How do you view the current era with regards to the HOF?

Topnotchsy · May 7, 2009

So we now have Bonds, Clemens, Arod, Manny, McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, Tejada, Canseco, Caminiti etc. plus the (almost completely) unnamed Mitchell list with 100+ more names of users. How do you view the current era with regards to the HOF? If you can explain your vote that would be great.

Johan Santana 57 · May 7, 2009

I voted to let them in anyways.

I probably am in the minority that believes that the steroids don't effect as much as people claim and argue that anyone should be allowed in the HOF based on what they did on the field.

How do we know some who were great ambassadors to the game were clean? Just cause no one would accuse them? You just don't know, but I really don't think it matters.

Topnotchsy · May 7, 2009

An option I did not throw out would be to make the decision based on when the use occurred, and the rules at that point in time.

Kutzy · May 7, 2009

Topnotchsy said:
An option I did not throw out would be to make the decision based on when the use occurred, and the rules at that point in time.

This is how I veiw it. Before 2004 you are given a pass, it was a bit of a common thing and noone really cared. Post 2004, you are off the HOF ballot IMO.

All The Hype · May 7, 2009

Topnotchsy said:
An option I did not throw out would be to make the decision based on when the use occurred, and the rules at that point in time.

This is important because although it's pretty obvious McGwire was on somethin, at the time, it was not banned. After they changed the rules to make PEDs illegal, anyone who then used them should not be allowed in. Guys who used before that did not break the rules, so they should have a shot at the hall.

muskiesfan · May 7, 2009

Steroids were banned by then Commissioner Faye Vincent in 1991. Whether there was testing or punishment outlined by baseball is irrelevant. They were banned substances dating back to June 1991. Any player who has failed a drug test (MLB issued or otherwise) should not be allowed in the HOF. Bonds*, Palmeiro, Clemens, Pettite, Ramirez, etc, etc should NOT be inducted into the HOF.

Does that mean that someone who used and didn't fail a test might get in? Sure. However, those we know for fact cheated should not be rewarded with the highest individual honor in Major League Baseball.

*EDIT* I meant to that anyone who has failed a test since June 1991 should be kept out.

Joe

Topnotchsy · May 7, 2009

To me there are so many issues here, there's no real way to sort it out.

We still have substances that can't be tested for.
We have no way of quantifying how much PED's help.
We know there's a list of over 100 players who used PED's, but we don't know who they are.
There's no way to know how frequently and for how long some of these players were using steroids.

Because of all the above, I go back to viewing players the "fairest" way I know how, which is by comparing them to others in their era. A player like Arod was better than the competition in an era where a very large number of players used PED's. Did he have an unfair advantage against those who didn't? Presumably. We don't know though, how many others were using them, how much they helped him, and for how long he was using them.

I think in the long run we'll see a few players used to "teach a lesson" (maybe Clemens, Palmeiro and Bonds) but in the long run the era will be viewed for what it is. I do think that players who give off the impression of being "clean" will get the benefit of the doubt on close calls.

Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

How do you view the current era with regards to the HOF?

How do you view the current era with regard to the HOF?

No way to tell who was really clean. Everyone assumed guilty I'll simply vote based on on-field numb

When it's close I'll look to steroids to decide if a player on the cusp deserves in. I'd vote Arod,

Take it case by case. If a player puts up 10 great years after a suspension (presumably clean) I'd

Those who were caught are blacklisted. No chance at the Hall. Everyone else assumed clean.

Close the Hall. The new guys don't the character, talent etc. that the older players did. When I w

No one with over 7 homeruns should be allowed in, it's a clear sign on steroids.

All those guys were juicing, let's put every pitcher in.

Other (please explain)

Topnotchsy

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?

Johan Santana 57

New member

Topnotchsy

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?

Kutzy

New member

All The Hype

Active member

muskiesfan

New member

Topnotchsy

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?

Similar threads

Members online

Latest posts