Steroids and HOF votes?

[mjb2124]

Re: Steroids and HOF votes?

joeboo......we finally disagree on something.

Steroid use was not against baseball policy while these players used them. Plain and simple. I understand they were against the law, but many players have violated many laws during their playing times and that never stopped anyone.

Baseball has a history of:

Cocaine abuse
Alcohol abuse (during prohibition)
Gambling (not on baseball)

And let's not forget the moral issues as well:

Womanizing
Adultery

The list goes on and on. While I don't agree with steroid use/abuse, you can't hold something over a players head when it wasn't against the games set of rules.

I see your side of it and completely understand where you're coming from. I'm having a hard time accepting that even though there weren't rules in MLB about steroid use, those players stats/records should be valid.

When I look at a guy and think HOF, I usually compare his stats to current players and players of the past in the HOF. With the steroid issues, it's hard to do that. Comparing players of different generations is tough to do anyway, but factoring in steroids is making it even more difficult.

Here's another thing I'm on the fence with - 300 wins, 3000 hits or 500 HR's has usually been HOF worthy in the past. Now with steroid issues, is that still true? I need to think about that more because I'm not sure how I feel about it.

With that said, there's no doubt in my mind Bonds gets in the HOF. McGwire probably will as well - just not 1st ballot.

[mjb2124]

Re: Steroids and HOF votes?

joeboo......we finally disagree on something.

Steroid use was not against baseball policy while these players used them. Plain and simple. I understand they were against the law, but many players have violated many laws during their playing times and that never stopped anyone.

Baseball has a history of:

Cocaine abuse
Alcohol abuse (during prohibition)
Gambling (not on baseball)

And let's not forget the moral issues as well:

Womanizing
Adultery

The list goes on and on. While I don't agree with steroid use/abuse, you can't hold something over a players head when it wasn't against the games set of rules.

I see your side of it and completely understand where you're coming from. I'm having a hard time accepting that even though there weren't rules in MLB about steroid use, those players stats/records should be valid.

When I look at a guy and think HOF, I usually compare his stats to current players and players of the past in the HOF. With the steroid issues, it's hard to do that. Comparing players of different generations is tough to do anyway, but factoring in steroids is making it even more difficult.

Here's another thing I'm on the fence with - 300 wins, 3000 hits or 500 HR's has usually been HOF worthy in the past. Now with steroid issues, is that still true? I need to think about that more because I'm not sure how I feel about it.

With that said, there's no doubt in my mind Bonds gets in the HOF. McGwire probably will as well - just not 1st ballot.

[bravosfan]

Re: Steroids and HOF votes?

Steroids were prohibited by Major League Baseball at least as early as 1997:


MLB Drug Policy and Prevention Program

This policy was distributed as a memorandum from Bud Selig, Chairman of Major League Baseball, to all Major League Baseball Clubs, on May 15, 1997. The policy is subject to change.

Major League Baseball's Drug Policy

The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players and personnel is strictly prohibited. Major League players or personnel involved in the possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game. In addition to any discipline this office may impose, a Club also may take action under applicable provisions of and special covenants to the Uniform Player's Contract.

This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs and controlled substances, including steroids or prescription drugs for which the individual in possession of the drug does not have a prescription.

[bravosfan]

Re: Steroids and HOF votes?

Steroids were prohibited by Major League Baseball at least as early as 1997:


MLB Drug Policy and Prevention Program

This policy was distributed as a memorandum from Bud Selig, Chairman of Major League Baseball, to all Major League Baseball Clubs, on May 15, 1997. The policy is subject to change.

Major League Baseball's Drug Policy

The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players and personnel is strictly prohibited. Major League players or personnel involved in the possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game. In addition to any discipline this office may impose, a Club also may take action under applicable provisions of and special covenants to the Uniform Player's Contract.

This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs and controlled substances, including steroids or prescription drugs for which the individual in possession of the drug does not have a prescription.

[SportsTop]

Re: Steroids and HOF votes?

Steroids were prohibited by Major League Baseball at least as early as 1997:


MLB Drug Policy and Prevention Program

This policy was distributed as a memorandum from Bud Selig, Chairman of Major League Baseball, to all Major League Baseball Clubs, on May 15, 1997. The policy is subject to change.

You should bring that up to Congress because Selig just testified that he was unaware of steroid abuse prior to the Andro incident in 1998.

[SportsTop]

Re: Steroids and HOF votes?

Steroids were prohibited by Major League Baseball at least as early as 1997:


MLB Drug Policy and Prevention Program

This policy was distributed as a memorandum from Bud Selig, Chairman of Major League Baseball, to all Major League Baseball Clubs, on May 15, 1997. The policy is subject to change.

You should bring that up to Congress because Selig just testified that he was unaware of steroid abuse prior to the Andro incident in 1998.

[jdros13]

Re: Steroids and HOF votes?

You should bring that up to Congress because Selig just testified that he was unaware of steroid abuse prior to the Andro incident in 1998.

This is from Buster Olney's weblog on ESPN.com (it's an insider story so I won't link it).

And please, let's stop with the sham that Selig didn't know about this until 1998. Yesterday, ESPN researchers found a story from 1995, written by Bob Nightengale and printed in the LA Times on July 15 of that year, which contains the following two paragraphs:

Acting Commissioner Bud Selig says the topic (steroids) was last addressed by owners in a private meeting about a year or 18 months ago. The conclusion was that no one had any evidence steroid use should be a concern.
"If baseball has a problem," Selig says, "I must say candidly that we were not aware of it. It certainly hasn't been talked about much. But should we concern ourselves as an industry? I don't know, maybe it's time to bring it up again."

Private meeting. Eighteen months before this story was published, in July of 1995. That dates the issue back to the offseason of 1993-'94, or about four to five years before the Commissioner says he became aware of it.
As one congressman said: Baseball wants to be trusted fully. What has it done to earn that kind of credibility?

[jdros13]

Re: Steroids and HOF votes?

You should bring that up to Congress because Selig just testified that he was unaware of steroid abuse prior to the Andro incident in 1998.

This is from Buster Olney's weblog on ESPN.com (it's an insider story so I won't link it).

And please, let's stop with the sham that Selig didn't know about this until 1998. Yesterday, ESPN researchers found a story from 1995, written by Bob Nightengale and printed in the LA Times on July 15 of that year, which contains the following two paragraphs:

Acting Commissioner Bud Selig says the topic (steroids) was last addressed by owners in a private meeting about a year or 18 months ago. The conclusion was that no one had any evidence steroid use should be a concern.
"If baseball has a problem," Selig says, "I must say candidly that we were not aware of it. It certainly hasn't been talked about much. But should we concern ourselves as an industry? I don't know, maybe it's time to bring it up again."

Private meeting. Eighteen months before this story was published, in July of 1995. That dates the issue back to the offseason of 1993-'94, or about four to five years before the Commissioner says he became aware of it.
As one congressman said: Baseball wants to be trusted fully. What has it done to earn that kind of credibility?