First off let me just say that anyone who is on Facebook needs to become a fan of One-Nine Sports. It is run by a very intelligent sports man and personal friend Joe Al. It is a great way to debate and comment on everyday sporting topics.
Now for the post, Is anyone really surprised that Sammy Sosa was found guilty of doing steroids? I mean for a guy to stand in front of congress and say that he can not speak English when asked the question of whether or not he took them in the first place is lying. Did he think that because his lawyer said he didn't do them that he would avoid perjury? I mean not only did he test positive for steroids he used a corked bat more than once, even in that same season. Wow. Of all the names that I have heard this guy might be the least surprising of all of them. Moving on to a separate topic the conversation has come up as to whether or not Sammy Sosa and other convicted steroid users should be allowed to enter the Hall of Fame. In my personal opinion I believe that people like Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds and other people who fit this same profile should be allowed to go into the hall based upon their performance in a tainted era. Just because they got caught does not mean that they are the only people in the era who used PED's. For example a guy like Brady Anderson who was an average outfielder goes on to hit 50 home runs one season after not topping 21 in his career until that point or ever after that. Maybe he got better pitching, saw more fastballs or had a better hitter hitting behind him who knows but one tends to wonder about things and certain players who have never come up in PED conversation or positive tests. It is people like this who we assume did steroids or PED's that leave us open to attack when we make assumptions about other players. I do believe that cheating in the game is wrong and that there are different ways of cheating i.e. Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson. Those players statistically belong in the hall of fame but tainted the game by not playing on the level. Rose bet on his own team, and Shoeless Joe "threw" games in the 1919 World Series. Players who have been accused or have even been convicted of doing steroids may have helped themselves out but they did not lose a game on purpose or try to get a certain result out of a game. Steroids is not the be all end all of baseball either guys like the aforementioned Barry Bonds still have to hit a baseball and people like Clemens still have to be able to spot a fastball and mix up his pitches. It would not be fair to punish those guys just because they are the people who we believe did steroids or were convicted of doing PED's they were not alone, and these players still have to be good all around baseball players to put up the kind of numbers that would enter that player into the Hall of Fame discussion. A parting thought on this topic is the lack of testing prior to the 2003 "anonymous" testing that took place, in 1961 Roger Maris hit 61 home runs passing Babe Ruth's single season home run record. Other than 1961 Maris hit a season high of only 39 home runs which happened to be the year prior to hitting 61. Was he on steroids? or PED's? We will never know and that is why people should not penalize those who have been assumed or convicted of using. The whole era is tainted either way.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
i really enjoy your thoughts and theories on this topic. I agree with you completely on the fact that steriod users with outstanding statistical numbers (Bonds and Clemens) should be allowed in the hall of fame because your right, they still have to be able to perform. Just because they are on the juice does not mean a whole lot. Hitters still have to be able to hit the ball and pitchers still have to be able to get the ball over the plate. Sure, steriods are known for making you stronger, but they also help improve longevity (butchered the spelling on that). Hence why Clemens and Bonds continued to play into their early and mid 40's. But steriods affect everyone differently. Did it make Clemens throw harder, no. Clemens was always able to pump consistent mid to high 90's. Bonds in the early part of his career was an all around hitter who could hit the ball to all fields and put about 20-30 balls into the bleachers a season. Granted, in the late 90's and early 2000's Bonds was a completely different looking person (physically) from his days with the Pirates. Bonds strength grew tremendously in the latter part of his career, but he was still a great hitter. When the shift was on, he would go the opposite way. He had a great eye and good patient to earn a base on balls. So, yes, I agree with you that some of these players should still be in the hall of fame because of what they accomplished in the steriod era. They produced and changed the game (especially after the strike in '94) for the better. The steriod era help put people back in the seats at the ballparks.
ReplyDeleteOne other thing, your comment on Maris, true his 61 home run season was something else, maybe even questionable, but there are some things to look at. For most of the '61 season, Maris hit 3rd and Mantle 4th. Obviously pitchers would rather pitch to Maris than Mantle (even though he was injured or had some injury for most of the year). Mantle was respected and feared. Maris was just kid coming from Clevlend after the '59 season and even though he won the MVP in 1960, pitchers still would rather throw to Maris than Mantle. Also, in the old stadium, a left handed hitter with the short porch in right? Come on.
this was fun
by rich raymond
ReplyDelete