tducey
Sports discussion
Yeah, Bonds and Clemens have to go in eventually. Yeah steroids ? surround them but I think it's time to move on.
Ah, thanks for correcting me. Still pretty aloof voting from this guy.He voted for Griffey last year.
2014: Morris, Glavine, Maddux, Thomas
2013: Morris
2010: Alomar, Larkin, Morris
2009: Henderson, Morris, Rice
Can't find the other years.
I read his article from 2013 regarding his Morris vote. Here's an excerpt:Ah, thanks for correcting me. Still pretty aloof voting from this guy.
Chass's argument for Morris is laughable by the way, as expected. Just a bunch of quotes from former teammates. Also that Morris was so important to three championship teams. Doesn't mention his performance in the 1992 playoffs funny enough.
Barry Zito has a CY. He started game 1 of the 2012 World Series. He started multiple opening days.But he started on opening day! And game 1 of BOTH postseason series. I mean, just being picked for those honours tells us all that we need to know, there's no need to look at the value of the actual performances.
Barry Zito has a CY. He started game 1 of the 2012 World Series. He started multiple opening days.
Is he a HOFer?
Why Bonds but not Clemens?Barry Bonds
Trevor Hoffman
That's it!
You don't think mine was in response to yours?
Mine seems to be working I think, but yours may need to be calibrated
Barry Bonds
Trevor Hoffman
That's it!
The two are elite, no-question HOFers before you enter the PED issue. I can't imagine anyone putting forth a serious argument against that stance.Not sure what the logic is for voting either Bonds/Clemens and not the other...
Jon Heyman is the only voter (public) that has voted for one and not the other. He voted Bonds, not Clemens. His reasoning was that he didn't know when Clemens started using and therefore doesn't know if he was a HOFer prior to steroids. While Bonds, on the other hand, he thinks the story makes sense that he started using after being envious of McGwire and Sosa and thinks he was a HOFer before this time.The two are elite, no-question HOFers before you enter the PED issue. I can't imagine anyone putting forth a serious argument against that stance.
While I disagree with keeping PED players out (basically), I understand the argument.
But what could the difference between these two possibly be to split your vote? Some kind of homerism is the only thing I can imagine.
Remember this guy?But he started on opening day! And game 1 of BOTH postseason series. I mean, just being picked for those honours tells us all that we need to know, there's no need to look at the value of the actual performances.
Why Bonds but not Clemens?
Bonds could hit already. Jury is out on, to me anyway, if Clemens could pitch clean..
Is Gaylord Perry in the HOF? Maybe I should reevaluate?