Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Other Sports (http://www.thewarpath.net/other-sports/)
-   -   Who doesn't vote for Ripken? (http://www.thewarpath.net/other-sports/16729-who-doesnt-vote-for-ripken.html)

onlydarksets 01-09-2007 04:20 AM

Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
[url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070109/ap_on_sp_ba_ne/bbo_hall_of_fame_4]Gwynn, Ripken will fall short of perfect - Yahoo! News[/url]

Seriously, how can you possibly think that Tony Gwynn and Cal, Jr. were on the juice? Has this guy Paul Ladewski actually seen a picture of either of these guys? What a joker.

dmek25 01-09-2007 04:58 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
i dont have a witty reply to this

djnemo65 01-09-2007 05:18 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
Yeah, but there has never been a unanimous pick in history. Every year someone votes no just to preserve that tradition. It's stupid, but not surprising.

FRPLG 01-09-2007 08:18 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
He's a self important jackass who thinks he knows what's best. I think voters like him should lose their voting privileges.

Mattyk 01-09-2007 11:37 PM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
He's not voting for anyone from the steroid era.

jsarno 01-10-2007 01:18 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
This disturbs me:
[quote]Ty Cobb was left off four ballots, Nolan Ryan wasn't on six, Hank Aaron on nine, Babe Ruth on 11 and Willie Mays on 23. Joe DiMaggio needed to appear on the ballot three times to get in, receiving 44 percent and 69 percent in his first two tries.[/quote]

Wow...How can it take DiMaggio 3 times, or Aaron 9? Babe Ruth was THE BEST player of his era, hands down, and he was on 11? Mays on 23? Come on! He was arguably the best baseball player of all time!

That being said, I honestly feel that guy, Ledewski, should be stripped of his right to vote. Ripken is a no brainer for the hall. No question. You don't put in a no vote. Vote for Gossage or Rice...both of whom are extremely derserving, and neither played in the steroid era.

BDBohnzie 01-10-2007 08:29 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
He's making a blanket statement about the era of baseball, not the fact that both Ripken and Gwynn are Hall worthy. He's also bucking the trend to get some publicity and get his name read. While I don't agree with his ethic, he has earned the right to vote, and shouldn't be stripped of that.

jsarno - not sure I follow your logic. The above, when referring to Cobb, Ryan, Aaron, Ruth and Mays, refer to the number of people who didn't vote for each player. All of those guys made it in on their first ballot. Not sure why DiMaggio took 3 years to get in...

onlydarksets 01-10-2007 08:44 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
[quote=Mattyk72;268867]He's not voting for anyone from the steroid era.[/quote]

I read the article and understand that, but it's twisted logic. Ripken was a HoF'er by 1993, which is when this guy claims is the start of the "steroid era". Plus, Ripken is not in the hall for his bat, he's there for his glove and for his ironman consistency (which is damn near impossible on the roids because it tends to makes you more injury prone). It's just ludicrous to lump Ripken in with players like Mcgwire, who get Hall-talk because of what they did [U]after[/U] 1993.

GhettoDogAllStars 01-10-2007 08:56 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
Just for the record: they didn't vote "no", they just didn't vote. They knew they would get in without a hitch. They just didn't want it to be unanimous because they don't think these guys are better than the others who came before them and didn't get unanimous elections. It Makes sense. Neither Ripken or Gwynn are/were better than Ruth, Cobbs, Mays, et. al.

jdlea 01-10-2007 11:02 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
[QUOTE=jsarno;268901]This disturbs me:


Wow...How can it take DiMaggio 3 times, or Aaron 9? Babe Ruth was THE BEST player of his era, hands down, and he was on 11? Mays on 23? Come on! He was arguably the best baseball player of all time!

That being said, I honestly feel that guy, Ledewski, should be stripped of his right to vote. Ripken is a no brainer for the hall. No question. You don't put in a no vote. Vote for Gossage or Rice...both of whom are extremely derserving, and neither played in the steroid era.[/QUOTE]

No, the only one that it took more than one try was DiMaggio, which is ****in ridiculous. He was an amazing hitter.

What they're saying about the others, though, is that they didn't get voted for by 9, 11, or 23 people respectively. They all got in on the first ballot, just saying that they had those jackasses not vote for them. However, with a guy like Ruth, I can see him missing a few votes because they are supposed to vote on character as well, he and Cobb should have been left off of ballots cause they were such dicks. However, they were so good that they have to be first ballot guys, kind of a tough spot.

With all that said, those issues make me think that McGwire should be in the Hall. It's a museum of the history of baseball! You can't act like the steroids era didn't exist! If let an outright racist like Cobb or a pretty sorry human being like Ruth in, I think you need to let a guy like McGwire in. He probably cheated, but baseball sold its soul to bring people back to the game by letting guys like McGwire and Canseco go untested for so long. I don't wanna hear the baseball guys crying foul. They knew what was going on and they didn't want it to stop, not with everyone turning out to see the games. He helped save baseball, and it was more than likely steroids aided, baseball didn't care then, they shouldn't care now.

And, for the record, MLB is a bunch of cowards. They dump all of this on the sports writers and say, "you figure it out." They don't do anything to retroactively punish McGwire or Canseco, they just turn it over to the sports writers who vote for the hall and hope they don't get in. Well, they're taking the same stance as Selig: pretend it's not happening. This is the stance he's taking with Bonds and it makes me sick. Make it a big deal and put an asterisk by the numbers or you could just do like you did with Rose and ban him from the game. I say let McGwire and Pete Rose into the Hall and put this right on their plaque:

McGwire: career home runs and slugging percentage were more than likely strongly aided by the use of performance enhancing drugs

Rose: banned from the game, effectively ending his career because he bet on baseball, comprimising the integrity of the game.

SmootSmack 01-10-2007 11:19 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
I agree with you Jdlea, except what Pete Rose did was illegal while he was in uniform. What Mark McGwire allegedly did was not illegal while he was in uniform. If they're going to let Gaylord Perry, who made his career on illegally doctoring baseballs while pitching, in the hall of fame then they should let McGwire in.

jdlea 01-10-2007 11:44 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
[QUOTE=TAFKAS;269013]I agree with you Jdlea, except what Pete Rose did was illegal while he was in uniform. What Mark McGwire allegedly did was not illegal while he was in uniform. If they're going to let Gaylord Perry, who made his career on illegally doctoring baseballs while pitching, in the hall of fame then they should let McGwire in.[/QUOTE]

I see your point, but if Strawberry or Doc Gooden had better numbers then they would let them in. The legality of a guy's actions aren't really what should be questioned. I understand that that speaks to their character, but as I said, with a precedent of Ty Cobb, it's hard to argue that anyone has too poor character to be in the Hall of Fame. While I understand the argument about the integrity of the game, I don't think baseball can deny the whole era happened.

Also, something to consider, with Jason Grimsley (who was a mediocre pitcher at best) admitting to steroid use, how many pitchers were possibly using steroids as well? How is anyone to know that a Glavine or Smoltz or Maddux weren't juicing. They're bodies don't appear that they had, but having read Canseco's book, he claims you don't have to get huge, you can just make your muscles twitch faster, that would seem advantageous to someone looking to add some miles per hour to his pitches. The fact is no one knows how rampant steroids were and no one really knows if McGwire was using the juice to hit homers while pitchers were using the juice to hit 100 on the gun. It's a very touchy situation, but pretending like the problem isn't there will not make it go away.

GhettoDogAllStars 01-10-2007 11:48 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
[QUOTE=TAFKAS;269013]If they're going to let Gaylord Perry, who made his career on illegally doctoring baseballs while pitching, in the hall of fame then they should let McGwire in.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. There were other eras of questionable integrity, yet players from those eras still go to the hall. If I'm voting, there is no room for speculation. I can't say, "well, I think he might have used performance enhancing drugs, so I won't vote for him." I think any voter using that kind of logic to keep Mac out should have their voting privleges revoked.

SmootSmack 01-10-2007 11:56 AM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
[QUOTE=jdlea;269029]I see your point, but if Strawberry or Doc Gooden had better numbers then they would let them in. The legality of a guy's actions aren't really what should be questioned. I understand that that speaks to their character, but as I said, with a precedent of Ty Cobb, it's hard to argue that anyone has too poor character to be in the Hall of Fame. While I understand the argument about the integrity of the game, I don't think baseball can deny the whole era happened.

Also, something to consider, with Jason Grimsley (who was a mediocre pitcher at best) admitting to steroid use, how many pitchers were possibly using steroids as well? How is anyone to know that a Glavine or Smoltz or Maddux weren't juicing. They're bodies don't appear that they had, but having read Canseco's book, he claims you don't have to get huge, you can just make your muscles twitch faster, that would seem advantageous to someone looking to add some miles per hour to his pitches. The fact is no one knows how rampant steroids were and no one really knows if McGwire was using the juice to hit homers while pitchers were using the juice to hit 100 on the gun. It's a very touchy situation, but pretending like the problem isn't there will not make it go away.[/QUOTE]

Totally agree on the pitching. I mean the majority of people suspended have been pitchers.

jsarno 01-10-2007 12:57 PM

Re: Who doesn't vote for Ripken?
 
[QUOTE=jdlea;269004]No, the only one that it took more than one try was DiMaggio, which is ****in ridiculous. He was an amazing hitter.

What they're saying about the others, though, is that they didn't get voted for by 9, 11, or 23 people respectively. They all got in on the first ballot, just saying that they had those jackasses not vote for them. However, with a guy like Ruth, I can see him missing a few votes because they are supposed to vote on character as well, he and Cobb should have been left off of ballots cause they were such dicks. However, they were so good that they have to be first ballot guys, kind of a tough spot.

With all that said, those issues make me think that McGwire should be in the Hall. It's a museum of the history of baseball! You can't act like the steroids era didn't exist! If let an outright racist like Cobb or a pretty sorry human being like Ruth in, I think you need to let a guy like McGwire in. He probably cheated, but baseball sold its soul to bring people back to the game by letting guys like McGwire and Canseco go untested for so long. I don't wanna hear the baseball guys crying foul. They knew what was going on and they didn't want it to stop, not with everyone turning out to see the games. He helped save baseball, and it was more than likely steroids aided, baseball didn't care then, they shouldn't care now.

And, for the record, MLB is a bunch of cowards. They dump all of this on the sports writers and say, "you figure it out." They don't do anything to retroactively punish McGwire or Canseco, they just turn it over to the sports writers who vote for the hall and hope they don't get in. Well, they're taking the same stance as Selig: pretend it's not happening. This is the stance he's taking with Bonds and it makes me sick. Make it a big deal and put an asterisk by the numbers or you could just do like you did with Rose and ban him from the game. I say let McGwire and Pete Rose into the Hall and put this right on their plaque:

McGwire: career home runs and slugging percentage were more than likely strongly aided by the use of performance enhancing drugs

Rose: banned from the game, effectively ending his career because he bet on baseball, comprimising the integrity of the game.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for clarifying. I think I saw the DiMaggio section taking 3 years to get in and I assumed the rest were talking about how many years it took too. I misunderstood.
Fact is, McGwire should be in the hall. He almost single handedly brought baseball back from the grave. He admitted to using performance enhancing drugs when no one was whispering a word, but the key is, it was LEGAL performance enhancing drugs. How is this McGwire's fault? If it's do to the speculation of steroids, well, then Bonds should be stripped of all his stats since I don't think there is a single soul that is more guilty of steroids in baseball than Bonds. The only thing missing is the blood test or his admission, everything else is common knowledge.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.

Page generated in 0.08106 seconds with 8 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25