I am very pleased that Cal was added to the HOF and the class of '07 couldn't be any classier with Cal and Gwynn (sweatin' like a slave and all.) What bothers me is the undue attention that is being put on the fact that McGwire isn't included in the class of '07. To me, it isn't really fair to say this is a vote against the steriod era since I wasn't entirely convinced that even without the controversy McGwire would be sure fire first ballot guy.

Let me give Big Mac his due right off the bat. He hit alot of homeruns and did so right out of the gate. His ROY win was well deserved and the Bash Brothers were entertaining. He didn't play very long (16 seasons if you include his cup of coffee year in '86), which makes the numbers that he put up for his career all the more impressive. His average HR total for a season was 50 which is pretty amazing stuff and he walked away after two injury filled seasons so maybe he was breaking down and couldn't add on the but injury shortening a career is sometimes looked at as well (Mantle's projected number brought up in discussing his enshrinment comes to mind.) So, if the steriod issue isn't brought to the forefronte and he had been enshrined this year, I doubt many people would have been shocked.

Having said all that, I always looked at McGwire as a one-dimensional player. He was just a masher and he hit a hell of a lot of homeruns without ever becoming a complete player. His career average is just .263 and his best year of average was .312. He wasn't a threat on the bases and that is being very polite. His career feilding percentage is .993 which is solid but he was never a spectacular first baseman and playing first means that he was probably one of the worst defensive players on his team at any given time (he won one Gold Glove in '90 but I have never really thought this was a great judge of defensive ability but that is my own personal bias.) McGwire never took control of a post-season series and personally carried his team which is usually a tie breaker for fringe hall candidates. He was a multiple all-star but never an MVP...

The hall should be a place for the best players to have ever played the games. McGwire was a great home run hitter and that definetly has it's place in the game but isn't a guaranteed trip to Cooperstown, just ask Roger Maris.

The real litmus teast for the steriod era and the HOF won't come until the class of 2013 is announced and Bonds is up. I think Bond deserves to be in even though I hate the jerk, because he did multiple things well long before he started juicing.

Until then, let Cal and Tony have their day and recognize them for not only their playing ability but also the class that they brought to the field everytime that they laced them up.

PUMA

here's the stat that gets me every time: 16 years playing, 1600 hits.


me and a friend watched the ESPN coverage yesterday when they announced it ~ we were lunching at the ESPNZone in D.C. and had no choice but ESPN ~ and after the announcement came, they spent a good 15 minutes talking not about Cal, who was named, or Tony, who was named, but Mark McGwire, who was not. even when they finally did do a segment on Cal, they spent 5 minutes asking him what he thought about McGwire, replaying the same damn McGwire clips.

it was infuriating.

I completely agree with you Puma. McGwire was a great home run hitter and that's about it. The way they say Cal would have made the HOF without the streak is the same way I would say Big Mac would not make it if he wasn't accused of steroids.

I always thought the HOF was for players that dominated the game.

Ripken had 11,551 at bats and was walked 1129 times
McGwire had 6,187 at bats and was walked 1317 times

I doubt you will find someone who will say Ripken was an impatient Jeter-like hitter, so this data leads me to believe that pitchers were much more afraid of McGwire than Ripken. Longevitywise, defensively, morally, etc Ripken destroys McGwire. Instilling fear in opposing pitchers, no way.

McGwire dominated when he was healthy (as did Albert Belle). Ripken was a really good ballplayer for a very long time.

That being said there are a few milestones that have thus far guaranteed enshrinement for everyone but Peter Rose. 3000 hits, 500 homeruns, and 300 wins. Gwynn and Ripken have the hits, McGwire has the homers. All 3 should be in controversy aside.

That is ridiculous. Maris had 275 career HR's.
McGwire should have went in without question.

I think that was because there was'nt anyone who did'nt expect Ripken and Gwynn to get in.
The only surprise was the McGwire was not voted in and that he only received 23% of the vote.

Ultimately, I think he should be in the Hall as well. The only point I was making was that I didn't see him as a slam dunk first ballot guy and a case could be made against him not using the steriod arguement.

Bonds will be the first real test of the writer's resolve because he was a complete player and then (apparently) took steriods. He would be a sure fire first ballot guy but now the steriod issue clouds the picture.

I guess it bothers me that Cal and Tony are almost the side story after McGwire...

PUMA

Well there you go... I try to respond and you already get what I am saying (you may not agree but at least you understand.)

PUMA

Even if you take away 200 of Bond's homeruns, he is still a shoe-in for the Hall. Unless he eats a small child, burns down a stadium, or bets on baseball, he should be in the HOF.

I think I agree, or do for the most part. McGwire was'nt just a great HR hitter though.
There have been lots of great HR hitters who never reached 583.

Absolutely, no doubt.

I agree that I think that Bonds, whether I like him or not, should be in the HOF. That is why, if the writers are so truly displeased by the steriod era, then they will have to voice their opinion on a sure-fire hall of famer like Bonds.

Even without the juiced era home runs, he should be a Hall of Famer so if they want to send a "message" then he is the one that they should focus on.

Personally, I think they should just vote for the best players of every era and Bonds (and yes McGwire for the most part) qualify. They are sports writers and not the moral conscience of the sporting world.

PUMA

there has been/is so much hypocrisy and rewritten ethics on the part of MLB, players, FOs, managers and coaches, trainers and doctors, sports media, and many fans.

double standards, learn 'em, live 'em!

Milt, I'm with you 100%...

First of all I would like to address the writers who returned blank ballots. I believe that their reasoning was that they cannot cast a vote until they have more information about the 'steroid era.' I move that these writes have their voting privileges revoked. By saying this, to me, they are saying that they will never vote for any player of that era of baseball because more information will never be available. Drug test results from that time period are not going to magically appear. They are implying that they believe that Ripken and Gwynn were on the juice...and for that matter all other ball players; Clemens, Maddux, Boggs, Griffey, Floyd Rayford, Chuck Knoblauch, Bud Selig....all of them, perhaps even the mighty Ken Gerhart. I am not ignoring that juice was part of the game, nor am I saying to ignore it. But, unless a player comes forward and says 'My name is Jose Canseco, and I a players career dictates they be in the hall, then they should be in the hall. If there is suspicion of thier involvement with juice, make note of it on thier plaque, but be damn sure to remove that note if that player is ever cleared!

Should McGwire be in the hall?
Argument for McGwire: He hit an absolute ton
Argument against: He didn't do anything else

Would I vote for him....yes, one reason-he did punch out over 500

I am a 'homer' and believe that Cal should have got 100%....I demand answers!

That's my 10 cents...



Dgreen1899

Welcome aboard dgreen. Y.I.T.B.O.S. It is always nice to have additional opinions brought up...

It seems like the steriod issue is just the latest greatest excuse that a writer will use to avoid giving anyone 100%. It used to just be the arguement that no one is Cobb, Wagner, Ruth, or Young so no one should be better than them. I have read writers who state that they will never vote for someone on the first ballot because they fill that only the afore mentioned group was deserving of first ballot status.

Nonsense. Cal's stats along would warrant HOF consideraton but then you have to take into account Cal's contributions to the game. The streaks ability to heal some of the wonds of the strike, his graciousness and kindness to the fans and media making him an ambassador of the game, and last but certainly not least his continuing efforts to grow the game with Ripken baseball on both an amateur and minor league level.

All that should equal 100% but it just doesn't...

PUMA

welcome to the board, great to have your :twocents: :twocents: :twocents: :twocents: :twocents: