2013 HOF

markj111 · November 21, 2012 2:46AM

The holdovers are:

Player

Jack Morris
Jeff Bagwell
Lee Smith
Tim Raines
Alan Trammell
Edgar Martínez
Fred McGriff
Larry Walker
Mark McGwire
Don Mattingly
Dale Murphy
Rafael Palmeiro
Bernie Williams

I would definitely vote for Bagwel, Raines, and Trammell. I might vote for Walker and Martinez.

Among the newcomers, I would vote for Biggio and Piazza. I would have to think about the Steroid Studs. Among the oldtimers, only Dahlen is worth considering.

digicat · November 21, 2012 4:33AM

I'm curious to see what the writers do with Bonds, Sosa, and Clemens. If any of them get inducted, it'll be a pretty awkward induction ceremony.

Piazza and Biggio are easy picks. Schilling's on the bubble too.

There seems to be a lot of "Hall of Good" players on this new ballot: Kenny Lofton, David Wells, Julio Franco, Reggie Sanders, Shawn Green, Ryan Klesko.

stown · November 21, 2012 4:39AM

I think Clemens tries another comeback to reset his admissions clock.

I'll do a little jig if Biggio gets in, the city will party if it's Big and Bags.

perkdog · November 22, 2012 1:02AM

You better include Biggio in with Steroid users.

zendude · November 22, 2012 2:49AM

Bagwell and Raines.

digicat · November 22, 2012 3:00AM

<< You better include Biggio in with Steroid users. >>

Why?

Dboneesq · November 22, 2012 4:00AM

I'd like to see Biggio get in. He grew up in the town next to mine. (Also the same town where Frank Catalanotto grew up.)

megatron · November 22, 2012 5:46AM

I would vote for the obvious choices:

Jeff Bagwell
Mark McGwire
Rafael Palmeiro

perkdog · November 22, 2012 9:09AM

<< 

<< You better include Biggio in with Steroid users. >>

Why? >>

Simple.

He used

Edit: And Bagwell did too

perkdog · November 22, 2012 9:15AM

Im so tired of all this BS about the HOF, its painfully obvious people have made up their minds to forever judge Bonds, Sosa and McGwire but somehow look the other way when it comes to certain other players.

Justacommeman · November 22, 2012 9:40AM

Pass.

MJ

digicat · November 22, 2012 12:30PM

<< Simple.
He used
Edit: And Bagwell did too >>

I've never heard anyone try to point the steroid finger at him until just now. Is he guilty because he played with Bagwell and Caminitti and posted decent numbers, or do you have something more solid?

Tabe · November 23, 2012 7:03AM

<< I've never heard anyone try to point the steroid finger at him until just now. Is he guilty because he played with Bagwell and Caminitti and posted decent numbers, or do you have something more solid? >>

There's the obvious stench of him playing with so many other known roid users - Bagwell, Luis Gonzalez, Andy Pettite, Roger Clemens, Ken Caminiti, Miguel Tejada, and so on. Combine that with setting a career HR mark at age 38 - and then breaking it age 39 - and you do start to wonder.

Tabe

fiveniner · November 24, 2012 1:17AM

Lee Smith,Alan Trammel,Craig Biggio.

jay0791 · November 24, 2012 8:37PM

Never heard Biggio was asuspect of peds.

R the voters going to vote as per hearsey or evidence?

My fav is L Walker. Great #'s and 5 way player. Not suspected of anything other than playing in coor's field.

I'd vote for Edgar he was a hitting monster.

I think at some point Clemens gets in. He was legaly cleared and not actually convicted of anything. Maybe of poor judgement, ect.,.

Maybe that opens the door for a few other? don't know.

This year Biggio and Morris get in

Raines and bags are strong 2nd choices.

MajorDanby · November 25, 2012 9:02AM

i think perkdog's point is that hall of fame voters have already separated in their minds who has and has not used steroids and that in and of itself dictates who they will vote for. If someone believes biggio used, then in some voters' minds, they wont vote for him. They do this despite not knowing what he used, when he used, how it affected his performance and, heck, having any concrete evidence that he actually did use!

my view is that unless i know basic facts about usage, the effects of usage, the timing of the effects of usage, and concrete evidence on who used, i personally would either abstain from voting or vote based on how i would have voted had steroid usage not occur.

digicat · November 25, 2012 9:24AM

<< My fav is L Walker. Great #'s and 5 way player. Not suspected of anything other than playing in coor's field. >>

Testing positive for Coors Field might be enough to keep him out though, at least until the veterans committee reviews him.

digicat · November 26, 2012 3:15AM

Have we seen enough to be able to predict what the voters will do?

They've only been called to judge a hand-full of steroid-connected guys who had HoF numbers:

Mark McGwire: getting less than 25% of the vote each year, but some argue that his HR numbers are his only strong suit, and that the rest of his game was non-HoF.
Albert Belle: total d-bag and a-hole to the media. They punished him and he's off the ballot. Hard to tell if steroids or bat corking had anything to do with it.

Rafael Palmeiro: Amazing stats, but he's been hit hard by the voters. He did blame Miguel Tejada (who was later found to be dirty) for his positive test, and has yet to change his story.

Coming up...
Sosa is in a similar boat as Palmiero. Both were light-hitting players before the start of their suspected usage.

Bonds and Clemens are different though. Both were considered to be shoe-in HoFers before they started using.

Bonds was a career .288 hitter, with and impressive combination of 445 HR and 460 SB, as well as 3 MVP's, 8 Gold Gloves, 7 Silver Sluggers, and 8 All Star selections.
Clemens had a carer record of 192-111, with a 3.06 era, 38 shutouts, and 2590 so to go along with his 3 Cy Young Awards and his 1 MVP honor.

So with Bonds and Clemens, you have dirty players who were HoFer-ish when clean.

perkdog · November 26, 2012 3:40AM

I think the only reasonable way to continue with adding players into the Hall is to just vote as if the steroids were not part of the equation, sadly I think this is the only answer. You cannot hold a handful of guys accountable for it and let others in who very well may have used but without having 100% evidence.

What happens if you let a player in who has never been linked directly but down the road some bombshell occurs and that HOF player is found to have used?

In my opinion its impossible to know what was going on with the entire league 100% then and now.

digicat · November 26, 2012 5:13AM

<< You cannot hold a handful of guys accountable for it and let others in who very well may have used but without having 100% evidence. >>

Why wouldn't you hold the guys with positive tests accountable?

ernie11 · November 26, 2012 5:45AM

About the only way the writers might deny guys like Bonds or Clemens the HOF is to not vote for them for a year or two's ballots, just to have them suffer the humiliation of not being first-ballot inductees. It's a shame that there isn't a de-election process that would allow the writers to remove someone from the HOF if later evidence showed positive steroid use.

Objectivity · November 26, 2012 6:54AM

<< 

<< You cannot hold a handful of guys accountable for it and let others in who very well may have used but without having 100% evidence. >>

Why wouldn't you hold the guys with positive tests accountable? >>

Those tests were a joke. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that many players passed those so called test and they were users.

I don't see how passing one of those joke tests means anything.

I don't have any more faith in Biggio being clean from PED use, than I do in Arod being clean. I don't see how anyone can...unless they are wearing blinders.

digicat · November 26, 2012 6:56AM

<< I don't see how passing one of those joke tests means anything. >>

What does failing one of these tests mean then?

Objectivity · November 26, 2012 7:57AM

<< 

<< I don't see how passing one of those joke tests means anything. >>

What does failing one of these tests mean then? >>

That they have a low IQ.

digicat · November 26, 2012 8:42AM

<< <>
What does failing one of these tests mean then? >>
That they have a low IQ. >>

So, your take is that today's drug testing is like testing to see if water is wet, is that about right?

What do you do with the knowledge of steroids in the sport? Ignore/accept it, or disqualify everyone who played in the last 30-40 years?

Objectivity · November 26, 2012 9:31AM

<< 

<< <>
What does failing one of these tests mean then? >>
That they have a low IQ. >>

So, your take is that today's drug testing is like testing to see if water is wet, is that about right?

What do you do with the knowledge of steroids in the sport? Ignore/accept it, or disqualify everyone who played in the last 30-40 years? >>

If they want to 'disqualify' guys from the HOF or suspend them for using, then they need to do the testing so it is a real test. If the players don't like it, then find new players who will be willing to take real testing for the privilege of getting paid to play a game. When those holdout players get tired of washing dishes or stocking shelves, then they will be lining up to take whatever test is necessary for them to play.

Sure, a few users might slip through the cracks with real testing, but not like now or before where 85% slipped through the cracks.

Since the tests they have done in the past were such a joke and so poor at finding the users, it almost makes no sense to discredit some guys who were dumb enough to get caught, while letting other guys go by who were just as guilty...but not as dumb.

How do you handle that era with McGwire etc...? I don't have an easy answer. However, anyone with a brain and a pair of eyes could see that 85% of the guys were on PED's...so maybe do like perkdog said, just label it the steroid era and vote for guys who were the best of the era since they were playing under an equal playing field while they were all on it anyway.

PS, I'm not worried about players pre 1990ish. Sure, there were some pioneers back then who were doing it, but it was not widespread use in the 70's or 80's. In the end, you probably would have the same number who slipped through the cracks back then as there would be if there were real testing going on in the future. I can live with that. The 90's-now? Steroid era.

perkdog · November 26, 2012 9:53AM

<< 

<< 

<< <>
What does failing one of these tests mean then? >>
That they have a low IQ. >>

So, your take is that today's drug testing is like testing to see if water is wet, is that about right?

What do you do with the knowledge of steroids in the sport? Ignore/accept it, or disqualify everyone who played in the last 30-40 years? >>

How do you handle that era with McGwire etc...? I don't have an easy answer. However, anyone with a brain and a pair of eyes could see that 85% of the guys were on PED's...so maybe do like perkdog said, just label it the steroid era and vote for guys who were the best of the era since they were playing under an equal playing field while they were all on it anyway.

. >>

Thank God! Finally someone spells it out the way it is! I been saying all along that at least 75% of the guys were doing it AND they were all on a equal playing field!

stown · November 26, 2012 11:19PM

The Witch: I'm not a witch I'm not a witch!
Sir Bedevere: But you are dressed as one
The Witch: *They* dressed me up like this!
Crowd: We didn't! We didn't...
The Witch: And this isn't my nose. It's a false one.
Sir Bedevere: [lifts up her false nose] Well?
Peasant 1: Well, we did do the nose.
Sir Bedevere: The nose?
Peasant 1: And the hat, but she is a witch!
Crowd: Yeah! Burn her! Burn her!
Sir Bedevere: Did you dress her up like this?
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 3: No!
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 1: Yes!
Peasant 2: Yes!
Peasant 1: Yeah a bit.
Peasant 3: A bit!
Peasant 1, Peasant 2: A bit!
Peasant 2: a bit
Peasant 1: But she has got a wart!
Random Person in the crowd: *cough* *cough*

Objectivity · November 27, 2012 12:14AM

<< The Witch: I'm not a witch I'm not a witch!
Sir Bedevere: But you are dressed as one
The Witch: *They* dressed me up like this!
Crowd: We didn't! We didn't...
The Witch: And this isn't my nose. It's a false one.
Sir Bedevere: [lifts up her false nose] Well?
Peasant 1: Well, we did do the nose.
Sir Bedevere: The nose?
Peasant 1: And the hat, but she is a witch!
Crowd: Yeah! Burn her! Burn her!
Sir Bedevere: Did you dress her up like this?
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 3: No!
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 1: Yes!
Peasant 2: Yes!
Peasant 1: Yeah a bit.
Peasant 3: A bit!
Peasant 1, Peasant 2: A bit!
Peasant 2: a bit
Peasant 1: But she has got a wart!
Random Person in the crowd: *cough* *cough* >>

Nobody force them the PED route...they did it themselves. They made their bed and now they have to sleep in it. Biggio and co. had the power to show otherwise, but instead chose to hide behind the union. All of which is completely different than a witch hunt...besides it isn't a 'witch hunt' if they are indeed witches. If it bothers you or him that this is what it came to, then too bad.

...and I suppose Lance Armstrong didn't use either? LOL

stown · November 27, 2012 1:20AM

<< Nobody force them the PED route...they did it themselves. They made their bed and now they have to sleep in it. Biggio and co. had the power to show otherwise, but instead chose to hide behind the union. All of which is completely different than a witch hunt...besides it isn't a 'witch hunt' if they are indeed witches. If it bothers you or him that this is what it came to, then too bad.

...and I suppose Lance Armstrong didn't use either? LOL >>

Strawman fail.

My point is, which clearly went over your head, it's irresponsible to accuse someone of taking PEDs just because you can.

X played with B and C, who also played with D, therefore X is guilty.

You are right about 2 things though, which I didn't even remotely imply. The players / union could have simplified it by accepting blood test, and players should be penalized after getting popped.

Objectivity · November 27, 2012 2:23AM

<< 

<< Nobody force them the PED route...they did it themselves. They made their bed and now they have to sleep in it. Biggio and co. had the power to show otherwise, but instead chose to hide behind the union. All of which is completely different than a witch hunt...besides it isn't a 'witch hunt' if they are indeed witches. If it bothers you or him that this is what it came to, then too bad.

...and I suppose Lance Armstrong didn't use either? LOL >>

Strawman fail.

My point is, which clearly went over your head, it's irresponsible to accuse someone of taking PEDs just because you can.

X played with B and C, who also played with D, therefore X is guilty.

You are right about 2 things though, which I didn't even remotely imply. The players / union could have simplified it by accepting blood test, and players should be penalized after getting popped. >>

Not irresponsible at all. In fact, one player has already pointed players out based on first hand accounts...and he wrote a book about it....and they didnt even fail any tests. So it isnt a case of x played with b and c, who also played with d, etc... and anyone with a half a brain and pair of eyes can see that. PED was their culture.

Actually, the irresponsible thing to do is wear the blinders you have on just because you are a 'fan' of them.

So your guy Biggio did some roids. No need to get upset about it...just accept it as part of the culture he was in.

Curious, do you still believe Lance Armstrong didn't do any PEDs?

digicat · November 27, 2012 2:36AM

Objectivity just can't help himself from peppering his arguments with ad hominem mines.

Objectivity · November 27, 2012 3:02AM

After all these years I've come to the realization that it doesn't really bother me much that the players did PED's. They did it, still do it, and life evolves. The players from that era were almost all partaking, and the time has come to accept it...and to recognize the stars of the steroid era.

The more alarming fact is the number of grown men who just can't get past the fact that it is very likely that their hero did PED's. Pull your pants back up, wipe your chin, and get over it.

Heck, 20 years from now the stuff those guys did may seem like child's play.

stown · November 27, 2012 3:35AM

<< Curious, do you still believe Lance Armstrong didn't do any PEDs? >>

Look skin, hoop, or whatever. I know how much you extremely obsess over insignificant matters to justify an argument, so you may not be able to comprehend this simple response. I don't care. I don't lose any sleep. And I don't ride my bike because of anybody. It's like saying the sky is blue and the grass is green. Okay, and your point is? I mean, you can keep bringing Lance up. It is a free country after all. But at least drop the homophobic digs, which are probably projections, and make a point.

<< Objectivity just can't help himself from peppering his arguments with ad hominem mines. >>

Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

Objectivity · November 27, 2012 5:07AM

<< Curious, do you still believe Lance Armstrong didn't do any PEDs? >>

Look skin, hoop, or whatever. I know how much you extremely obsess over insignificant matters to justify an argument, so you may not be able to comprehend this simple response. I don't care. I don't lose any sleep. And I don't ride my bike because of anybody. It's like saying the sky is blue and the grass is green. Okay, and your point is? I mean, you can keep bringing Lance up. It is a free country after all. But at least drop the homophobic digs, which are probably projections, and make a point.

<< Objectivity just can't help himself from peppering his arguments with ad hominem mines. >>

Odd that you say you don't care...yet you argue about it.

Enough points have already been made about their PED use. At this point, if one can't see them, there really isn't much else to say other than "remove your blinders".

Like I said, most likely your baseball guys did roids....grab a Kleenex and get over it. No need to get upset.

stown · November 27, 2012 5:31AM

perkdog · November 27, 2012 5:50AM

Oh man I hate to have to keep my mouth shut but I will

Reason being is that Barry ( Stown ) and Skin/hoop ( Objectivity ) are BOTH my all time favorite Posters here at CU and I will not be taking sides.

You guys both Rock in my book

stown · November 27, 2012 6:29AM

Go for it, Paul. Seriously, nothing you say will piss me off or make me think less of you. Honest.

Personally, as an admitted life long 'Stros fan that attended hundreds of games featuring Bags and Big: If they get in, great. If not, life goes on.

At the end of the day, I think skin is bitter the 'steroid era' skews his all-knowing formula. You can't put a numerical value on steroids and there's no way it can be applied "fairly". So rather than deal with obvious collateral damage, just lump all players together and not be bothered with it.

Win, win.

stown · November 27, 2012 6:43AM

Just so skin's attempted strawman doesn't paint me incorrectly:

I don't give two poops. If a clean player gets labeled a cheat due to their teammate(s), then it's a witch hunt. On the other hand, I believe the clean players knew about steroid abuse yet said nothing of it. I can appreciate the loyalty but not widespread abuse like this. Dogs, fleas, and stuff...

Our opinions expressed here mean absolutely nothing to the HOF voters. It is what it is and don't hate the player, hate the game.

Objectivity · November 27, 2012 8:11AM

<< Go for it, Paul. Seriously, nothing you say will piss me off or make me think less of you. Honest.

Personally, as an admitted life long 'Stros fan that attended hundreds of games featuring Bags and Big: If they get in, great. If not, life goes on.

At the end of the day, I think skin is bitter the 'steroid era' skews his all-knowing formula. You can't put a numerical value on steroids and there's no way it can be applied "fairly". So rather than deal with obvious collateral damage, just lump all players together and not be bothered with it.

Win, win. >>

LOL, there's some truth to that!

For what it is worth...PED issue aside, Bagwell and Biggio would be more than worthy HOF members.

JoeBanzai · November 27, 2012 3:54PM

The guy I feel is being unfairly "punished" is Walker. The guy played in an easier park to hit, but he also hit better than anyone (including a bunch of guys that also played there). What was he supposed to do hit .400 with 50 home runs every year?

He was also pretty good at all the other phases of the game, is that because of Coors field as well? He hit well his last year in Montreal, is that another launching pad? 2004 in STL his OPS was almost at his carreer average, another hitters park?

He's my first pick for HOF, I also like Raines, Trammell and McGriff. NEVER for admitted steroid users and positive testers. Hard to say about Clemens and Bagwell, although I don't feel there is any REAL proof there. Bonds did admit to using although it was supposed to be secret testimony............he's out. Sorry Barry, you were good enough before you decided to blow yourself up. What a waste.

Joe

53BKid · November 28, 2012 12:56AM

Lee Smith is one of the most underated pitchers in our lifetime. Other than Eckersley, he was baseball's most dominant reliever. I don't think I ever saw a combination of starter/reliever better than Clemen's/Smith...Devastating.

Rains would get my vote too.

Still not comfortable with Morris.

The steroid abusers can suck an egg. Those suspected such as Piazza are going to take some time, and probably a publicity campaign before voters have confidence to induct them.

stown · November 28, 2012 2:12AM

<< Those suspected such as Piazza are going to take some time, and probably a publicity campaign before voters have confidence to induct them. >>

That's why I believe Clemens will attempt another comeback. Other than being an attention wh.. I mean seeker, it will reset the HOF eligibility clock and give him another 5 years.

Tabe · December 3, 2012 3:32AM

<< The guy I feel is being unfairly "punished" is Walker. The guy played in an easier park to hit, but he also hit better than anyone (including a bunch of guys that also played there). What was he supposed to do hit .400 with 50 home runs every year? >>

The problem with Larry is that his home/road splits are SO skewed. Keeping in mind that the Coors Field effect is worse than what his career #s show, here's his home/road splits for his entire career:

Home: .348/215HR/747RBI/.637SLG
Road: .278/168HR/564RBI//.495SLG

So the knock on Larry is that he was merely "pretty good" away from home. To be more specific, here's his Coors Field numbers:

.381/154HR/521RBI/.710SLG

IMHO, to truly merit HOF consideration, he would have simply have had to put up better numbers outside of Coors. Failing that, put him in the Hall of Very Good.

<< Lee Smith is one of the most underrated pitchers in our lifetime. Other than Eckersley, he was baseball's most dominant reliever. I don't think I ever saw a combination of starter/reliever better than Clemen's/Smith...Devastating. >>

Relievers with 3.03 ERAs are a dime a dozen. Smith might be one of the most overrated pitchers in our lifetime. And I think Mo Rivera might fit somewhere in that "baseball's most dominant reliever" discussion...

Tabe

MantleMarisFordBerra · December 4, 2012 7:16AM

<< 

<< Those suspected such as Piazza are going to take some time, and probably a publicity campaign before voters have confidence to induct them. >>

That's why I believe Clemens will attempt another comeback. Other than being an attention wh.. I mean seeker, it will reset the HOF eligibility clock and give him another 5 years. >>

It is for this exact reason that I thought McGwire might be granted an at bat or two from his ol buddy Tony LaRussa in 2011. Unfortunately for McGwire (or my theory) The Cards had an unsuspectingly good year and managed to get to the post season & win The Series. But if they were a sub- .500 team, do ya think it might have been tempting for LaRussa to let Big Mac step up to the dish one last time? File under things that make you go hmmm........

digicat · December 4, 2012 8:14AM

<< It is for this exact reason that I thought McGwire might be granted an at bat or two from his ol buddy Tony LaRussa in 2011. Unfortunately for McGwire (or my theory) The Cards had an unsuspectingly good year and managed to get to the post season & win The Series. But if they were a sub- .500 team, do ya think it might have been tempting for LaRussa to let Big Mac step up to the dish one last time? File under things that make you go hmmm........ >>

They wouldn't even need to go that far.

In 2008, J.T. Snow wanted to retire as Giant, and the Giants wanted to give him his own AT&T Park sendoff. He hadn't played since 2006, so, they signed him to a 1 day contract, wrote him into the starting lineup, and had him take his position at 1st base, get introduced, then pulled him before the first pitch.

While not the objective, this pushed back Snow's HoF eligibility date to 2013. Teams can work stuff like this out with the league office so that they don't have to make any roster moves while doing stuff like this.

53BKid · December 18, 2012 12:14PM

<< 

<< It is for this exact reason that I thought McGwire might be granted an at bat or two from his ol buddy Tony LaRussa in 2011. Unfortunately for McGwire (or my theory) The Cards had an unsuspectingly good year and managed to get to the post season & win The Series. But if they were a sub- .500 team, do ya think it might have been tempting for LaRussa to let Big Mac step up to the dish one last time? File under things that make you go hmmm........ >>

They wouldn't even need to go that far.

In 2008, J.T. Snow wanted to retire as Giant, and the Giants wanted to give him his own AT&T Park sendoff. He hadn't played since 2006, so, they signed him to a 1 day contract, wrote him into the starting lineup, and had him take his position at 1st base, get introduced, then pulled him before the first pitch.

While not the objective, this pushed back Snow's HoF eligibility date to 2013. Teams can work stuff like this out with the league office so that they don't have to make any roster moves while doing stuff like this. >>

Ah, so that's what Hall of Fame induction comes down to for the cheaters. Cheat the system again, and everything will be fine

digicat · December 18, 2012 12:51PM

<< Ah, so that's what Hall of Fame induction comes down to for the cheaters. Cheat the system again, and everything will be fine >>

No one has ever used this "method" to beat the system. You still need to get voted on for HoF induction.

All you're doing with un-retiring is extending your eligibility window and hoping that the guys who will be doing the voting in 6 years like steroid linked players.

Of course, you have to have a team that's willing to collaborate with the player in order to un-retire.

ernie11 · December 21, 2012 5:30AM

All debates aside, the one thing that struck me was how many good or great players are all on the ballot this year.

2013 HOF

Comments