2022 Baseball Hall of Fame

David Ortiz's career OBP: .380. Bonds' career OBP if you turned all of his HRs into outs: .384. DS, Barry Bonds never tested positive. Just sayin'... 


jfinnegan said:

Bonds' career OBP if you turned all of his HRs into outs: .384.

That’s part of the argument, isn’t it? Ortiz made a precedented leap at 27. Bonds took an unprecedented ride into orbit at 35.


I think this is pretty much it. For better or worse, Clemens has a reputation of being a jerk. He very clearly belongs in the HoF and it’s almost comical he’s not in, but maybe he should have thought of that when he refused to sign my baseball in the players parking lot on Van Ness Street in 1989.

yahooyahoo said: I don't think being nice is criteria for being in the HOF either.  Being a nice guy helps voters give Ortiz benefit of the doubt and makes it easier to overlook his flaws.  


DaveSchmidt said:

That’s part of the argument, isn’t it? Ortiz made a precedented leap at 27. Bonds took an unprecedented ride into orbit at 35.

If you take out Bonds' stats from 35 on he's still a HOFer. One of Ortiz's best years was when he was 40 years old. As a wise man once said if you don't get tested you can't test positive.  


I agree with Stroman's assessment: Who cares about validation from a bunch of outdated-a$$ writers. MLB has a pre-historic mindset with all endeavors. Barry Bonds is a HOF. Everyone who's actually gone on that field and grinded at the big-league level would agree...as well as a large majority of the fans! 


jfinnegan said:

I agree with Stroman's assessment: Who cares about validation from a bunch of outdated-a$$ writers. MLB has a pre-historic mindset with all endeavors. Barry Bonds is a HOF. Everyone who's actually gone on that field and grinded at the big-league level would agree...as well as a large majority of the fans! 

The same can be said for Shoeless Joe and Rose, spurned by what some might call a bunch of outdated-a$$ commissioners. It's patently a form of punishment for tarnishing the game, whether in the official eyes of MLB or the unofficial eyes of sportswriters. Clemens, Bonds and ARod are being made examples, which is never fair. Still, it's hard to think of an organized group that doesn't use it as a tool.


I guess my issue with it is the selective indignation over PEDs in the 90s and 00s.  There was testimony under oath about Willie Mays' use of amphetamines in the 60s and 70s, and some of the same people who won't vote for Bonds will hold up Mays as an example of when guys played "clean."  There's strong evidence that most MLB players in the 60s through the mid 2000s used speed on at least an occasional basis.  Tom House also is on the record as saying that steroid use in MLB began in the late 60s.

A lot of baseball writers seem intent on protecting an image of an innocent "clean" MLB past that never actually existed.  And they are doing it by making examples of Bonds and Clemens.  And probably choosing them because they seem like generally unlikable people.  I'm glad Papi made the Hall despite the steroid rumors. I had hoped Bonds and Clemens would have been joining him.


ml1 said:

A lot of baseball writers seem intent on protecting an image of an innocent "clean" MLB past that never actually existed.

Or they acknowledge the unclean past but decide that the effect of 1990s-era PEDs on the integrity of the game was so pronounced, distorting and selective that a line can be drawn between them and greenies and spitballs.

(My hunch is that telegraphic trash cans end up, maybe after a couple of years, on the other side of the line from PEDs, too.)


ml1 said:

I'm glad Papi made the Hall despite the steroid rumors.

There was the 2003 positive test. Are there rumors or other evidence beyond that?


according to this Daily News article, the rumor include innuendo about his hanging out with a big time drug dealer. Maybe they're wrong who knows?  But that's the thing about rumors isn't it?  Who knows?

Personally, I don't care about the rumors.  

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/ny-madden-hall-of-fame-20220126-frzjwhxhxjcffpjyu65bm4mlum-story.html


I lost respect for the BBWAA years ago when they failed to put Wayne Garrett in the HOF.   It still pisses me off.    


Be sure to read Roger Clemens’ smarmy statement today about how he never cared about the HOF. (Was never a Roger fan myself.)


Heynj said:

Be sure to read Roger Clemens’ smarmy statement today about how he never cared about the HOF. (Was never a Roger fan myself.)

There is not likely anyone who has more disdain than I have for Roger Clemens the human. But I think he should be in the Hall for his achievements on the field. 


ml1 said:

There was testimony under oath about Willie Mays...

Didn't Clemens, Sosa, Palmiero, McGwire testify under oath?


Testimony under oath by John Milner about Willie Mays doesn't mean it is true.


sbenois said:

Testimony under oath by John Milner about Willie Mays doesn't mean it is true.

Which brings us back to the REAL issue...Wayne Garrett. 


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.