Jump to content
NBC Sports EDGE Forums

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, StevieStats said:

I said he checks all the boxes of a steroid user... scrawny scrub 26 year old rookie... didn't become great until 32.... After massive body changes... During steroid era...

But there was actually a report that came out from a former player from the Mariners that didn't have a great career and didn't really make it... He said steroids were rampant in the Mariners clubhouse... When asked for a comment about this in retirement Edgar Martinez claimed he never once ever saw a single steroid or heard of anyone using in the Mariners org... Lmao that's such a laughable lie, he's guilty as heck.

Point is, you can't put him in and not a guy like Bonds. Edgar was a fraction the player of bonds.

If you want to see a team where more than likely the whole team was juicing take a look at the 2001 Mariners. Most damning of all was ARod was on that team. Another funny one was Boone and the power he found from 1998-2001. No proof just amazing the power number increases of players on that team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Smallball said:

I watched it. 
 

I asked you to defend Cobb going into the stands and beating a cripple in front of his children. Something that Cobb admitted to doing. 
I absolutely don’t blame you for avoiding that completely because it invalidates the point you’re trying to make. 

I can't.

One mistake doesn't account for being labeled whatever you call him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, this guy right here said:

I can't.

One mistake doesn't account for being labeled whatever you call him.

I can absolutely agree that one mistake shouldn’t make or break anyone. However it does tell me what he was capable of. 
And even though you saw a nice video (that I did watch) the stories from other players during that time, in their biographies, cemented my option. 
But you’ve also made my ultimate point. I still believe Cobb should be in the HOF regardless. 
 

So should Bonds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2021 at 7:50 PM, GamblorLA said:

I think you mean virtue, rather than virtue signaling.  

Even then, it's not about if they are good or bad people. It's about endangering the game.

Gambling is the ultimate sin because it threatens the integrity of the game. If you could get away with it, we'd never know if the players, umps or managers were actually trying to to do well. 

Roids wrecked all the hallowed records and stats. Obviously baseball is the most stats/numbers driven game, so it was a pretty big deal. Us over 40s grew up wondering if anyone would ever hit 60 dingers again. All that's gone and the records are forever meaningless. It also puts pressure on other players to endanger their health. 

The comparison of roids users to players during segregation, made by another poster, is off.  Babe Ruth didn't create racism to gain an advantage. 

I agree, it's amazing Penn State got away with running a pedo operation. This stuff doesn't matter much compared to stuff like that. But it is consistent to keep people out for damaging the sport without worrying  about all these other issues.

That was my comparison, and it wasn't off, you just didn't see my point. The point wasn't that Babe Ruth created anything; the point was the "hallowed records and stats" you speak of were never all that "special" in the first place. Your (And many others) entire argument is that steroid users accrued stats that allowed them to surpass the "sacred" numbers that Babe Ruth did - which he accrued over a CENTURY ago in a good ol' boys league, where a large percentage of the population wasn't even allowed to participate, where most pitchers not named Walter were throwing about 80 mph or less, in a stadium with 250 foot walls in right and left field. If ANY stats in baseball history warranted asterisks, it's the ones put up in those conditions. You say Barry Bonds made those records meaningless, I say those stats never should have meant all that much in the first place.

Anyone that can overlook segregation as a hurdle to get players into the Hall of Fame shouldn't have much of anything to say about steroids, which weren't tested for until 2003, and wasn't even banned until 2005. So not only are we selectively keeping guys out of the Hall of Fame depending on whichever crime the media seems to be most offended by (spoiler alert: they're most offended by whichever players they don't personally like), we're also doing so for something that literally wasn't a crime to do until one day the media decided it was (again, see "mountain of drugs in McGwire's locker that no one cared about"). 

And "Gambling is the ultimate sin?" whoo boy, one day someone will pull back that curtain, and you're going to hear things that will blow your mind. Let's just say it's probably not a coincidence that Tim Donaghy story was buried deeper than Jeffrey Epstein...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're just saying it was easier to succeed in the past, then sure.  Segregation was only part of it. The population has quadrupled since Ruth. Baseball wasn't quite the dream career it is now. If you had a chance to play MLB but could be a lawyer, you might be wise to choose lawyer. 

This is all standard stuff about why it is pointless to compare eras. 

Bonds and Rose are being kept out as punitive measures for things they did that damaged the sport. Not because those things were the most immoral, but because they hurt baseball. Guys who played in the past did not intentionally cause any of the issues described, so it would be crazy to keep them out as a punitive measure.

Should they be kept out because the standards were lower in the past? I don't think so, but either way, it's not relevant. 

While there were many caveats, including segregation, shorter seasons, etc. many records largely held water prior to roids. 70 HRs is pretty much impossible without cheating. So that record is just kind of done. We'll never see someone flirt with the record again.

Bonds being a jerk certainly doesn't help his cause. Especially since the man whose title he usurped was such an admirable person. Oh well.

As an earlier poster said, I don't care if Bonds or Clemens get in. But neither "deserves" crap and if they don't, they have nobody to blame but themselves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/17/2021 at 6:54 AM, ChrisChinMcCaffrey said:

That's not even bad compared to red schoendiendst.

Wow, never heard of him until now(I see why), and that isn't even an all star much less a HOF stat sheet. He had four above average season according to wRC+, and only one over 120. Stole double digit bases twice in his career and double digit HR's three seasons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/17/2021 at 1:59 PM, Low and Away said:

If you want to see a team where more than likely the whole team was juicing take a look at the 2001 Mariners. Most damning of all was ARod was on that team. Another funny one was Boone and the power he found from 1998-2001. No proof just amazing the power number increases of players on that team.

Arod was not on the 2001 Mariners. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2021 at 8:35 PM, Smallball said:

There have been several documentaries made trying to clear his name.
Reading old books with actual players talking about his character is way more than I needed to know about Cobb. 
 

I had to edit this because of your snide reply. 
You get the honorable task if defending a man that went into the stands and beat a cripple who was heckling him. That’s who your defending. 
 

So please, please lecture and tech me about how he was misunderstood. 

And please do note, that this wasn’t a single incident over a otherwise unblemished 24 year career. 

The guy deserved a beating... Not like the guy was in a wheel chair, he lost a hand and fingers and Cobb had no clue until he got on top of him... The guy picked a fight spouting a bunch of nasty stuff throughout the game at Cobb and it wasn't until he started chirping about his mother sleeping around that Cobb had enough... 

Cobb deserves to be in the hall. He is. Bonds deserves to be in as well and the only people he beat were pitchers.

spacer.png

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, StevieStats said:

The guy deserved a beating... Not like the guy was in a wheel chair, he lost a hand and fingers and Cobb had no clue until he got on top of him... The guy picked a fight spouting a bunch of nasty stuff throughout the game at Cobb and it wasn't until he started chirping about his mother sleeping around that Cobb had enough... 

Cobb deserves to be in the hall. He is. Bonds deserves to be in as well and the only people he beat were pitchers.

spacer.png


I disagree. Think about how many athletes have played the game. You think he was the first to get heckled way past the line?  How many other players in the last 150 years have done that?

Ty Cobb, Ron Artest, and probably a few more and there is zero excuses that can justify it. In fact think of all the black players that probably had every right to go into the stands and beat some a** that didn’t. 
Cobb doesn’t get a pass here for any reason. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Smallball said:


I disagree. Think about how many athletes have played the game. You think he was the first to get heckled way past the line?  How many other players in the last 150 years have done that?

Ty Cobb, Ron Artest, and probably a few more and there is zero excuses that can justify it. In fact think of all the black players that probably had every right to go into the stands and beat some a** that didn’t. 
Cobb doesn’t get a pass here for any reason. 
 

Makes him even more of a legend to me. If Jackie Robinson laid a whooping to someone saying nasty stuff to him I'd love it too, but that's not the type of person he was, not in a bad way he was just more of a sportsman... I don't need all my players to be the same or have the same attitude. I celebrate and enjoy the differences between guys. As much as I love the gentle kind sportsman, I also love the rabid hardline hard as nails gunning at you competitor. And the hall of Fame needs to be filled with all of these different personalities and different qualities you can find all throughout people.

He belongs in the hall regardless of whooping that foul mouthed trash bag fan. You don't need to like him, you can hate him like many did and do. But he belongs in the hall and it's rightfully there.

People need to stop treating other people and these athletes like they are supposed to be infallible angels. This isn't heaven, and neither is the hall of Fame, people are flawed and imperfect. Bonds did things that were lapse in judgement, as did many others. It becomes part of their story and part of their legend... But for Bonds, his story and legend most certainly belongs in the hall of Fame.

I rest my case.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2021 at 11:15 AM, dicka24 said:

The man made a mockery of the sport imo.  In Pitt he hit .275 with a 162 game average of 28 HR's per.   In SF he hit .312 with a 162 game average of 48 HR's per.   He did this while walking 1947 times in 1976 games in SF, versus  611 times in 1010 games in Pittsburgh.   No one threw to him  in SF and he still hit 20(!) more homers on average.   

Was he really good before SF?  Yes he was.  Was he a HOF'er?  Not at 27 years old he wasn't.  Being awesome thru your age 27 season doesn't guarantee you're a lock for the HOF.  The leagues history is littered with players who have great 5 or 6 year stretches and then hit a wall, or regress from their peaks.  Chances are he might have been, but we just can never say for sure.  

Bonds took off in 1990 and proceeded to win 3 of the next 4 MVPs (the third in SF). I don't think his per 162 in Pittsburgh tells the full story because he wasn't the superstar he became out the gate. Here are his per 162 splits since his first MVP season:

1990-1992: 34 HR, 122 RBI, 113 R, .301 BA, .990 OPS

1993-1998: 43 HR, 121 RBI, 126 R, .307 BA, 1.062 OPS

1999-2004: 58 HR, 125 RBI, 140 R, .328 BA, 1.275 OPS

2005-2007: 36 HR, 92 RBI, 95 R, .274 BA, 1.025 OPS

I used 98' as a cutoff because it is believed that he started cheating in 1999. He was a monster long before he that, although clearly there was a big boost in his numbers during his cheating-aided peak.

On 6/16/2021 at 12:11 PM, Backdoor Slider said:

Your timeline is off here. I don’t know anyone who thinks he went to SF and immediately started juicing. Most accounts have him hiring the personal trainer and taking steroids to recover after missing 60 games in 1999. 
At that point Bonds had already accumulated over 400 HR & SB, a 158 wRC+, and over 100 fWAR.  
And was lapping Griffey.

He was a no doubt, 1st ballot HOFer before taking steroids. 

Has a 3x MVP in any sport not made the HOF? That is what he was before he cheated. Here is how Bonds would have stacked up if he retired in 1998 (from a 2017 Washington Post article):

 

Quote

If his career had ended in 1998, Bonds would be a .290 hitter with 411 home runs, 1,917 hits, 1,216 RBI, 1,357 walks (289 intentional) and a .966 OPS (164 OPS+). There are four other players eligible for the Hall of Fame with at least 400 home runs and 1,900 hits combined with a .290 career average and 160 career OPS+, all are enshrined in Cooperstown — Babe Ruth, Mickey Mantle, Jimmie Foxx and Ted Williams.

 

Bonds had accrued 99.6 career wins above replacement by 1998 and he would rank 22nd all-time and 132 hitters with a lower career WAR mark are already in Cooperstown. His JAWS score, for a career ending in 1998, of 81.0 would also compare favorably to left fielders already in the Hall of Fame.

Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's be clear here,  only Bonds knows when he started to cheat.

Curious, why did you omit his first 4 seasons in pitt? He ave. 21 hrs during that span, with ba's of:  .223, 261, .283, and .248..

Could he have started after those first 4 seasons? I mean, his numbers jumped after those first 4, so it is possible, whether you want to believe it or not, it is possible... lets not cherry pick since NO ONE outside of Bonds knows when he started.

In essence, this thread is full of, I believe this, or, I believe that, but no one is right or wrong, it's a personal belief, you either believe he belongs, or you don't.

I'm of the mind that if you have the talent to make it on your own merit, do it without cheating period. You are an idol to kids that want to be where you are, playing the, once great game of baseball, act like an idol, send the right message to the kids, not the message that cheaters prosper, that's not how it's supposed to go. He admitted he cheated, but tried to push his personal trainer under the bus by saying he never questioned what he was given as supplements, from BALCO of all places.

We're not perfect, but come on, he might have made it without, but we will never know, thus the question, does he belong?

I say no, but that's my opinion, and none of us are going to  change our minds from someone elses opinion..

Carry on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, colepenhagen said:

what prime? ages 26-30

or age 35-39. late bloomer i guess

While a riveting question, it still doesn’t matter the slightest bit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His production is consistent with the presumed timeline. Yeah, no one will know for sure when he started cheating but he went from 46 HR in what should have been his physical prime (28 years old then) to hitting 73 HR at age 36 and 45 HR at 39. Even past forty he had a per 162 pace of 35 HR his last two seasons. Something gave him the same power at 39 that he had when he was 28, which is unheard of without cheating. 

He didn't dominate his first four seasons but a lot of players need 3-4 seasons in the majors before doing so. The alternative explanation is he started cheating a little then but started cheating a lot after 98'? You would think once that line is crossed a player would go all in on that approach.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd let the Veteran's Committee vote him in, but think he should be there.

 

I wouldn't have any issues with him not getting in, either. Might not be fair to him, since I am sure plenty of others who used are in or will be in, but he's one of the faces of cheating and I can get behind the message that not sending him in would make.

Edited by colorado2013
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/17/2021 at 5:35 AM, bluntbros said:

I think the Hall Of Fame committee might be a little salty towards Barry stockpiling a ton of his achievement memorabilia. They want to display his milestones and add to their collection. Except, Barry, won’t give it up.

He knows they want to use his goods primarily for financial gains. His display of achievements would be legendary inside The Hall. They don’t want him....just his stuff.

The actual Hall of Fame Museum and the writers who vote on members are different entities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/17/2021 at 4:32 AM, this guy right here said:

Go look at some of the very old members. Joke. 

This guy, too. https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/simmote01.shtml

HOF should be people that are unforgettable. They need to be the upper echelon.

Second time you've gone in on Simmons.  Odd one to point out.  He's a top 10 catcher all time by WAR.  There are far more egregious inductions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/17/2021 at 3:44 AM, StevieStats said:

The fact his like Edgar Martinez and Harold Baines are in and he isn't makes the HOF an absolute joke.

Assume you're just going in on DHs here, but Edgar shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath with Harold Baines.  Edgar was substantially better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...