Maddux, Glavine, Thomas elected to Baseball Hall of Fame; Biggio just misses

Mauve_Avenger · Nov 29, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

outofplace said:

Mauve_Avenger said:

outofplace said:

Mauve_Avenger said:

outofplace said:

Mauve_Avenger said:

outofplace said:

Mauve_Avenger said:

outofplace said:

With all due respect, Mauve, there are some significant holes in your argument.

One is making far to many assumptions based on age. There is certainly evidence out there against Bonds, but comparing his numbers after 35 to Ruth's is a terrible argument. Ruth was known for his lack of conditioning. More importantly, players in Ruth's time did not have the equipment, training methods and legal supplements to their health that Bonds was able to use to his advantage.

I'm not saying Bonds didn't use illegal means as well. I'm saying that the comparison you chose isn't nearly good enough to prove that.

Also, what about the accusations that Ruth used a corked bat? I'm not sure it has ever been clearly proven, but that doesn't seem to stop the PED accusations being applied to so many steroid era players.
Click to expand...

So basically Bonds' numbers don't seem suspicious to you? Is that your point?
Click to expand...

Not even close to my point. I know I say this a lot, but that was one hell of a failure in reading comprehension on your part.

The Ruth comparison doesn't work because there are other factors in their career trajectories. That's the problem with so many people like you trying to draw conclusions based on incomplete evidence. You just don't care how far you have to stretch and you constantly confuse opinion and fact.
Click to expand...

Maybe I am having trouble comprehending what you are saying because you don't seem to really have a point other then to crap on my numbers theory. You said in your original post that Bonds could have taken PEDs, but now you are saying it is a stretch to question the monster numbers he put up at the end of his career.

That's why I asked whether you think Bonds took PEDs or not, a question you really haven't answered. I am trying to figure out if people actually doubt that Bonds took something, or if they are just turning a blind eye from the problem.
Click to expand...

Nope, it is a failing on your part. I've explained it to you twice and you can't keep up.

You are trying to use a comparison of the career arcs of Babe Ruth and Barry Bonds as evidence that Bonds used PEDs. Even if you compared Bonds to a player in the modern era, that would be flawed evidence at best. The sample size is too small and it could just be one body aging better than another.

But it is even worse when you use Ruth for the reasons I explained. Ruth was known for not taking proper care of his body. Bonds was the exact opposite. Bonds also had training methods, equipment and legal supplements that Ruth could have only dreamed of, so of course Bonds would age better.

That's the point. There is certainly evidence that Bonds used. He did, in his own screwy way, admit to unknowingly using something. That doesn't make your comparison to Ruth useful. It isn't.

Regarding whether or not I think Bonds used, I leave the speculation to others. There are far too many people willing to pass judgement based on educated guesswork. I am not willing to do that. I'd say that "confession" deserves closer scrutiny because it is the most damning evidence, but even that isn't clear.
Click to expand...

I understand crystal clear. You are an expert on why my theory is flawed, but you don't have the stones to give me a straight answer on what you think is going on.

This kind of whining accomplishes nothing.
Click to expand...

Learn to read. I've made it very clear what I think of people making judgements they can't back up with solid evidence. For me to turn around and make such a judgement would be hypocritical.

Any chance you will admit the massive holes in your theory?
Click to expand...

I never said my theory was perfect, but the writing is on the wall here with Bonds. If you want a full confession from every player before you believe they used, that is your business.
Click to expand...

Failed drug tests work, too. You know, actual evidence rather than guesswork.

Far better than setting the standard of proof at the level of educated guess, which is what you want to do.

Your theory isn't just not perfect. It doesn't work at all.
Click to expand...

So Bonds' obstruction of justice conviction and his BALCO involvement are all fabricated? You would have to be insane to believe Bonds is clean. The writing is on the wall here.

Joe Williams · Nov 29, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

outofplace said:

Joe Williams said:

I'm keeping my ballot out of this forum this year, because of some folks' tone and refusal to respect differing opinions.

But I hate that the "first year of eligibility" thing became a thing, because once it did, it became a thing for some voters to protect.

I think the 15-year eligibility period is a good thing because of the context it allows. Some players are so clearly deserving that they go in right away. Others look better over time, as their careers get compared to more recent players. And I maintain that waiting while PED suspicions are sorted out is legitimate, since we're given the time in the first place.

I've always figured there were some voters who don't want anyone to be elected unanimously. I also assume there are the "first-year" guardians. They aren't necessarily the same voters. Only those with a chance at unanimity would summon the first group to action, while only those who might not be slam-dunk HOFers would stir the second group. Probably there's some overlap. It's possible there are those who figure Maddux will make it and will vote for 10 others.

But overall, the anti-unanimity and anti-first-year groups are small and only a part of the many agendas voters bring to this process. We're learning more about the anti-DH bloc in recent years. And there's some schisming between the analytics folks and those who still talk "eye test." Haven't budged that far from the anti-relief pitching bias either.

I don't see any great injustices at this point. No obviously deserving player I"m aware of has had his 15 years of eligibility lapse, without making the Hall, for a truly unfair or wrong reason. (Rose has never been on the ballot, and I've actually softened on him lately since he's served more time than most felons.)
Click to expand...

Yes, we are aware that you are perfectly comfortable with voters misusing or abusing their vote. You have made that abundantly clear many times over.

And now you are softening on Rose? He bet on baseball. He broke the most important rule in the game and he lied about it for YEARS. He did far more to compromise the integrity of the game than any of the PED users you are so desperate to punish. To say he should get in but somebody like Bagwell or Piazza, who you can't even prove did anything wrong, should not simply makes you look like a hypocrite.

But hey, you found an excuse to justify not having the guts to post your vote, so congratulations on that.
Click to expand...

I haven't found an excuse. You have provided it, over and over, through your immature ravings and attacks on me and on others here. Though I might wait until I sense you're having a particularly good day and share my ballot then, just to elicit your predictable response.

As for voters "misusing or abusing votes," I'm not comfortable with it but I don't spin out of control over it. The electorate is big enough to overcome such votes, unless you want to obsess over stuff that most people consider trivial (unanimity, first-year, etc). Who has been kept out of the Hall to the point of falling off the ballot due to those who misuse or abuse? Who has gotten in due to those same voters? I'd say no one at this point. You're flexing a whole lot of resentment for some pretty minor ills.

We get it, outofplace. You don't like the system. But if it were up to you, there would be no "voting." It would all be automatic thresholds or other statistical triggers, little or no subjectivity. Or maybe you personally would just want to dictate who gets in or doesn't.

JC · Nov 30, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

Thank god for you and the other keepers of the game. Whatever would we do without you.

3_Octave_Fart · Nov 30, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

Yeah, we really need Tim Marchman on that wall.
I don't know whose recent pomposity is more unbearable - the BBWAA or Deadspin's.
A stodgy chowder club vs. a coterie of stunted adolescents.
In a way they deserve each other as adversaries.

outofplace · Nov 30, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

Mauve_Avenger said:

outofplace said:

Mauve_Avenger said:

outofplace said:

Mauve_Avenger said:

outofplace said:

Mauve_Avenger said:

outofplace said:

Mauve_Avenger said:

outofplace said:

With all due respect, Mauve, there are some significant holes in your argument.

One is making far to many assumptions based on age. There is certainly evidence out there against Bonds, but comparing his numbers after 35 to Ruth's is a terrible argument. Ruth was known for his lack of conditioning. More importantly, players in Ruth's time did not have the equipment, training methods and legal supplements to their health that Bonds was able to use to his advantage.

I'm not saying Bonds didn't use illegal means as well. I'm saying that the comparison you chose isn't nearly good enough to prove that.

Also, what about the accusations that Ruth used a corked bat? I'm not sure it has ever been clearly proven, but that doesn't seem to stop the PED accusations being applied to so many steroid era players.
Click to expand...

So basically Bonds' numbers don't seem suspicious to you? Is that your point?
Click to expand...

Not even close to my point. I know I say this a lot, but that was one hell of a failure in reading comprehension on your part.

The Ruth comparison doesn't work because there are other factors in their career trajectories. That's the problem with so many people like you trying to draw conclusions based on incomplete evidence. You just don't care how far you have to stretch and you constantly confuse opinion and fact.
Click to expand...

Maybe I am having trouble comprehending what you are saying because you don't seem to really have a point other then to crap on my numbers theory. You said in your original post that Bonds could have taken PEDs, but now you are saying it is a stretch to question the monster numbers he put up at the end of his career.

That's why I asked whether you think Bonds took PEDs or not, a question you really haven't answered. I am trying to figure out if people actually doubt that Bonds took something, or if they are just turning a blind eye from the problem.
Click to expand...

Nope, it is a failing on your part. I've explained it to you twice and you can't keep up.

You are trying to use a comparison of the career arcs of Babe Ruth and Barry Bonds as evidence that Bonds used PEDs. Even if you compared Bonds to a player in the modern era, that would be flawed evidence at best. The sample size is too small and it could just be one body aging better than another.

But it is even worse when you use Ruth for the reasons I explained. Ruth was known for not taking proper care of his body. Bonds was the exact opposite. Bonds also had training methods, equipment and legal supplements that Ruth could have only dreamed of, so of course Bonds would age better.

That's the point. There is certainly evidence that Bonds used. He did, in his own screwy way, admit to unknowingly using something. That doesn't make your comparison to Ruth useful. It isn't.

Regarding whether or not I think Bonds used, I leave the speculation to others. There are far too many people willing to pass judgement based on educated guesswork. I am not willing to do that. I'd say that "confession" deserves closer scrutiny because it is the most damning evidence, but even that isn't clear.
Click to expand...

I understand crystal clear. You are an expert on why my theory is flawed, but you don't have the stones to give me a straight answer on what you think is going on.

This kind of whining accomplishes nothing.
Click to expand...

Learn to read. I've made it very clear what I think of people making judgements they can't back up with solid evidence. For me to turn around and make such a judgement would be hypocritical.

Any chance you will admit the massive holes in your theory?
Click to expand...

I never said my theory was perfect, but the writing is on the wall here with Bonds. If you want a full confession from every player before you believe they used, that is your business.
Click to expand...

Failed drug tests work, too. You know, actual evidence rather than guesswork.

Far better than setting the standard of proof at the level of educated guess, which is what you want to do.

Your theory isn't just not perfect. It doesn't work at all.
Click to expand...

So Bonds' obstruction of justice conviction and his BALCO involvement are all fabricated? You would have to be insane to believe Bonds is clean. The writing is on the wall here.
Click to expand...

I just explained my approach to you. It is not my fault if you are too stupid to understand it or too stubborn to accept it.

outofplace · Nov 30, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

Joe Williams said:

outofplace said:

Joe Williams said:

I'm keeping my ballot out of this forum this year, because of some folks' tone and refusal to respect differing opinions.

But I hate that the "first year of eligibility" thing became a thing, because once it did, it became a thing for some voters to protect.

I think the 15-year eligibility period is a good thing because of the context it allows. Some players are so clearly deserving that they go in right away. Others look better over time, as their careers get compared to more recent players. And I maintain that waiting while PED suspicions are sorted out is legitimate, since we're given the time in the first place.

I've always figured there were some voters who don't want anyone to be elected unanimously. I also assume there are the "first-year" guardians. They aren't necessarily the same voters. Only those with a chance at unanimity would summon the first group to action, while only those who might not be slam-dunk HOFers would stir the second group. Probably there's some overlap. It's possible there are those who figure Maddux will make it and will vote for 10 others.

But overall, the anti-unanimity and anti-first-year groups are small and only a part of the many agendas voters bring to this process. We're learning more about the anti-DH bloc in recent years. And there's some schisming between the analytics folks and those who still talk "eye test." Haven't budged that far from the anti-relief pitching bias either.

I don't see any great injustices at this point. No obviously deserving player I"m aware of has had his 15 years of eligibility lapse, without making the Hall, for a truly unfair or wrong reason. (Rose has never been on the ballot, and I've actually softened on him lately since he's served more time than most felons.)
Click to expand...

Yes, we are aware that you are perfectly comfortable with voters misusing or abusing their vote. You have made that abundantly clear many times over.

And now you are softening on Rose? He bet on baseball. He broke the most important rule in the game and he lied about it for YEARS. He did far more to compromise the integrity of the game than any of the PED users you are so desperate to punish. To say he should get in but somebody like Bagwell or Piazza, who you can't even prove did anything wrong, should not simply makes you look like a hypocrite.

But hey, you found an excuse to justify not having the guts to post your vote, so congratulations on that.
Click to expand...

I haven't found an excuse. You have provided it, over and over, through your immature ravings and attacks on me and on others here. Though I might wait until I sense you're having a particularly good day and share my ballot then, just to elicit your predictable response.

As for voters "misusing or abusing votes," I'm not comfortable with it but I don't spin out of control over it. The electorate is big enough to overcome such votes, unless you want to obsess over stuff that most people consider trivial (unanimity, first-year, etc). Who has been kept out of the Hall to the point of falling off the ballot due to those who misuse or abuse? Who has gotten in due to those same voters? I'd say no one at this point. You're flexing a whole lot of resentment for some pretty minor ills.

We get it, outofplace. You don't like the system. But if it were up to you, there would be no "voting." It would all be automatic thresholds or other statistical triggers, little or no subjectivity. Or maybe you personally would just want to dictate who gets in or doesn't.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm having a good time now watching you squirm and cry about being persecuted around here, but that still doesn't change things. You obviously can't handle criticism of your ballot, so you use me as an excuse to hold it back. I find that kind of cowardice on a message board very funny,.

You constantly defend the misuse of votes, which would be a damn odd thing to do if you really weren't comfortable with it.

Why do we have to wait until somebody deserving fails to get in before we fix the flaws in the system? Just to spare the egos of voters like you who can't handle the criticism? Sorry, but that isn't a good enough reason.

And your last paragraph? Well, you are apparently very comfortable with making things up. Where did I propose forcing my view of how voting should go on anybody? Nowhere. I'm simply stating my opinion and calling y'all out on your bullshit.

My issue isn't with subjectivity or voting. My issue is with people like you that are so desperate to punish PED users that you are willing to punish the innocent along with the guilty.

MisterCreosote · Nov 30, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

Dick Whitman · Nov 30, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

I've said this a million times on here: I'm not sure what all the outrage is for regarding the BBWAA's process. There are a significant number of voters. You're bound to have a few contrarians and morons slip in. It all comes out in the wash.

I'm sure someone has some theory as to why Greg Maddux doesn't belong in the HOF. I'm also quite certain it's ridiculous. But do we really want to advocate staunching unpopular opinion completely? The vote's a microcosm of America, really. The voices in the wilderness will be drowned out if their ideas are not worthwhile. And if they are worthwhile, they will eventually stick. And sometimes they have.

Gold · Nov 30, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

Della9250 said:

heyabbott said:

23 voters chose to ignore Willie Mays; in 1966 there were 20 who ignored Ted Williams; in 1969 there were 23 who ignored Stan Musial; in 1955 there were 28 who ignored Joe DiMaggio, 45 who ignored Frank Robinson and 9 members ignored Hank Aaron.

BBWAA s a fraud and the members are insufferably arrogant and ignorant
Click to expand...

Not only that, but DiMaggio was elected in his third year on the ballot. He got 44.3 percent (behind 8 guys) in 1953. He got to 69.4 percent the next year (behind Maranville, Dickey and Terry) and then was elected with 88.8 percent.
Click to expand...

I believe in DiMaggio's time, the procedure was different. I read about this one time but I can't recall what it was. Bill James may have written something about it. If the current rules were in effect, DiMaggio would wait five years and probably be a first-ballot selection.

I wonder if some of the voters might just absent-mindedly forget to choose a Hank Aaron - they don't even think about Aaron, look to other candidates to consider, and then forget to check or write-in Aaron's name.

outofplace · Nov 30, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

Dick Whitman said:

I've said this a million times on here: I'm not sure what all the outrage is for regarding the BBWAA's process. There are a significant number of voters. You're bound to have a few contrarians and morons slip in. It all comes out in the wash.

I'm sure someone has some theory as to why Greg Maddux doesn't belong in the HOF. I'm also quite certain it's ridiculous. But do we really want to advocate staunching unpopular opinion completely? The vote's a microcosm of America, really. The voices in the wilderness will be drowned out if their ideas are not worthwhile. And if they are worthwhile, they will eventually stick. And sometimes they have.
Click to expand...

Nobody is saying they can't have unpopular opinions. That is another strawman constructed by you, but we're used to that misleading crap coming from your posts.

That said, those voices should be held accountable, and in some cases, they step so far outside the bounds of what is appropriate that they need to be stripped of their votes. The jackass selling his vote to Deadspin is a prime example. I don't care if he or she is trying to make a point, to agree to do it in that way, selling it, is inexcusable.

The number of voters abusing the privilege so they can punish PED users, even those they aren't sure are guilty, is more than just a few contrarians and morons.

Della9250 · Dec 1, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

Gold said:

Della9250 said:

heyabbott said:

23 voters chose to ignore Willie Mays; in 1966 there were 20 who ignored Ted Williams; in 1969 there were 23 who ignored Stan Musial; in 1955 there were 28 who ignored Joe DiMaggio, 45 who ignored Frank Robinson and 9 members ignored Hank Aaron.

BBWAA s a fraud and the members are insufferably arrogant and ignorant
Click to expand...

Not only that, but DiMaggio was elected in his third year on the ballot. He got 44.3 percent (behind 8 guys) in 1953. He got to 69.4 percent the next year (behind Maranville, Dickey and Terry) and then was elected with 88.8 percent.
Click to expand...

I believe in DiMaggio's time, the procedure was different. I read about this one time but I can't recall what it was. Bill James may have written something about it. If the current rules were in effect, DiMaggio would wait five years and probably be a first-ballot selection.

I wonder if some of the voters might just absent-mindedly forget to choose a Hank Aaron - they don't even think about Aaron, look to other candidates to consider, and then forget to check or write-in Aaron's name.
Click to expand...

Even with the lack of a five-year waiting period, DiMaggio still shouldn't have had to wait three tries. Here is the voting for those first two years. Explain to me how DiMaggio, who was revered by the same writers just years before, thought players like Rabitt Maranville and Dazzy Vance and Ted Lyons were more worthy of votes.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1953.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1954.shtml

Dick Whitman · Dec 1, 2013

Re: 2014 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame ballot released

outofplace said:

Dick Whitman said:

I've said this a million times on here: I'm not sure what all the outrage is for regarding the BBWAA's process. There are a significant number of voters. You're bound to have a few contrarians and morons slip in. It all comes out in the wash.

I'm sure someone has some theory as to why Greg Maddux doesn't belong in the HOF. I'm also quite certain it's ridiculous. But do we really want to advocate staunching unpopular opinion completely? The vote's a microcosm of America, really. The voices in the wilderness will be drowned out if their ideas are not worthwhile. And if they are worthwhile, they will eventually stick. And sometimes they have.
Click to expand...

Nobody is saying they can't have unpopular opinions. That is another strawman constructed by you, but we're used to that misleading crap coming from your posts.

That said, those voices should be held accountable, and in some cases, they step so far outside the bounds of what is appropriate that they need to be stripped of their votes. The jackass selling his vote to Deadspin is a prime example. I don't care if he or she is trying to make a point, to agree to do it in that way, selling it, is inexcusable.

The number of voters abusing the privilege so they can punish PED users, even those they aren't sure are guilty, is more than just a few contrarians and morons.
Click to expand...

I'll give you the Deadspin guy. But the PED holdouts are being perfectly reasonable. They have a long time to let these chips fall. Compare to Jameis Winston. Think Heisman voters would like some more time? I get that it's different because it's a law enforcement thing. On the other hand, these guys covered Bagwell and Piazza. As well as your uber-martyr Barry Bonds. They feel more comfortable waiting on those guys, having walked among them for 15 years. They aren't abusing anything. They want to get it right. They are actually taking the privilege seriously, despite Tommy Craggs's unquenchable desire to vote in Arnold Schwarzenegger, Hulk Hogan, and the East German women's swimming team.

Log in or Sign up

Maddux, Glavine, Thomas elected to Baseball Hall of Fame; Biggio just misses

Who will be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame this year?

Jeff Bagwell

Craig Biggio

Barry Bonds

Roger Clemens

Tom Glavine

Jeff Kent

Greg Maddux

Edgar Martinez

Don Mattingly

Fred McGriff

Mark McGwire

Jack Morris

Mike Mussina

Rafael Palmeiro

Mike Piazza

Tim Raines

Curt Schilling

Lee Smith

Sammy Sosa

Frank Thomas

Alan Trammell

Larry Walker

Mauve_Avenger Member

Joe Williams Well-Known Member

JC Well-Known Member

3_Octave_Fart Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

Gold Active Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

Della9250 Well-Known Member

Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Maddux, Glavine, Thomas elected to Baseball Hall of Fame; Biggio just misses

Who will be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame this year?

Jeff Bagwell

Craig Biggio

Barry Bonds

Roger Clemens

Tom Glavine

Jeff Kent

Greg Maddux

Edgar Martinez

Don Mattingly

Fred McGriff

Mark McGwire

Jack Morris

Mike Mussina

Rafael Palmeiro

Mike Piazza

Tim Raines

Curt Schilling

Lee Smith

Sammy Sosa

Frank Thomas

Alan Trammell

Larry Walker

Mauve_Avenger Member

Joe Williams Well-Known Member

JC Well-Known Member

3_Octave_Fart Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

Gold Active Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

Della9250 Well-Known Member

Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches