HOF voting

[danesei@yahoo.com]

I don't think that the argument of "If Bonds/Clemens, then everyone" holds. The reason that Bonds/Clemens get votes is their relative positions as arguably the greatest players in the game over their respective careers.

Clemens is arguably the top RH power pitcher of his generation.
Bonds is arguably the greatest power/speed combination of all time. He holds the all-time and single season HR records.

Even if we lump all PED users into a "PED pool," it wouldn't change the fact that these two individuals were exceptional among that pool.

Let's assume for a moment that all players in the 80s/90s/00s were PED users of some sort or another. You'd be forced to either ignore a generation of baseball or, at least, pick the best of the best:

Greg Maddux - Best finesse pitcher of the generation
Randy Johnson - Best LH power pitcher of the generation
Pedro Martinez - Best RH peak power pitcher of the generation
Roger Clemens - Best RH power pitcher of the generation
Mike Piazza - Best offensive catcher of the generation
Barry Bonds - Best offensive player & power/speed combination of the generation
Rickey Henderson - Best speed player of the generation
Tom Glavine - Possibly best LH finesse pitcher of the generation

I'm sure I missed a lot of players, but that is what I view as a list of players who would be arguably in, even if they used PEDs... along with the rest of the game.

Now, after that top tier of players, I would ask "Did this player use or was he suspected of using PEDs during his career?"

That's why Bonds and Clemens in, but not the other PED users.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

On a side note, I'm in the camp of individuals who think Piazza took PEDs. I just don't think anyone cares, since he was generally nice to the media. I think, if Bonds and Clemens were so brash with the media, they might be up in the 50+ percentile, as well.

[earlywynnfan]

I think the idea behind Bonds and Clemens but not the others is that there is a very clear line as to when they, uh, raised their careers to another level. But with Bonds and Clemens, they both had HOF careers before this happened. I'm not saying I would vote this way, it's just what I've read.

As for McGriff and Kent, if you are looking at stats on a piece of paper, McGriff wins. But if you put it on the field, Kent was far more valuable in terms of position. How many all-time teams do you pick before you get to Kent? How many 1B are there in front of McGriff? (And I love McGriff, and Raines.)

Ken

[Roady]

I think the idea behind Bonds and Clemens but not the others is that there is a very clear line as to when they, uh, raised their careers to another level. But with Bonds and Clemens, they both had HOF careers before this happened. I'm not saying I would vote this way, it's just what I've read.

As for McGriff and Kent, if you are looking at stats on a piece of paper, McGriff wins. But if you put it on the field, Kent was far more valuable in terms of position. How many all-time teams do you pick before you get to Kent? How many 1B are there in front of McGriff? (And I love McGriff, and Raines.)

Ken

No they didn't and for sure Bonds didn't.
Look at the stats again and ask yourself if you would vote either of them in the HOF if they quite before taking roids. Bonds was a 25-30 HR type player with the Pirates before steroids. I have no idea where people get the idea Bonds was so great before his San Fran days and roids. I believe his first full season taking roids was 1993, his first year with the Giants.
No way he was HOF worthy in just 7 good years with the Pirates.
Clemens didn't have the body of work to be a HOFer before his first bought with steroids either. If he started taking them in 1997 as most believe then look at his stats before that. No way a HOF player. A good pitcher for several years but in definite decline until the magic juice.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

No they didn't and for sure Bonds didn't.
Look at the stats again and ask yourself if you would vote either of them in the HOF if they quite before taking roids. Bonds was a 25-30 HR type player with the Pirates before steroids. I have no idea where people get the idea Bonds was so great before his San Fran days and roids. I believe his first full season taking roids was 1993, his first year with the Giants.
No way he was HOF worthy in just 7 good years with the Pirates.
Clemens didn't have the body of work to be a HOFer before his first bought with steroids either. If he started taking them in 1997 as most believe then look at his stats before that. No way a HOF player. A good pitcher for several years but in definite decline until the magic juice.

What is your justification of 1993 for Bonds? Bonds was the reigning NL MVP going into 1993.

