Register

HOF?

Who's the best 2nd baseman of all time? Should there be a salary cap? Should Pete Ro...er...some things have been talked about enough. Come talk MLB!
The Straw That Stirs the Drink
User avatar
Posts: 5314
Joined: July 30th, 2013, 3:12 pm
Location: Portlandia

Re: HOF?

Postby Iconoclast » February 7th, 2019, 4:14 pm

MikeTheTiger wrote:
Iconoclast wrote:And MTT, to be fair, Griffey and Rivera played during the era of substance so how do we know that they didn't use them? The baseball world doesn't think so, and they show no obvious signs of use, so they voted them in to the hall, Griffey at like 99.3% and Rivera at 100%. Today, we see players getting caught using substances and they show no obvious signs. I wouldn't have suspected Braun to be a juicer, but he was caught. We really don't know who did or didn't use, yet HOF worthy players are being kept out because of suspicions.


Yes, I agree with that. That's why I said they should either exclude all players from that era or none. It's all speculation.


I didn't mean to imply that you were saying that it's ok for the writers to pick and choose, we are very much on the same page with our thoughts about this issue. Sadly, that period of baseball players will be painted with those who juiced and those who didn't with the writers being the judge and jury and basing it on assumption and their view that if a player juiced, he doesn't belong in. Will A Rod get in? I mean, he was actually caught juicing. Does that take away from his accomplishments?
Make GASF Great Again!

The Artist FKA SECRules
Posts: 2822
Joined: July 30th, 2013, 12:17 pm
Location: Metro Atlanta

Re: HOF?

Postby MikeTheTiger » February 8th, 2019, 12:30 am

Iconoclast wrote:I didn't mean to imply that you were saying that it's ok for the writers to pick and choose, we are very much on the same page with our thoughts about this issue. Sadly, that period of baseball players will be painted with those who juiced and those who didn't with the writers being the judge and jury and basing it on assumption and their view that if a player juiced, he doesn't belong in. Will A Rod get in? I mean, he was actually caught juicing. Does that take away from his accomplishments?


Sorry, I wasn't suggesting that you thought we weren't in agreement. I was just reiterating the ways we were in agreement. If Clemens and Bonds don't get in, then A-Rod probably won't get in (unless there is enough turnover in the time that elapses between eligibility). With A-Rod, I'm a little more torn. He did violate the rules. On the other hand, he paid the penalty and was not banned for life. I think that one becomes more open to interpretation as to the character clauses within the Hall charter. Personally, I would only exclude any player banned for life since that is an explicit consequence. Beyond that, I would examine the player's career and how influenced I believe it was by steroid use. In A-Rod's case, while I think he certainly enhanced his stats with steroids, he still had a Hall of Fame combination of average, speed, defensive and somewhat lesser power without taking them. I would vote him in, but I wouldn't begrudge others the right to make a different choice.

The Straw That Stirs the Drink
User avatar
Posts: 5314
Joined: July 30th, 2013, 3:12 pm
Location: Portlandia

Re: HOF?

Postby Iconoclast » February 11th, 2019, 12:00 am

Mike you bring up an interesting issue I hadn’t considered. A Rod did get caught and paid the price via a suspension. If that allows him to get in vs players like Bonds, who played when there were no rules or testing, then that sullies the HOF. The NFL has it right. They separate the substance abuse from the accomplishments. MLB seems to be completely clueless in this regard.
Make GASF Great Again!

Thong
Posts: 885
Joined: August 1st, 2013, 3:49 pm

Re: HOF?

Postby bigearl » February 11th, 2019, 9:35 am

Iconoclast wrote:Mike you bring up an interesting issue I hadn’t considered. A Rod did get caught and paid the price via a suspension. If that allows him to get in vs players like Bonds, who played when there were no rules or testing, then that sullies the HOF. The NFL has it right. They separate the substance abuse from the accomplishments. MLB seems to be completely clueless in this regard.


Agreed. They really need to get off the high horse and let the extreme cases at least in. Not having Bonds and Clemens in is an embarrassment for them.

The Unimpeachable Source
User avatar
Posts: 5193
Joined: July 30th, 2013, 1:15 pm
Location: I Was Born In A Small Town!

Re: HOF?

Postby irishmark » February 21st, 2019, 2:03 pm

Still on the Harold Baines trip for me.

While I'm a Cub fan, having grown up 60 minutes away from the old Comiskey Park, I have great appreciation for Harold as a player.

But if he's Hall worthy, why not Richie Allen?? Richie had similar numbers, was a 7 time all star and played 14 seasons compared to Harold's 21!
"I don't care if Pat Terrell is so wide open, you could walk up and hand him the football! Take the sack"!

Lou Holtz to Tony Rice.

Previous

Return to MLB

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests