Jump to content

No one elected to Baseball Hall of Fame Class of 2021


Recommended Posts

These writers don't mess around. 

For the first time since 1960, the membership of the National Baseball Hall of Fame will remain frozen.

No player on the Hall's 2021 Baseball Writers' Association of America ballot reached the 75 percent threshold needed for enshrinement in Cooperstown. The results of the voting were announced by Hall of Fame president Tim Mead on MLB Network on Tuesday night.

The leading vote-getter was controversial pitcher Curt Schilling, who was named on 71.1 percent of the ballots, 16 votes shy of the minimum needed for selection. Schilling was followed by all-time home run leader Barry Bonds (61.8 percent) and 354-game winner Roger Clemens (61.6) in the voting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Why?

Piazza and Ivan Rodriguez are both in and did steroids

 

it’s amazing how the media gives those guys a pass but Bonds, Arod and Clemens all astronomically way better before even using steroids are cancel cultured for life

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Why?

Actually I just looked him up and I thought he was on a definite path to 500 home runs before the steroids. I think he was but there is a lot of it that is dicey. Did he really start in 1998 or was it earlier? If it was '98 it looks like he would have gotten to 500 even if his performance dropped off significantly. But I thought that was going to be a slam dunk and it isn't.  He was in the upper 300's before roids if '98 is true.  I thought it was going to be like 450 or something like that.

My real stance is keep them all out. If they played during that time and the #s show a trajectory that doesn't make sense, we know why.

But Pudge is in there, Bagwell is in there, so the lines get blurred. I am not one of those people that wants to revisit the past, like Mike Schmidt confessing to using amphetamines.

What I think is going to happen is a few will pay the price for many, Clemens, Bonds and McGuire will be the poster children for this.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Maxman said:

Actually I just looked him up and I thought he was on a definite path to 500 home runs before the steroids. I think he was but there is a lot of it that is dicey. Did he really start in 1998 or was it earlier? If it was '98 it looks like he would have gotten to 500 even if his performance dropped off significantly. But I thought that was going to be a slam dunk and it isn't.  He was in the upper 300's before roids if '98 is true.  I thought it was going to be like 450 or something like that.

My real stance is keep them all out. If they played during that time and the #s show a trajectory that doesn't make sense, we know why.

But Pudge is in there, Bagwell is in there, so the lines get blurred. I am not one of those people that wants to revisit the past, like Mike Schmidt confessing to using amphetamines.

What I think is going to happen is a few will pay the price for many, Clemens, Bonds and McGuire will be the poster children for this.

 


The most egregious users should get punished the most.  I.E. the guys who weren't just following along with the trend, they were SETTING the trend and going way above and beyond "normal" use.  Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, and Sosa are in that category.  Obviously, McGwire and Sosa were "borderline" candidates for the HOF, so no one really noticed or cared that those 2 got blacklisted.  Palmeiro as well, who lied under oath.

Bonds and Clemens get the most support because of their HOF paths prior to use.  But to me, that doesn't matter.  They forfeited their privilege to join the HOF when they went way above and beyond "normal use".  That's why a few "questionable" guys got in, and deserve to, but they do not.  I don't see it as a blurring of lines as much as others do.  The writers know EXACTLY who was using, how much they were using, and their motivations for doing so.  They were the steroid "kingpins" while most of the other guys were just following the crowd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:


The most egregious users should get punished the most.  I.E. the guys who weren't just following along with the trend, they were SETTING the trend and going way above and beyond "normal" use.  Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, and Sosa are in that category.  Obviously, McGwire and Sosa were "borderline" candidates for the HOF, so no one really noticed or cared that those 2 got blacklisted.  Palmeiro as well, who lied under oath.

Bonds and Clemens get the most support because of their HOF paths prior to use.  But to me, that doesn't matter.  They forfeited their privilege to join the HOF when they went way above and beyond "normal use".  That's why a few "questionable" guys got in, and deserve to, but they do not.  I don't see it as a blurring of lines as much as others do.  The writers know EXACTLY who was using, how much they were using, and their motivations for doing so.  They were the steroid "kingpins" while most of the other guys were just following the crowd.

McGuire would be in for sure with 583 home runs. The problem is he admitted to Starting before the 90 season and at that point he was so young he only hit 117 home runs. Damn near half of them came in his rookie year. But there is no way he is getting in, same for Clemens because he lied so much about it.

Clemens, Bonds and McGuire when you look at the #s all benefited so much from cheating. So where it ended up is really fair, none of them are getting in.

I'd let Pete Rose in before any of them.

I realize this is all very different from my let Bonds in comment. But sometimes I have to throw things out there to revive threads.  :)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Maxman said:

McGuire would be in for sure with 583 home runs. The problem is he admitted to Starting before the 90 season and at that point he was so young he only hit 117 home runs. Damn near half of them came in his rookie year. But there is no way he is getting in, same for Clemens because he lied so much about it.

Clemens, Bonds and McGuire when you look at the #s all benefited so much from cheating. So where it ended up is really fair, none of them are getting in.

I'd let Pete Rose in before any of them.

I realize this is all very different from my let Bonds in comment. But sometimes I have to throw things out there to revive threads.  :)

I don't want any of the steroids guys in and I don't want Rose in either. I understand the argument for Pete Rose but rules are rules and he broke them. He also still won't acknowledge that what he did was wrong which doesn't help him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, JustEndTheSuffering said:

What pisses me off the most is that big sloppy will probably get in like first ballot even though he was also OBVIOUSLY using oh and not to mention that the 2004 red sux were running an astros style sign stealing scheme.

David Ortiz another guy the media gives a pass

 

Such arbitrary nonsense 

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...

I'd put Barry Bonds in man. They all 90% cheated but no one was as great as Barry Bonds. Him and Griffey Jr. had the sweetest swings of All-Time and Griffey Jr. is my favorite baseball player ever but Barry Bonds steroids or not was greatness man.

If Bill Belichick wasn't banned from football? If Tom Brady was banned for cheating? Why the hatred for Barry Bonds? 

I don't care about steroids in baseball because Bonds was greatness and why didn't anyone else finish with 700+ HRs?

We need to be more forgiving as a Country. You can no longer talk about the history of baseball and HOME RUNS without mentioning Barry Bonds. What? Are we supposed to eliminate him from history and pretend he never existed? 

Mike Vick tortured innocent dogs. He electrocuted the dogs who lost before drowning them in water after slamming then into walls. Michael Vick was a murderer who tortured my favorite breed of puppies. I used to not root for an ACL injury as a JET I literally prayed for death of him on the football field and wouldn't care one bit if he died in an accident tomorrow. I'm not the perfect man but I've never hurt anyone or anything like, that. 

Vick can play Football and one day become an announcer? But Bonds can't enjoy the HOF? I've already forgiven Barry. I'll never forgive Vick. I'll let God forgive him for me. 

Bonds was a great American baseball player I hope the younger writers forgive him. He gave his life since childhood to the game of baseball.

How many other players got hooked to the needle but never got busted but still in the little innocent HOF? It's not fair and the HOF is more a joke without him than with him. 

O.k. I was in the 10th grade. I copied this girls HW. I cheated. I lied. I cheated multiple times in Science class. Now I'm 36. 20 years ago. Should they take my diploma away that I worked hard for since Elementary PS100? And in college @ USF I was hungry and I stole two Publix sub sandwiches. Walked right out the door with them. Should I be banned for life?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2021 at 12:57 AM, Maxman said:

I love that Schilling didn't make it though lol.

https://primetimesportstalk.com/2021/01/20/hall-of-fame-case-curt-schilling/#:~:text=Hall of Fame Case%3

Pros 

Schilling is one of the most consistent pitchers in history. He earned his 200th career win in 2006 and collected his 3,000th strikeout in August that year. He has the highest strikeout-to-walk ratio (3,116-711) of any pitcher in the 3,000 strikeout club and is one of four pitchers (Fergie Jenkins, Greg Maddux, Pedro Martinez) to reach 3,000 strikeouts without 1,000 walks. His performances in the playoffs are a huge part of his case. He retired with an 11-2 career postseason record with a 2.23 postseason ERA and 120 to 25 strikeout-to-walk ratio. Schilling is tied for third with three 300-strikeout seasons (1997, 1998, 2002).

