Shoeless Joe, don't cha know?
Shoeless Joe, don't cha know?
Biggo, Bagwell, Piazza, Walker, Murphy, Trammel, Raines, Edgar, Schilling, Rocket. Ran out of room for Bonds. Have to give it to him next year.
I'm not sure that's in question. The issue is whether the "demerits" of steroid use are enough of a weight against him to negate even his (assumed) pre-steroid accomplishments.Quote:
Originally Posted by lolPhillies
As for Piazza, no there have been no formal allegations or serious reports of him using, but the same was said of ARod before he was caught. I honestly can't blame anyone for wanting to wait a while to make their judgement. The hall will still be there next year.
And you ignore this how?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
tony womack
the man's known to lie(see denying it for 20 years),so your going to take his word when he says that? a gambling addict that is in a position to influence the outcome of what he's betting on and he was to honorable to take advantage of it? ..well i also have a bridge to sell you.Quote:
Originally Posted by mariner4life
What is being ignored exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Haha
Quote:
Originally Posted by bagwell368It totally is. When you pitch all your best relievers and play your best players to secure a win, and use lesser players when there is not money on the line, it's the essence of manipulation. The sort of manipulation that's needed for insider trading. Rose was a cheat, refuses to come clean, and he can rot.Quote:
Originally Posted by mariner4life
Yet you support others that cheat...
I believe you previously stated You support Barry Bonds.. (He refuses to admit it)
Regardless of how they cheated - cheating is cheating.
Peak of the Roid Boys VS Peak of the Greenies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
Home Runs 1998
1. McGwire (STL) 70
2. Sosa (CHC) 66
3. Griffey (SEA) 56
4. Vaughn (SDP) 50
5. Belle (CHW) 49
6. Canseco (TOR) 46
Castilla (COL) 46
8. Ramirez (CLE) 45
Gonzalez (TEX) 45
10. Galarraga (ATL) 44
Home Runs 2001
1. Bonds (SFG) 73
2. Sosa (CHC) 64
3. Gonzalez (ARI) 57
4. Rodriguez (TEX) 52
5. Green (LAD) 49
Helton (COL) 49
Thome (CLE) 49
8. Palmeiro (TEX) 47
9. Sexson (MIL) 45
10. Nevin (SDP) 41
Ramirez (BOS) 41
Glaus (ANA) 41
VS.
Home Runs 1977
1. Foster (CIN) 52
2. Burroughs (ATL) 41
3. Luzinski (PHI) 39
Rice (BOS) 39
5. Schmidt (PHI) 38
6. Nettles (NYY) 37
Bonds (CAL) 37
8. Scott (BOS) 33
Garvey (LAD) 33
10. Jackson (NYY) 32
Smith (LAD) 32
Home Runs 1961
1. Maris (NYY) 61
2. Mantle (NYY) 54
3. Killebrew (MIN) 46
Cepeda (SFG) 46
Gentile (BAL) 46
6. Colavito (DET) 45
7. Cash (DET) 41
8. Mays (SFG) 40
9. Robinson (CIN) 37
10. Stuart (PIT) 35
Adcock (MLN) 35
You realize that pitchers were using roids too, right? And they play more games and the ballparks are smaller too right?Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeckcampaign
It isn't just steroids.
You realize the Roid Boys were using Greenies too?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
Donnie baseball and pete rose
It still kind of bothers me that people view steroids as cheating prior to 2004.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scully in 2012
It wasn't cheating because it wasn't against the baseball rules.
Now a pattern of dishonesty was exhibited by several of the individuals, and there is a character section for the hall of fame voting, and you can view their dishonesty as a disqualifier. But it wasn't cheating until 2004, and now it is. You can't really judge those that took PED's prior to 04 when there was no penalties or consequences to their actions at the time. What they were doing any other player could choose to do. They were taking advantage of an opportunity, regardless of moral righteousness. But it wasn't cheating, they weren't breaking any rules.
Rose broke a baseball rule. A rule that was posted in front of his face on a daily basis that had a set penalty in place, and he chose to break that rule, and then on top of that he exhibited the pattern of dishonesty when trying to cover it up. He is banned from the game because he broke the rule and that was the consequence to breaking that rule.
If Barry Bonds took steroids in 1998, he didn't break any rules at the time. All we had at the time was a letter from Fay Vincent in 91 saying you can't take PEDs, but it wasn't a rule. It was his opinion with no consequences set in place and no actions prepared to prevent it. He just said you can't do it and everybody went on. That would be like me coming on here on PSD and saying you can't post the phrase 'trill' any longer and that's it. No consequences were ever laid out, the rest of the moderators didn't say you couldn't, and there were no actions put in place to prevent it from happening again in the future. The posters didn't break any rule because there was actually no set policy or rule actually in place. I just said it, it was my opinion and it ends there.
These players didn't cheat. It's cheating today because it's against the very literal rules of the game. There are consequences to using PED's today. But prior to 04? Nope.
I am not saying all PED users prior to 04 should be let in. But their sins do not compare to those of Pete Rose. He broke a defined rule, PED users did not. This is why Rose isn't on the ballot and won't get in (at least for a very long time) and the PED users are on the ballot and might get in.
You can disqualify players for being dishonest because there is a character clause in the hall of fame voting procedure. If you feel it is a great enough character flaw, you could choose to eliminate a player based on his character. That's up to each voter. But they didn't cheat if they used PED's prior to 2004. It may have been dishonest, but it wasn't cheating.
Just reading on EPN.com how this is the last year for Dale Murphy to get into the HOF. I am looking at his advanced stats and I know he was a 2 time MVP but I am really not sure if I would put him in or not. What is everyone's thoughts?
These are from fangraphs
.292 BABIP
.357 wOBA
120 wRC+
47.3 WAR
Yes. Yes. And Yes.
If Dawson is, Murphy is. Murphy also scores extremely high on rule #5