Barry, Big Mac, and the Hall

[lesgrant]

If you take away 2000 (49 HR) and 2001(73 HR) from Bonds’ legacy he still makes it. Those were the problem years (for me anyway) where his power output is ‘out of character’. Minus that period, Bonds is among the top 5 all round players of all time. I just don’t think he should be on the same page as Ruth (because he was also an incredible pitcher) and Aaron (because he holds the record).

Mac is much more sketchy. Much of his notoriety is tied to the single season HR record and his HR output isn’t as consistent as Bonds’. It’s much harder to speculate what he could have generated without ‘roids.

And cmchampa2, I don’t think Sosa or Mac’s numbers post-roids are an indication of their true abilities anymore than their roided stats. There is a steep drop-off in production and health after using that stuff. Essentially, it looks like ‘roids shorten the productive portion of a player’s career.

I’m left to wonder if Bonds could have broken the (all time) record without steroids. Right now his health and legal problems stemming from steroid related scandals are the impediments to Aaron’s record. Had he never used, could he have come back from injuries late in his career? Would he have the longevity to better Hank Aaron – keeping in mind that Aaron only hit more than 45 in a season once?

A NO answer would make things easy. But a YES would be one of the greatest tragedies in all of sports: a cheater who didn’t need to cheat to be the greatest. Very sad.

We will never know.

But, isn’t that the way Baseball screws itself all the time? We will never know how great the likes of Cobb, Ruth and Williams were because they played in a segregated league. If the game did the right thing then, we would know now. If Baseball had a strict steroids policy from the moment they banned steroids in the late 80s, we’d know about Bonds and Mac as well.

[bleach168]

If they let Bonds and Mac in, they better let Pete Rose in too.

[OwenTheBlonde]

My problem is that we just don't know who has taken steroids, only who people tell us has taken them. We can surmise all we want but we'll never know. It's left to the opinions of sportswriters, etc who vote and we know the process is subjective enough as is. If, as a HOF voter, you say that McGwire was on steroids, then you better ask yourself if say, Bagwell was, and any other player that may or may not but we just don't know. NOTE: Bagwell was just an example, no implications. If steroids were as rampant as many way, then it almost needs to be thrown out of the selection process.

[Deuce]

Mark McGwire and Barry are both deserving and going into the Hall of Fame. No question. So far in this post, I have only seen reaction to the latest scandals. Who in the HOF is without scandal or question?
Let he who hath not sinned, cast the first stone.

For the past 10-15 years, these two have been the premier players in the game. Not because they were on juice, but because they could play the game of baseball.
This poll was not about whether or not they should be in the HOF, it is simply another attempt to exclude Barry, while not seeming racist.
Together and alone, they made baseball worth watching after the strike. The excitement the homerun chases have created, has been a major part of the return of baseball fans. If you don't believe that, don't draft Bonds, Pujols, Abreu, Rodriguez or any other power hitter.

[Pacman]

I think Jeff Horrigan of the Boston Herald put it best (he's quoted in this article that's linked at the beginning of this thread):

"I begrudge the era that tolerated this more than I begrudge the man," said Jeff Horrigan of the Boston Herald, who said he would vote for both. "You can't wipe out the '90s."

I agree with that.

[RynMan]

They should both be in the hall in my mind.

They only surveyed 31% of the total people voting so this doesn't mean it wouldnt happen. Theres a good chance that they still would.

[OwenTheBlonde]

I think Jeff Horrigan of the Boston Herald put it best (he's quoted in this article that's linked at the beginning of this thread):

"I begrudge the era that tolerated this more than I begrudge the man," said Jeff Horrigan of the Boston Herald, who said he would vote for both. "You can't wipe out the '90s."

I agree with that.

Perfectly said. In the "Juiced Era" they were in the elite. Nuff said. Keep out a couple of people and you better be prepared to keep a whole lot more out. Both should be in, no question.

[beltrans_boy]

Until conclusive proof comes out that they cheated, let them in.

If it is proven beyond a resonable doubt that either Bonds or McGwire have cheated at ANY point in their career, then don't let them in.

It's as simple as that, folks. Precedent was set with Pete Rose. He broke the rules of baseball, thus he's not allowed in the HoF. That should be the standard by which all ballplayers are judged.

[Honus]

Mark McGwire and Barry are both deserving and going into the Hall of Fame. No question. So far in this post, I have only seen reaction to the latest scandals. Who in the HOF is without scandal or question?
Let he who hath not sinned, cast the first stone.

