Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

[Sportsforever]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Apparently right now Bonds and Clemens got around 71% of votes.

Names who'll likely be in are Bagwell and Raines with over 90%(about time Raines made it), Pudge with almost 85%, and Vlad with just over 75%.

Where is this info coming from? The results aren't announced until mid-January...

EDIT: Never mind...I found that guy's HOF tracker. Interesting stuff...

[Majingir]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Where is this info coming from? The results aren't announced until mid-January...

EDIT: Never mind...I found that guy's HOF tracker. Interesting stuff...

https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=F2E5D8FC5199DFAF!7731&ithint=file,xlsx&app=Excel&authkey=!AE2Lu5P1f92OW8o

[SPTO]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Wow. That's quite the turn of events. Could it be the BBWA isn't as dumb as I thought?


Sent from my HTCD200LVWPP using Tapatalk

Don't necessarily think it's a matter of being "dumb" but holding some kind of moral standards. Honestly I can see both sides. You have to remember that the BBWAA is starting to skew younger plus the whole hypocrisy of Selig getting in when he basically turned a blind eye to the steroid era.

[DamnYanks2]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Don't necessarily think it's a matter of being "dumb" but holding some kind of moral standards. Honestly I can see both sides. You have to remember that the BBWAA is starting to skew younger plus the whole hypocrisy of Selig getting in when he basically turned a blind eye to the steroid era.

You took that too literal, I meant that, in the way, could they be getting off their high horse finally?

I agree, Selig should open the floodgates.

Sent from my HTCD200LVWPP using Tapatalk

[BigOscar]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Not sure how I feel about players only suspected of drug use being blackballed in the way they are, even if there is a lot of convincing speculation. At the end of the day, innocent until proven guilty still means something to me, even if it as an era where no one was trying to prove anyone guilty.

If someone tests positive and is found guilty, then fine, ban them from the HOF, put it in the rules for penalties for PED use as well as those bans. But without clear rules on these things then it just muddles things and you end up with players missing out on the HOF because the ballot is filled with people who either should definitely be in, or definitely not be on the ballot at all. Every year these people remain on the ballot is taking votes away from other more marginal contenders.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

It's murkier than that, Bonds and Clemens didn't fail tests.

[Qdiddy]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Not sure how I feel about players only suspected of drug use being blackballed in the way they are, even if there is a lot of convincing speculation. At the end of the day, innocent until proven guilty still means something to me, even if it as an era where no one was trying to prove anyone guilty.

If someone tests positive and is found guilty, then fine, ban them from the HOF, put it in the rules for penalties for PED use as well as those bans. But without clear rules on these things then it just muddles things and you end up with players missing out on the HOF because the ballot is filled with people who either should definitely be in, or definitely not be on the ballot at all. Every year these people remain on the ballot is taking votes away from other more marginal contenders.

I agree, the rules at the time did not ban these substances, much like spit ball pitchers back in the day. Every era has its "enhancement" thing and until its officially ban then those using it should not be punished imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[redsox4evur]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

It's murkier than that, Bonds and Clemens didn't fail tests.

Also as Buster Olney said in a piece I read last night there are already PED users in the HOF.

[Sportsforever]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

IMO, the reaction/handling to the 'steroid era' is more disgraceful than what any of the PED guys ever did. The sooner they vote the right guys in and we can move past all this the better.

[redsox4evur]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

I think the bigger story here is that Manny is polling at 31.5%, especially where he failed not 1 but 2 drug tests.

[DrJones]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

I agree, the rules at the time did not ban these substances, much like spit ball pitchers back in the day. Every era has its "enhancement" thing and until its officially ban then those using it should not be punished imo.

Incorrect. The "substances" that Bonds/Clemens et al allegedly used were banned at the time.
MLB banned steroids in 1991. The players' union wouldn't allow testing until 2003.

[Qdiddy]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Incorrect. The "substances" that Bonds/Clemens et al allegedly used were banned at the time.
MLB banned steroids in 1991. The players' union wouldn't allow testing until 2003.

You are correct, thanks I totally forgot it was banned that far back just not tested for


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Caulfield]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

The HoF lost its integrity on keeping the riffraff out when it inducted Ty Cobb.
If they can make an exception for Cobb, then they can make an exception for
Shoeless Joe, Pete Rose, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. IMO

[TripleCrown9]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

The HoF lost its integrity on keeping the riffraff out when it inducted Ty Cobb.
If they can make an exception for Cobb, then they can make an exception for
Shoeless Joe, Pete Rose, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. IMO

One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong

[Master Live 013]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Bagwell, Raines and Pudge Rodriguez are the Class of 2017.