Which suspected steroids-user has best shot at HoF?

[LGehrigFan]

In your opinion, which suspected player will have the best shot at making the Hall of Fame. If the writers were to induct one of them, who would it be? And I'm not going by only statistics. Barry Bonds has received a lot more heat for steroids than Roger Clemens, so maybe Clemens has a better shot. Who do think ?

I'll add a poll if enough people are interested in this threat. Thanks!

[n3rd]

For me it's sort of a tough decision. My first inclination would be to say Barry Bonds simply because he's suspected of using steroids to help him break the game's most hallowed and saught after record, and perhaps the most saught after record in all of sports. Really though, I think if both Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds were up for the Hall of Fame and the voting was today, they'd both get in, there hasn't been enough concrete evidence (we shall see in few weeks and months if there is any solid evidence) to really give me a reason not to vote for either of these gentleman. Sure, we have plenty of pictures for Bonds showing him as a skinny outfielder at Arizona State and with the Pirates but, one cannot go on pictures alone. But right now, I think Clemens would have the better chance at drawing more votes, if not simply because he doesn't have a bad relationship with the media etc, etc, like Barry has/had during his career. I still think they're both in as of right now.

[OleMissCub]

Maybe Sammy Sosa, because everything dealing with his potential steroid use is purely circumstantial. Not so with the others.

[n3rd]

Maybe Sammy Sosa, because everything dealing with his potential steroid use is purely circumstantial. Not so with the others.

I forgot all about Slammin' Sammy....seems like he remembers English pretty well now-a-days, I guess he just forgot during the congressional hearings...strange.

[digglahhh]

Define "suspected steroid user."

Suspected by whom?

Pending further clarification, I'm going with Ivan Rodriguez.

[MadHatter]

Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Miguel Tejada
Mark McGwire

In that order, perhaps.

[Rotoprofessor]

I'd love to see McGwire get in, but people view him as only being successful due to his use of steroids, so he's a long-shot at best at this point.

Both Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds had significant success prior to it is believed they started using steroids, so I can see both of them getting in because of it. I think Bonds is the more likely at this point, but it's awfully close and they both can easily get in.

Guys like Sammy Sosa and Rafael Palmeiro I put in the same class as McGwire, so if he's not going to get in, neither will they.

[whoisonit]

In your opinion, which suspected player will have the best shot at making the Hall of Fame. If the writers were to induct one of them, who would it be? And I'm not going by only statistics. Barry Bonds has received a lot more heat for steroids than Roger Clemens, so maybe Clemens has a better shot. Who do think ?

I'll add a poll if enough people are interested in this threat. Thanks!

Are you asking; which suspected player ...ie; Bonds & Clemens -

or

Are you asking about ALL suspected players ?

Please clarify and I will answer accordingly

[5ToolPlayer]

Great Question. Tough to Answer

Since we are talking about the Steroid Era, I will assume, for argument's sake, that they all did it.

When discussing who should and who shouldn't be inducted into the Hall of Fame from baseball's Steroid Era, I use the "hypothetical plane crash in 1997" as a litmus test. That is, if the player under consideration for the Hall had the (admittedly macabre) misfortune of dieing in a plane crash at the end of the 1997 season, would the player under consideration have had a good enough career to make it into the Hall anyway?

Using this test, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens are definite shoe-ins. I have no problem with either of these two players entering the Hall (their objectionable personalities notwithstanding) because both of these players would undoubtedly have made it into the Hall if they never had taken a performance enhancing drug in their lives.

Mark McGwire's case is more problematic. He MIGHT have hit enough home runs to warrant admission to the Hall had he never taken steroids, but it is far from certain if he would have. Since he was such a one dimensional player, his admission into the Hall is entirely dependent on his power numbers. It is close, but I don't think he meets the litmus test. The Hall of Fame is a privilege; the burden of proof is on him, and he, unfortunately, probably does not meet it.

Sorry fellow Cub fans -- Sammy Sosa doesn't come close. He never would have amassed the monumental power numbers had he never taken steroids.

[KCGHOST]

Tough call. Maybe Bonds, I guess.

[fenrir]

probably pudge rodriguez. while i think he did roids there is no concrete evidence to say he did. he also never had any weird spikes in his career, and he's declining normally for an aging player.

[digglahhh]

5ToolPlayer,

First, welcome to BBF.

Second, I think there is one other variable you are ignoring, and that is the degree of stigma attached to potential candidates. You plane crash analogy does not simulate the circumstances of the question asked, it simulates, well... what would have happened if all players died in 1997.

Presumably the voters are not voting under your proposed model, presumably they are not just assuming everyone took. Incidentally, what's the difference between assuming everyone is guilty or assuming everyone is innocent? Either way the numbers go back to face value and Bonds and Clemens have the strongest respective cases. Not to mention that your hypothetical is only really fair to players who debuted in the mid 80's or earlier. A guy like Pedro is a shoo-in, but not by your method...

The best candidate here is a guy who is universally regarded as a HOFer, who has had publicized steroid suspicion, but to whom the allegations either didn't stick, or were just forgotten about. Hence my choice, Pudge. Pudge is also universally liked, as opposed to Clemens and Bonds, another aspect we've seen is relevant in HOF voting.

[stejay]

Bonds simply because of his records. Clemens will get in too. I dont agree, but thats the rules I suppose.

[whoisonit]

Mike Piazza has the best chance because he has always, (with one notable exception), been treated with kid gloves by the press. In my opinion, he will be voted in on the first ballot without any questions raised about his offensive output.

Bonds and Clemens will forever be linked now as the iconic tainted bookends of this statisticly molested era. ie; as one goes, so goes the other. They will not make it.

Whoever supports the grotesquely inflated numbers and physique of Mark McGuire should also push for acknowledgement of his pre-steroid era twin, Dave Kingman, allthough some could argue, justifyably, that is unfair to Kingman.

[digglahhh]

Mike Piazza has the best chance because he has always, (with one notable exception), been treated with kid gloves by the press. In my opinion, he will be voted in on the first ballot without any questions raised about his offensive output.

Bonds and Clemens will forever be linked now as the iconic tainted bookends of this statisticly molested era. ie; as one goes, so goes the other. They will not make it.

Whoever supports the grotesquely inflated numbers and physique of Mark McGuire should also push for acknowledgement of his pre-steroid era twin, Dave Kingman, allthough some could argue, justifyably, that is unfair to Kingman.

1. When was Piazza named as a steroid suspect?

2. Use the search function, find a Kingman/Mac thread, read it. If you still feel compelled to regurgitate your unsubstantiated, patently ridiculous hyperbole, put on your flame suit and post away...