Should Mark McGwire be Voted In The HOF ?

jjgold · 08-17-06, 05:55 AM

No way and he will never get in

He disgraced the game, he used Roids for years and actually shot them in his arms before every game

He is scum

EBone · 08-17-06, 07:18 AM

Personally, I would vote "NO". But, in reality, there is no way the writers who have a vote will keep him out totally.

If you halfway believe that the record year was real, there is no way to keep him out. But that's my problem: I think it was all an illusion.

E

Wassymac · 08-17-06, 07:41 AM

I don't even think it should be discussed. He's a fraud.

kdmfox · 08-17-06, 07:47 AM

Absolutely NOT.

Illusion · 08-17-06, 08:21 AM

A sportswriter recently said, if McGwire doesn't wanna discuss the past why should he look at his past numbers.

Willie Bee · 08-17-06, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by bigboydan

So, would you vote him in right away, make him wait some length of time or just plain vote NO?

I don't believe in, nor do I undestand, the make 'em wait philosophy. Either they are Hall of Famers or they are not, in my opinion.

That said, despite his HR totals, I don't think McGwire was in the upper echelon of 1B during his era as far as all-around play goes, and for that reason I would not vote for him. Has nothing to do with steroids.

Razz · 08-17-06, 10:17 AM

I've written in the past about how I will vote for Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro, Barry Bonds, etc. for the Hall of Fame; in trying to find a consistent standard, I'm going to vote for the best players of the generation, in the belief that the use of steroids was so widespread, involving hundreds of players, that the playing field was essentially level.

My quandary is this: How can I withhold a vote for McGwire while voting for a half-dozen to a dozen other players from the era who I absolutely believe took steroids, while not having any proof? I've examined the list of major awards since 1988, and think that 75 to 80 percent were won with the use of performance-enhancing drugs. The only difference between McGwire and many other stars from the generation is that McGwire hit more homers, and got the congressional subpoena.

A lot of readers have e-mailed in relation to McGwire, in particular, that this is like letting a bank robber get away because you can't catch all crooks.

But the analogy is imprecise for this reason: The institution of baseball -- the bank, as it were -- was complicit in the crime. The union, Major League Baseball, etc., effectively looked the other way for 10 to 15 years while the steroid vault was raided over and over again, and everybody shared in the spoils of what the juiced era wrought. The steroid-users cashed in, but so did the rest of baseball, riding on the backs of McGwire and Sammy Sosa a mere 10 years after the first steroid accusations popped up in the sport.

So because of this context, to suddenly apply retroactive morality in the case is absurd. If it's an embarrassment for baseball to have Mark McGwire inducted into the Hall of Fame, well, the institution of baseball earned it.

I'll draw an analogy of my own, although I don't mean to equate nation-building with hitting home runs. Some of our first presidents were slave owners, and any such thing now, in the 21st century, would be beyond horrible, worthy of vigorous indictment. However, in the context of the times, it was not unusual for land owners from the South to buy and sell slaves.

So do we now, in retrospect, disavow all that Thomas Jefferson accomplished? Or George Washington? Do we ignore the greatness of Abraham Lincoln -- who, to be clear, did not own slaves -- for some of the racist phrases attributed to him by history?

I do think it would be a good idea for the Hall of Fame to separate the plaques from different eras, with some kind of notation that in the '90s and early in the 21st century, it is believed that the use of steroids was rampant. That would help distinguish the accomplishments of Aaron, Mays, Ruth and Foxx from others, and help explain, for future generations, the incredible spike in statistics. (To repeat, I feel that I did a terrible job, as a beat writer, in covering this issue).

This is an article by Buster Olney that describes almost precisely how I feel. I have bolded what I feel especially strong about.

Bulldog · 08-17-06, 10:41 AM

I had read Olney's article and I pretty much agree as well.
I think McGwire is a Hall of Fame player, his home runs alone should be enough to get him in...
I just think sportswritters trying to play "moralists" will leave him out...

EBone · 08-17-06, 02:39 PM

Razz, I think the Olney article is pretty good as well. My major beef is with the records.

For me, baseball records are absolute immortality. I believe what Dimaggio and Hank Aaron did were just monumental feats. I think it is safe to say that their feats were done without the use of steroids.

For guys like McGwire, Sosa and Bonds to take their place because they were, in my eyes, cheating is just a terrible commentary on baseball in general. The "revenues over principles" theory.... All businesses go through and normally succomb to the "revenues over principles" theory because they justify it by saying "it's the only way to keep our business alive". In this case, the business is baseball. Sosa and McGwire are routinely credited for "saving" baseball with their HR race in 1998 (I think 1998 is correct, correct me if I'm wrong).

As a Cardinal fan, I absolutely hated the McGwire years in STL. The reason I hated it was because the Cards were not interested in winning during that era. They were interested in packing butts into the seats to watch this abnormal human hit baseballs a long way. We had guys like Kent Bottenfield in our starting rotation and we starting batting pitchers in the '8' hole. It was Ringling Brothers & Barnum & Bailey were running the Cards during that time. Every year, we were .500 or something like that. We just werent interested in winning at all. It was entertainment and not sport.

I think Olney's article is correct but, for me, something has to be done with the record book. No way am I going to equate Barry Bonds with Hank Aaron. No way, no how.

E

Chuck Sims · 08-17-06, 03:27 PM

I made a wager at Olympic that he McGwire would not get in on the first ballot. Easy money.

Chuck Sims · 08-17-06, 03:33 PM

Buster Olney has to be one clueless ****. Does anyone listen to him when he is on ESPN's Baseball Tonight? He kept saying the Marlins may move Willis. He would repeat it over and over as if the Marlins would trade their underpaid ace.

Then the clueless one predicts the Marlins to win the wildcard. Does he enjoy embarrassing himself on TV?

SBR_John · 08-17-06, 08:24 PM

12 All Star appearances.... yea, he's in.

jjgold · 08-17-06, 09:19 PM

MAc might not be on the ballot at all, he is a disgrace to everyone and his lies killed his chances.