Cons

Schilling spent most of his early years pitching for bad Phillies teams, which obviously was not his fault. But he only earned 216 career wins which is well below the 300-win benchmark for Hall of Fame pitchers. This is not much to knock him on, as wins are not a legitimate pitching statistic. He was never the best starting pitcher on his own team during his peak as that was Randy Johnson when he was in Arizona. But that doesn’t make him less Hall of Fame worthy.

Verdict

Schilling’s presence on Twitter and the person he is has nothing to do with his case for the Hall. The so-called “character clause” that the voters roll with is pedestrian. They shouldn’t be the gatekeepers of integrity and there are already players in the Hall of Fame who were not cover boys for integrity. Schilling was an outstanding pitcher and is very much deserving of being voted in based on his on-field merit only. The Hall of Fame is a museum and all of the on-field histories should be enshrined. The rest of the stories can be filled in by teachers and parents who take their kids to Cooperstown.

Schilling is a Hall of Famer and should have already been voted in long ago.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2021 at 2:21 PM, Maxman said:

Actually I just looked him up and I thought he was on a definite path to 500 home runs before the steroids. I think he was but there is a lot of it that is dicey. Did he really start in 1998 or was it earlier? If it was '98 it looks like he would have gotten to 500 even if his performance dropped off significantly. But I thought that was going to be a slam dunk and it isn't.  He was in the upper 300's before roids if '98 is true.  I thought it was going to be like 450 or something like that.

My real stance is keep them all out. If they played during that time and the #s show a trajectory that doesn't make sense, we know why.

But Pudge is in there, Bagwell is in there, so the lines get blurred. I am not one of those people that wants to revisit the past, like Mike Schmidt confessing to using amphetamines.

What I think is going to happen is a few will pay the price for many, Clemens, Bonds and McGuire will be the poster children for this.

 

You mean like this guy? LOL

image.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2021 at 1:21 PM, Maxman said:

Actually I just looked him up and I thought he was on a definite path to 500 home runs before the steroids. I think he was but there is a lot of it that is dicey. Did he really start in 1998 or was it earlier? If it was '98 it looks like he would have gotten to 500 even if his performance dropped off significantly. But I thought that was going to be a slam dunk and it isn't.  He was in the upper 300's before roids if '98 is true.  I thought it was going to be like 450 or something like that.

My real stance is keep them all out. If they played during that time and the #s show a trajectory that doesn't make sense, we know why.

But Pudge is in there, Bagwell is in there, so the lines get blurred. I am not one of those people that wants to revisit the past, like Mike Schmidt confessing to using amphetamines.

What I think is going to happen is a few will pay the price for many, Clemens, Bonds and McGuire will be the poster children for this.

The story is, Bonds was the 1st ever to 400 HR, 400 SB.  However, no one cared due to McGuire/Sosa, and he got pissed and started juicing after that.

I agree, Pudge, total juicer.   Bagwell, Piazza, so many others.   Plus, the owners DID NOT CARE and were actually happy about it, as it brought fans back to the game.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Alot of other cheaters are going to get in while better players who also cheated won't.  

I'm not a fan of keeping greats out over such things, they played in an era when it was rampant.  I vote of play on the field, and if needed, add caveats to plaques and the like that they also cheated.

Same would, IMO, go for Pete Rose.  He's a HOF'er, in there or not.  Same for Clemens and others.

Be assured, you have detestable scumbag people as well as cheaters in there right now.  Halls of Fame are for play on field, not moralizing.  If they murdered someone, fine, but even the Hall can be used to teach by teaching about some of baseballs less fair eras (and there have been plenty, not just the roid' era).

