Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

[SPTO]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Thome is an absolute LOCK for me.

I know the whole PEDs thing might cloud some people because he was a big looking guy but I recently watched the first game ever at Jacobs Field in '94 and Thome looked pretty much the same as he did the last game of his career.

[lhslancers]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Thome is an absolute LOCK for me.

I know the whole PEDs thing might cloud some people because he was a big looking guy but I recently watched the first game ever at Jacobs Field in '94 and Thome looked pretty much the same as he did the last game of his career.

That's what sets him apart. I would bet on Thome and Jeter being clean.

[ubernoob]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

That's what sets him apart. I would bet on Thome and Jeter being clean.

Betting on anyone that plays any sport to be clean is kinda silly.

[lhslancers]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Betting on anyone that plays any sport to be clean is kinda silly.

OK they're all dirty. I would bet on Thome and Jeter being clean.

[DrJones]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Thome is an absolute LOCK for me.

I know the whole PEDs thing might cloud some people because he was a big looking guy but I recently watched the first game ever at Jacobs Field in '94 and Thome looked pretty much the same as he did the last game of his career.

Jeff Bagwell looked pretty huge in '94 as well, but plenty of BBWAA writers suspect him.

I've met Bagwell, Thome, Jason Giambi, Frank Thomas, Gary Sheffield, Rafael Palmeiro, Luis Gonzalez and others during the 99-02 period, and they all looked like gigantic freaks in person. Which were juicing and which were merely "country strong", I have no idea.

Personally, I believe it's up to MLB, not the BBWAA, to determine what the HoF consequences are for PED users. If they don't want juicers in the Hall, MLB should disqualify those who've either failed a test or admitted using. The writers should merely determine if players should be inducted based on on-field performance. It's especially egregious for votes to be cast based on guesswork. If Thome's numbers and performance relative to his peers and position say he should be in, vote for him. Same for Bagwell and Piazza (and Bonds and Clemens and whoever).

[DrJones]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Jeff Bagwell looked pretty huge in '94 as well, but plenty of BBWAA writers suspect him.

I've met Bagwell, Thome, Jason Giambi, Frank Thomas, Gary Sheffield, Rafael Palmeiro, Luis Gonzalez and others during the 99-02 period, and they all looked like gigantic freaks in person. Which were juicing and which were merely "country strong", I have no idea.

Personally, I believe it's up to MLB, not the BBWAA, to determine what the HoF consequences are for PED users. If they don't want juicers in the Hall, MLB should disqualify those who've either failed a test or admitted using. The writers should merely determine if players should be inducted based on on-field performance. It's especially egregious for votes to be cast based on guesswork. If Thome's numbers and performance relative to his peers and position say he should be in, vote for him. Same for Bagwell and Piazza (and Bonds and Clemens and whoever).

EDIT: The quote below is from almost 2 years ago. Apparently I repeat myself a lot, though at least I'm consistent.

No on Vizquel, yes on Thome. Though I'd have a few questions for the voters if they keep Piazza and Bagwell out due to 'roid suspicion but give Thome a pass. I met Thome (as well as his power-hitting contemporaries Giambi, Palmeiro, Sheffield, Bagwell, Thomas, L. Gonzalez, etc.) circa 2000 and up close he looked as ridiculously built as any of the others. If the BBWAA thinks Thome's merely "country strong", does that mean they think he would've hit 700-800 HR if juicing?

[SPTO]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Jeff Bagwell looked pretty huge in '94 as well, but plenty of BBWAA writers suspect him.

I've met Bagwell, Thome, Jason Giambi, Frank Thomas, Gary Sheffield, Rafael Palmeiro, Luis Gonzalez and others during the 99-02 period, and they all looked like gigantic freaks in person. Which were juicing and which were merely "country strong", I have no idea.

Personally, I believe it's up to MLB, not the BBWAA, to determine what the HoF consequences are for PED users. If they don't want juicers in the Hall, MLB should disqualify those who've either failed a test or admitted using. The writers should merely determine if players should be inducted based on on-field performance. It's especially egregious for votes to be cast based on guesswork. If Thome's numbers and performance relative to his peers and position say he should be in, vote for him. Same for Bagwell and Piazza (and Bonds and Clemens and whoever).

You make such strong and concise common sense points. Why can't there be more people like you in the sports world?

[lhslancers]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Fred McGriff is probably the ultimate borderline case. 493 HR nearly .900 OPS. I think he's a HOF player.

[jth1331]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Fred McGriff is probably the ultimate borderline case. 493 HR nearly .900 OPS. I think he's a HOF player.

What is crazy to me is if he hits 7 more homeruns, he's probably a near lock. But because he has "just" 493, no way.

as regards to all these "roid" users, yeah, there are a lot of iffy questions and if voters let Thome in but not Bagwell, etc., then the HOF is becoming even more ridiculous.

[Sportsforever]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

What is crazy to me is if he hits 7 more homeruns, he's probably a near lock. But because he has "just" 493, no way.

as regards to all these "roid" users, yeah, there are a lot of iffy questions and if voters let Thome in but not Bagwell, etc., then the HOF is becoming even more ridiculous.

I've mentioned this before…McGriff suffers more than anyone from the 1994 strike. He missed 68 games between the 1994 strike and the shortened 1995 season. I am pretty sure he'd hit 7 homers in that stretch and if he's over 500 the voters look at him completely different. Hate that the strike might cost him the HOF...

[AC]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

McGriff is way above the standards for a first baseman. .383 wOBA, 134 wRC+, 57.2 fWAR. Had an impressive peak and somehow managed to post .407 wOBAs and 156 wRC+s in back to back years, lol. Plus, he's a Blue Jay, which can't hurt.

Even though I dunno if he'd go in as a Jay or not, he's an easy lock for me.

[Sportsforever]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

McGriff is way above the standards for a first baseman. .383 wOBA, 134 wRC+, 57.2 fWAR. Had an impressive peak and somehow managed to post .407 wOBAs and 156 wRC+s in back to back years, lol. Plus, he's a Blue Jay, which can't hurt.

Even though I dunno if he'd go in as a Jay or not, he's an easy lock for me.

I'd love to see him in as a Brave, but an argument could be made for either team…and yes, I agree he's a HOF.

[DrJones]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

You make such strong and concise common sense points. Why can't there be more people like you in the sports world?

Because the people like this refuse to die.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/26/murray-chass-thinks-craig-biggio-did-steroids/

[ImTellinTim]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Because the people like this refuse to die.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...-did-steroids/

Boy, the comments section on that article escalated quickly.

[rsnomar05]

Re: Hall Of Fame: Yes Or No?

Boy, the comments section on that article escalated quickly.

How an article on Murray Chass's HOF ballot lead to a comments section argument on homosexuality and evolution is beyond me.

On topic, absolute YES on McGriff. But these stupid hard-lines like "he must have 3000 hits or 500 homers" will likely keep him out. I'm hoping that as analytics continue to play an increased role in player evaluation that those hard-lines will begin to change.