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

[tyrus]

"I did not have anabolic relations with those steroids."

 

[Bucklion]

Homers aren't enough? Are you serious? Of course homers are enough. As well they should be.

The point of baseball is to score runs. Why is the Home Run properly inflated as the important stat of baseball offense? Well, of all the categories that measure a how a run is created are encompassed in the HR. You get a Hit, a run and an RBI. It raises your .avg, you're OBP, your .slg... The only stat I can think of that the HR doesn't include in and of itself in terms of run creation is the stolen base, which of course, the HR itself, renders irrelevant. (The HR hitter need not steal a base to manufacture a run when he just hits the ball over the fence)

Lets contrast that with an obvious hall choice - Ty Cobb. (who, incidentally, is the career leader in Bill James' category "runs produced" which for some reason disregards the HR, and instead looks at Runs + RBI MINUS HR, which I don't understand... I can understand not counting HRs at all, in that the produced run is accounted for in the RBI, but subtracting them? That, to me, punishes power hitters for no reason... the run was still created)
Cobb hit 3,053 singles. Obviously, it's good to be on base, as it increases your chances of scoring. But, Cobb scored only 2,246 times. Obviously, he did not score only after hitting a single.... indeed, I know he stole home 50 times, and he hit 117 HRs (well, I don't know know, but you know what I mean) So... the most times he could have scored after a single is 2079. McGwire scored a run 100% of the time he hit a HR. 583 times. Cobb's singles? 68.1% of the time. A percentage that is actually less, considering the number of times he scored after hitting a double or a triple.
What I'm saying is, Cobb's singles hitting, while impressive and worthy, is -even at best - far less effective than the HR in the scoring of runs.

My point is that the HR is a critical stat in baseball as a measure of run production, not that Cobb didn't manufacture runs, or etc.. What I'm saying is, saying "He's just an HR hitter" as if that is some kind of knock misses the entire point of why they play the game, if you ask me.

HRs matter, but how much do they matter for HOF induction when the numbers are inflated as much as they are? Does Juan Gonzalez belong in the Hall of Fame? He hit a crap load several seasons. Cecil Fielder? I think the point several including me are trying to make is that HRs matter, but if that's all your HOF credentials are based on, and was a hell of a lot easier for McGwire to hit his 583 than it was for guys like Killebrew or Schmidt, is the HR level enough? What if McGriff had hit the final 9 to get to 500, would that guarantee him entry? Should it? What about Canseco? He hit less HRs, but his numbers in basically every other category are superior to McGwire's...yes, he admitted to using steroids, but since he was never caught when he played, should he be in too?

 

[CookyPuss]

I must have missed the breaking news where it was proved he doped. I thought this one thing we agreed on, that it we have no proof?

I am done. Everyone has their own opinion, and it doesnt seem any of us are willing to cmpromise, which is fine.

I will say this....IMO, his numbers are among the best ever and he belongs with the greats of the game. It is not my place or right to judge Mark McGwire who has never been convicted of any wrong-doing. He is a good guy from everything I have seen and read. He admitted to performing a completely legal act, using ANDRO...nothing more. And there is no proof he has done more than that.

I pretty much agree with this statement. McGwire didn't even hide the fact that he was using ANRO at the time (which from what I have read is a steroid LINK). So, yes, he did dope. It was not illegal at the time and the fact that he didn't hide it shows that he wasn't trying to "cheat." The fact he was using came out when a reporter saw it in his locker and asked about it. I don't see what good comes of punishing the guy for living within the rules of the time. I think that the stigma attached to those years by fans of the game is punishment enough. It will always be debated the impact that roids had on the game and hopefully this era will serve as learning for the future.

So, yeah, put in Mac, Sosa, Bonds. Palmerio is out. He was a borderling HOFer as was and he got caught after clear rules and testing were in play. F him. I don't think it is the job of the sports writers to rewrite history by leaving Mac out. You can't say "if there had been rules and testing McGwire wouldn't have put up HOF numbers." There weren't proper rules and testing and we have to live with it.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I agree that this is an emotional issue where opinions rarely change. But I will say this to the proof factor: Speak up Mark and stop punting. Did you use anabolic steroids?

His homers are not enough, considering everything associated with them.

Come on, SD... you should know better... innocent until proven guilty. It's not on McGwire to prove he did not use the juice. That's absurd. Fact is, the man never tested positive (Although, of course, he was never made to test.. BASEBALL's not McGwire's problem), and while he did admit to using a LEGAL supplement which later became illegal, fact is he did nothing wrong which has been documented and "proven."

Believe he was juiced if you want to. But, don't expect him to answer the question. I happen to believe Dubya was a coke fiend... but, he never answered the question, so it's really just my opinion. And yet, he's still President.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

HRs matter, but how much do they matter for HOF induction when the numbers are inflated as much as they are? Does Juan Gonzalez belong in the Hall of Fame? He hit a crap load several seasons. Cecil Fielder? I think the point several including me are trying to make is that HRs matter, but if that's all your HOF credentials are based on, and was a hell of a lot easier for McGwire to hit his 583 than it was for guys like Killebrew or Schmidt, is the HR level enough? What if McGriff had hit the final 9 to get to 500, would that guarantee him entry? Should it? What about Canseco? He hit less HRs, but his numbers in basically every other category are superior to McGwire's...yes, he admitted to using steroids, but since he was never caught when he played, should he be in too?

Yes. They should be in. (and I don't like either one of them, to be honest)

What you're saying is the HR is now discounted because so many people recently went over 500. Well, what about 3,000 Ks? For ... what.... 50 years it was Walter Johnson at 3,000 and NO ONE else... now, everyone and their brother has 3,000Ks... Friggin Phil Goddamned Nikro has 3,000 Ks. I don't give a shit, you strike out3,000, 4,000.. 5,714 people, and that's impressive and hall worthy. Era notwithstaning.

And, I should add, about McGwire's "easy road to 583" How about what the strike year and a foot back problem did to him from 1993 - 1994 9 HR both years, total of 74 Games Played ) ... And 1995 was a short season as well... 144 games as I recall. Mac still hit 39 (in 317 ABs) And something else I just thought of... Babe Ruth hit a crap load of Home Runs and all, but you talk about ease? How hard is it to hit dongs against a SP who's thrown 9 innings a game 50 times a year over a 314 foot fence when Lou Gehrig is protecting you in the lineup, when you compare that to the modern player who has to face a fresh arm every 3 - 5 innings with the likes of Ray Lankford, Brain Jordan, Carney Lansford, or Terry Steinbach protecting him? I'm not arguing we should discount Ruth, the guy was truly one of the top 5 players of all time... I'm just saying "easy" is in the eye of the beholder.

Finally, show me where McGwire started hitting the juice... What year did he leave looking like a scrawny weakling (with 49HR power) and come back a hulking mass capable of hitting 70? If you look, you'll see a natural progression in his body shape over time. The kind of thing I'd expect from some work in a professional organization's weight room. That, and getting his eyes fixed up in 92 to help him see the ball better account for his power in the mid to late 90s... not necessarily illegal drugs. Andro, which he admitted, was an over the counter supplement available at GNC for christ's sake. I'm no weight room rat, but from what I understand, it's not uncommon for dudes in the weight room to take a muscle recovery supplement and so forth.

A 34 year old Pitcher gains 5 - 7MPH on his fastball and no one cares... Mark McGwire hits a shit load of HRs against these same unbelievable pitchers who get faster as they age and hes the guilty one? Spare me.

 

[Buckin' A]

BKB- Us bottom feeders would appreciate it if you would handle this in a PM. Thank You.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

BKB- Us bottom feeders would appreciate it if you would handle this in a PM. Thank You.

 

[tyrus]

HRs matter, but how much do they matter for HOF induction when the numbers are inflated as much as they are? Does Juan Gonzalez belong in the Hall of Fame? He hit a crap load several seasons. Cecil Fielder? I think the point several including me are trying to make is that HRs matter, but if that's all your HOF credentials are based on, and was a hell of a lot easier for McGwire to hit his 583 than it was for guys like Killebrew or Schmidt, is the HR level enough? What if McGriff had hit the final 9 to get to 500, would that guarantee him entry? Should it? What about Canseco? He hit less HRs, but his numbers in basically every other category are superior to McGwire's...yes, he admitted to using steroids, but since he was never caught when he played, should he be in too?

LOLOL

Fielder hit 319 HRs!!! How can he be in the same sentence as McGwire?

Gonzalez had 434.

McGriff had 493, as you noted, but he did this in 2500 MORE ABs than McGwire.

You are hung up on 500 HRs. There has been 6 guys in the long history of baseball hit more HRs than him, 6. Era, parks, roids, whatever, that is impressive and he did this at a greater pace than any of them. Ruth and Bonds are the only ones close, and they are 2 of the best ever to put on a glove.

here are the ABs the 6 ahead of him had:

Aaron--12,364
Bonds--9507
Ruth---8398
Mays--10881
Sosa--8401
Robinson--10006

McGwire--6187

Everyone of these guys had atleast 2000 more ABs than him. That is 4 seasons full of swings. And as I have said earlier and BKB just pointed out, Some of these guys saw 1 pitcher a game. There were no specialist, so an argument could be made that this fact could cancel out your small park theory. I dont by the expansion thing. The less teams there are, the more times you face the same pitcher....the more often a hitter sees a pitcher, the more familiar he is with him. Advantage, pitcher. Now, with more competition, you face guys less, so you arent as familiar with their release points, tendancies, pop, break adn bite on their pitches.

You are hung up on 500, which is actually 583 (much closer to 600 since we want to play that game in the McGriff and Gonzo references) but you have to recognize he did it in a more impressive fashion than anyone else (numbers wise)

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Crime dog had 2500 MORE ABS.. not less. Know that's what you meant, but that's not what I read.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

And, before I turn in for the night, I was thinking about the "ease" of today's Home Run hitters over yesterdays.....

Today we have a game specifically designed to increase offense. People pay for home runs. So, what do we see? We see brand spankin new balls put in play every 2 or 3 pitches (or so it seems) Ball hit the dirt? Throw in a fresh one....

We see parks that are smaller
We see a center field that has a dark color so the hitter can pick up the ball better.
A lower mound
We have baseballs that are wound to exacting specifications.... (Live balls)

just a few things off the top of my head.

 

[Bucklion]

I'M hung up on 500? It seems like everyone is hung up on 500. One of my major points is that 500 HRs used to be a "benchmark" for hall worthiness. Now it isn't, in my view, in the juice era. OK, so not many people have more than McGwire...yet. But there will be a lot more people who reach, approach, pass, and exceed it that started playing right around the time he finished.

And spare me the injury argument. Jeeesus, if that's not a reach, I don't know what is. If Griffey kept from tearing all his hamstrings every year, maybe he would end up hitting 1000 home runs, if Gayle Sayers stayed healthy, he might have rushed for 30,000 yards...what's your point? If people want to mock the "take away McGwire's HRs and look what you have" argument, then you certainly can't cling to this one either.

I brought up Fielder because everyone made a huge deal when he hit 50 in 1990...he was the second player (with George Foster) to hit 50 home runs since 1965. 1965! He hit 44 the following year (also leading the league) and finished 2nd in the MVP voting both seasons. Foster won the MVP when he hit 52. Brady Anderson, by contrast, hit 50 in 1996 and barely cracked the top 10 in the MVP voting. Why would that be?

So some can discount the obvious, and swear up and down that it was "harder" to hit the home runs in the 1990s because you don't "buy" the stadium and pitching and expansion arguments, but the FACTS are that from 1966 to 1995 exactly two players hit 50 home runs...one time each. The LEAGUE LEADERS from 1982 to 1995 hit 40 home runs or less 16 times...out of a possible 28 when counting both leagues. After 1995, miraculously apparently, the league leaders hit 50 or more 10 times out of 20. Out of those 20 (10 years, 2 leagues), the leader hit 47 or more 19/20 times...and hit over 60 3 times. If you don't think that indicates that home runs were more prevalent, then I don't know what to say.

So worship McGwire if you want...do I think he "did it more impressively that anyone else?" Well, he did have bigger arms I guess...

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Griff and Sayers are both in their Halls of Fame (or will be)

Why didn't Brady Anderson win the MVP? Because Brady Anderson fuckin sucks. :p Plus, Juan Gonzalez had 47 HR, 144RBI and hit .314 which outpaced Anderson quite a bit.

 

[OH10]

Come on, SD... you should know better... innocent until proven guilty. It's not on McGwire to prove he did not use the juice. That's absurd. Fact is, the man never tested positive (Although, of course, he was never made to test.. BASEBALL's not McGwire's problem), and while he did admit to using a LEGAL supplement which later became illegal, fact is he did nothing wrong which has been documented and "proven."

Believe he was juiced if you want to. But, don't expect him to answer the question. I happen to believe Dubya was a coke fiend... but, he never answered the question, so it's really just my opinion. And yet, he's still President.

This isn't a court of law, and I'm not asking McGwire to lose anything he already has. The Hall of Fame is a privilege, and the criteria as subjective as it gets. Therefore, I think subjective belief as to his guilt is fair game.

And I think W was a Coke fiend too. But then again, I don't think using Coke gave him a competitive advantage over his political opponents. Al Gore and John Kerry did that by themselves.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

This isn't a court of law, and I'm not asking McGwire to lose anything he already has. The Hall of Fame is a privilege, and the criteria as subjective as it gets. Therefore, I think subjective belief as to his guilt is fair game.

And I think W was a Coke fiend too. But then again, I don't think using Coke gave him a competitive advantage over his political opponents. Al Gore and John Kerry did that by themselves.

I realize that. What I was driving at was more in terms of your demand that he prove he didn't juice.... or, "answer the question" I don't think that's fair, and it doesn't matter if I'm in a court room or not, I try not to make people prove the negative.

 

[scooter1369]

The short concise answer is "yes". McGwire belongs in the HOF.