MLB Hall of Fame and the Steroid Era

[odom730]

Late to the party, and I love talking about baseball - especially the 90's which was the peak of my childhood obsession.

I'm a homer 100%, but I think wholeheartedly that Griffey would be the all-time HR leader if he took PEDs. The amount of time he missed because of injuries is pretty wild for a guy who still hit 630 HR. He missed almost 900 games in his career including 260 in a 3 year stretch. So there is a weird thing to me with comparing him to Bonds.

I'm OK with Andruw Jones being the hall. Maybe even Posada just because stellar defense and catchers don't get enough credit for what they do. Bonds, Clemens, and Rose at the very least need to immortalized somehow, but in the same vein as @baylrballa I'm not sure it should be scott-free and I don't have better suggestions.

The truth is that personality and ethics matter to us and it matters to the voters because we want to celebrate our heroes, but not sure how you can pick and choose so subjectively - like Big Papi. And to JBs point, the current players are going to be treated differently than those steroid era guys, like Cano and Tatis.

dl;dr: Too much subjectivity in selection.

Pete Rose already in the Hall of Fame, just not a Hall of Famer | Sporting News

People sometimes forget that Pete Rose being banned from baseball does not mean he is whitewashed from history. The Hall of Fame still celebrates Rose's legendary career.

www.google.com

Pete Rose and Barry Bonds' accomplishments are in the Baseball Hall of Fame. They are not enshrined as players. I'm ok with that.

 

[bigbov]

Him betting on baseball is sufficient for me to keep him out. I'm a lifelong Reds diehard, going back to when Rose was fighting Bud Harrelson at second base and running over Ray Fosse at home. And he should never be in the Hall imo.

Even if Rose only bet on the Reds to win, there were days he didn't bet at all. That was a giant red flag to bookies and other gamblers to load up on the other team. The only way the "Pete only bet on his team to win" argument has any merit would have been if he bet on them to win every game they played.

• He was accused of betting on baseball, including Reds games, in 1989. He denied, UNDER OATH, that he did. He then signed the deal for a LIFETIME ban from MLB.
• He and his lawyer presented "evidence" that shows he bet on baseball in 2000 when trying to get reinstated, knowing it was a lie.
• He sold baseballs at card shows saying he didn't bet on baseball.
• In late 2003 he admitted to betting on baseball and released a book to make money off of it. The book was released 2 days after the 2004 HOF class was announced.
• He started selling baseballs saying he DID bet on baseball.
• In 2015, Outside the Lines reported to have documents that showed he bet on the Reds in 1986 when he was a player. Something else he always denied.
• In 2023 he placed the first legal sports bet in Ohio history. Again thumbing his nose at MLB and everyone else and showing no remorse or common sense.

Those are just the highlights and there is plenty more to fill in the timeline of his hypocrisy and stupidity.

If it was announced tomorrow that he bet against his team, would you be surprised? I wouldn't. He has never shown contrition and never given a true apology. He doesn't feel bad for what he did, only what's happening to him. He jeopardized the legitimacy of the game.

When we watch sports we HAVE to know the competition is real. Otherwise it's a well written drama. That's why it is comparable to the Black Sox and worse than steroids. Steroids is cheating and if the players never get in, I won't lose any sleep. But they were still competing and trying to win. By betting on HIS team, people have wondered if he managed badly, or played badly, for personal benefit vs trying to win for the team.

And I love Pete Rose as a player. I'm a Reds fan and always will be. But he made his own bed and he can deal with the consequences.

You 2 are obv both passionate Reds fans and I will defer to you guys. I don’t lose sleep over him not being in. It’s just silly to me that the player with the most hits ever is not in HOF because he bet on baseball when he was a manager.

 

[JB]

Late to the party, and I love talking about baseball - especially the 90's which was the peak of my childhood obsession.

I'm a homer 100%, but I think wholeheartedly that Griffey would be the all-time HR leader if he took PEDs. The amount of time he missed because of injuries is pretty wild for a guy who still hit 630 HR. He missed almost 900 games in his career including 260 in a 3 year stretch. So there is a weird thing to me with comparing him to Bonds.

I'm OK with Andruw Jones being the hall. Maybe even Posada just because stellar defense and catchers don't get enough credit for what they do. Bonds, Clemens, and Rose at the very least need to immortalized somehow, but in the same vein as @baylrballa I'm not sure it should be scott-free and I don't have better suggestions.

The truth is that personality and ethics matter to us and it matters to the voters because we want to celebrate our heroes, but not sure how you can pick and choose so subjectively - like Big Papi. And to JBs point, the current players are going to be treated differently than those steroid era guys, like Cano and Tatis.

dl;dr: Too much subjectivity in selection.

It’s hard to say someone did or didn’t take when we watch their body breakdown and the era they were involved in. Griffey seems like a decent guy in my interactions with him, but I have no faith in anybody when tens of millions are on the table during an era when many believe everybody did.

