2019 MLB HOF Class...

I never said McGriff isn't deserving of the HOF, btw. .284/.377/.509 is a damn good hitter. But .297/.408/.540 is a lot better. Like, a lot. 30+ point differential in both OBP and SLG is huge.

 

Even if you want to discount the SLG advantage due to, uh, "training regimen," the OBP difference is massive.

 

I think it looks massive on paper but in reality isn't. Let's say a good long career lasts 12 seasons....assuming the player is healthy and plays nearly the whole season he's gonna have something like 700 plate appearances a year, ballpark. Over 12 seasons that 8400 plate appearances.

Player A gets on base at a pace of .408....he would have gotten on base 3427 times in those 8400 appearances. Essentially 286 times a season.
Player B would have gotten on base 3167 times....or 264 times a season.
Player A is definitely performing better but it's not massive. It's 22 times a season...something around 3 or 4 more hits/walks/whatever per month.

In my mind when you then consider that Player A used chemistry while Player B used only what he was naturally born with....I have a really hard time saying Player A is significantly better than Player B.

Bagwell was definitely the better baserunner and defender...that combined with his obviously advantage in raw numbers I will give you he's likely the better player. I just don't see McGriff being all that far behind.

 

a long time ago in a NFL far, far away...

 

speaking of peds...everyone says "look at Barry Bonds head size, etc." yeah well look at the rookie card of Cal Ripken Jr and look at him years later. Not saying Cal cheated, but wow he has a big head.

 

Fair enough. Suffice to say I place a lot more value on the exponential difficulty of that one extra time a week on base than you do, but I get where you're coming from.

 

Not trying to devalue it....I think you're correct here.

 

Aw, don't go messing with one of the "don't let the PED guys in" people's sacred cows lol.

I mean to some degree that shit just happens...my head's fatter now than it was 20 years ago, too, lol. That said, it wouldn't shock to me learn Cal had some help getting up for some of those 2,632 games here or there, either.

 

Personally...I'm 100% okay with those that did PEDs getting in if their play on the field justifies it.

Since you can't with 100% determine who was or wasn't on PEDs and when....the only right thing to do in my opinion is vote for those that did enough on the field to be a HOFer.

 

to me that's bonds. clemens, palmeiro, arod and ramirez.

 

well the mitchell report had names on it. that's one way you can tell....?

 

Yeah it has names but from those names can you determine exactly who did what and when? What numbers are influenced by PEDs and what numbers aren't?

 

i don't recall what it said. i thought it listed all the players that failed a mlb drug test?

 

It did. But it doesn't have evidence for all of them. And to my knowledge doesn't have timelines for who was on what and when. Some guys took roids and other things their entire careers...others for only bits and pieces.

 

ok thanks bww.

 

funny how canseco was laughed at for his book about some of the game's biggest names on steroids and he was right !

 

Fred McGriff and Tony Fernandez for Rob Alomar and Joe Carter, best jays trade ever.

 

The Mitchell report should be treated more as strong evidence that MLB had a PED problem than an indictment of the 89 players whose names are mentioned and/or an exoneration of those who are not. There was no testing in place during the time frame Mitchell investigated, so none of those players failed a test, whatever their connection to the Radomskis, McNamees, et al, of the world may have been.

 

And if you look at the 89 names in the Mitchell report and the 103 names on the list that failed the random tests in 2002 (which remember was never supposed to have been made public in the first place), they run the gamut from ham-and-egg utility guys to the most elite players in the game. So good luck sorting out who did what, how much, for how long, and how much effect any of it actually had on player performance from all that. Never mind all the guys already in the Hall that have admitted to taking stuff or known to have.

 

and yet HOF'ers Joe Morgan and Barry Larkin are so against the steroid guys like Bonds and Clemens from getting into the HOF when some of their fellow HOF members are dirty.