Peter Bourjos deserves his own bobblehead based on this photo alone.
Halolinks of Fame edition:
Of course you've heard by now that there was only one player voted into the HOF this year: 2012 Baseball Hall of Fame voting breakdown - CBSSports.com. "Barry Larkin was voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame with 86.4 percent of the vote. The results of the BBWAA votes were revealed Monday afternoon, and Larkin was the only player garnering the required 75 percent of the vote for enshrinement. " The above link lists the number of vote each eligible player received. The only Angel on the ballot was Tim Salmon. Salmon tallied just 5 votes, or 0.9% and will not appear on next year's ballot.
The Angels had their own voting thing going on, but this was for something much more important than the Hall of Fame. The Angels were giving fans the opportunity to vote for the player they wanted featured in a bobblehead give-away: Bobblehead Fan Vote - angels.com. And the winnner is - Peter Bourjos - 3612 - 56%
MORE LINKS AFTER THE BREAK...
Here's the latest Angels in the bullpen rumor: Latest On Brad Lidge - MLBTradeRumors.com. "At this point I probably could have taken some offers," said Lidge to MLB.com's Paul Hagen, who notes that the right-hander hopes to make a decision soon. "At the same time, they weren't quite right for me ... There are a lot of teams that want you to be there in case their young guys doesn't do well -- to be a setup guy. And that's great. We'll kind of see how that plays out. That might be what I have to do." This sounds a whole lot like the Angels situation, as Jerry DiPoto has stated Walden is the Angels closer and all they are looking at is strengthening their relief corps. OC Register's Bill Plunkett has more: Does Lidge make sense for Angels? - The Orange County Register. "At 35, Lidge’s best days and his best fastball might be behind him. He averaged just 89 mph on that pitch last season after returning to the Phillies in mid-season after rehabbing from a rotator cuff problem."
There's also this reliever rumor:Angels have checked in on Cordero - MLB.com. "Cordero is only looking to go into a situation where he can close, and he’d probably have to take a big paycut or backloaded deal — or both — to find a fit in Southern California." At this point, Cordero is the better pitcher, but Lidge's situation might be a better fit.
Looks like Morales cleared another hurdle. Hopefully, he stepped over it very lightly...Angels first baseman Kendrys Morales cleared to increase activity - angels.com. "The tests Kendrys Morales underwent in Colorado last week came back positively, clearing the Angels' recovering first baseman to begin running on his own power and ramping up his baseball activities, general manager Jerry Dipoto confirmed Monday." There's also this: Angels’ Morales cleared to ramp up rehab activities- The Orange County Register. "We're looking forward to seeing him ramp it up toward the end of this week," Dipoto said. "I don't want to say it's 'full go.' But it is – 'Let's get him out there.' It's live swinging as opposed to hitting off a tee in a (batting) cage. It's gradually adding some baseball activities."
More Albert Pujols contract analysis: Albert Pujols’ Contract in NPV - FanGraphs Baseball. "Due to the back-loaded nature of the salaries, I became curious as to what is called the net present value (NPV) of Pujols’ contract. Basically, how much money would you need right now to equal the above payments, spread over the next years? That question is unanswerable until 10 years from now when we can look back and point to how much inflation actually occurred."
Larry Granillo looks into his old magazine collection to find this: Wezen-Ball: HOF Candidates as Prospects. "Using my collection of annual baseball preview magazines from the likes of Street and Smith's and The Sporting News, I've gone back and found each candidate's name in the various "minor leagues" sections of the magazines."
Another baseball job posting: BP Unfiltered: Want To Work For The St. Louis Cardinals?. The St. Louis Cardinals have contacted us to ask us to share a pair of openings they have in their front office, in the Baseball Operations department. If you know databases and/or web development, these are great entry-level positions in the wonderful world of baseball.
Some fantasy baseball 2B rankings: Second Base Rankings Review - Roto Hardball. "He (Kendrick) finally broke out in the way people have been waiting for, though, and might have finally earned a spot with the rest of the three-star players because of it."
As much as the hall/voters likes to say there is a morality clause, there isn’t. The hall is about the who were the best players or made the biggest impact on the game.
If being immoral could keep you out of the Hall....
No Mantle or Ruth. The never quite gone rumor that Rickey Henderson raped his sister would have been investigated the heck out of. Josh Gibson? Hack Wilson? Chief Bender? Lefty Grove? TY COBB? That fella whose name escapes me who owned teams and basically made the Negro League what it was but was also a psychotic thug/crime figure?
The HOF is full of assholes and criminals. They should at least let Bagwell in.
Taking a greenie is like fudging your taxes a bit. Roiding up and breaking hallowed records is paramount to cheating on your wife with her best friend on Valentine’s day.
They’re both drugs that allow the human body to do things it wouldn’t otherwise be able to do. And many of those “hallowed records” were set by racists, drunks, wife-beaters, criminals, and cheaters in their own way. The game changes, but no player is sinless.
But the racists, drunks, etc. weren't on steroids.
That behavior did not directly or soley contribute to that player’s success. Take steroids away from Bonds, Big Mac, and Sosa, and none of them crack 500 home runs. Bonds was a great all around player, but the other two don’t even get 5% in their first year.
I’ve taken stimulants. Hell, most of America wakes up to caffeine which is a chemical cousin to speed. There’s a huge difference between a little pep and 30-40 pounds of solid muscle.
Basically what I was trying to say, is that coffee, caffeine, 5 hour energy, etc… do not even compare to the effects of speed & the duration which it last. It is a PED & is also illegal.
Working on a farm, dealing with a lot of truckers, they’ve always been around. None of them put a bunch of muscle on me and allowed me to feel fresh day after day. If anything, using stimulants made my body wear down faster because I didn’t get good sleep at night. That’s why I don’t do coffee or energy drinks.
After not getting a good night sleep, did you use stimulants, if so did you perform at a higher level than you would have if you hadn’t used stimulants?
Two days in a row was my max, and of course they helped a bit
After that, I just sucked it up and got a good night’s sleep.
The help was minor, but it was there. No way did I get the same boost from caffiene/amphetamine that an athlete gets from steroids, though. I had friends who did roids and they were much more enhanced than me on mini-thins.
There was nothing minor about the help I got from amphetamines. From my perspective they would be just as instrumental to someones ability to play at a higher level as steriods would be.
Kobe could be called for carrying over every single time he dribbles, but now everyone dribbles that way. Players from the 60s should be pissed and demand no one from the “wrist era” should get in the basketball hall.
Pitchers took roids, hitters took roids, bench coaches free based roids, Sosh baked it into his lasagna, I sprinkled it into my coffee in three morning.
If Barry Bonds its not a unanimous first round hall of famer then there is something serious wrong with the logic of the entire sport.
We live in a world where DoV conquers a clearly superior opponent, new age cheating is less ok than old timey cheating, and the BWAA is on a pedestal so high they could clean Gods toe fungus.
I thought it was cool when they showed it to me in the store. After trying it out for the first day or two, I kicked it the curb and went back to typing.
I was the opposite. Typing on my Captivate pissed me off. Swype is a godsend.
It’s learned just about every word I type, including words that aren’t really words(like ‘herp’ and ’derp’’). Swype is for cool guy millionaires, like me and Phi.
I have a Captivate too, so I understand your point about the keyboard. Still, I’m pretty fast with it normally. Swype literally screwed up 80% of the words I wanted. I need to “get to the airport,” not “gator taco the armadillo,” dammit.
SwiftKey is the one and only app from my old Android phone that I miss on my iPhone.
The only app. Period.
The beauty of SwiftKey is that it anticipates the next word you’re going to type and suggests it before you even begin to type it. There there are combinations of words which are commonly used in phrases, the logic in SwiftKey knows this, anticipates a word which commonly follows the word you first typed, and suggests it in a bubble above the keyboard (NOT on the text area itself). If that is the word you were going to type next, just tap the bubble and the word enters the text. Often, you can find yourself tapping 3-7 words in a row without needing to type any of them. Once you get your sea legs, it is so damn fast it is scary.
Jordan led the way for carrying over well ahead of Kobe.
When the league was seeing the Magic/Bird era fade into twilight, and they turned to Jordan as their primary marketing vehicle, all the rule calling went lax to allow for Jordan to be showcased on ESPN nightly. Palming? Carrying over? Traveling? Sorry, not worth calling anymore. It was all NBA marketing in the 1990’s to remain relevent.
Add the physical beat-down style of defense that the Bad Boys Pistons brought into the league, and there are just too many rules infractions that occur on every single possession to call them all. Fans just want to “let them play” and see the highlight reel stuff. Refs get to pick and choose what they call and don’t call – and when and why, empowering them with too much control over the outcome.
