All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Disturbing comments from Cooperstown President.
11/29/2013 10:51 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 11/29/2013 9:34:00 PM (view original):
Clemens was on his way to being one of the best of all time until he turned to PEDs.  Anything achieved beyond that is tainted.

Cheaters should not be rewarded for cheating.
You want to kick all the guys who used greenies out of the Hall?  Mays?  Aaron?  What about the spitballers?  Neither greenies nor steroids were ever explicitly against MLB rules or policy, just US law.  Spitballs were explicitly against the rules.  So time to give Gaylord Perry the boot?

I'm so sick of this bullshit argument.  Baseball has always rewarded those who get away with cheating.  And the same guys who revere the spitballers and amphetamine abusers can't stand Bonds and Clemens because "they cheated the game."  They did the same thing all the generations before them did, they just happened to have the best cheating technology available to date.  Frankly, I think most of it is that everyone wants to believe the players and the game they saw when they were young and full of wonder were as good as it gets.  The same reason that old guys in the '20s and '30s and even '40s would never accept that Ruth had been a better hitter than Cobb.  The same reason everyone in the '60s and '70s and '80s was obsessed with putting an asterisk behind Maris' record.  And the same reason that almost everyone over 40 now wants the steroid guys out of the Hall.
11/29/2013 11:15 PM
Not to split hairs, but any drug scheduled as being illegal by the US government was deemed against the rules/policy.  It's been in every bargaining agreement since there's been one. Starting in 1969, greenies were against the rules as that's the year they were scheduled illegal by the feds.
11/29/2013 11:16 PM
Steroids were scheduled illegal in 1990, therefore they were against baseballs rules starting in 1990.
11/29/2013 11:22 PM
Posted by dahsdebater on 11/29/2013 9:10:00 PM (view original):
I have a hard time believing that most of the greatest pitchers in history pitched either before 1920 or after 1990.  Even if we can't quantify what about the game allowed guys to flourish so much during the steroid era, whether or not they were using themselves, it seems apparent to me that something allowed 4 guys (you left out Pedro) to be so historically good at the same time.
I wonder how many pitchers would have had much "better" stats if they had pitched in the bullpen era.
11/30/2013 12:41 AM
Feller and Spahn would probably look a hell of a lot better.  Robin Roberts.  That guy had his arm pitched off for the first half of his career and then went way downhill.  Allie Reynolds.  Those are 4 names that jump to mind who were all thought to be elite, nasty, generational pitchers in their time who often get left out of discussions of the best pitchers of all time.  All of them threw a ton of innings in their best seasons, and no doubt had a hard time maintaining their best stuff through their 150-pitch starts.  Feller and Spahn certainly get a solid amount of press, Roberts and Reynolds almost nothing.
11/30/2013 7:28 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 11/29/2013 8:22:00 PM (view original):
I'm not saying he's better than some shitbag who shouldn't be allowed within 100 miles of Cooperstown, even just to visit. Someone like Jack Morrus or Catfush Hunter. He's as good as most if the pitchers in.

Like I said "He's as good as......."
 
Fanfuckingtastic.  

11/30/2013 8:28 AM
Posted by dahsdebater on 11/29/2013 10:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 11/29/2013 9:34:00 PM (view original):
Clemens was on his way to being one of the best of all time until he turned to PEDs.  Anything achieved beyond that is tainted.

Cheaters should not be rewarded for cheating.
You want to kick all the guys who used greenies out of the Hall?  Mays?  Aaron?  What about the spitballers?  Neither greenies nor steroids were ever explicitly against MLB rules or policy, just US law.  Spitballs were explicitly against the rules.  So time to give Gaylord Perry the boot?

I'm so sick of this bullshit argument.  Baseball has always rewarded those who get away with cheating.  And the same guys who revere the spitballers and amphetamine abusers can't stand Bonds and Clemens because "they cheated the game."  They did the same thing all the generations before them did, they just happened to have the best cheating technology available to date.  Frankly, I think most of it is that everyone wants to believe the players and the game they saw when they were young and full of wonder were as good as it gets.  The same reason that old guys in the '20s and '30s and even '40s would never accept that Ruth had been a better hitter than Cobb.  The same reason everyone in the '60s and '70s and '80s was obsessed with putting an asterisk behind Maris' record.  And the same reason that almost everyone over 40 now wants the steroid guys out of the Hall.
It seems to me that the "greenies = PEDs" argument is a "bullshit argument" as well.  Are you saying that greenies in the 60's and 70's had the same impact on performance as steroids and other PEDs in the 90's and 00's?

With that line of logic, we should probably also throw in caffeine or sugar.  Anybody who's had a cup or two of coffee before a game, or ate a candy bar, should be tossed as well.
11/30/2013 11:28 AM
Posted by tecwrg on 11/30/2013 8:28:00 AM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 11/29/2013 10:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 11/29/2013 9:34:00 PM (view original):
Clemens was on his way to being one of the best of all time until he turned to PEDs.  Anything achieved beyond that is tainted.

Cheaters should not be rewarded for cheating.
You want to kick all the guys who used greenies out of the Hall?  Mays?  Aaron?  What about the spitballers?  Neither greenies nor steroids were ever explicitly against MLB rules or policy, just US law.  Spitballs were explicitly against the rules.  So time to give Gaylord Perry the boot?

I'm so sick of this bullshit argument.  Baseball has always rewarded those who get away with cheating.  And the same guys who revere the spitballers and amphetamine abusers can't stand Bonds and Clemens because "they cheated the game."  They did the same thing all the generations before them did, they just happened to have the best cheating technology available to date.  Frankly, I think most of it is that everyone wants to believe the players and the game they saw when they were young and full of wonder were as good as it gets.  The same reason that old guys in the '20s and '30s and even '40s would never accept that Ruth had been a better hitter than Cobb.  The same reason everyone in the '60s and '70s and '80s was obsessed with putting an asterisk behind Maris' record.  And the same reason that almost everyone over 40 now wants the steroid guys out of the Hall.
It seems to me that the "greenies = PEDs" argument is a "bullshit argument" as well.  Are you saying that greenies in the 60's and 70's had the same impact on performance as steroids and other PEDs in the 90's and 00's?

With that line of logic, we should probably also throw in caffeine or sugar.  Anybody who's had a cup or two of coffee before a game, or ate a candy bar, should be tossed as well.
Have you ever taken speed? I have. It's not comparable to coffee.

We really don't know how much of an impact steroids had. Looking at the list if minor and major league players caught using, steroids certainly weren't enough to make anyone great on their own. And if enough players were on them, the competitive advantage would be minimal.

But yes, I think the steroid/speed comparison was accurate. Both are illegal drugs available by prescription that allow you to perform at a level beyond your natural abilities.
11/30/2013 11:30 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/30/2013 7:28:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 11/29/2013 8:22:00 PM (view original):
I'm not saying he's better than some shitbag who shouldn't be allowed within 100 miles of Cooperstown, even just to visit. Someone like Jack Morrus or Catfush Hunter. He's as good as most if the pitchers in.

Like I said "He's as good as......."
 
Fanfuckingtastic.  

He was as good or better than the average hall if fame pitcher. How else would you determine a hall of famer?
11/30/2013 11:34 AM
It can very much be comparable to coffee, or some of the energy drinks that are out there now.  Not to mention something like No Doz which is pretty much just concentrated caffeine.


My quad eggnog latte on Wednesday had me sweating and shaking.
11/30/2013 1:21 PM
Posted by deathinahole on 11/29/2013 7:18:00 PM (view original):
FFS. Stat nerds are the death of any Hall of Fame.
^^^THIS!!!
11/30/2013 1:22 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/29/2013 8:07:00 PM (view original):
At the end fo the day, there's no right or wrong answer.    It's all about what you want a HOF to be.  Personally, I want the best of the best.    If I have to lobby for a guy, he's probably not a HOFer. 
^^^AND THIS!!!
11/30/2013 7:05 PM
Posted by dahsdebater on 11/29/2013 9:10:00 PM (view original):
I have a hard time believing that most of the greatest pitchers in history pitched either before 1920 or after 1990.  Even if we can't quantify what about the game allowed guys to flourish so much during the steroid era, whether or not they were using themselves, it seems apparent to me that something allowed 4 guys (you left out Pedro) to be so historically good at the same time.
I always thought that Jack Morris was a true HOFer!
11/30/2013 7:23 PM
Posted by mlent on 11/23/2013 1:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Got_Worms on 11/23/2013 3:08:00 AM (view original):
The only one in that group that just doesn't pass the smell test for me is Lee Smith.  Granted he was the all-time saves leader when he retired, but is now 3rd to Rivera & Hoffman (both 1st ballot HOFers BTW), and John Franco is 4th.  That says a lot, although Billy Wagner is 5th on that list, & I feel he's a HOFer.

Discuss...
Actually Lee smith belongs in the Hall of Fame,  (if you allow relievers, remember most relievers are failed starters and there are no punters in the football hall of fame)
he was as good as Sutter,Gossage and Eck.  and he wasn't a failed starter like Goose and Eck.

Of the current 1 inning save specialists only Mariano belongs.  
Ahhh.  Ray Guy is going to get in this year or next.
11/30/2013 9:18 PM
Posted by The_Creeper on 11/30/2013 7:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by mlent on 11/23/2013 1:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Got_Worms on 11/23/2013 3:08:00 AM (view original):
The only one in that group that just doesn't pass the smell test for me is Lee Smith.  Granted he was the all-time saves leader when he retired, but is now 3rd to Rivera & Hoffman (both 1st ballot HOFers BTW), and John Franco is 4th.  That says a lot, although Billy Wagner is 5th on that list, & I feel he's a HOFer.

Discuss...
Actually Lee smith belongs in the Hall of Fame,  (if you allow relievers, remember most relievers are failed starters and there are no punters in the football hall of fame)
he was as good as Sutter,Gossage and Eck.  and he wasn't a failed starter like Goose and Eck.

Of the current 1 inning save specialists only Mariano belongs.  
Ahhh.  Ray Guy is going to get in this year or next.
I hope so, even though the Raiders used to inflate the balls with helium  to get him more hang time.
of 14
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Disturbing comments from Cooperstown President.

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.