state of hockey
He fixes the cable?
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
Big fan of the GRIT+.
It's all about VORP, OPS+, TRON, and GRIT.
Big fan of the GRIT+.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
- Thread starter GreatLakerMohawk
- Start date
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
Really close to my point. Unless it was specifically against the rules of baseball at that time, one cannot take away from that player due to that. Now, one can say that if a player was busted breaking the rules later on he shouldn't be eligible, that's fine with me, and I'd agree (see: Pete Rose).
Really close to my point. Unless it was specifically against the rules of baseball at that time, one cannot take away from that player due to that. Now, one can say that if a player was busted breaking the rules later on he shouldn't be eligible, that's fine with me, and I'd agree (see: Pete Rose).
state of hockey
He fixes the cable?
Hammer
We'll be back.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
Pete Rose is another discussion, maybe for later today.
As for the steriods, I'd like to see a few of these guys end up in Cooperstown, just as a reminder of what really went on during this time period. MLB knew about the 'roids, and did nothing to try to stop it until everyone raised holy hell about it. Now baseball's got to wear it. Put Bonds in. Same with Clemens and Palmeiro, and if the numbers suit you, Sosa as well.
Pete Rose is another discussion, maybe for later today.
As for the steriods, I'd like to see a few of these guys end up in Cooperstown, just as a reminder of what really went on during this time period. MLB knew about the 'roids, and did nothing to try to stop it until everyone raised holy hell about it. Now baseball's got to wear it. Put Bonds in. Same with Clemens and Palmeiro, and if the numbers suit you, Sosa as well.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
Have to disagree here. With the ruling coming down in '91, and Sosa, Bonds, and Palmeiro known cheaters, they're banned. Bonds is a tough one because you can make a good argument he would have made the Hall without roids, but there should be some consequences to cheating.
McGwire is banned not for andro or whatever he took that was legal at the time, but for the illegal stuff he took and won't address now.
Clemens you let in because there's no actual evidence, be it a failed test or paper trail, to implicate him. I don't want to conduct a witch hunt here. The people who are excluded are those who have been proven to be cheaters, not those who are only suspected of doing so. Unfortunately, that means some who got away with it will get in, but I'm adament that the Sosa's of the world stay out. It does a great disservice to a guy like Griffey Jr who from what we can tell hasn't cheated. Take the juicers of his era out (McGwire, Sosa, Bonds, Manny, etc) and he stands alone as the only 600 HR hitter of his time and one of the 10 greatest players in baseball history. Add the juicers back in and he's one of a half dozen guys putting up big #'s during his career.
Have to disagree here. With the ruling coming down in '91, and Sosa, Bonds, and Palmeiro known cheaters, they're banned. Bonds is a tough one because you can make a good argument he would have made the Hall without roids, but there should be some consequences to cheating.
McGwire is banned not for andro or whatever he took that was legal at the time, but for the illegal stuff he took and won't address now.
Clemens you let in because there's no actual evidence, be it a failed test or paper trail, to implicate him. I don't want to conduct a witch hunt here. The people who are excluded are those who have been proven to be cheaters, not those who are only suspected of doing so. Unfortunately, that means some who got away with it will get in, but I'm adament that the Sosa's of the world stay out. It does a great disservice to a guy like Griffey Jr who from what we can tell hasn't cheated. Take the juicers of his era out (McGwire, Sosa, Bonds, Manny, etc) and he stands alone as the only 600 HR hitter of his time and one of the 10 greatest players in baseball history. Add the juicers back in and he's one of a half dozen guys putting up big #'s during his career.
Hammer
We'll be back.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
I don't agree. The only ones who are truly banned are those who are baseball's permanently ineligible list (for sake of this discussion, this reads: Joe Jackson and Pete Rose). The men in our discussion were never even suspended, with the obvious exception of Palmeiro. Also mix in the fact that MLB was an accomplice in the players' activities, and they've got to wear it and start preparing some bronze busts. And if you don't think that the management of MLB knew what was going on, then you also believe that Puff the Magic Dragon was a documentary.
I don't agree. The only ones who are truly banned are those who are baseball's permanently ineligible list (for sake of this discussion, this reads: Joe Jackson and Pete Rose). The men in our discussion were never even suspended, with the obvious exception of Palmeiro. Also mix in the fact that MLB was an accomplice in the players' activities, and they've got to wear it and start preparing some bronze busts. And if you don't think that the management of MLB knew what was going on, then you also believe that Puff the Magic Dragon was a documentary.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
This.
