Sure, that's the normal progression, but each player has their own path, and there are always outliers. And there's just no way to know who is who in the steroid era.

Willie McCovey has a very similar career profile to Frank Thomas, and I think it's safe to say he didn't use steroids.


But that wasn't my point anyway. People who want to see steroid use will see it, no matter what. Player A is extra durable - steroids!. Player B gets hurt more late in his career - steroids! Player C has a great outlier year - steroids! Player D is remarkably consistent even late in his career - steroids!

It's A and B particularly that kill me. If a guy is hurt, it's because of steroids. If a guy doesn't get hurt, it's because of steroids.


The reality is, some guys did them, some guys didn't, and we don't really know who and when. And we'll never really know. The question is what to do about it? Does it really make sense to have many of MLB's most prestigious record-holders out of the HOF? I know where I come down on that, but it's not me that counts. It's going to be up to MLB, the HOF, and hopefully the voice of the fans to make a final decision on that. There certainly seems to be a growing opposition to the writers' monopoly on the decision.

As an aside for all of us baseball history-loving people, how about McCovey coming 9th in the 1970 MVP award voting? He led the league in OPS! But nobody had heard of OBP back then, and his .289 average left him behind even Wes Parker that year.

To anybody who argues in this forum that the writers make good decisions, just take a look at the history of MVPs and CYAs. It's basically AVG and RBI's for one and W on the other. And nowadays everybody knows that those are far from the best indicators of a player's value.

Times change.   Hernandez won a CY.   RP have won CY.    The "old guard" eventually dies out. 

That said, with the way MLB is handling A-Rod, don't you think MLB is setting a standard for PED users wrt to the HOF?

Interesting question. I'm not sure that the A-Rod situation speaks to any larger situation, as he put himself in most of this trouble by lying and obstructing the investigation. And I don't, on the surface, think that it impacts the HOF particularly (other than he probably won't get in).

But I'm a believer in putting the best performers in the Hall, and documenting their careers with the good and the bad. I would have Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro and ARod in.

Well, if you want to put it on a larger scale, MLB's(and the public's handling of MLB PED use) in general.

Think about it.   NFL guy gets busted for PED, he's in the Pro Bowl and no one has said a word since he returned(Merriman, I think).   You can't tell me that no NBA players don't take something illegal.   Bosch said he had NBA clients.   Never hear about it.

MLB player gets busted and it's news for everyone. 

My feeling is that Bud Selig really hated feeling the heat, especially from Congress, about turning a blind eye for so many years. So he wants his legacy to be the guy who cleaned up the sport. So I think MLB is happy with the way it's going right now, including the HOF voting. But as you mentioned before, I don't think the general public wants a whole generation of guys they grew up with excluded, and I have a feeling that once he retires, things may change a bit, especially with regards to the HOF.


And why baseball felt the heat more than other sports, it was all because of the single-season and career HR records. (To put it simplistically)

Posted by mfahie on 1/14/2014 2:50:00 PM (view original):
Interesting question. I'm not sure that the A-Rod situation speaks to any larger situation, as he put himself in most of this trouble by lying and obstructing the investigation. And I don't, on the surface, think that it impacts the HOF particularly (other than he probably won't get in).

But I'm a believer in putting the best performers in the Hall, and documenting their careers with the good and the bad. I would have Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro and ARod in.

All these guys will eventually get in.  Most certainly not voted in by the BBWAA in the next 10-15 years, but they eventually will all be enshrined by the Veteran's Committee in a special "Steroid Era" election.

That's a bold claim! I wonder... it's certainly within the realm of possibility.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/14/2014 3:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mfahie on 1/14/2014 2:50:00 PM (view original):
Interesting question. I'm not sure that the A-Rod situation speaks to any larger situation, as he put himself in most of this trouble by lying and obstructing the investigation. And I don't, on the surface, think that it impacts the HOF particularly (other than he probably won't get in).

But I'm a believer in putting the best performers in the Hall, and documenting their careers with the good and the bad. I would have Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro and ARod in.

All these guys will eventually get in.  Most certainly not voted in by the BBWAA in the next 10-15 years, but they eventually will all be enshrined by the Veteran's Committee in a special "Steroid Era" election.

Hmmm, you're stating that as a fact. Is that just your opinion?

Opinion. 

Posted by tecwrg on 1/14/2014 4:45:00 PM (view original):
Opinion. 

Oh, ok. Just making sure. Rumor has it that there's this grumpy *** dude posting on here who freaks the **** out anytime anyone states their opinion in a manner that sounds as if it is a fact.

Of course, I can tell the difference but I wanted to make sure no one else got confused.

Sounded like he stated it as fact to me.    He didn't say "probably slightly" so it was a bit confusing.   Thanks for clearing it up. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/14/2014 5:53:00 PM (view original):
Sounded like he stated it as fact to me.    He didn't say "probably slightly" so it was a bit confusing.   Thanks for clearing it up. 

You mean like "Mussina was probably slightly better than Glavine?"

I stand by it. I think the overall difference between the two was very, very small.