Christmas Dilemma- Question of the Day

Call me old school, but.....when it came to those Congressional hearings,

McGwire totally refused to talk about the issue, when he could have come clean. To him, NO!;

Palmiero completely lied, and had the guts to finger wag in the process. To him, NO!;

Sosa played the "I don't understand English very well game". Again, NO!

Yes, I know that there have been whispers about many others, but the aforementioned three don't deserve enshrinement. And first ballot is not an issue. They do not belong.

Costco hot dogs are... opps! Wrong thread.

OK. Home runs and steroids.
I think ultimately McGwire will get in the HOF, and I hate to say this, only because he didn't get legally caught. If he did steroids he shouldn't get in, period. If he was on them, that's when he hit all those homers. And that's his claim to fame, the home runs.

At the least, he should have to wait for the last possible chance to get in for all the doubt about using or not.

Things are at their all time slow right now it seems. I always crave a little Dodger "juice" each day.
Can I get a wake up call for March?

Dodgerdog-

I get what you're saying, but what if McGwire didn't get called? Is it unfair to penalize him over that bit of bad luck when others who likely did the same thing had the good fortune to be ignored by Congress? That whole production, to me, was such a turnoff. A bunch of politicans posturing to make themselves look good. Not that the players didn't bring it on themselves, but hopefully you get my point.

BK

BK,

Man, do I agree with you when it comes to the self-righteous politicans preening for the camera and for publicity. They're worthless.

However, McGwire was called. The "but what about those guys that you didn't call" argument is the same one I tried to use when being stopped for speeding. Although there were others, as well, in the court of public opinion, McGwire was cited.

I think that the key issue to the McGwire situation are the numbers. According to baseball-reference.com's similarity scores, McGwire's numbers liken him to Jim Thome, Jose Canseco, Carlos Delgado, Harmon Killebrew, Willie McCovey, Man-Ram, Juan Gonzalez, Norm Cash, Jason Giambi, and Dave Kingman. Of these players, Killebrew and McCovey are the only HOFers, and none of the currently active players (except Manny) are dominant enough to project into the HOF when they retire. And you'll see that Manny will be in a completely different league from McGwire's stats by the time he retires

Comparing career stats, McGwire had better power numbers than Killebrew or McCovey, but he much more of a one dimensional player. You can look up the actual numbers yourself, but other than the 500+ HRs, there's actually nothing eye poppingly dominant about McGwire's career. He didn't reach 2000 hits, he couldn't run for crap, and he only played 16 years in the bigs. He deserves mention in the HOF for his tremendous rookie season and dramatic HR chase, but his numbers just don't add up to be enshrined.

By the same logic, Canseco, Palmeiro, and Caminiti are not worthy, but Bonds definitely is. I really dislike the guy, but IF he is not convicted of illegal steroid use, it would be a shame if he were not inducted into the HOF. His numbers say he should have been enshrined three years ago.

greetings and holiday smiles...

Interesting dilema when considering these guys as HOF'ers...I have been asking myself the "...what would Judge Landis do...?" question.

It is a hard decision. They all cheated in one way but in another not really. But when you consider that their ability to provide for their family hinged on success on the field it is hard to blame then for a year or two of cheating. But to spend a decade or more showing a complete lack of ethics is hard to ignore.

Also, I recall reading a question as to how do we know Babe Ruth did not take steroids...they were discovered in the early 30's and Ruth was known for almost freakish strength as well as musculature. So there is no way know for certain. Same goes for any number of players over the years.

Thing is I consider this sort of cheating as bad or worse then betting on baseball. It should carry an automatic lifetime ban, period, end of story. I promise that would end all use of these ahem..."supplements" Also testing should be done every week during the season...on a random day but samples should be taken either weekly or after every game. Ahhhh, but I digress...

Judging cheating looks to be the hardest thing in baseball. I mean look, it KILLED Bart Giamatti. But he actually cared about the ethics and integrity or the game. This current bunch of billionaire wanna be's became wealthy by lying, cheating and stealing and stepping on anyone in they way...so we get a commissioner that reflects these "values" and players that realize what is "ok" in order to put butts in the seats.

I say ban them all of let them all in...no middle of the road stuff.

Andy B:

"...I always crave a little Dodger "juice" each day...."

don't let Glenn Burke or Piazza hear you say that...

You can lay this whole steroid mess at the feet of Bud Selig. Baseball has boomed during his time in office, but I think aside from 20 new stadiums, expansion, etc, etc, his legacy is going to be marked by the steroids saga (and the loss of the '94 season). The game has been tainted. There is no way to compare Hank Aaron and Babe Ruth to McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, Palmiero et. al. One of the greatest joys of the game is debating what a certain player would have done in a different era and comparing/contrasting stats. You can basically throw out all the records and accomplishments from what, 1990 to 2005?? They are all suspicious. Even singles hitters who reached 3000 hits might have used the juice to keep them in the game an extra couple years. Does anyone think that if Bart Giamatti had lived that this would have happened? I know Fay Vincent was shown the door so the owners could force the lock out in '94. But, one has to wonder if another reason to stick the used-car salesman in as the Commish. was to keep the lid on the "juice abuse" going on. "Chicks dig the long-ball" and so did millions of fans and I'm sure the owners were more than happy to look the other way to protect their revenue stream.

As for McGwire and his numbers. Something we might want to consider is that how many of his homers (and let's face it, homers are the only thing that would get him in the hall) were hit against pitchers using the juice? According to Jose Canseco (I cringe to use him as a reference but, he seems to have been proven accurate about his steroids claims), wasn't it something like 75% of players in the early to mid 90's that he thought were using the 'roids. Wouldn't this also include pitchers? Guys who instead of throwing in the high 80's were now throwing in the mid 90's because of the juice. Of course there is no way to know, but I'm just throwing this out there for debate: If the biggest chunk of McGwire's homers were hit early in his career (before he started shooting up--remember he hit 49 homers his rookie year as a string-bean compared to his later years) and against steroid using pitchers later in his career (so that there was an 'even playing field', cheater vs. cheater) does that mean that his numbers should be looked at as legitimate for his "era" of the game and his 580(?) some odd homers put him in the HOF?? It's a sad way to look at it but that's what we're left with thanks to Bud.

Obviously the Sosa's and the Caminiti's dont deserve to get into Cooperstown steriod issue aside. What i would do with both McGwire and Bonds is wait until they;re like 79, or on their death bed, to induct them--dont let them enjoy it at all. They are both dirty without a doubt, but also probably deserving of the Hall (numbers wise) But that also brings up another interesting point-- should character be judged when Hall of Fame voters are doing there thing? Cheating is bad-- i dont know the technicalities of what was legal and what was not in the terms of steroids and enhancements, but something should be said towards the apparant absolute indifference the league treated the situation with. It is more of the league's fault for sanctioning such behavior, rather than the players who just want to win.

Dodgerdog:

Well posted!! I concur as the the root cause of the game of baseball being in the state it's in reputation wise.

What gets me though it attendence is UP. And it't at record levels to boot. Maybe it is better marketing or the steroids thing just putting the MLB in front of more people every day this year.

I for one have less interest in the game. I honestly have zero desire to attend a MLB game. Though I am thinking of heading to either LV or Fresno to watch them play on my birthday weekend...figure we'll make a week of it...but that is more to visit friends and not really about baseball. I find that sad really.

I can say for sure one thing that has reduced my interest in the game is the overall quality of play. I loved the subtle parts of the game. You know bunts, SF, hitting behind a runner, stolen bases when they really matter, working the count...all that stuff that even the worst player on the field would learn to do just so they could play the game. I dunno if it is the talent dilution or ????

I also had/have a hard time with the McCourt's. I just get a slik-willy impression whenever she speaks. And he is just a slimy parking lot mogul...actually the two together reminds me of an Amway-team.

What keeps me interested right now is the Dodgers developing from within. Being able to follow players as the progress and wonder how they are gonna turn out.

But the biggest reason I am still enjoying and following the team is that Colletti seems to value the team and a community/family. He understands that when the people who work for you enjoy their job then the customers they deal with will enjoy your product all the more. And those customers might even take an active interest in the details.

Oh, well, bah-humbug... :)

Question to ponder:

Is it more of an advantage to use steroids in a league where many people are using steroids (Bonds, McGwire, etc.) or to play in a segragated league where many of the best players are excluded from competition (Ruth, Cobb, etc.)?

grumpy

I too try to catch the 51's & Grizzlies play in Fresno at least once every year (I've done it about 4 years in a row now). Last April I got to watch Martin, Guzman, Ethier, Young, & Aybar play before they were all called up. The best place to sit is along the 3rd base line next to the bull-pen bench. You're just a foot away from the guys in the pen and can carry on conversations with them. It's a great place for autographs and access. I'm hoping that if Vegas ever got a Major League team that the Dodgers' AAA team would move to Bakersfield. Fresno & B'field already have a rivaly as cities (insert your own joke here)so it would be classic to have them home to the Dodgers & Giants--not to mention the easy access for fans wanting to watch the young kids coming up. (It would also make those 2 or 3 day rehab starts for the major leaguers coming off injury within a couple hours drive from home.)

I guess I’ll be the fly in the ointment, as Vinny would say.

I don’t understand all this “he’ll eventually get it in” business. I never have. Either he (McGwire) is a HOFer, or he’s not. What is going to change in 3 years? He’s not “cleaner”. He’s not gaining any stats. Why is he not a HOF’er now, but will be a few years down the road?

I don’t buy the idea of punishing him by making him wait. That’s a bunch of crap from no-talent writers that got the snot beat out of them in high school and now think they can play God (cough cough Mike Lupica cough cough). What gives a sports writer the right to say “I’m going to f**k with McGwire because I think he’s a cheater”?? That a load of crap.

I have more respect for people who stick to their guns and say “he’s not getting in”.

I’ve said this before, and I will say it again: this is baseball’s fault. Specifically, it’s Selig’s fault. None of these players broke any baseball rules by taking steroids. And that is what it boils down to. Blame Selig for turning the other cheek. Blame Selig for not introducing a steroid policy when he was well aware that players were taking roids. But you can’t lay the blame on the players for doing things to better themselves within the rules.

You can “asterisk” all their records, but you can’t keep them out of the HOF. As cruel as it sounds, all of these guys played by the rules. Bonds, McGwire, Palmero, and Sosa all belong in the HOF. They can put them in their own separate wing if they want to, right next to Selig’s plaque that reads “This is the idiot that allowed these players to cheat”.

Since bmurph brought up the race issue, I have to ask this question: How much of this is fueled by race. Obviously the majority of the players in question concerning HOF status are minorities. Yeah, there’s McGwire. But that’s only ONE white guy. And the only reason he’s going down with the ship is because he got caught with some stuff in his locker, and because of that fiasco on Capitol Hill. Most of the players called to The Hill were minorities, and I’m sure baseball and the media have no problem sacrificing one white guy.

You have to ask yourself if this were the 50s, 60s, or 70s, and players like Mantle, Williams, DiMaggio, and Koufax were the culprits in a steroids scandal if the reaction would have been the same. I think not. People are quick to turn the other cheek in regards to the point bmurph made (something that has to be looked at when considering how skewed are the number that Ruth, Gehrig, etc, put up, even though I think the quantity of “great” black players not allowed to play baseball is greatly overstated) because it involves white players. Aaron went through hell when he approached Ruth’s record even though he was clean and an standout guy (and boy has baseball gone out of their way “asterisk” Aaron’s record by saying that he played in longer seasons than Ruth did; anything to protect the sanctity of Ruth’s record, who happens to be white). True, that era was fueled by racial discrimination in general, but you can’t tell me that the fact that Bonds is black isn’t a big factor in all of this. After all, I think people have made a bigger deal of Bonds breaking Ruth’s record than they have about him breaking Aaron’s.

Fast forward to this era, and you see the differences in how scandals involving minorities differs from those involving white players. Take Sammy Sosa and the big deal that was made when he got caught using a corked bat. A corked bat? A hitter’s equivalent to a pitcher’s spitball? Now all of a sudden Sosa’s numbers come into question because he MUST have used a cork bat for all of those home runs, right? Yet Warren Spahn, a self-proclaimed and celebrated cheater, who happens to be white, is in the HOF. None of his stats are in question, and his enshrinement is not in any jeopardy. How much of that has to do with Spahn being white? And it’s not like Sosa is a bad guy (although all of those people that said nice things about him aloud have proven that they were saying other things under their breath).

Where’s the probe on the great white pitcher Roger Clemens? How about Eric Gagne and trying to find out what fueled one of the best relief performances of history? All white players, all an afterthought about whether or not these players cheated. Yet Rafael Palmero, someone who accomplished stats that few white players have ever achieved is not a HOFer. Why? Because he HAD to have been cheating the whole time, right? Every one of his stats, steroids induced. But not Clemens. Not Gagne. And certainly not Spahn.

You have to ask these things. Are some of these points “circumstantial”? Of course they are. But you’d have to be a fool to not acknowledge that some of this stuff is more likely than not.

BTW, Merry X-Mas everyone.

A little off the topic.
You know what would be the best Christmas gift ever? If no one wanted to sign Zito for anything near Boras's asking price. What would be the odds of all the GM's saying ENOUGH, all at the same time?
That would be swell, by golly!

A Merry Blue Christmas to all! And blessings to you and your families.

LoLo-My daughter who was 15 or 16 at the time, questioned if there was a race issue involved between Mac and Bonds. I tried to explain that Bonds is also disliked [by me and other Dodgers fans]because he is a Giant, his rudenss and arrogance and his general dislike from his peers. There were no sad goodbyes from his Pirates teamates when he signed with the Giants. Mac had his cream opened on his locker shelf. Bonds denies and denies. But, Mac evaded all the congressional questions.

