Who will be the first PROVEN steroid user to go to the HOF...

BLUEJAYWAY · April 15, 2014 2:51PM

and will his rookie card increase/decrease in price? This is providing that there is not at least one steroid user in there already. But I've classified the question as PROVEN user. Apologys if this has been the subject of a thread before.

markmac · April 15, 2014 3:02PM

I don't see how Barry Bonds can't be in there. He was a hall of famer before he got big and hit all the home runs.

vols1 · April 15, 2014 3:37PM

I think Bonds will get in but not until after he is deceased.

vintageinvestments · April 15, 2014 9:54PM

Clemens

shagrotn77 · April 15, 2014 10:10PM

Agree. Bonds or Clemens. Two class acts...NOT.

Dialj · April 15, 2014 10:38PM

Not this guy

jay0791 · April 15, 2014 10:39PM

Was Clemens actually proven?
I think he was just under strong suspicion.

For that matter was Bonds OFFICIALLY proven????

Of the 2 it will be Clemens.

Bonds isn't liked at all.

Both didn't need roids.

As far as cards....not a good comparison. 1984 Fleer update at 5000 production
Vs 1986 topps traded or 87 fleer 50000000 production

bxb · April 15, 2014 11:12PM

Clemens. He had HOF numbers before he was accused of using. I mean 7 Cy Youngs, 354 wins, and 4672 Ks? Come on.

olb31 · April 15, 2014 11:40PM

Eventually all will get in that should, including Pete. The steroid thing is so rampant, just like cheating in the SEC, it will eventually just get over looked.

Roger Clemens
Barry Bonds
Mark McGwire
Sammy Sosa
Rafael Palmeiro
Alex

Going forward, there probably never be another 300 game winner. Few people have a chance at 3000 hits. At some point there won't be any viable candidates for years at a time.

shagrotn77 · April 15, 2014 11:58PM

<< Going forward, there probably never be another 300 game winner. Few people have a chance at 3000 hits. At some point there won't be any viable candidates for years at a time. >>

I disagree with this statement. You don't have to win 300 games or collect 3,000 hits to get into the HOF. The vast majority of players in Cooperstown fell short of these marks. Going forward there will be new benchmarks for measuring a player's greatness. 500 home runs used to be a really big deal. Now it's ho hum. I suspect sabermetrics will come into play more and more.

Steelernation · April 15, 2014 11:59PM

How about Andy pettite? The only admitted user who seems to have been given a pass. Just tried it once....hmm, ok.

mtcards · April 16, 2014 12:27AM

I think all of the major stars (McGwire, Clemens, Bonds, even AROD) will eventually get in. I still think Pete Rose will get in eventually.

Dialj · April 16, 2014 12:40AM

Any changes to the "benchmarks" will have to come from within the HOF and voters; and until you get enough of the "new" in and more of the "old" out it may not be anytime soon. If players take more of a responsibility for their actions, instead of blaming others, it might help their case for enshrinement with the voters. One question that will need to be addressed is, "in the future, if no one is meeting current 'benchmarks' do we vote players in, just to keep an interest in the HOF?" Some would argue that it is the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Feats. Should those players linked to steroids, proven or unfounded and meet benchmarks, be enshrined, there would more than likely be increase in value of their RCs. It's just the nature of the beast.

JoeBanzai · April 16, 2014 1:30AM

The key word here to me is "PROVEN". Bonds admitted to use, but said he was unaware of what he was doing (yeah right) and his testimony was supposed to be confidential. He is such a jerk, I don't think the writers will vote him in.

Clemens has never been proven as far as I have heard, accusations, but the people accusing him were $cumbags and had reason to lie, so of all the players who put up the numbers, I think he will be the one (if any) to get in.

I hope the guys that tested positive and/or admitted use NEVER get in. Since Pete Rose got dragged into the thread...............he's O. U. T. as well. Betting on your own team is breaking one of the basic rules.

Sorry Pete, you were once my hero, now you are a zero.

mlbfan2 · April 16, 2014 1:34AM

<< Going forward, there probably never be another 300 game winner. >>

Someone wrote that a few years ago and everyone seemed to jump on board. It's nonsense.

You don't think Verlander can possibly average 14.7 wins over the next 11 years? Mussina averaged 15.0 over his last 11.

gemint · April 16, 2014 2:57AM

<< Clemens. He had HOF numbers before he was accused of using. I mean 7 Cy Youngs, 354 wins, and 4672 Ks? Come on. >>

I'd say the line would be drawn at 'suspected of using'. His career was going downhill fast at the end of his Red Sox career and then suddenly recovered when he went to Toronto. I think that's the point where steroid use is suspected to have started. Would he have made the HOF based on his Red Sox career only?

stormtrooper80 · April 16, 2014 4:21AM

I'd agree with all those who vote for the Rocket.

Brady Anderson and Brett Boone will not make the Hall though

mygotta · April 16, 2014 4:25AM

I think Bonds and Clemens will be the first drug users in the Hall.

larryallen73 · April 16, 2014 4:29AM

<< 

Going forward, there probably never be another 300 game winner. Few people have a chance at 3000 hits. At some point there won't be any viable candidates for years at a time. >>

I think CC has a reasonable chance at 300. Also, Kershaw is on the right path... barring injuries of course.

parkerj · April 16, 2014 4:43AM

I don't see how you can say clemens had HOF numbers prior to taking roids. I suspect he took them prior to his magical rejuvenation when he joined toronto in 97 or 98. at that point was he really a HOFer? I think not....

lseecon · April 16, 2014 5:02AM

AROD, Bonds and Clemens were all hall of famers prior to taking steroids or allegedly taking steroids. Stupid of them to take them (if they did), but at the time, it was the same old "everyone is doing it".

They were the best and most elite players of their era who tried to fight father time and injuries. I certainly dont condone what they did and I have much more respect for the players during that era who did not take steroids.

However I think they should all be in the hall of fame. However, I do believe that certain of their statitistics should be tainted, especially Bonds and AROD.

But you know nothing about baseball if you dont agree that these three players were elite players and hall of fame caliber players regardless of whether they did steriods. They had talent at a young age and their numbers and accomplishments proved that early on prior to any possible steroid use.

Someone asks about Clemens' numbers prior to 97---well they were unbelieveable. 20 game win average, era in the 2.00s, 3 cy youngs, mvp, strikeout king--all prior to 97
AROD wasnt the number one draft pick at 17 or 18 because he was a roid user at 18. He was a hall of fame caliber player early on and proved as much in his early years. look up his stats
Bonds was an all star, unbelievable player in college and then went on to be the best all around player prior to any alleged steriod use. look up his stats

You may think these players dont deserve to be in the HOF on principle because of their roid or alleged roid use and thats fine. I dont disagree if taking steriods is a ban to being admitted to the HOF....but anyone who thinks these players are not HOF caliber players without steriod use is just not very baseball smart. They all would have been first ballot HOFrs even without steriod use.

rjcoy06 · April 16, 2014 5:09AM

I tend to agree with most here. Bonds, Clemens and A-Rod make the Hall. McGwire, Sosa, and Palmero do not.

byrd3102 · April 16, 2014 5:18AM

I think in a few more years there will be more info coming out on who used steroids. I suspect that many Hall of Famer's will be linked (Henderson, Jackson and Nolan Ryan for example). Eventually steroids won't be viewed in the same manner and I think many(Bonds, Clemens, etc.) will get in. Already there have been many (Bob Costas) who are saying things like "he was a hall of famer before he used". Too many people used them to take such a hard stance on the issue.

akuracy503 · April 16, 2014 6:35AM

Its already done! The Ultimate Warrior!

parkerj · April 16, 2014 7:06AM

Sorry guys, look at his stats up to and including 1996. he won 20 games 4 times in 13 years (not bad...) but his last 4 seasons including 1996 were one game over 500, wins of 11, 9, 9, 10. Era's of 4.46, 2.85, 4.18, 3.63. This was a pitcher on his last gasps of breath....He never comes back from 4 years of that without juice....HOF very questionable.....if he retired in 1996 or sputtered to 2-4 more years of those kind of numbers.....i say he doesn't make it. And if you were around back then in Boston, he was a totally different pitcher than his once dominating late 80s self....

link to stats.

Tabe · April 16, 2014 7:18AM

<< How about Andy pettite? The only admitted user who seems to have been given a pass. Just tried it once....hmm, ok. >>

Andy Pettite doesn't belong in the HOF, steroids or not. Just doesn't have the numbers. ERA under 3 just twice in 18 seasons - including, coincidentally I'm sure, his first season back from injury in Houston. The year he admitted taking roids. ERA of 3.99 or higher 10 times. Yeah, he won a billion games, regular season or postseason. But he did it by playing on really good teams and being consistent not by being great or even, really, very good.

JoeBanzai · April 16, 2014 8:51AM

<< AROD, Bonds and Clemens were all hall of famers prior to taking steroids or allegedly taking steroids. Stupid of them to take them (if they did), but at the time, it was the same old "everyone is doing it".

They were the best and most elite players of their era who tried to fight father time and injuries. I certainly dont condone what they did and I have much more respect for the players during that era who did not take steroids.

However I think they should all be in the hall of fame. However, I do believe that certain of their statitistics should be tainted, especially Bonds and AROD.

But you know nothing about baseball if you dont agree that these three players were elite players and hall of fame caliber players regardless of whether they did steriods. They had talent at a young age and their numbers and accomplishments proved that early on prior to any possible steroid use.

Someone asks about Clemens' numbers prior to 97---well they were unbelieveable. 20 game win average, era in the 2.00s, 3 cy youngs, mvp, strikeout king--all prior to 97
AROD wasnt the number one draft pick at 17 or 18 because he was a roid user at 18. He was a hall of fame caliber player early on and proved as much in his early years. look up his stats
Bonds was an all star, unbelievable player in college and then went on to be the best all around player prior to any alleged steriod use. look up his stats

You may think these players dont deserve to be in the HOF on principle because of their roid or alleged roid use and thats fine. I dont disagree if taking steriods is a ban to being admitted to the HOF....but anyone who thinks these players are not HOF caliber players without steriod use is just not very baseball smart. They all would have been first ballot HOFrs even without steriod use. >>

The point of the Hall of Fame (discussed many times before) is not just statistical achievements but also character. When you are able to SMASH long standing records by using PEDs, you make the HUGE money, but in my opinion you forfeit the honor of being enshrined in the HOF. Yes there are people in the Hall that might not belong, but these steroid guys can be big at the bank but not in the Hall.

I for one think HOW you play the game still means something.

Joe

fiveniner · April 16, 2014 8:58AM

none of them I hope get in unless Pete Rose and Joe Jackson get in.

fiveniner · April 16, 2014 8:59AM

<< I don't see how you can say clemens had HOF numbers prior to taking roids. I suspect he took them prior to his magical rejuvenation when he joined toronto in 97 or 98. at that point was he really a HOFer? I think not.... >>

agreed!Same with all of the suspected users.

bballjunkie · April 18, 2014 4:33AM

Someone asks about Clemens' numbers prior to 97---well they were unbelieveable. 20 game win average, era in the 2.00s, 3 cy youngs, mvp, strikeout king--all prior to 97 - NOT ACCURATE AT ALL!

Someone needs to get their facts straight. Clemens averaged 15 wins per season and his lifetime ERA prior to 1997 was 3.32. Hardly a shoe-in for the HOF with those numbers. Not out of the realm but certainly borderline.

lseecon · April 18, 2014 5:48AM

Someone asks about Clemens' numbers prior to 97---well they were unbelieveable. 20 game win average, era in the 2.00s, 3 cy youngs, mvp, strikeout king--all prior to 97 - NOT ACCURATE AT ALL!

Someone needs to get their facts straight. Clemens averaged 15 wins per season and his lifetime ERA prior to 1997 was 3.32. Hardly a shoe-in for the HOF with those numbers. Not out of the realm but certainly borderline.

Hardly a shoe-in? Most baseball historians and experts would completely disagree with you.

1994 was strike shortened season and in 1995 and 1996 Clemens was fighting injuries and he only pitched in 23 games in 1995.

His first full season was 1986 and for the next 11 seasons, including the strike shortened season of 1994 and his injury riddled seasons of 95 and 96, he won 20 games plus 3 times, 18 wins, 3 times, led the league in ERA 4 times, won 3 cy youngs, had 36 shut outs, a crazy number of complete games (90 plus). struckout 20 batters TWICE during that timeframe (only player to ever do so) He was dominating during those years. I am not even a Redsox or Clemens fan, but Its hard to argue with dominating performances and statistics from the day the guy stepped ino the major leagues.

The point you are clearly missing is that he was a HOF caliber pither prior to his alleged steroid use. Steroids did not make Roger Clemens an elite and dominant pitcher, his raw talent and ability and pitching prowess did. Case closed. Could steriods have helped him overcome injuries or father time? I suppose so. But Clemens was well on his way to HOF before he allegedly took any steroids. Ditto, Bonds and AROD.

doog71 · April 18, 2014 5:53AM

Arnie Canseco IV, 2079.

Ilovecards · April 18, 2014 9:34AM

Bonds did hgh not steroids

otwcards · April 18, 2014 10:19AM

Why do people continue to bring up Pete Rose with regard to the Hall of Fame? Pete is not banned from the Hall of Fame. He's ineligible to be voted upon as part of his agreement with Bart Giamatti when he accepted a lifetime ban from baseball. The agreement was based upon Giamatti not releasing the Dowd Investigation information that proved that Rose had bet on baseball and that he would be banned with the opportunity for reinstatement. Before the ink was dry and not less than 24 hours later, Rose was spouting off about how he was innocent and had never bet on baseball at the news conference announcing Tommy Helms as the new Reds manager, which violated the agreement and allowed Giamatti to release the information. Rose continued to lie about betting for more than a decade until he realized he could make money signing baseballs stating the he did...

Baseball didn't ban Rose . . . Pete banned himself.

raykasa · April 18, 2014 12:08PM

"Bonds did hgh not steroids"

Not true. Look up what "the clear" and "the crème" were. Remember, Bonds has stated he didn't know what he was taken...hence the perjury indictment. It is without question he use these Balco Lab substances....just saying....

vols1 · April 18, 2014 12:18PM

<< Someone asks about Clemens' numbers prior to 97---well they were unbelieveable. 20 game win average, era in the 2.00s, 3 cy youngs, mvp, strikeout king--all prior to 97 - NOT ACCURATE AT ALL!

Someone needs to get their facts straight. Clemens averaged 15 wins per season and his lifetime ERA prior to 1997 was 3.32. Hardly a shoe-in for the HOF with those numbers. Not out of the realm but certainly borderline. >>

These are his Boston Stats 192-111 3.06 ERA 2,590 K's

Very good but not a lock by any means. David Cone's record was 194-126 and he might get 1% of the HOF vote.

RonBurgundy · April 18, 2014 12:42PM

I don't think any of them ever get in. And that's fine with me. Sort of disappointing to see how many are apparently ok with it.

halosfan · April 18, 2014 12:49PM

It's odd how this is really a baseball thing ..

BLUEJAYWAY · April 18, 2014 3:00PM

I think MLB will cringe every year for the next 5-10 years with every HOF vote consideration. As when the suspected/alledged participants are paraded out once again by the writers votes for HOF consideration, it only brings to the forefront what MLB would like to see in their rear view mirror. And as time moves on and the vote % drops for certain players, they will fade from view and become less relevant. Bonds/Clemens may stand the outside chance to get in. Rose, never, as his banning was based on an age hardened/posted in the clubhouse rule-No betting on baseball. The "roids" issue is more a gray area/arguementative issue. When, what, HOF caliber before "roids" etc. Even if HOF consideration judges pre-roids stats as being HOF worthy, it still does not mask the issue that they still used them in their career. And by voting them in knowing this, will only continue to fan the negative image flames for MLB by making this a yearly in the news issue. This, I believe is what MLB does not wish to continue to do.

MikeyP · April 19, 2014 8:17AM

I believe that if the numbers support their induction, they will all get in eventually. Most of them will probably be inducted postmortem. Even Pete. Hopefully, if Pete gets in, so will Shoeless Joe Jackson.

WinPitcher · April 19, 2014 9:59AM

Is Palmeiro even still eligible? What no one has mentioned is that these guys have to
get a certain pct. each year to even stay on the ballot. I do not see any of them ever getting in.

My question is will the veterans vote them in?
Or do they only vote in those that stay on for 15 years?

MiniDuff · April 19, 2014 1:41PM

No way to know when and what if, but to suggest that Clemens was done before Toronto is and not a HoF is a reach IMO. He already had 3 Cy Youngs and was utterly robbed of a 4th by Bob Welch by that point and had led the league in ERA 4 times as well. By his last year in Boston he was actually improving after three straight years under 200 innings. He led the league in k/9 and overall k's his last year, but was held back by the most walks of his career.

While he likely juiced, don't ignore that the numbers he put up were against the most juiced group of hitters to play the game as well.

In the end, after much time has passed and maybe the players too, the only way to look at it will be this:

Like the dead ball era, this will be known as the steroid era. It will be assumed that virtually everyone did or was suspected of doing them and they will have no historical context for their numbers. The only context will be greatness among each other during their time. My two cents.

Estil · April 19, 2014 2:52PM

<< I don't see how Barry Bonds can't be in there. He was a hall of famer before he got big and hit all the home runs. >>

If I remember correctly the story goes that he was a totally legit 'roid free player back in the '90s...but got jealous that he wasn't nearly as popular as Griffey/Thomas and later McGwire/Sosa. True he was the first to win three MVPs in four years (1990. 1992, 1993) and we all remember his landmark $43M/7yr contract to go to the Giants. Essentially he was frustrated that despite him being one of the best players in baseball in the 90s it didn't seem nearly good enough (of course he was never all that fan/teammate/management friendly) hence why he went to the dark side.

Who will be the first PROVEN steroid user to go to the HOF...

Comments