Who do you guys think should get in? Curt Schilling may be the closest. Should the PED users get in? What if it?s just suspected PED use?
Printable View
Who do you guys think should get in? Curt Schilling may be the closest. Should the PED users get in? What if it?s just suspected PED use?
MLB Hall of Fame voting is a sham.
Can't keep the ped users out. MLB and the players' union basically colluded to ensure PED use. The players just responded to the incentives. It'd be one thing if there were a few users and you didn't want to reward them. The people not using were possibly the exception. I'm sure a lot of people using would have preferred to not use PEDs and to compete with other people not using PEDs. They didn't have that option, and understandably most were not willing to give up or shorten their time making millions of dollars over it.Quote:
Originally Posted by William Tecumsah Sherman
Curt Schilling should absolutely be in the HOF but my guess is that the liberal media finds a way to keep him out.
At 79 WAR, Schilling has the 26th highest WAR all time among pitchers & more than such HOFers: Tom Glavine, Don Sutton, Carl Hubbell, Jim Palmer, Smoltz, etc & more than Justin Verlander.
Politics should not play a role in HOF nominations in any way.
As for the Clemens & Bonds, they've got to be in. You can't have Jeff Bagwell, who used PEDs as much as anyone, in the HOF & not the two best players of that era
The biggest problem is some are going to get in, some are not. Palmeiro doesn't have a chance in hell of making it. Either all of them, or none. Already a some in there................Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Agreed, this is the way I see it too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Homedawg
100% agree. The best players of the steroid era get punished more than the lesser players of the era due to being the face of itQuote:
Originally Posted by Homedawg
I mean who thinks Jim thome was legit??? I can go on. Yet arod, palmeiro, Clemons, soda, McGwire and bonds are the big boys that take all the heat. Or most anyway. I do think bonds and Clemons and arod end up in.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
The Baseball HOF should be 100% about what players did ON the field. It's not a House of the Holier Than Thou.
The media has ruined it- like they do everything else.
The Baseball HOF needs to have a process like the Football HOF.
Fishdawg and Dale Murphy agree with this assessmentQuote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
I agree. Unless we keep all out, which is impossible to know, you gotta let this in based on play. History will tell the story of PEDs, but you cannot keep the greats out
Yep. Anyone on this board believe that Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, and Ted Williams wouldn't have used PED's if they were available in their respective era?Quote:
Originally Posted by William Tecumsah Sherman
Harold Baines being in the Hall of Fame completely discredits the institution. That should be immediately revoked.
Curt Schilling is a no-doubter. Should have been 1st ballot.
N/MQuote:
Originally Posted by Rex54
Eta: Commented on wrong quote...
Yes, the Baseball HOF has become a joke. Nobody got in this season. Nobody. That tells you what a sham and flawed process it is right there
Chipper Jones and John Smoltz are outspoken conservatives like Schilling and got in on the first ballot. The idea that the baseball hall of fame voters are some kind of liberal mob who value politics over performance is ridiculous.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Havent seen anything nationally on Chipper or Smoltz. But I have watched Schilling on national shows talking conservatism. Please link Smoltz and Glavine on national media talking about their politics pleaseQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
1. I don't know about Glavine. Not sure why you're bringing him up, because I didn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
2. Are you f'ing serious with that question? Smoltz is well-known for campaigning for Republican candidates, and Jones is well-known for outlandish and controversial statements on Twitter. You could have found this stuff in seconds on Google if you honestly somehow didn't know:
- https://www.masslive.com/redsoxmonst...elected_t.html
- https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...s-offensive-d/
- https://www.daytondailynews.com/spor...D29bEl9p1OCDI/
3. I should have remembered that Mariano Rivera (100% of the vote) is a better example than either Smoltz or Chipper.
I get that conservatives always have a persecution complex, and it's a particularly emotionally trying time for yall right now, but the idea that the baseball HOF voters has some kind of anti-Republican or anti-conservative bias is so easily disproven with lots of recent counterexamples. Remember, facts have to win out over feelings every time, even when our worldviews and agendas really wish the facts went the other way.
Would I vote for Schilling? Of course. His sabermetric stats put him there, and he was the hero of 2 World Series. It sure looks like there are voters with a personal issue with him that is overruling an objective analysis of his career. But evidence strongly and conclusively demonstrates that personal issue is not his politics or else you wouldn't have had such overwhelming support from these same voters for Smoltz, Jones, Rivera, and many others.
He wasn't talking conservatism, he was talking some damn crazy ass bullshit. No offense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Psychological Terrorism on full display. Spiteful Mutant effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
This is from Curt Schilling and it's cold blooded:
Curt Schilling in letter to the Hall of Fame: "I will not participate in the final year of voting. I am requesting to be removed from the ballot. I’ll defer to the veterans committee and men whose opinions actually matter and who are in a position to actually judge a player.''
Is Schilling just being kept out because of his politics? I'd have thought he'd be a sure fire HOFer, but that's just based on what I remember of his playoff performances as a casual fan. Seemed like he was the most dominant pitcher for a few years. Did he just peak in a couple of post seasons? Or was the rest of his career not good? Or are sports writers just as idiotic and blinded by partisanship as the normal press?Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
ETA: Guess I should have read back one page before posting. But still hasn't answered the question of whether there is any legitimate argument that he shouldn't be in the HOF.
Personally, I always saw Schilling as a good not great pitcher. He had three dominant season - which I would suspect were enhanced as pitchers tend not to get better at 34. The one thing he had going for him is that he was money in the post season.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
Frankly, if Dale Murphy can't get in, Schilling shouldn't either.
The one thing that people point to about Raffy being on roids was he stayed injury free. If that is the case then I wouldn't doubt every pitcher in MLB being on them.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
The whole roids thing is making the HOF a joke. They are keeping out Bonds, McGuire, and Sosa which are some of the best power hitters in MLB history along with Clemens.
Raffy also is one of like 6-8 players to get to 500 HRS and 3,000 hits.
They need to put them all in and just put some kind of disclaimer about roids.
The problem with the HOF is the majority of the jack offs that are deciding who does and doesn’t get in .
Fix who can and can’t vote..
Bill James wrote a book back in the 90s, "Hall of Fame: The Politics of Glory". I highly recommend it because it delves into the pure numbers but also the politics involved with hall of fame voting. It's an excellent read for baseball lovers.
I remember when Bonds played for the Pirates .... He looked like a bean pole then and didn't have the power that he later developedQuote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe
Bonds had all the signs of juicing just like McGuire. Raffy didn't really have anything that you would point to as a symptom of juicing.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
That's not entirely true. Bonds had power. He hit 23 HR in '85 at Arizona State; and hit 25 his first full season in Pittsburgh in '87, and averaged 25 a year at Pittsburgh. And yeah, he was a 21-22 year old bean pole then. That's not unusual - Hank Aaron was his first couple of seasons in Milwaukee. If Bonds had maintained that pace over his 22 year career he would have had 550ish HR - basically just like Raffy. The Roids made him a HR monster. I think that is why so many people have issues with him. He was talented enough and would have put up HOF numbers without cheating.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
He was probably the best all around OF in the game before the juice. His numbers after the age of 35 are ridiculous. You don't get that much better without cheating. He was probably the most feared hitter in baseball since Ted Williams.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
If Don Lemon hit 600 homers: "Don Lemon was voted into the Hall of Fame today. He hit 600 homers in his career and was known as one of the premier power hitters of his era, while also being a strong advocate for social justice and equality."
If Tucker Carlson hit 600 homers: "Tucker Carlson was voted into the Hall of Fame today, despite his controversial stance on many issues. While he did hit 600 homers in his career as one of the premier power hitters of his era, many voters refused to vote for Carlson because of character issues concerning his outspoken racist and controversial political beliefs."
The above is how the media would report it.
Wrong....
smh.....
I'm less offended by him juicing, which everybody did although based on the way his body changed, it seemed like he was doing something a little more than others (maybe HGH?), than I am by him putting a big ass pad on his elbow and taking away a quarter of the plate. I've got no problem with batters crowding the plate if they're putting some skin in the game. It's just ridiculous to let them do it with a three inch pad to take the blow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe