Bonds and Clemens denied again.

[Bubb Rubb]

Please list the reason he is the greatest hitter ever.

He was a great hitter no doubt...but his accomplishment that would put him at the top were ALL enhanced by steroid use. Therefore I cannot put him ahead of many guys that didn't use. Again, the bad part is he would already have been in on the first ballot if he never used. His inflated numbers wouldn't be as gawdy but he'd be thought of as a great all around player.

How do you know who didn't use? How do you know who else was using when Bonds was? That's why these are futile debates. Players have taken performance enhancers back to the golden era. Dimaggio talked about "vitamin shots" that everyone of that era were taking...that turned out to be methamphetamine. Players in the 60s and 70s took amphetamines like they were tic tacs. Players in the 80s did a lot of cocaine. Tim Raines, a new hall of famer, once admitted that he had a vial of coke break in his back pocket during a game.

When sports writers single out players in the steroids era, they are being very hypocritical. I'm not making excuses for the players, but you have to apply these arguments consistently. Players have been looking for an edge all the way back to the turn of the century when they soaked their hands in horse piss to prevent blisters.

You can't say Bonds was so much better because of steroids, because he was getting hits off pitchers who may also have been juicing. If his performance was elevated, so was the performance of many players around him. You can't just make a blanket statement that he was so much better because of it. Ken Caminiti estimated that 80% or more of the league was juicing at one point.

[Dawg61]

How do you know who didn't use? How do you know who else was using when Bonds was? That's why these are futile debates. Players have taken performance enhancers back to the golden era. Dimaggio talked about "vitamin shots" that everyone of that era were taking...that turned out to be methamphetamine. Players in the 60s and 70s took amphetamines like they were tic tacs. Players in the 80s did a lot of cocaine. Tim Raines, a new hall of famer, once admitted that he had a vial of coke break in his back pocket during a game.

When sports writers single out players in the steroids era, they are being very hypocritical. I'm not making excuses for the players, but you have to apply these arguments consistently. Players have been looking for an edge all the way back to the turn of the century when they soaked their hands in horse piss to prevent blisters.

You can't say Bonds was so much better because of steroids, because he was getting hits off pitchers who may also have been juicing. If his performance was elevated, so was the performance of many players around him. You can't just make a blanket statement that he was so much better because of it. Ken Caminiti estimated that 80% or more of the league was juicing at one point.

This!! All of it!!

[smootness]

How do you know who didn't use? How do you know who else was using when Bonds was? That's why these are futile debates. Players have taken performance enhancers back to the golden era. Dimaggio talked about "vitamin shots" that everyone of that era were taking...that turned out to be methamphetamine. Players in the 60s and 70s took amphetamines like they were tic tacs. Players in the 80s did a lot of cocaine. Tim Raines, a new hall of famer, once admitted that he had a vial of coke break in his back pocket during a game.

When sports writers single out players in the steroids era, they are being very hypocritical. I'm not making excuses for the players, but you have to apply these arguments consistently. Players have been looking for an edge all the way back to the turn of the century when they soaked their hands in horse piss to prevent blisters.

You can't say Bonds was so much better because of steroids, because he was getting hits off pitchers who may also have been juicing. If his performance was elevated, so was the performance of many players around him. You can't just make a blanket statement that he was so much better because of it. Ken Caminiti estimated that 80% or more of the league was juicing at one point.

I don't. But I know Bonds did. That removes him from the debate. Sorry.

[Bubb Rubb]

I don't. But I know Bonds did. That removes him from the debate. Sorry.

OK, so you eliminate all of them, or you eliminate non of them. You just can't selectively enforce it. We "know" of a lot of people who did it. We're all fairly certain that Bagwell and Piazza did it (now HOF'ers). There are guys, like our own Palmiero, who should be in the HOF because he is on the very exclusive 3000 hit/500 homerun club. When did they start using? When did they stop. How many times? Who did they face who was using? It's just wrong to selectively penalize a few when so many of the era were doing it. It's also reasonable to assume that some of our "poster boys" of that era, who we would never suspect would juice, probably did it, too.

I'm not excusing Bonds, and I hated the guy as a player. But I'm also not going to deny his talent - he's easily in the discussion of one of the best players of all time, regardless of steroid use.

[Dawg61]

It's also reasonable to assume that some of our "poster boys" of that era, who we would never suspect would juice, probably did it, too.

Cal Ripken

[smootness]

OK, so you eliminate all of them, or you eliminate non of them. You just can't selectively enforce it. We "know" of a lot of people who did it. We're all fairly certain that Bagwell and Piazza did it (now HOF'ers). There are guys, like our own Palmiero, who should be in the HOF because he is on the very exclusive 3000 hit/500 homerun club. When did they start using? When did they stop. How many times? Who did they face who was using? It's just wrong to selectively penalize a few when so many of the era were doing it. It's also reasonable to assume that some of our "poster boys" of that era, who we would never suspect would juice, probably did it, too.

I'm not excusing Bonds, and I hated the guy as a player. But I'm also not going to deny his talent - he's easily in the discussion of one of the best players of all time, regardless of steroid use.

Yes, I can. I remove those who I strongly believe cheated. Bonds is one of them.

Bonds was a truly great player before HGH, no question. And his results once he did are the best ever, no question. But I couldn't care less what he did after he started taking HGH, I don't count it.

[Bubb Rubb]

Yes, I can. I remove those who I strongly believe cheated. Bonds is one of them.

Bonds was a truly great player before HGH, no question. And his results once he did are the best ever, no question. But I couldn't care less what he did after he started taking HGH, I don't count it.

My bad. When I said "you" can't enforce it...it was more a general "baseball can't selectively enforce it." We all have our own opinions and biases. I just have a problem with baseball writers, most of whom never put on a set of leggings in their lives, selectively choosing who is worthy and not worthy for the hall based on those biases. At the end of the day, you deserve it or you don't. And if cheating got you there, well, other cheaters have been rewarded, so where do you draw the line? It's hard to selectively enforce those things.

[smootness]

My bad. When I said "you" can't enforce it...it was more a general "baseball can't selectively enforce it." We all have our own opinions and biases. I just have a problem with baseball writers, most of whom never put on a set of leggings in their lives, selectively choosing who is worthy and not worthy for the hall based on those biases. At the end of the day, you deserve it or you don't. And if cheating got you there, well, other cheaters have been rewarded, so where do you draw the line? It's hard to selectively enforce those things.

Their entire job in voting is to determine who is worthy and not worthy of the HOF. They can choose whatever criteria they want.

Those who were clearly cheaters should be out. No, you won't catch everyone. That's life. We don't close down all our prisons because we'll never catch them all.

[Dawg61]

Their entire job in voting is to determine who is worthy and not worthy of the HOF. They can choose whatever criteria they want.

Those who were clearly cheaters should be out. No, you won't catch everyone. That's life. We don't close down all our prisons because we'll never catch them all.

As long as they keep out the guys you don't like anyways what's it matter right? What happens if they keep out your favorite player next though? You gonna find fault with the system then? Just outta curiosity who is your favorite player that is in the HOF? Would you be pissed if they refused to vote him in cause of allegedly taking steroids during a time when everyone was taking steroids? Nobody gives a shit till the shit is on your doorstep.