Hello & Welcome to our community. Is this your first visit? Register
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 46

Thread: HOF voting

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,100

    HOF voting

    These voters are jokes. If you are voting Bonds and Clemens why are you leaving Sosa and Mcgwire off and for that matter Palmerio should be back on the list. These are the voters who refuse to vote Mcgriff or Raines yet they vote Jeff Kent. Was Kent better than either of these 2. Personally I think every member of the Hall should be getting a vote to even it out so worthy candidates get elected in or at least get a fair shake.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,015

    Re: HOF voting

    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.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,015

    Re: HOF voting

    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.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,210

    Re: HOF voting

    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

  5. #5
    Senior Member 3arod13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,923

    Re: HOF voting

    Ex-Yankees pitcher Brandon McCarthy is well known on Twitter -- he's got almost 150,000 follower -- for his strong opinions.

    He issued another recently. McCarthy, who recently signed a four-year deal with the Dodgers, wrote about the Hall of Fame on Derek Jeter's website, PlayersTribune.com

    McCarthy's proposition? Put everyone, including those suspected of steroid abuse, in the Hall of Fame.

    From McCarthy's post:

    Admittedly, it's a mess. The ramifications extend far and wide, but I believe the answer is to admit those players whose on-field accomplishments merit it and leave history to be the final judge and jury. Ultimately, I believe the greatest injustice would be to leave worthy players--some of whom are objectively among the greatest ever--out of the Hall of Fame, when there very well may be guys already enshrined who have used performance enhancing drugs. Who knows how many PED users are already in the Hall of Fame? And in the future, who knows how many PED users, who managed to stay under the radar, will join them in Cooperstown? The true shame would be knowing that players who got away with using PEDs were voted in, while others connected to PEDs--either by proof, or worse yet, suspicion--continue to be left out and villainized.

    McCarthy then posted his own Hall of Fame ballot, which included Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.
    Regards, Tony

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    ~I'm sorry, I can't hear you....my World Series Ring is making too much NOISE! - Alex Rodriguez~

  6. #6

    Re: HOF voting

    So there are lots of people who murdered others, but simply walk around and we don't know about it. So let's just let the ones we know just walk free so everyone can be in the same boat. Just release everyone from jail because it isn't fair they are locked up when others did the same thing and are free.

    Sorry McCarthy that is some broken logic you hold. I'd be more accepting of someone saying PEDs are ok than what you suggested.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,015

    Re: HOF voting

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsontravis@ymail.com View Post
    So there are lots of people who murdered others, but simply walk around and we don't know about it. So let's just let the ones we know just walk free so everyone can be in the same boat. Just release everyone from jail because it isn't fair they are locked up when others did the same thing and are free.

    Sorry McCarthy that is some broken logic you hold. I'd be more accepting of someone saying PEDs are ok than what you suggested.
    There's a huge logical fallacy at work here...

    I think it's called "False Analogy" or something. After all, the difference between PED users and murderers is the degree to which they are punished. In the case of PED users, they're punished according to the MLB rules and uniform player agreement between MLB & MLBPA. The fact that HOF voters choose to exclude PED users and suspected users out of the HOF has nothing to do with the law.

    If you wanted to parallel this to murderers, you could argue that murderers who have served their time and been released into society should not be discriminated against when it comes to hiring practices. Many employers do discriminate specifically on this basis, but the EEOC is finally taking the most blatant violators to court.

    To this point, MLB has taken a "hands off" approach to directing the HOF voters, with the exception of individuals on the permanently ineligible list. If Selig really wanted to take a stand against PEDs, he could have pushed for all players (including those whose names were found on "anonymous" reports) who were found to have been users of any type of PED to be banned from the HOF. If he wanted a HOF that showcased the greatest statistical players of the era, he could have mandated that voters not hold PED use against players. It's possible, if not likely, that some voters would not adhere to the rule, for personal reasons, but I think journalists, as a whole, feel they have a high level of integrity, and they'd be honest in applying the mandate.

    Now, if there is a total ban on known PED users from the HOF, MLBPA would insist on having a committee to determine what the defining line is for "PED user" (known to have used; admitted to use; failed test; Mitchell report; BALCO client; Biogenesis client). I have know idea where that line would be drawn.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,258

    Re: HOF voting

    Quote Originally Posted by earlywynnfan View Post
    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.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,015

    Re: HOF voting

    Quote Originally Posted by Roady View Post
    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.

  10. #10
    Senior Member 3arod13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,923

    Re: HOF voting

    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.
    Regards, Tony

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    ~I'm sorry, I can't hear you....my World Series Ring is making too much NOISE! - Alex Rodriguez~

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:46 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5
Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com