Any thoughts.Mcgwire did not get in.:mad: Its going to be a long road.
Printable View
Any thoughts.Mcgwire did not get in.:mad: Its going to be a long road.
So, McGwire is out but I've read a few articles that are making excuses for why they are going to vote Bonds in. This is nonsense. I'm boycotting the HOF. I won't darken the door of that place.
Here is the official HOF Voting results..........up for debate, but Bonds, McGwire, Sosa and Raffy have no one to blame but themselves........Roger Maris still holds the single season HR record.......... I am quite pleased to see the lack of votes that McGwire received. Jim
2007 Hall of Fame Voting http://espn.go.com/photo/2007/0109/m...loffame_80.jpgTotal ballots cast: A record 545 (including two blanks). Necessary for election: 409 votes. Minimum votes needed to remain on the ballot: 28.
Votes Pct. Cal Ripken Jr. 537 98.5
Tony Gwynn 532 97.6
Rich Gossage 388 71.2
Jim Rice 346 63.5
Andre Dawson 309 56.7
Bert Blyleven 260 47.7
Lee Smith 217 39.8
Jack Morris 202 37.1
Mark McGwire 128 23.5
Tommy John 125 22.9
Steve Garvey 115 21.1
Dave Concepcion 74 13.6
Alan Trammell 73 13.4
Dave Parker 62 11.4
Don Mattingly 54 9.9
Dale Murphy 50 9.2
Harold Baines 29 5.3
Orel Hershiser 24 4.4
Albert Belle 19 3.5
Paul O'Neill 12 2.2
Bret Saberhagen 7 1.3
Jose Canseco 6 1.1
Tony Fernandez 4 0.7
Dante Bichette 3 0.6
Eric Davis 3 0.6
Bobby Bonilla 2 0.4
Ken Caminiti 2 0.4
Jay Buhner 1 0.2
Scott Brosius 0 0
Wally Joyner 0 0
Devon White 0 0
Bobby Witt 0 0
Here's my struggle with this. Players have used things to enhance their performance for many years before the steroid era, but haven't been proven or an issue until now. In addition, there are the names we know now that used steriods. I'm sure there are many more, like Brady Anderson, who hit 50 HR's in 1996, but never hit more than 21 before 1996 and hit no higher than 24 after 1996. Yes, he's no hall of famer, but I'm sure there are so many others we don't know about.Quote:
Originally Posted by cjmedina1
McGwire hit 49 HR's as a rookie in 1987. From 1987 to 1992, he it 49, 32, 33, 39, 22 and 42 HR's, and was a proven HR hitter. No question after that, 1993 to 1994 which he only played 74 games and only it 18 HR's due to injuries. Then 1995 to 2001, he it 39, 52, 34, 24, 70, 65, 32 and 39 HR's.
McGwire definately started using steroids following his injury years (not an excuse). Do I believe he could still have hit HR's if he didn't use steroids. Yes. Do I think he should be in the hall of fame? Still a struggle.
Before my comments get slammed, I want to make it clear. I am not saying it's ok because so many others did it. I believe in earning your stripes from natural ability. As you know, I was a big Juan Gonzalez fan. It killed me when I found he used steroids. His numbers weren't real due to his natural ability.
My stuggle is this has gone on (not steroids only) for years in sports and there are many in the hall of fame who are know to do things to cheat.
Ok, I'm standing by for my beating!
Friends,
My first thought is what will this do to the Values of Mark, Joses, and Sammys game used items?
23% for McGwire is sure sending a message.
My best,
Den
Dan, yes...not only have McGwire and friends hurt themselves and baseball, they've hurt all their loyal fans and collectors in so many ways!Quote:
Originally Posted by Calrima
I tried talking this up at work, and can't get a good conversation going. I can't understand Mattingly not getting more votes. It seems this would have been the year for him to get some votes...people that are number people giving him the benefit of not using steriods. He barely got any votes, less than 10%. There were a few years he was so awesome, I just can't believe he doesn't get more attention...even the East Coast biasis isn't getting him in.
Bill
Without turning this into another needless steriod debate here are my observations.
No real surprises on the upper end of the voting other than Blyleven losing support (percentage wise).
McGwires vote total was on par with what ESPN was predicting. No surprise there. Next year will be the true indicator though. Many writers did not vote for him because he was not a "first ballot hall of famer."
Anyone else find it hypocritical that the writer's gave McGwire the thumbs down while giving Merriman the thumbs up for the Pro Bowl?
I was shocked to see Canseco get no support. He is now a one and done. I thought he would have hung around for a couple of years. And with him Albert "don't call me Joey" Belle was sent packing, no doubt due to his charming personality.
If Canseco's game used stuff is going down in price, I will be happy to take it off of anyones hands. If you have any you would like to get rid of, please contact me at spideyman79@yahoo.com
Todd Ricks
Me too. I'd be happy to take any of that worthless crap off your hands fellas. Just to help you out. That's the kind of guy I am. He he.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canseco44
Bruce Sutter is the most recent closer to be elected to the HOF. It looks like Rich Gossage will be next. I thought it might be interesting to compare their numbers to those of Lee Smith.
Sutter: 661 games, 68-71 record, 300 saves, 861 K's in 1042 innings, 2.83 ERA
Gossage: 1002 games, 124-107 record, 310 saves, 1502 K's in 1809 innings, 3.01 ERA
Lee Smith: 1022 games, 71-91 record, 478 saves, 1251 K's in 1289 innings, 3.03 ERA
I'm a big fan of all three of these guys, but why is Gossage getting 71% of the vote and Lee Smith only 39%? Why did Bruce Sutter get elected before Lee Smith? Now that Smith's record has been broken by Trevor Hoffman, does he still have a shot at Cooperstown? Interesting stuff.
- Sutter won the only Cy Young Award among these three pitchers.
- Gossage pitched in 8 postseason series to Smith and Sutter's 2 each.
- Sutter appeared in 4 All-Star Games, while Gossage appeared in 9 and Smith in 8.
- Playing in just 20 more career games, Smith recorded 168 more saves than Gossage.
- Lee Smith held the record for most career saves for over a decade.
Send me your email if you want to sell any Mcgwire game used items.On a side note in the autograph section I post some pics of my Mcgwire items in my collection.Its just a small part.Please check it out:DQuote:
Originally Posted by JasonM33
Carlie Medina III
carliemedinaiii@sbcglobal.net
I said it before, and I'll say it again: McGwire was a one-trick pony, and I am not sure if he belongs in the HOF anyways!!
You can say many things about Bonds (and we all have), but at least he could play the ENTIRE game up until the last couple of years.
Ken
I dissagree with you on that point. I thought McGwire was an excellent first baseman for most of his career. He even won a gold glove if I'm remembering correctly. It's not like he was a DH.
I'm not dissapointed or surprised that McGwire didn't get elected to the HOF under the current system. I just have as problem with the current system. If you are really good for a long time you get showered with glory. But if you are dominant for a shorter period of time you get the shaft.
In my eyes Canseco is a hero for his role in exposing steroids. In time, he will be regarded as a mythical being. The Hall of Fame means little to the value of a player's memorabilia. It did matter 15 or 20 years ago. Ripken memorabilia should not go up in value because of HOF induction. In terms of "speculation" or "investment potential", the memorabilia of a so-called "future hall-of-famer" seems to have more value.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canseco44
Also, there are tons of collectors of Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe. The HOF is losing its street-cred.
You mean like Bert Blyleven and Sandy Koufax?Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonM33
Exactly.
I place a high value on players who were dominant forces in the league. I'm talking about players that pitchers or hitters feared and that opposing managers had to plan around.
Hey guys,
I'm fairly new to this forum but had a couple of ponts to make:
1. Those of us affected by falling memorabilia values of players such as McGwire, Canseco, Palmeiro, etc. should get together and file a class action lawsuit against the envolved players to recover money lost due to their direct actions. After all, class action lawsuits are filled everyday by a group of people affected as a direct result of something or someone. If these players had not done steroids, their values would have held steady over time. Just a thought.....Any lawyers listening?
2. Why no support for Tommy John? I feel that the surgery he pioneered has led to the enhancement of the sport of Baseball and has prolonged many Major League careers. Isn't the Hall of Fame for people who have been Pioneers in their sport?
Best wishes to you all....
