- Thread starter
- #1
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
pudge retires
- Thread starter bouwob
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Hallsgator
New member
Somewhere on the wall in the Hall. Maybe in the front, I think that's where they put the newer guys if I remember correctly.
mjbuchanan80
Member
Travesty if he is not a first ballot. Catcher. Great bat. Incredible glove. Lock!
gmarutiak
Active member
Steroid implications prevent him from going in on the first ballot.
I'm totally intrigued to see how this one pans out. Do the Hall voters only choose to keep power hitters (Bonds, McGwire) and power pitchers (Clemens) out of the Hall, or do they wise up and realize that one of the main benefits of steroids lies in shortening recovery time (catchers, pitchers).
I still think it's funny how, for the most part, the average person associates steroids with bulk and muscle, but if you look at the annual batch of Tour de France riders who pee positive, they are some of the thinnest guys in the world.
I'm totally intrigued to see how this one pans out. Do the Hall voters only choose to keep power hitters (Bonds, McGwire) and power pitchers (Clemens) out of the Hall, or do they wise up and realize that one of the main benefits of steroids lies in shortening recovery time (catchers, pitchers).
I still think it's funny how, for the most part, the average person associates steroids with bulk and muscle, but if you look at the annual batch of Tour de France riders who pee positive, they are some of the thinnest guys in the world.
hive17
Active member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 21,426
- 24
As I didn't follow him much, I have to ask: was Pudge ever hurt that much. Your point it totally valid, but does it apply to him? I remember Piazza being hurt more, so that spectre might be there, but Pudge just seemed durable and that was his true "super-power".
Randy Shields
Well-known member
I have to go with 1st ballot. I don't think steroid use will be that much of an issue with the majority of writers. And I do not understand the "No HOF" votes here. Not at all.
uniquebaseballcards
New member
- Nov 12, 2008
- 6,783
- 0
Same thoughts here, nice post.
sportscardtheory
Active member
Rodriguez will not be making the Hall. Sorry to all his fans and proponents of PED abusers making the Hall. If Bagwell can't even get in with no real ties to PEDs, no way Rodriguez gets in when it was obvious to anyone he used.
mjbuchanan80
Member
sportscardtheory
Active member
Guilt by association? If you truly believe Rodriguez never used, especially after Canseco said he shot him up, you are either blindly biased, willfully ignorant or just plain stupid. He wouldn't even deny it when asked.
egon8
New member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 431
- 0
What will the ballot look like the year he goes in?
Who else will be on?
That could influence 1st ballot or not.
Is he eligible in 2016 or 2017?
Who else will be on?
That could influence 1st ballot or not.
Is he eligible in 2016 or 2017?
sportscardtheory
Active member
uniquebaseballcards
New member
- Nov 12, 2008
- 6,783
- 0
It doesn't seem that IRod's level of offense rises to the same level as some of the others who have been (fairly or unfairly) implicated. I think IRod is a better/more important catcher than Bagwell was as a first-sacker though.
Pine Tar
Active member
I liked to watch him play, but not to sure if he is HOF material. And I was a little surprised to see him leave this year, but some guys know when it is time.
sportscardtheory
Active member
Using steroids is using steroids. It doesn't matter that he didn't hit 600 HRs. He got an MVP Award because of his PED abuse. He would have been a HOFer had he not abused steroids, but that's the path he chose and will now probably not make the Hall because of it. I don't feel bad for him or any player left out due to PEDs. They aren't victims.
gmarutiak
Active member
Sorry. I wasn't clear when I used the phrase "recovery time." I was referring to the daily recovery time from squatting behind the plate, not recovery from any specific injury. Many (including Jose Canseco) would argue that his durability was helped out immensely by steroids.
hive17
Active member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 21,426
- 24
Would it be fair to say that Pudge was a better catcher than everyone else at his position, thus elevating him to a "stand-out" and a HoF'er? Steriods or no, I would think that his abilities that were probably not enhanced (assuming HE was), like defense, championship and leadership, would put him in anyway.
I guess my point is: if you don't put Pudge in, you're not going to put a catcher in the Hall for another decade, the fact of which would proabably influence voters.
I guess my point is: if you don't put Pudge in, you're not going to put a catcher in the Hall for another decade, the fact of which would proabably influence voters.
gmarutiak
Active member
I think it's absolutely fair to argue that Pudge is one of the five best all-around catchers of all time.
Personally, I think he is a HoFer. Of course, I also think the same about Bonds, McGwire, Clemens, and the others who dominated the game during the "Steroid Era."
BUT...if Pudge did, indeed, take steroids, I don't think any of us can say that it didn't help improve aspects of his game such as his defense or his endurance. Catchers' bodies break down more quickly than those of any other position. Steroids don't just make guys hit home runs. They also let them squat down behind the plate for 150+ games for 20 years.
(hive17, I hope it doesn't seem like I'm trying to be disrespectful to you, or even argue with you, because I'm definitely not. I just worry about how my tone comes across in emails and posts sometimes!)
uniquebaseballcards
New member
- Nov 12, 2008
- 6,783
- 0
I understand and can agree with this statement (I hate PEDs too), however HOF voting has always dealt with shades of gray. Offenses (or perceived offenses) will be taken in context - just like HOF voting has always taken everything into context.
nborton
Active member
I think in the long run players who were head and shoulders better anyway will eventually get in. For some reason people equate roids with gambling and Rose. When in reality, it's 100% different.
Betting on the game you are playing is and will always be the worst offense a player or anyone part of the game can do.
At least the roiders were trying to be better. You have no idea what a guy's motivations are in betting.
Betting on the game you are playing is and will always be the worst offense a player or anyone part of the game can do.
At least the roiders were trying to be better. You have no idea what a guy's motivations are in betting.
