|
Post by RepairmanJack on Dec 3, 2006 0:02:47 GMT -5
Balloting is going on as I write this for the next group of players to be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. There are two locks for election--Tony Gwynn and Cal Ripkin Jr.. It is another name that is causing a lot of debate among fans and even non-fans. The player is Mark McGuire. He is the first player from the steroid era whom many people feel used steroids. The question is since he never was proven to have taken them should he be denied entry to the HOF? I have to say no. From day one players have tried to find whatever advantage--legal or illegal--they could. Batters cork their bats. Pitchers doctor the baseball. Can we say that there are no players currently in the HOF who never stretched the rules? Amphetamines were rampant in the game in the 60s and 70s. How is that different from steroids. It is still illegally obtaining a drug to try and improve player performance. None of those players were kept out of the HOF. And the last thing that bothers me is the sports writers making a big deal about it now. Where were there when he was supposedly taking steroids? Writers who see the players everyday and they don't know anything is going on? Who is kidding who? I say don't vote him in on the first ballot (Gwynn and Ripkin deserve to go in without any controversy), but after that vote based on his statistics and not allegations...
|
|
|
Post by RepairmanJack on Jan 10, 2007 0:28:08 GMT -5
The balloting is over and the results were announced today. As we all thought Ripkin and Gwynn were elected easily. McGuire got less than 1/4 of the votes necessary. This does not bode well for him. Players are eligible for 15 years as long as they get at least 5% of the vote. Time will tell how players from the steroid era do in future Hall of Fame elections... Complete voting results can be seen here sports.espn.go.com/mlb/hof07/news/story?id=2725461
|
|
|
Post by MaxQuad on Jan 10, 2007 8:38:34 GMT -5
McGuire got less than 1/4 of the votes necessary. This does not bode well for him. Players are eligible for 15 years as long as they get at least 5% of the vote. Time will tell how players from the steroid era do in future Hall of Fame elections... RJ, What are your thoughts on the McGuire vote percentage? What is your view of whether or not he should be elected? As much as he captured my heart during his record breaking season, I am now in the camp of not wanting to reward those who have artificially enhanced their physical prowess. Yes, a fine line between that and the foreign-substance-on-the-ball pitchers, but I never said I was internally consistent with my logic. MQ
|
|
|
Post by stubedoo on Jan 11, 2007 2:08:29 GMT -5
McGuire got less than 1/4 of the votes necessary. This does not bode well for him. Players are eligible for 15 years as long as they get at least 5% of the vote. Time will tell how players from the steroid era do in future Hall of Fame elections... RJ, What are your thoughts on the McGuire vote percentage? What is your view of whether or not he should be elected? As much as he captured my heart during his record breaking season, I am now in the camp of not wanting to reward those who have artificially enhanced their physical prowess. Yes, a fine line between that and the foreign-substance-on-the-ball pitchers, but I never said I was internally consistent with my logic. MQ Well, I personally think he's toast. He'll never get in. Pity, really, because Barry [expletive deleted] Bonds will get in regardless. Also, I might fly out to watch Tony Gwynn's induction. He's always been one of my favorite players and I have an autographed baseball by him. My other favorite player is Trevor Hoffman--another future HOFer. (Padres fan). And a third favorite player just got bought up by the Padres--ANOTHER future first round draft HOFer. Greg Maddox. Did you hear that Raphael Palmiero is going to try to make a come back at 42?
|
|
|
Post by MaxQuad on Jan 11, 2007 15:24:42 GMT -5
Well, I personally think he's toast. He'll never get in. Pity, really, because Barry [expletive deleted] Bonds will get in regardless. Did you hear that Raphael Palmiero is going to try to make a come back at 42? Barry Baby - today's story? Amphetamines. His story? Got them from a locker of a team mate - unwittingly. Yes, I believe him. As for Palmiero - remnants of his performance enhancing drugs allow him to physically do it, eh? MQ
|
|
|
Post by stubedoo on Jan 11, 2007 17:08:27 GMT -5
Well, I personally think he's toast. He'll never get in. Pity, really, because Barry [expletive deleted] Bonds will get in regardless. Did you hear that Raphael Palmiero is going to try to make a come back at 42? Barry Baby - today's story? Amphetamines. His story? Got them from a locker of a team mate - unwittingly. Yes, I believe him. As for Palmiero - remnants of his performance enhancing drugs allow him to physically do it, eh? MQ Yes. Sure. He accidentally opened up a locker of a team mate and accidentally saw an unfamiliar pill, and accidentally picked it up and accidentally put it in his mouth and accidentally swallowed.
|
|
|
Post by MaxQuad on Jan 12, 2007 17:42:43 GMT -5
Yes. Sure. He accidentally opened up a locker of a team mate and accidentally saw an unfamiliar pill, and accidentally picked it up and accidentally put it in his mouth and accidentally swallowed. Stubedoo, I believe I detect some sarcasm in your words. Barry is right. People are out to get him. His paranoia is justified, I guess. Oh, the plight of misunderstood superstars. MQ
|
|
|
Post by RepairmanJack on Jan 13, 2007 0:10:56 GMT -5
The plight indeed...
I have to say I have thought long and hard on the steroid issue. As a huge baseball fan I do care about the game and the direction it takes. That said I was happy McGuire did not get in on his first try. And I do not think he will be elected in future ballots. I just hope the reason is because of his statistics and not the steroid issue. He was a one dimensional player who hit a lot of home runs in an era of inflated stats. Does that make him HOF worthy? I am not so sure. As far as the steroid allegations--nothing was proven and he never failed a drug test so how can writers use that as the excuse? Especially when ALL the writers conveniently ignored reporting on any steroid use by the players. Retroactive morality is not the solution to the problem...
|
|
|
Post by MaxQuad on Jan 13, 2007 16:10:19 GMT -5
Retroactive morality is not the solution to the problem... RJ, I hear what you are saying and believe there is some truth in it...yet, I seem to remember McGuire's chase for the record was not without those who questioned a variety of aspects of it, including the concern that his performance was enhanced by steroids. Subsequently his testimony before Congress was not a shining moment for him - nor a confidence builder that he followed the rules. Lastly, is it retroactive morality? After all, major league baseball may not have done anything when it should have, but a number of baseball writers did say something at the time - and now it is the writers who vote, not major league owners and employees. Thus, no reason for the writers to be consistent with what the owners may have condoned either explicitly or implicitly. Just thinking out loud - and trying to find reasons to feel very good about McGuire not getting in. MQ
|
|