Steve
Hello all:
I thought I'd chime in on my thoughts on the Hall of Fame. First off, I don't care about all the McGwire haters out there. I respect the Canseco fans out there, they stick by there boy so hats off to you Canseco fans. The one thing I have to say about Canseco is its a shame to rat on your fellow ball players. Where is the brotherhood like you see in the military? The Police force? Isn't there an unwritten law, like baseball, which has many unwritten laws, not to rat?! The only way I can tolerate a rat is if it is saving someones life! But thats just me, if you can live with yourself rating on people, then fine, I just hope you can sleep at night! Personally I think McGwire got screwed!! It's a darn shame to condemn a man for doing nothing wrong!!! As I said once before, he has never been found guilty!! And, what if he did use steroids? It wasn't illegal in the game!!!!!! If it was such a big deal, baseball would have had a ban on it from the get go!!! Are you going to punish people because you think someone used. No one can tell for sure when the steroid era began. And, might I add, just becasue you use steroids doens't mean you're a huge guy!!! You can still be a buck eighty five and be on roids!!! You're always going to have people try and cheat the system now, oh, and there's no testing for HGH, I could guess there are still tons using performance enhancers. Should you ban protein drinks too? They could help build muscle...uh oh, better not vote for anyone suspected of drinking protein!!!!! I read an article that said that baseball is strict in making sure people know that you're only to critique on the players performance!!! Not what you think he may have done, or by invoking their 5th amendment rights!!!! Trying to send a message?? I got a message for the people who are happy McGwire got such poor votes but I can't remember what you can or cannot say without getting into trouble on here, so I won't say it...people are too sue happy and have nothing better to do than sue, where is the thick skin real men should have? Fact is, his numbers are there, comparable to Reggie, I believe there were two others in the Hall, but forgot who, they were spoken about on a previous forum. Anyway, I'm not sure if this all makes sense, I'm just livid!!!! McGwire deserves to be in the Hall this year or at least next. Qutie frankly, all the others ahead of him are boring!!! Bert, Andre, Goose..hahaha, need I say more, Steve Garvey? Come on are you kidding me?!?! Jim Rice? Ridiculous!!
Aaron
The "wasn't illegal in the game" argument is one of the flimsiest, often stated arguments of all time. It was illegal, period!!! I'm not sure if there's a handbook somewhere that states that murder is illegal on the field of play, but does it really have to? If McGwire hasn't been found guilty yet, so be it but if a voter has reason to suspect that he may have been, that is his right as a human being. And if that is reason enough for a voter to withhold his vote, that too, is his right as a voter. We all have varying moral and ethical values that we find important. We can discuss the degrees by which we agree or disagree, but that is up to the discretion of each voter to weigh. The fact that his vote total was so low is an indication that MANY of the voters have a problem with Big Mac.Quote:
Originally Posted by whatupyos
You're right Yankwood. Let's remember Joe Jackson was found not guilty in a court of law, but was expelled from the game. Baseball has it's own law.
Everyone has a right to their opinion so no one is wrong here. If someone is sickened by steriod users and doesn't think they belong in the HOF then that's fine. What I don't like though is the hipocracy of crapping on some players and giving others a pass. The sports writers have been doing this a lot lately. To say McGwire doesn't belong in the hall but Bonds does is nonsense.
Here is a fact......we do not know who took what, whenthey started, or to what degree it helped them.
We dont know who's clean either so to say that so-and-so is clean because he doesn't weigh 270 is a mistake. Saying that Bonds would have been a Hall of Famer without steroids implies that we know when he started using. That's not possible. Even if we did know for sure there's no garauntee that he wouldn't have gotten injured or that he would have continued to play at the same level. Who knows if he would have been a Hall of Famer? It's all speculation. Who knows when Big Mac started using. Was he clean in 1987 when he hit 49 home runs? If he could hit 49 homers when he was clean, then why couldn't he have continued to put up those type numbers while not juicing for the next 10 to 15 years? After all, he's supposedly a single tool player who only hit for power and couldn't do anything else. We don't know. It's all speculation. I say, you either blame everyone or no one. It's not fair to pick and choose.
-Jason M
Being a member of the Hall of Fame is a priveledge, not a right. There are many tangibles involved other than numbers when gaining acceptance into an institution. Just because someone has a 3.9 GPA doesn't mean they will automatically get into the college of their choice, especially if they have been caught lying, cheating, or withholding information during their interview.
Big Mac???
I thought I'd throw my 2 cents in as well. I do have a lot of the same opinions as previously posted by other board members, so I will try to keep it to new points that have not yet come up.
POINT #1
---------
Back in 1998, there was plenty of skepticism as to how McGwire became so strong. Could it just be andro? or could it be something more extreme? Same holds true for Sosa -- how could someone with no history of hitting for power all of a sudden be a dymano -- much larger than ever before, hitting 20 Home Runs in the month of June, etc. Again, there was speculation.
Was anything done? No.
Reason - After the 1994 strike crippled baseball, the sport needed something big to revitalize interest. And that interest came in the historic McGwire/Sosa home run chase. Was any baseball writer out there in their right mind willing to challenge the source of their power? No, because what they were doing was good for baseball.
My point -- Now that baseball has turned the corner, the same hypocrites who turned a blind eye to what could have been happening now have it in for those very players who they credit for putting the game back on the map. It's not even been 10 years, and they are now condemning the very heroes who they thanked for their accomplishments. This is disgusting.
POINT #2
---------
Baseball never had the testing of these types of substances before. And I do concur that it doesn't make it right to take a banned substance just because there was no way of getting caught doing so... but what I am saying is that there is a lot to this whole steroid saga that we don't know and probably may never know. Is there anyone that is currently in the hall of fame or on the ballot (or even coming up on the ballot in the next few years) that has taken a banned substance? You would have to be completely naive to say no. Someone on the board mentioned earlier that "you don't have to be 270 pounds to have been on a steroid"... but it's pretty stereotypical that those are the types of characteristics one looks for -- that classic slugger type -- like McGwire. Call him an easy target if you will... but the most comical aspect to this saga I think has come out in recent years is the list of names of those who were actually found to be using the substances -- Jason Grimsley??? Alex Sanchez??? Not exactly burly strong men are they? How many others like these guys have slid under (or will slide under) the radar just because it is not obvious by their physique...
Amen.Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonM33
HOF voting is but two things, a blatant popularity contest and a set of double standards. I've given up on the Hall a long time ago.
We should not let our fury get in the way of two very important points which I will now make.Quote:
Originally Posted by CansecoPower33
1. Nothing is perfect and there will never be a perfect system for inductions, and...
2. It's still a great place which any and every hardcore baseball fan should attempt to visit.
I have been there probably 10 times at least. It's only a 3 hour drive for me and although nothing about it is exactly as I want it, I enjoy it immensely every time I go. I feel bad for those who live too far away. I consider myself VERY lucky to have the opportunity to visit.
The problem isn't the BBWAA voting. In fact, I'd venture to say that the vast majority of players elected by the BBWAA are absolutely worthy. It's the Veterans Committee selections that defy logic (Phil Rizzuto? Jim Bottomley? Jesse freakin' Haines?)
I believe that one reason for Lee Smith's lower numbers than Gossage or Sutter is the number of one-inning appearances he had to get those saves. Smith appeared in 1022 games for 1289+ innings.
The better question is whether the BBWAA voters felt that McGwire is unworthy because of steroid accusations or simply because a lot felt he's not truly a HOF-caliber player. McGwire had a .263 career batting average, which is one-thousandth of a point higher than Ozzie Smith (whose selection was derided because "The guy batted .262!") with 12 fewer Gold Gloves. He had a .394 career OBP, which is definitely something that works in his favor, and the home runs totals are terrific. The sum of the parts is, in my opinion (and keep in mind this is coming from a Cardinals fan), a marginal candidate. He's less deserving than Gwynn and Ripken by a decent margin.
OK, so lets forget about steroids for a moment. If McGwire was a marginal Hall of Famer then I don't wnt anything to do with the place. McGwire was a dominant force in baseball for years. He got on base, and he drove in a lot of runs. Runs win games. Hit hit many a game winning home run including one in the World Series. His teams won a lot of games and he won awards. If he isn't worthy of getting in then they should shut the doors.
Two Comments:
1) I almost think Canseco's value in the collectibles market will be higher if he stays out of the HOF. He's become a cult player, like Kingman.
2) I figured someone would come up with the old "steroids weren't illegal in baseball" argument. Not exactly true; baseball has had a statement that any substance that is illegal in this country is banned. (If i had the time, I'd look up the exact rule, but it's in there.) So, were steroids SPECIFICALLY banned by baseball? No, but anyone this side of Don Fehr should understand that a substance banned in the US (at least without a prescription) is taboo in baseball. Does the rulebook specifically say that players cannot take crystal meth before a game? I'd bet not, but would we argue if a player was using it??
Ken
I'm pretty sure Canseco is out of consideration for the hall. You need a certain amount of votes in order to stay on future ballots. Maybe the veterans committee but I'm not sure how that works.