Mitchell Report Names [Archive] - SpursTalk.com Forums

King

12-13-2007, 01:25 PM

List I've seen:

Brady Anderson,
Manny Alexander,
Rick Ankiel,
Jeff Bagwell,
Barry Bonds,
Aaron Boone,
Rafaeil Bettancourt,
Bret Boone,
Milton Bradley,
David Bell,
Dante Bichette,
Albert Belle,
Paul Byrd,
Wil Cordero,
Ken Caminiti,
Mike Cameron,
Ramon Castro,
Jose and Ozzie Canseco,
Roger Clemens,
Paxton Crawford,
Wilson Delgado,
Lenny Dykstra,
Johnny Damon,
Carl Everett,
Kyle Farnsoworth,
Ryan Franklin,
Troy Glaus,
Rich Garces,
Jason Grimsley,
Troy Glaus,
Juan Gonzalez,
Eric Gagne,
Nomar Garciaparra,
Jason Giambi,
Jeremy Giambi,
Jose Guillen,
Jay Gibbons,
Clay Hensley,
Jerry Hairston,
Felix Heredia, Jr.,
Darren Holmes,
Wally Joyner,
Darryl Kile,
Matt Lawton,
Raul Mondesi,
Mark McGwire,
Guillermo Mota,
Robert Machado,
Damian Moss,
Abraham Nunez,
Trot Nixon,
Jose Offerman,
Andy Pettitte,
Mark Prior,
Neifi Perez,
Rafael Palmiero,
Albert Pujols,
Brian Roberts,
Juan Rincon,
John Rocker,
Pudge Rodriguez,
Sammy Sosa,
Scott Schoenweiis,
David Segui,
Alex Sanchez,
Gary Sheffield,
Miguel Tejada,
Julian Tavarez,
Fernando Tatis,
Maurice Vaughn,
Jason Varitek,
Ismael Valdez,
Matt Williams and
Kerry Wood.

sribb43

12-13-2007, 01:28 PM

a bunch of former Texas Rangers on that list

Mister Sinister

12-13-2007, 01:33 PM

Pujols? Holy shit...

midgetonadonkey

12-13-2007, 01:34 PM

NOOO!!! Not Fernando Tatis!! NOOOO!!!

sribb43

12-13-2007, 01:35 PM

NOOO!!! Not Fernando Tatis!! NOOOO!!!

how do you think he hit those 2 grand slams in one inning

midgetonadonkey

12-13-2007, 01:36 PM

how do you think he hit those 2 grand slams in one inning

Natural talent

Mister Sinister

12-13-2007, 01:37 PM

how do you think he hit those 2 grand slams in one inning
Voodoo.

Johnny_Blaze_47

12-13-2007, 02:00 PM

Here's the report.

www.mlb.com/mitchellreport

Extra Stout

12-13-2007, 02:24 PM

The preliminary lists were woefully inaccurate.

Johnny_Blaze_47

12-13-2007, 02:28 PM

Some of the names I've seen in the report:

Denny Neagle
Ron Villone
Lenny Dykstra
Mo Vaughn
Glenallen Hill
David Justice
Roger Clemens
Andy Pettitte
F.P. Santagelo
Gregg Zaun
Jason Grimsley
Miguel Tejada

Johnny_Blaze_47

12-13-2007, 02:29 PM

Adam Piatt
Kent Mercker
Mike Stanton
Cody McKay
Mike Lansing
Kevin Young
Todd Pratt
Phil Hiatt

Johnny_Blaze_47

12-13-2007, 02:30 PM

Eric Gagne
Fernando Vina
Paul Lo Duca

Thunder Dan

12-13-2007, 02:42 PM

I refuse to believe Albert Belle used steroids. This senator is lying.

Johnny_Blaze_47

12-13-2007, 03:00 PM

Below, a complete list of players mentioned in the Mitchell Report.

All the players listed in the section VIII. B.: "Information Regarding Purchases or Use of Performance Enhancing Substances by Players in Major League Baseball" (section 3 is "Radomski¹s Distribution of Performance Enhancing Substances to Major League Baseball Players")

Lenny Dykstra
David Segui
Larry Bigbie
Brian Roberts
Jack Cust
Tim Laker
Josias Manzanillo
Todd Hundley
Mark Carreon
Hal Morris
Matt Franco
Rondell White
Roger Clemens
Andy Pettitte
Chuck Knoblauch
Jason Grimsley
Gregg Zaun
David Justice
F.P. Santangelo
Glenallen Hill
Mo Vaughn
Denny Neagle
Ron Villone
Ryan Franklin
Chris Donnels
Todd Williams
Phil Hiatt
Todd Pratt
Kevin Young
Mike Lansing
Cody McKay
Kent Mercker
Adam Piatt
Miguel Tejada
Jason Christiansen
Mike Stanton
Stephen Randolph
Jerry Hairston
Paul Lo Duca
Adam Riggs
Bart Miadich
Fernando Vina
Kevin Brown
Eric Gagne
Mike Bell
Matt Herges
Gary Bennett, Jr.
Jim Parque
Brendan Donnelly
Chad Allen
Jeff Williams
Howie Clark
Nook Logan

Section IX. B."Alleged Internet Purchases of Performance Enhancing Substances By Players in Major League Baseball"

Rick Ankiel, Paul Byrd, Jay Gibbons, Troy Glaus, Jose Guillen, Jerry Hairston, Jr., Gary Matthews, Jr., and Scott Schoeneweis, and former players David Bell, Jose Canseco, Jason Grimsley, Darren Holmes, John Rocker, Ismael Valdez, Matt Williams, and Steve Woodard."

Kermit

12-13-2007, 03:01 PM

Yea! No Bagwell bitches!

FromWayDowntown

12-13-2007, 03:02 PM

No Pujols, right? That's a good thing, I think.

Mr. Body

12-13-2007, 03:29 PM

Now if the Senate can just do this shit for the Iraq War. Do the rest of your job! Baseball is just a game!

samikeyp

12-13-2007, 03:32 PM

so no McGwire or Sosa...interesting.

or did I miss them?

MajorMike

12-13-2007, 03:40 PM

The preliminary lists were woefully inaccurate.

Pujols is no where in the document.

Mitchell also defends Mark McGwire.

samikeyp

12-13-2007, 03:41 PM

I don't see Bonds on that list but apparently he is mentioned in the report.

FromWayDowntown

12-13-2007, 03:44 PM

I don't see Bonds on that list but apparently he is mentioned in the report.

That jumped out at me, too. Curiously, speculation seems to have landed some players -- Dykstra in particular (from the little bit of the report that I've read).

degenerate_gambler

12-13-2007, 03:46 PM

PLAYERS NAMED IN THE REPORT INCLUDE:

Chad Allen
Rick Ankiel
David Bell
Mike Bell
Marvin Benard
Gary Bennett, Jr.
Larry Bigbie
Barry Bonds
Kevin Brown
Paul Byrd
Jose Canseco
Mark Carreon
Jason Christiansen
Howie Clark
Roger Clemens
Jack Cust
Brendan Donnelly
Chris Donnels
Lenny Dykstra
Bobby Estalella
Matt Franco
Ryan Franklin
Eric Gagne
Jason Giambi
Jeremy Giambi
Jay Gibbons
Troy Glaus
Jason Grimsley
Jose Guillen
Jerry Hairston, Jr.
Matt Herges
Phil Hiatt
Glenallen Hill
Darren Holmes
Todd Hundley
David Justice
Chuck Knoblauch
Tim Laker
Mike Lansing
Paul Lo Duca
Exavier "Nook" Logan
Josias Manzanillo
Gary Matthews, Jr.
Mark McGwire
Cody McKay
Kent Mercker
Bart Miadich
Hal Morris
Daniel Naulty
Denny Neagle
Rafael Palmeiro
Jim Parque
Andy Pettitte
Adam Piatt
Todd Pratt
Adam Riggs
Brian Roberts
John Rocker
F.P. Santangelo
Benito Santiago
Scott Schoeneweis
David Segui
Gary Sheffield
Miguel Tejada
Ismael Valdez
Mo Vaughn
Randy Velarde
Ron Villone
Fernando Vina
Rondell White
Jeff Williams
Matt Williams
Todd Williams
Steve Woodard
Kevin Young
Gregg Zaun

timvp

12-13-2007, 03:48 PM

Hopefully whoever jumped the gun and released that first list needs to get busted. That was wrong on so many levels ... especially considering Darryl Kile was on the list.

Maybe this can be Mitchell's next investigation . . .

samikeyp

12-13-2007, 03:48 PM

mentioned in the report and named as being involved with steroids are two different things.

ATRAIN

12-13-2007, 03:48 PM

They should just give everyone the option to use or not and then just let it be. Records dont really mean shit anyways so who cares.

K-State Spur

12-13-2007, 03:48 PM

degenerate_gambler

12-13-2007, 03:56 PM

... especially considering Darryl Kile was on the list.

that is messed up.

Bagwell's name also appeared on it and I'm really, really glad to see he's not mentioned in Mitchell's report...

MajorMike

12-13-2007, 03:58 PM

I wouldn't say that he "defends McGwire" at all.

