Here are the 10 players Buster Olney voted for

Sosa never did anything before roids...nothing and his career numbers like McGwire's fall short.

It's like his ballot has everything.....do any 1 HOF worthy thing and you're in.

Sosa never did anything before roids...nothing and his career numbers like McGwire's fall short

That is why I feel Bonds/Clemens should be in even though we know they juiced.

Had Bonds retired in 1998 (last year before he started roiding from what we know) he would have been a HOF based on what he had accomplished to that point alone. He was a great player without roids. Roids just took him to a level no mere mortal has ever been.

Clemens is a little less of a lock because his career was declining before he took the needle, but he would have been borderline (probably in) had he retired that last year with the Red Sox (his first year with the Jays is when he is believed to have started roiding - when his career turned around).

Those were guys that played at a HOF level without roids, so I have less of a problem putting them in than guys who were pedestrian before roids and then turned into Babe Ruth only once they started juicing.

I don't think it's hypocritical to draw a distinction on how it is different on a case by case basis, and the sports writers are going to have to do that.

IggyPride00;1352111 wrote:That is why I feel Bonds/Clemens should be in even though we know they juiced.

Had Bonds retired in 1998 (last year before he started roiding from what we know) he would have been a HOF based on what he had accomplished to that point alone. He was a great player without roids. Roids just took him to a level no mere mortal has ever been.

Clemens is a little less of a lock because his career was declining before he took the needle, but he would have been borderline (probably in) had he retired that last year with the Red Sox (his first year with the Jays is when he is believed to have started roiding - when his career turned around).

Those were guys that played at a HOF level without roids, so I have less of a problem putting them in than guys who were pedestrian before roids and then turned into Babe Ruth only once they started juicing.

I don't think it's hypocritical to draw a distinction on how it is different on a case by case basis, and the sports writers are going to have to do that.

I think Clemens was less than borderline.....he was going downhill pretty quickly and his fastball was down to 91-92

Bonds was the best player in the game and the steroid freaks were garnering all the attention.....then he began and showed us what the best on the best can do. Bonds was the best player not on roids....and then became the best on steroids.

Ironman92;1352422 wrote:Bonds was the best player in the game and the steroid freaks were garnering all the attention.....then he began and showed us what the best on the best can do. Bonds was the best player not on roids....and then became the best on steroids.

I think this sums it up perfectly. Bonds is obviously a Hall of Famer for sure, but will probably never get in. It's really his own fault, but it still just doesn't seem right.

Morris should have been in 12 years ago.

Sonofanump;1352588 wrote:Morris should have been in 12 years ago.

Yep

I say let them all in. Who cares if they took steroids, they did absolutely phenomenal things