Pete Rose in the HOF? Yes or no?

Uhh ... more than half of all the 50-home run seasons in baseball history have come since 1995. That's 21 of the 39 all time, including the top 6 highest single-season totals ever.

And it's not only the 50-HR club that's been booming. More guys are hitting 20, 30 and 40 than ever before, too.

So what do you mean the numbers haven't skyrocketed? Of course they have.

 

What he said for the rest of it. I was specifically answering the final question -- why aren't there 25 or 30 members in the 50 home run club each year? -- with my response.

 

So throw them out.

 

OK.

 

No doubt — he should be in.

 

You are aware that Rose's accomplishments are noted in the Hall of Fame?

It's not like there's no mention of him.

 

Absolutely no.

And to the people who say he's being ignored in the HOF ... bullshit. Have you been to the HOF? They have Rose artifacts -- or did the numerous times I've been there. They acknowledge his existence and accomplishments. They just don't give him the highest honor you can give somebody in baseball.

So it's a hollow argument. They're not pulling and Orwellian 1984 whitewash.

 

That has been mentioned, yes.

 

If Pete gets in, Joe Jackson should be in.

 

Put 'em both in.

 

he not only bet on the game, but he bet on games he pulled strings in. i not only hope he doesn't ever sniff the HOF, i also hope he burns in hell.

 

Point of order: At this point, it's 745.

Hand-eye: I would submit that it really was no different. Only three times between 1986 and 2001 did he strike out more than 90 times. In this era, that's making a lot of contact. During the same period, he hit .300 six times and led the league in walks seven times. Plus, it is not unsual for hitters to mature as they get older. Look at the difference between Jeff Francoeur last year and this year. It's a simple matter of plate discipline. If you strike out a lot, somewhere in there you've swung at significant numbers of bad pitches.

The added strength generates a lot of things. Doubles turn into home runs, but so, too, do some balls that before were caught on the warning track. I'm convinced of that. Outfielders play deeper, so balls are more likely to fall in front of them for singles, not to mention between the. Or at least, that's the theory, and I can see the logic. The deeper you go, the more room there is to cover. For me, the salient argument is that the extra strength he gets from the workout regimen facilitated by steroids gives him greater margin for error in terms of point of contact; it effectively expands the "sweet spot" on the bat.

On topic, you can contrast that with Rose, who merelyinfluenced the outcome. Bonds and the others who have used steroids have changed the outcome.