OT: HOF Big Papi No - AROD No | The Boneyard

OT: HOF Big Papi No - AROD No

Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
16,037
Reaction Score
23,104
Both players are Dominican although AROD was born in New York and Papi was born and was a resident of the island. Neither failed a public drug test though AROD admitted to buying and using the supplements. The Dominican is very small and the major league players from there hang out with each other like glue in the cold offseason especially when the steroid culture down there was running rampant. They hang together and are treated like Gods down there and i saw it in person while on vacation. The hotels fall all over themselves when they drop by. They work out together and show up at resorts like celebrities and are treated like gold. Until age 26 Ortiz was a fat guy and pretty undistinguished offensively. His offense above average percentage was the lowest among players, about 25 of them in the 500 home run club by that age, only 3%. babe's was low too but he was a pitcher early. Ortiz all of a sudden started working out and changed his body type as the steroid era blossomed and his production magically soared. A great clutch hitter for sure he played lousy or no defense going to DH. AROD was an offensive and defensive juggernaught for most of his productive years.
Ortiz failed a drug test that was not supposed to be released but we don't know the actual details other than that and he denies use. We are supposed to believe that Ortiz hung out with all of these steroid guys and didn't use them in Dominica. It's a huge leap of faith. Until we know how he failed that test I don't understand how anyone can vote Papi in the HOF regardless of what the rumors are. He doesn't merit it defensively and there are too many questions clouding him. AROD does not deserve it for the same reason as Sosa whose offense above average by 26 is in the Papi range very low. Palmiero no, Bonds no, Sosa no, McGuire no. Papi and AROD no.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
33,489
Reaction Score
96,163
Baseball board would be best, take it from me jibs;)

Actually no thread would be best LOL
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
16,037
Reaction Score
23,104
Baseball board would be best, take it from me jibs;)

Actually no thread would be best LOL
They will both come up same year right? It makes it tougher because he is likeable personality wise, although he didn't take a called 3rd strike very well, acted like they shot his dog. The writers love him and hate AROD but that's not supposed to be part of it. Red Sox fans act like it's a done deal, but who knows?
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
33,489
Reaction Score
96,163
Ortiz probably goes in on the first ballot.

Would be awful if so for so many reasons! May very will be though he kissed a few a**es and somehow became a media darling.:rolleyes:
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
2,286
Reaction Score
2,965
They will both come up same year right? It makes it tougher because he is likeable personality wise, although he didn't take a called 3rd strike very well, acted like they shot his dog. The writers love him and hate AROD but that's not supposed to be part of it. Red Sox fans act like it's a done deal, but who knows?
That's right. No place to hide when the question comes up. Either you support both or you support neither. There is no argument to be made otherwise.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
16,037
Reaction Score
23,104
Ortiz is a big "supplement" guy, he says legal. In 2003 most supplements legal and illegal were sold over the counter in the Dominican and continue to be, and how hard would it be to have friends or relatives buy it?you could technically take them off-season build yourself up and quit so you could pass the tests, except for the one he failed. Most guys did not get caught or even test positive. AROD didn't get caught on a test. His production is an outlier in all of baseball's 500 club history in offensive production above average, this from a former fat guy not in shape. One thing though, steroids or not you still have to hit the ball which is why it's not an easy choice.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
4,972
Reaction Score
10,537
Bonds and Clemens should have been in already. The Big PED will get in on year two. He is a media darling and one of the most clutch hitters of all-time. McGuire was never a HOFer in my opinion. Same is true of Sosa, but I can see an argument in his case. Palmiero should have been in already as well.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
8,234
Reaction Score
17,488
That's right. No place to hide when the question comes up. Either you support both or you support neither. There is no argument to be made otherwise.

You could make the argument that players who were caught after 2006 (the first time MLB instituted a banned-substance policy with any teeth) you should be treated differently. I'm not sure I buy it, and besides who can say for sure who is or isn't using and who is doing a better job of staying ahead of the tests?
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
33,489
Reaction Score
96,163
You could make the argument that players who were caught after 2006 (the first time MLB instituted a banned-substance policy with any teeth) you should be treated differently. I'm not sure I buy it, and besides who can say for sure who is or isn't using and who is doing a better job of staying ahead of the tests?

This is true, fair. They are ahead, many of them it's way too obvious but no matter, it would seem the 2003 test is the one leaving people wondering. Baseball would be smart to open those floodgates, or I guess not huh?

And if you used you should be banned until the others are let in.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
8,234
Reaction Score
17,488
Papi is a PED guy. Sorry he just is.

Believe me, I doubt that he will get in until the voters just decide to let everyone in regardless of PED suspicion. I don't agree with that approach -- I think you let in the best players of the era and baseball only has itself to blame for rampant PED use from '92-'05. The only reasonable dividing line would be to exclude those confirmed via test to have used after the institution of the banned substances policy in 2006.
 
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
7,188
Reaction Score
8,765
Interesting write-up on NBC before the 2016 season started about Papi getting into the HOF. Briefly notes the PED issue as it instead focuses on the question should 'permanent' DH's get into the HOF in general. To date, the only player who spend >50% of his career as a DH is in the HOF, Frank Thomas, who numbers are similar, though Thomas was hurt by a rapid decline at the end of his career.

It’s complicated
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
33,489
Reaction Score
96,163
Believe me, I doubt that he will get in until the voters just decide to let everyone in regardless of PED suspicion. I don't agree with that approach -- I think you let in the best players of the era and baseball only has itself to blame for rampant PED use from '92-'05. The only reasonable dividing line would be to exclude those confirmed via test to have used after the institution of the banned substances policy in 2006.

The only problem with 2006 is it's not working so it means little in all reality. It's still rampant and the era lives on like it or not. There really is no separation and potentially will never be one now as they find things to stay way ahead of testing.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
8,234
Reaction Score
17,488
The only problem with 2006 is it's not working so it means little in all reality. It's still rampant and the era lives on like it or not. There really is no separation and potentially will never be one now as they find things to stay way ahead of testing.

I only reference that year as that's when MLB actually implemented a policy that has at least some teeth to it. I suspect that you're right about players staying ahead of the game, but I don't think it's as rampant as it was in the late 1990's through the mid 2000's. I'd guess that 75% of the league was using at that point.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
2,286
Reaction Score
2,965
You could make the argument that players who were caught after 2006 (the first time MLB instituted a banned-substance policy with any teeth) you should be treated differently. I'm not sure I buy it, and besides who can say for sure who is or isn't using and who is doing a better job of staying ahead of the tests?
Eh. I'm not sure some vague notion of their policy having "teeth" is really all that meaningful. If there was a policy against it and some evidence they were breaking the rules by using them, the standard should be the same.
 

intlzncster

i fart in your general direction
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
29,094
Reaction Score
60,516
The only problem with 2006 is it's not working so it means little in all reality. It's still rampant and the era lives on like it or not. There really is no separation and potentially will never be one now as they find things to stay way ahead of testing.

So basically, 'everyone' since is juicing too. If there's not adequate testing, you have to assume players are doing it. They want an edge just as bad now as they did then. Especially with the money at stake now.

If 'everyone' can be considered possibly juicing, all the best guys should be let in as a matter of course.

I'm of the opinion, that they all should be in. Clemens was one of the best pitchers of his generation, without question. Barry Bonds is probably a top 10 all time player without Steroids.

Plus, we as fans/writers can't be remotely certain who used and who didn't. The fact that people focus solely on size is laughable. Look at someone like Lance Armstrong. Never got bigger, but benefited immensely. And baseball is very much a marathon, conducive to those sorts of benefits. Recovery is probably the most important thing about being able to play day after day.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
33,489
Reaction Score
96,163
So basically, 'everyone' since is juicing too. If there's not adequate testing, you have to assume players are doing it. They want an edge just as bad now as they did then. Especially with the money at stake now.

If 'everyone' can be considered possibly juicing, all the best guys should be let in as a matter of course.

I'm of the opinion, that they all should be in. Clemens was one of the best pitchers of his generation, without question. Barry Bonds is probably a top 10 all time player without Steroids.

Plus, we as fans/writers can't be remotely certain who used and who didn't. The fact that people focus solely on size is laughable. Look at someone like Lance Armstrong. Never got bigger, but benefited immensely. And baseball is very much a marathon, conducive to those sorts of benefits. Recovery is probably the most important thing about being able to play day after day.

"Focus" is said to be a huge factor. Seeing the ball better out of the pitchers hand is huge and I remember one of the guys saying that made his confidence ooze at the plate. Will try to find that. I mean let's be honest Barry Bonds is a great baseline - not only a great player prior but a guy who hit HR's easily when he did partake, I mean easily too. They had to walk him all the time to keep him in the park he was that much better.
 

intlzncster

i fart in your general direction
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
29,094
Reaction Score
60,516
"Focus" is said to be a huge factor. Seeing the ball better out of the pitchers hand is huge and I remember one of the guys saying that made his confidence ooze at the plate. Will try to find that.

Yeah, I didn't even think of that, but it makes perfect sense. Anything that heightens the senses really.
 

Online statistics

Members online
406
Guests online
3,505
Total visitors
3,911

Forum statistics

Threads
155,803
Messages
4,032,134
Members
9,865
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom