The Mark McGwire Decision

johnstrubel · 12-02-2006, 04:32 PM

Will Mark McGwire get in on the first-ballot? Who's voting for him? Against him? Read my exclusive story here ...

Decision Time: Will McGwire get in?

MuffinMcFluffin · 12-02-2006, 04:41 PM

I haven't read it yet, but in my opinion, I'm not going to put anybody in/take anybody out because of any issues with them involving anything off the field or steroid-related. That said, I honestly don't know (or care) if McGwire is part of the steroid scandal, but I don't think he has any of the numbers to grant him the Hall of Fame. His home run number is extravagant, but he was really only a one-tool player for that matter. His home run number still doesn't beat many of the three-tool and four-tool players that have a higher home run count than him that are in the Hall of Fame.

I just still can't believe that Pete Rose isn't in... but that's a different story.

kflo · 12-02-2006, 09:12 PM

no he won't get in first ballot.

he's easily hof worthy if we ignore steroids.

he clearly did steroids.

therefore, he won't get in first ballot, and may need to speak up before he does get in.

BenB · 12-03-2006, 01:41 AM

I wouldn't put him in until more information comes out. And if that never happens, then he can stay out of the HOF.

MuffinMcFluffin · 12-03-2006, 01:59 AM

You know, I honestly don't care about steroids anymore. They make you stronger, they reduce your testicle size, and they make you die more quickly. They don't help you hit a baseball, and they don't make you swing a bat faster if you know how to swing a bat properly. McGwire didn't, but Bonds does.

The only other thing steroids may do for you is allow you to last longer through a season, but not overnight. They aren't magic pills... they are an overly effective Creatine drug that is illegal for the very reason that it is harmful to the human body, and it can be known for people to "cheat".

The fact of the matter is, steroids weren't illegal in baseball at the time that McGwire may or may not have taken them, and while he may be handled federally, baseball should choose to induce him for what was allowed and what wasn't at his time.

Are we to revoke Gaylord Perry's 314 wins and Hall of Fame status for using a spitball?

It doesn't matter in this case anyway, as I'm not defending McGwire. I don't think he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, but that's just me. Out of all 500+ career home run players, he is ranked 4th overall in lowest batting average... maybe third, I forget. He was also a slow first baseman his whole career that doesn't have any gold glove awards to show for any sort of remarkable defense, with less than enough steals to say that he was a speed-demon, either. 500+ home runs shouldn't grant you the Hall of Fame.

M's Fan · 12-03-2006, 03:35 AM

Mark helped turn baseball around and get it back on track after the strike year and downfall of the game. With no McGwire/Sosa battle, who knows what baseball would be like today. I'd vote him in, as I would Bonds, Clemens and any other player who took roids and deserved to be in.

I don't support what they did, and I think it is cheating and yes, Bonds record should have an asterik next to it, but the fact the MLB did nothing for so long about the matter, is why I think they should be in, and if punished for past choices, they should be punished by law, not the game. Nowadays, with suspensions in the contract, they are and players should be punished by the game.

Another thing, I think if a writer votes one guy who took roids in, he should allow all roid takers the chance to get in. Because you dislike a guy, and want to not let him in, then use the "he was on steroids" card, when the previous year you voted a steroid user in, is garbage IMO.

TonyBagO'Donuts · 12-05-2006, 03:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

He was also a slow first baseman his whole career that doesn't have any gold glove awards to show for any sort of remarkable defense...

Mark McGwire won a Gold Glove in 1990. I think he would have won a few more Gold Gloves in his younger years if he hadn't played in the same league as Don Mattingly.

Cochise22 · 12-05-2006, 04:00 AM

Im very torn on this issue. That 1998 season was about the most fun a baseball season could be without winning a world series. I still remember my parents and myself dropping everything to watch almost every at bat. I didn't think there would be anything that could ever bring my grandfather back to watching the game after the strike, but that season was even able to do just that.

But I also feel kind of cheated thinking that he took steroids in order to do this, and I feel that this is an unacceptable type action and one should be punsished for it.

I guess I am glad that I don't have to vote because it would be to tough a decision for me.

Goose · 12-05-2006, 04:36 AM

Quote:

Mark helped turn baseball around and get it back on track after the strike year and downfall of the game. With no McGwire/Sosa battle, who knows what baseball would be like today

Who knows if we would even HAVE baseball today?

I'll always be grateful to Sosa and Big Mac for keeping the game alive when it looked like it might disappear. Yeah it may be tainted, but I don't care. I'd rather have tainted baseball then no baseball at all.

That being said, I don't think Mark will get in on the first ballot. But I do think he'll get in before 2010.

kflo · 12-05-2006, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

[font=Times New Roman][size=3]You know, I honestly don't care about steroids anymore. They make you stronger, they reduce your testicle size, and they make you die more quickly. They don't help you hit a baseball, and they don't make you swing a bat faster if you know how to swing a bat properly. McGwire didn't, but Bonds does.

The only other thing steroids may do for you is allow you to last longer through a season, but not overnight. They aren't magic pills... they are an overly effective Creatine drug that is illegal for the very reason that it is harmful to the human body, and it can be known for people to "cheat".

it's probably just a coincidence that the 3 guys who shattered hr records were all juicers. it's also a coincidence that the bigger stronger guys tend to hit the ball farther. steroids make you stronger, materially stronger, which certainly will help you hit a baseball, and hit it farther.

magic pills? no. clear cometitive advantage? without question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

[font=Times New Roman][size=3]
The fact of the matter is, steroids weren't illegal in baseball at the time that McGwire may or may not have taken them, and while he may be handled federally, baseball should choose to induce him for what was allowed and what wasn't at his time.

yes they were.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

[font=Times New Roman][size=3]
Are we to revoke Gaylord Perry's 314 wins and Hall of Fame status for using a spitball?

baseball's dealings with the ball doctorers was shameful as well and it's a disgrace tha perry was able to get away with what he did for so long, and that he flaunted and was unapologetic about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

It doesn't matter in this case anyway, as I'm not defending McGwire. I don't think he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, but that's just me. Out of all 500+ career home run players, he is ranked 4th overall in lowest batting average... maybe third, I forget. He was also a slow first baseman his whole career that doesn't have any gold glove awards to show for any sort of remarkable defense, with less than enough steals to say that he was a speed-demon, either. 500+ home runs shouldn't grant you the Hall of Fame.

it's not just his 500+ hr's. of retired players, he's 6th in slg %, 10th in adj ops, 7th in ops, and i think he's 2nd in hr rate.

Codered · 12-05-2006, 09:20 AM

I don't think he gets in on the first ballot. If this was Barry Bonds type numbers then it may be near impossible to keep him out. However I think the fans and media are still a bit jaded on the whole roids topic and will use Mark as the scapegoat.

Let's not kid ourselves we don't have much of a clue who took them in this era. There will be guys to get in the Hall on the first ballot who took them.

Mark probably deserves the spot, but I don't see him getting in just yet. Especially with Cal and Tony on the same first year ballot. It will be easier to make a case against him when placed up against those two.

yankee'sRbetterthenurteam · 12-05-2006, 12:50 PM

McGwire is a great overall ball player but the steriods killed his career. the steriods didnt affect his fielding its was just the hitting so he has a 50%, 50% chance of getting in to me personaly i dont like him its just he was a good ball player

dandabeachman99 · 12-05-2006, 10:31 PM

Mark doesn't care about the past just the future. That's fine by me as I hope he never get's in the Hall of Fame.

LouGehrig · 12-12-2006, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnstrubel

Will Mark McGwire get in on the first-ballot? Who's voting for him? Against him? Read my exclusive story here ...

Decision Time: Will McGwire get in?

Fine article. Please react to mine.

http://baseballpiggies.blogspot.com/

kflo · 12-13-2006, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouGehrig

Fine article. Please react to mine.

http://baseballpiggies.blogspot.com/

i'm puzzled at the attention given to andro in the article. mcgwire's andro use is not really much of an issue with regard to the hof. andro wasn't banned from baseball at the time. illegal steroids were. mcwire's entire hof debate is centered around whether he used illegal steroids. his baseball credentials place him as a shoe in. his performance on capital hill places him on the outside. until he addresses the issue, and speaks truthfully about the role of steroids in his career, the assumption will be that it was instrumental in his late career run. that assumption is built on his own actions, not blind speculation. mcgwire's got some splainin to do, and it's got nothing to do with andro. till then, he waits. as he should. he shouldn't be allowed to have his next public appearance be to be showered with praise for a glorious career. not after his last public appearance.

View Poll Results: Would you vote McGuire into the Hall of Fame?
Never	6	40.00%
Not on the First Ballot	4	26.67%
First Ballot	5	33.33%
Voters: 15. This poll is closed

12-02-2006, 04:32 PM	#1 (permalink)
johnstrubel New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 4	The Mark McGwire Decision Will Mark McGwire get in on the first-ballot? Who's voting for him? Against him? Read my exclusive story here ... Decision Time: Will McGwire get in?

12-02-2006, 04:41 PM	#2 (permalink)
MuffinMcFluffin Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 584	I haven't read it yet, but in my opinion, I'm not going to put anybody in/take anybody out because of any issues with them involving anything off the field or steroid-related. That said, I honestly don't know (or care) if McGwire is part of the steroid scandal, but I don't think he has any of the numbers to grant him the Hall of Fame. His home run number is extravagant, but he was really only a one-tool player for that matter. His home run number still doesn't beat many of the three-tool and four-tool players that have a higher home run count than him that are in the Hall of Fame. I just still can't believe that Pete Rose isn't in... but that's a different story. __________________

12-03-2006, 01:59 AM	#5 (permalink)
MuffinMcFluffin Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 584	You know, I honestly don't care about steroids anymore. They make you stronger, they reduce your testicle size, and they make you die more quickly. They don't help you hit a baseball, and they don't make you swing a bat faster if you know how to swing a bat properly. McGwire didn't, but Bonds does. The only other thing steroids may do for you is allow you to last longer through a season, but not overnight. They aren't magic pills... they are an overly effective Creatine drug that is illegal for the very reason that it is harmful to the human body, and it can be known for people to "cheat". The fact of the matter is, steroids weren't illegal in baseball at the time that McGwire may or may not have taken them, and while he may be handled federally, baseball should choose to induce him for what was allowed and what wasn't at his time. Are we to revoke Gaylord Perry's 314 wins and Hall of Fame status for using a spitball? It doesn't matter in this case anyway, as I'm not defending McGwire. I don't think he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, but that's just me. Out of all 500+ career home run players, he is ranked 4th overall in lowest batting average... maybe third, I forget. He was also a slow first baseman his whole career that doesn't have any gold glove awards to show for any sort of remarkable defense, with less than enough steals to say that he was a speed-demon, either. 500+ home runs shouldn't grant you the Hall of Fame. __________________

12-03-2006, 03:35 AM	#6 (permalink)
M's Fan Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Washington State Posts: 54	Mark helped turn baseball around and get it back on track after the strike year and downfall of the game. With no McGwire/Sosa battle, who knows what baseball would be like today. I'd vote him in, as I would Bonds, Clemens and any other player who took roids and deserved to be in. I don't support what they did, and I think it is cheating and yes, Bonds record should have an asterik next to it, but the fact the MLB did nothing for so long about the matter, is why I think they should be in, and if punished for past choices, they should be punished by law, not the game. Nowadays, with suspensions in the contract, they are and players should be punished by the game. Another thing, I think if a writer votes one guy who took roids in, he should allow all roid takers the chance to get in. Because you dislike a guy, and want to not let him in, then use the "he was on steroids" card, when the previous year you voted a steroid user in, is garbage IMO. __________________ Mariners - Clippers - Panthers - Bearcats - Chargers Much success to you, even if you wish me the opposite... Sooner or later, we'll all see who the prophet is...

12-02-2006, 09:12 PM	#3 (permalink)
kflo Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,725	no he won't get in first ballot. he's easily hof worthy if we ignore steroids. he clearly did steroids. therefore, he won't get in first ballot, and may need to speak up before he does get in.

12-03-2006, 01:41 AM	#4 (permalink)
BenB Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Plymouth, MN Posts: 44	I wouldn't put him in until more information comes out. And if that never happens, then he can stay out of the HOF.

12-05-2006, 04:00 AM	#8 (permalink)
Cochise22 Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 190	Im very torn on this issue. That 1998 season was about the most fun a baseball season could be without winning a world series. I still remember my parents and myself dropping everything to watch almost every at bat. I didn't think there would be anything that could ever bring my grandfather back to watching the game after the strike, but that season was even able to do just that. But I also feel kind of cheated thinking that he took steroids in order to do this, and I feel that this is an unacceptable type action and one should be punsished for it. I guess I am glad that I don't have to vote because it would be to tough a decision for me.

12-05-2006, 09:20 AM	#11 (permalink)
Codered Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 148	I don't think he gets in on the first ballot. If this was Barry Bonds type numbers then it may be near impossible to keep him out. However I think the fans and media are still a bit jaded on the whole roids topic and will use Mark as the scapegoat. Let's not kid ourselves we don't have much of a clue who took them in this era. There will be guys to get in the Hall on the first ballot who took them. Mark probably deserves the spot, but I don't see him getting in just yet. Especially with Cal and Tony on the same first year ballot. It will be easier to make a case against him when placed up against those two. __________________ Save us Jay Cutler....

12-05-2006, 12:50 PM	#12 (permalink)
yankee'sRbetterthenurteam New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 3	McGwire is ok McGwire is a great overall ball player but the steriods killed his career. the steriods didnt affect his fielding its was just the hitting so he has a 50%, 50% chance of getting in to me personaly i dont like him its just he was a good ball player

12-05-2006, 10:31 PM	#13 (permalink)
dandabeachman99 New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: San Diego Posts: 5	Mark doesn't care about the past just the future. That's fine by me as I hope he never get's in the Hall of Fame.