Should McGwire be elected to the HOF next year?

[The Voice of Reason]

I'd say eventually he should get in but only after Rice and Dawson make it who again failed to gain the necessary support Tuesday despite hitting a combined 820 home runs in a prejuiced era.

 

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/FE30F1DBB7806703862570F3001D37AA?OpenDocument

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I think he'll still go in, but I have serious doubts as to whether he'll go in on the first ballot.

 

Ripken and Gwynn are no-brainers. I can also see many voters thinking McGwire does not deserve to share the podium with those two because of the steroid allegations. In many ways, I agree with that assessment.

 

If I were a voter, I'd probably reluctantly vote for him. I'd strongly consider withholding a vote for a year or two in order to make a point and to keep him from sharing the podium with Ripken and Gwynn, but after moments of waffling, I'd probably end up casting a vote for him.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I think he'll still go in, but I have serious doubts as to whether he'll go in on the first ballot.

 

Ripken and Gwynn are no-brainers. I can also see many voters thinking McGwire does not deserve to share the podium with those two because of the steroid allegations. In many ways, I agree with that assessment.

 

If I were a voter, I'd probably reluctantly vote for him. I'd strongly consider withholding a vote for a year or two in order to make a point and to keep him from sharing the podium with Ripken and Gwynn, but after moments of waffling, I'd probably end up casting a vote for him.

 

You don't think he should share the podium with Ripken and Gwynn because of allegations? He probably took steroids however I don't think voters should exclude people based on allegations.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I think he'll still go in, but I have serious doubts as to whether he'll go in on the first ballot.

 

Ripken and Gwynn are no-brainers. I can also see many voters thinking McGwire does not deserve to share the podium with those two because of the steroid allegations. In many ways, I agree with that assessment.

 

If I were a voter, I'd probably reluctantly vote for him. I'd strongly consider withholding a vote for a year or two in order to make a point and to keep him from sharing the podium with Ripken and Gwynn, but after moments of waffling, I'd probably end up casting a vote for him.

 

You don't think he should share the podium with Ripken and Gwynn because of allegations? He probably took steroids however I don't think voters should exclude people based on allegations.

 

And hence my statement:

 

 

 

If I were a voter, I'd probably reluctantly vote for him. I'd strongly consider withholding a vote for a year or two in order to make a point and to keep him from sharing the podium with Ripken and Gwynn, but after moments of waffling, I'd probably end up casting a vote for him

 

Yes, based on the "allegations" and all the garbage that will go with them, I'd hate for those questions and discussions to take away from the honor that Ripken and Gwynn (two wonderful ambassadors of the game) richly deserve. I guess I consider McGwire less deserving than those two.

 

But as you have said, I too would have a hard time not voting a deserving candidate just on what I "believe" to be true instead of what I know...therefore my statement that I would "reluctantly" cast that vote.

 

Of course, I can see a lot of voters not voting him on the first ballot because they view a first ballot HOFer to be a greater honor than getting in on a later ballot. I would not begrudge a voter who wanted to make McGwire wait until 2008 or 2009 for induction. I would begrudge those who refuse to ever induct him.

[Chris]

There's still a lot of time between now and the vote. I believe he'll make it to the Hall, but will not be surprised if he's not voted in on the 1st ballot.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

And hence my statement:

 

 

 

If I were a voter, I'd probably reluctantly vote for him. I'd strongly consider withholding a vote for a year or two in order to make a point and to keep him from sharing the podium with Ripken and Gwynn, but after moments of waffling, I'd probably end up casting a vote for him

 

Yes, based on the "allegations" and all the garbage that will go with them, I'd hate for those questions and discussions to take away from the honor that Ripken and Gwynn (two wonderful ambassadors of the game) richly deserve. I guess I consider McGwire less deserving than those two.

 

But as you have said, I too would have a hard time not voting a deserving candidate just on what I "believe" to be true instead of what I know...therefore my statement that I would "reluctantly" cast that vote.

 

Of course, I can see a lot of voters not voting him on the first ballot because they view a first ballot HOFer to be a greater honor than getting in on a later ballot. I would not begrudge a voter who wanted to make McGwire wait until 2008 or 2009 for induction. I would begrudge those who refuse to ever induct him.

 

Whoops, after rereading your original post I realize my error.

[DesMoinesCub]

Do you think his Congressional Hearing made his chances even slimmer to be a first ballot HOF'er or do you think he was "doomed" before that.

[The Voice of Reason]

Do you think his Congressional Hearing made his chances even slimmer to be a first ballot HOF'er or do you think he was "doomed" before that.

 

If he had simply answered the questions while under oath instead of dodging them, we wouldn't even be having this discussion as he would be a first round lock.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Even if you take away McGwire's STL career(and therefore most if not all of the steroid scandal), he's hall worthy.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Do you think his Congressional Hearing made his chances even slimmer to be a first ballot HOF'er or do you think he was "doomed" before that.

 

I think it had a huge effect in the minds of many voters.

[Andy]

McGwire hit 49 home runs in his rookie year with twigs for arms. Even if he never touches a syringe he's an HOFer.

[DesMoinesCub]

I was thinking the same thing about his rookie season.

[rawaction]

McGwire hit 49 home runs in his rookie year with twigs for arms. Even if he never touches a syringe he's an HOFer.

 

I don't think so. My thinking is that the steroids helped him stay healthy. He couldn't stay healthy during his prime years. I think the voters have to decide if they think he would have made it if he had continued to play less than 100 game seasons. From 93-96, it looked like his career might be over. Then had the big surge in 96 at age 32. He was under 250 HRs at that point.

 

I don't think he is a HOF'er without the roids. I don't know that he would have stayed healthy enough to do so.

[SouthSideRyan]

McGwire hit 49 home runs in his rookie year with twigs for arms. Even if he never touches a syringe he's an HOFer.

 

I understand your point, but those things were far from twigs back then.

[CubinNY]

He will get in but if I'm a voter I'd never vote him in, never.

[The Voice of Reason]

A few excerpts from a long NY Post article on McGwire

 

Sure, McGwire broke Roger Maris' single-season home run mark, but that does not make him a first ballot Hall of Famer. He hit 583 home runs, but Eddie Mathews, who hit 512 home runs in a much more difficult home run era, had to wait five years to get elected to the Hall.

 

McGwire had his chance to set the record straight March 17 in front of Congress and said, "I'm not here to talk about the past."

 

Why not Big Mac? What do you have to hide Mr. Andro? McGwire essentially has gone into hiding since St. Patrick's Day.

 

On that day he was directly asked whether the use of steroids was cheating.

 

"That's not for me to determine," McGwire said. To some other probing questions, all he would say is, "I'm retired."

 

When I fill out my ballot next December, I will remember all that. I will answer the question. Using steroids is cheating - in the worst possible way. In my mind, a corked body is worse than a corked bat.

 

"If McGwire wasn't man enough or honest enough to defend his career under oath in front of his country, why should I celebrate his career?" asked Howard Bryant, a Washington Post reporter and author of "Juicing The Game." "Why should I immortalize something he doesn't even feel strong enough to defend?"

[TruffleShuffle]

"If McGwire wasn't man enough or honest enough to defend his career under oath in front of his country, why should I celebrate his career?" asked Howard Bryant, a Washington Post reporter and author of "Juicing The Game." "Why should I immortalize something he doesn't even feel strong enough to defend?"

 

 

I will say one thing, at least he was man enough to sit there and not lie to Congress like Palmeiro did. He might not want to admit to steroid use, but at least he is not willing to lie about it, which at least gives him a couple points up on the character scale.

[The Voice of Reason]

"If McGwire wasn't man enough or honest enough to defend his career under oath in front of his country, why should I celebrate his career?" asked Howard Bryant, a Washington Post reporter and author of "Juicing The Game." "Why should I immortalize something he doesn't even feel strong enough to defend?"

 

 

I will say one thing, at least he was man enough to sit there and not lie to Congress like Palmeiro did. He might not want to admit to steroid use, but at least he is not willing to lie about it, which at least gives him a couple points up on the character scale.[/quote]

 

True but giving someone credit for having more character than Palmeiro is kind of like giving a player credit for having more patience at the plate than Neifi.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

True but giving someone credit for having more character than Palmeiro is kind of like giving a player credit for having more patience at the plate than Neifi.

 

"I have never used steroids. Period."

 

http://www.foxnews.com/photo_essay/photoessay_335_images/031704_palmeiro.jpg

[wolf stansson]

McGwire hit 49 home runs in his rookie year with twigs for arms. Even if he never touches a syringe he's an HOFer.

 

I understand your point, but those things were far from twigs back then.

Rookie Mac:

http://www.sportsposterwarehouse.com/warehouse/mcgwire87sl-1.jpg

 

http://www.homeruncards.com/imagesrc/mcgwiretp.jpg

 

http://www.ioffer.com/img/1126508400/_i/8144017/1.jpg

 

McGwire to the max:

 

http://cache.boston.com/images/bostondirtdogs//Headline_Archives/MM_MaY_2.15.jpg

 

http://www.whymilk.com/ad_downloads/mark_mcgwire_l.jpg

McGwire pushing it past the max:

 

http://i.cnn.net/si/pr/subs/swimsuit/images/05_athletes_04.jpg

 

http://www.silverscreentest.com/koala/eucalyptus/mcgwire.jpg

 

 

He is a big man, and I'm sure he wasn't physically mature until a few years into his major league career, but there isn't much question in my eyes whether or not he juiced.

 

HOF'er? I say yes. But I am biased.

[gus_dog]

"If McGwire wasn't man enough or honest enough to defend his career under oath in front of his country, why should I celebrate his career?" asked Howard Bryant, a Washington Post reporter and author of "Juicing The Game." "Why should I immortalize something he doesn't even feel strong enough to defend?"

 

 

I will say one thing, at least he was man enough to sit there and not lie to Congress like Palmeiro did. He might not want to admit to steroid use, but at least he is not willing to lie about it, which at least gives him a couple points up on the character scale.

 

There are lies of comission, and lies of omission. McGwire's lack of forthright could be (and is) considered by many as a lie of omission. i.e. If I don't say anything substantive, is it really a lie? To that question I answer yes.

 

Too much cloudiness there for him to be a first ballot guy, but I would probably vote for him.

 

Another question: If he gets in, does he wear an A's hat or a Redbird hat?

 

Should be an A's hat, IMO, but 1998 will probably cause him to be wearing a red cap.

 

Did he even play three full seasons in The 'Lou?

[K-Town]

There are lies of comission, and lies of omission. McGwire's lack of forthright could be (and is) considered by many as a lie of omission. i.e. If I don't say anything substantive, is it really a lie? To that question I answer yes.

 

Too much cloudiness there for him to be a first ballot guy, but I would probably vote for him.

 

 

 

By that reasoning, every player who has never answer the "steroid question" before a Congressional committee is a liar. That's faulty logic.

 

When every other player in baseball is scrutinized the way Mac was and is, then you can criticize him. Until then, he's being treated unfairly.

[UK1679666180]

How is he being treated unfairly? By being accused of taking steroids? By going in front of Congess?

 

I fail to see why he is being treated unfairly?

 

Has Bonds and Sosa been treated unfairly? What about Brady Anderson or Bret Boone?

[K-Town]

How is he being treated unfairly? By being accused of taking steroids? By going in front of Congess?

 

I fail to see why he is being treated unfairly?

 

Has Bonds and Sosa been treated unfairly? What about Brady Anderson or Bret Boone?

 

Sosa was treated unfairly. So was Palmeiro.

 

 

The entire Congressional hearing was a farce. It was political propoganda. Why do you pick and choose players to question? Was it because of Canseco's book? Yeah, there's a credible source, with no agenda. Yeah right.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

How is he being treated unfairly? By being accused of taking steroids? By going in front of Congess?

 

I fail to see why he is being treated unfairly?

 

Has Bonds and Sosa been treated unfairly? What about Brady Anderson or Bret Boone?

 

Sosa was treated unfairly. So was Palmeiro.

 

 

The entire Congressional hearing was a farce. It was political propoganda. Why do you pick and choose players to question? Was it because of Canseco's book? Yeah, there's a credible source, with no agenda. Yeah right.

 

Well everyone attacked Canseco's credibility (myself included), it seems with Palmeiro, not only was he right, but he even named the right steroid in his book.

 

While there are many reasons to question Canseco's motives, it looks as if, at least in Palmerio's case, that he wasn't just blowing smoke.