1. Not everyone else was taking steroids and to tar every honest player from that era with the badge of ‘cheat’ is less than fair
2. Why should Bonds get a free ride for cheating because he was a great player before he cheated and others shouldn’t? Is it OK for the best players to cheat because they are great already but not the next tier who aspire to greatness through illicit means? He cheated, he got caught, bad luck Barry no hall pass for you…
3. Rule number one of any nefarious enterprise is ’don’t get caught’
Everyone knew it was happening, and kept silent about it. Since nobody in the game, and I mean nobody, had the moral fortitude to stand up at the time and object, why shouldn’t they go in? The honest players obviously accepted what was going on. Since that’s the case, why shouldn’t PED users get into the Hall?
Also, with respect to the entire concept of “cheating,” I’m currently reading an fun book called: The Baseball Codes: Beanballs, Sign Stealing, and Bench-Clearing Brawls: The Unwritten Rules of America’s Pastime
It devotes several chapters to the concept of “cheating” in baseball. The upshot: cheating is as old as the game itself, and has been universally accepted throughout the history of the game. Many of the game’s great moments (and its great players) are intimately involved in these episodes, and benefited greatly from their nefarious acts. Championship seasons, not to mention entire Hall of Fame careers, have been built upon cheating.
…where a policy of brushing it under the carpet is considered OK. No-one said anything then so let’s continue the charade and pretend it was all ok. Clearly it wasn’t OK, and unless there is some form of retribution for the sins of the past, those sins beg to be repeated. Perhaps not with pharmacotherapy, but with our evolving understanding of our own genes, who knows where the bottom of the rabbit hole is.
Personally, I would throw anyone who got caught under the metaphorical bus “pour encourager les autres”. And then I’d back it up a couple of times…
The fact of the matter is that it was OK. The non-cheaters knew it was happening and accepted it as part of the game, just as cheating has always been an accepted in baseball. The HOF is filled with people who outright cheated to win games, or to gain a competitive advantage. For many years, there was no express prohibition on using various PEDs; how is using them fundamentally different than using the team scoreboard to tell the batter what pitch is coming? How is it so morally different than applying foreign substances to the baseball? Cheating, in its various forms, has been a part of baseball for more than a century, and has never been seen as a roadblock to inclusion in the hall of fame.
Wouldn't you rather have some integrity in baseball?
How about aspiring to a better set of values for your national sport? When the message sent out and accepted is that “Baseball is full of cheats, has always been full of cheats, and frankly that’s OK”, then I despair.
Sport, in it’s simplest form is about fair play and honest competition. When you say that that doesn’t matter, then the sport has lost its soul.
Then baseball never had a soul. Because it is a documented fact that baseball is full of cheats, has always been full of cheats, and most likely always will be full of cheats. That’s just how it is. We can hide our heads in the sand and pretend it isn’t true, but that doesn’t change the state of affairs.
Sport, in it’s simplest form is about fair play and honest competition.
I don’t disagree. But one of the points of the book is that your statement does not apply to professional sports, as distinguished from “sport.”
What are you talking about it has always been a part of the game?
A spitball? Sand paper? Corked bat? Those are hardly the same as shooting up testosterone.
I see a major difference in looking for some physical advantage in performing what you do better and looking to chemistry to make a better athlete.
You say they are “hardly the same.” What does that mean? Yes, they’re different (sandpaper is sandpaper; spit is spit; testosterone is testosterone). But I know you mean something else; I believe you’re suggesting that that there is a moral difference. How so, though? Doctoring a baseball is a direct form of cheating that is expressly prohibited by the rules. Bettering oneself physically through the use of chemistry was not, prior to recent rule changes, in direct contravention of a written rule. Moreover, doing that does not have any direct impact on any specific game event, unlike throwing the doctored baseball, unlike using a specific light on the scoreboard to tell the batter what pitch is coming next.
I’m honestly seeking an explanation as to what made the use of PEDs fundamentally worse, as opposed to simply different.
The “morality” discussion of steroids really comes out of the cold war. Americans (and russians) were so eager to beat each other in sports to illustrate dominance Russians started taking steroids. Americans condemned it as cheating (completely ignoring that many of their athletes were taking them too). It became an issue of “clean” and “dirty” or “us” vs “them.” All the science says steroids really arent all that bad, but the stigma remains.
As for the difference between a little spit or tar and steroids, I get what you are saying that it gets cloudy and the athletes were not specifically forbidden to take drugs to get an edge.
What I am suggesting is there is a difference between something that gives a player a one time advantage- a piece of sandpaper, etc… and something that makes him a different player altogether; a difference between outside aides and internal modification.
I suppose you could argue that steroids aren’t all that different from an improved training regimen or diet; but to me, it seems like that is a stretch of the argument. Clearly Bonds and Co. all knew what they were doing went beyond the traditional forms of getting ahead into something new. It was a corked bat injected into your thigh once a week or invisible pine tar; it was an edge that was undetectable.
To me, it comes down to the fact that these drugs changed the players and made careers surge when they should have been ending, made careers happen when they should have failed. They made mediocre players look like all time greats and greats look superhuman- with the worst part being that those players that didn’t or wouldn’t take them were at a clear and distinct disadvantage. They didnt alter at-bats or innings, they made and ruined careers.
A very well-reasoned and cogent response; and, I suspect, much more so than many members of the BBWAA could give in explaining their votes.
I appreciate the distinction, however nuanced, of the “different player altogether.” I’m not sure I agree, but I’m not sure that I don’t.
I believe there are sound policy reasons for prohibiting PED use and punishing those who get caught, but as far as history is concerned, there’s no changing what happened. Might as well acknowledge it and move on.
If you are a hitter in any baseball era, and you are aware that those against whom you are competing for a job, a paycheck, a new contract, and/or a big raise are stuffing cork in their bats to gain a statistical advantage over you, your decision is strictly one about obeying the book rules or not.
But if you are in an era where your financial competitors are injecting themselves with experimental and untested chemicals whipped up in secret labs, ones which might have significant near-term or short side effects (some of which might end up being devesatating, for all you know), your choice is one of personal risk. This is the condition whether or not the action is even in violation of any sporting rules or institutional laws.You are put into a position whereby you must consider accepting an unknown risk to your own physical welfare in order to remain competitive in your chosen career. You put yourself at risk, your future lifestyle at risk, and your future family life at risk. For all you know, you put any future offspring at risk.
To me, that is why there is a huge difference between spitballs and corked bats, versus greenies and steroids.
The difference you describe is a sound policy argument (ultimately, the one with which I agree) for prohibiting PED use; however, that’s an entirely separate issue from whether pre-rule PED use constituted “cheating” any more than an elaborate system for relaying pitch information to a hitter constitutes cheating. Moreover, since it was tolerated by everyone involved with the game (players, coaches, trainers, general managers and even owners) for many years, PhiSlamma’s comment (which generated this particular exchange) remains valid – when everyone is cheating, or at least a substantial number are cheating and the rest go along with it, it’s disingenuous to turn around years later and say, “oh no, you were naughty, so we won’t let you into the Hall of Fame now.”
Guys who used PEDs before the rules were changed were not cheating any more than Gaylord Perry cheated (to pick one obvious example). It’s wrong to single out their type of “cheating” for punishment while giving a free pass to every other form of cheating in the game.
was McGwire such an asshole to the reporter who questioned him on the bottle of andro in his locker. Did McGwire just laugh and say IT’S LEGAL, IT’S JUST LIKE CREATINE… no, he got hostile and immediately set up the press pool as my-side/his-side, o which the lapdog press went with him.
It was legal to use but McGwire KNEW he was cheating, in the ethical sense, and ethics are way bigger than laws (no offense to the profession that puts food on the jjack family table).
Teams don’t openly talk about the other (not technically illegal) ways that they cheat, either; however, the baseball establishment seems to accept various forms of cheating with impunity, or nothing more than a gentle tap on the wrists, so once again: if cheating is pretty much allowed, then it doesn’t make a heck of a lot of sense to draw arbitrary lines (much after the fact) and punish some cheaters while honoring others.
Attempting to deceive an umpire is a form of cheating (and one that’s technically against the rules, incidentally); and while Angels fans were rightly pissed when Pierzinsky duped Doug Eddings (an event that arguably had a huge impact in deciding the championship that year), I’ve never heard anything suggesting that MLB ever considered punishing him for cheating.
Baseball’s relationship with cheating is certainly a complicated one. Singling our one subset of cheaters after-the-fact as somehow deserving of punishment while honoring others frankly offends my sense of ethics.
If cheating is / was proved, then the player should not be eligible for the HoF. If cheating is suspected but not proved – innocent until proven guilty.
was Pete Rose in Vages trying to sign autographs at the Ceaser Fourms and just 20 feet way is a long line for one of the midgets from the wizard of oz and no one in line for Rose
I always take advantage of the chance to walk up and chat with Rose in person. Ty Cobb was an asshat, too, but I would give 20 bucks to hear him talk baseball or go socially crazy as well.
5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.
So betting, roids, teling someone ‘yo mamma so fat’ (even if true) all counts against you.
With the racist, womanizer & admitted drug users that have already been elected to the hall, these criteria are just being used as a convienent crutch by the BBWAA against the athletes that broke their hero’s clean records.
They were fine with ignoring steroids when they were actually running rampant
The BBWAA is also at fault here. I mean, what serious fan, in his/her quiet moments, didn’t already know what was really going on? The journalists would have known better than anyone. But to hear them tell the story later, it was like, oh, how could we have been so naive? We’re only guilty of being too innocent. Bullshit.
Now those same BBWAA members are assuaging their consciences the only way it can, by using their Hall of Fame votes to foist blame on the players. That strikes me as the opposite of journalistic integrity.
…as we’re only too aware of over here at the moment journalistic integrity is something of a vexed question. Hypocrisy abounds, and this is obviously another case in point.
As somewhat of an outsider, it still amazes me that there was absolutely no policing of performance enhancing drugs in US professional sports for so long, when it was something that was pursued so actively (if occasionally rather ineffectively) in most other high profile sports – Olympic drug testing had been in place since the 60s. The players unions have managed to avoid the blame for this mess that they clearly deserve – if they’d done a better job of looking out for the health of their members and the integrity of their sports rather than the just padding their wallets, then this might have been avoidable. Their short-sighted self-interest has been disappointing (and to a certain degree still is). And the outcome has been that some of their most high profile members have been hung out to dry.
I have no sympathy with those that cheated. They knew what they were doing. I have little respect for the role of journos, who, as you so rightly point out, were complicit in this abortion, though I do appreciate that some are trying to make the best of a bad situation. But the blame for me sits firmly with the union, and if that means some of the players are going to suffer for it, ultimately they have only themselves to blame.
They knew what was going on, but winning fans back to the game after the strike was more important. And of course, fans love the long ball. Sure, they were powerless to force the players to do anything, but they had every opportunity to stand up for the integrity of the game.
Without a truly comprehensive investigation (Mitchell Report wasn’t), we’ll never know for sure who did and who didn’t. Therefore it’s hard to judge. Personally, I think Bonds and Clemens are being hung out to dry in an attempt for MLB to save face. To me it seems like MLB is hoping the writers crucify these guys so they can wipe their hands of it.
And Limey, your earlier point is valid: don’t get caught. However, I kinda want to see everyone go in, just so we can stop this pollyanna idea that the HOF and baseball are clean and fair — they’re not. It is a horrible stain on our beloved game, but we have to acknowledge it in its full breadth.
I just recently got into soccer, and from what I can tell, FIFA looks like the freaking Mafia compared to MLB in terms of corruption. But let’s not pretend that our beloved baseball is immune from nefarious and fully blameful people who did great things because they cheated. And let’s not turn our ire away from the institutions that helped perpetuate it: the players, their union, the owners, MLB, and the journalists who all turned a blind eye in the name of $$$.
…the lack of moral leadership from MLB was similarly awful and this is a collective failure on behalf of all parties. The Hall of Fame itself is a very peculiar fish to an Englishman – we have nothing similar – so I do find myself ever so slightly confused / amazed by it. Skewering the holier-than-thou attitude that surrounds it (and the journalists who vote for it) might not be a bad thing in the long run.
And yes, you’re right about FIFA – the single most corrupt organisation in world sports. As you might imagine we read an awful lot about FIFA’s various sins in the British media… it appeals to our over-developed and sanctimonious sense of fair-play having a pantomime villain like Sepp Blatter to ridicule, especially when it’s our game, football, that he’s murdering.
And let’s hope it’s not a “Meet the new boss/Same as the old boss…” thing.
And what about match-fixing? Shit, it seems to happen alot — but strangely not in a major league (EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A) or in a major tournament. Seems way too coincidental to me. The pressure must be enormous in EPL — English bookies want action on anything: what color dress the Queen will wear, what time the Pope farts, etc. Have I just not looked close enough?
Match fixing (or attempts at it) tends to happen most commonly...
…in places where betting is unregulated / illegal. In the UK, as soon as you get an unusual betting pattern, where it appears to the bookies that there is a fix in, they don’t pay out and the police get involved.
There were a couple of betting irregularities a few years ago with things like betting on the time if the first throw in, and as soon as they realised it was subject to cheating, those sorts of bets got banned.
The last attempt to fix a match was with Bruce Grobelaar when he was at Southampton – a goalkeeper is pretty much the only player on whom you can rely to fix the game – but that was 20 odd years ago. Refs might be susceptible though.
For the most part, with the bookies, there is plenty of legitimate action. These stock exchange listed companies don’t need to take much risk to make a tidy profit.
There was a very recent case of attempted spot fixing...
…in an international cricket match, in England between England and Pakistan, in which a player deliberately threw down an illegal delivery on a designated ball, which was run by a Pakistani betting syndicate.
3 Pakistani players are now serving sentences here ranging from 18 months to 2 and 1/2 years
exactly! I was going to post this above but decided it didnt fit with what I was arguing...
Look at Arod and Salmon for an example of why steroids were a problem. Its been suggested that Arod started taking in high school. So if he doesnt start taking steroids, and competed equally with all the other kids, does he still get drafted #1? Who gets drafted instead? Where does Arod end up? who missed out on an opportunity because some 16 year old was taking steroids? Clearly they move down fast- from the majors to minors to college to high school- people looking for an edge to a multi-million dollar career.
Because Salmon is facing pitchers who can throw harder and recover faster than ever before, he doesnt get as many fat pitches to hit. Instead of being an amazing hitter through his 20’s and into his 30’s, and a good hitter through his 30’s his career fades quickly and never reaches the heights it could have/ should have.
Its not as easy as saying that well lets just take them based on their numbers because some guys who were actually really great baseball players but didnt take steroids look like they were just so so.
when it was announced that Trumbo was getting one and Howie was aprt of the fan vote I thought they should’ve switched it. although I’m 99% sure the Trumbo bobblehead will end up being a Pujols one.
I know a local Salvation Army store where one can pick up a Vlad bobblehead in mint condition, still in the box, for $10. And you can get an Erstad or Napoli bobblehead just a couple miles away.
Having him hit behind Pujols would be awesome. Even if he only DH’s 100-120 games during the regular season but is full bore for the playoffs (should the Angels get there).
It was a lot more than a little kick (at least that's what my, uh...friends, told me)
I, I mean my friends, have had Monsters and Red Bulls and Amp (product placement, folks), and its not even freakin close. Furthermore, while there evidence that steroid abuse over an extended period of time is harmful, I know from my 1960s and 70s school drug education that speed kills.
This is all about the records. But after coast-to-coast trips, day-after-night games, and general f’ing around night after night, how many records would have been set in the first place without the aid of mother’s little helper?
I think that this argument is lame. What happens when we find out St. Derek took roids five years after his automatic induction? Gonna have a recall? Just factor it in. Maybe Mighty Mark doesn’t get in even WITH the steroids, but Bonds? Roger (that one pains me…what a dick)? Those guys are in…after they do the time.
I wrote an article once on the development of drug and their use in the 50’s- 70’s which is why I know all this stupid stuff.
The slogan was actually intended to teach that speed makes its users more prone to violence and killing others, not that it is killing the user.
As someone who took Aderol legally for about 6 years for ADHD
I can say that it helped me stay up to write papers a few times through college when I procrastinated too much, or stayed awake in class after I stayed up later than I should, but overall? I can’t see it making a huge difference in how far you hit a baseball or how hard you throw. I’m pretty sure the latter two are more game changers than being a little more alert or getting help fighting off jetlag.
Zu, there is no comparison. ADHD medication are mild stimulants meant to enhance focus. The amphetamines were not Ritalin/Aderol . If you can’t see the advantage of heightened awareness by either a pitcher or a batter/fielder in performance then I think you’re fooling yourself.
Point is that they were illegal drugs that enhanced performance. Are they as bad as steroids? maybe not, but is someone going to draw a line and say PEDs that enhance the ability to grow muscle mass is beyond the pale, but other PEDs are OK for the Hall? In my view, condemn one, condemn all. Either put a moratorium on all entry to the HOF until the testing era comes into play or don’t draw a bright line and make it a factor not THE factor.
I dont quite get why they think the current angels are in anyway similar to last year’s red sox. Our pitching staff is better than theirs was and more disciplined. I mean when the fried chicken article broke out was any one actually shocked? T
he attitude of the Sox last season, all the arrogence, the promises made by the club only heightened the arrogence already prominent in pitchers like Beckett and Lackey.
