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.

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.

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.  

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.

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.

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.  

Posted by deathinahole on 11/29/2013 7:18:00 PM (view original):
FFS. Stat nerds are the death of any Hall of Fame.

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. 

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.

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.  

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.