For the past 10-15 years, these two have been the premier players in the game. Not because they were on juice, but because they could play the game of baseball.
This poll was not about whether or not they should be in the HOF, it is simply another attempt to exclude Barry, while not seeming racist.
Together and alone, they made baseball worth watching after the strike. The excitement the homerun chases have created, has been a major part of the return of baseball fans. If you don't believe that, don't draft Bonds, Pujols, Abreu, Rodriguez or any other power hitter.

There are a lot of things in this post I diagree with. There is A LOT of question about whether either of these two should be in the HOF.

Here are the key criterion for HOF voters:

Rules for Election to the National Baseball Hall of Fame by Members of the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA):

5. Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Player's record and ability? In question - both probably would have faded earlier without steroids.

Integrity - They cheated and they lied about cheating.

Sportsmanship - They stuck needles in their butts to gain an inappropriate advantage when the essence of competition is a fair/level playing field.

Character - At every opportunity to show character, they have done the opposite to cover their cheating.

"For the past 10-15 years, these two have been the premier players in the game. Not because they were on juice, but because they could play the game of baseball."

If they were so darn good, why did they have to inject themselves with drugs?

"Together and alone, they made baseball worth watching after the strike."

Baseball would have recovered without them. Neither of them had anything to do with the exciting playoff run of the Cubs two years ago or the come from behind victory of the Red Sox last year.

Integrity, sportsmanship and character are supposed to be key factors. It is somewhat irritating to me when people in steroid discussions bring up the fact that players who cheated by corking bats or throwing spitballs have been inducted. Just because HOF voters errored by rewarding cheaters in the past does not mean that it should be overlooked in the present. Will the same excuses be made 50 years from now when players are finding new ways to cheat? An opportunity exists to draw the line today and send a very, very powerful message for future athletes - don't cheat or you will never get into the Hall of Fame. Bud Selig and the head of the union and those other oxygen thieves who perpetuate this drug using culture should be removed from power. Their replacements should make it very simple and very clear for everyone - if you use steroids, or amphetimines, or human growth hormone and are found out, you will never again play major league baseball in this country (have you ever seen the movie Eight Men Out - a couple of guys got treated very harshly, but a very clear message was sent and games being thrown has not been a major issue since, if it has been an issue at all). It isn't complicated, it is very simple - it's just that the leaders try to make it complicated so they can make it seem like they aren't to blame.

And, Sosa and McGwire didn't save baseball and Bonds is not the reason fans come to the park - if they had never existed, people would still want to experience the innate thrills of the game, would still want to be there when the Sox come back to beat the Yanks. These people who defend cheaters amaze me - I guess they are just big fans or something. But the thing is, if the cheaters weren't in the game, somebody would still have the highest batting average, somebody would still have the most homeruns, somebody would still win the World Series - and they could be fans of THOSE guys - the ones who don't get the recognition they should because they chose to do the RIGHT thing and not spin the steroid wheel of fate with their bodies.


These guys cheated. They lied. They stole money from young players who should have been in the Show but instead had to wallow in the minors because some older dude took steroids and unnaturally prolonged his career. They made a silent scream to kids that doing drugs was not only right, but really the only way to go.

If McGwire doesn't make the HOF and Bonds, Sheffield, Sosa, Giambi and IRod (or whoever is found to have used steroids) are banned from baseball, it will send the strong kind of message that should be sent. And 50 years from now, nobody will care (when's the last time somebody put a post on this board saying that Shoeless Joe Jackson of the Black Sox was screwed and should be in the HOF?).

[moochman]

It's as simple as that, folks. Precedent was set with Pete Rose. He broke the rules of baseball, thus he's not allowed in the HoF. That should be the standard by which all ballplayers are judged.

That's incorrect, the standard by which all ballplayers are judged is their numbers. Hit over 3,000 hits = in. Win over 300 games = in. Hit over 500 HRs = in. And there's the rub. HR numbers have been artificially inflated during the steroid era. Sosa, Bonds, And McLiar are the figureheads of MLB's tainted monter mashers.

Bonds is a lock to be a first ballot HOFer. He has put up the numbers worthy of one of the best players ever. And that is prior to him disgracing himself. Barry won 3 MVP awards as a stick figure. His credentials are solid and beyond reproach.
Mark McLiar, however, is a different story. Here we have the case of a player who prior to cheating was never going to be mentioned in the same breath as the HOF. His injuries alone would have prevented him from playing enough to put up the numbers needed. I would hope that the voters would take that into consideration when they vote. Even if they feel that both are lying and have deceived baseball, themselves, and the fans, they must remember who is the fraud and who is a HOFer.
Throw McLiar to the curb, but Bonds earned his place.