The Redemption Plan for Ryan Braun

[TooLiveBrew]

I think the "I took it to recover" admission is a way for many to partially come out and ask for forgiveness but not tell the whole story. Kind of like a politician getting caught with a woman of the night. This was the first time I've ever done this and I got caught. I don't buy that usually.

Yep, or like a celebrity getting popped for his/her first DUI & then suddenly admitting they're battling alcoholism & checking into rehab. Playing the part of the victim.

[Crew2323]

If the museum in Cooperstown, NY were called the "Hall of Baseball Purity" then guys like McGwire, Bonds, Clemens, Palmiero, etc. should never be allowed in. But that's not what it's called. It's called the "Hall Of Fame." The definition of the word "fame" (being known or talked about by many people, esp. on account of notable achievements) lends itself to those guys and potentially Braun being in the Hall. The Hall of Fame is a museum of baseball's history, both good and bad. For that reason alone McGwire, Bonds, Clemens, Palmiero, and hopefully Braun should be in it.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Molitor is a hypocrite. Part of the criteria for being in the HOF is 'character', and he was a douchebag coke addict.

 

Yeah, because he was the only guy in the Hall of Fame from that era who did cocaine, right?

 

 

Right, because that's exactly what I said. Nice strawman argument.

[DuWayne Steurer]

If the museum in Cooperstown, NY were called the "Hall of Baseball Purity" then guys like McGwire, Bonds, Clemens, Palmiero, etc. should never be allowed in. But that's not what it's called. It's called the "Hall Of Fame." The definition of the word "fame" (being known or talked about by many people, esp. on account of notable achievements) lends itself to those guys and potentially Braun being in the Hall. The Hall of Fame is a museum of baseball's history, both good and bad. For that reason alone McGwire, Bonds, Clemens, Palmiero, and hopefully Braun should be in it.

 

 

It may be called the Hall of Fame, but it says right on the ballot that one of the crieteria to be used is character and inegrity.

 

5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

 

With that being said, I would rather see those guys in that not. I'm just pointing out that I find it hypocritical that guys like Molitor can say "those guys shouldn't be in" when their own 'character and integrity' were certainly lacking at points in their own lives. Don't cast stones, glass houses, blah blah blah.

[3and2Fastball]

35+ HR's and all will be forgiven by the casual fans

 

Personally, I've already gotten over it

[gregmag]

Molitor is a hypocrite. Part of the criteria for being in the HOF is 'character', and he was a douchebag coke addict.

 

Yeah, because he was the only guy in the Hall of Fame from that era who did cocaine, right?

 

 

Right, because that's exactly what I said. Nice strawman argument.

No, but nothing you did say is defensible. Let's take your statements one by one:

 

Molitor is a hypocrite: A hypocrite is someone who accuses someone else of doing something the accuser himself has done. If Molitor had said "We should condemn A-Rod because, at some point in his life, he used a prohibited drug," then he would be a hypocrite. Of course, that isn't what Molitor said. He called A-Rod out for using a specific drug that, in Molitor's (and most people's) view, allowed him to cheat at baseball. In addition, Molitor used cocaine as a very young man for a relatively brief period, figured out the error of his ways, admitted his mistake, and moved on. It's apples and oranges. No hypocrisy here.

 

"Part of the criteria for being in the HOF is 'character'": No it isn't: http://baseballhall.org/hall-famers/rules-election/bbwaa. Even if it were, a lot of HOFers have severe and well-documented character flaws, so the character criterion would be meaningless.

 

Molitor is a "douchebag": The statement doesn't deserve a response; it indicts itself and you. I will say that, the one time I was involved in corresponding with Molitor, he was gracious and generous.

 

Molitor was a coke addict: This is the one statement in your post that has an element of truth to it. According to this account of his former agent's book, Molitor called his condition at the end of 1980 an addiction: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1499&dat=19930927&id=q6IaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xSwEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6480,4539171. Apparently he quit cold turkey and didn't require treatment, so I'm not sure a physician would have considered him an addict. Your statement is still misleading, I'll assume inadvertently, because your lack of qualification suggests that Molitor was a coke addict in general. In fact he appears to have used cocaine only during part of 1979 and all of 1980 and to have developed a serious problem only in the later part of that span. The judgmental tone of your statement, while it's your prerogative, strikes me as extremely harsh, given that Molitor was a very young man, under a lot of pressure, in an era when cocaine use was rampant in sports and society; quit when he realized the problem was out of his control; and grew up.

 

Overall, you couldn't have written a less truthful, more corrosive post if you had tried.

[jerichoholicninja]

35+ HR's and all will be forgiven by the casual fans

 

Personally, I've already gotten over it

 

You would think but that will just lead to people asking how he can still beat the testing.

[torts]

Yeah, because he was the only guy in the Hall of Fame from that era who did cocaine, right?

 

 

Right, because that's exactly what I said. Nice strawman argument.