The general consensus has been that Bonds started using PEDs in response to Sosa's HR surge and McGwire's 70 HRs in 1998. That would imply that Bonds started using PEDs in 1999 or 2000. Going by that assumption (as opposed to your arbitrary 1993), Bonds was already the only 400/400 player in MLB history after 1998.

Let's say we go with your assumption of 1993. From 1986-1992, Bonds had 176 HR and 251 SB, through his age 27 season. Players typically hit their peak performance years from 27-31. That means Bonds was expected to see a spike in production from 1992-1996, based upon a typical aging curve. Bonds had a 204 OPS+ in 1992 and 206 OPS+ in 1993. From 1986-1999, his career looked pretty normal, so I think it's a reach to believe Bonds started using "steroids" (your word) in 1993.

If not for voters valuing batting average & hits over HR, SB, SLG, OBP, runs & RBI in 1991, Bonds would have won the NL MVP award for four consecutive seasons (1990-1993). I don't see how a player who had a reasonable shot at four consecutive MVP awards would be considered anything but great.

[3arod13]

I find it amazing that many, including MLB, team owners, coaches, players, fans, collectors, media, ESPN, etc., all had an idea and/or knew back then that this was going on, yet cheered them on, with many benefitting from it and most enjoying the ride. Funny, how when things took a turn for the negative, many got on their high horse, look the other way, and now can't believe this even went on.

[3arod13]

I find it amazing that many, including MLB, team owners, coaches, players, fans, collectors, media, ESPN, etc., all had an idea and/or knew back then that this was going on, yet cheered them on, with many benefitting from it and most enjoying the ride. Funny, how when things took a turn for the negative, many got on their high horse, look the other way, and now can't believe this even went on.

And now they're considered cheaters. Hilarious!!

[Roady]

What is your justification of 1993 for Bonds? Bonds was the reigning NL MVP going into 1993.

That award does not give him the ability to hit .336 with 46 home runs.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

That award does not give him the ability to hit .336 with 46 home runs.

Correct. His ability to hit for contact, hit for power and quick bat speed led to his hitting .336 w/ 46 HR.

1992 (age-27 season):
140 G, 109 R, 147 H, 36 2B, 5 3B, 34 HR, 103 RBI, 39 SB, 8 CS, 127 BB

1993 (age-28 season):
159 G, 129 R, 181 H, 38 2B, 4 3B, 46 HR, 123 RBI, 29 SB, 12 CS, 126 BB

He played 13.6% more games in 1993. He hit 35.3% more HRs in 1993. His batting average improved by 8%.

Those aren't extreme changes.

1994 (age-29 season):
112 G, 89 R, 122 H, 18 2B, 1 3B, 37 HR, 74 RB, 29 SB, 9 CS, 74 BB

1995 (age-30 season):
144 G, 109 R, 149 H, 30 2B, 7 3B, 33 HR, 104 RBI, 31 SB, 10 CS, 120 BB

If we go with your conclusion that Bonds used steroids from 1993, how do you explain 1994 and 1995? Did Bonds decide that he shouldn't use steroids anymore? His 1992 and 1995 seasons are nearly identical.

The simpler (and far more logical) conclusion is that Bonds matured during his prime and learned to maximize his skill set.

The difference in 1998 and 1999 statistics are far more drastic (and indicative of something changing).

1998 (age-33 season):
156 G, 120 R, 167 H, 44 2B, 7 3B, 37 HR, 122 RBI, 28 SB, 12 CS, 130 BB

1999 (age-34 season):
102 G, 91 R, 93 H, 20 2B, 2 3B, 34 HR, 83 RBI, 15 SB, 2 CS, 73 BB

Another thing to consider is that Bonds' career unfortunately also involved three home ballparks:

1986(21)-1992(27): Three Rivers Stadium (335 RF)
1993(28)-1999(34): Candlestick Park (328 RF)
2000(35)-2007(42): Pac Bell/SBC/AT&T Park (309 RF)

The 309 RF foul pole made that a left-handed pull-hitter's dream. If you got the ball over the 24 ft wall, it was a HR. If you didn't clear the wall, the ball would take a wicked bounce, and the batter would be awarded with a double or triple.