 

[wazzubrew]

It’s hard to say someone did or didn’t take when we watch their body breakdown and the era they were involved in. Griffey seems like a decent guy in my interactions with him, but I have no faith in anybody when tens of millions are on the table during an era when many believe everybody did.

Fair enough. Griffeys career trajectory was much more natural than Bonds or A-Rod but it's possible that he was just unlucky. And again to your point, it's mostly speculation which isn't a fair criteria.

 

[braveheart]

Do you think these players should be in?
Some are, some aren't, including Griffey, Jeter, Rivera (first ever unanimous). Some that have used have gotten in including Big Papi.
Yet some of the greats, are still left off. And more importantly, in the HOF, its about numbers and how many are distorted from this period.

Where do you stand?

Put them all in but have an asterisk on their plaques that states, “ Played with suspicion of using PEDs during the steroid era.”
If they all are voted in, I feel Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson should be in as well.

 

[braveheart]

This is a topic I'm oddly passionate about and a hill I will die on forever. At this point I think the MLB hall of fame is a completely broken concept and just needs torn down and restarted.

The writers have been historically bad at electing players. Even in the first ballot, no one was unanimous. I think about that a lot. The writers founded this institution, decided who gets to vote, who is eligible, and guys like Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth were not 100% selections. Which then started the whole "if Babe Ruth didn't get 100% , then no one should" stupidity we've dealt with forever. Then in the 1950s Joe DiMaggio didn't get elected on the first ballot and we had to deal with 'if DiMaggio isn't a first ballot guy, then no one is" mentality. The writers also used to have a saying - "If I have to think about it, the answer is no" for those who are worthy.

Then there was the train wreck that was the 2013 ballot. On what could've been the greatest hall class ever, no one got elected in a sham protest vote. No less than 8 players on that ballot - Bonds, Clemens, Piazza, Sosa, Schilling, Biggio, Kenny Lofton, and David Wells had strong arguments to be inducted into the hall. I would consider at least 4 of those names to be slam dunk candidates. We've had to deal with an overstuffed ballot ever since. The writers have essentially invalidated an entire generation of players by refusing to elect anyone (but David Ortiz) even closly related to PED use, held back candidates for years that were even suspected, and even the clean players still get a mark because they played in you know, that era.

The Veterans committee is also a failure. It had generally just been a tool for the already enshrined players to elect their buddies. Go look up the Frankie Frisch All-Stars. Basically every HoFer you've never heard of that was elected in the 1950s through early 70s was the responsibility of this guy. It was essentially the same thing in 2019 when we saw Harold Baines get elected. The committee that elected him contained the GM that drafted him, two GMs that signed/traded for him, two former managers, and at least one teammate. He just had the numbers. Add to the politics, the fact that now the veterans committees are tasked with correcting the oversight of the writers, and they are an ill constructed and overwhelmed body.

I would like to see a much more inclusive Hall, with a tiered structure. And yes, Pete Rose should be in the hall of fame. As this is getting long, I'm going to close with a list of juiced era players I think belong in the hall. And I love talking baseball and will talk about anyone or anything with the game. You can @ at me all day and I'll talk.

C - Jorge Posada
1B: McGwire, Helton, Palmeiro, Giambi, Delgado, Mattingly, Andres Galarraga
2B: Lou Whitaker
3B: Matt Williams (Scott Rolen is not a HoFer)
SS: Garciaparra
LF: Bonds, Manny, Albert Belle
CF: Dale Murphy, Jim Edmonds, Bernie Williams, Kenny Lofton
RF: Sosa, Canseco, Juan Gonzalez, Sheffield
SP: Clemens, Kevin Brown, David Cone, Doc Gooden, Schilling, Saberhagen, Hershiser
CP: Billy Wagner, Quisenberry, John Franco

What is your feeling about Joe Olerud? I think he deserves consideration. I think he should be in. Was a professional hitter extraordinaire.

 

[Joshnoble01]

I would love to know when the first MLB elected to the HOF that used steroids played. I would guess that there for sure is someone that played in the 70's maybe even 60s elected to the HOF that used.

 

[Sox_Fan]

If they were truly great (i.e., Bonds, Clemens), they should be in. Both mentioned were HOFers before the steroid discussion ever came around to them. Even if players were juiced, the skill has to be there to put up the great numbers. Juicing alone does not provide the necessary skill set to play and exceed at the professional level.

In addition, some form of PEDs has always existed in professional sports. There are numerous guys that used "greenies" that are in the HOF and nobody is bashing them or saying they should not have been elected.

 

[braveheart]

You 2 are obv both passionate Reds fans and I will defer to you guys. I don’t lose sleep over him not being in. It’s just silly to me that the player with the most hits ever is not in HOF because he bet on baseball when he was a manager.

I grew up idolizing Pete Rose as a player. My dad was from Cincinnati, so I was indoctrinated early on Charley Hustle. I wore the number 14 my whole baseball and softball career. I slid headfirst. The way he played, it is hard for me to imagine him throwing any game, even if he bet on it. Joe Morgan said he never played with anyone who wanted to win as much as him.
But. Although, I think he should be enshrined, his arrogance, lack of judgement and downright stupidity has ruined his legacy. If he had come clean early, his penance could have been to do baseball clinics for MLB. Imagine if he had been on probation doing that, how it could’ve impacted his chances.
Now back to PEDS. Andy Petite, in my mind is the only one who handled the whole thing in a proper fashion. Admitting it sooner in an apologetic way. Showed character, which matters most in life. Easier to forget what he did and people then see and remember how he came back from it.

 

[keto]

What is your feeling about Joe Olerud? I think he deserves consideration. I think he should be in. Was a professional hitter extraordinaire.

John, the former Blue Jay? Watched all of his TOR career, looked at his numbers just now. Not close to the borderline even, sorry. 1 batting title, that year has the only other 'category led' stats (doubles, OBP, OPS, which nobody was even talking about the latter 2 back then). Couple all-star selections, 3 Gold Gloves. Really really good career and player, but not a hall of famer.

 

[braveheart]

John, the former Blue Jay? Watched all of his TOR career, looked at his numbers just now. Not close to the borderline even, sorry. 1 batting title, that year has the only other 'category led' stats (doubles, OBP, OPS, which nobody was even talking about the latter 2 back then). Couple all-star selections, 3 Gold Gloves. Really really good career and player, but not a hall of famer.

Stats. Yes, I have heard of his totals not being quite up the mark for consideration. Myself and many others who love and know baseball, always noticed and remarked on his talents.

 

[wazzubrew]

John, the former Blue Jay? Watched all of his TOR career, looked at his numbers just now. Not close to the borderline even, sorry. 1 batting title, that year has the only other 'category led' stats (doubles, OBP, OPS, which nobody was even talking about the latter 2 back then). Couple all-star selections, 3 Gold Gloves. Really really good career and player, but not a hall of famer.

The former Washington State University alum and Seattle Mariner . I agree with you.

 

[Jrt13]

Yes. I think steroid/performance enhancement wasn’t limited to the 90’s or just a few select players. For what it’s worth, the Sosa/McGwire battle was historic and fun to watch even if they were juiced. They should be in.

 

[razaar]

If performance enhancing drugs were accepted or ignored by the leagues at the time, then they deserve to be in.

 

[The Dave]

HOF should be about numbers on the field, period. "Steroid era" just because some got caught and/or admitted to using them, but I'm sure others prior to and after have been using performance enhancing supplements that are in without question.

 

[PVA_Golf 93]

I used to be so hard nosed against it. But I agree with a lot of the folks on here. Steroids or not, these guys that put up monster numbers had hall of fame talent. I think if bonds wasn’t such a jerk to the media he would be in and the floodgates would open. But I think he’s accepted it by now.

Not steroid era but….

PETE ROSE BELONGS IN THE HALL!

 

[DiscipleofPenick]

I think Olerud falls a little short. He was a great defensive 1B, but only won 3 gold gloves and by that time he was in Seattle. I'm not sure why he was overlooked so much when with Toronto. 2200+ hits is really good, but 255 HRs is very low, especially for a 1B. What also hurts him is that he really only has the one standout season in 1993, where he definitiely should've won the MVP over Frank Thomas. And when compared to the players of his era, he really only stands out in OBP.

If there was a hall of very good, he is a lock for that, but just short of the hall of fame.

 

[GolfTravelDude]

It's a tad hypocritical of MLB to throw shade on the "users" when in fact they were looking the other way when those users were bringing the game back from the edge of despair.

 

[sheepdawg]

Bonds and Rose are a lock for the a-hole HOF.

 

[brians]

This is why Buehrle is a Hall of Famer

On the surface, Mark Buehrle may not jump off the page as a Hall of Famer. The remarkably consistent left-hander posted a 3.81 ERA over 16 Major League seasons. Buehrle was a five-time All-Star and four-time Gold Glove winner, but he otherwise did not receive any major awards. He garnered

www.mlb.com

Not sure if I think he should be in, by my oh my what a convincing argument…



Edit: added to this thread only because he played in this era.

 

[AndyL0711]

This is why Buehrle is a Hall of Famer

On the surface, Mark Buehrle may not jump off the page as a Hall of Famer. The remarkably consistent left-hander posted a 3.81 ERA over 16 Major League seasons. Buehrle was a five-time All-Star and four-time Gold Glove winner, but he otherwise did not receive any major awards. He garnered

www.mlb.com

Not sure if I think he should be in, by my oh my what a convincing argument…



Edit: added to this thread only because he played in this era.

Good durable pitcher but not a hall of famer.

 

[brians]

Good durable pitcher but not a hall of famer.

How I felt as well. But what a great writeup for him. Hall of very good for sure though.

 

[AndyL0711]

How I felt as well. But what a great writeup for him. Hall of very good for sure though.

Exactly

Yes, it is a good article and they do make a good argument