Do you think Mark McGwire should be in the Hall of Fame?

[PrincetonBuckeye]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=mcgwire&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1

interesting story.....

 

[Dryden]

I voted yes, for a variety of reasons that I won't get into, but the catalyst in why I think Big Mac goes into the hall is because he represents a generation of baseball players whom we'll never know were clean or not, and that includes the pitchers. Will the HoF have no representatives from the 80s, 90s, or 00s? Why do we think Big Mac is guilty but Junior Griffey is beyond reproach? Why do we suspect Bonds or Sosa but not Bagwell or Andruw Jones? There's been speculation that even Clemens has 'roided up, but Maddux obviously has not!

That's my problem. There is no way, and will never be a way, to determine who did what. The statistics exist in the context of the time and the players who played the game during that era, and McGwire's statistics are phenominal. There was no drug testing, and the one drug McGwire has admitted to taking, Andro, was a legal OTC supplement at that time.

Who took Andro? Who took Creatine? Who used The Creme or The Clear?

We'll never know.

I would add that I am of the opinion that it is hypocritical to enshrine known cheaters, ball doctoring pitchers, jackasses, and alcoholics, but to not allow Shoeless Joe, or Rose, and so on.

In the end, the name on the building is "Hall of Fame." It isn't the Hall of Great Statistics or the Hall of Model Citizens ... it's the Hall of Fame. If Mark McGwire is anything, he's certainly famous.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Much like Pete Rose, he's already in the Hall. ie bats, balls etc. from various milestones.

People always focus on the roids apparently taken by hitters. However, it's not like the pitchers aren't juiced as well. All things considered, the playing field was equal relative to itself. Can't say the roid era is fair to compare to the 1920s, but then no two eras are comparable. Anyway, cheating was alive and well in the 1920s. I don't hear anyone wondering if certain old timers should get their busts removed from Cooperstown because they were doctoring baseballs. Cheating is cheating. It's part of baseball. Like it or not.

 

[FCollinsBuckeye]

4192

 

[BB73]

I'm OK with McGwire in the Hall of Fame. He looked bad at the Congressional hearings, but he hasn't been found guilty of anything illegal or against baseball rules. As Dryden said, andro/creatine was OK in baseball when he was taking it.

But I'm also OK with not giving him the special honor of being voted in during his first year of eligibility, due to people having doubts about how he bulked up.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I should say, though, Sammy Sosa's cheating should keep him from the hall. If you need roids AND a corked bat, well... you're admitting you suck.

 

[Brutus1]

I can't stand Mcgwire. I'm an A's fan so screw him. That aside, I'd
say yes, he deserves in at some time.

He hit 49 dingers as a rookie. He was fairly skinny but had those
Paul Bunyon forearms.

Juice or not, you still need to hit the balls.

 

[OH10]

No. It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Shame.

Big Mac's only credentials for the Hall are his homer totals. And those are skewed by expansion, smaller parks, and steroids. He was, at best, a terrible fielder, couldn't hit for average, and a poor baserunner after his billion walks.

By all accounts, he appeared to be an ambassador of good will, but by failing to apologize and preach about the health dangers of steroids, that good will is canceled out.

Character and credibility have to count for something, but even if I just based his resume on his numbers, I wouldn't vote him in.

 

[Bucklion]

Much like Pete Rose, he's already in the Hall. ie bats, balls etc. from various milestones.

People always focus on the roids apparently taken by hitters. However, it's not like the pitchers aren't juiced as well. All things considered, the playing field was equal relative to itself. Can't say the roid era is fair to compare to the 1920s, but then no two eras are comparable. Anyway, cheating was alive and well in the 1920s. I don't hear anyone wondering if certain old timers should get their busts removed from Cooperstown because they were doctoring baseballs. Cheating is cheating. It's part of baseball. Like it or not.

Interesting point, and if you cancel the power numbers (strikeouts and home runs, for example) out then, McGwire has...1600 hits? Not even close to HOF. Unlike Bonds (who I also can't stand), without the extra HRs, McGwire is Rob Deer.

 

[Thump]

Hasn't been delcared to have done anything illegal.

 

[Brutus1]

Interesting point, and if you cancel the power numbers (strikeouts and home runs, for example) out then, McGwire has...1600 hits? Not even close to HOF. Unlike Bonds (who I also can't stand), without the extra HRs, McGwire is Rob Deer.

Take away his hr and he's lucky if he had 1000 hits.

 

[heisman]

If you say he doesn't belong because his numbers or talent are not worthy, then I have absolutely no problem with that. If you say no, because of some moral highground, then I have a big problem with that. I mean, if Gaylord Perry is in the HOF, how can we not have McGwire? Perry admitted to breaking the rules every time he pitched, while even if McGwire admitted to steroid use, he would not be cheating since baseball had no rules against it. Reeks of hypocrisy if you ask me.

 

[OH10]

If you say he doesn't belong because his numbers or talent are not worthy, then I have absolutely no problem with that. If you say no, because of some moral highground, then I have a big problem with that. I mean, if Gaylord Perry is in the HOF, how can we not have McGwire? Perry admitted to breaking the rules every time he pitched, while even if McGwire admitted to steroid use, he would not be cheating since baseball had no rules against it. Reeks of hypocrisy if you ask me.

What if I have a problem with Gaylord Perry being in the Hall of Fame? Can I use the moral highground then without being labeled a hypocrite?

See, I don't get the whole "there was no rule against it" argument. There was a LAW against it. Big Mac couldn't legally use steroids. So why should MLB have needed to fashion a rule against something you can't otherwise use under the law of the government? That's just redundant.

Furthermore, the prevalent use of steroids created a difficult situation for up-and-coming baseball players. If you want to compete and make it to big show, you could either accept the fact there you are on an uneven playing field because you don't want to take the health risks, OR you could take the health risks to even the field. That's the predicament guys like Big Mac and Sosa helped perpetuate. Maybe they weren't the first 'roid heads, but they were the most important. And the situation got worse as a result.

I believe the Hall of Fame should recognize those that had an extreme positive effect on the game based upon their accomplishments and achievements. So I don't know how a voter could not take into account the negative impact McGwire had on baseball.

 

[Thump]

What if I have a problem with Gaylord Perry being in the Hall of Fame? Can I use the moral highground then without being labeled a hypocrite?

See, I don't get the whole "there was no rule against it" argument. There was a LAW against it. Big Mac couldn't legally use steroids. So why should MLB have needed to fashion a rule against something you can't otherwise use under the law of the government? That's just redundant.

Furthermore, the prevalent use of steroids created a difficult situation for up-and-coming baseball players. If you want to compete and make it to big show, you could either accept the fact there you are on an uneven playing field because you don't want to take the health risks, OR you could take the health risks to even the field. That's the predicament guys like Big Mac and Sosa helped perpetuate. Maybe they weren't the first 'roid heads, but they were the most important. And the situation got worse as a result.

I believe the Hall of Fame should recognize those that had an extreme positive effect on the game based upon their accomplishments and achievements. So I don't know how a voter could not take into account the negative impact McGwire had on baseball.

Andro wasn't illegal.

Now if you are talking about other undisclosed roids, that's different.

One disadvantage that players today have over players over the past is the intense media scrutiny of their lives. Every detail is known unlike players of the past.

If Todd Walker farts in a restaurant, it's on the internet within 15 minutes.

I look at the Hall of Fame as players who excelled while bettering the game of baseball.

Does Mark McGwire fit that criteria, yes.

 

[JohnnyCockfight]

If McGwire hadn't done anything wrong then he would have been open about his past. He chose to speak at the hearings but then refused to really say anything. McGwire's choice to refuse to speak about his past could only mean one thing. If andro or creatine were indeed the issue and were the only supplements McGwire had taken, then why wouldn't he disclose that if they were allowed in MLB at the time he took them? Obviously, he was taking something else, something that gave him a competitive edge over others in the same league.

The baseball Hall of Fame is not a court of law--he doesn't need to be found guilty of the accusations against him beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't think the Hall of Fame should reward cheaters.

Having said that, if McGwire would fess up to exactly what he did, make a public apology about what he did (should the truth warrant an apology) and ask for forgiveness, then I would be open to the discussion of McGwire's place in the Hall of Fame. That scenario would place him in a much greater light than the several others who patently deny cheating when it is obvious that they did cheat. Perhaps it isn't a criterion for Hall of Fame selection, but these athletes set an example to be followed by kids around the world. Any athlete who encourages cheating or breaking the rules to get ahead should not be rewarded and held up on a pedestal.