RIP MLB Hall of Fame

[jbergey22]

It probably peaked 30 years ago and now it is a joke. No consistency.

[tarcone]

So MLB turns a blind eye then punishes the players. F that.

[jbergey22]

...

Jeff Sullivan
@based_ball
the difference between Barry Bonds' career WAR and David Ortiz's career WAR is equal to Alex Rodriguez's career WAR

Oh, but Bonds used PEDs.... Hmmmm, and Papi didnt?

[tarcone]

The irony is the fact people blamed HRs due to peds, see Bonds.

Yet Clemens is being kept out too. Sounds to me like 2 of the greatest of their era would have dominated no matter if it was greenies or Coke or PEDs.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The irony is the fact people blamed HRs due to peds, see Bonds.

Yet Clemens is being kept out too. Sounds to me like 2 of the greatest of their era would have dominated no matter if it was greenies or Coke or PEDs.

Yup, their career trajectory's were so far above Hall of Fame level even before the mystery of PED's came into play. It is a sham. They fucked up, and they paid the price for 9 years. Put them where they belong.

[Atocep]

I don't mind the PED guys being kept out, but there should definitely be some consistency. If you keep Bonds and Clemens out then you can't put Ortiz in. It doesn't make sense and instead of being a PEDs issue it now seems like we're back in the 50s and 60s when how nice a player was to the media weighed heavily on their Hall chances.

Between this and the Veterans committee being the "Friends of Tony LaRussa club" it's definitely damaged the MLB Hall of Fame's credibility.

[Ksyrup]

It's always been a popularity contest to some degree. This just makes it even more obvious.

[sterlingice]

I was talking with my dad and uncle this weekend and they were, of course, opposed to the steroid guys getting in. One of them brought up Aaron as the true HR king and I mentioned that he's a known amphetamine user (A writer gives up his Hall of Fame vote. They changed the subject.

SI

[PilotMan]

Don't worry, they will get their due when they are voted in by the veterans committee.

That's the price they are paying. They will still get in. Don't fret your little heart.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Don't worry, they will get their due when they are voted in by the veterans committee.

That's the price they are paying. They will still get in. Don't fret your little heart.

Yeah, let it simmer another 5 years and the vets will almost certainly vote them in

SI

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The irony is the fact people blamed HRs due to peds, see Bonds.

Yet Clemens is being kept out too. Sounds to me like 2 of the greatest of their era would have dominated no matter if it was greenies or Coke or PEDs.

WHAT??? Clemens is being kept out???? Why?!?!? Best pitcher ever!

[ISiddiqui]

The fact that Ortiz gets the same year that Bonds and Clemens hit their 10 years really drives home the point. We know that Ortiz tested positive in the 2003 testing regimen but apparently he was a decent dude so who cares?

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[Solecismic]

I've made the argument in the past that Pete Rose should remain out because his crime was against the integrity of the game.

So, if ARod, Bonds, Clemens, Schilling and more fringe guys like Sosa, Palmeiro and McGwire were part of the steroids controversy (was Schilling - I don't keep up on everything - the steroids era had a lot to do with why I stopped being a big fan of baseball - only that his numbers suggest he's a no-brainer like the other three), then the argument can be made that their exclusion is an important reminder because the juicing is part of the enormous decline in baseball's popularity.

And yet, amphetamines got a free pass. Somewhere, there's a threshold of percentage of use that makes those free passes a given, though at the height of the steroids era, there were rumors that team doctors were supplying everything and there was a lot of pressure to use them.

Being in the Boston area during the early 2000s renaissance, it's nice to see Ortiz get the notice, but surely his name was attached to it all. And ARod seemed to get special flak, because he denied everything but apparently traveled with his supplier or something along those lines, and he wasn't exactly a clubhouse favorite.

The Rose issue is the genesis of this, I think, but when you start down that slippery slope, it turns this into a popularity contest and I have hard time caring that Clemens or Bonds isn't included. At some point, those who aren't in the club become cooler than those who are.

If I were ever to do a baseball game (and I've almost started a few times), it would stop at 2000 or somewhere around then.

[miami_fan]

I don't know if his resume gets him in. If it does, it also a shame that Curt Schilling did not get in either. I am on the opposite side of most of his politics but that ain't got shit to do with what he did on the field.

[Solecismic]

I might base it off of career WAR for eligible players not in the Hall. Hard to say. If I voted, I would take the deep dive into the numbers the way Bill James did in his HoF book.

So, for pitchers:
1. Clemens (3rd overall)
2. Schilling (26th overall)
3. Jim McCormick (27th overall, from the 1880s)
4. Kevin Brown (34th overall, about 15% lower than Schilling)
5. Rick Reuschel (35th overall)

And hitters:
1. Bonds (1st overall, tie with Ruth)
2. ARod (12th overall)
3. Rose (40th overall)
4. Bill Dahlen (50th overall, from the 1900s and '10s)
5. Lou Whitaker (51st overall, about 35% lower than ARod and 55% lower than Bonds)

For that matter, why isn't Whitaker in? Growing up in Michigan, it seemed the Whitaker/Trammell combo was destined to go in together.

[HomerSimpson98]

How is ARod/Bonds/Clemens actions not an integrity of the game issue, like Rose's? Do y'all not remember how many times they forcefully denied PED use?

[spleen1015]

At first, I didn't want any of them in. Now, who cares? Let them in.

If you're going to one in, you have to let them all in.

I'm not going to worry about it either way though.

I do think it is a shame that the conversation is all about Bonds/Clemens not getting in and not about Ortiz getting in.

[Ksyrup]

Whitaker not being in is a travesty.

As far as putting the PED people in, I don't care anymore. Some are already in and we don't know it. Some, like Ortiz, are voted in because they are liked/good interviews and it was looked past. If it's not all or none, and we don't know who "all" is, then just put them in. The HoF is an honor, yes, but it's also the story of the game. And like it or not, that's been a big part of the game. Probably still is.

[miked]

I mean we have Harold Baines, Alan Trammell, Jack Morris, and more borderline players in, seems kind of stupid not to have the best players of a generation in. Plus, Big Papi was a likely juicer and on top of that never played the field.

[albionmoonlight]

I respect the honesty here from Clemens:

Roger Clemens releases statement after falling short of Hall of Fame election: ‘I didn’t play baseball to get into the HOF’ - masslive.com

He played baseball to, in order

(1) Make so much money that it would positively impact his family for generations;
(2) Win championships;
(3) Give back to the fans.

Most players won't ever admit to caring about #1--even though almost all of them do.

Props to just admitting it. There's nothing to be ashamed of in noting that your grandkids and great grandkids are going to have an easier time of it because of all the money you made for them.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by HomerSimpson98

How is ARod/Bonds/Clemens actions not an integrity of the game issue, like Rose's? Do y'all not remember how many times they forcefully denied PED use?

How is Ortiz not an integrity of the game issue if ARod/Bonds/Clemens are?

I thought the issue was them using PEDs not that they forcefully denied it?

I think David Ortiz should be in. I think the best players of the generation should get in whether they used PEDs or not. However, if the voters have decided that anyone who has tested positive, been rumored to have tested positive, are rumored to maybe have used PEDs during the career will not be voted into the Hall of Fame, fine. I will disagree but that is the standard. But that is not the case.

David Ortiz tested positive for PEDs. Like others of that time, I don't believe that it was his first and only time using PEDs nor do I believe that the PEDs got into his body accidentally. His numbers are as questionable as any other baseball player during that time who has been associated with PEDS because we don't actually know for sure when they started and when they stopped. Once again, I don't think this should preclude him from getting in. By voting Ortiz in, the voters agree with me. It would be nice to know all the valid reasons why they did not Bonds and Clemmens. PED use is no longer a valid reason.

[Solecismic]

The Ortiz test, IIRC, was part of a large group that was supposedly guaranteed privacy. So who decided against being tested because they were smart enough to realize that the guarantee wasn't very strong? We don't even know what Ortiz tested positive for, nor did he have the opportunity to challenge that result (as players did since) and have the sample rechecked.

For that matter, how many players or managers have bet on the game using inside information and not been dumb enough to get caught (Rose being in a unique position here because he was the manager and had a very unusual reliever substitution pattern that greatly harmed the Reds at the time)?

How many players have political or other views that we find abhorrent, especially since things change a lot over time?

I'm leaning toward changing my opinion here - inclusion should be about on-field performance alone, and if bad behavior earned a suspension or a ban of sorts (thinking Shoeless Joe here), the penalty is only that there's less on-field performance to judge.

It's just too hard to apply the "good citizen" stuff fairly that many voters espouse. We have, in baseball, a wealth of numbers. Unlike football, it's relatively easy to separate one player from another. And as others have noted, it devalues the Hall to constantly talk about players who have accumulated numbers that should make inclusion obvious, but then we have to worry about other things.

So celebrate Ortiz and get the others in there soon.

And Kenny Anderson belongs in Canton. Not sure why he isn't enshrined.

[jbergey22]

Great conversation you guys are having.

I am a little more sensitive about Bonds & Clemens because as many of us growing up around the same age these guys along with Griffey and a few others were the greatest of our generation. Also, I am probably a bit stubborn about this but Bonds was just that much better than any other hitter I have ever seen. The PED's didnt give him the best hand/eye coordination to ever play, it didnt give him the best ability to know the strike zone of his time, it also didnt make him one of the most intelligent baseball players to ever play.

The Rocket wasnt as great as his job as Bonds was but he was clearly the top pitcher of the mid-late 80s and a large portion of the 90s. In my opinion, he was a top 5 pitcher of all time.

If you want to keep out a borderline player because of PED's, sure that is your opinion. But to keep out the all-time greats to make a point means you shouldnt get to vote or your vote means nothing to a lot of people.

Keeping these guys out is basically saying that baseball during this time period didnt even exist.

[HomerSimpson98]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Great conversation you guys are having.

I am a little more sensitive about Bonds & Clemens because as many of us growing up around the same age these guys along with Griffey and a few others were the greatest of our generation. Also, I am probably a bit stubborn about this but Bonds was just that much better than any other hitter I have ever seen. The PED's didnt give him the best hand/eye coordination to ever play, it didnt give him the best ability to know the strike zone of his time, it also didnt make him one of the most intelligent baseball players to ever play.

But it did give him the unnatural strength to put more balls in the Pacific Ocean than he otherwise would have. Having said that, he's a HOF without the HR record. But again, do y'all remember all of the denials and bullshit surrounding him? He willingly, admittedly, knowingly lied and rubbed it all in our noses. Over and over and over again. Despite everyone knowing the bastard was doing it. He helped cheapen the game of baseball, which again, goes back to the integrity of the game question.


Same with Clemens. He was one of my favorite pitchers growing up. Incredible fastball and you never knew what you were going to see when he was on the mound. But again - same thing with the denials. I remember clearly when the Mitchell Report came out. One observer said "watch this. Andy Pettitte will own it immediately and admit it. Rocket will never do that even though it was common knowledge he did." Or something to that effect. And thats exactly what happened.


Regarding Pete Rose - I dont see how anyone can say he belongs in the HOF. Youre taking the essence of sport and wiping your ass with it. If you compare it to PEDs then at least those guys were trying to gain a competitive advantage and blurred the lines of acceptable behavior. Charlie Hustle compromised the integrity of potentially every game he managed.


Not sure why I'm getting so invested in this, but here we go. In the end, the HOF means jackshit (Billy Wagner close to getting in??! WTF). But it does lead to interesting discussions. I do think Bonds and Clemens get in eventually. Schilling's numbers arent as glowing, and with him being a Grade A Dickbag, I wouldnt be surprised if he never got the call.

[PilotMan]

Their successes well into their 40s and well beyond the career performance arc of every other player before them probably single them out far more than any other. Yeah, they were great, but the thing that differentiates a good player from a great player at the MLB level is pretty thin. That they somehow found the fountain of youth in a way that no player before and no player since had really brings that point home.

[jbergey22]

Hey now! Why bring Tom Brady into this?

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Hey now! Why bring Tom Brady into this?

I'm pretty sure he spells his name P-e-y-t-o-n-M-a-n-n-i-n-g. Oh wait, that was for his wife.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Their successes well into their 40s and well beyond the career performance arc of every other player before them probably single them out far more than any other. Yeah, they were great, but the thing that differentiates a good player from a great player at the MLB level is pretty thin. That they somehow found the fountain of youth in a way that no player before and no player since had really brings that point home.

Are you talking about Randy Johnson? I mean, he does have the highest WAR of any player in baseball over the age of 35 post-1994.

Also feels like Bagwell and Piazza got a free pass.

It will be interesting what happens with Carlos Beltran next season.

[tarcone]

Scott Rolen should be in as should Lou Whittaker.

[sterlingice]

Yeah, Rose seems like a different case than the PED users. You can say the PED users are messing with the integrity of the game, specifically the "sacred" records in it, but they were trying to win. Rose's (and Jackson, in theory) gambling actually really threatens the integrity of the game by potentially trying to lose games intentionally. I'm much more sympathetic to the former than the latter.

However, I readily admit that this may be my bias because it's been the gambling rules have been that way since I was a kid versus watching PED use evolve in real time. Though it's convenient that steroids bad but amphetamines ok, and that feels like a purely generational difference, too.

SI

[Swaggs]

Bonds had a 10.6 WAR season in 2004 at the age of 39, which seems to be the year Manfred identifies as the first year of legitimately reported testing (he publicly excused Ortiz’s 2003 positive). The fact that Bagwell, Pudge, and Ortiz are in and Bonds and Clemens are not is just silly. I do like that folks are starting to call out all the “journalists” that were okay with the offensive explosion and popularity while it was going, but couldn’t be bothered to do the investigations into it.

[bhlloy]

The concept that a guy who went from 190 to 230 and started hitting home runs and also failed a test in that time period is worthy of the HOF but two of the best players in the history of the game aren’t is quite something, but I guess never underestimate the ability of crusty old sportswriters to make excuses for not voting for guys who weren’t nice to them back in the day.

[Mike Lowe]

Just posting here to say that Bonds and Clemens (probably others) will eventually be in the MLB HoF, rules be damned.

It's way overdue for that whole process to be reevaluated. This will start it.

[RainMaker]

Cap Anson is in the Hall of Fame.

[BYU 14]

Well yeah, he was a gambling racist when that was not only tolerated, but encouraged and was elected in 1939, hardly the height of the civil rights era and in a time where gambling before 1919 was apparently forgiven.

If nothing else, it tells you how ignorant some modern sports writers are to the history of the game, or their holier than thou asses would be screaming for him to be removed.