Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Thu Jul 31, 2014 10:30 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:43 pm
Posts: 4771
Location: Omaha, NE via Sioux City, Kansas City, and Chicago
I'm assuming Bonds doesn't get in this go-around. Do you think MLB would want Bonds to go in with a Pirates cap? This would be a pre-steroid era tribute.

_________________
North Dakota State Bison (0-0) at Iowa State Cyclones (0-0)
Jack Trice Stadium
August 30, 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:50 pm
Posts: 3879
Location: Glenshaw, PA
IA Pirate wrote:
I'm assuming Bonds doesn't get in this go-around. Do you think MLB would want Bonds to go in with a Pirates cap? This would be a pre-steroid era tribute.


No chance.

_________________
Well NH did get Cutch signed, but what have you done for me lately?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:35 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm
Posts: 6169
Nobody was elected. Bonds got 36.2% of the votes. Clemens, 37%. Jack Morris should have been elected. Just ask Sparky Anderson. Saw an interview with him previous to him passing and he was all over it that Morris should be in the Hall. I can take that as a ringing endorsement. 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Apparently the BBWA completely ignored the fact that the HOF includes a significant number of cheaters, drug-users, and other miscreants.

From Deadspin:
Quote:
Barry Bonds. The AP conducted a straw poll of 112 BBWAA voters (there are more than 600 in total), and found that Bonds has only 45 percent support. Yes, it's about the steroids, and the integrity of the game, and we presume those voters also want to vacate all the championships from that era because they weren't won on an even playing field.

Bonds has no chance of getting in this year, even though he never tested positive for PED use, was not convicted of perjury charges relating to his BALCO involvement, and was one of baseball's best players even before he grew into a hulk. Voters leaving him off their ballots will feel a large amount of unearned smugness.

http://deadspin.com/5965578/a-guide-to- ... irculation

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:38 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm
Posts: 6169
So you would vote for him? :shock: :shock: :shock: :? :? :?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Az Bucco fan wrote:
So you would vote for him? :shock: :shock: :shock: :? :? :?

The best hitter in baseball? Yeah, I would.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 7:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:00 am
Posts: 3083
Willton wrote:
The best hitter in baseball? Yeah, I would.


Seconded.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 7:20 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 9:46 am
Posts: 1926
He was a hall of famer before he began taking PED's. But he cheated once his body began to break down. I'm unsettled on what decision to make.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 7:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 4841
Location: Pittsburgh
Az Bucco fan wrote:
Nobody was elected. Bonds got 36.2% of the votes. Clemens, 37%. Jack Morris should have been elected. Just ask Sparky Anderson. Saw an interview with him previous to him passing and he was all over it that Morris should be in the Hall. I can take that as a ringing endorsement. 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)

Those percentages tell me that Bonds and Clemens both get in eventually.

I don't see Morris as anything more than a good pitcher. I don't think he's close to being a HOFer.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:43 pm
Posts: 4771
Location: Omaha, NE via Sioux City, Kansas City, and Chicago
I would absolutely vote for the steriod-era players. The only person that shouldn't be allowed in the HOF is Bud Selig. Under his supervision he allowed the players to do whatever they wanted. The inmates ran the asylum. Think about it, what is the Hall of Fame? It's a museum. The baseball writers act like they are voting on who goes to heaven and who goes to hell. They are voting on a bronze plaque, that's it. Selig turned away while players used drugs while the product on the field became as popular as ever. I don't fault the players at all.

_________________
North Dakota State Bison (0-0) at Iowa State Cyclones (0-0)
Jack Trice Stadium
August 30, 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:17 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm
Posts: 6169
I am watching mlb tonight and they made the case for Morris and then compared 6 other pitchers with comparable numbers. One of my all time favorites, Mickey Lolich actually had better numbers AND pitched 3 complete game victories in the WS. 68 I believe but could be wrong on the year. How about that performance.... 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:30 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:27 am
Posts: 1349
Location: Eastern Shore
sisyphus wrote:
Those percentages tell me that Bonds and Clemens both get in eventually.

I don't see Morris as anything more than a good pitcher. I don't think he's close to being a HOFer.

While I am implacably opposed to Bonds, Clemens, and Pete Rose ever entering the Hall, I think you are right about Clemens and Bonds. There are literally eons of time for BBWAA writers to fold and let them in.

As for Morris, he was fun to watch. On his best day, I kind of imagined I was seeing what Bob Gibson might have been like. Rather than being a great pitcher, Morris had the right mental makeup to be the staff leader. And he did pitch the best ever WS series that I've ever seen. So, given the paucity of inductees the past couple of years, he's by default in the conversation. But you're right. He shouldn't be...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
The MLB Network guys have been touting Jack Morris non-stop with nonsensical arguments all week long. The most fervent, and thus the most nonsensical, is Mitch Williams, who I heard on MLB Network Radio state (I'm paraphrasing), "A pitcher's job is not about preventing runs; it's about winning the game." Hey, Mitch: if a pitcher's job is not to prevent runs, then what the f*** is he doing on the mound? The whole act of pitching is done while the team is on defense; what else is there to do other than record outs and prevent runs?

I give credit to Morris for being a very good pitcher for a long time, but the HOF is supposed to be reserved for truly great players, and the only thing truly great about Morris was his stamina and his ability to go deep into games. His win total is a product of him pitching on teams with great offenses. He's the anti-Bert Blyleven.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 1:33 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:30 pm
Posts: 6169
He is right though...It is about winning the game....I am backing off my Morris HOF endorsement....I want Mickey Lolich.....who by the way was on a bike for "1 hour after every game....pitching or not......" Leon Brown, former MLB....to my face....son Channing was Sr. when No. 1 son was a Fr. at Marcos de Niza. They faced each other last summer in Ind. Freedom Pro League. Leon is a hoot. He and fellow MLB alumni guys do clinics for all LL around Tempe for last 12-13 years..Derry native, Lou Klimchock, is MLB alum. President..


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 1:47 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Az Bucco fan wrote:
He is right though...It is about winning the game.

On the whole, yes, it is about winning the game. But pitchers don't win games; teams do. Pitchers can only contribute their efforts in helping the team win games, and those contributions are measured in runs prevented because that's how pitchers contribute to winning: by preventing runs.

As I've said many times before, pitchers do not play the game of baseball by themselves. In every game, a pitcher has at least eight other teammates that also contribute to the outcome of the game. They do so by converting batted balls into outs on defense and scoring runs on offense. Pitchers are powerless without their teammates, but the win stat gives the impression that the pitcher is the only player that does anything to win the game.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:32 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:50 pm
Posts: 3879
Location: Glenshaw, PA
Az Bucco fan wrote:
Nobody was elected. Bonds got 36.2% of the votes. Clemens, 37%. Jack Morris should have been elected. Just ask Sparky Anderson. Saw an interview with him previous to him passing and he was all over it that Morris should be in the Hall. I can take that as a ringing endorsement. 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)


There is no plausible argument for Jack Morris. Writers love stories and his 7 WS starts were very good, of course the 10 inning shutout is legendary, but he is just not even close to being a hall of famer. His career ERA+ is 105 the same as Tomo Ohka. A 3.90 ERA during a low run scoring era is average as can be and its not like he ran up great career numbers. You see people mention complete games, but that was a product of era, Tommy John was better and has just as many CG.

_________________
Well NH did get Cutch signed, but what have you done for me lately?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 4841
Location: Pittsburgh
val wrote:
sisyphus wrote:
Those percentages tell me that Bonds and Clemens both get in eventually.

I don't see Morris as anything more than a good pitcher. I don't think he's close to being a HOFer.

While I am implacably opposed to Bonds, Clemens, and Pete Rose ever entering the Hall, I think you are right about Clemens and Bonds. There are literally eons of time for BBWAA writers to fold and let them in.

As for Morris, he was fun to watch. On his best day, I kind of imagined I was seeing what Bob Gibson might have been like. Rather than being a great pitcher, Morris had the right mental makeup to be the staff leader. And he did pitch the best ever WS series that I've ever seen. So, given the paucity of inductees the past couple of years, he's by default in the conversation. But you're right. He shouldn't be...

They really don't even have to fold. I'm guessing that, on the average, the older the writer, the less support they have for the steroid guys, and vice-versa. Every year older guys die off, and younger guys become voters.

I'm sorry that you never got a chance to see Gibson. He was a beast, much, much better than Morris. They did have one thing in common, though: they were both fiercely competitive.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Bonds HOF question
PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2013 12:06 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:27 am
Posts: 1349
Location: Eastern Shore
sisyphus wrote:
I'm sorry that you never got a chance to see Gibson. He was a beast, much, much better than Morris. They did have one thing in common, though: they were both fiercely competitive.

I certainly didn't mean to compare Gibson to Morris. That's just not fair to Jack. Morris is just one of the very few players that I would watch, just to see him play.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], PirateParrot, Ralphie and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits