Hall of Fame Questionaire

[clarknova]

A couple nights ago I watched Dan Patrick's radio show TV show (yeah, he televises his radio broadcasts) and a discussion came up about the Hall of Fame and the steroid era. I know this has been discussed by pundits ad nauseum, but I wanted to know where others stood on this because it got me thinking.

If you had a Hall of Fame vote, who on this list would you vote for, if any? Do you think none of them deserve to be in the hall because they cheated? I'm including a couple other well known non-steroid cheaters because I'm interested to see if people think steroid use is more egregious.

Let's start with the usual suspects:

1. Barry Bonds
762 HR, 2,935 career hits, 1,996 RBI, Career HR record holder*, Single season HR record holder, 7 time NL MVP, 14 time All Star, Career BB record holder, etc. etc. etc.

Circumstantial steroid abuser (duh.), adulterer, jerk

2. Mark McGwire
583 HR, 70 HR in 1998, 1,414 RBI, 12 time All Star

Steroid user, hermit

4. Roger Clemens
354 Wins, 4,672 strike outs, 3.12 career ERA, 11 time All Star, 7 time Cy Young Award winner, 1986 AL MVP, 2 time pitching triple crown

Probable steroid user, admitted adulterer, meanie

5. Sammy Sosa
609 HR, 2,408 Hits, 1,667 RBI, 160 RBI in 2001, only player to hit 60 or more home runs 3X, foreign born career HR leader, 7 time All Star, 1998 NL MVP

Steroid user, bat corker, "No Ingles" faker

6. Rafael Palmeiro
569 HR, 3,020 Hits, 1,835 RBI, 4 time All Star, one of only 4 players to hit 500+ HRs and record 3,000+ career hits

Steroid user, big fat liar

How about other admitted or "totally busted" steroid/HGH users? Alex Rodriguez? Jason Giambi? Andy Pettitte? Gary Sheffield? Manny Ramirez? Do you think any or all should be banned from the hall?

What about the implicated but not "proven" guys? Ivan Rodriguez? Mike Piazza? David Ortiz? Juan Gonzalez? Magglio Ordonez?

What about the other "cheaters" not in the hall? Where do you stand on:

Pete Rose
4,256 career hits (1st all time), 3,562 games played (1st all time), 3X batting champion, 1973 NL MVP, 17 time All Star

Gambler, meanie, liar, tax evader

"Shoeless" Joe Jackson
.356 career batting average (3rd best all time), hit .408 his rookie season

Disputed cheater

Also, if you had your way, how would these records and legacies be handled? Asterisks in the record books?

[E_Martinez11]

The way I would vote, since there is a level of "cheating" in every decade, and various things that will affect the numbers of production (example: dead ball / Live ball)

None of this is an exact science:
I feel you need to weigh their performance relative to their own era
How much their "cheating" impacted their performance to what they "would have done without it"
And comparing ALL factors.

I would even go so far as to try and "estimate" what a player who "did NOT" take Steroids... would have ranked among his peers if they did.
Because there are alot of REALLY Great players who had zero chance of Making the Hall of Fame because they didnt take Steroids, because they were compared to those who did (compared without the knowledge we have now)
Think of the bunch of Great players who played mid 80s thru the 90s...that if they "took Roids" They would be in the Hall of fame.

Example:
Former Mariners and Hall of Famer
Gaylord Perry --- Notorious Spitball Cheater, Broke the rules repeatedly

The way I would evaluate is...Take the cheating away in your estimation (obvious discuss with others to get a better estimate) and determine what you think their over all career performance would be.

How much decline would he have done if he wouldnt have cheated?
I personally think the drop off would have been alot less cuz of the Spitter than a guy such as Clemens and Petite who Roids helped to differing degrees.

1. Barry Bonds -- HoF, if ya go off of estimation of starting Roids, he was near hall of Fame before than....He took roids imo to gain Legendary status that has backfired
2. Mark McGwire No way, from reports, Roids most of his career....If you take away the career extended length because of increased power, and then reduce the HRs...
I would vote Jay Buhner in the Hall of Fame before McGwire..... There are a bunch of 250+ career HR guys what would have played 4+ extra years and hit 500 HR with roids. Gaining 10+ HR per year for 10+ years...Mc Gwire is basically a guy who unless he played for your tream, they might remember
3)Roger Clemens -- this is the one that can go either way..... If he started in Toronto to reasurect his career...I am on the fence but would probably vote him in...No way He pitches another 11 years and 150+ wins..4 less Cy Youngs and 2 pitching Triple crowns in Toronto are gone........Unlikey he sticks around for 1/10th of the paycheck for the last 4 years of his career (less production means he doesnt make as much per game, he retires earlier, from loss of performance and family)
IMHO he doesnt hit 300 wins (not even close)...he's most likely in the 250 area.
But I think enough to be in Hof "IF he started in Toronto.
If he Juiced in Boston, I would not vote for him, he's boarderline Ho
5. Sammy Sosa Nope, reduce the HRs....And Once again I vote Jay Buhner for HoF before Sosa (even though I dont think he is)

6. Rafael Palmeiro ...I havent heard any approximation when he started juicing.....If was 92/93 when Jose Canseco was with the Rangers..I would say No HoF but still up for discussion, because of the overall hitting....Might be able to convince me with arguements... and then would have to try an estimate how many of the 100+ walk season were because of pitchers fearing him or how good of an eye he had. If he Juiced 1999 or later...I probably would vote him in.
A player who wasnt "just power" or its hard to predict how long Roids prolonged their career, are harder to estimate.

7)Alex Rodriguez Right now if he retired or his career ended due to injury....No.....another 4+ years, then I probably would...His numbers are inflated, but at some point you cant look at other players and say "They would be better than Alex with Roids"
8) Jason Giambi --Ummm, even if I didnt know he used...no way
9) Andy Pettitte No way, Playoff performance might get bonus points into the HoF, but when most of your wins are because you happend to play on a Team with stud offence......Good Pitcher, not even close to world class.
10)Gary Sheffield doesnt even deserve discussion
11) Manny Ramirez... I dont know.... Its really hard to determine the Great all around hitters...... Guys who can do it all with the bat..... Most hitters who are Great at all aspects of hitting, often get overlooked for hall of Fame consideration......Unless you hit 3000 hits even with zero power but you play 40 years, Or hit .235 Ave with 500 Hrs no matter how many years you played.....Thos guys in the past Always got in without roids.
I personally think the 20-25 HR .300+ave .400 OBP .500+ Slg players are under rated....
They will never get to 3000 hits because they have too good of an eye for the strike zone
They will never get 500 Hrs, because its better for their team if they dont kill tons of Rallys with a Strikeout, when a Double or a Single will still win the game.
I probably wouldnt vote for Manny, because I dont think I could ever pin down when he started, and I would have to assume for most of his career,

12) Ivan Rodriguez I would lean to Yes....because of position and defense...and steriods has more effect on power than making contact...generally speaking a high average low walk guy who doesnt strike out that much, would not be hurt as much by not taking the steriouds

13) Mike Piazza Yes, but I would have to analyze it more....because much of his HoF is because of the HR
14) David Ortiz No, unless he plays a really long time
15) Juan Gonzalez would not consider
16) Magglio Ordonez ask me in 5 years

17) Pete Rose Yes, but still should not be allow to manage/play/etc etc
18) "Shoeless" Joe Jackson Yes I would...Maybe in 1920 I wouldnt... but in retrospect I would vote for him


"Also, if you had your way, how would these records and legacies be handled? Asterisks in the record books? "
You cant put asterisks by each record, unless you can specifically state what that number would have been. (i.e. Asterisk for a record that was in 154 game seats instead of 162 game season...where the counting stats come into play)

I mean, I am pretty sure Bonds and McGwire wouldnt hold the HR record....but "In my opinion" is not a reason for an Asterisk.

I dont mind at the "introduction of 'the record book'" prefacing general statements of given era (dead ball, Steroids, greenies) so it include information.
But "Imho" should not be associated with specific record asterisks.
Because in General, it is believe that Steriods enhanced players performance, we can not and probably never be able to give exactly #s of how enhanced specific players.

Roger Maris only had 3 years over 30 HRs and hit 61
Bonds career year without the Roids......

Lots of single season Records dont have the best player ever associated with them.
As Much as I would like to see other names as the record holder, unless you are gonna ban that player and then have a rule to take them out of the record book, I dont think you should (like with NCAA, I think its dumb to "erase" games and records....but the rule is in place, so as stupid as I think it is, at least their is precedent)