Posted by tecwrg on 6/11/2015 12:35:00 PM (view original):
Amphetimines are not steroids.  Not even close.

Correct. They are a different kind of PED.

Just like HGH is also a different kind of PED than steroids.

If McGwire didn't use steroids, his already garbage batting average of .263 would have been lower. He would have hit far less home runs and pitchers would not have issued him intentional walks because he would have been the easy out he should have been. And more than likely he would have been out of baseball earlier than the long career he had. I remember the excitement of 1998 between him and Sosa hitting all the home runs and breaking Maris' record. It was fun while it went on, but after the fact, knowing what he did I feel cheated as a fan. McGwire is lucky he can find employment in MLB...he should be banned. I remember when the reporter found Andro in his locker and they seemed to brush it under the rug and give him a pass. Nobody wanted to believe it. I wouldn't be surprised if he was on roids his entire career, including his rookie season when he hit all those HRs. So you can throw out all your numbers of OBP, OPS, etc...they are tainted numbers. And a tainted .263 batting average is pathetic.

You're not making any sense. There's nothing inherently wrong with a .263 batting average. Only 8 players in the history of baseball had McGwire's on base and slugging skills while hitting for better average.

If you want to disqualify him for PEDs, fine. I disagree but it's a reasonable position.

Disqualifying him because he "only" hit .263 is stupid when you look at the rest of his numbers.

I'm not a "McGwire for HOF" guy because I think the HOF is full of good, not great, players but I thought of 4 guys, off the top of my head, that are HOFers and they have BA that are pretty similar.

Bench, Schmidt, Banks, Killebrew.   Then, while checking to make sure they were all "low average guys"(they were), I noticed Rickey Henderson hit .279.   Based on 500 AB, the difference between .263 and .279 is 8 hits a season.    There are dozens of reasons to say "NO" to McGwire in the HOF but BA doesn't seem to be one of them.

HOF debates are fun. Everyone has their own way at looking at things. The players Mike has mentioned did not have high batting averages but also they didn't use steroids. Bench had power and was an excellent defensive catcher. Banks primarily was a SS. Killebrew played in an era where not a lot of players hit 500 HRs. Schmidt was the best third baseman of his era both defensively and offensively.

Was McGwire the best first baseman offensively and/or defensively of his era by a long shot? I am not sure. His low average as I stated above would have been LOWER if he hadn't used steroids. Steroids increase your bat speed and don't just provide power, they provide hits. So he might have had 8 LESS hits per season if he didn't juice. McGwire played in an era where there was a LOT of power hitters. That hurts his chances in my opinion. He had some real clunker seasons...he wasn't consistent. His best seasons he was juicing and it is those seasons that raise his average and power numbers. Unlike say a Clemens, Bonds, or ARod who had consistent seasons whether they were juicing or not. In my opinion, respectfully...McGwire does not belong in the HOF.

How do you know, for any of those guys, which seasons they were and were not using steroids?