Informative.
Printable View
Informative.
Man, I loved John Kruk. He looked like the least likely human being to ever be a pro athlete. I remember that '93 World Series. A lot of fans up here were actually quietly rooting for the Phillies to win. Heck, they looked like a professional version of a beer league softball team! Kruk's gut, Dykstra's chew stains, Daulton's surgically-barely-held-together knees, Incaviglia's home run or nothing swing...they were hard to hate.Quote:
Originally Posted by dps
Is it not hypocritical to be hailing Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire as saviors of baseball, etc. and then turning around and saying "I'm not voting him into the Hall because he may have used steroids...oh but I'll vote in other players from this same era who may have used steroids but who just have not been fingered by someone else."?Quote:
Originally Posted by robinhoodnik
And why do you only care about steroids? What about the tons of current Hall of Famers who cheated, or used non-steroid performance-enhancing drugs?
I don't think it's realistic to go back 40, 50 or 60 years and start looking into who did greenies. I do think it's realistic to handle the present, in the present, and not wait to find out 20 years down the line that we've been duped by a guy who didn't get caught.
It isn't hypocritical to hail McGwire and Sosa as saviors of the game if a person didn't know they were using steroids, and then change your opinion of them once the truth comes out.
Why would it be wrong to vote in someone who hasn't been accused? If they've not been accused, then there's no stain on their name. Not sure you're making your idea come across clearly on this one.
To make a counter point, When Landis threw out nearly a whole baseball team almost ninety years ago, Landis set one he!! of a precedent, I think a similarly strong stand needs to be taken with steroids now. If it continues on as it is, I'm not sure that the game would survive as anything more than a WWE type of event in time. The focus of the game already has changed because of juice. There's so much focus placed on longballs that the rest of the game is almost an extended bathroom break for the casual fan while they wait for some gorilla like Giambi to hit a rainbow over the Grand Concourse.
As long as nobody tries to "fix" the statistical record, I honestly don't care about anything else. The Baseball Hall of Fame is a sham already, to me, so I personally don't care who they do or do not vote in any longer. While Cooperstown is certainly not hurting for attendance, I get the feeling that I'm not the only one who feel the way I do about the Hall of Fame, either.
At least their trying to do something about it now by allowing more people into the BBWAA. That organization is struggling though (mostly because newspapers themselves are really starting to struggle), and I don't think that they should be the organization to control induction anyway. The Hall of Fame needs to choose their own voting membership, which should be independent of any actual media group and have the singular task of inducting members.
Regardless, the media, the owners and official league and team personnel, every single player in the majors over the last several decades, and the fans; we all share blame for the problems with drug use in baseball. Even Curt Shilling is to blame for part of this. If it's true that Clemens was a steroid user, then Curt, as a teammate of his, is to blame for not speaking out earlier. It's easy enough to be outraged after the fact, but where was he when it was going on right in front of him? I view just about anyone who does this sort of thing as a coward, pure and simple. It's really too bad I can't see him in person too, because I'd say the same thing straight to his face. Curt Schilling: "Coward".
Good. Let's handle the present and deal with the players currently taking steroids.Quote:
Originally Posted by robinhoodnik
Also, what would you say if the Hall elects someone...say, Craig Biggio (note: I AM NOT SAYING THAT I BELIEVE BIGGIO TOOK STEROIDS.), and then, 10 years after he's elected, its' found out that he took steroids. What do you do to him then? And then, what do you tell the players like McGwire who were kept out because they took steroids?
Uh, no. Andro was found in the guy's locker. Yes, it was legal. But, nobody cared then, and now all of a sudden, they do. They care that he used andro. But they didn't then.Quote:
It isn't hypocritical to hail McGwire and Sosa as saviors of the game if a person didn't know they were using steroids, and then change your opinion of them once the truth comes out.
Because this entire era was rampant with steroid use, and just because someone has been fingered by someone doesn't mean they didn't use, and just because somebody has been fingered by someone doesn't mean they did use. So, basically, the Hall is just going to arbitrarily decide who from this era did steroids, while letting in other potential steroid users. THE ENTIRE ERA WAS RAMPANT WITH STEROID USE. The best players of the era belong in the Hall.Quote:
Why would it be wrong to vote in someone who hasn't been accused? If they've not been accused, then there's no stain on their name. Not sure you're making your idea come across clearly on this one.
Throw out a whole heck of a lot of players, far more than just a part of a team?Quote:
To make a counter point, When Landis threw out nearly a whole baseball team almost ninety years ago, Landis set one he!! of a precedent, I think a similarly strong stand needs to be taken with steroids now.
The testing is working. I've posted numbers in the Mitchell report thread of the minor league testing. The number of positive tests have been on a rapid decline. Sorry, but, this isn't 1998 still. Steroids are still being used, and will always be used, just as players have always found ways to cheat, and just as players have always taken drugs, legal and illegal, in an attempt to improve their performance. No matter how much you wish, it's never going to go away, and the game has never been free of it. And this isn't to say that I don't think baseball should crack down on steroid use. It should. Steroid use is dangerous and illegal, and baseball has already begun to crackdown on it, and should continue. But we can't just erase the players that took steroids when nobody in baseball cared - the players, the owners, the Commissioner's office, the fans, and if they were the best players of this era, they deserve to be honored as such.Quote:
If it continues on as it is, I'm not sure that the game would survive as anything more than a WWE type of event in time.
I'd also argue that the focus of the game has changed because there has been more studying of the game, and it's quite obvious that a home run is an automatic run, and thus, valuable. And please, teams don't "wait" around for a homer. They play the game. The game changes.Quote:
The focus of the game already has changed because of juice. There's so much focus placed on longballs that the rest of the game is almost an extended bathroom break for the casual fan while they wait for some gorilla like Giambi to hit a rainbow over the Grand Concourse.
And that is exactly what this all about. People are afraid of change, and the game has changed - because of steroids, and other reasons. Just like the game changed with the introduction of amphetamines. Just like the game changed when the mound was moved. Just like the game changed when the balls were changed. THE GAME CHANGES.
And also, apparantly, the casual fans don't really care, and if they do, they don't care enough to stop going to the games, considering MLB is breaking and re-breaking attendence and revenue records every year.
True. If you read Bill James' book on the Hall, it's been a sham since its inception.Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
Definately. Especially considering the BBWAA refuses to see that its "purpose" has changed from merely allowing reporters access to ballparks. Whether they like it or not, their primary purpose to the fans is choosing award winners and the Hall of Fame, and if they can't realize this and expand their membership to allow qualified voters in, then the Hall should change the way it elects members.Quote:
At least their trying to do something about it now by allowing more people into the BBWAA. That organization is struggling though (mostly because newspapers themselves are really starting to struggle), and I don't think that they should be the organization to control induction anyway. The Hall of Fame needs to choose their own voting membership, which should be independent of any actual media group and have the singular task of inducting members.
Exactly.Quote:
Regardless, the media, the owners and official league and team personnel, every single player in the majors over the last several decades, and the fans; we all share blame for the problems with drug use in baseball.
If the Mitchell Report taught us anything, it's that people knew about steroids when it was happening. The media knew. A good portion of fans knew. Front offices knew. The players obviously knew. That is why it is hypocritical to now go back and punish players for doing something that everybody let them do. If you did steroids after punishments were instituted , it's a different story and you should be subject to the punishments as they were when you took steroids (Note: 3 positive tests = lifetime ban).
My reference to Kruk was not that he was taking steroids, but rather a great deal of players on his team in '93 (Dykstra, Incaviglia, etc). Its hard to imagine that MLB locker rooms in the 80s and 90s weren't much like Oliver Stone's Any Given Sunday (Lawrence Taylor's character). This whole story seems to be one big game of six degrees of separation from Jose Canseco.Quote:
Originally Posted by dps
My reference to Kruk was a joke, so lighten up.Quote:
Originally Posted by sardins
About how the game changes and there were other reasons for the offensive increase than just steroids...Joe Posnanski had a nice paragraph on it on his blog:
Quote:
In the 1990s, ballparks got smaller, bats got harder, players started working out intensely (even without steroids), the leagues expanded, the strike zone shrunk, general managers became more determined to find power hitters and were willing, perhaps, to give up other qualities such as defense and batting average. It is very clear that game changed in important ways that had nothing to do with steroids … though that’s not what anyone seems ready to hear now.
I lollered at this