She has heard me speak about how racists a lot of occurances in our history both past and contemporary.

i hate all this steroid talk, i dont care if ur not cheating ur not trying. Lets play ball not worry about what these players are doing its just entertainment

Bigblue48,

Trust me. I absolutely DESPISE Bonds. Not only because he’s a Gnat (ESPECIALLY because he’s a Gnat) but because he’s a jerk and an a-hole. I can’t stand him.

But he’s a HOFer. No ands, ifs, or buts about it. In no way should my hate for the guy skew my view of him as a HOFer. While my personal contempt is fueled by hate for the guy, you have to wonder how much of others’ hate is fueled by racism. Sosa is a HOFer. Palmero is a HOFer. Palmero is the only guy who “popped”, so he’s the only guy that has that going against him, and it might end up haunting him. But none of the other guys have popped. Baseball is not the grand jury. So unless the grand jury convicts Bonds, baseball can’t because their only method of catching cheaters is through a urinalysis exam, which Bonds has yet to fail.

I wish Palmero wouldn’t have popped. I wish he would have gotten his chance to go before voters in 5 years and tested the “racial waters”. I truly wanted to see if the voters would keep him out based solely on rumors that he took steroids. Everyone knows about the magic numbers in baseball (unwritten or not). 500HRs, 3000 hits, 300 wins, 3000 Ks. Palmero achieved TWO of them, and you mean to tell me that he’s not a HOFer? The most ridiculous argument I have heard is that he shouldn’t be a HOFer because “he didn’t have that ONE big season”. What a bunch of horse sh*t!! There are plenty of players in the HOF that didn’t have spectacular seasons, and also fell short of those unwritten plateaus. Why are THEY in the HOF?? All this was being said BEFORE Palmero popped, so the proof is the pudding that they wanted to keep Palmero out before he messed up. Now the idiot screwed up and doesn’t have a leg to stand on. He got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, so now he’s at the mercy of the writers.

I also hope that Giambi reaches 500+ home runs. It will be interesting to see if they allow him to be voted into the HOF after admitting that he used steroids. It will also be interesting to see if Palmero, Sosa, and Bonds aren’t the HOF yet. And it will also be interesting to see if they let them get in after allowing Giambi in.

It’s amazing how they have embraced Giambi after admitting he cheated, while they ran Sosa and Palmero out of the game. I guess those two will never be forgiven. Such a coincidence that Giambi is white, isn’t it?

What baseball doesn’t realize is that all hell is going to break loose if Bonds isn’t allowed into the HOF. The NAACP and Jesse Jackson will be on Selig and MLB like white on rice (no pun intended). MLB is one tough client to defend given their discriminatory past, and they are going to go down like dominos when the wrath of these minority groups strikes down upon them.

Funny how the “final stand” on Bonds was made when he approached Ruth’s record. Since when did we start celebrating second place? I’m not very good at math, but last time I checked 755 is more than 714. Why stop at celebrating second place? Why not third place? Why not stop Bonds from breaking Mays’ mark? Why has the attitude changed from “We absolutely have to draw the line right here to keep him from breaking Ruth’s record” to “I guess he’s going to break Aaron’s record. Oh well.”??

We all have to ask ourselves these questions. Ask why are steroids TRULY such a big issue? And if they are a big issue, why does it only affect certain players. After all, if baseball could write a waiver to put Clemens in the HOF NOW instead of having to wait 5 years, they would do it in a heartbeat.

Roger Clemens. Accused of taking steroids and probable steroids user (just as probable as Sosa and the others). Under the same allegations as the others, but not under the same scrutiny. Again, you have to ask yourself why are steroids TRULY such a big issue?

My take -

If we're going to let any one of those guys into the HOF, then I have one very BIG statement to make. They each engaged in illegal activites, why they did it is up for debate, but I think it was for a bigger payday. How is that any different than what Pete Rose did? He gambled on games to make a little bit more money. They used performance-enhancing drugs to make a little bit more money. The difference? Pete Rose did something that is not illegal, just immoral. They broke federal law. Pete Rose was a far better baseball player than any one of them, hands down. He was one of the best, if not the best hitter of all time. He deserves it, whether or not they do is debatable.

Lolo

In response to your comment:
"Funny how the “final stand” on Bonds was made when he approached Ruth’s record. Since when did we start celebrating second place? I’m not very good at math, but last time I checked 755 is more than 714. Why stop at celebrating second place? Why not third place? Why not stop Bonds from breaking Mays’ mark? Why has the attitude changed from “We absolutely have to draw the line right here to keep him from breaking Ruth’s record” to “I guess he’s going to break Aaron’s record. Oh well.”??"

While out of the countless millions of baseball fans out there, there may be some who look at the race of Ruth & Aaron, I think they are few--especially today as opposed to 30 or 40 years ago. I just think Babe Ruth is an icon. He is a part of American history--not just baseball history. Much like a John Wayne may not have won as many academy awards as other actors, when you see him on the screen it's larger than life. Hank Aaron was an icredible player, but his greatness was achieved over time. In that I mean, he was just consistently good year in and year out and after a couple of decades of being real good, you looked at his stats and realized he was great. It kind of crept up on the masses. Ruth, on the other had, burst onto the scene. He hit 60 homers in a season when the previous record was like 13!!! It would be like someone hitting 200 homers in a season in today's game. It was mind-boggling. Then couple that with the fact Ruth played in New York (Aaron in Milwaukee), Ruth starred in movies, made all the highlight reels shown before movies, was outspoken and gave many interviews, "called his shot" in the World Series, hit 2 homers for a dying boy in the hospital!! For Pete's sake, Ruth still holds the RECORD for most scoreless innings in the World Series--as a PITCHER!!! Aaron was shy, not in the spotlight much, out of the media glare of the East Coast, didn't do anything "spectacular" except play good baseball year in and year out--he just didn't draw attention to himself. Ruth became an American icon and a baseball 'god' as a pitcher & and hitter. I think the only one who has come close to being viewed as Ruth in our time is Tiger Woods (who happens to be non-white--which hasn't seemed to slow him down). So, I can understand that people view Ruth differently from Aaron. Not because of race (while, as I said, there may be a few) but because his name still invokes an awe and recognition that transcends sports and touches our inner psyche at a deeper level than just the pure numbers. Aaron was a great baseball player--Ruth WAS/IS baseball.

dodgerskip,

Great points. And for the record, I believe Babe Ruth is the greatest baseball player in history. But you have to ask yourself this…

“…his name still invokes an awe and recognition that transcends sports and touches our inner psyche at a deeper level than just the pure numbers.”

Really? Are you sure about that? Do you realize that most of these minority players (who now make up a large percentage of MLB) don’t give a damn who Babe Ruth is? Ruth is a big part of history. But it’s more like white history. The truth is that Ruth may transcend many things, but he doesn’t transcend race. Ruth is such a big deal because the majority of sports writers are white. But I can assure you that people in the ghetto and in “the barrio” the don’t care who Babe Ruth is. I should know. I grew up there.

The truth is that minorities are taking their stake as the best athletes in the world. For years the best basketball players have been black. Hispanics make up the bulk of the best baseball players. Track and field? Black. Same for football.

Baseball is the national pastime, and it’s core of “purists” are made up of white males. In a sport where minorities are becoming more and more prominent, Ruth is the last remaining icon where white people can say “he’s the best”. That is until his records started falling, and falling to minority players. Bonds has broken his slugging record, his walks record, his career home runs mark, has more MVPs, and obliterated his single-season HR mark. And you don’t think for one second the fact that Bonds is black has something to do with the need for white people to preserve Ruth’s stature as the greatest player of all time?

Of course, Bonds doesn’t help matters when he comes out saying things like "755 isn't a number that's always caught my eye..... the only number I care about is Babe Ruth's. Because as a left-handed hitter, I wiped him out. That's it. And in the baseball world, Babe Ruth's everything, right? I got his slugging percentage and I'll take his home runs and that's it. Don't talk about him no more."

A classless thing to say, no doubt (we all know he said that because Ruth is white, not because he actually thinks that Ruth is the greatest). But the truth sometimes hurts.

Nils:

Not to nit pick...but exactly who's "morals" did Pete Rose step on? Morality has not a single thing to do with gambling. Unethical, I think so, immoral, not even close.

Always remember "morality" is in the eye of the beholder.

And as far as Pete Rose being a great player...I think he was durable and had more heart then other then a handful of players but the dude may as well have worn oven mits on the field for all the booted balls, kicks balls and flat out missed balls he had...that was his ONLY weakenss though he was mediocre on the field. But so mediocre he would not even be in the top five of my all time 3rd basemen, maybe not even top 10.

But I loved watching the guy at the plate...and YES, he cheap shot'd Ray Fosse. That should show the sort of person he is/was...

Still, Pete Rose belongs in the HOF as does Shoeless Joe...the reason Rose is not in the HOF is the same reason Marta Stewart went too jail. Niether one of them was man enough to simply say "...I am sorry, I made a horrible error in judgement..." When ya get caught, fess up and get it done with...same goes for the 'roid Boy's. Fess up and be done with it...hell Sosa LEFT THE COUNTRY just in case...how funny was that?

I really say let them all in...Aaron was THE MAN as far as homeruns. And I love the dignity he has shown during the whole mess...

Babe Ruth did nothing to diminish the game and actually pulled it out of its darkest hour.
Bonds on the other hand has been a major contributer to a very dark period for baseball.
HOF: Was the player positive for baseball or negative.
RUTH; definitately helped the game.
Bonds; has not helped and has probably done more damage than good. Should not go in the Hall.

By the way, black, white, or yellow; it doesn't matter. Did the player contribute to the betterment of the game?
Bonds has not. I don't care if he hits a thousand home runs.
Aaron did!!

Jim,

I can definitely respect that stance (and I happen to agree). In fact, I’ve asked that very same question myself on this blog (the first time Bonds came to The Ravine). “Is the game better off because of Bonds”? That answer is “No”. At least that’s MY answer.

I’m playing devil’s advocate on these posts because they are certainly great conversation for those that can handle it and not get stupid (which is what I love about the regulars on this blog; I feel we can talk about anything). I consider myself to be somewhat of a purest because I’ve had such an intimate relationship with baseball. But I realize that my position is in “the minority in the minorities” (bear with me, haha). I may think that sacred records like those of Ruth and Aaron should be saved somehow, but the reality is that these issues are not as pure and as simple as that. There are many hidden agendas throughout. And the fact is that racial issues come into play, especially with the points I have made. Again, playing devil’s advocate, that’s not how I feel, but those issues exist, and the people that feel that way have a legitimate argument.

I want to put an end to this era, and I don’t want the can of worms to be inevitably opened. Let these turds into the HOF (because I don’t think the Hall is as sacred as we hope or make it out to be) and let’s turn this goddam page so it is no longer an issue. Let’s play ball, and let’s get it back to where it was pure, fun, and the Hershisers, Scioscias, and Koufaxs of the world just went out and played BASEBALL.

A little off-topic, but did anyone see this Paul Depodesta trade analysis. This links to the Epstein one (click on Depo's name to see his article) but it's interesting, he statistically analyzed the trades made by the GMs to see who has been more successful
http://bvtn.blogspot.com/2006/12/epstein-trade-analysis-tidbits.html

While I would like to believe that I could vote Barry Bonds out of the Hall of Fame for not bettering the sport, that is not what I believe the Hall of Fame is for. The Hall of Fame is a measure of someone's baseball greatness. Ty Cobb is one of the best players of all time and few would deny that he should be in the hall of fame. However he is famous for being a bastard of a person and didn't contribute to the game, so why start with Bonds? I don't think that we should reinvent the HOF to suit our particular whims.

well, well, welly, well....seems all is not copacetic with the Princess these days.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2006/12/drew_talks_cont.html

It leads on to think that there is no chance Drew's shoulder is OK or even close to OK...

Dodgerskip-

I don't think you can blame the Commish without blaming the players, too. Selig turned a blind eye, or two, or ten, but the union resisted testing, too. They wanted no part of holding the membership responsible, either.

BK

The race question is an interesting one, and I go back and forth on how much it fits in here, and more specifically, where. I don't doubt that Bonds gets treated differently by some because of his race, but I really do believe it has more to do with the personality than color. I find it hard to believe that if Ken Griffey Jr. was knocking on the door of Aaron, which seemed like a possibility a few years ago, that he would be getting the "Bonds Treatment." Why? He's not an a-hole.

Sosa, in my mind, really isn't getting treated any differently than McGwire. The same brush that got Mac got him. Looked bad in front of Congress, seemed to confirm suspicions, etc. And it's fair to say the guy was beloved while making his run. Pepsi pitchman, etc. Did the corked bat thing hurt? Yeah, but not as much as the steroids, and the sharp drop in his production (plus some attitude isses that people overlooked while he was productive). Again, could race be an issue? Sure. Is it THE issue? I can't believe that.

But back to Bonds, it's a shame there are so many other mitigating factors that color the coverage of his chase. Because then, it really would be a better indication of how far this country has come since Aaron caught Ruth.

BK

BK,

You echoed my sentiments exactly on the so-called "race" issues that inevitably creep into dialog when discussing Barry Bonds. Nicely done.

FDrew!!,

Thanks for the link exposing Theo's GM skills. Wow. I have always been underwhelmed by most every move that Theo has made as Red Sox GM and I always said that the Sox won that World Series in spite of anything that was done by Epstein.

One series of trades Boy-Genius Theo made last season with the Padres particularly comes to mind:

Theo trades away a washed-up Doug Mirabelli for Mark Loretta at the very end of 2005, which was a good move. But then six months later, he ends up trading away Cla Meredith AND Josh Bard to get the washed-up Mirabelli back! Then at the end of the season he trades David Wells away for George Kotteras (after first asking the Dodgers to rent Wells for Matt Kemp AND two other prospects). I'm still trying to figure out when this guy's Cinderella story is going to come to an end.

Len

BK,

What a sad commentary on the great game of baseball in your statement that "the union did not want to hold the membership responsible."

Ever since Dan White and his "twinkies defense", as a country we have turned to avoiding consequences for actions or trying to explain our way out of situations as opposed to accepting responsibility.

Unfortunately, the illegal substance issue has become a huge by-product of this misplaced philosophy.

Now, with the revelation that prosecutors have the right to get the names of 100 players who tested positive in 2003 (so long, Barry, Roger, Eric)perhaps this terrible chapter will get some closure.

BK

"but the union resisted testing, too. They wanted no part of holding the membership responsible, either."

I thought that was why we lost the last half of the '94 season, to break the power of the union for the betterment of the game. That horrible period accomplished NOTHING!! I would have had far more respect for Selig if he would have stuck to his guns and played the replacements instead of caving in and basically saying that we lost 2 months of pennant races, all the playoffs, the World Series, and essentially the Montreal franchise, for absolutely no ultimate purpose. If Selig had stuck to his guns, the players would have agreed to keep payrolls in check and would have agreed to drug testing eventually because they wouldn't have kept unified in the face of all the millions they would have lost. That's why the Commish needs to be an independent outsider and not a player or an owner. Here's hoping that we get another Ueberoth or Giamanti in 2 years when Selig says he's leaving.

Lolo:
To get back to our previous conversation, and particularly to this point you made:

"Do you realize that most of these minority players (who now make up a large percentage of MLB) don’t give a damn who Babe Ruth is? Ruth is a big part of history. But it’s more like white history. The truth is that Ruth may transcend many things, but he doesn’t transcend race. Ruth is such a big deal because the majority of sports writers are white. But I can assure you that people in the ghetto and in “the barrio” the don’t care who Babe Ruth is. I should know. I grew up there."

Young people these days don't know and don't care about history period regardless of race-- whether they're in Beverly Hills or Watts, Dallas or Detroit. They know who Paris Hilton, J Lo, and 50cent are but ask them who Harriet Tubman, George Washington Carver, or even George Washington are and I'm sure they'll respond the same way Bonds did to Ruth. I didn't grow up in the ghetto, so I don't have a clue about what is deemed important to know--as far as history/heritage is concerned. So maybe you can answer this question for me out of genuine curiousity. (I'm not trying to be a wiseguy and hope this doesn't come across that way.) If Babe Ruth was not deemed an important figure/role model/American hero etc. etc. were Josh Gibson, Cool-Papa Bell, Satchel Paige and the rest of the elite ballplayers who never got a chance to get the noteriety that their white peers did revered in the ghetto? If they were, then I could understand Bonds' statement a little more (of course I doubt Bonds grew up in the ghetto being the son of a major leaguer). My suspicion is that regardless of race and background it's a generational thing more than a race thing. But I could be wrong.

Only on the Blue Notes Blog can you be talking about the nuances of stadium hot dogs one day and "generation-gap-race-relations in relation to 20th century sports icons viewed from the inner city", the next. We should be honored on the cover of Time Magazine--oh wait, I guess we were last week....

Dodgerdog,

“Now, with the revelation that prosecutors have the right to get the names of 100 players who tested positive in 2003 (so long, Barry, Roger, Eric)perhaps this terrible chapter will get some closure.”

Is this true (I haven’t heard about this)? If it is, then it is definitely GREAT news

dodgerskip,

You don’t sound like a wiseguy at all. I have much respect for the points-of-view of the people of this blog, including our moderators. Everyone here brings a little something to the blog, and I think that’s what makes it the best Dodger blog out there.

To answer your question. I can’t speak from a black person’s point of view. I grew in East LA (the barrio), which is all Hispanic (at least it used to be when I grew up there). I went to high school with 4000+ students, 4000 of which were Hispanic. And I will tell you that when we talked baseball we talked about the great Hispanic players of years past, as well as current. The names Ruth, Mantle, and DiMaggio didn’t have nearly the same meaning as Clemente, Valenzuela, and Lopes. I mean, we knew Ruth was considered to be the best that had ever played, but we certainly didn’t look upon him as icon. And that shouldn’t surprise you. As young men we often follow role models we can relate to. Hispanics relate with Hispanics. White with whites. Etc, etc. (I am speaking in general since we both know there are exceptions to every rule). Obviously, minorities did not become part of the game until the latter decades, so our history doesn’t go back as far as Honus Wagner, Babe Ruth, etc. But we’ve certainly had our fair share of Hispanic icons.

It wasn’t until I truly studied the game and played baseball in college that I got an understanding of the history of the game. I embraced it, and with that I embraced all of the icons, no matter their race.

Which brings me back to my original point. Most of these baseball purists, writers, and members of the this organization called baseball itself, are in fact white. Also, most of these people are older and of the old school (not necessarily the “better” school). That old school mentality never goes away. These people idolized the greats such as Ruth, Mantle, and DiMaggio. And I can understand why they would stop at nothing to tarnish anyone (especially a minority) who comes close to surpassing the feats of their idols. I’m not saying that’s how you feel. How BK feels. Or how anyone else on the blog feels, for that matter. But it would be naïve to think that it doesn’t go on. My wife is white. At first she couldn’t comprehend the severity of the subtle issues we minorities go though ever day. That is until she saw them with he own eyes. I bought a nice 7-series BMW last year. Since then I have been pulled over twice because I was “exhibiting an unusual driving behavior”. Those words were followed by “may we take a look inside your car?” “No problem officer, I’m used to it” I responded. And that doesn’t even cover the times where my wife and I go to a nice restaurant, where the majority of the people are white. The looks and the poor service are all too familiar. Not to mention the ugly looks my wife gets from other whites. I don’t have to tell my wife about this stuff anymore; she’s living it. And it’s not like we live in Alabama, or some other southern rural area. We live in our nation’s capital. My wife gets mad about it, but I don’t. I make more money that 5 of those idiot cops put together, and probably have more education than 10 of them put together. Not to mention that I am a 2-time war veteran. What do they have that I have to sweat? It’s all water under the bridge for me.

I’m not trying to make people understand what we go through, or make them see the realities that are out there. I don’t expect people to walk in my shoes and I expect white people to roll their eyes when they hear a minority bring about race issues, no matter how legitimate they are. But the issues ARE out there. And whether people like it or not, they do apply to Bonds in some cases, no matter how much of an a-hole he is.

Lolo

Thanks for the info. & your perspective. One of the reasons I'm passionate about baseball, is that in playing it (college ball was the highest level I achieved) or just being a fan, as I've been since I started on solid food and stopped drooling, it mirrors life. We've all heard the analogies so I won't go into that and bore anybody, but so many lessons can be learned about life through baseball. Since race has come up the last couple days, it reminds me that many credit Jackie Robinson with taking the first big "sledge hammer" blow that led to the Civil Rights movement. And I'm sure Fernando can be credited with causing many people's view of hispanics (especially in So. Cal.) to change. The game, its players (good & bad), its nuances, its rules, its 'rules breakers', all mirror society. Maybe we are about to see another "milestone" moment take place in America through baseball. Maybe this whole steroids ordeal in baseball will cause a change in attitudes or even perhaps laws themselves that will change our society by giving people an example of the consequences of drug use and/or just plain cheating in general. And baseball, once again, will have played a major role. Maybe that's why this blog is so addicting--because in talking baseball, we really wind up talking life.

A lot of good stuff on this thread. Thanks lolo and Skipper. My take is this. McGwire - Hall of Famer. He hit 500 + HR's. He may have been juiced but as likely juiced were the opposing pitchers.

Bonds, Rose - a**holes, but Hall of Famers. The Hall is based on Baseball NUMBERS and not what a guy did for baseball. I'm the greatest baseball fan alive, you don't see me in the Hall of Fame!? I'm a nice guy and will talk to media... but I still don't belong in the Hall of Fame!

Race? - You bet it has some relation to whats going on in baseball today. If it didn't, we wouldn't be debating it right now. I ask anyone and please answer, "Why is the Steroids thing so big now in baseball?" Steroids was prevalent in Body Building in the 70's. Our governor likely is guilty of juicing. Not a big issue then. What about steroids in Football in the 80's with guys like Mike Webster from the Steelers and Lyle Alzado of the Raiders and Tony Mandarich from the GB Packers. No CONGRESSIONAL HEARING then?!

People say that steroids is cheating. What about SPIT BALLS and Vasoline. What about Corked Bats. That's cheating... no big deal? Then they argue that it's cheating but also against the law to do steroids. It was against the law for Football players too but we didn't see people getting prosecuted. Baseball players in the 70's hippy era must have smoked a few joints... against the law? Yes. Congressional hearing? No!

I definitely don't condone cheating or taking steroids illegally but why is it a Federal issue all of a sudden? Has to make one wonder... The Federal Government needs to get out of Baseball affairs.... they should try regulating the Gas/Oil Industry.... I kknow I would appreciate that more.