BBA HoF Ballot Discussion: Mark McGwire

by on December 31, 2009 · 5 comments

Mark McGwire

Nick: I’m not going to get into statistical analysis with Mark McGwire.

It’s likely I will be criticized as a homer, dismissed as a PED-apologist, or whatever other disparaging remarks can come along with supporting a guy like McGwire…

…but he has my vote.

Look, if this discussion was independent of McGwire’s rumored steroid use, there would be no question. He would be in.

How will you vote when Roger Clemens, Alex Rodriguez, Barry Bonds, et al are eligible? There is still really no right answer when asking just how engulfed the game was with performance-enhancing influence. It seems safe to say “plenty”.

If McGwire was using while hitting his home runs off of a pitcher that was using – what’s the difference?

I hate to be so apathetic about something that has brought shame and scandal to the game I love, but it’s either all or none. McGwire gets my vote – and I’d vote for Pete Rose if I could.

Josh: I was a Big Mac fan independent of everything that happened in St. Louis. To me he makes it for the same reason Cal did — getting the game back where it belonged following the strike but wow, the Bash Brothers were fun to watch too. It is hard not to argue with people anytime McGwire is brought up, as the naysayers only want to use the congress appearance and the s-word against him.

Sign me up as well for voting everytime out for Mark, and I’m very interested for his re-introduction interviews in the near future as the Cards’ hitting coach. Will it put him over the top with all the rest of the voters out there? That is what makes baseball the best sport in my opinion.

—–

McGwire has the support of PH8 for Hall of Fame induction. We could debate about this one all day, right? Convince us otherwise. Comments are open.

email
Writing about the Cardinals and other loosely associated topics since 2008, I've grown tired of the April run-out only to disappoint Cardinal fans everywhere by mid-May. I do not believe in surrendering free outs.
View all posts by Nick
Follow Nick on Twitter

{ 4 comments }

golface8 December 31, 2009

no doubt…if they dont allow McGwire in with his stats then I tremble to think how many other players will be overlooked. In all honesty wouldn’t every player (yes even el hombre) have to be looked at with suspicion due to the era of the game, and as such all be graded with the same “curve?”

PH8 December 31, 2009

Well, exactly my point (I think).

Therein lies the largest problem with casting a net on all players both confirmed and suspected of using PEDs.

All it would seemingly take is one smear campaign against Pujols, or any other player who is no longer “beyond suspicion” and then the voter who chose to eliminate McGwire from consideration must eliminate Pujols as well.

I still feel like McGwire is being punished because some see him as a fringe candidate anyway.

This debate will really hit the fan when Bonds and Clemens come eligible.

Or even Alex Rodriguez. Does an admission and half-hearted apology make everythink okay again? If you apologize, then you’re still ok to vote into HoF?

golface8 December 31, 2009

what I wonder is will his coaching performance next year impact the results of his HOF assuming he is held out again this year? say he does well with the cardinals hitting, pujols does need some help coaching everyone else, then will that reinforce his position as a good hitter, well atleast a hitter with a keen eye for the plate?

PH8 December 31, 2009

I doubt it. Unfortunately, probably the only thing that will immediately help or hurt his candidacy is to throw himself to the wolves, so to speak.

Sit in front of the microphones and cameras, and answer questions. Answer truthfully and exhaustively. At that point, he either was going to eventually be voted in or not.

Strangely, I still don’t think he cares one way or another about being enshrined.

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: