Of those whose surveys were taken and columns were read, the results are below (questions in bold).
How would you vote in the survey? Here's your chance to register your vote.
Will you vote for Mark McGwire, on the first ballot, for induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame?
• Yes -- 37 (26.8 percent)• No -- 101 (73.2 percent) Of the 101 who said that they would not vote for McGwire, ESPN asked the following question:
If no, will you vote for him in succeeding years?
• Yes -- 5 (5.0 percent)• No -- 31 (30.7 percent)• Undecided -- 43 (42.6 percent)• No opinion given -- 22 (21.8 percent)
We also asked the following questions to those who responded to our survey:
If he were eligible this year, would you vote for Barry Bonds?
• Yes -- 44 (44.4 percent)• No -- 31 (31.3 percent)• Undecided -- 24 (24.2 percent)
If he were eligible this year, would you vote for Sammy Sosa?
• Yes -- 20 (20.4 percent)• No -- 50 (51.0 percent)• Undecided -- 28 (28.6 percent)
If he were eligible this year, would you vote for Rafael Palmeiro?
• Yes -- 8 (8.2 percent)• No -- 68 (69.4 percent)• Undecided -- 22 (22.3 percent)
― spectre (gear), Thursday, 4 January 2007 21:14 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 4 January 2007 21:33 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 5 January 2007 15:17 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Friday, 5 January 2007 15:48 (eighteen years ago)
Will Carroll has pointed this out, but it’s worth bringing up again: how can McGwire be so vilified for steroid use that has never come close to being proven, while Shawne Merriman is perhaps the most celebrated defensive player in the NFL during the same season in which he tested positive for steroids? The hypocrisy in the coverage of steroids in sports has never been so evident as it is today, the gulf between the media’s handling of MLB and the NFL wide enough to drive the truth through.
I would vote for McGwire for the Hall of Fame, because his accomplishments, his performance, warrant his induction. Whatever questions there may be about how he achieved what he did on the field are simply not answered well enough to void his claim to a spot in Cooperstown. But for the afternoon of March 17, 2005, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion, and I’m just not willing to give a grandstanding Congressional committee that much sway over my thinking.
The steroids-in-sports story is an embarrassment to the American sports media. The shaming of Mark McGwire is just another point of evidence that this is really about creating a story, rather than covering it.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 5 January 2007 20:14 (eighteen years ago)
But what if they are answered in the next 1-15 years? What's the problem with holding off voting him in if there is still a bunch of lingering questions about his "achievements"?
Also baseball fans being pissed at football fans because their sport is more under the limelight steroid-wise is pretty lame.
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Friday, 5 January 2007 21:08 (eighteen years ago)
Yeah, but it's also intensely hypocritical.
Then again, there's the Hollis Thomas thing, where the dude was suspended for taking an inhalant for his asthma that had steroids in it... which he needs to uh BREATHE. He submitted it to the team doctor for approval, which was forwarded to the league for approval, and then the dude was suspended. Wtf is that about.
If you can't take steroids for genuine medical needs, the whole system is stupid and broken.
― polyphonic (polyphonic), Friday, 5 January 2007 22:33 (eighteen years ago)
"In an attempt to uphold the Hall of Fame standards established by their predecessors, I will not vote for anyone who played in the 1993-2004 period, which I consider to be the Steroids Era," Ladewski wrote in an e-mail to The Sun last month. "That includes Tony Gwynn, Mark McGwire and Cal Ripken Jr.""It's not an anti-Cal Ripken vote or an anti-Tony Gwynn vote; it's a vote about not knowing enough, in my opinion, of the Steroids Era and performance-enhancing drugs to make the kind of decision that needs to be made," Ladewski said.
"From my dealings with Cal Ripken Jr. in the past, he was very pleasant, a good ambassador for the game, and his numbers speak for themselves," Ladewski said. "But I don't have enough information on the [steroids] subject to make a decision."
what a douche.
― jonathan quayle higgins (j.q. higgins), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:19 (eighteen years ago)
Oh you do now, do ya?
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:37 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:48 (eighteen years ago)
― Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 00:05 (eighteen years ago)
― ‘•’u (gear), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 00:29 (eighteen years ago)
― Andy_K (Andy_K), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 02:01 (eighteen years ago)
I think the whole roids issue is really shady, but to say that it was the definitive reason for the hitting explosion is lame. Criminy, just look at home run numbers for '61 and '77 which were both expansion seasons and you will find some patterns.
― Earl Nash (earlnash), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 02:41 (eighteen years ago)
― polyphonic (polyphonic), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 05:44 (eighteen years ago)
Or why 2004 should be considered the "end" of that era?
Introducting new drug testing rules in a sport =! the end of drug-taking in that sport
― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 12:31 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 14:34 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 16:25 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:20 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:25 (eighteen years ago)
― polyphonic (polyphonic), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:26 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:27 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:29 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:45 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 18:48 (eighteen years ago)
― polyphonic (polyphonic), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:05 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:06 (eighteen years ago)
result: Just Cal & Tony. Gossage up to 71.2 percent.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:09 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:12 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:14 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:15 (eighteen years ago)
― peepee (peepee), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:32 (eighteen years ago)
I don't begrudge people who don't vote for McGwire (unless they lie and say they're basing it on his numbers not being good enough, which is hilariously stupid), but I personally would not have any problems voting for him because for the most part I think steroids are a health issue, not a moral issue.
― polyphonic (polyphonic), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 19:59 (eighteen years ago)
He moved up a bit, from 337 to 346. He'll almost certainly make it next year, thanks in part to the Red Sox's anti-sabermetric p.r. campaign. There's nothing like a little parochialism to justify one's faith in the power of objectivity!
(Neyer judges Rice inferior to Parker, Murphy, Jim Wynn, Ted Simmons, Raines, etc)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 20:05 (eighteen years ago)
― polyphonic (polyphonic), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 21:59 (eighteen years ago)
Jay Jaffe: Would I vote for McGwire? I honestly don't know. The numbers say yes. The lack of hard evidence -- a positive test, an admission, definitive proof -- says yes. The amount of circumstantial evidence surrounding him -- the andro, the Canseco book, Operation Equine, Congress -- makes me hesitate.
I'd rather defer the matter for 14 years, until we gain a better perspective on all of this stuff, then cast a ballot that I feel truly comfortable with.
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 9 January 2007 23:01 (eighteen years ago)
― tony conrad schnitzler (sanskrit), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 04:27 (eighteen years ago)
Mark McGwire 128 23.5
Don Mattingly 54 9.9
YOU ARE WRONG
― If you fuck with Jimmy Mod, you call down the thunder (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 04:53 (eighteen years ago)
Cal Ripken Jr. 537 98.5 Tony Gwynn 532 97.6 Rich Gossage 388 71.2 Jim Rice 346 63.5 Andre Dawson 309 56.7 Bert Blyleven 260 47.7 Lee Smith 217 39.8 Jack Morris 202 37.1 Mark McGwire 128 23.5 Tommy John 125 22.9 Steve Garvey 115 21.1 Dave Concepcion 74 13.6 Alan Trammell 73 13.4 Dave Parker 62 11.4 Don Mattingly 54 9.9 Dale Murphy 50 9.2 Harold Baines 29 5.3 Orel Hershiser 24 4.4 Albert Belle 19 3.5 Paul O'Neill 12 2.2 Bret Saberhagen 7 1.3 Jose Canseco 6 1.1 Tony Fernandez 4 0.7 Dante Bichette 3 0.6 Eric Davis 3 0.6 Bobby Bonilla 2 0.4 Ken Caminiti 2 0.4 Jay Buhner 1 0.2 Scott Brosius 0 0 Wally Joyner 0 0 Devon White 0 0 Bobby Witt 0 0
― timmy tannin (pompous), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 05:31 (eighteen years ago)
Tony Fernandez: 0.7%Dave Conception: 13.6%
Jim Rice: 63.5%Albert Belle: 3.5%
(this is not to say that any of those four guys are necessarily HOFers)
― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 08:21 (eighteen years ago)
― ‘•’u (gear), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 08:50 (eighteen years ago)
http://news.theolympian.com/marinersMvNY/yankeesteam/photos/scottbrosius.jpg
― timmy tannin (pompous), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 09:00 (eighteen years ago)
― jonathan quayle higgins (j.q. higgins), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 13:58 (eighteen years ago)
oh yankeepaws
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 14:46 (eighteen years ago)
Concepcion's HOF credentials really aren't that bad (he's only narrowly below the HOF SS average.) Trammell not getting more votes is the sadder criminal thing here. I hope the VC puts him in.
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 17:07 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 18:07 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 18:12 (eighteen years ago)
― ‘•’u (gear), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 18:20 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 18:25 (eighteen years ago)
― ‘•’u (gear), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 18:30 (eighteen years ago)
― cousin larry bundgee (bundgee), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 18:39 (eighteen years ago)
this is from a yanks board. they threw in jeter & a-rod to add a little sabermetric perspective to the reflexive hyperventilation caused by an anti-jeter article on espn this past spring...
Player Career WARP3 Peak JAWS Wagner 193.6 84.8 139.2 Ripken 165.6 86.2 125.9 Vaughan 127.9 87.4 107.7 Banks 129.3 84.3 106.8 A-Rod 118.9 90 104.5 Ozzie 135.5 66.2 100.9 Appling 129.9 71.5 100.7 Yount 131.9 67.9 99.9 Cronin 115.7 73.9 94.8 Boudreau 107.5 79.4 93.5 Wallace 115.8 58.8 87.3 Sewell 102.2 70.1 86.2 Reese 104.2 64.3 84.3 Bancroft 90.3 53.3 71.8 Rizzuto 77.4 60.3 68.9 Jeter 77.8 53.2 65.5
average HoF SS JAWS is 82.2?
― jonathan quayle higgins (j.q. higgins), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 22:55 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 23:07 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 23:08 (eighteen years ago)
― bnw (bnw), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 23:08 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 23:20 (eighteen years ago)
anyways, surprised to see how far over the line cal is and far below it derek awesome is.
― jonathan quayle higgins (j.q. higgins), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 23:36 (eighteen years ago)
POS # BRAR BRAA FRAA WARP PEAK JAWSC 13 425 215 70 95.7 59.0 77.31B 18 744 489 -9 106.1 62.8 84.52B 17 579 304 92 122.8 71.5 97.13B 11 668 385 69 117.4 67.3 92.4SS 20 453 153 120 112.3 67.1 89.7LF 18 752 477 7 111.1 62.6 86.8CF 17 720 466 15 109.1 63.7 86.4RF 22 795 519 36 119.6 65.4 92.5
CI 29 716 450 20 110.3 64.5 87.4MI 37 510 222 107 117.1 69.1 93.1IF 66 600 321 69 114.1 67.1 90.6OF 57 759 490 21 113.8 64.0 88.9
Middle 67 547 283 77 111.0 65.8 88.4Corners 69 751 479 22 113.5 64.3 88.9
Hitters 136 651 383 49 112.3 65.0 88.6
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 23:42 (eighteen years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 10 January 2007 23:47 (eighteen years ago)
― tony conrad schnitzler (sanskrit), Thursday, 11 January 2007 03:58 (eighteen years ago)
― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 11 January 2007 09:28 (eighteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 11 January 2007 17:54 (eighteen years ago)
― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 11 January 2007 18:17 (eighteen years ago)
― ‘•’u (gear), Thursday, 11 January 2007 18:37 (eighteen years ago)
― ‘•’u (gear), Thursday, 11 January 2007 23:27 (eighteen years ago)
― polyphonic (polyphonic), Friday, 12 January 2007 00:06 (eighteen years ago)
― Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Friday, 12 January 2007 00:06 (eighteen years ago)
― ‘•’u (gear), Friday, 12 January 2007 00:28 (eighteen years ago)