Author Share Posted January 8, 2013 Jon Heyman @JonHeymanCBS interesting note in @DKnobler column. if elected, jack morris would be 1st AL only pitcher with whole career in DH era Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lasttriptotulsa Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 7, 2013 -> 03:24 PM) Don Drysdale & Gaylord Perry openly cheated, yet ethics were ignored with their election. My opinion on this has always been "cheating" between the lines is "ok", cheating outside the lines is not. The players can police the game themselves when its done between the lines (HBP, hard slides, etc.) but how do players stop others from using steroids? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.