This angels team doesn’t have that arrogence, at the press conference one of the most telling moments was that the team constantly said how much they were looking forward to spring training, not October.
Were done in by injuries to their pitching staff. Does anyone really think they wouldn’t have won two more games over the course of the season if they’d had a healthy Buchholz or a healthy Lackey? If they’d rolled through the playoffs, the fried chicken episodes would have been lauded as an example of how loose and easy the team was, Francona would still have a job and Epstein wouldn’t be in Chicago.
The 2011 Sox and 2012 Angels are remarkably similar in that both were/are high payroll teams with lots of star power playing in big markets. Because of their rosters, there were/are justifiably high expectations. Moreover, if the Angels suffer a similar number of injuries to key personnel over the course of the season, they’re unlikely to live up to the lofty expectations that many (including the team) have for them.
Yes If the Red Sox had rolled through the playoffs it would have been lauded
But they didn’t so now I look at why the Red Sox collapsed. That collapse was more than injuries, and Im not sure Lackey and his 5+ ERA would have stopped it, Buchholz might have but I dont know how great he was.
What I saw happen to the Red Sox on the NESN broadcasts (which I watch to appease my lack of ESPN Angels broadcasts) was a bunch of highly paid guys who quit on the team. It was a clubhouse questioning Youk’s dedication to the team while “rehabbing” his injury. It was a team that couldn’t come up with a big hit in the big moment and had a pitching staff that forced the offense into those moments.
This angels team is built around a pitching staff and offensive style that doesnt always require the big hit and will be able to deal with offensive slump in a waythat the Red Sox couldn’t. It is also a team that has alot of comraderie, many of these guys were on the 09 team which was an emotional and successful team. Many others came up together and are a support net for each other. Even outsiders buy into this mentality, Torii Hunter has always been a mentor for Howie (or at least he thinks he is), in addition to him asking Soth to start Pete. I could never see Crawford or Drew ask Francona to start Reddick or Kalish, and they didn’t.
The other thing I saw was the promos on NESN, a channel owned by the Sox which talked about a team built for October, a team that seemed invincible.
I havent seen that come from the Angels yet, the Angels have increased both talent and payroll over the past 3 months, but they have not set the outlandish expectations, at least not publically.
We will have this same argument when it comes out. Every year that argument will continue. Thanks for taking the joy out of the HOF ballot Fehr, Selig, and the union.
Even if that’s the case, you still have an unfair advantage over the monitored half. It makes you appear to be a better student if the cheating goes unnoticed, but really you’re no better than the average joe.
…but they work in different ways – hypertrophy (bigger muscle fibres with steroids) vs hyperplasia (more muscle fibres with HGH). Should actually (theoretically) be complimentary.
No good reason why they should bypass it, aside from the fact that the bigger and easier battle to win was steroids – easier to detect than HGH which requires a blood test. HGH’s time will come in baseball. It has already on most other sports.
To reap the benefits of obvious juicing when offensive records are being slaughtered left and right, and then later on wax morality and purity. Just vote based on the numbers and the game on the field. It’s all you can do. If you try to dig into it all, it gets too messy. I think you need to give a bit more leeway to borderline candidates becuase you can’t know if they used and were playing the same game, or didn’t and were at an inherent disadvantage, but beyond that, you’re playing a losing game. What if it comes out Larkin used but was more circumspect? Do you boot him out? What if a player had an HoF career, but then started using?
Unless you are the player in question, you don’t know enough to make that judgment about how much it helped, when it helped, etc. You just don’t know. And to take a ahrd stance against it sets you up for failure when, eventually, the truth oozes out, and players you thought were clean maybe weren’t.
PED's
Have been in the game for so long, you can’t arbitrarily select a group of “cheaters” and say these are the ones that don’t get in.
Seik1177 - January 10, 2012
but the ones that are obvious and perjured themselves to cover it up should NOT be
ladybug - January 10, 2012
I have to disagree
As much as the hall/voters likes to say there is a morality clause, there isn’t. The hall is about the who were the best players or made the biggest impact on the game.
Seik1177 - January 10, 2012
Feels too much like rewarding them to me.
“Well sure, you cheated, but it made you a great player, so we’ll disregard that.” It just doesn’t fly. If you got caught, you get left out.
Zu Long - January 10, 2012
There IS a morality clause
It’s true that it’s been very selectively applied to this point, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
Gorbachav5 - January 10, 2012
If being immoral could keep you out of the Hall....
No Mantle or Ruth. The never quite gone rumor that Rickey Henderson raped his sister would have been investigated the heck out of. Josh Gibson? Hack Wilson? Chief Bender? Lefty Grove? TY COBB? That fella whose name escapes me who owned teams and basically made the Negro League what it was but was also a psychotic thug/crime figure?
The HOF is full of assholes and criminals. They should at least let Bagwell in.
gitchogritchoffmypetis - January 10, 2012
Steroids was cheating on a whole new level
Taking a greenie is like fudging your taxes a bit. Roiding up and breaking hallowed records is paramount to cheating on your wife with her best friend on Valentine’s day.
JeffJoiner - January 10, 2012
I don't really see the difference
They’re both drugs that allow the human body to do things it wouldn’t otherwise be able to do. And many of those “hallowed records” were set by racists, drunks, wife-beaters, criminals, and cheaters in their own way. The game changes, but no player is sinless.
Suboptimal - January 10, 2012
But the racists, drunks, etc. weren't on steroids.
That behavior did not directly or soley contribute to that player’s success. Take steroids away from Bonds, Big Mac, and Sosa, and none of them crack 500 home runs. Bonds was a great all around player, but the other two don’t even get 5% in their first year.
I’ve taken stimulants. Hell, most of America wakes up to caffeine which is a chemical cousin to speed. There’s a huge difference between a little pep and 30-40 pounds of solid muscle.
JeffJoiner - January 10, 2012
Now you're minimalizing the use of speed
If you’ve ever done speed you’d know it is a PED. Theses players were not taking no-doz or 54 hour energy, they were using speed.
Bad arguement
Seik1177 - January 10, 2012
Damnit
Hit post instead of preview
Basically what I was trying to say, is that coffee, caffeine, 5 hour energy, etc… do not even compare to the effects of speed & the duration which it last. It is a PED & is also illegal.
Seik1177 - January 10, 2012
Yes, I've done stimulants
Working on a farm, dealing with a lot of truckers, they’ve always been around. None of them put a bunch of muscle on me and allowed me to feel fresh day after day. If anything, using stimulants made my body wear down faster because I didn’t get good sleep at night. That’s why I don’t do coffee or energy drinks.
JeffJoiner - January 10, 2012
OK, Question for you:
After not getting a good night sleep, did you use stimulants, if so did you perform at a higher level than you would have if you hadn’t used stimulants?
Seik1177 - January 10, 2012
Two days in a row was my max, and of course they helped a bit
After that, I just sucked it up and got a good night’s sleep.
The help was minor, but it was there. No way did I get the same boost from caffiene/amphetamine that an athlete gets from steroids, though. I had friends who did roids and they were much more enhanced than me on mini-thins.
JeffJoiner - January 10, 2012
I can only go off my experience
There was nothing minor about the help I got from amphetamines. From my perspective they would be just as instrumental to someones ability to play at a higher level as steriods would be.
Seik1177 - January 10, 2012
I couldn't throw a baseball 10 mph faster on mini-thins
Give me a good roid cycle and some weights and I’m pretty sure I could.
JeffJoiner - January 10, 2012
Its just not about the increase in overall raw talent
without the stimulants, these players would have been playing at a fatigued level, which would have resulted in lower production.
You can’t hit as well if you’re tired, your reaction time to a ball hit is going to be delayed, even you’re reads on a pitcher will be off.
They may not have increased their natural abilities, but they did use an illegal substance to maximize their existing abilities
Seik1177 - January 11, 2012
If everyone is cheating the same way
is it still cheating?
Kobe could be called for carrying over every single time he dribbles, but now everyone dribbles that way. Players from the 60s should be pissed and demand no one from the “wrist era” should get in the basketball hall.
Pitchers took roids, hitters took roids, bench coaches free based roids, Sosh baked it into his lasagna, I sprinkled it into my coffee in three morning.
If Barry Bonds its not a unanimous first round hall of famer then there is something serious wrong with the logic of the entire sport.
We live in a world where DoV conquers a clearly superior opponent, new age cheating is less ok than old timey cheating, and the BWAA is on a pedestal so high they could clean Gods toe fungus.
PhiSlamma - January 10, 2012 via Android app
This whole Swype to text thing is going to make me sound like a short buser for a while.
Also, why does this sb nation not show when there are new posts in a thread externally?
Boo.
PhiSlamma - January 10, 2012 via Android app
Swype is bogus
I thought it was cool when they showed it to me in the store. After trying it out for the first day or two, I kicked it the curb and went back to typing.
Commander_Nate - January 10, 2012
My fingers may be too fat for this touch screen Martinez
PhiSlamma - January 10, 2012 via Android app
…keyboard.
Whatever a touchpad Martinez odds I want one though.
PhiSlamma - January 10, 2012 via Android app
Dude...Swype is not that hard, bro.
You give Swype a bad name.
Mayheminthehood - January 10, 2012
Its not
Just totally not used to it yet.
PhiSlamma - January 10, 2012 via Android app
yeah, I hated swype for about a week and then got used to it
it is awesome now.
Balls and Strikes - January 10, 2012
I was the opposite. Typing on my Captivate pissed me off. Swype is a godsend.
It’s learned just about every word I type, including words that aren’t really words(like ‘herp’ and ’derp’’). Swype is for cool guy millionaires, like me and Phi.
Mayheminthehood - January 10, 2012
It was taking too long to learn
I have a Captivate too, so I understand your point about the keyboard. Still, I’m pretty fast with it normally. Swype literally screwed up 80% of the words I wanted. I need to “get to the airport,” not “gator taco the armadillo,” dammit.
Commander_Nate - January 10, 2012
Would make movies better
if you wrote them:
Gator taco da choppa!
PhiSlamma - January 10, 2012 via Android app
Not as good as my new band, Touchscreen Martinez.
Mayheminthehood - January 10, 2012
You're opening for Sublime with Rome soon, right?
5thStarter - January 10, 2012
That made me laugh significantly more than it should have
PhiSlamma - January 10, 2012 via Android app
It really shines when you need to type with one hand
Otherwise I usually fold out the keyboard.
Suboptimal - January 10, 2012
Nothing will ever be better than T9 was.
But I love typing on my Evo’s virtual keyboard. Just have to be in the neighborhood.
Halowitz - January 10, 2012 via mobile
T9 is still there
You can bring it up in the keyboard settings
eyespy - January 10, 2012
Drop Swype for SwiftKey
SwiftKey is the one and only app from my old Android phone that I miss on my iPhone.
The only app. Period.
The beauty of SwiftKey is that it anticipates the next word you’re going to type and suggests it before you even begin to type it. There there are combinations of words which are commonly used in phrases, the logic in SwiftKey knows this, anticipates a word which commonly follows the word you first typed, and suggests it in a bubble above the keyboard (NOT on the text area itself). If that is the word you were going to type next, just tap the bubble and the word enters the text. Often, you can find yourself tapping 3-7 words in a row without needing to type any of them. Once you get your sea legs, it is so damn fast it is scary.
George Kaplan - January 10, 2012
Sound delicious
I’ll check it out, thanks Kap.
PhiSlamma - January 10, 2012 via Android app
Jordan led the way for carrying over well ahead of Kobe.
When the league was seeing the Magic/Bird era fade into twilight, and they turned to Jordan as their primary marketing vehicle, all the rule calling went lax to allow for Jordan to be showcased on ESPN nightly. Palming? Carrying over? Traveling? Sorry, not worth calling anymore. It was all NBA marketing in the 1990’s to remain relevent.
Add the physical beat-down style of defense that the Bad Boys Pistons brought into the league, and there are just too many rules infractions that occur on every single possession to call them all. Fans just want to “let them play” and see the highlight reel stuff. Refs get to pick and choose what they call and don’t call – and when and why, empowering them with too much control over the outcome.
Stirrups - January 10, 2012
Michael Jordan did nothing wrong. Ever.
5thStarter - January 10, 2012
Three points
1. Not everyone else was taking steroids and to tar every honest player from that era with the badge of ‘cheat’ is less than fair
2. Why should Bonds get a free ride for cheating because he was a great player before he cheated and others shouldn’t? Is it OK for the best players to cheat because they are great already but not the next tier who aspire to greatness through illicit means? He cheated, he got caught, bad luck Barry no hall pass for you…
3. Rule number one of any nefarious enterprise is ’don’t get caught’
The Limey - January 10, 2012
Not Everyone Was Taking, But
Everyone knew it was happening, and kept silent about it. Since nobody in the game, and I mean nobody, had the moral fortitude to stand up at the time and object, why shouldn’t they go in? The honest players obviously accepted what was going on. Since that’s the case, why shouldn’t PED users get into the Hall?
Also, with respect to the entire concept of “cheating,” I’m currently reading an fun book called: The Baseball Codes: Beanballs, Sign Stealing, and Bench-Clearing Brawls: The Unwritten Rules of America’s Pastime
It devotes several chapters to the concept of “cheating” in baseball. The upshot: cheating is as old as the game itself, and has been universally accepted throughout the history of the game. Many of the game’s great moments (and its great players) are intimately involved in these episodes, and benefited greatly from their nefarious acts. Championship seasons, not to mention entire Hall of Fame careers, have been built upon cheating.
jjackflash - January 10, 2012
What a depressing state of affairs...
…where a policy of brushing it under the carpet is considered OK. No-one said anything then so let’s continue the charade and pretend it was all ok. Clearly it wasn’t OK, and unless there is some form of retribution for the sins of the past, those sins beg to be repeated. Perhaps not with pharmacotherapy, but with our evolving understanding of our own genes, who knows where the bottom of the rabbit hole is.
Personally, I would throw anyone who got caught under the metaphorical bus “pour encourager les autres”. And then I’d back it up a couple of times…
The Limey - January 10, 2012
Charade? Pretending?
The fact of the matter is that it was OK. The non-cheaters knew it was happening and accepted it as part of the game, just as cheating has always been an accepted in baseball. The HOF is filled with people who outright cheated to win games, or to gain a competitive advantage. For many years, there was no express prohibition on using various PEDs; how is using them fundamentally different than using the team scoreboard to tell the batter what pitch is coming? How is it so morally different than applying foreign substances to the baseball? Cheating, in its various forms, has been a part of baseball for more than a century, and has never been seen as a roadblock to inclusion in the hall of fame.
jjackflash - January 10, 2012
Wouldn't you rather have some integrity in baseball?
How about aspiring to a better set of values for your national sport? When the message sent out and accepted is that “Baseball is full of cheats, has always been full of cheats, and frankly that’s OK”, then I despair.
Sport, in it’s simplest form is about fair play and honest competition. When you say that that doesn’t matter, then the sport has lost its soul.
The Limey - January 10, 2012
Soul?
Then baseball never had a soul. Because it is a documented fact that baseball is full of cheats, has always been full of cheats, and most likely always will be full of cheats. That’s just how it is. We can hide our heads in the sand and pretend it isn’t true, but that doesn’t change the state of affairs.
I don’t disagree. But one of the points of the book is that your statement does not apply to professional sports, as distinguished from “sport.”
jjackflash - January 10, 2012
Wonderful as I'm sure your book is...
…there’s more to sport than that level of pitiless cynicism.
The Limey - January 10, 2012
What are you talking about it has always been a part of the game?
A spitball? Sand paper? Corked bat? Those are hardly the same as shooting up testosterone.
I see a major difference in looking for some physical advantage in performing what you do better and looking to chemistry to make a better athlete.
Balls and Strikes - January 10, 2012
Do Explain
You say they are “hardly the same.” What does that mean? Yes, they’re different (sandpaper is sandpaper; spit is spit; testosterone is testosterone). But I know you mean something else; I believe you’re suggesting that that there is a moral difference. How so, though? Doctoring a baseball is a direct form of cheating that is expressly prohibited by the rules. Bettering oneself physically through the use of chemistry was not, prior to recent rule changes, in direct contravention of a written rule. Moreover, doing that does not have any direct impact on any specific game event, unlike throwing the doctored baseball, unlike using a specific light on the scoreboard to tell the batter what pitch is coming next.
I’m honestly seeking an explanation as to what made the use of PEDs fundamentally worse, as opposed to simply different.
jjackflash - January 10, 2012
No, Im not talking about any moral difference.
The “morality” discussion of steroids really comes out of the cold war. Americans (and russians) were so eager to beat each other in sports to illustrate dominance Russians started taking steroids. Americans condemned it as cheating (completely ignoring that many of their athletes were taking them too). It became an issue of “clean” and “dirty” or “us” vs “them.” All the science says steroids really arent all that bad, but the stigma remains.
As for the difference between a little spit or tar and steroids, I get what you are saying that it gets cloudy and the athletes were not specifically forbidden to take drugs to get an edge.
What I am suggesting is there is a difference between something that gives a player a one time advantage- a piece of sandpaper, etc… and something that makes him a different player altogether; a difference between outside aides and internal modification.
I suppose you could argue that steroids aren’t all that different from an improved training regimen or diet; but to me, it seems like that is a stretch of the argument. Clearly Bonds and Co. all knew what they were doing went beyond the traditional forms of getting ahead into something new. It was a corked bat injected into your thigh once a week or invisible pine tar; it was an edge that was undetectable.
To me, it comes down to the fact that these drugs changed the players and made careers surge when they should have been ending, made careers happen when they should have failed. They made mediocre players look like all time greats and greats look superhuman- with the worst part being that those players that didn’t or wouldn’t take them were at a clear and distinct disadvantage. They didnt alter at-bats or innings, they made and ruined careers.
Balls and Strikes - January 10, 2012
Thanks
A very well-reasoned and cogent response; and, I suspect, much more so than many members of the BBWAA could give in explaining their votes.
I appreciate the distinction, however nuanced, of the “different player altogether.” I’m not sure I agree, but I’m not sure that I don’t.
I believe there are sound policy reasons for prohibiting PED use and punishing those who get caught, but as far as history is concerned, there’s no changing what happened. Might as well acknowledge it and move on.
jjackflash - January 10, 2012
Here is where I see the difference being major:
If you are a hitter in any baseball era, and you are aware that those against whom you are competing for a job, a paycheck, a new contract, and/or a big raise are stuffing cork in their bats to gain a statistical advantage over you, your decision is strictly one about obeying the book rules or not.
But if you are in an era where your financial competitors are injecting themselves with experimental and untested chemicals whipped up in secret labs, ones which might have significant near-term or short side effects (some of which might end up being devesatating, for all you know), your choice is one of personal risk. This is the condition whether or not the action is even in violation of any sporting rules or institutional laws.You are put into a position whereby you must consider accepting an unknown risk to your own physical welfare in order to remain competitive in your chosen career. You put yourself at risk, your future lifestyle at risk, and your future family life at risk. For all you know, you put any future offspring at risk.
To me, that is why there is a huge difference between spitballs and corked bats, versus greenies and steroids.
Stirrups - January 11, 2012
Policy
The difference you describe is a sound policy argument (ultimately, the one with which I agree) for prohibiting PED use; however, that’s an entirely separate issue from whether pre-rule PED use constituted “cheating” any more than an elaborate system for relaying pitch information to a hitter constitutes cheating. Moreover, since it was tolerated by everyone involved with the game (players, coaches, trainers, general managers and even owners) for many years, PhiSlamma’s comment (which generated this particular exchange) remains valid – when everyone is cheating, or at least a substantial number are cheating and the rest go along with it, it’s disingenuous to turn around years later and say, “oh no, you were naughty, so we won’t let you into the Hall of Fame now.”
Guys who used PEDs before the rules were changed were not cheating any more than Gaylord Perry cheated (to pick one obvious example). It’s wrong to single out their type of “cheating” for punishment while giving a free pass to every other form of cheating in the game.
jjackflash - January 13, 2012
then why, in 1998, pray tell
was McGwire such an asshole to the reporter who questioned him on the bottle of andro in his locker. Did McGwire just laugh and say IT’S LEGAL, IT’S JUST LIKE CREATINE… no, he got hostile and immediately set up the press pool as my-side/his-side, o which the lapdog press went with him.
It was legal to use but McGwire KNEW he was cheating, in the ethical sense, and ethics are way bigger than laws (no offense to the profession that puts food on the jjack family table).
Rev Halofan - January 13, 2012
Ethics
Teams don’t openly talk about the other (not technically illegal) ways that they cheat, either; however, the baseball establishment seems to accept various forms of cheating with impunity, or nothing more than a gentle tap on the wrists, so once again: if cheating is pretty much allowed, then it doesn’t make a heck of a lot of sense to draw arbitrary lines (much after the fact) and punish some cheaters while honoring others.
Attempting to deceive an umpire is a form of cheating (and one that’s technically against the rules, incidentally); and while Angels fans were rightly pissed when Pierzinsky duped Doug Eddings (an event that arguably had a huge impact in deciding the championship that year), I’ve never heard anything suggesting that MLB ever considered punishing him for cheating.
Baseball’s relationship with cheating is certainly a complicated one. Singling our one subset of cheaters after-the-fact as somehow deserving of punishment while honoring others frankly offends my sense of ethics.
jjackflash - January 15, 2012
Is that pronounced “SHERR-aide” or “shuh-ROD?”
Downing Rules - January 10, 2012
Suspiction is not proof
If cheating is / was proved, then the player should not be eligible for the HoF. If cheating is suspected but not proved – innocent until proven guilty.
mustard_man - January 10, 2012
So there's a huge disincentive to be honest?
A level of disincentive that might actually lead a former player to perjure himself in an attempt to preserve his record and reputation?
LAASurfin - January 10, 2012
As opposed to a huge incentive to cheat? It gets you more money, a more illustrious career and even if your
caught dead to rights doing it, it’s okay, people will forgive you.
Zu Long - January 10, 2012
If you are doing anything illegal, coming clean about the illegal activities does not prevent being held accountable
That’s life.
mustard_man - January 10, 2012
You can be proven guilty based on a preponderance of evidence. You don't need CSI.
Stirrups - January 10, 2012
Agree - key word remains "proven"
mustard_man - January 10, 2012
You are hanging your hat on the result of a process that does not exist.
Stirrups - January 11, 2012
Bagwell isn't even "suspected"
He’s really not even “rumored” yet. There are only rumors of rumors.
Suboptimal - January 10, 2012
Pete Rose holds one of two records that will likely never fall and is banned for something off the field
The rest of these dudes are in line behind him as far as I’m concerned.
Commander_Nate - January 10, 2012
once he dies he will be in
DAD OF VLAD - January 10, 2012
That's pretty shitty.
Until then we will pretend like all these hits didn’t happen.
NathanielS - January 10, 2012
the saddest thing i ever saw
was Pete Rose in Vages trying to sign autographs at the Ceaser Fourms and just 20 feet way is a long line for one of the midgets from the wizard of oz and no one in line for Rose
DAD OF VLAD - January 10, 2012
I've seen that several times.
I always take advantage of the chance to walk up and chat with Rose in person. Ty Cobb was an asshat, too, but I would give 20 bucks to hear him talk baseball or go socially crazy as well.
Stirrups - January 10, 2012
He should have slid into the munchkin.
Cleats up.
NathanielS - January 10, 2012
So I take it you were waiting in line for a munchkin autograph.
Mayheminthehood - January 10, 2012
i walked past both
becasue i was a 18 year old with no cash on the Strip
DAD OF VLAD - January 10, 2012
Alll cheaters must wait
they should be allowed in the HOF but in a special wing with all the PED users
DAD OF VLAD - January 10, 2012
Moment please
From the HOF website. Under “Method of Election”
So betting, roids, teling someone ‘yo mamma so fat’ (even if true) all counts against you.
Theren86n02 - January 10, 2012
Part of this a crock
With the racist, womanizer & admitted drug users that have already been elected to the hall, these criteria are just being used as a convienent crutch by the BBWAA against the athletes that broke their hero’s clean records.
Seik1177 - January 10, 2012
Learned a new formatting tool
bookend a word with asterisks & it gets bolded
Seik1177 - January 10, 2012
Just because previous members did a poor job applying those standards...
…doesn’t mean today’s writers should be required to ignore them
The Limey - January 10, 2012
They were fine with ignoring steroids when they were actually running rampant
The BBWAA is also at fault here. I mean, what serious fan, in his/her quiet moments, didn’t already know what was really going on? The journalists would have known better than anyone. But to hear them tell the story later, it was like, oh, how could we have been so naive? We’re only guilty of being too innocent. Bullshit.
Now those same BBWAA members are assuaging their consciences the only way it can, by using their Hall of Fame votes to foist blame on the players. That strikes me as the opposite of journalistic integrity.
Suboptimal - January 10, 2012
Fair point...
…as we’re only too aware of over here at the moment journalistic integrity is something of a vexed question. Hypocrisy abounds, and this is obviously another case in point.
As somewhat of an outsider, it still amazes me that there was absolutely no policing of performance enhancing drugs in US professional sports for so long, when it was something that was pursued so actively (if occasionally rather ineffectively) in most other high profile sports – Olympic drug testing had been in place since the 60s. The players unions have managed to avoid the blame for this mess that they clearly deserve – if they’d done a better job of looking out for the health of their members and the integrity of their sports rather than the just padding their wallets, then this might have been avoidable. Their short-sighted self-interest has been disappointing (and to a certain degree still is). And the outcome has been that some of their most high profile members have been hung out to dry.
I have no sympathy with those that cheated. They knew what they were doing. I have little respect for the role of journos, who, as you so rightly point out, were complicit in this abortion, though I do appreciate that some are trying to make the best of a bad situation. But the blame for me sits firmly with the union, and if that means some of the players are going to suffer for it, ultimately they have only themselves to blame.
The Limey - January 10, 2012
MLB is to blame, as well
They knew what was going on, but winning fans back to the game after the strike was more important. And of course, fans love the long ball. Sure, they were powerless to force the players to do anything, but they had every opportunity to stand up for the integrity of the game.
Without a truly comprehensive investigation (Mitchell Report wasn’t), we’ll never know for sure who did and who didn’t. Therefore it’s hard to judge. Personally, I think Bonds and Clemens are being hung out to dry in an attempt for MLB to save face. To me it seems like MLB is hoping the writers crucify these guys so they can wipe their hands of it.
And Limey, your earlier point is valid: don’t get caught. However, I kinda want to see everyone go in, just so we can stop this pollyanna idea that the HOF and baseball are clean and fair — they’re not. It is a horrible stain on our beloved game, but we have to acknowledge it in its full breadth.
I just recently got into soccer, and from what I can tell, FIFA looks like the freaking Mafia compared to MLB in terms of corruption. But let’s not pretend that our beloved baseball is immune from nefarious and fully blameful people who did great things because they cheated. And let’s not turn our ire away from the institutions that helped perpetuate it: the players, their union, the owners, MLB, and the journalists who all turned a blind eye in the name of $$$.
yeswecan - January 10, 2012
Yep, agreed...
…the lack of moral leadership from MLB was similarly awful and this is a collective failure on behalf of all parties. The Hall of Fame itself is a very peculiar fish to an Englishman – we have nothing similar – so I do find myself ever so slightly confused / amazed by it. Skewering the holier-than-thou attitude that surrounds it (and the journalists who vote for it) might not be a bad thing in the long run.
And yes, you’re right about FIFA – the single most corrupt organisation in world sports. As you might imagine we read an awful lot about FIFA’s various sins in the British media… it appeals to our over-developed and sanctimonious sense of fair-play having a pantomime villain like Sepp Blatter to ridicule, especially when it’s our game, football, that he’s murdering.
The Limey - January 10, 2012
Not all bad news at FIFA though...
…change could be coming
The Limey - January 10, 2012
Let's hope it does
And let’s hope it’s not a “Meet the new boss/Same as the old boss…” thing.
And what about match-fixing? Shit, it seems to happen alot — but strangely not in a major league (EPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A) or in a major tournament. Seems way too coincidental to me. The pressure must be enormous in EPL — English bookies want action on anything: what color dress the Queen will wear, what time the Pope farts, etc. Have I just not looked close enough?
yeswecan - January 10, 2012
Match fixing (or attempts at it) tends to happen most commonly...
…in places where betting is unregulated / illegal. In the UK, as soon as you get an unusual betting pattern, where it appears to the bookies that there is a fix in, they don’t pay out and the police get involved.
There were a couple of betting irregularities a few years ago with things like betting on the time if the first throw in, and as soon as they realised it was subject to cheating, those sorts of bets got banned.
The last attempt to fix a match was with Bruce Grobelaar when he was at Southampton – a goalkeeper is pretty much the only player on whom you can rely to fix the game – but that was 20 odd years ago. Refs might be susceptible though.
For the most part, with the bookies, there is plenty of legitimate action. These stock exchange listed companies don’t need to take much risk to make a tidy profit.
The Limey - January 11, 2012
There was a very recent case of attempted spot fixing...
…in an international cricket match, in England between England and Pakistan, in which a player deliberately threw down an illegal delivery on a designated ball, which was run by a Pakistani betting syndicate.
3 Pakistani players are now serving sentences here ranging from 18 months to 2 and 1/2 years
The Limey - January 11, 2012 via mobile
Cool, thanks for the perspective, Limey
yeswecan - January 11, 2012
and Tim Salmon got jackschitttt votes. He is the poster child for all that baseball stands for
ladybug - January 10, 2012
exactly! I was going to post this above but decided it didnt fit with what I was arguing...
Look at Arod and Salmon for an example of why steroids were a problem. Its been suggested that Arod started taking in high school. So if he doesnt start taking steroids, and competed equally with all the other kids, does he still get drafted #1? Who gets drafted instead? Where does Arod end up? who missed out on an opportunity because some 16 year old was taking steroids? Clearly they move down fast- from the majors to minors to college to high school- people looking for an edge to a multi-million dollar career.
Because Salmon is facing pitchers who can throw harder and recover faster than ever before, he doesnt get as many fat pitches to hit. Instead of being an amazing hitter through his 20’s and into his 30’s, and a good hitter through his 30’s his career fades quickly and never reaches the heights it could have/ should have.
Its not as easy as saying that well lets just take them based on their numbers because some guys who were actually really great baseball players but didnt take steroids look like they were just so so.
Obviously
Balls and Strikes - January 10, 2012
Salmon Is KINGFISH
Salmon has more class than anyone I can think of right now.
He epitomizes baseball to the nth degree and getting zero votes for the HoF really effing sucks
ladybug - January 10, 2012
Does the exclusion of players suspected of PED use include pitchers as well?
If so, then a blanket NO across the board.
Angelsfan015 - January 10, 2012
I'm stoked on a Fleet Pete bobblehead, but I also thought it was bogus that Howie has to get votes to get one.
Dude should have one already.
Mayheminthehood - January 10, 2012
Agreed....
I am keeping my fingers crossed for an Orlando Mercado bobble head night this year as well.
Doctor Wu - January 10, 2012
You could almost use the Bobblhead vote as insight to the fanbase.
Only 6300 or so votes…do they think Peter is just that more deserving?
OR ARE THEY RACIST?!?!?!?!
Mayheminthehood - January 10, 2012
racist..
Frank158369 - January 10, 2012
imposter
BruinHalo - January 10, 2012
interloper
blast21dave - January 10, 2012
Balance this outrage with a Jorge Cantu bobble head.
gitchogritchoffmypetis - January 10, 2012
couldn't agree more
when it was announced that Trumbo was getting one and Howie was aprt of the fan vote I thought they should’ve switched it. although I’m 99% sure the Trumbo bobblehead will end up being a Pujols one.
2pintsofbooze - January 10, 2012
*a part
2pintsofbooze - January 10, 2012
Yeah, Howie needs one.
It could be sponsored by Howard’s. Thing practically writes itself.
5thStarter - January 10, 2012
whoa wait time out Jeff Bagwell took PEDs?
KB_24 - January 10, 2012
Fans are fickle
I know a local Salvation Army store where one can pick up a Vlad bobblehead in mint condition, still in the box, for $10. And you can get an Erstad or Napoli bobblehead just a couple miles away.
Stirrups - January 10, 2012
curious....
where is this salvo? I live in Boston usually but am back home visiting folks and wouldnt mind picking up a vladdy bobblehead
ItCouldHappen - January 10, 2012
On Tustin Avenue, in Orange, just south of Chapman on the west side fo the street.
The Vladdy bobblehead was on the shelves against the right wall, towards the back, top shelf.
Stirrups - January 11, 2012
I really hope Morales comes back
Having him hit behind Pujols would be awesome. Even if he only DH’s 100-120 games during the regular season but is full bore for the playoffs (should the Angels get there).
JeffJoiner - January 10, 2012
If he doesn't sign with the Cubs, I think Kerry Wood would be the best...
option as Walden’s mentor/setup man. He’s younger than both Cordero and Lidge and at $4m for a year he would come much cheaper.
angelsownredsux - January 10, 2012
Yes!
We got Pujols. Now we want Wood.
5thStarter - January 10, 2012
That's funny, when we got Pujols
I got wood.
Moondoggy - January 10, 2012
I see what you did there
red floyd - January 10, 2012
I need to close the curtains every nce in a while
Moondoggy - January 10, 2012
With your wood?
5thStarter - January 10, 2012
Nope
uhhh…let’s just say my feet are too small for that
Moondoggy - January 10, 2012
HA!
5thStarter - January 10, 2012
Just buy big socks
eyespy - January 10, 2012
The 5 Bold Predictions article
“If Darvish is added along with after arbitration and free agency ends, the Rangers payroll should be in the $90 million range for another year.”
Huh? Their payroll is already about $95 million. Adding Darvish will surely put them over $100 million, right?
5thStarter - January 10, 2012
thats not how they do math in Texas
2pintsofbooze - January 10, 2012
Well, now it all makes sense. Thanks, 2pints!
5thStarter - January 10, 2012
Assuming that "greenies" are a PED (and I do, because speed does work and oh, they're illegal)
then shouldn’t everybody from about 1955 on be precluded from the Hall?
Oh, and I think Collmentor is a doppelganger for Mayhem
Moondoggy - January 10, 2012
There's a difference between a little kick and 30+ pounds of solid muscle
A greenie isn’t much stronger than a couple of Monsters. The two are in the same chemical family.
JeffJoiner - January 10, 2012
It was a lot more than a little kick (at least that's what my, uh...friends, told me)
I, I mean my friends, have had Monsters and Red Bulls and Amp (product placement, folks), and its not even freakin close. Furthermore, while there evidence that steroid abuse over an extended period of time is harmful, I know from my 1960s and 70s school drug education that speed kills.
This is all about the records. But after coast-to-coast trips, day-after-night games, and general f’ing around night after night, how many records would have been set in the first place without the aid of mother’s little helper?
I think that this argument is lame. What happens when we find out St. Derek took roids five years after his automatic induction? Gonna have a recall? Just factor it in. Maybe Mighty Mark doesn’t get in even WITH the steroids, but Bonds? Roger (that one pains me…what a dick)? Those guys are in…after they do the time.
Moondoggy - January 10, 2012
Funny story about the "speed kills" slogan
I wrote an article once on the development of drug and their use in the 50’s- 70’s which is why I know all this stupid stuff.
The slogan was actually intended to teach that speed makes its users more prone to violence and killing others, not that it is killing the user.
Balls and Strikes - January 10, 2012
As someone who took Aderol legally for about 6 years for ADHD
I can say that it helped me stay up to write papers a few times through college when I procrastinated too much, or stayed awake in class after I stayed up later than I should, but overall? I can’t see it making a huge difference in how far you hit a baseball or how hard you throw. I’m pretty sure the latter two are more game changers than being a little more alert or getting help fighting off jetlag.
Zu Long - January 10, 2012
My son was on Aderol for 18 years.
Zu, there is no comparison. ADHD medication are mild stimulants meant to enhance focus. The amphetamines were not Ritalin/Aderol . If you can’t see the advantage of heightened awareness by either a pitcher or a batter/fielder in performance then I think you’re fooling yourself.
Point is that they were illegal drugs that enhanced performance. Are they as bad as steroids? maybe not, but is someone going to draw a line and say PEDs that enhance the ability to grow muscle mass is beyond the pale, but other PEDs are OK for the Hall? In my view, condemn one, condemn all. Either put a moratorium on all entry to the HOF until the testing era comes into play or don’t draw a bright line and make it a factor not THE factor.
Moondoggy - January 10, 2012
The 5 bold predictions article is interesting
I dont quite get why they think the current angels are in anyway similar to last year’s red sox. Our pitching staff is better than theirs was and more disciplined. I mean when the fried chicken article broke out was any one actually shocked? T
he attitude of the Sox last season, all the arrogence, the promises made by the club only heightened the arrogence already prominent in pitchers like Beckett and Lackey.
This angels team doesn’t have that arrogence, at the press conference one of the most telling moments was that the team constantly said how much they were looking forward to spring training, not October.
ItCouldHappen - January 10, 2012
Rec'd for overall awesomeness.
5thStarter - January 10, 2012
The Sox
Were done in by injuries to their pitching staff. Does anyone really think they wouldn’t have won two more games over the course of the season if they’d had a healthy Buchholz or a healthy Lackey? If they’d rolled through the playoffs, the fried chicken episodes would have been lauded as an example of how loose and easy the team was, Francona would still have a job and Epstein wouldn’t be in Chicago.
The 2011 Sox and 2012 Angels are remarkably similar in that both were/are high payroll teams with lots of star power playing in big markets. Because of their rosters, there were/are justifiably high expectations. Moreover, if the Angels suffer a similar number of injuries to key personnel over the course of the season, they’re unlikely to live up to the lofty expectations that many (including the team) have for them.
jjackflash - January 10, 2012
Yes If the Red Sox had rolled through the playoffs it would have been lauded
But they didn’t so now I look at why the Red Sox collapsed. That collapse was more than injuries, and Im not sure Lackey and his 5+ ERA would have stopped it, Buchholz might have but I dont know how great he was.
What I saw happen to the Red Sox on the NESN broadcasts (which I watch to appease my lack of ESPN Angels broadcasts) was a bunch of highly paid guys who quit on the team. It was a clubhouse questioning Youk’s dedication to the team while “rehabbing” his injury. It was a team that couldn’t come up with a big hit in the big moment and had a pitching staff that forced the offense into those moments.
This angels team is built around a pitching staff and offensive style that doesnt always require the big hit and will be able to deal with offensive slump in a waythat the Red Sox couldn’t. It is also a team that has alot of comraderie, many of these guys were on the 09 team which was an emotional and successful team. Many others came up together and are a support net for each other. Even outsiders buy into this mentality, Torii Hunter has always been a mentor for Howie (or at least he thinks he is), in addition to him asking Soth to start Pete. I could never see Crawford or Drew ask Francona to start Reddick or Kalish, and they didn’t.
The other thing I saw was the promos on NESN, a channel owned by the Sox which talked about a team built for October, a team that seemed invincible.
I havent seen that come from the Angels yet, the Angels have increased both talent and payroll over the past 3 months, but they have not set the outlandish expectations, at least not publically.
ItCouldHappen - January 10, 2012
2013's HOF ballot is going to be a bitch
We will have this same argument when it comes out. Every year that argument will continue. Thanks for taking the joy out of the HOF ballot Fehr, Selig, and the union.
JeffJoiner - January 10, 2012
If you write the answers of your biology test on your hand
And get caught using them, you dont get an A. You fail.
Halos2011champs - January 10, 2012 via mobile
but if its an anatomy test
the answers are already on your hands…… and boners might be an answer
ItCouldHappen - January 10, 2012
LOL BONERS ARE HILARIOUS!!!
red floyd - January 10, 2012
that’s debatable for this guy
ladybug - January 10, 2012
If the teacher's only allowed to monitor half the class
Does that change anything?
yeswecan - January 10, 2012
No. Sometimes you get lucky cheating.
Even if that’s the case, you still have an unfair advantage over the monitored half. It makes you appear to be a better student if the cheating goes unnoticed, but really you’re no better than the average joe.
Halos2011champs - January 10, 2012 via mobile
Or if it's only cheating if you wrote it in blue in, not if you wrote it in black
The Limey - January 10, 2012
I don't understand that analogy
Halos2011champs - January 10, 2012 via mobile
Under the current testing regime...
…they’ll look for steroids but not for HGH
The Limey - January 10, 2012
Oh I see. Good point.
Im guessing they only bypass HGH because of healing treatments. Both give an unfair advantage but Anabolic Steroids must give a bigger edge.
Halos2011champs - January 10, 2012
No head to head trials...
…but they work in different ways – hypertrophy (bigger muscle fibres with steroids) vs hyperplasia (more muscle fibres with HGH). Should actually (theoretically) be complimentary.
No good reason why they should bypass it, aside from the fact that the bigger and easier battle to win was steroids – easier to detect than HGH which requires a blood test. HGH’s time will come in baseball. It has already on most other sports.
The Limey - January 10, 2012
Thanks for enlightening.
Halos2011champs - January 10, 2012 via mobile
I thought the new CBA included HGH?
red floyd - January 10, 2012
It includes one solitary test at a pre-specified time
…bearing in mind the current thresholds for detection with HGH in terms of timing, it is laughable to describe that as proper testing
The Limey - January 10, 2012
My theory
The HOF is not in place to whitewash the history of baseball, but to accurately depict what went on.
b0rd3rline - January 10, 2012
If we sign Brad Lidge it only makes sense if we can give him some steroids.
gitchogritchoffmypetis - January 10, 2012
Sure. But if we give him steroids, should he be allowed into the HOF?
~MMP~ - January 10, 2012
Funke5ive - January 11, 2012
It Must Be Nice
To reap the benefits of obvious juicing when offensive records are being slaughtered left and right, and then later on wax morality and purity. Just vote based on the numbers and the game on the field. It’s all you can do. If you try to dig into it all, it gets too messy. I think you need to give a bit more leeway to borderline candidates becuase you can’t know if they used and were playing the same game, or didn’t and were at an inherent disadvantage, but beyond that, you’re playing a losing game. What if it comes out Larkin used but was more circumspect? Do you boot him out? What if a player had an HoF career, but then started using?
Unless you are the player in question, you don’t know enough to make that judgment about how much it helped, when it helped, etc. You just don’t know. And to take a ahrd stance against it sets you up for failure when, eventually, the truth oozes out, and players you thought were clean maybe weren’t.
Kernel - January 11, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Halos Heaven to post a comment.