Steroids are illegal. I don't have a bias against them. They're...illegal. They make you perform better then you physically could. And did I mention they're illegal?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Printable View
Steroids are illegal. I don't have a bias against them. They're...illegal. They make you perform better then you physically could. And did I mention they're illegal?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Sutter? He should not be any where near Mariano, why is Seaver so low, and why is Maddux not Numerņ Uno?Quote:
Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX
Some of them were not illegal when Clemens allegedly used them, however....Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
HGM, your list is awful so your not one to talk
1) Clemens- STEROIDS *
2) Maddux- *
3) Seaver
4) Johnson- * He's not that amazing
5) Spahn
6) Pedro- * Laughable...
7) Koufax
8) Carlton
9) Wynn -LOL
10) Glavine- *
11) Perry
12) Niekro- Should be 13th
13) Ryan- Are you slow or something?
14) Sutton-
*= Can you say "Modern Bias"?
Again, tell me how using them than somehow makes you the worst player to ever play the game. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
By all current evidence, the EARLIEST "starting point" of steroid use by Clemens was the mid/late-1990's. He was already an all-time great pitcher without steroids. Having used steroids doesn't then make him a terrible player. In terms of on-field performance, he's one of the top 5 pitchers of all-time, let alone the last half-century. The ONLY way to deny that is to incorporate a huge amount of personal bias into your evaluation, which you're no stranger of.
"subjective" ranking. Basically, he ranked his favorite players.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxRockies
They still enhanced his performance tho... so he really didn't win all those games and strike out all those batters, the drugs didQuote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
You're insane.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
I also said that I didn't put much time into the ranking. I will post a revised ranking when I get home.
Uh, what? The pitchers to be ranked are mostly modern pitchers.Quote:
*= Can you say "Modern Bias"?
Because Clemens wouldn't be half as good without the steroidsQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
You are hopelessQuote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
But all the 90s/2000s people are right at the top... patheticQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
It is not semantics but precision as YOU started (see post #1) by claiming that Objectivity was the basis of some votes.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
*rank = SUBJECTIVENESS **personal opinion = SUBJECTIVITYQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
I simply pointed out that NO ONE can give an objective analysis of Clemens because of the "steroids" issue & its POSSIBLE Effects on his stats.Now if you believe HE NEVER did steroids EVER & obviously have proof of this,not once ,then you can claim to have an objective viewpoint.
However the athletes in question do not compete directly against one another,unlike say in 50m Freestyle or 1500M running or even in NASCAR then the rankings in themselves are totally subjective as the comparisons are based on personal weights & likes eg is K more important than IPs or Wins than ERA+ etc etc
Wtf? Dude....Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
My list was the most accurate so farQuote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
But all those 90s/2000 people were good. Just because they all played at once should not count against them...Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
ROFL! LMAO! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Your not serious, are you?Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234