I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
Sosa should have also seen a 'clean' increase in production like everyone else as well.
I suspect you're just being obtuse, but even so you run the risk that someone here will take this seriously. Had Sosa gotten the 'clean' increase everyone else got, his OPS+ would have remained at 107. What baseball fans are pointing to is Sosa getting such a larger increase than the rest of the league did. The answer, obviously, is that he was cheating on a massive scale while the rest of the league wasn't. It's an obvious answer to baseball fans, anyway.
It's a shame PSA doesn't have a "Pharmaceuticals" forum to discuss Sosa and Bonds and the others. Talking about them in a "Sports Talk" forum is just wrong.
Outside of steroids, what caused the uptick in offense? Lively ball, smaller parks, body armor are the three biggest factors other than mechanical changes in a swing which were also a big factor.
So how does an OPS+ get helped for some in the league more than others? Lively ball, smaller park, and body armor will affect some players more than others.
The most obvious thing is bunting. Live balls and smaller parks do not affect bunts at all. They may even hurt them if the ball is lively if we want to get nitty gritty. Smaller park doesn't either.
So right away we see in their careers from 1988 on:
Bret Butler had 481 bunts in play
Otis Nixon 446 bunts
Sammy Sosa had 58 bunts
The league had a good amount of Butler/Nixon type hitters still employed in the 1990's so most certainly there were that many more balls less affected by a live ball, smaller park. body armor for those types of hitters as opposed to the guys who were hitting hard two hop ground balls(instead of choppers by the Nixon/Butler types) where the hard ground balls do get affected as well by a live ball more than the choppers, and the same guys hitting deep fly balls(the most affected by the live ball/small park/body armor).
Butler hit 967 fly balls
Nixon hit 839 fly balls
Sosa hit 2,517 fly balls
So as long as you are hitting balls hard enough already and on a good trajectory like Sosa, then your balls will be more affected positively by a live ball, small park, body armor, than the Butler/Nixon/Fermin types who are bunting and chopping far more often.
That is why some can see an increase in OPS+ more than others in the same league.
Then when you see that hitters tailored their swings to really take advantage of all that, as Sosa did in 1998, it enhances it even more.
Then eventually, the Otis Nixon types started getting phased out(and I know that is an aspect people don't like because they liked that style of game) but per this topic it matters.
The mechanical revolution was a good thing for hitters and made them better too, just as it did for Sosa from 1997 to 1998.
I used those same mechanics and turned myself from a one time pitcher only in college and a good hitter, to severely out hitting the same guys i played against in college even though I was older at that time and not on steroids(but still lifted). So the mechanics revolution certainly work.
I also used those mechanics to take good pre adolescent athletes with bad hitting habits from a travel team and giving a couple simple cheat codes and making them viable top half of the lineup hitters in one off season.
So those personal reference points above are to show that it wasn't steroids that allowed those hitting mechanics that Sosa employed to work. They work just as well on any good athlete who wasn't doing them to begin with, both adults and kids, who are not on PED.
Looking at Sosa's rookie swing, it isn't hard to see that with his electric bat, that a few adjustments(that he did make later would change him drastically with or without steroids.
Though steroids do help overall, but by how much? Sosa was allegedly on roids in 1997 just as he was allegedly on roids in 1998, yet look how much better he got by employing a better modern power swing with easily repeatable loads and timing, and setting a hand location that had less chance to veer.
Yes, they do, and they're not allowed. Sosa used them (a LOT) and that makes him a cheater. You can discuss how many other people were cheating (I won't participate because I couldn't care less) and all the other pharmaceutical questions you and others may have. But I'm a baseball fan, I love to discuss baseball, and like all baseball fans (literally 100% of us) I'm not going to discuss Sosa's pharmaceutical accomplishments as if they're baseball accomplishments. They're not. They're just not.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
The evolution of how athletes are training and coached and doing all things to elevate their game is boggling.
The fact that some of you can't accept the reality that improvements in someones game/skills/etc aren't all based on peds is ridiculous. The insane amount of hours of conversations I've had with the strength trainer for UMiami and the Heat over the past 40 years with how they evolve things is something most folks who can't stop screaming peds taint is lost on.
@DrBuster said:
The evolution of how athletes are training and coached and doing all things to elevate their game is boggling.
The fact that some of you can't accept the reality that improvements in someones game/skills/etc aren't all based on peds is ridiculous. The insane amount of hours of conversations I've had with the strength trainer for UMiami and the Heat over the past 40 years with how they evolve things is something most folks who can't stop screaming peds taint is lost on.
Very good post about the revolution of training both mechanically and fitness wise.
One reason why Otis Nixon types aren't really viable anymore is because there are a ton of guy who can hit better than him now...and could lay down a bunt if needed(or if it were a good strategy).
There are so many naturally gifted competitive athletes in the world now that have near equal skill and if you aren't doing things mechanically at an elite level too, then you will be passed up....again, why Otis Nixon and Felix Fermin don't crack the MLB anymore. The guys that hit bad in MLB with good mechanics are because the pitching is ridiculous like never seen before.
The 1990's was really a mechanical revolution. Sosa changed mechanically mid stream in his career and it made a huge difference.
@bgr said:
I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
Without Bonds, Clemens, Sosa etc the HOF has no legitimacy. Ortiz is in he failed a test. Mantle went on the DL from a bad steroid shot hes in. Guys that threw spitballs and used vaseline etc are in. Its basically just the writers saying these guys were mean to me so I wont vote for them and acting like theyre guarding the gates of Heaven. Ironically all they have accomplished is just making a ton of fans especially younger ones think the HOF is currently a joke
Yes, they do, and they're not allowed. Sosa used them (a LOT) and that makes him a cheater. You can discuss how many other people were cheating (I won't participate because I couldn't care less) and all the other pharmaceutical questions you and others may have. But I'm a baseball fan, I love to discuss baseball, and like all baseball fans (literally 100% of us) I'm not going to discuss Sosa's pharmaceutical accomplishments as if they're baseball accomplishments. They're not. They're just not.
You don't have to, but it still doesn't change that some guys were helped more in their OPS+ than others in the same league.
You don't have to, but it still doesn't change that some guys were helped more in their OPS+ than others in the same league.
That may be, but speculating about how much a player's improvement (and I assume you recognize that it is 100% speculation) was due to cheating and how much was due to other factors isn't a sports discussion. Once we recognize that a player cheated, WHO THE HELL CARES how much he might have improved if he hadn't cheated? Seriously, why does anyone care what the answer is? Sosa was a cheater, we are all 100% certain that he was a cheater, and yet we're supposed to talk about him as if he weren't a cheater. Why?
How fast would Rosie Ruiz have run the NYC marathon if she hadn't taken a shortcut? We could speculate about it, but we don't because nobody gives a damn, because all that matters is that she cheated. That's where I am, along with every baseball fan everywhere, with Sammy Sosa and Punkinhead and the others that disgraced baseball and made fools of their fans.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
@bgr said:
I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
For someone with a great vocabulary, you don't seem to comprehend what a player needs to do to deserve HOF enshrinement. You should look it up. In a nutshell, 3 of the 5 requirements involve "integrity, sportsmanship and character". Bonds is out........WAY OUT.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@bgr said:
I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
For someone with a great vocabulary, you don't seem to comprehend what a player needs to do to deserve HOF enshrinement. You should look it up. In a nutshell, 3 of the 5 requirements involve "integrity, sportsmanship and character". Bonds is out........WAY OUT.
I doubt that many people would consider all the players that had affairs or slept with married women to be the definition of integrity and character. If were using that as justification the majority of the HOF needs to be removed
@bgr said:
I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
For someone with a great vocabulary, you don't seem to comprehend what a player needs to do to deserve HOF enshrinement. You should look it up. In a nutshell, 3 of the 5 requirements involve "integrity, sportsmanship and character". Bonds is out........WAY OUT.
I just see it differently but I don’t begrudge you your opinion.
I also agree with Basebal21 about Clemens. I think arod also. There are more that I believe deserve consideration.
The history of baseball is littered with cheaters and the hall has players who have cheated in it.
I think the hall is more legitimate with these great players.
@bgr said:
I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
For someone with a great vocabulary, you don't seem to comprehend what a player needs to do to deserve HOF enshrinement. You should look it up. In a nutshell, 3 of the 5 requirements involve "integrity, sportsmanship and character". Bonds is out........WAY OUT.
I just see it differently but I don’t begrudge you your opinion.
I also agree with Basebal21 about Clemens. I think arod also. There are more that I believe deserve consideration.
The history of baseball is littered with cheaters and the hall has players who have cheated in it.
I think the hall is more legitimate with these great players.
Arod for sure, Palmerio and Manny also. Theres already guys in that failed tests.
If they want to put up some plaque saying this was the believed PED user section thats fine. They arent the only guys for sure and it didnt start in the 1990s but whatever.
They should all be in though. They were the best of their generation and theirs a huge gap now of what is supposed to be a museum of the history of the game not some moral police that most of the voters wouldnt even meet their own standards
The history of baseball is littered with cheaters and the hall has players who have cheated in it.
I think the hall is more legitimate with these great players.
You may want cheaters in the HOF for some reason, but to say that it makes the HOF more legitimate is absolutely ridiculous. The question is whether the hit the HOF's legitimacy takes by inducting known cheaters is offset by some other positive good. I vote "hell no", but any sensible argument someone else may have has to identify the positive good that follows from awarding the sport's highest honor to men who are dishonorable.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
The history of baseball is littered with cheaters and the hall has players who have cheated in it.
I think the hall is more legitimate with these great players.
You may want cheaters in the HOF for some reason, but to say that it makes the HOF more legitimate is absolutely ridiculous. The question is whether the hit the HOF's legitimacy takes by inducting known cheaters is offset by some other positive good. I vote "hell no", but any sensible argument someone else may have has to identify the positive good that follows from awarding the sport's highest honor to men who are dishonorable.
I suppose then I’m just an absolutist. If players who cheated cannot be in the hall of fame then we have to remove any players already in who cheated. Some of the games greats.
Guys like Bonds, Clemens…. Even taking their non-steroid years they would be in.
The standard applied by the HOF historically as regards "character" has very little to do with how a player conducted himself in his private life, although presumably a murderer would not get in. It is players who bring disrepute to the game of baseball itself that don't - and absolutely shouldn't - get in the HOF. The Black Sox are the top of that pyramid and Joe Jackson will never be in the HOF. Pete Rose is a step down, and he, too, will never be in the HOF. The modern cheaters are another step or two down, and its the better ones and the ones who set records who became the face of baseball and in so doing brought disrepute to the game itself. Yeah, some of the players who have gotten in recently were probably just as guilty, but we're not sure which ones, and while they were playing they didn't make a mockery of the game the way Sosa and Punkinhead did.
I'd be happier if Ortiz and some of the others had been kept out, but I'm bothered much more by the mindset that because we made mistakes in the past it adds legitimacy to the HOF to intentionally make more.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Joe Jackson isnt in the HOF because he was unfairly banned for hitting .375, the only homerue, and being the best hitter in a WS he was supposedly throwing
His is one of the dumbest bans of all time from a horrible owner and the first of many bad MLB commissioners
Joe Jackson is banned because he participated in conversations about throwing the World Series, knew that the World Series was fixed, and was paid $5,000 to throw the World Series. Whether or not he thought better of it once he got a bat in his hands could not be more irrelevant.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
@dallasactuary said:
Joe Jackson is banned because he participated in conversations about throwing the World Series, knew that the World Series was fixed, and was paid $5,000 to throw the World Series. Whether or not he thought better of it once he got a bat in his hands could not be more irrelevant.
The Black Sox scandal is more layered, and interesting than anything else we’re discussing here.. I think.
Those 8 players might have done more for the game of baseball, unwittingly, than anyone since. It took some time to unwind but the league back then was terrible for the players.
Joe Jackson hit .375/.394/.563 with the only homerun of the series, the second most RBIs of either team with 6 and only struck out twice while making 0 errors.
He would have to be the dumbest person in the history of the world to think that being the best player of the series on either team by far is throwing a series.
He got railroaded being lumped in with guys like Lefty instead of getting judged individually. If he were to get unbanned from baseball (less likely now with the gambling partnerships) he likely would be voted into the HOF. Most people realize he was the best player on either team in that series and thats not someone who is tanking a game
@dallasactuary said:
The standard applied by the HOF historically as regards "character" has very little to do with how a player conducted himself in his private life, although presumably a murderer would not get in. It is players who bring disrepute to the game of baseball itself that don't - and absolutely shouldn't - get in the HOF. The Black Sox are the top of that pyramid and Joe Jackson will never be in the HOF. Pete Rose is a step down, and he, too, will never be in the HOF. The modern cheaters are another step or two down, and its the better ones and the ones who set records who became the face of baseball and in so doing brought disrepute to the game itself. Yeah, some of the players who have gotten in recently were probably just as guilty, but we're not sure which ones, and while they were playing they didn't make a mockery of the game the way Sosa and Punkinhead did.
I'd be happier if Ortiz and some of the others had been kept out, but I'm bothered much more by the mindset that because we made mistakes in the past it adds legitimacy to the HOF to intentionally make more.
To get this back on track or to put it to bed. I remembered something this old timer told me at the national one time. He was setup with almost all 1900s cards. 1887s especially.
He was talking about cheating scandals and Rose and then said that he wasn’t even the biggest cheater in the game but he was the most disgraceful cheater in the game.
So I asked him who was. He said. Look up King Kelley — he never touched 2nd base.
@Basebal21 said:
Joe Jackson hit .375/.394/.563 with the only homerun of the series, the second most RBIs of either team with 6 and only struck out twice while making 0 errors.
He would have to be the dumbest person in the history of the world to think that being the best player of the series on either team by far is throwing a series.
He got railroaded being lumped in with guys like Lefty instead of getting judged individually. If he were to get unbanned from baseball (less likely now with the gambling partnerships) he likely would be voted into the HOF. Most people realize he was the best player on either team in that series and thats not someone who is tanking a game
He was paid $5,000 to throw the Series and told nobody that his teammates had also been paid to throw the Series. That he screwed over the gamblers does not undo any of that. And not for nothing, Joe Jackson, while a fine baseball player, is a reasonable candidate for the dumbest person in the history of the world, at least among famous people. In fact, the only possible case to exonerate Jackson would start from that fact. He may truly not have been intelligent enough to understand the conspiracy in which he participated. I doubt it, but it's the only possibility I can see.
For whatever reason, Eight Men Out (which is apparently your sole source of knowledge on this subject) tried to make a martyr out of Jackson. It made for good theater, but it wasn't true. Jackson, whether through greed or sheer idiocy, was an active participant in a conspiracy to throw the World Series. And he'll never be in the HOF and doesn't deserve to be.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
You don't have to, but it still doesn't change that some guys were helped more in their OPS+ than others in the same league.
That may be, but speculating about how much a player's improvement (and I assume you recognize that it is 100% speculation) was due to cheating and how much was due to other factors isn't a sports discussion. Once we recognize that a player cheated, WHO THE HELL CARES how much he might have improved if he hadn't cheated? Seriously, why does anyone care what the answer is? Sosa was a cheater, we are all 100% certain that he was a cheater, and yet we're supposed to talk about him as if he weren't a cheater. Why?
How fast would Rosie Ruiz have run the NYC marathon if she hadn't taken a shortcut? We could speculate about it, but we don't because nobody gives a damn, because all that matters is that she cheated. That's where I am, along with every baseball fan everywhere, with Sammy Sosa and Punkinhead and the others that disgraced baseball and made fools of their fans.
I recognize. how hard it is to separate how much the OPS+ issue comes into play. However, it is one of the few remaining things that is really unknonwn in the baseball measurement world. As such, I still find it important to look at, even if a conclusion may never be drawn.
@JoeBanzai said:
This has to be one of the most ridiculous threads of all time.
Why don't we add coffee and tobacco to the PED list? Maybe even getting an extra hour of sleep the night before a game? How about getting a haircut before the big game? New shoes?
Here's a comparison for those here not entering the "Twilight Zone".
In dividing their careers into first half and second have performance, Mays, Mantle and Aaron's first half OPS numbers were Mays .976, Mantle. 994 and Aaron .943. Second half, Mays .899, Mantle .957 Aaron .912. An average decrease of 49 points.
Let's look at the 3 poster boys for steroids; Bonds went from .951 to 1.241 McGwire from .869 to 1.113 and Sosa from .777 to .977. An average increase of 245 points. Bonds increased by 290!
I agree that cheating is wrong, but if it doesn't lead to a significant increase in performance, your not surpassing players who aren't cheating.
The fact that Bonds, McGwire and Sosa (along with A-Rod) are all above Kilebrew on the all time HR list bothers me, especially Sosa, who for his first 1,100 games was little more than an average hitter.
@Darin said:
JoeBanzai nails it!
After 4,000 at bats in mlb Sosa had an ops+ of 107. Now that’s a pretty large sample size. Basically 7 full years of at bats. Then starting in 1998 until the end of his career his ops+ is 149.
So without the juice Sosa would have been a good fit for swellrobinsons’ Gallo thread along with Balboni.
But swell and Craig pretend there was nothing wrong with the juice whores doing what they did.
It isn’t fair to Killebrew and a slew of other sluggers who didn’t juice.
part of the problem is that we don't KNOW who did and did not use PED. the only ones we KNOW of are the failed tests and admissions. other than that, we don't know. You don't know if Killebrew, Aaron, mantle, ripken, brett, boggs, gwynn, johnson, griffey, thomas etc. did or did not use PED. pre 2005 it doesn't matter anyways.
we KNOW that at least 2 HOFers admittedly used a current PED, Andro, and it did not effect their HOF resumes.
what supplements are players using today that will be banned 20 years from now. should that be considered "cheating?"
@JoeBanzai said:
This has to be one of the most ridiculous threads of all time.
Why don't we add coffee and tobacco to the PED list? Maybe even getting an extra hour of sleep the night before a game? How about getting a haircut before the big game? New shoes?
Here's a comparison for those here not entering the "Twilight Zone".
In dividing their careers into first half and second have performance, Mays, Mantle and Aaron's first half OPS numbers were Mays .976, Mantle. 994 and Aaron .943. Second half, Mays .899, Mantle .957 Aaron .912. An average decrease of 49 points.
Let's look at the 3 poster boys for steroids; Bonds went from .951 to 1.241 McGwire from .869 to 1.113 and Sosa from .777 to .977. An average increase of 245 points. Bonds increased by 290!
I agree that cheating is wrong, but if it doesn't lead to a significant increase in performance, your not surpassing players who aren't cheating.
The fact that Bonds, McGwire and Sosa (along with A-Rod) are all above Kilebrew on the all time HR list bothers me, especially Sosa, who for his first 1,100 games was little more than an average hitter.
What would happen if all PED's were made legal?
If they were made legal even more ham-and-eggers would put up huge numbers.
Great players who used them would eclipse the all time greats.
Here's a "what if" for you;
What if Ted Williams had juiced up and added another 20-30 pounds of muscle to his frame AND didn't miss time for 2 wars?
1,200 HR?
Joe, how do you know Williams was not on PED? anabolic steroids were around when he played and he is acknowledged as an amphetamine user. Keep in mind that he also hit .388 at age 38...
@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
Sosa should have also seen a 'clean' increase in production like everyone else as well.
I suspect you're just being obtuse, but even so you run the risk that someone here will take this seriously. Had Sosa gotten the 'clean' increase everyone else got, his OPS+ would have remained at 107. What baseball fans are pointing to is Sosa getting such a larger increase than the rest of the league did. The answer, obviously, is that he was cheating on a massive scale while the rest of the league wasn't. It's an obvious answer to baseball fans, anyway.
It's a shame PSA doesn't have a "Pharmaceuticals" forum to discuss Sosa and Bonds and the others. Talking about them in a "Sports Talk" forum is just wrong.
dallas, it wasn't "cheating" until the 2005 season.
@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
Sosa should have also seen a 'clean' increase in production like everyone else as well.
I suspect you're just being obtuse, but even so you run the risk that someone here will take this seriously. Had Sosa gotten the 'clean' increase everyone else got, his OPS+ would have remained at 107. What baseball fans are pointing to is Sosa getting such a larger increase than the rest of the league did. The answer, obviously, is that he was cheating on a massive scale while the rest of the league wasn't. It's an obvious answer to baseball fans, anyway.
It's a shame PSA doesn't have a "Pharmaceuticals" forum to discuss Sosa and Bonds and the others. Talking about them in a "Sports Talk" forum is just wrong.
dallas, it wasn't "cheating" until the 2005 season.
You make fair points but it does seem no one wants to really confront the fact that these weren’t just good American boys playing the purest game on earth.
You don't have to, but it still doesn't change that some guys were helped more in their OPS+ than others in the same league.
That may be, but speculating about how much a player's improvement (and I assume you recognize that it is 100% speculation) was due to cheating and how much was due to other factors isn't a sports discussion. Once we recognize that a player cheated, WHO THE HELL CARES how much he might have improved if he hadn't cheated? Seriously, why does anyone care what the answer is? Sosa was a cheater, we are all 100% certain that he was a cheater, and yet we're supposed to talk about him as if he weren't a cheater. Why?
How fast would Rosie Ruiz have run the NYC marathon if she hadn't taken a shortcut? We could speculate about it, but we don't because nobody gives a damn, because all that matters is that she cheated. That's where I am, along with every baseball fan everywhere, with Sammy Sosa and Punkinhead and the others that disgraced baseball and made fools of their fans.
if your hang up is cheating in general:
"Once we recognize that a player cheated, WHO THE HELL CARES how much he might have improved if he hadn't cheated?"
you have added a WHOLE bunch of great HOFers to your list of players that cannot be spoken of and whose statistical records cannot be compared/used/evaluated.
amongst those:
Ruth: illegal bat
Whitey ford illegal ball
gaylord perry: illegal ball
Don Drysdale: illegal ball
Albert Pujols: illegal bat
Hank Greenberg: sign stealing
Pete Rose: illegal bat (I realize he is not a HOFer, but should his hits record be removed?)
Mantle: possibly corked bats
Rogers Hornsby, HOFer, himself said:
“I’ve been in pro baseball since 1914 and I’ve cheated, or watched someone on my team cheat, in practically every game. You’ve got to cheat.”
Hank Greenberg, one of the premier power hitters of his day discussed how the stealing of signs helped him. “I loved that. I was the greatest hitter in the world when I knew what kind of pitch was coming up.”
should these cheaters and admitted cheaters no longer be spoken of because they cheated?
@bgr said:
I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
For someone with a great vocabulary, you don't seem to comprehend what a player needs to do to deserve HOF enshrinement. You should look it up. In a nutshell, 3 of the 5 requirements involve "integrity, sportsmanship and character". Bonds is out........WAY OUT.
would that not also exclude Hornsby, Greenberg, Ford, Perry, Drysdale, Ruth and the like?
@1948_Swell_Robinson said:
Sosa should have also seen a 'clean' increase in production like everyone else as well.
I suspect you're just being obtuse, but even so you run the risk that someone here will take this seriously. Had Sosa gotten the 'clean' increase everyone else got, his OPS+ would have remained at 107. What baseball fans are pointing to is Sosa getting such a larger increase than the rest of the league did. The answer, obviously, is that he was cheating on a massive scale while the rest of the league wasn't. It's an obvious answer to baseball fans, anyway.
It's a shame PSA doesn't have a "Pharmaceuticals" forum to discuss Sosa and Bonds and the others. Talking about them in a "Sports Talk" forum is just wrong.
dallas, it wasn't "cheating" until the 2005 season.
>
>
You keep spreading this untruth, I don't know why. They were illegal to use in 1990, anyone using after this was committing a crime. Just because MLB and union didn't add every illegal substance to the collective bargaining agreement, doesn't make it OK.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@bgr said:
I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
For someone with a great vocabulary, you don't seem to comprehend what a player needs to do to deserve HOF enshrinement. You should look it up. In a nutshell, 3 of the 5 requirements involve "integrity, sportsmanship and character". Bonds is out........WAY OUT.
would that not also exclude Hornsby, Greenberg, Ford, Perry, Drysdale, Ruth and the like?
No.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
I think craig44 is right about Steroids here. The facts are pure.
Fay Vincent admittedly sent out a memo indicating that PEDs were 'morally objectionable', but he did not go so far as to ban them because, and as he said, the commissioners office could not without a new collective bargaining agreement.
These substances were not banned by MLB until 2005.
He's absolutely correct here.
Further. The steroids mentioned (anabolic steroids) were specifically specified by Congress as illegal without prescription. It also was not all steroids, such as androsterone, which is quite possibly the one we're referring to when speaking about many of the "Steroid Era" guys. They were referred to later by governing bodies, such as the IAC, as pre-anabolic. When that reporter wrote about how he saw a steroid in McGwire's locker after a game during an interview, he was looking at a substance which was not banned in baseball. This wasn't added until 2004 with an amendment to the controlled substances act. It's good that this was banned, but when it wasn't, players had the right to shrink their testicles as they saw fit I suppose.
@JoeBanzai said:
This has to be one of the most ridiculous threads of all time.
Why don't we add coffee and tobacco to the PED list? Maybe even getting an extra hour of sleep the night before a game? How about getting a haircut before the big game? New shoes?
Here's a comparison for those here not entering the "Twilight Zone".
In dividing their careers into first half and second have performance, Mays, Mantle and Aaron's first half OPS numbers were Mays .976, Mantle. 994 and Aaron .943. Second half, Mays .899, Mantle .957 Aaron .912. An average decrease of 49 points.
Let's look at the 3 poster boys for steroids; Bonds went from .951 to 1.241 McGwire from .869 to 1.113 and Sosa from .777 to .977. An average increase of 245 points. Bonds increased by 290!
I agree that cheating is wrong, but if it doesn't lead to a significant increase in performance, your not surpassing players who aren't cheating.
The fact that Bonds, McGwire and Sosa (along with A-Rod) are all above Kilebrew on the all time HR list bothers me, especially Sosa, who for his first 1,100 games was little more than an average hitter.
What would happen if all PED's were made legal?
If they were made legal even more ham-and-eggers would put up huge numbers.
Great players who used them would eclipse the all time greats.
Here's a "what if" for you;
What if Ted Williams had juiced up and added another 20-30 pounds of muscle to his frame AND didn't miss time for 2 wars?
1,200 HR?
Joe, how do you know Williams was not on PED? anabolic steroids were around when he played and he is acknowledged as an amphetamine user. Keep in mind that he also hit .388 at age 38...
Yeah, he was juicing from the age of 4 or 5, that's the real reason he was so much better than anyone else. He was also good friends with Dr Frankenstein as well and regularly had 10,000 volts of electricity zapped into his head to make him a more "electric" hitter.
I enjoy most of your posts, but on this subject you are simply ridiculous.
As you continually ignore, what I have yold you, is amphetamines do not improve performance they merely stimulate you and can decrease performance as well. Bouton discusses it in his book "Ball Four".
As I showed, Bonds, Sosa And McGwire all had GIGANTIC increases in offensive output and muscle mass. They all admitted to, or were caught using steroids. At least Bonds was good before he mutated, Sosa was an AVERAGE player. McGwire had a great rookie year and then wasn't that great and had trouble staying on the field.
You try to spin it to compare it to ONE injection (probably amphetamines and b12) Mantle got (that actually caused his performance to suffer). He got an infection and never went back to that guy again. How is that a performance "enhancing" drug? It caused him to miss World Series games!
There's absolutely no benefit to an occasional or one time injection of steroids. Is it cheating? Sure. So's bringing the wrong answers to the big math test and not getting a better score, shows you're a cheater, but doesn't change the outcome.
Yes, most ballplayers did some minor cheating, this is unavoidable.
Throwing a scuffed ball a few times a game is nothing compared to putting on 20-30 pounds of muscle and bringing that advantage to every at bat. To lump them in with players who "might" have cheated, or were caught with an illegal bat one time is ludicrous.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
again, you do not KNOW Williams did or did not use Steroids. we KNOW he used Amphetamines. You delve into hyperbole trying to defend Williams, but you cannot. holding your breath and jumping up and down will not strengthen your argument. Isnt it amazing that he had probably his second best season at age 38?
If Amphetamines were not a performance enhancer, why were they taken? and taken to excess. we have all heard the Willie Mays stories.
I don't believe Sosa either admitted or was caught.
that is the "ONE" injection Mantle got that we know of. it is like the guy pulled over for DUI, blows a .16 and tells the cop "officer, this is the first time I have ever done this..."
So, is all cheating bad? or just one type of cheating? or is some cheating acceptable if you only do it a few times?
is it cheating if there is no rule against it?
What about admitted cheaters Rogers Hornsby and Hank Greenberg? was their cheating an "acceptable" kind?
Rafael Palmeiro was only caught cheating once. just one failed test. how is that different than a player getting caught with an illegal bat once? He also was not a guy who added 20-30 pounds of muscle and was certainly not musclebound.
again, while for some reason you do not want to acknowledge it, PED was NOT against the rules until 2005. it just was not.
@bgr said:
I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
For someone with a great vocabulary, you don't seem to comprehend what a player needs to do to deserve HOF enshrinement. You should look it up. In a nutshell, 3 of the 5 requirements involve "integrity, sportsmanship and character". Bonds is out........WAY OUT.
would that not also exclude Hornsby, Greenberg, Ford, Perry, Drysdale, Ruth and the like?
No.
why not? all were either admitted or caught cheaters. does that not break the integrity, sportsmanship and character clauses?
As you continually ignore, what I have yold you, is amphetamines do not improve performance they merely stimulate you and can decrease performance as well. Bouton discusses it in his book "Ball Four".
Amphetamines & Are they performance enhancing?
They could help a player stay on the field and perform at a higher level. Amphetamines reduce fatigue, enhance alertness, and produce a measurably faster reaction time. This is referred to as the ergogenic effect of stimulants. Caffeine produces a similar, shorter-lasting, vastly reduced effect and is a helpful mechanism of explaining the effect that amphetamines have for those who are not familiar.
Amphetamine usage changed the game of baseball. We don't talk about Cocaine usage in baseball either. Shhh.
There's absolutely no benefit to an occasional or one time injection of steroids. Is it cheating? Sure. So's bringing the wrong answers to the big math test and not getting a better score, shows you're a cheater, but doesn't change the outcome.
This isn't correct, but for anabolic steroids. occasional, periodic, and even one-time usage of steroids has therapeutic purpose.
We do have a robust scientific understanding of the effect, impact, and outcome of the usage of amphetamines and various types of steroids in sports. The whipped up frenzy of PEDs in Sports, and most egregiously MLB, was not based in a firm scientific understanding. 2005 was an exciting year of ignorance and over-reaction based on public outcry.
He had a great series, as was said. I understand the argument for and against this. What I don't get, and I'm surprised no one has brought this up is... Jackson and other players were sued for "throwing the series" based on the share difference between winner and loser for the players not believed to be part of this scheme and I recall that most were acquitted -- including Jackson which has bearing on this discussion.
As this was a civil trial, the burden of proof was pretty low. There isn't much actual detail on the trial and what arguments and evidence was considered.
This one has always bothered me.
If Pete Rose would have just admitted to Selig that he bet on baseball, Selig would have reinstated him -- he has said as much. If Rose was reinstated he would more likely than not have been voted into the HOF. I wonder how that would sit with people. I don't think he has much of a shot anymore but he did that to himself.
@bgr said:
Regarding Joe Jackson. Help me understand this.
He had a great series, as was said. I understand the argument for and against this. What I don't get, and I'm surprised no one has brought this up is... Jackson and other players were sued for "throwing the series" based on the share difference between winner and loser for the players not believed to be part of this scheme and I recall that most were acquitted -- including Jackson which has bearing on this discussion.
As this was a civil trial, the burden of proof was pretty low. There isn't much actual detail on the trial and what arguments and evidence was considered.
The owners wanted to send a message. Jackson knew about the conspiracy, yet didn't speak up. Eight players were banned, not the entire team. I don't know how it was determined who knew about it and who didn't.
>
If Pete Rose would have just admitted to Selig that he bet on baseball, Selig would have reinstated him -- he has said as much. If Rose was reinstated he would more likely than not have been voted into the HOF. I wonder how that would sit with people. I don't think he has much of a shot anymore but he did that to himself.
>
>
You need to read a bit more about the piece of $hit Pete.
Start by looking at the Dowd report.
From what I have read, Pete was going to get a chance for reinstatement on two occasions, but screwed it up both times.
Rose gets MORE publicity (and probably more money) being kept out of the HOF than if he was in. He's a total $cumbag.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
As you continually ignore, what I have yold you, is amphetamines do not improve performance they merely stimulate you and can decrease performance as well. Bouton discusses it in his book "Ball Four".
Amphetamines & Are they performance enhancing?
They could help a player stay on the field and perform at a higher level. Amphetamines reduce fatigue, enhance alertness, and produce a measurably faster reaction time. This is referred to as the ergogenic effect of stimulants. Caffeine produces a similar, shorter-lasting, vastly reduced effect and is a helpful mechanism of explaining the effect that amphetamines have for those who are not familiar.
>
Amphetamine usage changed the game of baseball. We don't talk about Cocaine usage in baseball either. Shhh.
There's absolutely no benefit to an occasional or one time injection of steroids. Is it cheating? Sure. So's bringing the wrong answers to the big math test and not getting a better score, shows you're a cheater, but doesn't change the outcome.
This isn't correct, but for anabolic steroids. occasional, periodic, and even one-time usage of steroids has therapeutic purpose.
Nobody's talking about therapeutic use.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@bgr said:
Regarding Joe Jackson. Help me understand this.
He had a great series, as was said. I understand the argument for and against this. What I don't get, and I'm surprised no one has brought this up is... Jackson and other players were sued for "throwing the series" based on the share difference between winner and loser for the players not believed to be part of this scheme and I recall that most were acquitted -- including Jackson which has bearing on this discussion.
As this was a civil trial, the burden of proof was pretty low. There isn't much actual detail on the trial and what arguments and evidence was considered.
The owners wanted to send a message. Jackson knew about the conspiracy, yet didn't speak up. Eight players were banned, not the entire team. I don't know how it was determined who knew about it and who didn't.
>
If Pete Rose would have just admitted to Selig that he bet on baseball, Selig would have reinstated him -- he has said as much. If Rose was reinstated he would more likely than not have been voted into the HOF. I wonder how that would sit with people. I don't think he has much of a shot anymore but he did that to himself.
>
>
You need to read a bit more about the piece of $hit Pete.
Start by looking at the Dowd report.
From what I have read, Pete was going to get a chance for reinstatement on two occasions, but screwed it up both times.
Rose gets MORE publicity (and probably more money) being kept out of the HOF than if he was in. He's a total $cumbag.
I have reviewed the Dowd report, but it's not something I think I'll ever fully read. I tried at one point to read only Rose's deposition and... honestly... I just can't get through it.
Here's what I'll say about Rose.
I agree he's a disgrace, and it's pretty likely he bet on baseball as a player as well. Whether he bet on or against his own team as a player you can argue that he probably did not, but as a manager, it's pretty clear that he did.
What a great competitor he was, and it's a shame, but I'm not really in favor of Rose being in the Baseball HOF. I have no issue with his player records standing though. I also think he should remain banned from baseball. He's also probably a pedophile so there's that.
As you continually ignore, what I have yold you, is amphetamines do not improve performance they merely stimulate you and can decrease performance as well. Bouton discusses it in his book "Ball Four".
Amphetamines & Are they performance enhancing?
They could help a player stay on the field and perform at a higher level. Amphetamines reduce fatigue, enhance alertness, and produce a measurably faster reaction time. This is referred to as the ergogenic effect of stimulants. Caffeine produces a similar, shorter-lasting, vastly reduced effect and is a helpful mechanism of explaining the effect that amphetamines have for those who are not familiar.
>
Amphetamine usage changed the game of baseball. We don't talk about Cocaine usage in baseball either. Shhh.
You're listing the negative effects. I'm not manufacturing scientific results here. I do love the internet, but it's dangerous because I can ask any question and get an answer which supports my position regardless if it's true, correct, meaningful.
For example.
"Do dolphins commit crimes?"
Yes. Murder, Rape... Dolphins are obviously terrible. Just going to read this first link and then tell everyone!
There's absolutely no benefit to an occasional or one time injection of steroids. Is it cheating? Sure. So's bringing the wrong answers to the big math test and not getting a better score, shows you're a cheater, but doesn't change the outcome.
This isn't correct, but for anabolic steroids. occasional, periodic, and even one-time usage of steroids has therapeutic purpose.
Nobody's talking about therapeutic use.
So are we only talking about anabolic steroids then for a particular subset of individuals with an established medical condition where a type of steroid is part of a peer-reviewed treatment? People do use steroids for all types of things -- not just the purpose of anabolism. There are actually a lot of MLB players who are allowed to use banned substances because of other medical conditions. Methylphenidate for example. Some of the "side-effects" of this particular stimulant are:
Power
Stength
Stamina
This is a drug that may be prescribed for anyone with a ADD/ADHD diagnosis, and is available to many MLB players with a TUE.
There's a lot of literature available via NIH which supports my statements. If you want some appropriate links I'm happy to provide, but I'll assume anyone interested will seek out their own information.
@bgr said:
Regarding Joe Jackson. Help me understand this.
He had a great series, as was said. I understand the argument for and against this. What I don't get, and I'm surprised no one has brought this up is... Jackson and other players were sued for "throwing the series" based on the share difference between winner and loser for the players not believed to be part of this scheme and I recall that most were acquitted -- including Jackson which has bearing on this discussion.
As this was a civil trial, the burden of proof was pretty low. There isn't much actual detail on the trial and what arguments and evidence was considered.
The owners wanted to send a message. Jackson knew about the conspiracy, yet didn't speak up. Eight players were banned, not the entire team. I don't know how it was determined who knew about it and who didn't.
>
If Pete Rose would have just admitted to Selig that he bet on baseball, Selig would have reinstated him -- he has said as much. If Rose was reinstated he would more likely than not have been voted into the HOF. I wonder how that would sit with people. I don't think he has much of a shot anymore but he did that to himself.
>
>
You need to read a bit more about the piece of $hit Pete.
Start by looking at the Dowd report.
From what I have read, Pete was going to get a chance for reinstatement on two occasions, but screwed it up both times.
Rose gets MORE publicity (and probably more money) being kept out of the HOF than if he was in. He's a total $cumbag.
I have reviewed the Dowd report, but it's not something I think I'll ever fully read. I tried at one point to read only Rose's deposition and... honestly... I just can't get through it.
Here's what I'll say about Rose.
I agree he's a disgrace, and it's pretty likely he bet on baseball as a player as well. Whether he bet on or against his own team as a player you can argue that he probably did not, but as a manager, it's pretty clear that he did.
What a great competitor he was, and it's a shame, but I'm not really in favor of Rose being in the Baseball HOF. I have no issue with his player records standing though. I also think he should remain banned from baseball. He's also probably a pedophile so there's that.
For Jackson theres a ton of speculation about what was and wasnt said to who. Chicago wasnt exactly a city that didnt have corruption and anyone that knows what role the mob played in setting lineups or reporters working for them are all dead. For all we know the manager was threatened by the mob if he were to bench Lefty for his final start of the series. We know Jackson had the best series of anyone on either team the stats dont lie
Cominsky wanted blood once it was clear it wasnt going to go away after the trial and Jackson was a good fall guy to make an example. He wasnt educated, he was a big name towards the end of his career and Cominsky had a ton of power and was just a horrendous horrendous owner. The message was sent to everyone else in the league when Jackson was included even though Cominsky holds as much blame as any of the players.
As for Rose, you should be able to be in the HOF while also being banned from working in baseball. The HOF is supposed to be the history of the game, not the rewritten history. I dont want the space shuttle to not be spoken about in a space museum because two of them blew up, and I dont want my baseball museum to be missing players that were all time greats.
Dont invite him to the induction or do it quietly. Have a description of about he did and why he is currently banned from baseball.
Give me the actual history of the game and not some rewritten version
@bgr said:
Regarding Joe Jackson. Help me understand this.
He had a great series, as was said. I understand the argument for and against this. What I don't get, and I'm surprised no one has brought this up is... Jackson and other players were sued for "throwing the series" based on the share difference between winner and loser for the players not believed to be part of this scheme and I recall that most were acquitted -- including Jackson which has bearing on this discussion.
As this was a civil trial, the burden of proof was pretty low. There isn't much actual detail on the trial and what arguments and evidence was considered.
The owners wanted to send a message. Jackson knew about the conspiracy, yet didn't speak up. Eight players were banned, not the entire team. I don't know how it was determined who knew about it and who didn't.
>
If Pete Rose would have just admitted to Selig that he bet on baseball, Selig would have reinstated him -- he has said as much. If Rose was reinstated he would more likely than not have been voted into the HOF. I wonder how that would sit with people. I don't think he has much of a shot anymore but he did that to himself.
>
>
You need to read a bit more about the piece of $hit Pete.
Start by looking at the Dowd report.
From what I have read, Pete was going to get a chance for reinstatement on two occasions, but screwed it up both times.
Rose gets MORE publicity (and probably more money) being kept out of the HOF than if he was in. He's a total $cumbag.
I have reviewed the Dowd report, but it's not something I think I'll ever fully read. I tried at one point to read only Rose's deposition and... honestly... I just can't get through it.
Here's what I'll say about Rose.
I agree he's a disgrace, and it's pretty likely he bet on baseball as a player as well. Whether he bet on or against his own team as a player you can argue that he probably did not, but as a manager, it's pretty clear that he did.
What a great competitor he was, and it's a shame, but I'm not really in favor of Rose being in the Baseball HOF. I have no issue with his player records standing though. I also think he should remain banned from baseball. He's also probably a pedophile so there's that.
For Jackson theres a ton of speculation about what was and wasnt said to who. Chicago wasnt exactly a city that didnt have corruption and anyone that knows what role the mob played in setting lineups or reporters working for them are all dead. For all we know the manager was threatened by the mob if he were to bench Lefty for his final start of the series. We know Jackson had the best series of anyone on either team the stats dont lie
Cominsky wanted blood once it was clear it wasnt going to go away after the trial and Jackson was a good fall guy to make an example. He wasnt educated, he was a big name towards the end of his career and Cominsky had a ton of power and was just a horrendous horrendous owner. The message was sent to everyone else in the league when Jackson was included even though Cominsky holds as much blame as any of the players.
As for Rose, you should be able to be in the HOF while also being banned from working in baseball. The HOF is supposed to be the history of the game, not the rewritten history. I dont want the space shuttle to not be spoken about in a space museum because two of them blew up, and I dont want my baseball museum to be missing players that were all time greats.
Dont invite him to the induction or do it quietly. Have a description of about he did and why he is currently banned from baseball.
Give me the actual history of the game and not some rewritten version
The HOF includes a lot of baseball history and lore that isn't related to HOF members. You're coupling the HOF and the Museum into a single thing. I mean... I've been there, and there is Pete Rose stuff in the museum. I was surprised how well represented Rose is in the museum.
When the question about whether Rose should be a hall of famer because of his career accomplishments, I think the fact that he's banned from baseball prohibits him from becoming a hall of fame member in any capacity. I don't have anything else to say on this Rose subject, so I'll just copy this and have it ready.
@bgr said:
Regarding Joe Jackson. Help me understand this.
He had a great series, as was said. I understand the argument for and against this. What I don't get, and I'm surprised no one has brought this up is... Jackson and other players were sued for "throwing the series" based on the share difference between winner and loser for the players not believed to be part of this scheme and I recall that most were acquitted -- including Jackson which has bearing on this discussion.
As this was a civil trial, the burden of proof was pretty low. There isn't much actual detail on the trial and what arguments and evidence was considered.
The owners wanted to send a message. Jackson knew about the conspiracy, yet didn't speak up. Eight players were banned, not the entire team. I don't know how it was determined who knew about it and who didn't.
>
If Pete Rose would have just admitted to Selig that he bet on baseball, Selig would have reinstated him -- he has said as much. If Rose was reinstated he would more likely than not have been voted into the HOF. I wonder how that would sit with people. I don't think he has much of a shot anymore but he did that to himself.
>
>
You need to read a bit more about the piece of $hit Pete.
Start by looking at the Dowd report.
From what I have read, Pete was going to get a chance for reinstatement on two occasions, but screwed it up both times.
Rose gets MORE publicity (and probably more money) being kept out of the HOF than if he was in. He's a total $cumbag.
I have reviewed the Dowd report, but it's not something I think I'll ever fully read. I tried at one point to read only Rose's deposition and... honestly... I just can't get through it.
Here's what I'll say about Rose.
I agree he's a disgrace, and it's pretty likely he bet on baseball as a player as well. Whether he bet on or against his own team as a player you can argue that he probably did not, but as a manager, it's pretty clear that he did.
What a great competitor he was, and it's a shame, but I'm not really in favor of Rose being in the Baseball HOF. I have no issue with his player records standing though. I also think he should remain banned from baseball. He's also probably a pedophile so there's that.
For Jackson theres a ton of speculation about what was and wasnt said to who. Chicago wasnt exactly a city that didnt have corruption and anyone that knows what role the mob played in setting lineups or reporters working for them are all dead. For all we know the manager was threatened by the mob if he were to bench Lefty for his final start of the series. We know Jackson had the best series of anyone on either team the stats dont lie
Cominsky wanted blood once it was clear it wasnt going to go away after the trial and Jackson was a good fall guy to make an example. He wasnt educated, he was a big name towards the end of his career and Cominsky had a ton of power and was just a horrendous horrendous owner. The message was sent to everyone else in the league when Jackson was included even though Cominsky holds as much blame as any of the players.
As for Rose, you should be able to be in the HOF while also being banned from working in baseball. The HOF is supposed to be the history of the game, not the rewritten history. I dont want the space shuttle to not be spoken about in a space museum because two of them blew up, and I dont want my baseball museum to be missing players that were all time greats.
Dont invite him to the induction or do it quietly. Have a description of about he did and why he is currently banned from baseball.
Give me the actual history of the game and not some rewritten version
The HOF includes a lot of baseball history and lore that isn't related to HOF members. You're coupling the HOF and the Museum into a single thing. I mean... I've been there, and there is Pete Rose stuff in the museum. I was surprised how well represented Rose is in the museum.
When the question about whether Rose should be a hall of famer because of his career accomplishments, I think the fact that he's banned from baseball prohibits him from becoming a hall of fame member in any capacity. I don't have anything else to say on this Rose subject, so I'll just copy this and have it ready.
Being banned does mean you cant get in but it shouldnt. Someone not familiar with the sport should be able to go in and see all the players that were the best and their stories whether good or bad.
I haven’t read the referenced book, but short synopsis of the article is that Joe sued Comiskey in 1924 for back pay and the $5K payment for throwing the series was brought up at trial. Joe said it didn’t happen, his wife said it did, and they have the deposit info from the bank. Seems pretty solid that he took the money and knew about the plan. As someone mentioned previously, it doesn’t matter how he played in the series - he knew it was going to be thrown and did / said nothing about it. Now, the interesting part that might make the book worth reading is that the article implies Comiskey knew about the fix before the series started. Now THAT could be juicy if true.
Comments
I would put bonds in the hof without question. That’s both because bonds was great and because the hall is more legitimate with him in it - in my opinion.
I think the voters are all hypocrites and I think most of this commentary is off the rails.
Outside of steroids, what caused the uptick in offense? Lively ball, smaller parks, body armor are the three biggest factors other than mechanical changes in a swing which were also a big factor.
So how does an OPS+ get helped for some in the league more than others? Lively ball, smaller park, and body armor will affect some players more than others.
The most obvious thing is bunting. Live balls and smaller parks do not affect bunts at all. They may even hurt them if the ball is lively if we want to get nitty gritty. Smaller park doesn't either.
So right away we see in their careers from 1988 on:
Bret Butler had 481 bunts in play
Otis Nixon 446 bunts
Sammy Sosa had 58 bunts
The league had a good amount of Butler/Nixon type hitters still employed in the 1990's so most certainly there were that many more balls less affected by a live ball, smaller park. body armor for those types of hitters as opposed to the guys who were hitting hard two hop ground balls(instead of choppers by the Nixon/Butler types) where the hard ground balls do get affected as well by a live ball more than the choppers, and the same guys hitting deep fly balls(the most affected by the live ball/small park/body armor).
Butler hit 967 fly balls
Nixon hit 839 fly balls
Sosa hit 2,517 fly balls
So as long as you are hitting balls hard enough already and on a good trajectory like Sosa, then your balls will be more affected positively by a live ball, small park, body armor, than the Butler/Nixon/Fermin types who are bunting and chopping far more often.
That is why some can see an increase in OPS+ more than others in the same league.
Then when you see that hitters tailored their swings to really take advantage of all that, as Sosa did in 1998, it enhances it even more.
Then eventually, the Otis Nixon types started getting phased out(and I know that is an aspect people don't like because they liked that style of game) but per this topic it matters.
The mechanical revolution was a good thing for hitters and made them better too, just as it did for Sosa from 1997 to 1998.
I used those same mechanics and turned myself from a one time pitcher only in college and a good hitter, to severely out hitting the same guys i played against in college even though I was older at that time and not on steroids(but still lifted). So the mechanics revolution certainly work.
I also used those mechanics to take good pre adolescent athletes with bad hitting habits from a travel team and giving a couple simple cheat codes and making them viable top half of the lineup hitters in one off season.
So those personal reference points above are to show that it wasn't steroids that allowed those hitting mechanics that Sosa employed to work. They work just as well on any good athlete who wasn't doing them to begin with, both adults and kids, who are not on PED.
Looking at Sosa's rookie swing, it isn't hard to see that with his electric bat, that a few adjustments(that he did make later would change him drastically with or without steroids.
Though steroids do help overall, but by how much? Sosa was allegedly on roids in 1997 just as he was allegedly on roids in 1998, yet look how much better he got by employing a better modern power swing with easily repeatable loads and timing, and setting a hand location that had less chance to veer.
Yes, they do, and they're not allowed. Sosa used them (a LOT) and that makes him a cheater. You can discuss how many other people were cheating (I won't participate because I couldn't care less) and all the other pharmaceutical questions you and others may have. But I'm a baseball fan, I love to discuss baseball, and like all baseball fans (literally 100% of us) I'm not going to discuss Sosa's pharmaceutical accomplishments as if they're baseball accomplishments. They're not. They're just not.
The evolution of how athletes are training and coached and doing all things to elevate their game is boggling.
The fact that some of you can't accept the reality that improvements in someones game/skills/etc aren't all based on peds is ridiculous. The insane amount of hours of conversations I've had with the strength trainer for UMiami and the Heat over the past 40 years with how they evolve things is something most folks who can't stop screaming peds taint is lost on.
Very good post about the revolution of training both mechanically and fitness wise.
One reason why Otis Nixon types aren't really viable anymore is because there are a ton of guy who can hit better than him now...and could lay down a bunt if needed(or if it were a good strategy).
There are so many naturally gifted competitive athletes in the world now that have near equal skill and if you aren't doing things mechanically at an elite level too, then you will be passed up....again, why Otis Nixon and Felix Fermin don't crack the MLB anymore. The guys that hit bad in MLB with good mechanics are because the pitching is ridiculous like never seen before.
The 1990's was really a mechanical revolution. Sosa changed mechanically mid stream in his career and it made a huge difference.
Without Bonds, Clemens, Sosa etc the HOF has no legitimacy. Ortiz is in he failed a test. Mantle went on the DL from a bad steroid shot hes in. Guys that threw spitballs and used vaseline etc are in. Its basically just the writers saying these guys were mean to me so I wont vote for them and acting like theyre guarding the gates of Heaven. Ironically all they have accomplished is just making a ton of fans especially younger ones think the HOF is currently a joke
Missouri 14 OSU 3
You don't have to, but it still doesn't change that some guys were helped more in their OPS+ than others in the same league.
That may be, but speculating about how much a player's improvement (and I assume you recognize that it is 100% speculation) was due to cheating and how much was due to other factors isn't a sports discussion. Once we recognize that a player cheated, WHO THE HELL CARES how much he might have improved if he hadn't cheated? Seriously, why does anyone care what the answer is? Sosa was a cheater, we are all 100% certain that he was a cheater, and yet we're supposed to talk about him as if he weren't a cheater. Why?
How fast would Rosie Ruiz have run the NYC marathon if she hadn't taken a shortcut? We could speculate about it, but we don't because nobody gives a damn, because all that matters is that she cheated. That's where I am, along with every baseball fan everywhere, with Sammy Sosa and Punkinhead and the others that disgraced baseball and made fools of their fans.
For someone with a great vocabulary, you don't seem to comprehend what a player needs to do to deserve HOF enshrinement. You should look it up. In a nutshell, 3 of the 5 requirements involve "integrity, sportsmanship and character". Bonds is out........WAY OUT.
I doubt that many people would consider all the players that had affairs or slept with married women to be the definition of integrity and character. If were using that as justification the majority of the HOF needs to be removed
Missouri 14 OSU 3
I just see it differently but I don’t begrudge you your opinion.
I also agree with Basebal21 about Clemens. I think arod also. There are more that I believe deserve consideration.
The history of baseball is littered with cheaters and the hall has players who have cheated in it.
I think the hall is more legitimate with these great players.
Arod for sure, Palmerio and Manny also. Theres already guys in that failed tests.
If they want to put up some plaque saying this was the believed PED user section thats fine. They arent the only guys for sure and it didnt start in the 1990s but whatever.
They should all be in though. They were the best of their generation and theirs a huge gap now of what is supposed to be a museum of the history of the game not some moral police that most of the voters wouldnt even meet their own standards
Missouri 14 OSU 3
You may want cheaters in the HOF for some reason, but to say that it makes the HOF more legitimate is absolutely ridiculous. The question is whether the hit the HOF's legitimacy takes by inducting known cheaters is offset by some other positive good. I vote "hell no", but any sensible argument someone else may have has to identify the positive good that follows from awarding the sport's highest honor to men who are dishonorable.
I suppose then I’m just an absolutist. If players who cheated cannot be in the hall of fame then we have to remove any players already in who cheated. Some of the games greats.
Guys like Bonds, Clemens…. Even taking their non-steroid years they would be in.
Guys like Hornsby. Wasn’t he in the KKK??
The standard applied by the HOF historically as regards "character" has very little to do with how a player conducted himself in his private life, although presumably a murderer would not get in. It is players who bring disrepute to the game of baseball itself that don't - and absolutely shouldn't - get in the HOF. The Black Sox are the top of that pyramid and Joe Jackson will never be in the HOF. Pete Rose is a step down, and he, too, will never be in the HOF. The modern cheaters are another step or two down, and its the better ones and the ones who set records who became the face of baseball and in so doing brought disrepute to the game itself. Yeah, some of the players who have gotten in recently were probably just as guilty, but we're not sure which ones, and while they were playing they didn't make a mockery of the game the way Sosa and Punkinhead did.
I'd be happier if Ortiz and some of the others had been kept out, but I'm bothered much more by the mindset that because we made mistakes in the past it adds legitimacy to the HOF to intentionally make more.
Joe Jackson isnt in the HOF because he was unfairly banned for hitting .375, the only homerue, and being the best hitter in a WS he was supposedly throwing
His is one of the dumbest bans of all time from a horrible owner and the first of many bad MLB commissioners
Missouri 14 OSU 3
Joe Jackson is banned because he participated in conversations about throwing the World Series, knew that the World Series was fixed, and was paid $5,000 to throw the World Series. Whether or not he thought better of it once he got a bat in his hands could not be more irrelevant.
The Black Sox scandal is more layered, and interesting than anything else we’re discussing here.. I think.
Those 8 players might have done more for the game of baseball, unwittingly, than anyone since. It took some time to unwind but the league back then was terrible for the players.
Joe Jackson hit .375/.394/.563 with the only homerun of the series, the second most RBIs of either team with 6 and only struck out twice while making 0 errors.
He would have to be the dumbest person in the history of the world to think that being the best player of the series on either team by far is throwing a series.
He got railroaded being lumped in with guys like Lefty instead of getting judged individually. If he were to get unbanned from baseball (less likely now with the gambling partnerships) he likely would be voted into the HOF. Most people realize he was the best player on either team in that series and thats not someone who is tanking a game
Missouri 14 OSU 3
To get this back on track or to put it to bed. I remembered something this old timer told me at the national one time. He was setup with almost all 1900s cards. 1887s especially.
He was talking about cheating scandals and Rose and then said that he wasn’t even the biggest cheater in the game but he was the most disgraceful cheater in the game.
So I asked him who was. He said. Look up King Kelley — he never touched 2nd base.
He was paid $5,000 to throw the Series and told nobody that his teammates had also been paid to throw the Series. That he screwed over the gamblers does not undo any of that. And not for nothing, Joe Jackson, while a fine baseball player, is a reasonable candidate for the dumbest person in the history of the world, at least among famous people. In fact, the only possible case to exonerate Jackson would start from that fact. He may truly not have been intelligent enough to understand the conspiracy in which he participated. I doubt it, but it's the only possibility I can see.
For whatever reason, Eight Men Out (which is apparently your sole source of knowledge on this subject) tried to make a martyr out of Jackson. It made for good theater, but it wasn't true. Jackson, whether through greed or sheer idiocy, was an active participant in a conspiracy to throw the World Series. And he'll never be in the HOF and doesn't deserve to be.
I recognize. how hard it is to separate how much the OPS+ issue comes into play. However, it is one of the few remaining things that is really unknonwn in the baseball measurement world. As such, I still find it important to look at, even if a conclusion may never be drawn.
they all were until the 2005 season.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
part of the problem is that we don't KNOW who did and did not use PED. the only ones we KNOW of are the failed tests and admissions. other than that, we don't know. You don't know if Killebrew, Aaron, mantle, ripken, brett, boggs, gwynn, johnson, griffey, thomas etc. did or did not use PED. pre 2005 it doesn't matter anyways.
we KNOW that at least 2 HOFers admittedly used a current PED, Andro, and it did not effect their HOF resumes.
what supplements are players using today that will be banned 20 years from now. should that be considered "cheating?"
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Joe, how do you know Williams was not on PED? anabolic steroids were around when he played and he is acknowledged as an amphetamine user. Keep in mind that he also hit .388 at age 38...
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
dallas, it wasn't "cheating" until the 2005 season.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
You make fair points but it does seem no one wants to really confront the fact that these weren’t just good American boys playing the purest game on earth.
if your hang up is cheating in general:
"Once we recognize that a player cheated, WHO THE HELL CARES how much he might have improved if he hadn't cheated?"
you have added a WHOLE bunch of great HOFers to your list of players that cannot be spoken of and whose statistical records cannot be compared/used/evaluated.
amongst those:
Ruth: illegal bat
Whitey ford illegal ball
gaylord perry: illegal ball
Don Drysdale: illegal ball
Albert Pujols: illegal bat
Hank Greenberg: sign stealing
Pete Rose: illegal bat (I realize he is not a HOFer, but should his hits record be removed?)
Mantle: possibly corked bats
Rogers Hornsby, HOFer, himself said:
“I’ve been in pro baseball since 1914 and I’ve cheated, or watched someone on my team cheat, in practically every game. You’ve got to cheat.”
Hank Greenberg, one of the premier power hitters of his day discussed how the stealing of signs helped him. “I loved that. I was the greatest hitter in the world when I knew what kind of pitch was coming up.”
should these cheaters and admitted cheaters no longer be spoken of because they cheated?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
would that not also exclude Hornsby, Greenberg, Ford, Perry, Drysdale, Ruth and the like?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
>
>
You keep spreading this untruth, I don't know why. They were illegal to use in 1990, anyone using after this was committing a crime. Just because MLB and union didn't add every illegal substance to the collective bargaining agreement, doesn't make it OK.
No.
I think craig44 is right about Steroids here. The facts are pure.
Fay Vincent admittedly sent out a memo indicating that PEDs were 'morally objectionable', but he did not go so far as to ban them because, and as he said, the commissioners office could not without a new collective bargaining agreement.
These substances were not banned by MLB until 2005.
He's absolutely correct here.
Further. The steroids mentioned (anabolic steroids) were specifically specified by Congress as illegal without prescription. It also was not all steroids, such as androsterone, which is quite possibly the one we're referring to when speaking about many of the "Steroid Era" guys. They were referred to later by governing bodies, such as the IAC, as pre-anabolic. When that reporter wrote about how he saw a steroid in McGwire's locker after a game during an interview, he was looking at a substance which was not banned in baseball. This wasn't added until 2004 with an amendment to the controlled substances act. It's good that this was banned, but when it wasn't, players had the right to shrink their testicles as they saw fit I suppose.
Yeah, he was juicing from the age of 4 or 5, that's the real reason he was so much better than anyone else. He was also good friends with Dr Frankenstein as well and regularly had 10,000 volts of electricity zapped into his head to make him a more "electric" hitter.
I enjoy most of your posts, but on this subject you are simply ridiculous.
As you continually ignore, what I have yold you, is amphetamines do not improve performance they merely stimulate you and can decrease performance as well. Bouton discusses it in his book "Ball Four".
As I showed, Bonds, Sosa And McGwire all had GIGANTIC increases in offensive output and muscle mass. They all admitted to, or were caught using steroids. At least Bonds was good before he mutated, Sosa was an AVERAGE player. McGwire had a great rookie year and then wasn't that great and had trouble staying on the field.
You try to spin it to compare it to ONE injection (probably amphetamines and b12) Mantle got (that actually caused his performance to suffer). He got an infection and never went back to that guy again. How is that a performance "enhancing" drug? It caused him to miss World Series games!
There's absolutely no benefit to an occasional or one time injection of steroids. Is it cheating? Sure. So's bringing the wrong answers to the big math test and not getting a better score, shows you're a cheater, but doesn't change the outcome.
Yes, most ballplayers did some minor cheating, this is unavoidable.
Throwing a scuffed ball a few times a game is nothing compared to putting on 20-30 pounds of muscle and bringing that advantage to every at bat. To lump them in with players who "might" have cheated, or were caught with an illegal bat one time is ludicrous.
@JoeBanzai
again, you do not KNOW Williams did or did not use Steroids. we KNOW he used Amphetamines. You delve into hyperbole trying to defend Williams, but you cannot. holding your breath and jumping up and down will not strengthen your argument. Isnt it amazing that he had probably his second best season at age 38?
If Amphetamines were not a performance enhancer, why were they taken? and taken to excess. we have all heard the Willie Mays stories.
I don't believe Sosa either admitted or was caught.
that is the "ONE" injection Mantle got that we know of. it is like the guy pulled over for DUI, blows a .16 and tells the cop "officer, this is the first time I have ever done this..."
So, is all cheating bad? or just one type of cheating? or is some cheating acceptable if you only do it a few times?
is it cheating if there is no rule against it?
What about admitted cheaters Rogers Hornsby and Hank Greenberg? was their cheating an "acceptable" kind?
Rafael Palmeiro was only caught cheating once. just one failed test. how is that different than a player getting caught with an illegal bat once? He also was not a guy who added 20-30 pounds of muscle and was certainly not musclebound.
again, while for some reason you do not want to acknowledge it, PED was NOT against the rules until 2005. it just was not.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
why not? all were either admitted or caught cheaters. does that not break the integrity, sportsmanship and character clauses?
you need to be consistent here.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Amphetamines & Are they performance enhancing?
They could help a player stay on the field and perform at a higher level. Amphetamines reduce fatigue, enhance alertness, and produce a measurably faster reaction time. This is referred to as the ergogenic effect of stimulants. Caffeine produces a similar, shorter-lasting, vastly reduced effect and is a helpful mechanism of explaining the effect that amphetamines have for those who are not familiar.
Amphetamine usage changed the game of baseball. We don't talk about Cocaine usage in baseball either. Shhh.
This isn't correct, but for anabolic steroids. occasional, periodic, and even one-time usage of steroids has therapeutic purpose.
We do have a robust scientific understanding of the effect, impact, and outcome of the usage of amphetamines and various types of steroids in sports. The whipped up frenzy of PEDs in Sports, and most egregiously MLB, was not based in a firm scientific understanding. 2005 was an exciting year of ignorance and over-reaction based on public outcry.
Regarding Joe Jackson. Help me understand this.
He had a great series, as was said. I understand the argument for and against this. What I don't get, and I'm surprised no one has brought this up is... Jackson and other players were sued for "throwing the series" based on the share difference between winner and loser for the players not believed to be part of this scheme and I recall that most were acquitted -- including Jackson which has bearing on this discussion.
As this was a civil trial, the burden of proof was pretty low. There isn't much actual detail on the trial and what arguments and evidence was considered.
This one has always bothered me.
If Pete Rose would have just admitted to Selig that he bet on baseball, Selig would have reinstated him -- he has said as much. If Rose was reinstated he would more likely than not have been voted into the HOF. I wonder how that would sit with people. I don't think he has much of a shot anymore but he did that to himself.
Sosa was never caught and he never admitted to it. The only thing people have is he built muscles and improved his performance.
However, people are wrong on how he improved his performance and its timeline.
I laid it out above specifically in regard to his jump from 1997 to 1998 where it was hitting mechanics that were the biggest cause of that jump.
Sosa shouldn't be any more guilty than Jeff Bagwell or Ivan Rodriguez. Actually prolly less guilty than Irod.
Heck, if chosing between sosa and puckett as juicers, it is a coin flip.
or Piazza.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
The owners wanted to send a message. Jackson knew about the conspiracy, yet didn't speak up. Eight players were banned, not the entire team. I don't know how it was determined who knew about it and who didn't.
>
>
>
You need to read a bit more about the piece of $hit Pete.
Start by looking at the Dowd report.
From what I have read, Pete was going to get a chance for reinstatement on two occasions, but screwed it up both times.
Rose gets MORE publicity (and probably more money) being kept out of the HOF than if he was in. He's a total $cumbag.
>
Nobody's talking about therapeutic use.
I have reviewed the Dowd report, but it's not something I think I'll ever fully read. I tried at one point to read only Rose's deposition and... honestly... I just can't get through it.
Here's what I'll say about Rose.
I agree he's a disgrace, and it's pretty likely he bet on baseball as a player as well. Whether he bet on or against his own team as a player you can argue that he probably did not, but as a manager, it's pretty clear that he did.
What a great competitor he was, and it's a shame, but I'm not really in favor of Rose being in the Baseball HOF. I have no issue with his player records standing though. I also think he should remain banned from baseball. He's also probably a pedophile so there's that.
You're listing the negative effects. I'm not manufacturing scientific results here. I do love the internet, but it's dangerous because I can ask any question and get an answer which supports my position regardless if it's true, correct, meaningful.
For example.
"Do dolphins commit crimes?"
Yes. Murder, Rape... Dolphins are obviously terrible. Just going to read this first link and then tell everyone!
So are we only talking about anabolic steroids then for a particular subset of individuals with an established medical condition where a type of steroid is part of a peer-reviewed treatment? People do use steroids for all types of things -- not just the purpose of anabolism. There are actually a lot of MLB players who are allowed to use banned substances because of other medical conditions. Methylphenidate for example. Some of the "side-effects" of this particular stimulant are:
This is a drug that may be prescribed for anyone with a ADD/ADHD diagnosis, and is available to many MLB players with a TUE.
There's a lot of literature available via NIH which supports my statements. If you want some appropriate links I'm happy to provide, but I'll assume anyone interested will seek out their own information.
For Jackson theres a ton of speculation about what was and wasnt said to who. Chicago wasnt exactly a city that didnt have corruption and anyone that knows what role the mob played in setting lineups or reporters working for them are all dead. For all we know the manager was threatened by the mob if he were to bench Lefty for his final start of the series. We know Jackson had the best series of anyone on either team the stats dont lie
Cominsky wanted blood once it was clear it wasnt going to go away after the trial and Jackson was a good fall guy to make an example. He wasnt educated, he was a big name towards the end of his career and Cominsky had a ton of power and was just a horrendous horrendous owner. The message was sent to everyone else in the league when Jackson was included even though Cominsky holds as much blame as any of the players.
As for Rose, you should be able to be in the HOF while also being banned from working in baseball. The HOF is supposed to be the history of the game, not the rewritten history. I dont want the space shuttle to not be spoken about in a space museum because two of them blew up, and I dont want my baseball museum to be missing players that were all time greats.
Dont invite him to the induction or do it quietly. Have a description of about he did and why he is currently banned from baseball.
Give me the actual history of the game and not some rewritten version
Missouri 14 OSU 3
The HOF includes a lot of baseball history and lore that isn't related to HOF members. You're coupling the HOF and the Museum into a single thing. I mean... I've been there, and there is Pete Rose stuff in the museum. I was surprised how well represented Rose is in the museum.
When the question about whether Rose should be a hall of famer because of his career accomplishments, I think the fact that he's banned from baseball prohibits him from becoming a hall of fame member in any capacity. I don't have anything else to say on this Rose subject, so I'll just copy this and have it ready.
Being banned does mean you cant get in but it shouldnt. Someone not familiar with the sport should be able to go in and see all the players that were the best and their stories whether good or bad.
Missouri 14 OSU 3
Looked Joe up the other day to try to separate Eight Men Out from reality (one of my favorite baseball movies, so not throwing shade at it). Found this: https://www.fox32chicago.com/sports/new-book-reveals-shoeless-joe-jackson-involvement-chicago-black-sox-scandal
I haven’t read the referenced book, but short synopsis of the article is that Joe sued Comiskey in 1924 for back pay and the $5K payment for throwing the series was brought up at trial. Joe said it didn’t happen, his wife said it did, and they have the deposit info from the bank. Seems pretty solid that he took the money and knew about the plan. As someone mentioned previously, it doesn’t matter how he played in the series - he knew it was going to be thrown and did / said nothing about it. Now, the interesting part that might make the book worth reading is that the article implies Comiskey knew about the fix before the series started. Now THAT could be juicy if true.
Jim
That is interesting and some information I’ve never heard. But I couldn’t find the book title. Maybe I missed it but… what’s it called?
Had to search the authors to find it - available on Amazon:
Joe Jackson vs. Chicago American League Baseball Club: Never Before Seen Trial Transcript
Jim