Tweet
Steroids Notes- Hall Of Fame-Mac 2006
Steroids, Bagwell, and others on the Hall issue...
From A Houston Newspaper.
I was watching a show on CNBC the other night with Jose Canseco and his lawyer as guests. His lawyer implied that Barry Bonds might have been on the DL all year because then he could not be tested for steroids.
Is this true, because if a player is not required to test because he is on the DL, then why haven't I heard anyone in the media bring up this point?
Also I caught a few minutes of your guest appearance on 610 the other morning and you said that you if you had to choose between whether you thought Bagwell was on the juice or not
You said he probably was. Now in saying that, what implications is this going to have in the future considering the fact that I can go team by team in the '90s and probably pick over two dozen obvious candidates for juicers?
Finally, with this Palmeiro issue, I would definitely put him in the Hall over McGwire and Sosa just because of his all-around numbers compared to the other two. I'm not saying I think he should make it, but if McGwire and Sosa are elected there should be no way he gets left out, do you agree?
Point by point...
• 1. My understanding is that players can be tested whether they're on the disabled list or not. Bonds isn't playing because his knee is in bad shape. It's in such bad shape that it's unclelar if he'll ever play again.
• 2. Regarding Bagwell, I have no idea if he used steroids or not. Until I find out, I consider him innocent and will vote for him for the Hall of Fame.
A friend wrote me a note the other day and asked: ''How long before people starting pointing a finger at Roger Clemens?''
Huh? Clemens was winning before steroids entered the game. He has continued to win for 22 seasons. As far as I know, he has not tested positive.
Like Bagwell, he ought to be considered innocent until someone proves otherwise. All we know for sure right now is that Rafael Palmeiro took a steroid.
We're getting carried away pointing fingers at various players. I've had mail about Bagwell, Clemens, etc.
The point is this: only Raffy Palmeiro tested positive. He's the only guy we know. Leaked grand jury testimony tied Bonds, Giambi and Sheffield to steroids.
You can drive yourself crazy wondering about all the others. Until I know Jeff Bagwell took steroids or until he tests positive, I'm voting for him.
As for Bagwell, because he's a power hitter in this generation, because his body got bigger, he falls under the same umbrella of suspicion that many others do.
Even if he didn't use them, his accomplishments will be looked upon skeptically because he's a member of the steroid generation. That's unfair, but the players have only their union to thank. Had they agreed to testing earlier, this thing would be old news by now.
Steroids were added to the banned list in 1991 even though there was no testing until 2003. If a player was using steroids, he was cheating.
• 3. McGwire will be the first guy voters decide on. I believe he's on the ballot in Dec. 2006. At this point, I won't vote for him.
Regarding Hall of Fame voting, I'm hoping I can reach some clarity on the issue before I have to decide. Was using steroids a felony? Was it less than that?
Old-timers like Bob Gibson said they used them. It's important to remember how competitive these people are. They're driven to succeed. If someone came to them and offered something that would make them better, a lot of them aren't going to see the big picture. They're going to do what they have to do to get better.
The problem is they made the playing field uneven for others, they know they were using a banned substance and they were telling young players they, too, had to juice to succeed.
For all those reasons, I won't vote for a player I know has juiced. Maybe I'll change my mind.
People use the excuse that there are plenty of bad guys in the Hall of Fame. I can't do anything about them. I'm voting for the guy I'm voting for.
What steroid users did struck at the heart of the game. Maybe it's not as bad as what Pete Rose did, but it nevertheless is a character issue.
If you look at, say, Bobby Cox, who was arrested for hitting his wife, that, too, is a character issue. But it's not an integrity-of-the-game issue. Does that mean he should get in the Hall and Palmeiro shouldn't?
Those are hard questions, and it comes down to each guy with his ballot. I would imagine a hundred sportswriters will have a hundred different opinions on the matter.
Random notes...
• A Congressman talks about steroids and makes a fool of himself. This story made my day.
• Joe Morgan is angry about Rafael Palmeiro using steroids. People who've known Joe for awhile understand that he's always angry about something.
• Quote of the day
"I hated to bat against Drysdale. After he hit you, he'd come around, look at the bruise on your arm and say, 'Do you want me to sign it?' "--Mickey Mantle.
• Happy 43rd, Roger Clemens
From A Houston Newspaper.
I was watching a show on CNBC the other night with Jose Canseco and his lawyer as guests. His lawyer implied that Barry Bonds might have been on the DL all year because then he could not be tested for steroids.
Is this true, because if a player is not required to test because he is on the DL, then why haven't I heard anyone in the media bring up this point?
Also I caught a few minutes of your guest appearance on 610 the other morning and you said that you if you had to choose between whether you thought Bagwell was on the juice or not
You said he probably was. Now in saying that, what implications is this going to have in the future considering the fact that I can go team by team in the '90s and probably pick over two dozen obvious candidates for juicers?
Finally, with this Palmeiro issue, I would definitely put him in the Hall over McGwire and Sosa just because of his all-around numbers compared to the other two. I'm not saying I think he should make it, but if McGwire and Sosa are elected there should be no way he gets left out, do you agree?
Point by point...
• 1. My understanding is that players can be tested whether they're on the disabled list or not. Bonds isn't playing because his knee is in bad shape. It's in such bad shape that it's unclelar if he'll ever play again.
• 2. Regarding Bagwell, I have no idea if he used steroids or not. Until I find out, I consider him innocent and will vote for him for the Hall of Fame.
A friend wrote me a note the other day and asked: ''How long before people starting pointing a finger at Roger Clemens?''
Huh? Clemens was winning before steroids entered the game. He has continued to win for 22 seasons. As far as I know, he has not tested positive.
Like Bagwell, he ought to be considered innocent until someone proves otherwise. All we know for sure right now is that Rafael Palmeiro took a steroid.
We're getting carried away pointing fingers at various players. I've had mail about Bagwell, Clemens, etc.
The point is this: only Raffy Palmeiro tested positive. He's the only guy we know. Leaked grand jury testimony tied Bonds, Giambi and Sheffield to steroids.
You can drive yourself crazy wondering about all the others. Until I know Jeff Bagwell took steroids or until he tests positive, I'm voting for him.
As for Bagwell, because he's a power hitter in this generation, because his body got bigger, he falls under the same umbrella of suspicion that many others do.
Even if he didn't use them, his accomplishments will be looked upon skeptically because he's a member of the steroid generation. That's unfair, but the players have only their union to thank. Had they agreed to testing earlier, this thing would be old news by now.
Steroids were added to the banned list in 1991 even though there was no testing until 2003. If a player was using steroids, he was cheating.
• 3. McGwire will be the first guy voters decide on. I believe he's on the ballot in Dec. 2006. At this point, I won't vote for him.
Regarding Hall of Fame voting, I'm hoping I can reach some clarity on the issue before I have to decide. Was using steroids a felony? Was it less than that?
Old-timers like Bob Gibson said they used them. It's important to remember how competitive these people are. They're driven to succeed. If someone came to them and offered something that would make them better, a lot of them aren't going to see the big picture. They're going to do what they have to do to get better.
The problem is they made the playing field uneven for others, they know they were using a banned substance and they were telling young players they, too, had to juice to succeed.
For all those reasons, I won't vote for a player I know has juiced. Maybe I'll change my mind.
People use the excuse that there are plenty of bad guys in the Hall of Fame. I can't do anything about them. I'm voting for the guy I'm voting for.
What steroid users did struck at the heart of the game. Maybe it's not as bad as what Pete Rose did, but it nevertheless is a character issue.
If you look at, say, Bobby Cox, who was arrested for hitting his wife, that, too, is a character issue. But it's not an integrity-of-the-game issue. Does that mean he should get in the Hall and Palmeiro shouldn't?
Those are hard questions, and it comes down to each guy with his ballot. I would imagine a hundred sportswriters will have a hundred different opinions on the matter.
Random notes...
• A Congressman talks about steroids and makes a fool of himself. This story made my day.
• Joe Morgan is angry about Rafael Palmeiro using steroids. People who've known Joe for awhile understand that he's always angry about something.
• Quote of the day
"I hated to bat against Drysdale. After he hit you, he'd come around, look at the bruise on your arm and say, 'Do you want me to sign it?' "--Mickey Mantle.
• Happy 43rd, Roger Clemens
