Every other baseball site on the Web is asking, so let's see what Bauxites think: Mark McGwire -- Hall of Famer?
| Yes, on the first ballot |  69 (51.11%) |
| Yes, but make him wait | 25 (18.52%) |
| No | 41 (30.37%) |
Sentimental bad news bears moment
"Let him in"
"Let him in"
"Let him in"
Stark: Let's lay this out on the table right now: If Gwynn, or Ripken, or both, should -- miracle of miracles -- become the first player(s) ever elected to Cooperstown unanimously, that's the story.
One writer's blank ballot precludes this possibility.
Side note: I lived in Chicago for 4 years, and never saw a copy of the Southtown. Mind you, I spent my time between the West suburbs and the North Side.
As for Starks' column, I agree with most of his choices. I didn't follow the NL closely in the early '80s, and I haven't paid a lot of attention to Dale Murphy's career so I won't comment on his candidacy, but I will say I don't think Jack Morris belongs.
I will say I don't think Jack Morris belongs.
I agree.
Strangely, just two paragraphs after rightfully pointing out that Dale Murphy's numbers needed to be placed in the context of when he played, Stark favourably compared Morris' lifetime ERA to Jason Schmidt's, entirely ignoring context. And, of course, ignoring that no one considers Schmidt a HoF pitcher, thereby making that particular comparative choice a strange one. For the record, Morris' career ERA+ is 105 and Schmidt's is 110, though Schmidt hasn't pitched in his mid- and late-30's yet, so could well see that number drop by the end of his career.
You do the dope, you don't get my vote.
He used steroids. He wasn't as good as his numbers say he was. He doesn't belong.
If he does get in mark his name with a little syringe instead of an asterisk so everyone knows his numbers were artificially inflated.
I've read many articles on both the pro and con side of this arguement. Both make strong points. I wouldn't fault anyone for whatever choice they make.
Since the baseball HOF has always erred on the side of keeping people out, I would lean towards the side of not voting for him now and re-evaluating again later.
Stark's comments infer that Maguire only started using steriods in 1995/6, and that only four years of his stats are inflated. My impression is that he had been 'enhancing' ever since the brothers began bashing in the late eighties. My impression is that every year of his career resulted in 'juiced' stats. I haven't tried to normalize his stats under this assumption. My thought with respect to this is, if you think you must normalize a player's stats because they were enhanced, then he should probably spend some time on the sidelines anyways. First time inductees should be no-brainers.
Interest article on LASIK surgery. It improves eyesight to better that "natural" 20/20 eyesight. Is it cheating?
another thought.....Is it cheating to use a doctor prescribed combination of hGH and anabolic steriods to assist your recovery from Tommy John surgery? With an injury that serious, I'm quite sure I'd do everything I could to improve my prospects for full recovery.
Also, the writer noted that DiMaggio had to wait 3 ballots and Babe Ruth 11 ballots.
What does this mean, wait 11 ballots? Ruth was part of the first class inducted.
I voted "NO."
But I loved watching the guy.
To me Canseco was the poster kid for what roids could do and McGwire was the "obscene evil green monster" that you could become if you pushed the outside of the roid envelope. I was thinking about Bo Jackson and where he'd fit into this discussion...what would Jim Rice be on roids, Dwight Evans, Hendu, Barfield, Bell, Winfield, etc., etc.?
It was so much simpler when all they took was uppers and booze.
The facts around "uppers" or "greenies" use in baseball since the 60's, and suffice it to say that many sources put use levels where it was considered normal, or even expected, makes all the the moralizing about steroids that much harder to take for me. MLB players have been taking illegal drugs for 40 years, possibly more. Baseball, and the media did nothing to prevent it, despite it being widely known, until just recently. Seriously, will people not voting for McGwire refuse to vote for any slugger from this time period? So leave out Bagwell, Thomas, Bonds, A-Rod, Palmeiro, Sosa, Pujols, etc... And when people look back in 30 years, and wonder why 5 of the top 10 home run hitters of all time aren't in the hall, it'll be up to the veteren's committee to put them in.
The media is holding the past to a higher standard than they had the guts to do while actually living it. If they were so concerned about influencing children, the integrity of the game, and all those reasons I've been hearing, well, you KNEW 10 years ago and did nothing. Given the large time in close proximity reporters spend with players, and that they seem to "know" who was/is cheating, I don't think it's a stretch to call the reporters on it. If you know, take the book deal money, and name the players. So you can't go back into the locker-room. Suck it up and show your moral superiority through actions, not veiled complaints and occasional fits of conscience.
Also, the writer noted that DiMaggio had to wait 3 ballots and Babe Ruth 11 ballots.
***
What does this mean, wait 11 ballots? Ruth was part of the first class inducted.
I think the original poster misread the article. Ruth was not named on 11 ballots in the round of voting which elected the Hall's inaugural class. DiMaggio, on the other hand, was not inducted until his third year of eligibility.