Author Topic: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame  (Read 13303 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #30 on: January 26, 2022, 10:00:25 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31195
  • Tommy Points: 1439
Iím glad heís 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).
Why do steroids bother you in baseball?  Do you have the same feeling about NFL players that used steroids?  What about other forms of illegal drugs or forms of cheating in baseball?
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 #31 on: January 26, 2022, 10:05:56 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31371
  • Tommy Points: 10002
Iím glad heís 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).
Why do steroids bother you in baseball?  Do you have the same feeling about NFL players that used steroids?  What about other forms of illegal drugs or forms of cheating in baseball?
that bothers me as well.  Example, didn't follow the Astros issue in the WS other than hearing they were stealing signs out of the bullpen/outfield camera (if that's not what happened, bear in mind I don't follow the sport closely).  to me, that's something that requires a serious penalty be applied to the franchise.  It's not the same as a runner on second or the third base coach trying to read the catcher's signs--that's been going on for years and both teams have the opportunity to do it.  the cameras in the outfield were a distinct advantage to just the Astros.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #32 on: January 26, 2022, 10:48:05 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 54613
  • Tommy Points: -25874
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
Does anybody differentiate between PEDs vs. steroids vs. HGN?

Take a guy like Clemens.  Let's say he took steroid shots.  Steroids don't make you stronger.  Rather, they help your body heal faster.  That's obviously helpful as regarding injuries, but it also makes it so guys can lift more often.  They still have to put in the work, though.  If you're not lifting and working out, all steroids are going to do is make you fat and puffy.  Clemens was a workout machine.

HGN, on the other hand, helps build muscle mass without the insane workouts, from what I understand.  It also can improve eye sight / coordination.  To me, while both are bad, HGN is worse, because it's a shortcut.

I frankly think that some sort of steroid use should be legal in sports.  There are side effects, but the healing effects carry substantial benefit.  If a drug like that is going to cut months off of an athlete's recovery time, or make them less likely to get severely injured in the first place, I'd let all of these guys do them under a doctor's care.


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

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #33 on: January 26, 2022, 11:13:20 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31195
  • Tommy Points: 1439
Iím glad heís 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).
Why do steroids bother you in baseball?  Do you have the same feeling about NFL players that used steroids?  What about other forms of illegal drugs or forms of cheating in baseball?
that bothers me as well.  Example, didn't follow the Astros issue in the WS other than hearing they were stealing signs out of the bullpen/outfield camera (if that's not what happened, bear in mind I don't follow the sport closely).  to me, that's something that requires a serious penalty be applied to the franchise.  It's not the same as a runner on second or the third base coach trying to read the catcher's signs--that's been going on for years and both teams have the opportunity to do it.  the cameras in the outfield were a distinct advantage to just the Astros.
Take Willie Mays and other players of his era.  They almost certainly used "greenies" i.e. speed and other forms of amphetamines to help them stay alert and get through the grind of a long season, thus enhancing performance.  I mean there are stories out there that Mays had a liquid form of amphetamine in his locker when he played for the Mets.  If that is ok, why aren't steroids?  That is what I mean when I talk about hypocrisy.  Illegal speed, ok, non-illegal steroids, not ok.  The baseball HOF is riddled with cheats, admitted cheats, cheats that were caught, but they single out one form of cheating, but then let the guys in who they like they had that one form of cheating.  The Baseball HOF is a joke.  It should be disregarded entirely until they actually stop with the moral high horse nonsense.  If you don't put arguably the greatest pitcher and greatest hitter in the entire sports history in your HOF, then your HOF isn't really a HOF, it is a farce, which pretty much describes baseball of the last 15 years.  There is a reason no one watches it anymore.  There is a reason youth don't play it anymore.  The league is out of touch with reality. 
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 #34 on: January 26, 2022, 11:17:59 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31371
  • Tommy Points: 10002
Does anybody differentiate between PEDs vs. steroids vs. HGN?

Take a guy like Clemens.  Let's say he took steroid shots.  Steroids don't make you stronger.  Rather, they help your body heal faster.  That's obviously helpful as regarding injuries, but it also makes it so guys can lift more often.  They still have to put in the work, though.  If you're not lifting and working out, all steroids are going to do is make you fat and puffy.  Clemens was a workout machine.

HGN, on the other hand, helps build muscle mass without the insane workouts, from what I understand.  It also can improve eye sight / coordination.  To me, while both are bad, HGN is worse, because it's a shortcut.

I frankly think that some sort of steroid use should be legal in sports.  There are side effects, but the healing effects carry substantial benefit.  If a drug like that is going to cut months off of an athlete's recovery time, or make them less likely to get severely injured in the first place, I'd let all of these guys do them under a doctor's care.
I think the general opposition isn't so much the substance but the purpose behind taking it.  if it's part of a legitimate medical necessity, should be no issue.  if it's used outside of a medical need to gain a physical advantage, that should be penalized by the sport.  Over the counter stuff shouldn't matter but it's the substances that require prescriptions to obtain or are illegal that are the issue.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #35 on: January 26, 2022, 11:19:28 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 54613
  • Tommy Points: -25874
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
Iím glad heís 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).
Why do steroids bother you in baseball?  Do you have the same feeling about NFL players that used steroids?  What about other forms of illegal drugs or forms of cheating in baseball?
that bothers me as well.  Example, didn't follow the Astros issue in the WS other than hearing they were stealing signs out of the bullpen/outfield camera (if that's not what happened, bear in mind I don't follow the sport closely).  to me, that's something that requires a serious penalty be applied to the franchise.  It's not the same as a runner on second or the third base coach trying to read the catcher's signs--that's been going on for years and both teams have the opportunity to do it.  the cameras in the outfield were a distinct advantage to just the Astros.
Take Willie Mays and other players of his era.  They almost certainly used "greenies" i.e. speed and other forms of amphetamines to help them stay alert and get through the grind of a long season, thus enhancing performance.  I mean there are stories out there that Mays had a liquid form of amphetamine in his locker when he played for the Mets.  If that is ok, why aren't steroids?  That is what I mean when I talk about hypocrisy.  Illegal speed, ok, non-illegal steroids, not ok.  The baseball HOF is riddled with cheats, admitted cheats, cheats that were caught, but they single out one form of cheating, but then let the guys in who they like they had that one form of cheating.  The Baseball HOF is a joke.  It should be disregarded entirely until they actually stop with the moral high horse nonsense.  If you don't put arguably the greatest pitcher and greatest hitter in the entire sports history in your HOF, then your HOF isn't really a HOF, it is a farce, which pretty much describes baseball of the last 15 years.  There is a reason no one watches it anymore.  There is a reason youth don't play it anymore.  The league is out of touch with reality.

Yeah, two of my favorite players of all-time, Mays and Aaron, probably both cheated with use of illegal drugs.  But, everybody else was using them, too.  They were performance enhancing, but that was just the game at the time. 


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

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #36 on: January 26, 2022, 11:36:27 AM »

Offline greg683x

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3920
  • Tommy Points: 566
Does anybody differentiate between PEDs vs. steroids vs. HGN?

Take a guy like Clemens.  Let's say he took steroid shots.  Steroids don't make you stronger.  Rather, they help your body heal faster.  That's obviously helpful as regarding injuries, but it also makes it so guys can lift more often.  They still have to put in the work, though.  If you're not lifting and working out, all steroids are going to do is make you fat and puffy.  Clemens was a workout machine.

HGN, on the other hand, helps build muscle mass without the insane workouts, from what I understand.  It also can improve eye sight / coordination.  To me, while both are bad, HGN is worse, because it's a shortcut.

I frankly think that some sort of steroid use should be legal in sports.  There are side effects, but the healing effects carry substantial benefit.  If a drug like that is going to cut months off of an athlete's recovery time, or make them less likely to get severely injured in the first place, I'd let all of these guys do them under a doctor's care.

Look at Rogers numbers the last 3-4 seasons in Boston, then look at his numbers the two following seasons in Toronto when Mcname testified he started Clemens on roids.  His numbers arenít terrible those last couple seasons in Boston but in Toronto out of nowhere he has the two best seasons of his career, putting up numbers he hasnít flirted with in 12 years.

I just canít buy that all the steroids had to do with this is help him recover faster after workouts
Greg

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #37 on: January 26, 2022, 11:38:17 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31195
  • Tommy Points: 1439
Iím glad heís 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).
Why do steroids bother you in baseball?  Do you have the same feeling about NFL players that used steroids?  What about other forms of illegal drugs or forms of cheating in baseball?
that bothers me as well.  Example, didn't follow the Astros issue in the WS other than hearing they were stealing signs out of the bullpen/outfield camera (if that's not what happened, bear in mind I don't follow the sport closely).  to me, that's something that requires a serious penalty be applied to the franchise.  It's not the same as a runner on second or the third base coach trying to read the catcher's signs--that's been going on for years and both teams have the opportunity to do it.  the cameras in the outfield were a distinct advantage to just the Astros.
Take Willie Mays and other players of his era.  They almost certainly used "greenies" i.e. speed and other forms of amphetamines to help them stay alert and get through the grind of a long season, thus enhancing performance.  I mean there are stories out there that Mays had a liquid form of amphetamine in his locker when he played for the Mets.  If that is ok, why aren't steroids?  That is what I mean when I talk about hypocrisy.  Illegal speed, ok, non-illegal steroids, not ok.  The baseball HOF is riddled with cheats, admitted cheats, cheats that were caught, but they single out one form of cheating, but then let the guys in who they like they had that one form of cheating.  The Baseball HOF is a joke.  It should be disregarded entirely until they actually stop with the moral high horse nonsense.  If you don't put arguably the greatest pitcher and greatest hitter in the entire sports history in your HOF, then your HOF isn't really a HOF, it is a farce, which pretty much describes baseball of the last 15 years.  There is a reason no one watches it anymore.  There is a reason youth don't play it anymore.  The league is out of touch with reality.

Yeah, two of my favorite players of all-time, Mays and Aaron, probably both cheated with use of illegal drugs.  But, everybody else was using them, too.  They were performance enhancing, but that was just the game at the time.
Sure and the game in 90's/early 00's was riddled with steroids.  They were everywhere and pretty much everyone was taking them making it no different than Greenies of that era. 
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 #38 on: January 26, 2022, 11:43:15 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31371
  • Tommy Points: 10002
Iím glad heís 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).
Why do steroids bother you in baseball?  Do you have the same feeling about NFL players that used steroids?  What about other forms of illegal drugs or forms of cheating in baseball?
that bothers me as well.  Example, didn't follow the Astros issue in the WS other than hearing they were stealing signs out of the bullpen/outfield camera (if that's not what happened, bear in mind I don't follow the sport closely).  to me, that's something that requires a serious penalty be applied to the franchise.  It's not the same as a runner on second or the third base coach trying to read the catcher's signs--that's been going on for years and both teams have the opportunity to do it.  the cameras in the outfield were a distinct advantage to just the Astros.
Take Willie Mays and other players of his era.  They almost certainly used "greenies" i.e. speed and other forms of amphetamines to help them stay alert and get through the grind of a long season, thus enhancing performance.  I mean there are stories out there that Mays had a liquid form of amphetamine in his locker when he played for the Mets.  If that is ok, why aren't steroids?  That is what I mean when I talk about hypocrisy.  Illegal speed, ok, non-illegal steroids, not ok.  The baseball HOF is riddled with cheats, admitted cheats, cheats that were caught, but they single out one form of cheating, but then let the guys in who they like they had that one form of cheating.  The Baseball HOF is a joke.  It should be disregarded entirely until they actually stop with the moral high horse nonsense.  If you don't put arguably the greatest pitcher and greatest hitter in the entire sports history in your HOF, then your HOF isn't really a HOF, it is a farce, which pretty much describes baseball of the last 15 years.  There is a reason no one watches it anymore.  There is a reason youth don't play it anymore.  The league is out of touch with reality.
feel free to stick to your absolutism.  personally, I draw the line at substances that alter/improve a player's physique such that it provides an abnormal physical advantage.

Greenies don't fit that criteria.  I'm not advocating for their use nor do I like that they were used.  Steroids/HGH is a different situation.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #39 on: January 26, 2022, 11:46:21 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 54613
  • Tommy Points: -25874
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
Does anybody differentiate between PEDs vs. steroids vs. HGN?

Take a guy like Clemens.  Let's say he took steroid shots.  Steroids don't make you stronger.  Rather, they help your body heal faster.  That's obviously helpful as regarding injuries, but it also makes it so guys can lift more often.  They still have to put in the work, though.  If you're not lifting and working out, all steroids are going to do is make you fat and puffy.  Clemens was a workout machine.

HGN, on the other hand, helps build muscle mass without the insane workouts, from what I understand.  It also can improve eye sight / coordination.  To me, while both are bad, HGN is worse, because it's a shortcut.

I frankly think that some sort of steroid use should be legal in sports.  There are side effects, but the healing effects carry substantial benefit.  If a drug like that is going to cut months off of an athlete's recovery time, or make them less likely to get severely injured in the first place, I'd let all of these guys do them under a doctor's care.

Look at Rogers numbers the last 3-4 seasons in Boston, then look at his numbers the two following seasons in Toronto when Mcname testified he started Clemens on roids.  His numbers arenít terrible those last couple seasons in Boston but in Toronto out of nowhere he has the two best seasons of his career, putting up numbers he hasnít flirted with in 12 years.

I just canít buy that all the steroids had to do with this is help him recover faster after workouts

Why?  He was healthy, and he was in shape.

The man still went out there and pitched.  His workouts are legendary.  Steroids allowed him to be his healthiest and to workout at an insane pace.

Like I said, give a lazy dude steroids and all thatís going to happen is theyíll be bloated and angry, with smaller testicles and a lot of acne.


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

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #40 on: January 26, 2022, 11:48:42 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31195
  • Tommy Points: 1439
Iím glad heís 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).
Why do steroids bother you in baseball?  Do you have the same feeling about NFL players that used steroids?  What about other forms of illegal drugs or forms of cheating in baseball?
that bothers me as well.  Example, didn't follow the Astros issue in the WS other than hearing they were stealing signs out of the bullpen/outfield camera (if that's not what happened, bear in mind I don't follow the sport closely).  to me, that's something that requires a serious penalty be applied to the franchise.  It's not the same as a runner on second or the third base coach trying to read the catcher's signs--that's been going on for years and both teams have the opportunity to do it.  the cameras in the outfield were a distinct advantage to just the Astros.
Take Willie Mays and other players of his era.  They almost certainly used "greenies" i.e. speed and other forms of amphetamines to help them stay alert and get through the grind of a long season, thus enhancing performance.  I mean there are stories out there that Mays had a liquid form of amphetamine in his locker when he played for the Mets.  If that is ok, why aren't steroids?  That is what I mean when I talk about hypocrisy.  Illegal speed, ok, non-illegal steroids, not ok.  The baseball HOF is riddled with cheats, admitted cheats, cheats that were caught, but they single out one form of cheating, but then let the guys in who they like they had that one form of cheating.  The Baseball HOF is a joke.  It should be disregarded entirely until they actually stop with the moral high horse nonsense.  If you don't put arguably the greatest pitcher and greatest hitter in the entire sports history in your HOF, then your HOF isn't really a HOF, it is a farce, which pretty much describes baseball of the last 15 years.  There is a reason no one watches it anymore.  There is a reason youth don't play it anymore.  The league is out of touch with reality.
feel free to stick to your absolutism.  personally, I draw the line at substances that alter/improve a player's physique such that it provides an abnormal physical advantage.

Greenies don't fit that criteria.  I'm not advocating for their use nor do I like that they were used.  Steroids/HGH is a different situation.
Seems like a strange line to draw in the sand.  performance enhancing drugs that make you stronger are bad, but performance enhancing drugs that help you recover faster and allow you to actually play and not miss games, are good (and I know you didn't say they were good, but illustrating the line).  I just don't see how 1 form is ok, but 1 form is not, especially when the one that is ok is actually illegal, while steroids are not necessarily illegal (depends on how they are taken, if prescribed, etc.).  And to be clear, I think they should all be banned (though neither was during the eras in question) and if you got caught you should be suspended, I just don't see how that should have any bearing on whether you make the HOF.  It has no bearing in any other sport, especially far more physical sports where abnormally strong players could cause real damage to other players, yet the one with almost no physical contact among players has taken this weird hardline in the sand. 
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 #41 on: January 26, 2022, 11:50:23 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 54613
  • Tommy Points: -25874
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
Iím glad heís 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).
Why do steroids bother you in baseball?  Do you have the same feeling about NFL players that used steroids?  What about other forms of illegal drugs or forms of cheating in baseball?
that bothers me as well.  Example, didn't follow the Astros issue in the WS other than hearing they were stealing signs out of the bullpen/outfield camera (if that's not what happened, bear in mind I don't follow the sport closely).  to me, that's something that requires a serious penalty be applied to the franchise.  It's not the same as a runner on second or the third base coach trying to read the catcher's signs--that's been going on for years and both teams have the opportunity to do it.  the cameras in the outfield were a distinct advantage to just the Astros.
Take Willie Mays and other players of his era.  They almost certainly used "greenies" i.e. speed and other forms of amphetamines to help them stay alert and get through the grind of a long season, thus enhancing performance.  I mean there are stories out there that Mays had a liquid form of amphetamine in his locker when he played for the Mets.  If that is ok, why aren't steroids?  That is what I mean when I talk about hypocrisy.  Illegal speed, ok, non-illegal steroids, not ok.  The baseball HOF is riddled with cheats, admitted cheats, cheats that were caught, but they single out one form of cheating, but then let the guys in who they like they had that one form of cheating.  The Baseball HOF is a joke.  It should be disregarded entirely until they actually stop with the moral high horse nonsense.  If you don't put arguably the greatest pitcher and greatest hitter in the entire sports history in your HOF, then your HOF isn't really a HOF, it is a farce, which pretty much describes baseball of the last 15 years.  There is a reason no one watches it anymore.  There is a reason youth don't play it anymore.  The league is out of touch with reality.
feel free to stick to your absolutism.  personally, I draw the line at substances that alter/improve a player's physique such that it provides an abnormal physical advantage.

Greenies don't fit that criteria.  I'm not advocating for their use nor do I like that they were used.  Steroids/HGH is a different situation.

They improve your alertness and reflexes, though.  Those are both extremely important to baseball.  If youíre using them and your opponent isnít, you have a large competitive advantage.

Itís all cheating.  What about the guys who use lube / scuffing / tack?  Apparently that was rampant the past year.  Blatant cheating.  Do we ban guys like Cole and Scherzer from the Hall?


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

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #42 on: January 26, 2022, 11:52:40 AM »

Offline johnnygreen

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1871
  • Tommy Points: 265
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.

There is no way Sosa and McGuire were better than Ortiz. However, I do agree that Clemens, Bonds, Sosa, and McGuire should have been elected in the HOF. The BBWAA shouldnít be the only factor in determining who gets into the HOF for the first 10 years of eligibility. I know thereís the veterans committee after the 10 years, but the honor at that point is almost a backhanded compliment. How can the same BBWAA not elect Clemens, Bonds, etc, but elect Bud Selig in 2017? He was the commissioner of MLB when the steroid/PED era took place. The game was very popular during that time, especially during the McGuire/Sosa home run chase. The members of the BBWAA probably made more money too because of the increased coverage to do TV and radio segments, in addition to their writing responsibilities.

Bud Selig, and everyone involved with the MLB had to know of the rampant steroid/PED use, but did nothing about it because they were all making more money. Even the members of the BBWAA had to know, because it was pretty obvious as a viewer, especially when someone like Brady Anderson could suddenly hit 50 home runs. If it wasnít for one sports writer asking Mark McGuire about a bottle in his locker, the scandal may have never broke.

BTW, I know steroids/PEDís are a big part of the conversation, especially since itís linked to why players like Clemens and Bonds werenít elected. However, I also donít think we should lose sight of what Ortiz accomplished that made him worthy of being elected into the HOF either. As a Red Sox fan, I will never forget that 2004 season, especially that 7 game series against the Yankees. After the Boston marathon bombing, Ortiz gave opening remarks before the teamís first game back from the incident, where he said ďThis is our fín cityĒ. There was also the World Series that year, where Ortiz was unstoppable against St. Louis. Iím sure there are countless stories people have from not only watching him play, but meeting him, or even his charitable contributions. Heck the guy is still a huge Red Sox ambassador now, during his pre and post-game shows.

Re: David Ortiz elected to Hall of Fame
« Reply #43 on: January 26, 2022, 11:55:58 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31195
  • Tommy Points: 1439
Does anybody differentiate between PEDs vs. steroids vs. HGN?

Take a guy like Clemens.  Let's say he took steroid shots.  Steroids don't make you stronger.  Rather, they help your body heal faster.  That's obviously helpful as regarding injuries, but it also makes it so guys can lift more often.  They still have to put in the work, though.  If you're not lifting and working out, all steroids are going to do is make you fat and puffy.  Clemens was a workout machine.

HGN, on the other hand, helps build muscle mass without the insane workouts, from what I understand.  It also can improve eye sight / coordination.  To me, while both are bad, HGN is worse, because it's a shortcut.

I frankly think that some sort of steroid use should be legal in sports.  There are side effects, but the healing effects carry substantial benefit.  If a drug like that is going to cut months off of an athlete's recovery time, or make them less likely to get severely injured in the first place, I'd let all of these guys do them under a doctor's care.

Look at Rogers numbers the last 3-4 seasons in Boston, then look at his numbers the two following seasons in Toronto when Mcname testified he started Clemens on roids.  His numbers arenít terrible those last couple seasons in Boston but in Toronto out of nowhere he has the two best seasons of his career, putting up numbers he hasnít flirted with in 12 years.

I just canít buy that all the steroids had to do with this is help him recover faster after workouts

Why?  He was healthy, and he was in shape.

The man still went out there and pitched.  His workouts are legendary.  Steroids allowed him to be his healthiest and to workout at an insane pace.

Like I said, give a lazy dude steroids and all thatís going to happen is theyíll be bloated and angry, with smaller testicles and a lot of acne.
There are several different types of steroids.  The ones the players used most frequently were not used for recovery, but for bulk and mass.  Some players of course used the ones more similar to cortisone and things like that, but by and large they were using the anabolic steroids which helped them create muscle mass and more strength, power, etc.

The Mayo Clinic did a pretty good job of describing all of the various forms of PED's including steroids, Andro, HGH, diuretics, stimulants, etc. 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/fitness/in-depth/performance-enhancing-drugs/art-20046134

I just don't think anyone should be picking and choosing which of those are ok to get you into the HOF and which ones are not ok, or which ones may be ok if you are well liked or not only slightly linked.  There should be no gray area, either kick basically everyone out, or just let everyone in (who is otherwise deserving based on accomplishments).   
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 #44 on: January 26, 2022, 12:11:10 PM »

Offline greg683x

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3920
  • Tommy Points: 566
Does anybody differentiate between PEDs vs. steroids vs. HGN?

Take a guy like Clemens.  Let's say he took steroid shots.  Steroids don't make you stronger.  Rather, they help your body heal faster.  That's obviously helpful as regarding injuries, but it also makes it so guys can lift more often.  They still have to put in the work, though.  If you're not lifting and working out, all steroids are going to do is make you fat and puffy.  Clemens was a workout machine.

HGN, on the other hand, helps build muscle mass without the insane workouts, from what I understand.  It also can improve eye sight / coordination.  To me, while both are bad, HGN is worse, because it's a shortcut.

I frankly think that some sort of steroid use should be legal in sports.  There are side effects, but the healing effects carry substantial benefit.  If a drug like that is going to cut months off of an athlete's recovery time, or make them less likely to get severely injured in the first place, I'd let all of these guys do them under a doctor's care.

Look at Rogers numbers the last 3-4 seasons in Boston, then look at his numbers the two following seasons in Toronto when Mcname testified he started Clemens on roids.  His numbers arenít terrible those last couple seasons in Boston but in Toronto out of nowhere he has the two best seasons of his career, putting up numbers he hasnít flirted with in 12 years.

I just canít buy that all the steroids had to do with this is help him recover faster after workouts

Why?  He was healthy, and he was in shape.

The man still went out there and pitched.  His workouts are legendary.  Steroids allowed him to be his healthiest and to workout at an insane pace.

Like I said, give a lazy dude steroids and all thatís going to happen is theyíll be bloated and angry, with smaller testicles and a lot of acne.

Iím sorry I just canít buy that Clemens, And Bonds for that matter, had this massive resurgence at the tail end of their careers and it was solely because of workout recovery. 
Greg