No, but nothing you did say is defensible. Let's take your statements one by one:

 

Molitor is a hypocrite: A hypocrite is someone who accuses someone else of doing something the accuser himself has done. If Molitor had said "We should condemn A-Rod because, at some point in his life, he used a prohibited drug," then he would be a hypocrite. Of course, that isn't what Molitor said. He called A-Rod out for using a specific drug that, in Molitor's (and most people's) view, allowed him to cheat at baseball. In addition, Molitor used cocaine as a very young man for a relatively brief period, figured out the error of his ways, admitted his mistake, and moved on. It's apples and oranges. No hypocrisy here.

 

"Part of the criteria for being in the HOF is 'character'": No it isn't: http://baseballhall.org/hall-famers/rules-election/bbwaa. Even if it were, a lot of HOFers have severe and well-documented character flaws, so the character criterion would be meaningless.

 

Molitor is a "douchebag": The statement doesn't deserve a response; it indicts itself and you. I will say that, the one time I was involved in corresponding with Molitor, he was gracious and generous.

 

Molitor was a coke addict: This is the one statement in your post that has an element of truth to it. According to this account of his former agent's book, Molitor called his condition at the end of 1980 an addiction: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1499&dat=19930927&id=q6IaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xSwEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6480,4539171. Apparently he quit cold turkey and didn't require treatment, so I'm not sure a physician would have considered him an addict. Your statement is still misleading, I'll assume inadvertently, because your lack of qualification suggests that Molitor was a coke addict in general. In fact he appears to have used cocaine only during part of 1979 and all of 1980 and to have developed a serious problem only in the later part of that span. The judgmental tone of your statement, while it's your prerogative, strikes me as extremely harsh, given that Molitor was a very young man, under a lot of pressure, in an era when cocaine use was rampant in sports and society; quit when he realized the problem was out of his control; and grew up.

 

Overall, you couldn't have written a less truthful, more corrosive post if you had tried.

 

wow, well said, thank you for addressing those points!

[DuWayne Steurer]

 

 

Right, because that's exactly what I said. Nice strawman argument.

No, but nothing you did say is defensible. Let's take your statements one by one:

 

Molitor is a hypocrite: A hypocrite is someone who accuses someone else of doing something the accuser himself has done. If Molitor had said "We should condemn A-Rod because, at some point in his life, he used a prohibited drug," then he would be a hypocrite. Of course, that isn't what Molitor said. He called A-Rod out for using a specific drug that, in Molitor's (and most people's) view, allowed him to cheat at baseball. In addition, Molitor used cocaine as a very young man for a relatively brief period, figured out the error of his ways, admitted his mistake, and moved on. It's apples and oranges. No hypocrisy here.

 

"Part of the criteria for being in the HOF is 'character'": No it isn't: http://baseballhall.org/hall-famers/rules-election/bbwaa. Even if it were, a lot of HOFers have severe and well-documented character flaws, so the character criterion would be meaningless.

 

Molitor is a "douchebag": The statement doesn't deserve a response; it indicts itself and you. I will say that, the one time I was involved in corresponding with Molitor, he was gracious and generous.

 

Molitor was a coke addict: This is the one statement in your post that has an element of truth to it. According to this account of his former agent's book, Molitor called his condition at the end of 1980 an addiction: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1499&dat=19930927&id=q6IaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=xSwEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6480,4539171. Apparently he quit cold turkey and didn't require treatment, so I'm not sure a physician would have considered him an addict. Your statement is still misleading, I'll assume inadvertently, because your lack of qualification suggests that Molitor was a coke addict in general. In fact he appears to have used cocaine only during part of 1979 and all of 1980 and to have developed a serious problem only in the later part of that span. The judgmental tone of your statement, while it's your prerogative, strikes me as extremely harsh, given that Molitor was a very young man, under a lot of pressure, in an era when cocaine use was rampant in sports and society; quit when he realized the problem was out of his control; and grew up.

 

Overall, you couldn't have written a less truthful, more corrosive post if you had tried.

 

I will grant that the 'douchebag' part was, as stated, corrosive, and unnecessary, and I'll leave it at that.

[BarneyStinston]

From what I've heard, Molitor used coke and cannibus through the injury laden periods of his life, and he quit in 1981, after basically being caught when he had a wild Christmas Eve cocaine party. Yeah, the guy was an addict, and wouldn't have stopped if he wasn't caught. The cops had to break into his apartment to see if he was alive. As far as rehab, there isn't a technical detox regimen for cocaine withdrawal, so stopping on your own is pretty common.

[homer]

 

Molitor is a "douchebag": The statement doesn't deserve a response; it indicts itself and you. I will say that, the one time I was involved in corresponding with Molitor, he was gracious and generous.

 

I will grant that the 'douchebag' part was, as stated, corrosive, and unnecessary, and I'll leave it at that.

 

 

If you only met him once then you really don't know what kind of guy his is/was.