Barry Larkin to Hall of Fame

[JimH5]

Are you unwilling to recognize the difference between a guy doctoring up a ball and another guy doctoring up himself? One results in an altered ball, while another results in an altered body, without knowledge or regard to how that body will respond years later. Lyle Alzado's died as a result of using steroids. Nobody died because of a shine ball.

 

Sure, the guy who risked his health at least had some sort of consequence for his behavior, the guy who just doctored the ball was just pure cheating with no chance for it to matter, that is so much worse.

 

That's an interesting slant, though wouldn't that mean we are to hold armed robbers (because their actions had more potentially serious consequences for themselves) in higher esteem than purse snatchers?

 

I'll be honest, no matter what sport you like and no matter who your heroes are if you grew up in the 80s odds are your favorite players used steroids.

 

Are you saying more than 50 percent of the 1982 Brewers were steroid users? I don't think that's true.

 

Just because your hero wasn't linked to it doesn't mean he didn't do it and if your hero played something other than baseball the chances are even higher that he did it since football and NBA basically had no testing at all while baseball at least acknowledged it. If you want to hate a player because it was proven he did steroids that is fine but not putting someone in the hall because of some vague rumors about him doing them is just stupid.

 

I don't hate anyone. I like Clemens and Bonds and Piazza. I like Sammy Sosa. I'm just unsure that the BBWAA should give a player the highest lifetime honor when some of their achievements were accomplished while they were aided by drugs that were taken in secret, solely for the purpose of improving their performance.

 

Bagwell's case is the most compelling. By all statistical measures, he was an all-time great, and should be elected. But I don't blame writers for withholding their votes for the guy if they think he was aided. He's got 15 years with the writers, so there's plenty of time for some of the voters to change their minds--or to be replaced by a new group of writers who view his case in a different light.

[joepepsi]

I'm

still waiting to hear a good argument why it's OK to have surgery to

repair and strengthen a body, but taking certain medications is

cheating.

 

One is done to get a person back to their full natural health. It is also done with the approval of authorities.

 

The

other is done to take a person beyond their natural abilities. It is

often done in secret, without authority approval, and without knowledge

of or regard to long-term impact.

 

I may wear eyeglasses, but I may not inject fertility drugs.

 

Isn't

that it? Are you just against there being an authority figure being

able to tell people what they can and cannot do in the world of

athletics?

 

Oxy wrote:

---

Well, the easy answer is that surgery fixes

something that is broken while steroids artificially enhances something

for the short term with possibly life-threatening results in the long

term. The risk/benefit scales are far different for each case when it

comes to a person's long term health.

When baseball players started using steroids they weren't against the rules. Regular people in the real world are given prednisone and other steroids all the time for back injuries. Ken Caminiti and David Segui both admitted using steroids or HGH to recover from specific injuries.

 

How is that different from TJ surgery. Or from the surgery Bartolo Colon had in 2010 that basically rebuilt his arm?

 

I'm playing devil's advocate here, and certainly don't favor cheating or doping or steroid use if it's against specific rules. But as science and medicine advance, it is legitimate to question why something as inherently barbaric as surgery is OK, but taking a pill, having stem cell therapy, or Dr. Bones McCoy running a scanner over your body to fix what ails, is somehow cheating. I'm not in favor of electing players to the HOF who flagrantly violated league rules, but I suspect fans 30 years from now will view our uproar around PEDs as quaint and misguided.

[JimH5]

When baseball players started using steroids they weren't against the rules. Regular people in the real world are given prednisone and other steroids all the time for back injuries. Ken Caminiti and David Segui both admitted using steroids or HGH to recover from specific injuries.

 

How is that different from TJ surgery. Or from the surgery Bartolo Colon had in 2010 that basically rebuilt his arm?

 

 

One of the owners of the Palm Beach Rejuvenation Center, where Segui got his HGH, pleaded guilty to the felony charge of criminal sale of a controlled substance.

Nobody is convicting Dr. James Andrews of anything.

 

That's how it's different.

[RockCoCougars]

I don't know if I would put Bagwell with the all-time greats. He had a great career, but didn't hit any real milestones. To me, he's closer (but still a notch below) to an Dick Allen with a better personality than an sure hall of famer. If Allen is not in, Bagwell should not be either. The rub for me with Bagwell is that fairly or unfairly, I consider him a product of his time. He put up some huge numbers (very impressive when he was in the Astrodome), but lots of guys were putting up video game numbers in the 90's. I am also very suspicious of his association with Ken Caminiti. Bottom line, steroids or not, I don't think that he played long enough to put up the counting stats necessary for the HOF.

[Baldkin]

I don't know if I would put Bagwell with the all-time greats. He had a great career, but didn't hit any real milestones. To me, he's closer (but still a notch below) to an Dick Allen with a better personality than an sure hall of famer. If Allen is not in, Bagwell should not be either. The rub for me with Bagwell is that fairly or unfairly, I consider him a product of his time. He put up some huge numbers (very impressive when he was in the Astrodome), but lots of guys were putting up video game numbers in the 90's. I am also very suspicious of his association with Ken Caminiti. Bottom line, steroids or not, I don't think that he played long enough to put up the counting stats necessary for the HOF.

So how do you feel about Sandy Koufax?

[Ennder]

If Kirby Puckett got in anyone who had a couple good years should probably be let in.

[RockCoCougars]

So how do you feel about Sandy Koufax?

 

That's a strong argument. The thing with Koufax is that he put together perhaps the most dominant pitching stretch ever, then retired immediately. I think guys were voting based on his dominance and the assumption that would have continued had he not developed the arthritis. Bagwell was pretty much at the end of the line regardless. Kirby Puckett would be another argument, but I'm guessing that he wouldn't have gotten in had we know what we know now about him. I think that both Koufax and especially Puckett got in largely due to a sympathy factor in their abrupt retirements that was still fresh when they were voted in. Their postseason exploits played a role as well. I could be mistaken, but I don't remember Bags doing much of anything in the playoffs.

[RightFieldCoder]

MLB players use longer and heavier bats than most of any of us have used (maybe those of us that played in a college wood bat league have used similar).

JaDerHeyski and I both used Braun's bat during a BP session last year. I usually use a metal 28oz bat for softball. Braun's bat was like swinging a boat anchor. People also don't think about how different it is to swing with a heavy one-flap helmet on the head. (BTW, I was able to get several nice singles the opposite way on the 20-30mph pitcher thank you)

 

I think steroids should not be in the HOF decision. Every generation had their version of cheating. It becomes too hard to make decisions on who or when they were cheating. I think they should just be judged on how they performed compared to their contemporaries. It isn't the Hall of Awesome Human Beings, it is the Hall of Fame. You can be the worst human being (cough Bonds) and still have a lot of Fame (cough Cobb).

[topper09er]

McGwire, Sosa and Palmeiro are all no's...look at their numbers in the years before they started juicing

Like when Mark McGwire set the all-time rookie HR record of 49 in 1987?

 

Steroids do not make you better at baseball, just weightlifting!

[RockCoCougars]

Steroids do not make you better at baseball, just weightlifting!

 

Have you read Juiced? Canseco's word is pretty much gospel to me when it comes to steroids, as he was the father of the 'Steroid Era'.

 

As for McGwire's '87 season, I'll give him credit where credit is due. However, in '87 there was undoubtedly a 'juiced ball'. Nearly everyone who played in that era enjoyed a spike in HR in '87, some guys with significant outliers (Wade Boggs comes to mind immediately).

[topper09er]

Steroids do not make you better at baseball, just weightlifting!

 

Have you read Juiced? Canseco's word is pretty much gospel to me when it comes to steroids, as he was the father of the 'Steroid Era'.

 

As for McGwire's '87 season, I'll give him credit where credit is due. However, in '87 there was undoubtedly a 'juiced ball'. Nearly everyone who played in that era enjoyed a spike in HR in '87, some guys with significant outliers (Wade Boggs comes to mind immediately).

So in 1987 it is a juiced ball but in 1993 every player in the league all systematically used steroids at the same time to cause a uniform increase in power? Did you know in 1987 Rawlings opened a new manufacturing plant in Costa Rica for its balls? Maybe there were some start up problems in making the ball the exact same way they used to previously in Haiti, causing a juiced ball for the 1987 season?

 

And yes I have read Juiced and biceps do not make you better at hitting a baseball. Just because the players Canseco named have turned out to have used steroids does not mean that every other claim he makes is true.

[RockCoCougars]

So in 1987 it is a juiced ball but in 1993 every player in the league all systematically used steroids at the same time to cause a uniform increase in power? Did you know in 1987 Rawlings opened a new manufacturing plant in Costa Rica for its balls? Maybe there were some start up problems in making the ball the exact same way they used to previously in Haiti, causing a juiced ball for the 1987 season?

 

You are exactly right, as far as I know. I remember this being the case.

 

As for the ball being juiced in the 90's, I wouldn't be a bit surprised. At the same time, I have a tough time believing that guys like Brady Anderson would be hitting 50 home runs even with a juiced ball. I do believe that steroids really started taking hold in the early 90's. In large part, it seems that you can trace the beginnings of movement of steroids in baseball to Canseco's movement around the league, most notably Texas. As Canseco (and his former teammates) moved through the league, Pandora's box was opened. After that, outposts developed all over the country.

[brettac1]

I think part of the Canseco reputation is built out of his self-mythologizing. I loved his book and thought it had some great information in it and was entertaining, but we're talking about professional athletes here. Even without Canseco, steroids would have been widespread due to them becoming more readily available. Football players were using them long before Canseco started. Canseco is a face for steroid usage primarily because he was willing to be in order to sell books.

[topper09er]

So in 1987 it is a juiced ball but in 1993 every player in the league all systematically used steroids at the same time to cause a uniform increase in power? Did you know in 1987 Rawlings opened a new manufacturing plant in Costa Rica for its balls? Maybe there were some start up problems in making the ball the exact same way they used to previously in Haiti, causing a juiced ball for the 1987 season?

 

You are exactly right, as far as I know. I remember this being the case.

 

As for the ball being juiced in the 90's, I wouldn't be a bit surprised. At the same time, I have a tough time believing that guys like Brady Anderson would be hitting 50 home runs even with a juiced ball. I do believe that steroids really started taking hold in the early 90's. In large part, it seems that you can trace the beginnings of movement of steroids in baseball to Canseco's movement around the league, most notably Texas. As Canseco (and his former teammates) moved through the league, Pandora's box was opened. After that, outposts developed all over the country.

Brady Anderson is far from the first guy to have a huge power season compared to the rest of his career. I guess Roger Maris was juicing in 1961 also. Palmeiro joined the O's in 1994, why did Brady Anderson wait until 1996 to have his breakout season? Did Rafy have him on the 2 year steroid plan?

[TooLiveBrew]

I guess Roger Maris was juicing in 1961 also.

 

His hair was falling out! Juicer! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

[RockCoCougars]

I think part of the Canseco reputation is built out of his self-mythologizing. I loved his book and thought it had some great information in it and was entertaining, but we're talking about professional athletes here. Even without Canseco, steroids would have been widespread due to them becoming more readily available. Football players were using them long before Canseco started. Canseco is a face for steroid usage primarily because he was willing to be in order to sell books.

I agree to an extent. I'd be shocked if Canseco was the first MLB user of steroids. At the same time, it's pretty apparent that he got the ball rolling. His association with McGwire helped jumpstart the HR wars of the late 90's, and his trade to Texas basically resulted in one of the early hotbeds of steroid usage.

[topper09er]

I agree to an extent. I'd be shocked if Canseco was the first MLB user of steroids. At the same time, it's pretty apparent that he got the ball rolling. His association with McGwire helped jumpstart the HR wars of the late 90's, and his trade to Texas basically resulted in one of the early hotbeds of steroid usage.

McGwire and Canseco stopped being teammates in 1993, why did Mac wait until 1998 to hit significantly more HRs than he did as a rookie? What was the biggest change for him in 1998? A new stadium that was much more hitter friendly compared to the Oakland Coliseum.

[RockCoCougars]

I guess Roger Maris was juicing in 1961 also.

 

'61 was another outlier season of prodigious offense feasting on expansion pitching. Because of this, baseball tried to adjust by raising the mound, etc. The short porch in Yankee Stadium aided Maris as well.

 

McGwire and Canseco stopped being teammates in 1993, why did Mac wait until 1998 to hit significantly more HRs than he did as a rookie?

 

McGwire lost most of the early 90's to injury. I don't remember the exact timeline that Canseco spelled out, but from what I remember he started juicing in '89 or thereabouts. Outside of '91 (horrible year, maybe he laid off the juice), his PA/HR seemed to significantly decrease as his career moved forward.

[Baldkin]

So how do you feel about Sandy Koufax?

 

That's a strong argument. The thing with Koufax is that he put together perhaps the most dominant pitching stretch ever, then retired immediately. I think guys were voting based on his dominance and the assumption that would have continued had he not developed the arthritis. Bagwell was pretty much at the end of the line regardless. Kirby Puckett would be another argument, but I'm guessing that he wouldn't have gotten in had we know what we know now about him. I think that both Koufax and especially Puckett got in largely due to a sympathy factor in their abrupt retirements that was still fresh when they were voted in. Their postseason exploits played a role as well. I could be mistaken, but I don't remember Bags doing much of anything in the playoffs.

I really think Bagwell playing in Houston killed him for his HoF chances. I mean, he was the 2nd or 3rd best player in baseball over a 10 year period.

Yeah, he played 1B, but that just shows what a ridiculous hitter he was.

[RockCoCougars]

You can't take anything away from Bagwell's stats that's for sure. Really, any way you look at it, steroids hurt his chances for the HOF. Either he was a juicer, or even worse... was not, and his numbers don't look as good as they should because of all the juicing that was going on.

[MNBrew]

McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, Clemens, Palmeiro, all those guys should be in

 

I disagree. Bonds would have been in regardless, but his ego got in the way and he had to cheat. Clemens was right on the cusp, but he was starting to wane quite a bit until his 'career resurgence' in Toronto. McGwire, Sosa and Palmeiro are all no's...look at their numbers in the years before they started juicing, with McGwire and Palmeiro you can trace their juicing to playing with Canseco, I'd guess Sosa got started in the 97/98 offseason.

As Topper keeps saying, when these guys were so productive, steroids weren't a violation of baseball's rules. That's NOT cheating, then. Perry's spitter & ball-doctoring was. My point, again, is that if everyone's going to look the other way on Perry AND anyone who used greenies, amphetamines, or any other stimulant-category substance (legal or illegal -- they were the steroid-equivalent PEDs of their day!!!), then this anti-steroid sentiment is PIOUS HYPOCRISY -- dis-credible foolishness!

 

On a related note, Pete Rose, while arguably still highly arrogant and perhaps questionably repentant at best, did serve time in the government's license plate factory for his crimes. Doesn't that put him on legally if not somewhat morally higher "redemptive" ground (speaking in very relative terms) than others who never paid a price for their "crimes" against the game?

 

(edited for better clarity & word choice)

[endaround]

Tom House said he and almost every pitcher he knew was using steroids in the 1970s. Amazing how everyone always ignores that. Want to know how they got such insane innings totals back then?

[JimH5]

As Topper keeps saying, when these guys were so productive, steroids weren't a violation of baseball's rules. That's NOT cheating, then.

 

Of all the arguments supporting the steroid users, I think this is the weakest--it's certainly the weaseliest. It suggests that baseball was played in a vacuum, outside of the laws of he United States. If the distributors of these drugs were being convicted of felonies, and if drugs were being taken in secret--and taken with other things known as masking agents, don't you think the users feared getting caught? Guys were untruthful before Congress. They knew they were doing wrong. And now, some HOF voters are reacting.

 

The rules of baseball--certainly the rules related to PEDs--were and are negotiated between MLB and the MLBPA. Baseball couldn't just declare something as being against the rules without the players' approval. And the Players Association under Don Fehr did nothing to help that cause--ask Rick Helling. More homers meant higher player salaries, which was first and foremost on their agenda.

 

Not to suggest that the owners weren't also happy to cash in, too. Interest, attendance, tv ratings and gate receipts soared, pushing the steroid fight to the back burner.

 

Perry's spitter & ball-doctoring was.

Perry was inducted 20 years ago by a different group of writers. His "crimes" were also done with a wink and a smile, and don't think that doesn't compare favorably to Rafael Palmeiro defiantly pointing his finger at Congress and Sammy Sosa forgetting his understanding of English.

 

My point, again, is that if everyone's going to look the other way on Perry AND anyone who used greenies, amphetamines, or any other stimulant-category substance (legal or illegal -- they were the steroid-equivalent PEDs of their day!!!), then this anti-steroid sentiment is PIOUS HYPOCRISY -- dis-credible foolishness!

 

Standards of conduct change over time, and now some voters are declaring that players who engaged in unlawful conduct shouldn't be given the game's highest honor. And I agree with them.

 

On a related note, Pete Rose, while arguably still highly arrogant and perhaps questionably repentant at best, did serve time in the government's license plate factory for his crimes. Doesn't that put him on legally if not somewhat morally higher "redemptive" ground (speaking in very relative terms) than others who never paid a price for their "crimes" against the game?

Rose has paid his debt to society. But his crimes against the game were much more egregious than someone using steroids. Insider gambling brings into question the whole validity of a sport. It makes one wonder if both sides are playing to win.

 

And the Museum has plenty of his stuff on display, to accurately and fully tell the story of his greatness. They can do this without honoring him with induction.

[topper09er]

I guess Roger Maris was juicing in 1961 also.

 

'61 was another outlier season of prodigious offense feasting on expansion pitching. Because of this, baseball tried to adjust by raising the mound, etc. The short porch in Yankee Stadium aided Maris as well.

 

McGwire and Canseco stopped being teammates in 1993, why did Mac wait until 1998 to hit significantly more HRs than he did as a rookie?

 

McGwire lost most of the early 90's to injury. I don't remember the exact timeline that Canseco spelled out, but from what I remember he started juicing in '89 or thereabouts. Outside of '91 (horrible year, maybe he laid off the juice), his PA/HR seemed to significantly decrease as his career moved forward.

But 1998 was not an outlier season of prodigious offense feasting on expansion/Milwaukee pitching (in the NL)? Because of this baseball tried to adjust by using the humidor and enforcing a larger strike zone, etc. All the new band box stadiums that opened around that time aided the power boost as well.

 

If McGwire started juicing in 1989 why did it take him until 1998 to hit 70 HRs? Because he was injured, I thought steroids made you heal from injuries faster?

[brettac1]

Tom House said he and almost every pitcher he knew was using steroids in the 1970s. Amazing how everyone always ignores that. Want to know how they got such insane innings totals back then?

Exactly. Because he didn't write a book.