i'm tired of hearing of the "steroid era".
baseball has had its shares of scandals.
so is who is to say they haven't cheated in the past? In the earrly 1900's there was a lot of fixing of games/organized crime involved.
I hate how they are just picking on the roid era
and with this asterisk bullshit.
I would definitely
put mc gwire, bonds and sosa in the hall of fame.
integrity of the game, my ass!!!!!!!!!!!

... stats and baseball is all about the stats.  

Compare the Hall of Fame to Forbes 100 Richest People.  Would you keep Bernie Madoff on the list or anyone who got rich by never paying income taxes?

The hundred richest people is not a subjective list. It doesn't matter how they get there, and keep in mind that many of the 100 richest people got there via illegal activities, either of their own or their ancestors.

One other thing to consider. All of these "juiced up hitters" were batting against "juiced up pitchers." There is no place for asterisks because of steroids. Unless they are going to go back and undo the games, the championships, the pennants then what's been done has been done and is part of the permanent record of the game for better or worse.

...he used 'roids' instead of beer & hotdogs just before the game. or no roids, & no beer & hotdogs, lol...

pointing out the flaws in your logic doesn't make you a "victim" ala Jean Valjean, nor does it make me a villian.

It is curious that you would paint yourself in that light however. Have you been feeling persecuted lately Monsieur Valjean?

baseball is a game that lives on its statistics.  Speaking for myself, I think steroid users should be thrown out of baseball, and at the least not allowed in the HOF.

The hitters? The pitchers? The juiced up hitters that faced the juiced up pitchers? Just exactly which players do you plan on throwing out, and just as importantly, which players of the "steroid era" do you believe are worthy?

Tough question isn't it?

And what are you going to do........

about the years when the ball was "juiced".  It is what it is.....

What about all the guys taking greenies (or who knows what else?) in the 70s?  Or the pitchers who threw spitballs?

Nobody said a word when Sosa and Big Mac SAVED baseball -- and that is EXACTLY what they did.  Baseball was dying after a labor strike and wasn't drawing fans.  All of a sudden, the entire country was watching every night to see not if, but when 61 would be broken.  

I haven't been a big baseball fan since I was a kid, but even I was watching every night and tracking who was going to break it first, Mac or Sammy.  I would even talk to my dad about it on the phone.  

It was a special time, but even then I knew those guys HAD to be on something -- didn't we all?!?  They were just too big and were putting up absurd numbers.

I guess I'm more of a forgive and forget guy, but Mac has never tested positive for anything to the best of my knowledge and he's drawing a 25% vote for the Hall of Fame?  That's enough to drive me right back away.

Then again, as stated, I am not a baseball fan.  I watch an entire game, start to finish maybe once or twice an entire season.

Why do you feel so persecuted? I rarely engage you in conversation, either here or on the P&R board.

Pretty interestling leap, you go from Les Miserables to the Fugitive in the same post. Do you feel this way everytime someone disagrees with you?

... It was a joke to begin with, dude, because of the coincidental postings on different boards.

Of course, you had to go and psychoanalyze the posts and wring out whatever little bit of humor was intended.

Way to go.  It's a pleasure interacting with you.

runs in the 1920's, his records were the result of an expanded schedule. The statistical variation of Sosa, McGwire et al to Babe Ruth and Roger Maris is almost non-existent. Lets do the numbers:

Babe Ruth played 151 games with 540 at bats in his record year. He hit 0.39
home runs per game and 0.11 home runs per at bat. Roger Maris in 1961 hit 61 home runs, in
161 games and had 590 at bats. He hit 0.38 home runs per game and 0.10 home runs per at bat.
Neither played all the games in the season, 154 in 1927 and 162 in 1961. Ruth probably would have hit 63 home runs with an expanded schedule.

In 1998, Sammy Sosa hit 66 home runs in 159 games with 643 at bats. He hit 0.45 home runs per game and 0.10 home runs per at bat. If Ruth would have had the same numner at bats he may hit 73 home runs.

In 1998, Mark McGwire hit 70 home runs in 155 games and 509 at bats. He hit 0.45
home runs per game and 0.14 home runs per at bat.

In 2004, Barry Bonds hit 73 home runs in 153 games and 467 at bats. He hit 0.48 home runs per game and 0.15 home runs per at bat. Had he had Ruth’s at bats, he might have hit 81 home runs. Had he had Sosa’s at bats, he might have hit 96 home runs.

Were steriods the reason for the jump in home runs in the late 1990's or did the expanded schedule with more teams the reason. I do not know. Plus, we cannot dismiss the fact, when Babe Ruth played the game, baseball was a national sport with 127 million people. Now players are recruited from around the world of 6 billion people. There is got to be one Babe Ruth amongst them.

You have 11 posts on P&R over the last week, I have commented on none of them. Just how do you see me pursuing you over here or anywhere else for that matter?

As I asked earlier, do you have a persecution problem?

He also impressed me by his common sense in "not wanting to talk about the past" when supoened by Congress. Nothing is ever to be gained by talking to a subcomitee formed as a witch hunt. All the hobbyists and providers here should talk a lesson from Mac

A little known fact:  During Ruth's era, when a hit ball bounced over the outfield fence, it was counted as a homerun.  No separate record was kept for these homeruns, so there's no telling how many of the Babe's homeruns would be considered doubles under today's rules.

...seriously, what is your problem? I was just making a harmless remark about how we are both posting on different boards (which many people do) and you go research how many times I've posted and whether or not you responded.  Maybe my analogies were flawed, but you could have simply pointed that out without guessing about my mental state.

Dude, you need a hobby -- try hobbying.

he hit more homeruns than most other TEAMS in the league. Only his own teammate (Gehrig) came remotely close to the Babe's totals. He was one of the best pitchers in the league for 5-6 years before they moved him to the outfield, and he was an in-shape athlete for the first half of his career, several times leading the yanks in steals as well as every other offensive category.

Mark McGwire for the hall of fame? He's a lifetime .263 hitter who struck out more than he walked, hit few doubles, and 6 triples his whole career. He couldn't run and he was a butcher in the field (his 1990 gold glove is almost as laughable as the one palmeiro won as a DH He did one thing well - hit homeruns - and many of his dings are tainted. He's not even close to be a candidate in my book.

of a man, but that only tells part of the story. You bring up some excellent attributes. One of my quilty pleasures is the show: "King of the Hill". In one scene the character Bill Dauterive (the Army barber) wants to go back to high school to increase his touchdown total and surpass a current (prima donna) star player's record. Bill had left high school early to join the Army.

The football coach says why not; "you may not have his youth or performance enhancing drugs, but you hAve guts". In the end, Bill reclaims his glory and lives up to his the "Bulldozer".

I suppose that is the hallmark of great player for me, how did he play the game. Did he play it like a man, an example that we can look up to and admire or do you have to justify his greatness. Ted Williams left in the middle of his career to fly fighter planes for the US Marine Corp. McGwire goes before the US Congress and plays like a coward. Roger Clemons may have even lied.

To me if you got to defend a player's greatness, then he is not all that.

...but tell me, does Pete Rose deserve to be in Cooperstown?

Both of your metaphors indicated that you felt pursued or persecuted by my commenting on your post. If you hadn't noticed I have been posting on this board since it started, the same as you.

If you hadn't made analogies indicating that you felt persecuted I never would have commented on your "mental state." The reason I checked your posts on P&R is to check and see if indeed we had had a disagreement over there that might have carried over here. After all I am guilty on occassion of "posting under the influence" and on the off chance you were correct that was "following" you over here I wanted to be sure.

Honestly, look back on the to analogies you used. Both of them referred to unjustly accused heros (you) being obsessively hunted by obseesive villians under the guise of authority (me), when you or anyone else makes references like that to me, I am going to call them on it, and I did.

If you don't try to play a victim, I won't accuse you of it. Try different analogies next time that don't portray you as a persecuted victim, or take your own advice and just hobby.

steroid users who were involved before it became "illegal," asterisks around their stats would be OK by me.  

Players of the "steroid era" who are worthy?  Well, Griffey Jr. and Jeter come to mind.  I'm sure there are more.

a human being, given that he's a repulsive slimeball and a mental pygmy, and he did indeed gamble on games and break one of baseball's cardinal rules.  But in his favor, he has more hits than anybody, and he seems to have done that honestly.  Like I said, it's a tough call.

as a person is of questionable character (as we all are) however we admired the way he played the game. We respect Pete Rose as a player. He worked his ass off.

McGwire, Sosa are actually genuinely affable guys however as players we do not admire nor approve of the way they used steroids to enhance their game. Their play was artificial and dishonest.

That may be the bottom line: Character we can all judge all day, but on the playing field, play like a man. Leave the cheatin', lyin' and stealin' for the polticians.

I mean how many of us liked it when the communist countries would use steroids to pump up their gold medal total in the Olympic Games. I saw a documentary last year on the East German women swim team, damn some of those women were more muscular than most men. It was sad.

He basically told Congress to "fuck off", or Bonds? He has never "tested" positive. It is a certainty that both of them used steroid, so how do you plan on punishing the guilt while protecting the innocent?

If you are going to start using asterisk, you might as well put an asterik next to every player of the "steroid era", making the asterik meaningless in the process.

Let's face it steroid were prevalent, most of the biggest stars used them. They are now finally illegal, you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube, time to just move on. Or do you propose leaving it up to the court of pubic opinion?

While we both started posting here on the same day, my first post actually precedes your's by an hour or two. So technically, you pursued me. lol

Now that we've got that out of the way, let's fucking drop it already.

that he won't get in anytime soon.  I think the court of public opinion has spoken, and if I'm right, Bonds won't get in either, although his stats (both before and after steroids) are definitely HOF worthy.

medals should have been taken away from the East Germans for OBVIOUS cheating.  While it's a little late, it still should be done today.  It would be a great example of why steroids are bad and unfair, and would make a very strong statement.  I remember it well, and I hated it then and I hate it now!