Hammer, I get what you're saying, and yeah, there's the rub. The NFL turned a blind eye, too, and they got ripped for it. Imagine MLB taking a really big first step and doing something like this? I doubt it will ever happen, but that would really make a statement about PEDs and such.
This.
Hammer, I get what you're saying, and yeah, there's the rub. The NFL turned a blind eye, too, and they got ripped for it. Imagine MLB taking a really big first step and doing something like this? I doubt it will ever happen, but that would really make a statement about PEDs and such.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
What ruling are you referring to from 1991? That steroids were banned? That doesn't mean the players are ineligible for the Hall - I believe they have to be SPECIFICALLY on the "banned from baseball" list. Considering all those guys were allowed to play, they're not banned from anything.
And how often does one have to use steroids to be considered a cheater? Is A-Rod a cheater? Should they be more lenient and say if you get caught more than once, you're banned? I don't remember Sosa officially getting caught (but it was very easy to see the change in his body type, because he was so skinny before), but I really don't think he has to worry about the Hall anyway.
I don't think, if you're going to make exceptions, that they should be made based on talent. Either all the known cheaters get put on the ineligible list (and the definition of "known cheater" is certainly debatable), or none of them do. Do positive tests without suspensions count? Or do you have to serve a suspension? If so, then why not include anything a player gets suspended for? It's a slippery slope.
What ruling are you referring to from 1991? That steroids were banned? That doesn't mean the players are ineligible for the Hall - I believe they have to be SPECIFICALLY on the "banned from baseball" list. Considering all those guys were allowed to play, they're not banned from anything.
And how often does one have to use steroids to be considered a cheater? Is A-Rod a cheater? Should they be more lenient and say if you get caught more than once, you're banned? I don't remember Sosa officially getting caught (but it was very easy to see the change in his body type, because he was so skinny before), but I really don't think he has to worry about the Hall anyway.
I don't think, if you're going to make exceptions, that they should be made based on talent. Either all the known cheaters get put on the ineligible list (and the definition of "known cheater" is certainly debatable), or none of them do. Do positive tests without suspensions count? Or do you have to serve a suspension? If so, then why not include anything a player gets suspended for? It's a slippery slope.
Last edited:
Hammer
We'll be back.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
One more thing. MLB doesn't have a **** thing to do with the Hall of Fame. The voters on the main HOF ballot are from the Base Ball Writers Association of America. The same BBWAA who also knew what was going on and swallowed their keyboards.
MLB knew what was going on and did absolutly nothing to stop it, except that they paid some lip service. By the time Congress was ready to hammer their rear ends over it, it was too late, the big numbers were already on the board, and the fire department got called 2 days after the house burned to the ground. Look at the implementation of the policy. Oh, we'll just randomly test over a year, with no penalty, and then if enough guys test positive, we'll put a real policy in place. They sent a message to the players, in bright flashing neon lights, that stated "HEY!! YOU GOT A YEAR TO GET OFF THE STEROIDS!!!" And the only reason they did it is because Congress was about to do it for them.
Baseball wasn't serious about stopping the use of PED's. If the truth were to be known, they probably still aren't serious today. They'd rather sit back and count the money while McGwire, Bonds and Sosa round the bases with the needles still hanging out of their asses. Now they've got to acknowledge it and put the plaques up. After all, their (in)actions said that it was okay.
One more thing. MLB doesn't have a **** thing to do with the Hall of Fame. The voters on the main HOF ballot are from the Base Ball Writers Association of America. The same BBWAA who also knew what was going on and swallowed their keyboards.
MLB knew what was going on and did absolutly nothing to stop it, except that they paid some lip service. By the time Congress was ready to hammer their rear ends over it, it was too late, the big numbers were already on the board, and the fire department got called 2 days after the house burned to the ground. Look at the implementation of the policy. Oh, we'll just randomly test over a year, with no penalty, and then if enough guys test positive, we'll put a real policy in place. They sent a message to the players, in bright flashing neon lights, that stated "HEY!! YOU GOT A YEAR TO GET OFF THE STEROIDS!!!" And the only reason they did it is because Congress was about to do it for them.
Baseball wasn't serious about stopping the use of PED's. If the truth were to be known, they probably still aren't serious today. They'd rather sit back and count the money while McGwire, Bonds and Sosa round the bases with the needles still hanging out of their asses. Now they've got to acknowledge it and put the plaques up. After all, their (in)actions said that it was okay.
Last edited:
Hammer
We'll be back.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
Remember, two different entities. The Hall of Fame does not fall under the jurisdiction of Major League Baseball. The BBWAA controls the HOF. The BBWAA could tell MLB to go get screwed tomorrow if they wanted to. Of course, this is the same group of knuckleheads who would likely vote Joe Jackson and the rest of the Black Sox into the Hall, even though they THREW A ****ING WORLD SERIES, and deny Barry Bonds, even though he was never so much as suspended. Even though they swallowed their keyboards until the middle of 1998 and a certain record was about to be broken....
Remember, two different entities. The Hall of Fame does not fall under the jurisdiction of Major League Baseball. The BBWAA controls the HOF. The BBWAA could tell MLB to go get screwed tomorrow if they wanted to. Of course, this is the same group of knuckleheads who would likely vote Joe Jackson and the rest of the Black Sox into the Hall, even though they THREW A ****ING WORLD SERIES, and deny Barry Bonds, even though he was never so much as suspended. Even though they swallowed their keyboards until the middle of 1998 and a certain record was about to be broken....
Last edited:
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
The Hall of Fame did vote to exclude banned players, though. But yeah, they could change their minds if they wanted to, and let those guys in without MLB approval. So with Brent's idea, they'd just have to call it "banned from baseball" instead of "HOF ineligible" and they could do it - but it doesn't guarantee they will never be in the Hall.
Maybe the answer is to put test results on Hall of Fame plaques, if there's factual evidence.
interesting - list of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_Major_League_Baseball_people">banned people</a> from wiki - includes people who were reinstated.
The Hall of Fame did vote to exclude banned players, though. But yeah, they could change their minds if they wanted to, and let those guys in without MLB approval. So with Brent's idea, they'd just have to call it "banned from baseball" instead of "HOF ineligible" and they could do it - but it doesn't guarantee they will never be in the Hall.
Maybe the answer is to put test results on Hall of Fame plaques, if there's factual evidence.
interesting - list of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_Major_League_Baseball_people">banned people</a> from wiki - includes people who were reinstated.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
Exactly. The HOF could make their own standards, then. Won't happen, but that'd be really good.
The Hall of Fame did vote to exclude banned players, though. But yeah, they could change their minds if they wanted to, and let those guys in without MLB approval. So with Brent's idea, they'd just have to call it "banned from baseball" instead of "HOF ineligible" and they could do it - but it doesn't guarantee they will never be in the Hall.
Maybe the answer is to put test results on Hall of Fame plaques, if there's factual evidence.
interesting - list of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_Major_League_Baseball_people">banned people</a> from wiki - includes people who were reinstated.
Exactly. The HOF could make their own standards, then. Won't happen, but that'd be really good.
Hammer
We'll be back.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
Rover and Hoovs:
Had baseball had a long-standing policy THAT THEY ACTUALLY PUT TEETH INTO AND ENFORCED, then you and I would not be having this discussion right now, because the three of us would be in agreement. However, it is my belief that the owners did not want to get serious about PEDs, and the players' union sure as hell didn't want to deal with the issue either. You can tell by how the owners treated Mr. Vincent. Everybody wanted to sit back and count the money.
Well, here's where the other shoe drops. Here's what I tell the players and the owners: If you didn't want to deal with this issue, I guess there must not have been a problem. Everyone who puts up a worthy career gets in the Hall. I'm not going to differentiate, since you guys didn't, either. Now that close to a decade has passed, I don't want to hear any *****ing. You cannot wipe away a decade of what happened. You cannot un-ring a bell. You've got to acknowledge what happened, and this is the proper way to do it.
I used to be a purist. Not anymore. The last part of that died in me in August of 1994. My eyes are wide the **** open now. If your nuts shrink to the size of raisins before you're 45, and you fall over dead at 52, well, you got what you deserved. The rest of us can use this as a stark reminder and an educational tool to help explain what went on in the late 90's and earlier this decade. In the end, time is going to be the final judge on this era anyway.
Rover and Hoovs:
Had baseball had a long-standing policy THAT THEY ACTUALLY PUT TEETH INTO AND ENFORCED, then you and I would not be having this discussion right now, because the three of us would be in agreement. However, it is my belief that the owners did not want to get serious about PEDs, and the players' union sure as hell didn't want to deal with the issue either. You can tell by how the owners treated Mr. Vincent. Everybody wanted to sit back and count the money.
Well, here's where the other shoe drops. Here's what I tell the players and the owners: If you didn't want to deal with this issue, I guess there must not have been a problem. Everyone who puts up a worthy career gets in the Hall. I'm not going to differentiate, since you guys didn't, either. Now that close to a decade has passed, I don't want to hear any *****ing. You cannot wipe away a decade of what happened. You cannot un-ring a bell. You've got to acknowledge what happened, and this is the proper way to do it.
I used to be a purist. Not anymore. The last part of that died in me in August of 1994. My eyes are wide the **** open now. If your nuts shrink to the size of raisins before you're 45, and you fall over dead at 52, well, you got what you deserved. The rest of us can use this as a stark reminder and an educational tool to help explain what went on in the late 90's and earlier this decade. In the end, time is going to be the final judge on this era anyway.
Last edited:
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
Good points, and let me clarify one thing. When I say "banned" I didn't mean on the official list that Rose and Jackson are on. I'm all for them being on that list, but what I'm more referring to is them not being elected to the Hall. Whether its an official ban or not is a secondary issue for me. Also, Commissioner Vincent declared steroids illegal in 1991. Therefore, anybody using after that is a cheater.
Sosa was on the list of players who failed the test, so he's gone. However, this is the toughest thing for me to resolve. Sosa is an easy one because its doubtful he'd be under consideration without PED's inflating his stats. Same with McGwire & Palmeiro. What to do about Andy Pettite or A-Rod? I guess I would be more lenient on players who fessed up. So, if Pettite is telling the truth, and he goes out and wins 100 more games in his career, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. A-Rod I would wipe out the 3 years of steroid use, and then assess his career minus those years. This way you punish long term users, as the longer you did it, the more of your career that isn't part of the evaluation. Not a perfect system I'll admit...
To your last paragraph, I can live with known cheaters being ineligible if you want to eliminate any gray area. Yes, I put people on the list even if they didn't get suspended, because some people were outed after the fact via a paper trail (Bonds). They don't get away with it just because they beat the testing if you can prove they purchased the stuff. I think I answered your last question, but no - I wouldn't make everybody who gets suspended for charging the mound or throwing at a batter ineligible. That's ridiculous. The punishment is for cheating.
edit - Hammer, if your point is Selig and his cronies are a bunch of nutless F ups, you'll get no argument from me. Seems the HoF has to do the work he was too wimpy to do himself during his reign of incompetence.
Good points, and let me clarify one thing. When I say "banned" I didn't mean on the official list that Rose and Jackson are on. I'm all for them being on that list, but what I'm more referring to is them not being elected to the Hall. Whether its an official ban or not is a secondary issue for me. Also, Commissioner Vincent declared steroids illegal in 1991. Therefore, anybody using after that is a cheater.
Sosa was on the list of players who failed the test, so he's gone. However, this is the toughest thing for me to resolve. Sosa is an easy one because its doubtful he'd be under consideration without PED's inflating his stats. Same with McGwire & Palmeiro. What to do about Andy Pettite or A-Rod? I guess I would be more lenient on players who fessed up. So, if Pettite is telling the truth, and he goes out and wins 100 more games in his career, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. A-Rod I would wipe out the 3 years of steroid use, and then assess his career minus those years. This way you punish long term users, as the longer you did it, the more of your career that isn't part of the evaluation. Not a perfect system I'll admit...
To your last paragraph, I can live with known cheaters being ineligible if you want to eliminate any gray area. Yes, I put people on the list even if they didn't get suspended, because some people were outed after the fact via a paper trail (Bonds). They don't get away with it just because they beat the testing if you can prove they purchased the stuff. I think I answered your last question, but no - I wouldn't make everybody who gets suspended for charging the mound or throwing at a batter ineligible. That's ridiculous. The punishment is for cheating.
edit - Hammer, if your point is Selig and his cronies are a bunch of nutless F ups, you'll get no argument from me. Seems the HoF has to do the work he was too wimpy to do himself during his reign of incompetence.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
McGwire is an interesting case. If you go by WAR (I don't know if anyone on here knows what that is) he's the 88th best hitter ever.
But, because of the steroids thing and the embarrassing performance in front of congress, he probably won't get in. And his lack of singles/doubles, which is a stupid reason to keep him out, will provide a good crutch to writers who want to keep him out.
McGwire is an interesting case. If you go by WAR (I don't know if anyone on here knows what that is) he's the 88th best hitter ever.
But, because of the steroids thing and the embarrassing performance in front of congress, he probably won't get in. And his lack of singles/doubles, which is a stupid reason to keep him out, will provide a good crutch to writers who want to keep him out.
Hammer
We'll be back.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
You mean the same guys who didn't say a ****ed thing until it was politically correct to do so, and now want to act all high and mighty with their ballots? Sorry, I don't trust them with anything bigger than a cheeseburger, something most of them are very familiar with.
You mean the same guys who didn't say a ****ed thing until it was politically correct to do so, and now want to act all high and mighty with their ballots? Sorry, I don't trust them with anything bigger than a cheeseburger, something most of them are very familiar with.
Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class
I think the problem with this is you have no way of knowing when it started or stopped, and I don't think you can just pick certain years to exclude from their stats or decide it affected this stat, but not that stat. That doesn't seem fair - not all of Bonds' home runs were because he was using steroids, even in a year he was using. He was a great player. I think if you're going to punish him for using steroids, you need to keep him (and everyone else there's proof against) out of the Hall - not subtract stats or make allowances (not that I agree with doing this - I still like the idea of letting them in and putting it on the plaque
).
I don't agree with taking it easier on players that admit it - Pete Rose admitted what he did too (eventually). There's just too many gray areas to fairly account for them all, and the Hall shouldn't favor one player over another when both broke the same rules. Do you not let Palmiero in because he lied? Really, the other guys lied too when they did it (at least a lie of omission), even if they admitted it later.
As far as banning suspended players, I guess I was referring more to longer drug-related suspensions. Think Steve Howe and Fergie Jenkins - even though both were reinstated, and I certainly wouldn't call cocaine performance enchancing (cocaine also didn't keep others out, so it's stupid to ban players for cocaine use anyway, but that's a different discussion). What about using a corked bat? Isn't that "performance enchancing"? Doctoring a ball when it's illegal to do so?
I think there is an argument for banning everyone that is caught using steroids - because they've disgraced the game and likely artifically affected outcomes - like gamblers did. But as Hammer said, baseball knew about it and didn't force the issue, so it seems hypocritical to come back and punish it now.
I think the problem with this is you have no way of knowing when it started or stopped, and I don't think you can just pick certain years to exclude from their stats or decide it affected this stat, but not that stat. That doesn't seem fair - not all of Bonds' home runs were because he was using steroids, even in a year he was using. He was a great player. I think if you're going to punish him for using steroids, you need to keep him (and everyone else there's proof against) out of the Hall - not subtract stats or make allowances (not that I agree with doing this - I still like the idea of letting them in and putting it on the plaque
). I don't agree with taking it easier on players that admit it - Pete Rose admitted what he did too (eventually). There's just too many gray areas to fairly account for them all, and the Hall shouldn't favor one player over another when both broke the same rules. Do you not let Palmiero in because he lied? Really, the other guys lied too when they did it (at least a lie of omission), even if they admitted it later.
As far as banning suspended players, I guess I was referring more to longer drug-related suspensions. Think Steve Howe and Fergie Jenkins - even though both were reinstated, and I certainly wouldn't call cocaine performance enchancing (cocaine also didn't keep others out, so it's stupid to ban players for cocaine use anyway, but that's a different discussion). What about using a corked bat? Isn't that "performance enchancing"? Doctoring a ball when it's illegal to do so?
I think there is an argument for banning everyone that is caught using steroids - because they've disgraced the game and likely artifically affected outcomes - like gamblers did. But as Hammer said, baseball knew about it and didn't force the issue, so it seems hypocritical to come back and punish it now.
Last edited: