Author Topic: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame  (Read 13306 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #15 on: January 25, 2022, 10:05:50 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31371
  • Tommy Points: 10002
Im glad hes in.  He was legitimately feared, and came through in huge moments.

Clemens, Bonds and Schilling should all be in, too.
Clemens - Yes
Bonds - hell no.  no one on the roids should be in
Schilling - on the fence with him.  key pitcher for two WS winning teams but overall career, not good enough IMO
clemens pretty clearly did roids
clearly?  I'd disagree.  his body didn't ridiculously balloon up like Bonds and Sosa's (and a number of others) did.
 if it's determined (as in proven) that he did, then I'd keep him out. 

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #16 on: January 25, 2022, 10:31:17 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31195
  • Tommy Points: 1439
Im glad hes in.  He was legitimately feared, and came through in huge moments.

Clemens, Bonds and Schilling should all be in, too.
Clemens - Yes
Bonds - hell no.  no one on the roids should be in
Schilling - on the fence with him.  key pitcher for two WS winning teams but overall career, not good enough IMO
clemens pretty clearly did roids
clearly?  I'd disagree.  his body didn't ridiculously balloon up like Bonds and Sosa's (and a number of others) did.
 if it's determined (as in proven) that he did, then I'd keep him out.
Most of the steroid takers did not balloon up as there are lots of reasons to take them.  The shear fact that you don't think Clemens took them when faced with all of the evidence that he did, is quite frankly the most astonishing thing that has ever been stated on this board.
I was finally wrong. Boston not only didn't win in 5, but didn't win at all.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #17 on: January 25, 2022, 10:45:56 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31195
  • Tommy Points: 1439
So they put him in with a failed drug test but not other far superior players without a failed drug test. The shear hypocrisy of baseball hall of fame voters never ceases to amaze.

False.
I mean what is false there, Ortiz admitted he failed a test but then blamed supplements and vitamins.  Pretty classic excuse for failed test takers.  Then of course there is the less direct stuff like the DEA investigation into a Dominican drug lord connected to Ortiz, the failed assisnation attempt by a different Dominican drug lord, and a whole host of other seedy stuff. 

I have no issue with Ortiz in the HOF, but onky after far superior players like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, etc.  The hypocrisy of putting him in and not those others just taints the Hall.  It is just nonsense and every single person that failed to vote for Bonds and Clemens should have their vote revoked, especially if they voted for an inferior failed drug test player like Ortiz.  The hypocrisy is disgusting.

Wasn't the gist of the Ortiz issue was that he supposedly failed a test, but was never told why he failed it or if he failed it at all?

Edit:

Here's the MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred on the issue:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/10/02/rob-manfred-david-ortiz-drug-test-hall-of-fame/91442256/
He very well might have taken nandroline which was legal and sold at places like GNC that Ortiz has acknowledged he frequented. 

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/careless-david-ortiz-denies-steroid-apologizes-boston-red-sox-fans-teammates-article-1.395676

Quote
"I definitely was a little bit careless back in those days when I was buying legal supplements and legal vitamins over the counter - but I never buy steroids or use steroids," Ortiz said at Yankee Stadium before the Red Sox lost to the Bombers, 5-0. "I never thought buying supplements and vitamins was gonna hurt anybody's feelings. That happened. I'm sorry about that."

Quote
The supplement 19-norandrostenedione was legal in 2003 and contained the steroid nandrolone, a hard-core performance-enhancing drug used to build muscle. Nandrolone also appears in the steroid Deca-Durabolin. The positive levels caused by a dietary supplement would likely have been lower than for a straight steroid, allowing for the contested results.

And to be clear that test was in 2003 before there was testing and before steroids were banned by the sport.  That is of course the same list that has Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Andy Pettite, Gary Sheffield, Pedro Martinez, Nomar Garciaparra, Alex Rodriguez, Ivan Rodriguez, and a few other potential HOFers.  So now we Ortiz, along with Pudge and Pedro from the list, but we are still going to leave off the 3 best players in a very large part because they are 3 of the biggest ****s i.e. Bonds, Clemens, ARod.  It fits with what baseball claims to be, but is not, i.e. we love rules, but it is ok to break them, just don't break certain rules or you are out forever, unless of course we like you, then you get in no problem.  Nothing more than hypocrisy at its finest
I was finally wrong. Boston not only didn't win in 5, but didn't win at all.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #18 on: January 25, 2022, 11:58:50 PM »

Offline Goldstar88

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8129
  • Tommy Points: 849
Believe hes the first DH to make it. Bravo!

Edgar Martinez made it a few years back, I think.

Harold Baines too

Were they both strictly DHs, though? Thought Edgar became one later in his career.
Quoting Nick from the now locked Ime thread:
Quote
At some point you have to blame the performance on the court on the players on the court. Every loss is not the coach's fault and every win isn't because of the players.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #19 on: January 26, 2022, 12:21:05 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18517
  • Tommy Points: 1798
So they put him in with a failed drug test but not other far superior players without a failed drug test. The shear hypocrisy of baseball hall of fame voters never ceases to amaze.

False.
I mean what is false there, Ortiz admitted he failed a test but then blamed supplements and vitamins.  Pretty classic excuse for failed test takers.  Then of course there is the less direct stuff like the DEA investigation into a Dominican drug lord connected to Ortiz, the failed assisnation attempt by a different Dominican drug lord, and a whole host of other seedy stuff. 

I have no issue with Ortiz in the HOF, but onky after far superior players like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, etc.  The hypocrisy of putting him in and not those others just taints the Hall.  It is just nonsense and every single person that failed to vote for Bonds and Clemens should have their vote revoked, especially if they voted for an inferior failed drug test player like Ortiz.  The hypocrisy is disgusting.

Wasn't the gist of the Ortiz issue was that he supposedly failed a test, but was never told why he failed it or if he failed it at all?

Edit:

Here's the MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred on the issue:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/10/02/rob-manfred-david-ortiz-drug-test-hall-of-fame/91442256/
He very well might have taken nandroline which was legal and sold at places like GNC that Ortiz has acknowledged he frequented. 

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/careless-david-ortiz-denies-steroid-apologizes-boston-red-sox-fans-teammates-article-1.395676

Quote
"I definitely was a little bit careless back in those days when I was buying legal supplements and legal vitamins over the counter - but I never buy steroids or use steroids," Ortiz said at Yankee Stadium before the Red Sox lost to the Bombers, 5-0. "I never thought buying supplements and vitamins was gonna hurt anybody's feelings. That happened. I'm sorry about that."

Quote
The supplement 19-norandrostenedione was legal in 2003 and contained the steroid nandrolone, a hard-core performance-enhancing drug used to build muscle. Nandrolone also appears in the steroid Deca-Durabolin. The positive levels caused by a dietary supplement would likely have been lower than for a straight steroid, allowing for the contested results.

And to be clear that test was in 2003 before there was testing and before steroids were banned by the sport.  That is of course the same list that has Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Andy Pettite, Gary Sheffield, Pedro Martinez, Nomar Garciaparra, Alex Rodriguez, Ivan Rodriguez, and a few other potential HOFers.  So now we Ortiz, along with Pudge and Pedro from the list, but we are still going to leave off the 3 best players in a very large part because they are 3 of the biggest ****s i.e. Bonds, Clemens, ARod.  It fits with what baseball claims to be, but is not, i.e. we love rules, but it is ok to break them, just don't break certain rules or you are out forever, unless of course we like you, then you get in no problem.  Nothing more than hypocrisy at its finest

I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy, but no need to bend yourself over backwards to dirty Ortiz's legacy when most of his career and best years were post Steroid Era.

Others you mention we actually have more solid proof of what they did wrong.

All that said, I don't care about them using steroids back in the day, don't think they should be banned from HOF over it, particularly considering how widespread it was as it were.

Get me Pete Rose in as well.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2022, 02:33:52 AM »

Offline trickybilly

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5388
  • Tommy Points: 593
So they put him in with a failed drug test but not other far superior players without a failed drug test. The shear hypocrisy of baseball hall of fame voters never ceases to amaze.

False.
I mean what is false there, Ortiz admitted he failed a test but then blamed supplements and vitamins.  Pretty classic excuse for failed test takers.  Then of course there is the less direct stuff like the DEA investigation into a Dominican drug lord connected to Ortiz, the failed assisnation attempt by a different Dominican drug lord, and a whole host of other seedy stuff. 

I have no issue with Ortiz in the HOF, but onky after far superior players like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, etc.  The hypocrisy of putting him in and not those others just taints the Hall.  It is just nonsense and every single person that failed to vote for Bonds and Clemens should have their vote revoked, especially if they voted for an inferior failed drug test player like Ortiz.  The hypocrisy is disgusting.

Wasn't the gist of the Ortiz issue was that he supposedly failed a test, but was never told why he failed it or if he failed it at all?

Edit:

Here's the MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred on the issue:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/10/02/rob-manfred-david-ortiz-drug-test-hall-of-fame/91442256/
He very well might have taken nandroline which was legal and sold at places like GNC that Ortiz has acknowledged he frequented. 

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/careless-david-ortiz-denies-steroid-apologizes-boston-red-sox-fans-teammates-article-1.395676

Quote
"I definitely was a little bit careless back in those days when I was buying legal supplements and legal vitamins over the counter - but I never buy steroids or use steroids," Ortiz said at Yankee Stadium before the Red Sox lost to the Bombers, 5-0. "I never thought buying supplements and vitamins was gonna hurt anybody's feelings. That happened. I'm sorry about that."

Quote
The supplement 19-norandrostenedione was legal in 2003 and contained the steroid nandrolone, a hard-core performance-enhancing drug used to build muscle. Nandrolone also appears in the steroid Deca-Durabolin. The positive levels caused by a dietary supplement would likely have been lower than for a straight steroid, allowing for the contested results.

And to be clear that test was in 2003 before there was testing and before steroids were banned by the sport.  That is of course the same list that has Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Andy Pettite, Gary Sheffield, Pedro Martinez, Nomar Garciaparra, Alex Rodriguez, Ivan Rodriguez, and a few other potential HOFers.  So now we Ortiz, along with Pudge and Pedro from the list, but we are still going to leave off the 3 best players in a very large part because they are 3 of the biggest ****s i.e. Bonds, Clemens, ARod.  It fits with what baseball claims to be, but is not, i.e. we love rules, but it is ok to break them, just don't break certain rules or you are out forever, unless of course we like you, then you get in no problem.  Nothing more than hypocrisy at its finest

I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy, but no need to bend yourself over backwards to dirty Ortiz's legacy when most of his career and best years were post Steroid Era.

Others you mention we actually have more solid proof of what they did wrong.

All that said, I don't care about them using steroids back in the day, don't think they should be banned from HOF over it, particularly considering how widespread it was as it were.

Get me Pete Rose in as well.

TP.
"Gimme the ball, gimme the ball". Freddy Quimby, 1994.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #21 on: January 26, 2022, 06:48:00 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8757
  • Tommy Points: 286
Glad to see him make it. Showed good numbers and clutch play after testing positive so feel he is still worthy of the hall. I'm not against all baseball players who did steroids but understand how some feel against it as cheating. It's an opinion I respect.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #22 on: January 26, 2022, 06:56:21 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31195
  • Tommy Points: 1439
So they put him in with a failed drug test but not other far superior players without a failed drug test. The shear hypocrisy of baseball hall of fame voters never ceases to amaze.

False.
I mean what is false there, Ortiz admitted he failed a test but then blamed supplements and vitamins.  Pretty classic excuse for failed test takers.  Then of course there is the less direct stuff like the DEA investigation into a Dominican drug lord connected to Ortiz, the failed assisnation attempt by a different Dominican drug lord, and a whole host of other seedy stuff. 

I have no issue with Ortiz in the HOF, but onky after far superior players like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, etc.  The hypocrisy of putting him in and not those others just taints the Hall.  It is just nonsense and every single person that failed to vote for Bonds and Clemens should have their vote revoked, especially if they voted for an inferior failed drug test player like Ortiz.  The hypocrisy is disgusting.

Wasn't the gist of the Ortiz issue was that he supposedly failed a test, but was never told why he failed it or if he failed it at all?

Edit:

Here's the MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred on the issue:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/10/02/rob-manfred-david-ortiz-drug-test-hall-of-fame/91442256/
He very well might have taken nandroline which was legal and sold at places like GNC that Ortiz has acknowledged he frequented. 

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/careless-david-ortiz-denies-steroid-apologizes-boston-red-sox-fans-teammates-article-1.395676

Quote
"I definitely was a little bit careless back in those days when I was buying legal supplements and legal vitamins over the counter - but I never buy steroids or use steroids," Ortiz said at Yankee Stadium before the Red Sox lost to the Bombers, 5-0. "I never thought buying supplements and vitamins was gonna hurt anybody's feelings. That happened. I'm sorry about that."

Quote
The supplement 19-norandrostenedione was legal in 2003 and contained the steroid nandrolone, a hard-core performance-enhancing drug used to build muscle. Nandrolone also appears in the steroid Deca-Durabolin. The positive levels caused by a dietary supplement would likely have been lower than for a straight steroid, allowing for the contested results.

And to be clear that test was in 2003 before there was testing and before steroids were banned by the sport.  That is of course the same list that has Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Andy Pettite, Gary Sheffield, Pedro Martinez, Nomar Garciaparra, Alex Rodriguez, Ivan Rodriguez, and a few other potential HOFers.  So now we Ortiz, along with Pudge and Pedro from the list, but we are still going to leave off the 3 best players in a very large part because they are 3 of the biggest ****s i.e. Bonds, Clemens, ARod.  It fits with what baseball claims to be, but is not, i.e. we love rules, but it is ok to break them, just don't break certain rules or you are out forever, unless of course we like you, then you get in no problem.  Nothing more than hypocrisy at its finest

I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy, but no need to bend yourself over backwards to dirty Ortiz's legacy when most of his career and best years were post Steroid Era.

Others you mention we actually have more solid proof of what they did wrong.

All that said, I don't care about them using steroids back in the day, don't think they should be banned from HOF over it, particularly considering how widespread it was as it were.

Get me Pete Rose in as well.
Bending over backwards? He was on the dame list used to keep Bonds and Clemens out. The same list that giysblike Pettite acknowledged were accurate.  Either keep everyone from the list out or let those deserving in.  Picking and choosing is nothing more than hypocrisy that has no business in a hall of fame vote.
I was finally wrong. Boston not only didn't win in 5, but didn't win at all.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #23 on: January 26, 2022, 07:20:44 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 54616
  • Tommy Points: -25874
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
So they put him in with a failed drug test but not other far superior players without a failed drug test. The shear hypocrisy of baseball hall of fame voters never ceases to amaze.

False.
I mean what is false there, Ortiz admitted he failed a test but then blamed supplements and vitamins.  Pretty classic excuse for failed test takers.  Then of course there is the less direct stuff like the DEA investigation into a Dominican drug lord connected to Ortiz, the failed assisnation attempt by a different Dominican drug lord, and a whole host of other seedy stuff. 

I have no issue with Ortiz in the HOF, but onky after far superior players like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, etc.  The hypocrisy of putting him in and not those others just taints the Hall.  It is just nonsense and every single person that failed to vote for Bonds and Clemens should have their vote revoked, especially if they voted for an inferior failed drug test player like Ortiz.  The hypocrisy is disgusting.

Wasn't the gist of the Ortiz issue was that he supposedly failed a test, but was never told why he failed it or if he failed it at all?

Edit:

Here's the MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred on the issue:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/10/02/rob-manfred-david-ortiz-drug-test-hall-of-fame/91442256/
He very well might have taken nandroline which was legal and sold at places like GNC that Ortiz has acknowledged he frequented. 

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/careless-david-ortiz-denies-steroid-apologizes-boston-red-sox-fans-teammates-article-1.395676

Quote
"I definitely was a little bit careless back in those days when I was buying legal supplements and legal vitamins over the counter - but I never buy steroids or use steroids," Ortiz said at Yankee Stadium before the Red Sox lost to the Bombers, 5-0. "I never thought buying supplements and vitamins was gonna hurt anybody's feelings. That happened. I'm sorry about that."

Quote
The supplement 19-norandrostenedione was legal in 2003 and contained the steroid nandrolone, a hard-core performance-enhancing drug used to build muscle. Nandrolone also appears in the steroid Deca-Durabolin. The positive levels caused by a dietary supplement would likely have been lower than for a straight steroid, allowing for the contested results.

And to be clear that test was in 2003 before there was testing and before steroids were banned by the sport.  That is of course the same list that has Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Andy Pettite, Gary Sheffield, Pedro Martinez, Nomar Garciaparra, Alex Rodriguez, Ivan Rodriguez, and a few other potential HOFers.  So now we Ortiz, along with Pudge and Pedro from the list, but we are still going to leave off the 3 best players in a very large part because they are 3 of the biggest ****s i.e. Bonds, Clemens, ARod.  It fits with what baseball claims to be, but is not, i.e. we love rules, but it is ok to break them, just don't break certain rules or you are out forever, unless of course we like you, then you get in no problem.  Nothing more than hypocrisy at its finest

I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy, but no need to bend yourself over backwards to dirty Ortiz's legacy when most of his career and best years were post Steroid Era.

Others you mention we actually have more solid proof of what they did wrong.

All that said, I don't care about them using steroids back in the day, don't think they should be banned from HOF over it, particularly considering how widespread it was as it were.

Get me Pete Rose in as well.
Bending over backwards? He was on the dame list used to keep Bonds and Clemens out. The same list that giysblike Pettite acknowledged were accurate.  Either keep everyone from the list out or let those deserving in.  Picking and choosing is nothing more than hypocrisy that has no business in a hall of fame vote.

Actually, Mo, neither Clemens nor Bonds ever tested positive for PEDs.

Clemens was implicated by his trainer, but that trainer was also a scumbag.  Clemens was prosecuted for perjury to Congress about his PED use, and he was acquitted.

Barry Bonds was closely tied to BALCO, which produced PEDs.  There were also charts, dosing schedules, etc. 

But, neither man tested dirty in 2003, at least that has been released.  Assuming folks believe that both Clemens and Bonds are in fact guilty, that just shows how easy the tests were to beat.  It's highly, highly likely that guys already in the HOF used steroids.  I'd put forth Piazza, Bagwell, and Ivan Rodriguez as primary candidates who made the Hall who may have used.

The hypocrisy is rampant.  Sammy Sosa will never make the HOF, despite 600+ HRs.  Yet, the only evidence that he used is the same 2003 test that Ortiz failed.

If voters want to keep players out of the Hall for cheating, use a black and white standard:  you're not eligible if you tested dirty after 2005, when the rules about PEDs were implemented.  That keeps A-Rod and Manny Ramirez out, but they knew what they were doing and what the risks were.  I still would vote both in, I think, but at least it's a cleaner argument.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #24 on: January 26, 2022, 07:29:46 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18517
  • Tommy Points: 1798
So they put him in with a failed drug test but not other far superior players without a failed drug test. The shear hypocrisy of baseball hall of fame voters never ceases to amaze.

False.
I mean what is false there, Ortiz admitted he failed a test but then blamed supplements and vitamins.  Pretty classic excuse for failed test takers.  Then of course there is the less direct stuff like the DEA investigation into a Dominican drug lord connected to Ortiz, the failed assisnation attempt by a different Dominican drug lord, and a whole host of other seedy stuff. 

I have no issue with Ortiz in the HOF, but onky after far superior players like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, etc.  The hypocrisy of putting him in and not those others just taints the Hall.  It is just nonsense and every single person that failed to vote for Bonds and Clemens should have their vote revoked, especially if they voted for an inferior failed drug test player like Ortiz.  The hypocrisy is disgusting.

Wasn't the gist of the Ortiz issue was that he supposedly failed a test, but was never told why he failed it or if he failed it at all?

Edit:

Here's the MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred on the issue:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/10/02/rob-manfred-david-ortiz-drug-test-hall-of-fame/91442256/
He very well might have taken nandroline which was legal and sold at places like GNC that Ortiz has acknowledged he frequented. 

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/careless-david-ortiz-denies-steroid-apologizes-boston-red-sox-fans-teammates-article-1.395676

Quote
"I definitely was a little bit careless back in those days when I was buying legal supplements and legal vitamins over the counter - but I never buy steroids or use steroids," Ortiz said at Yankee Stadium before the Red Sox lost to the Bombers, 5-0. "I never thought buying supplements and vitamins was gonna hurt anybody's feelings. That happened. I'm sorry about that."

Quote
The supplement 19-norandrostenedione was legal in 2003 and contained the steroid nandrolone, a hard-core performance-enhancing drug used to build muscle. Nandrolone also appears in the steroid Deca-Durabolin. The positive levels caused by a dietary supplement would likely have been lower than for a straight steroid, allowing for the contested results.

And to be clear that test was in 2003 before there was testing and before steroids were banned by the sport.  That is of course the same list that has Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Andy Pettite, Gary Sheffield, Pedro Martinez, Nomar Garciaparra, Alex Rodriguez, Ivan Rodriguez, and a few other potential HOFers.  So now we Ortiz, along with Pudge and Pedro from the list, but we are still going to leave off the 3 best players in a very large part because they are 3 of the biggest ****s i.e. Bonds, Clemens, ARod.  It fits with what baseball claims to be, but is not, i.e. we love rules, but it is ok to break them, just don't break certain rules or you are out forever, unless of course we like you, then you get in no problem.  Nothing more than hypocrisy at its finest

I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy, but no need to bend yourself over backwards to dirty Ortiz's legacy when most of his career and best years were post Steroid Era.

Others you mention we actually have more solid proof of what they did wrong.

All that said, I don't care about them using steroids back in the day, don't think they should be banned from HOF over it, particularly considering how widespread it was as it were.

Get me Pete Rose in as well.
Bending over backwards? He was on the dame list used to keep Bonds and Clemens out. The same list that giysblike Pettite acknowledged were accurate.  Either keep everyone from the list out or let those deserving in.  Picking and choosing is nothing more than hypocrisy that has no business in a hall of fame vote.

Bonds and Clemens were not kept out because they were in a list... come on man.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #25 on: January 26, 2022, 07:54:53 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31195
  • Tommy Points: 1439
So they put him in with a failed drug test but not other far superior players without a failed drug test. The shear hypocrisy of baseball hall of fame voters never ceases to amaze.

False.
I mean what is false there, Ortiz admitted he failed a test but then blamed supplements and vitamins.  Pretty classic excuse for failed test takers.  Then of course there is the less direct stuff like the DEA investigation into a Dominican drug lord connected to Ortiz, the failed assisnation attempt by a different Dominican drug lord, and a whole host of other seedy stuff. 

I have no issue with Ortiz in the HOF, but onky after far superior players like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, etc.  The hypocrisy of putting him in and not those others just taints the Hall.  It is just nonsense and every single person that failed to vote for Bonds and Clemens should have their vote revoked, especially if they voted for an inferior failed drug test player like Ortiz.  The hypocrisy is disgusting.

Wasn't the gist of the Ortiz issue was that he supposedly failed a test, but was never told why he failed it or if he failed it at all?

Edit:

Here's the MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred on the issue:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/10/02/rob-manfred-david-ortiz-drug-test-hall-of-fame/91442256/
He very well might have taken nandroline which was legal and sold at places like GNC that Ortiz has acknowledged he frequented. 

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/careless-david-ortiz-denies-steroid-apologizes-boston-red-sox-fans-teammates-article-1.395676

Quote
"I definitely was a little bit careless back in those days when I was buying legal supplements and legal vitamins over the counter - but I never buy steroids or use steroids," Ortiz said at Yankee Stadium before the Red Sox lost to the Bombers, 5-0. "I never thought buying supplements and vitamins was gonna hurt anybody's feelings. That happened. I'm sorry about that."

Quote
The supplement 19-norandrostenedione was legal in 2003 and contained the steroid nandrolone, a hard-core performance-enhancing drug used to build muscle. Nandrolone also appears in the steroid Deca-Durabolin. The positive levels caused by a dietary supplement would likely have been lower than for a straight steroid, allowing for the contested results.

And to be clear that test was in 2003 before there was testing and before steroids were banned by the sport.  That is of course the same list that has Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Andy Pettite, Gary Sheffield, Pedro Martinez, Nomar Garciaparra, Alex Rodriguez, Ivan Rodriguez, and a few other potential HOFers.  So now we Ortiz, along with Pudge and Pedro from the list, but we are still going to leave off the 3 best players in a very large part because they are 3 of the biggest ****s i.e. Bonds, Clemens, ARod.  It fits with what baseball claims to be, but is not, i.e. we love rules, but it is ok to break them, just don't break certain rules or you are out forever, unless of course we like you, then you get in no problem.  Nothing more than hypocrisy at its finest

I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy, but no need to bend yourself over backwards to dirty Ortiz's legacy when most of his career and best years were post Steroid Era.

Others you mention we actually have more solid proof of what they did wrong.

All that said, I don't care about them using steroids back in the day, don't think they should be banned from HOF over it, particularly considering how widespread it was as it were.

Get me Pete Rose in as well.
Bending over backwards? He was on the dame list used to keep Bonds and Clemens out. The same list that giysblike Pettite acknowledged were accurate.  Either keep everyone from the list out or let those deserving in.  Picking and choosing is nothing more than hypocrisy that has no business in a hall of fame vote.

Actually, Mo, neither Clemens nor Bonds ever tested positive for PEDs.

Clemens was implicated by his trainer, but that trainer was also a scumbag.  Clemens was prosecuted for perjury to Congress about his PED use, and he was acquitted.

Barry Bonds was closely tied to BALCO, which produced PEDs.  There were also charts, dosing schedules, etc. 

But, neither man tested dirty in 2003, at least that has been released.  Assuming folks believe that both Clemens and Bonds are in fact guilty, that just shows how easy the tests were to beat.  It's highly, highly likely that guys already in the HOF used steroids.  I'd put forth Piazza, Bagwell, and Ivan Rodriguez as primary candidates who made the Hall who may have used.

The hypocrisy is rampant.  Sammy Sosa will never make the HOF, despite 600+ HRs.  Yet, the only evidence that he used is the same 2003 test that Ortiz failed.

If voters want to keep players out of the Hall for cheating, use a black and white standard:  you're not eligible if you tested dirty after 2005, when the rules about PEDs were implemented.  That keeps A-Rod and Manny Ramirez out, but they knew what they were doing and what the risks were.  I still would vote both in, I think, but at least it's a cleaner argument.
Bonds and Clemens were both on the 2003 list.  That is why they were called in to testify. 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/232808-steroidology-l-hoops-projects-all-104-players-on-the-2003-steroid-list

https://www.steroidtimes.com/alleged-unconfirmed-list-of-all-mlb-players-to-fail-2003-drug-test-leaked/2009

But for that list getting released, I'm not sure Clemens and Bonds ever get dragged into Congress and thus all of the evidence from them pretty much disappears.  And the thing the list shows you is that everyone was doing from the best players in the sport, to the guys barely in the league (like Valerio De Los Santos who may not even have made the league without steroids or Casey Blake who for his first 4 years played less than 50 games and then all of a sudden in 2003 becomes a 8 year starter)


And I can at least see the 2005 line as a reasonable one, but why is steroid cheating different than other cheating?  If you get caught and do your time, why should that hang over your head the rest of your career?  I mean what makes steroids different than say what the Astros did?  what makes steroids different than too much pine tar or sticky substances or corked bats or countless other ways MLB players break the rules?  It is nothing but hypocrisy from a sport that encourages cheating, but only to a point and only if we like you.  It is all just nonsense.
I was finally wrong. Boston not only didn't win in 5, but didn't win at all.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #26 on: January 26, 2022, 08:17:16 AM »

Offline boscel33

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2398
  • Tommy Points: 151
Im glad hes in.  He was legitimately feared, and came through in huge moments.

Clemens, Bonds and Schilling should all be in, too.

I agree on Bonds and Clemens, but I question Curt.  Looking at numbers, he was OK, had a few really good seasons, and also had a couple of really good post seasons, but does that make him a hall of famer, I don't even think he was the best pitcher on his team in his best seasons.

I think a hall of famer needs to pass the eye test, or basically, you know it when you see it, and I just don't see that automatic Yes for Curt. 

Charlie Hough has the number of wins, but I don't see him as a HoF'er, heck, Jamie Moyer has 269 wins, about 700 less SO's than Curt, two 20 win seasons (Curt has 3), but do we think Jamie Moyer is a HoF'er?

Just remember, the eye test.  You know it when you see it!

Don't Make Me Go Beth Dutton On You!

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #27 on: January 26, 2022, 08:29:46 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 54616
  • Tommy Points: -25874
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
Im glad hes in.  He was legitimately feared, and came through in huge moments.

Clemens, Bonds and Schilling should all be in, too.

I agree on Bonds and Clemens, but I question Curt.  Looking at numbers, he was OK, had a few really good seasons, and also had a couple of really good post seasons, but does that make him a hall of famer, I don't even think he was the best pitcher on his team in his best seasons.

I think a hall of famer needs to pass the eye test, or basically, you know it when you see it, and I just don't see that automatic Yes for Curt. 

Charlie Hough has the number of wins, but I don't see him as a HoF'er, heck, Jamie Moyer has 269 wins, about 700 less SO's than Curt, two 20 win seasons (Curt has 3), but do we think Jamie Moyer is a HoF'er?

Just remember, the eye test.  You know it when you see it!

Did Mike Mussina pass the eye test?

And in next year's class, Scott Rolen probably gets in.  Eye test?  Andruw Jones?

The Hall of Fame has been watered down.  To me, though, Schilling passed the eye test.  Every time he took the mound, I saw him as a true ace.  From about '95 to '04, he was as good as there was.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #28 on: January 26, 2022, 08:32:50 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 54616
  • Tommy Points: -25874
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
So they put him in with a failed drug test but not other far superior players without a failed drug test. The shear hypocrisy of baseball hall of fame voters never ceases to amaze.

False.
I mean what is false there, Ortiz admitted he failed a test but then blamed supplements and vitamins.  Pretty classic excuse for failed test takers.  Then of course there is the less direct stuff like the DEA investigation into a Dominican drug lord connected to Ortiz, the failed assisnation attempt by a different Dominican drug lord, and a whole host of other seedy stuff. 

I have no issue with Ortiz in the HOF, but onky after far superior players like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, etc.  The hypocrisy of putting him in and not those others just taints the Hall.  It is just nonsense and every single person that failed to vote for Bonds and Clemens should have their vote revoked, especially if they voted for an inferior failed drug test player like Ortiz.  The hypocrisy is disgusting.

Wasn't the gist of the Ortiz issue was that he supposedly failed a test, but was never told why he failed it or if he failed it at all?

Edit:

Here's the MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred on the issue:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/10/02/rob-manfred-david-ortiz-drug-test-hall-of-fame/91442256/
He very well might have taken nandroline which was legal and sold at places like GNC that Ortiz has acknowledged he frequented. 

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/careless-david-ortiz-denies-steroid-apologizes-boston-red-sox-fans-teammates-article-1.395676

Quote
"I definitely was a little bit careless back in those days when I was buying legal supplements and legal vitamins over the counter - but I never buy steroids or use steroids," Ortiz said at Yankee Stadium before the Red Sox lost to the Bombers, 5-0. "I never thought buying supplements and vitamins was gonna hurt anybody's feelings. That happened. I'm sorry about that."

Quote
The supplement 19-norandrostenedione was legal in 2003 and contained the steroid nandrolone, a hard-core performance-enhancing drug used to build muscle. Nandrolone also appears in the steroid Deca-Durabolin. The positive levels caused by a dietary supplement would likely have been lower than for a straight steroid, allowing for the contested results.

And to be clear that test was in 2003 before there was testing and before steroids were banned by the sport.  That is of course the same list that has Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Andy Pettite, Gary Sheffield, Pedro Martinez, Nomar Garciaparra, Alex Rodriguez, Ivan Rodriguez, and a few other potential HOFers.  So now we Ortiz, along with Pudge and Pedro from the list, but we are still going to leave off the 3 best players in a very large part because they are 3 of the biggest ****s i.e. Bonds, Clemens, ARod.  It fits with what baseball claims to be, but is not, i.e. we love rules, but it is ok to break them, just don't break certain rules or you are out forever, unless of course we like you, then you get in no problem.  Nothing more than hypocrisy at its finest

I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy, but no need to bend yourself over backwards to dirty Ortiz's legacy when most of his career and best years were post Steroid Era.

Others you mention we actually have more solid proof of what they did wrong.

All that said, I don't care about them using steroids back in the day, don't think they should be banned from HOF over it, particularly considering how widespread it was as it were.

Get me Pete Rose in as well.
Bending over backwards? He was on the dame list used to keep Bonds and Clemens out. The same list that giysblike Pettite acknowledged were accurate.  Either keep everyone from the list out or let those deserving in.  Picking and choosing is nothing more than hypocrisy that has no business in a hall of fame vote.

Actually, Mo, neither Clemens nor Bonds ever tested positive for PEDs.

Clemens was implicated by his trainer, but that trainer was also a scumbag.  Clemens was prosecuted for perjury to Congress about his PED use, and he was acquitted.

Barry Bonds was closely tied to BALCO, which produced PEDs.  There were also charts, dosing schedules, etc. 

But, neither man tested dirty in 2003, at least that has been released.  Assuming folks believe that both Clemens and Bonds are in fact guilty, that just shows how easy the tests were to beat.  It's highly, highly likely that guys already in the HOF used steroids.  I'd put forth Piazza, Bagwell, and Ivan Rodriguez as primary candidates who made the Hall who may have used.

The hypocrisy is rampant.  Sammy Sosa will never make the HOF, despite 600+ HRs.  Yet, the only evidence that he used is the same 2003 test that Ortiz failed.

If voters want to keep players out of the Hall for cheating, use a black and white standard:  you're not eligible if you tested dirty after 2005, when the rules about PEDs were implemented.  That keeps A-Rod and Manny Ramirez out, but they knew what they were doing and what the risks were.  I still would vote both in, I think, but at least it's a cleaner argument.
Bonds and Clemens were both on the 2003 list.  That is why they were called in to testify. 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/232808-steroidology-l-hoops-projects-all-104-players-on-the-2003-steroid-list

https://www.steroidtimes.com/alleged-unconfirmed-list-of-all-mlb-players-to-fail-2003-drug-test-leaked/2009

But for that list getting released, I'm not sure Clemens and Bonds ever get dragged into Congress and thus all of the evidence from them pretty much disappears.  And the thing the list shows you is that everyone was doing from the best players in the sport, to the guys barely in the league (like Valerio De Los Santos who may not even have made the league without steroids or Casey Blake who for his first 4 years played less than 50 games and then all of a sudden in 2003 becomes a 8 year starter)


And I can at least see the 2005 line as a reasonable one, but why is steroid cheating different than other cheating?  If you get caught and do your time, why should that hang over your head the rest of your career?  I mean what makes steroids different than say what the Astros did?  what makes steroids different than too much pine tar or sticky substances or corked bats or countless other ways MLB players break the rules?  It is nothing but hypocrisy from a sport that encourages cheating, but only to a point and only if we like you.  It is all just nonsense.

Those lists are "projected" and "unconfirmed".  Clemens reportedly was *not* on the list, according to documents allegedly submitted to Congress:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/news/story?id=4305635

Regarding Bonds, it's apparently a bit more nuanced.  He never failed an MLB drug test, including in 2003.  However, during the BALCO raid there were apparently four non-MLB tests.  His 2003 sample was tested by the government after the fact, and it included PEDs that were undetectable at the time of the original testing.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2022, 08:37:59 AM by Roy H. »


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #29 on: January 26, 2022, 09:51:27 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31371
  • Tommy Points: 10002
Im glad hes in.  He was legitimately feared, and came through in huge moments.

Clemens, Bonds and Schilling should all be in, too.
Clemens - Yes
Bonds - hell no.  no one on the roids should be in
Schilling - on the fence with him.  key pitcher for two WS winning teams but overall career, not good enough IMO
clemens pretty clearly did roids
clearly?  I'd disagree.  his body didn't ridiculously balloon up like Bonds and Sosa's (and a number of others) did.
 if it's determined (as in proven) that he did, then I'd keep him out.
Most of the steroid takers did not balloon up as there are lots of reasons to take them.  The shear fact that you don't think Clemens took them when faced with all of the evidence that he did, is quite frankly the most astonishing thing that has ever been stated on this board.
to be perfectly honest, I haven't really followed baseball since '94 when the strike cancelled the WS.  figured if the players didn't think the game mattered that much to them, it won't matter that much to me.

with that said, I didn't follow the steroid scandal closely but the major headlines were unavoidable in the news so the biggest names implicated were Bonds, Mcguire, Sosa, Giambi, A-Rod.  no doubt there were others but since I didn't care about the game anymore, I didn't track everyone implicated.  As I mentioned, if there's proof Clemens took the roids, or anyone else for that matter, they shouldn't be in the HOF.  period.  of course the standards of who gets in seems to be a lot lower in recent years though I have no quarrel with Ortiz getting in (provided he wasn't on roids).