Be assured, owners and TV networks aren't giving back any of the ill gotten loot they earned selling that product to Fans.  

  • Post of the Week 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2021 at 6:04 PM, Warfish said:

Alot of other cheaters are going to get in while better players who also cheated won't.  

I'm not a fan of keeping greats out over such things, they played in an era when it was rampant.  I vote of play on the field, and if needed, add caveats to plaques and the like that they also cheated.

Same would, IMO, go for Pete Rose.  He's a HOF'er, in there or not.  Same for Clemens and others.

Be assured, you have detestable scumbag people as well as cheaters in there right now.  Halls of Fame are for play on field, not moralizing.  If they murdered someone, fine, but even the Hall can be used to teach by teaching about some of baseballs less fair eras (and there have been plenty, not just the roid' era).

Be assured, owners and TV networks aren't giving back any of the ill gotten loot they earned selling that product to Fans.  

You said that perfectly. 

That's what I always wonder. What year did steroids begin in baseball? I'd bet before the 1980s. 

'1954

Professional athletes began misusing anabolic steroids during the 1954 Olympics, when Russian weightlifters were given testosterone."

So my question is this. How many MLB steroid users were able to avoid being busted and live in the HOF today?

If Michael Jordan wrote a book tomorrow about using steroids does the NBA HOF remove him from the Hall of Fame? Of course not. 

Barry Bonds. Mark McGwire. Sammy Sosa. Manny Ramirez. Rafael Palmeiro. Ivan "Pudge" Rodriguez. Gary Sheffield. Alex Rodriguez. David Ortiz. Roger Clemens. 

all of these ball players deserve to be in the Hall of Fame because I'm born in 1985 and as a kid growing up they were the greatest players of the 1990s. 

Its such horse crap it's keeping Jeff Bagwell out and he's never been busted for anything. 

"Unlike just about all of the players on this list, there is no hard evidence or strong allegations that Bagwell, picture above with Hall of Fame teammate Craig Biggio, ever used PEDs. But by virtue of being a power hitter in the 90’s and an absurd standard of evidence on the part of some writers, Bagwell isn’t in Cooperstown—yet."

So now it's guilty by association too?

FOH...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2021 at 6:04 PM, Warfish said:

Alot of other cheaters are going to get in while better players who also cheated won't.  

I'm not a fan of keeping greats out over such things, they played in an era when it was rampant.  I vote of play on the field, and if needed, add caveats to plaques and the like that they also cheated.

Same would, IMO, go for Pete Rose.  He's a HOF'er, in there or not.  Same for Clemens and others.

Be assured, you have detestable scumbag people as well as cheaters in there right now.  Halls of Fame are for play on field, not moralizing.  If they murdered someone, fine, but even the Hall can be used to teach by teaching about some of baseballs less fair eras (and there have been plenty, not just the roid' era).

Be assured, owners and TV networks aren't giving back any of the ill gotten loot they earned selling that product to Fans.  

I have a real problem with Pete Rose. He knew the rules, and it is a simple rule. But a very important one.

This is the example that I always give with Rose, and I believe it to be critical. Obviously, Rose was the manager of the Reds, and by all accounts, he bet on the Reds to win. That is at least what we are told, and I would believe that based upon his fiery will to win. OK.

Let's also say that Pete has money on a particular game, for the Reds to win. Let's also say that the Reds were in a particularly close game, a game where they have to bring their closer in to close the game. And this is a game that Rose has money on. Let's also pretend that Rose has used his closer the last 3 games, and is arm weary. Normally, a manager may want to stay away from that player for "arm maintenance" and preservation. But, Pete has money on this game. Because of that, Pete chooses to go to his stud. That is a situation where Pete could have likely chosen a different route of management, putting a player at risk, for his own personal gain.

Of course, we don't know that it happened that way. But it may have. And a Manager must always put the welfare of the players ahead of the welfare of himself, and gambling and having a monetary outcome riding on the decision of the game affects decisions. It isn't as easy as "Well, he was trying to win".

Because of that, and particularly because of the exploding proliferation of sports gambling in this world, Pete Rose must stand as an example for all. 

Pete Rose, Hall of Fame player, Hall of Shame Manager. And that negates the former.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

I have a real problem with Pete Rose. He knew the rules, and it is a simple rule. But a very important one.

Is it?  In this day and age where every professional sports league is partnering with/shilling a dozen Gambling websites on every commercial break?  For a league where the Astros cheated their way to a title and the players paid almost no penalty for it?  I find what the Astros players did vastly worse than what Rose did.

2 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

This is the example that I always give with Rose, and I believe it to be critical. Obviously, Rose was the manager of the Reds, and by all accounts, he bet on the Reds to win. That is at least what we are told, and I would believe that based upon his fiery will to win. OK.

Agreed so far.  I do not believe MLB ever proved that he bet against his own team (a meaningful difference perhaps).

2 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

Let's also say that Pete has money on a particular game, for the Reds to win. Let's also say that the Reds were in a particularly close game, a game where they have to bring their closer in to close the game. And this is a game that Rose has money on. Let's also pretend that Rose has used his closer the last 3 games, and is arm weary. Normally, a manager may want to stay away from that player for "arm maintenance" and preservation. But, Pete has money on this game. Because of that, Pete chooses to go to his stud. That is a situation where Pete could have likely chosen a different route of management, putting a player at risk, for his own personal gain.

Tell me how this is different that a Manager desperate to win so he won't get fired and lose his income.

2 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

Of course, we don't know that it happened that way. But it may have. And a Manager must always put the welfare of the players ahead of the welfare of himself, and gambling and having a monetary outcome riding on the decision of the game affects decisions. It isn't as easy as "Well, he was trying to win".

Except they don't.  They often put the interests of "not getting fired" ahead of everything else.  Thats why teams also have doctors and GM's, to help keep a Manager in-line.

2 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

Because of that, and particularly because of the exploding proliferation of sports gambling in this world, Pete Rose must stand as an example for all. 

I don't agree.  Nor do I find it consistent with the leagues making millions from gambling sponsor partnerships.  

2 hours ago, Scott Dierking said:

Pete Rose, Hall of Fame player, Hall of Shame Manager. And that negates the former.

Hall of Fame Players cannot and should not be negating by anything.

If we have a lesson to teach, teach it in the HOF on his plaque and his display.  Hell, list all the news articles on it, have a big show of how long he was banned.

The HOF has dozens of players far worse in every way than Rose.  He, and Shoeless Joe, must be in the Hall IMO, as should the various Juicers/Roiders.

Clearly MLB and the HOF Voters/Writers don't agree with me.  And that's fine.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Warfish said:

 

Tell me how this is different that a Manager desperate to win so he won't get fired and lose his income.

 

This is the only comment that you made that deserves response.

The difference in what you mentioned is you are talking about totally separate eras. Yes, today trainers and more importantly GM's have direct say into what players are available that day. In Rose's day, that was not the case. Players were at his whim. We have no idea what kind of careers he may have ruined, based upon his own, short term stakes in single games.

Inexcusable.

Many things in life demand deterrents for inexcusable conduct. Rose crossed that border and has to pay for that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2021 at 11:21 PM, Albaniajet said:

Schilling will never get in thx to cancel culture 

 

they hate our freedom 

You probably are not going to make it once people start to visit this board more. Just saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2021 at 9:54 AM, Scott Dierking said:

You probably are not going to make it once people start to visit this board more. Just saying.

The woke cancel culture mob coming for me

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Albaniajet said:

The woke cancel culture mob coming for me

Hey philc I am not sure why you are using a different name. The Q stuff I removed. No need for politics here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2021 at 11:21 PM, Albaniajet said:

Schilling will never get in thx to cancel culture 

 

they hate our freedom 

Imagine thinking you could applaud journalists being hung and expect a journalist to vote for you for anything? He's a piece of garbage and an idiot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...