Although he may have taken it easier on him that some of the other guys in there despite that the evidence against McGwire is one of the strongest (invoking the 5th amendment is only necessary for one reason).

I don't see anywhere in the report that he says McGwire took HGH or steriods. He says he took andro and creatine.

"In 1988, androstenedione became the subject of national attention after a reporter
observed a container of the supplement in the locker of Mark McGwire of the St. Louis
Cardinals during his pursuit of the single-season home run record.70 The ability to purchase the substance over-the-counter became a subject of intense discussion"

"Androstenedione is a steroid hormone produced in the body, where it is converted
into testosterone.232 In 1998, “andro” was sold in the United States as a dietary supplement and was available without a prescription. The use of andro was not illegal in the United States, nor was it a prohibited substance under baseball’s drug policy at the time."

"When Mark McGwire first was asked about the bottle of androstenedione in his
locker, he is reported to have admitted using it, as well as the over-the-counter amino acid supplement creatine, to assist his workout regimen.237 McGwire was quoted as having said: “Everything I’ve done is natural. Everybody that I know in the game of baseball uses the same stuff I use.”238 He also reportedly stated that “[i]f somebody tells me that it’s illegal and I shouldn’t be taking it, I will stop.”"

"The public comments from others in baseball generally supported McGwire, with players noting that andro was legal and not prohibited in Major League Baseball and observing that McGwire always had been a power hitter and that strength alone could not account for his home run hitting prowess."

"The Cardinals organization issued a
statement that the club did not object to McGwire’s use of the supplement because it had “no proven anabolic effects nor significant side effects.”242 Commissioner Selig told me that he was not aware of andro before the AP story was published, but shortly thereafter he visited his local pharmacy in Milwaukee where the pharmacist directed him to the bottles of the substance that were openly for sale on the shelves."

samikeyp

12-13-2007, 04:10 PM

If McGwire didn't use roids, im ok with that but why all the evasiveness in front of congress? Why not just say "I didn't do it"?

timvp

12-13-2007, 04:13 PM

timvp

12-13-2007, 04:14 PM

If McGwire didn't use roidsMcGwire probably poured more roids into his veins than the rest of the list combined.

samikeyp

12-13-2007, 04:17 PM

McGwire probably poured more roids into his veins than the rest of the list combined.

I agree which is why I find it odd that he is not on that list and is just "mentioned"

K-State Spur

12-13-2007, 04:26 PM

I don't see anywhere in the report that he says McGwire took HGH or steriods. He says he took andro and creatine.

"In 1988, androstenedione became the subject of national attention after a reporter
observed a container of the supplement in the locker of Mark McGwire of the St. Louis
Cardinals during his pursuit of the single-season home run record.70 The ability to purchase the substance over-the-counter became a subject of intense discussion"

"Androstenedione is a steroid hormone produced in the body, where it is converted
into testosterone.232 In 1998, “andro” was sold in the United States as a dietary supplement and was available without a prescription. The use of andro was not illegal in the United States, nor was it a prohibited substance under baseball’s drug policy at the time."

"When Mark McGwire first was asked about the bottle of androstenedione in his
locker, he is reported to have admitted using it, as well as the over-the-counter amino acid supplement creatine, to assist his workout regimen.237 McGwire was quoted as having said: “Everything I’ve done is natural. Everybody that I know in the game of baseball uses the same stuff I use.”238 He also reportedly stated that “[i]f somebody tells me that it’s illegal and I shouldn’t be taking it, I will stop.”"

"The public comments from others in baseball generally supported McGwire, with players noting that andro was legal and not prohibited in Major League Baseball and observing that McGwire always had been a power hitter and that strength alone could not account for his home run hitting prowess."

"The Cardinals organization issued a
statement that the club did not object to McGwire’s use of the supplement because it had “no proven anabolic effects nor significant side effects.”242 Commissioner Selig told me that he was not aware of andro before the AP story was published, but shortly thereafter he visited his local pharmacy in Milwaukee where the pharmacist directed him to the bottles of the substance that were openly for sale on the shelves."

Omission isn't defense. But he does talk about Canseco's accusation of McGwire, which is what he uses to link many players to the ordeal.

However, as I said, he went rather easy on him considering that McGwire's statements to Congress were basically an admission (although not in the legal sense).

degenerate_gambler

12-13-2007, 04:45 PM

I agree which is why I find it odd that he is not on that list and is just "mentioned"

So far there hasn't been a Radomski or McNamee in his past that's given him up to the feds.

Whatever Big Mac may have done, aside from the andro, he did it quietly.

2centsworth

12-13-2007, 04:53 PM

the list isn't all inclusive, but probably contains names where there is irrefutable evidence to avoid a defemation of character lawsuit.

samikeyp

12-13-2007, 05:19 PM

So far there hasn't been a Radomski or McNamee in his past that's given him up to the feds.

Whatever Big Mac may have done, aside from the andro, he did it quietly.

That is what I am thinking and no one in the Cards organization would give him up.

ClingingMars

12-13-2007, 05:28 PM

They should just give everyone the option to use or not and then just let it be. Records dont really mean shit anyways so who cares.

this is one of the stupidest posts I've ever seen.

-Mars

MajorMike

12-13-2007, 06:56 PM

Omission isn't defense. But he does talk about Canseco's accusation of McGwire, which is what he uses to link many players to the ordeal.

However, as I said, he went rather easy on him considering that McGwire's statements to Congress were basically an admission (although not in the legal sense).

Yes it does. And it also talks about how it became obvious that Jose was juicing and saying everyone else was to lessen their accomplishments.

Sorry, it flat out says McGwire only took andro and it was legal, even over-the-counter. They rat out much bigger names than Big Mac, so it leads one to believe if they had something else on him they would give it up. They don't.

MajorMike

12-13-2007, 06:58 PM

So far there hasn't been a Radomski or McNamee in his past that's given him up to the feds.

Whatever Big Mac may have done, aside from the andro, he did it quietly.

Then why is it that thru all of the allegations in Oakland, that the only person that did give him up was Canseco, who admittedly lied about many things, and everyone else that surfaced has been proven.

Sometimes things really are how they seem. Not often, but sometimes.

K-State Spur

12-13-2007, 07:40 PM

Sorry, it flat out says McGwire only took andro and it was legal, even over-the-counter.

It absolutely does not. It only talks about his andro, but it never once says that he "ONLY took Andro."

Besides, as has been indicated before, Mac has already taken the 5th regarding steroids. And there is only one legitimate reason to do that. It's just as strong, if not stronger, than the evidence against Bonds.

K-State Spur

12-13-2007, 07:42 PM

Then why is it that thru all of the allegations in Oakland, that the only person that did give him up was Canseco, who admittedly lied about many things, and everyone else that surfaced has been proven.

Sometimes things really are how they seem. Not often, but sometimes.

Who did Canseco admittedly lie about? So far he's been proven right every time.

Extra Stout

12-13-2007, 08:08 PM

Then why is it that thru all of the allegations in Oakland, that the only person that did give him up was Canseco, who admittedly lied about many things, and everyone else that surfaced has been proven.

Sometimes things really are how they seem. Not often, but sometimes.
McGwire's testimony before Congress effectively removed any doubt that he used steroids.

dallaskd

12-13-2007, 08:10 PM

dear god...

dallaskd

12-13-2007, 08:13 PM

besides srub hairston. and matthews jr it looks like the rangers have been pretty clean.
gagne and rocker are obvious and i think gagne probably used before he came to texas to help heal his injury. palmeiro has taken his crap. other than that....

way to do it with class Texas Rangers!

dallaskd

12-13-2007, 08:14 PM

dammit pudge. fuck you!

dallaskd

12-13-2007, 08:15 PM

god dammit SAMMY AND EVERETT!

FUCK!

dallaskd

12-13-2007, 08:20 PM

Yea! No Bagwell bitches!

hes on there too dumbshit

dallaskd

12-13-2007, 08:21 PM

my respect level for A-rod just shot up.

Kriz-Maxima

12-13-2007, 08:26 PM

Where the hell do you see Bagwell and Pudge?

Here is the list on ESPN
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3153646

BeerIsGood!

12-14-2007, 01:29 AM

my respect level for A-rod just shot up.

You realize that just because someone's name is not on the list doesn't mean they're clean. Just because their name is on the list doesn't mean they're dirty. Mitchell admitted himself that just about all of his information came from a trainer who was MANDATED BY A JUDGE to talk to him as part of the restitution regarding his own case. That's what's called dirty evidence as it comes from a dirty coerced source. That guy would give up everybody he ever even heard a rumor from to try to take his own ass somewhat out of the fire. This whole report is a joke and shouldn't be taken seriously. I personally think at least 80% of the current MLB is on some form of HGH. Until there is a blood test in MLB or an alternate HGH test then I'm assuming all of baseball is tainted and will remain as much. This fluff is all hearsay.

Kermit

12-14-2007, 08:13 AM

hes on there too dumbshit
Uh, no he's not Nick Cannon avatar dude.

Purple & Gold

12-14-2007, 09:27 AM

Incomplete list. No Sosa no Beltre on there.

K-State Spur

12-14-2007, 01:17 PM

Yes it does. And it also talks about how it became obvious that Jose was juicing and saying everyone else was to lessen their accomplishments.

Sorry, it flat out says McGwire only took andro and it was legal, even over-the-counter. They rat out much bigger names than Big Mac, so it leads one to believe if they had something else on him they would give it up. They don't.

Repeat: Omission is not defense. This report was not the end-all-be-all of everybody who used steroids, or the end-all-be-all of the extent of use by the people mentioned.

Jerry Crasnick:

One thing that bothers me is the arbitrary nature of the names being tossed around. If you went to BALCO or you crossed paths with Kirk Radomski, your name is splashed all over this report. If you went to a different supplier, you're in the clear. We all know that the list of players mentioned by Mitchell doesn't even scratch the surface.

BeerIsGood!

12-14-2007, 02:21 PM

:rollin :lmao @ some people thinking A-Rod is clean because Mitchell didn't put him in his list. A-Rods' head is expanding at a Sosa like rate.

MajorMike

12-14-2007, 05:36 PM

Repeat: Omission is not defense.

Great. Omission is not defense. Neither is it guilt.

K-State Spur

12-14-2007, 08:46 PM

Great. Omission is not defense. Neither is it guilt.

You're right. Nothing in the Mitchell report points to his doing steroids.

His testimony before Congress is what points to him doing steroids.

MajorMike

12-14-2007, 10:48 PM

His testimony before Congress is what points to him doing steroids.

Omission is not defense. Neither is it guilt.

Extra Stout

12-15-2007, 10:34 AM

Omission is not defense. Neither is it guilt.
That's a rather tattered and threadbare shred of hope you're clutching onto.

K-State Spur

12-15-2007, 12:12 PM

Omission is not defense. Neither is it guilt.

The fifth amendment gives Mac the right not to incriminate himself. Therefore the only reason to invoke it would be if the truth would have incriminated him.

It's like a 'no contest' plea. From a legal standpoint, it's not an admission. But in the court of public opinion, it's as strong as DNA evidence.

MajorMike

12-15-2007, 03:29 PM

The fifth amendment gives Mac the right not to incriminate himself.

...OR someone else.

MajorMike

12-15-2007, 03:30 PM

That's a rather tattered and threadbare shred of hope you're clutching onto.

My point is simple. Just as KState says, omission is not guilt. Likewise, the omission of is testimony is not guilt. Can't have it both ways.

K-State Spur

12-15-2007, 03:56 PM

...OR someone else.

uhhh, no. re-read our constitution. (or read it for the first time - with the exception of some talk of 3/5 of a person, it's a brilliant and wonderful document)

you do NOT have the right to refuse testimony under oath that might incriminate somebody else.

the fifth amendment (the portion that is applicable) deals only with being a witness against one's self.

Extra Stout

12-15-2007, 04:10 PM

...OR someone else.
:wtf

No, you can't plead the Fifth in order not to testify against somebody else. That would be contempt of Congress.

Extra Stout

12-15-2007, 04:14 PM

My point is simple. Just as KState says, omission is not guilt. Likewise, the omission of is testimony is not guilt. Can't have it both ways.
OK, fine, he won't get put in jail. That's the point of pleading the Fifth; he doesn't have to admit in front of Congress to purchasing illegal controlled substances. But he won't get in the Hall of Fame either, because everybody on Earth who is not a Cardinals homer understands what his pleading the Fifth means.

FromWayDowntown

12-15-2007, 05:40 PM

Pettitte has admitted that Mitchell's discovery was correct.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3156305

MajorMike

12-15-2007, 11:30 PM

I assume that you are sleeping better knowing that the baseball writers of America have sent a message. What that message might be, I am not certain, but there is comfort in knowing that a message has been sent. This week's announcement of the Baseball Hall of Fame voting saw Mark McGwire, once regarded as a Hall of Fame lock, receiving only 23.5% of the votes from the writers.

Did this happen because McGwire used steroids? Maybe he did, and maybe he didn't. Nothing has been proven and, indeed, if he did use steroids that would not have violated baseball drug policy at the time. What he did use was androstenedione, a pre-steroid which was banned in many sports, but which was perfectly legal in baseball. It works much like a steroid and indeed this is why it is banned in many venues.

When andro was found in Mark McGwire's locker, was there any suggestion that he was doing anything wrong? Very little. It did set off a brief discussion about banning andro in baseball. This was followed by a discussion of other bodybuilding substances and supplements, such as creatine, which was reported in wide use in sport. Sammy Sosa, McGwire's home-run-chase partner, was one who admitted to using creatine.

Performance enhancement substances were out there aplenty, and we can assume that many were being used. Did anyone, at the time, suggest that andro or creatine invalidated Sosa and McGwire's home runs? If there was, it was largely unheard. On the contrary, the baseball writers and baseball executives were just pleased as punch that Big Mac and Sammy were "saving the game."

On the face of it then, it would seem that the Hall of Fame vote did not stem from a performance enhancement transgression. What then was this week's message sending about? Perhaps it was Mark McGwire's appearance before the Congressional Committee hearings in March of 2005. At this farcical "dog and pony show," McGwire refused, as he said, to talk about the past. It was his rather abstruse way of pleading the Fifth Amendment, which in my view he should have done, along with all players called before this fishing expedition and publicity stunt by Congress.

For some reason McGwire's quasi-Fifth Amendment position infuriated sportswriters. I am not sure why. It reminded me of the hearings before Senator Joseph McCarthy when people took the Fifth Amendment, only to have the Senator denounce them as "Fifth Amendment Communists." It was a clever way of changing a constitutional protection into an admission of guilt. McCarthy used to say that these people refused to answer questions because to do so would prove their guilt. McGwire got the same treatment. Refusal to talk about the past was taken as evidence of guilt and steroid use, a reckless form of justice applied by less than brilliant writers and commentators. McGwire clearly is a "Fifth Amendment Steroid User."

What then is the message? Don't expect justice in the press. You are guilty without proof. Constitutional protections can't be used when dealing with baseball and steroids.

Furthermore, if we assume that McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, and a raft of other home run hitters used steroids, does that diminish their hitting achievements? How many pitchers used steroids or other performance enhancing substances, and would that negate any edge hitters might have gotten from steroids? We know now that pitchers test positive for illegal substances more frequently than hitters. We know that singles hitters are just as likely to use performance enhancement substances as power hitters. We know that marginal players are more likely to use performance enhancement drugs than the elite of the sport.

So why single out McGwire in this way? It is hypocritical in some cases, self-righteous in other cases, and just a simpleminded attack on constitutional rights in yet other instances. It was not a good day for Mark McGwire. It was not a good day for baseball. And it was not a good day for the Bill of Rights.

FromWayDowntown

12-16-2007, 01:17 AM

Why would anyone think McGwire deserved to be inducted into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot? Of the top 10 home run hitters of all-time, McGwire is most like Harmon Killebrew. Those two are the only hitters in the top 10 in home runs who didn't have career batting averages exceeding .270 (McGwire hit .263; Killebrew hit .256). McGwire hit 10 more home runs than Killebrew, but, admittedly played in substantially fewer games. Still, Killebrew one an MVP and finished in the top 10 in 5 other seasons; McGwire never won an MVP, but finished in the top 10 in 5 seasons.

With all of that -- Killebrew retired as the 5th most prolific home run hitter in major league history -- it took Killebrew 4 years of eligibility to reach the Hall of Fame.

I wouldn't attribute all of McGwire's failure to attain enshrinement on the first ballot to be a steroid backlash. I think there's a perfectly valid argument supporting the notion that while McGwire is a likely Hall of Famer, entry on the first ballot was never realistic. Given the substantial questions that (I think understandably) surround McGwire's career and the historical precedent of Killebrew, I don't see last year's vote as being particularly surprising.

K-State Spur

12-16-2007, 01:18 AM

"maybe he did, maybe he didn't??????????????"

he took the 5th amendment - which is only applicable if his answers would have incriminated himself. (as captain mike himself as so often pointed out, andro itself was not illegal at that time, so there's nothing incriminating there)

but, at least our good captain has backed off from showing ignorance towards the constitution of the nation in which he dwells. in some circles, i suppose that could be called progress...

K-State Spur

12-16-2007, 01:23 AM

BeerIsGood!

12-16-2007, 01:41 AM

K-State Spur

12-16-2007, 01:55 AM

I don't think McGwire is in the hall on first ballot regardless. He hit home runs and that's pretty much it. Average sucked, played decent 1st but nothing special, and never led his club to much of anything after the title season with the A's of which he was an integral part but not a cornerstone or leader.

reggie jackson's stats were similar, easily made the first ballot.

no member of the 500 HR club has missed the first ballot in the modern era.

FromWayDowntown

12-16-2007, 10:14 AM

reggie jackson's stats were similar, easily made the first ballot.

no member of the 500 HR club has missed the first ballot in the modern era.

Other than Harmon Killebrew -- and, as I said before, Killebrew's numbers are eerily similar to McGwire's.

And, yes, Killebrew is a modern era 500 HR guy; he retired in 1975 and was inducted in 1984 on the 4th ballot.

K-State Spur

12-16-2007, 12:44 PM

FromWayDowntown

12-17-2007, 03:30 PM

I was thinking more recent that Killebrew (i.e. since 1990), but I concede the point - since my sample size is a whopping 2 - Jackson & Eddie Murray.

But I think there is zero doubt Mac would have been in on the first ballot without the allegations and basically admitting it to congress.

I'll concede, as well, that today's media is more enthralled by big home run numbers and might not take the same principled stance taken a generation ago with regard to Killebrew. I maintain that one-dimensional guys like McGwire and Killebrew are not first-ballot hall of famers, despite gaudy HR numbers. You can point to Reggie, but I'll tell you that if you buy Baseball Reference's similarity scores (I generally do), Reggie Jackson's career is most like Ken Griffey Jr.'s career at this point. Griffey is a no-brainer first ballot Hall of Famer and I can understand why the multidimensional Reggie Jackson, who was also the most obviously clutch player of his generation, was a no-brainer first ballot Hall of Famer.

McGwire's comparables are guys like Jim Thome, Jose Canseco, Carlos Delgado, Killebrew, Willie McCovey, Jason Giambi, Juan Gonzalez, Norm Cash, Dave Kingman, and Manny Ramirez. Of those guys, Killebrew and McCovey are in the Hall and Thome and Manny seem bound for the Hall. But none of the names at the very top of the list -- the most similar players historically to McGwire -- are exactly no-brainer first ballot guys. Admittedly, McCovey did reach the Hall on the first ballot, but he might be the only comparable to Big Mac to hold that distinction -- and rightly so, I think.

J.T.

12-18-2007, 05:31 PM

Clemens denies using anything, :lmao

MajorMike

12-18-2007, 08:35 PM

McGwire would have been a 1st ballot for one reason - baseball needed him more than he needed baseball. During the years of strikes, cocaine suspensions, declining attendance and just down right awful years, the 98 McGwire/Sosa HR battle re-energized baseball like no one could ever imagine. Numbers alone do not get him in, I have no doubt.

The sad part is the same baseball writers that knew Mac was using andro and praised him as a savior are now vilifying him as scum simply because it is good press.

K-State Spur

12-18-2007, 10:48 PM

nobody gives a shit about the andro.

it's the testimony before congress that has kept him out.

MajorMike

12-19-2007, 09:37 AM

Untrue, and the same copout that the writers are using; but I expect nothing less from you.

K-State Spur

12-19-2007, 10:50 AM

MajorMike

12-20-2007, 09:53 AM

yeah, the guy who doesn't even understand his own 'bill of rights' knows the REAL reason that mark mcgwire is out of the hall of fame.

it has nothing to do with basically admitting to congress that he used steroids.

it has everything to do with using a supplement that wasn't even outlawed by most sports organizations at the time he was using it..

that makes a lot of sense.

It makes complete sense.

How many players you think used ephedrine until Bechler died? It is not illegal in the US, still to this day. How many players you think still use it?

You people don't even realize how silly you look in this arguement abuot what is and isn't and was and wasn't legal.

And what is with this whine you keep on about the Bill or Rights? Have you no other material so you just make it up?

K-State Spur

12-20-2007, 10:17 AM

yes, i made up the bill or rights, it's fictitious.

FromWayDowntown

12-20-2007, 11:39 AM

I think there was a tremendous cynicism about McGwire before he retired -- at least in terms of his qualifications to be a first ballot Hall of Famer. I think I've laid out that argument and stand by my belief that even without a steroids controversy, McGwire is, historically, not a first ballot sort of player.

But it also seems clear to me that as the steriods scandal has unwound itself, long after the summer of 98, McGwire has been an understandable suspect to most people with regard to that issue.

I don't think it matters to most people that he's never admitted to anything (Bonds and Clemens haven't admitted to anything, and there's obviously a wide-spread belief about their cheating) or that nobody's ever directly implicated him in anything (other than Canseco, of course; nobody had implicated Palmeiro other than Canseco, IIRC). I think the issue is that McGwire sure appears to be a model suspect for someone using steroids or HGH (along with Andro). When McGwire gave his wishy-washy, Fifth Amendment-clouded "testimony" before Congress, I think those who wondered about his use of steroids or HGH became convinced of Canseco's allegation.

This isn't a court of law; such inferences from vague testimony and Fifth Amendment assertions is perfectly understandable in the court of public opinion. Hall of Fame voting, when you get right down to it, is largely a matter of opinion (at least the opinions of baseball writers) and those are the very people who may have been most offended by McGwire's evasiveness in Washington.

Personally, I don't see McGwire's non-election in 2007 as some sort of unprecedented omission or a hideous injustice. I would see it that way if the Congressional hearing had never happened, but I'm particularly inclined to see it that way after that hearing. Whether it was permissible or not at the time, it seems clear to me that using steroids or HGH (at any time) is cheating. I believe that Mark McGwire cheated and I don't think a cheater should be rewarded with the very highest honor in the game.

violentkitten

12-20-2007, 02:32 PM

the argument for his induction would be that he is #8 on the all-time home run list and that he once held the single season home run record.

but, yeah, he was roided up.

K-State Spur

12-20-2007, 02:58 PM

the argument for his induction would be that he is #8 on the all-time home run list and that he once held the single season home run record.

but, yeah, he was roided up.

I get downtown's argument, he's saying that often historically, HRs alone - even at the peak numbers - haven't always proven to make a player a first ballot hall of famer.

Let us not forget that within their own era, Ty Cobb was considered a superior player to Babe Ruth.

FromWayDowntown

12-20-2007, 03:39 PM

I get downtown's argument, he's saying that often historically, HRs alone - even at the peak numbers - haven't always proven to make a player a first ballot hall of famer.

I'm saying that among the prolific home run hitters, McGwire is easily the most one-dimensional player and that his closest comparison within that group, Harmon Killebrew (a fairly one-dimensional player whose HR totals are inflated by his longevity) wasn't a first ballot guy.

I'm not saying that McGwire didn't (or doesn't) warrant induction. I'm saying that McGwire wouldn't be a first-ballot Hall-of-Famer if I had a say in that matter.

Ultimately, the point of adding my comments was to echo the idea that it's not some ridiculous thing that McGwire didn't get into the Hall on the first ballot. Whether that's because he's suspected of ingesting performance enhancing substances or because his numbers don't qualify him for induction on the first ballot, the result, it seems to me, is perfectly understandable.

MajorMike

12-20-2007, 04:09 PM

I don't think a cheater should be rewarded with the very highest honor in the game.

So Gaylord Perry and Don Sutton and Ty Cobb don't belong.

Mickey Mantle and Babe Ruth admitted that they played often under the influence of alcohol.

Therefore by default, Roger Clemens should receive no consideration into the HOF, as well.

K-State Spur

12-20-2007, 04:11 PM

So Gaylord Perry and Don Sutton and Ty Cobb don't belong.

Mickey Mantle and Babe Ruth admitted that they played often under the influence of alcohol.

Therefore by default, Roger Clemens should receive no consideration into the HOF, as well.

Clemens likely won't be a first ballot HOF now.

FromWayDowntown

12-20-2007, 04:33 PM

So Gaylord Perry and Don Sutton and Ty Cobb don't belong.

Perry and Sutton go some ways toward proving the point -- Perry, with his 300+ wins, got in on the third try; Sutton, with his 300+ wins, got in on the 5th try.

Again, my point is that these guys shouldn't be in the Hall -- it's that they deservedly didn't get into the Hall on the first ballot. To me there is no greater honor for a major leaguer than to be a first ballot hall of famer. Fewer than 40 men have achieved that honor. It's an elite group.

I'm not sure exactly what Ty Cobb's game-altering cheating was, but given that Cobb is easily considered one of the finest players ever and is considered to be such because he wasn't a one-dimensional player, I'm not sure that anything other than the most blatant cheating imaginable (and I'm not even sure what that would have been in the early 20th century -- paying opponents to rig plays in your favor?) would have kept Cobb from inclusion in the first Hall of Fame class.

Mickey Mantle and Babe Ruth admitted that they played often under the influence of alcohol.

Show me a suggestion that alcohol has some beneficial effect on one's ability to do the things required of a baseball player and I'll see your point.

Therefore by default, Roger Clemens should receive no consideration into the HOF, as well.

Errr, way to miss my argument. Clemens undoubtedly belongs in the Hall; it wouldn't surprise me, though, if he now misses enshrinement on the first ballot because of the allegations levied against him. There's no doubt in my mind, however, that Clemens will deservedly be enshrined at some point.

Clemens is much closer to having Cobb's argument than McGwire is.

MajorMike

12-20-2007, 05:51 PM

I'm not sure exactly what Ty Cobb's game-altering cheating was,

Cobb was well known as being one of the dirtiest players and furthermore a most worthless human being. Ok, so maybe saying cheating is stretching it a bit; however sitting in the dugout having the opposing team's 2nd baseman watching you sharpen your metal spikes certainly is going to make him think twice about standing in on a steal attempt by you. Additionally, Cobb was a notrious gambler, which would have gotten him banned alone these days, and there are many allegations that he bet on baseball.

Show me a suggestion that alcohol has some beneficial effect on one's ability to do the things required of a baseball player and I'll see your point.

From 1920 to 1933, alcohol was an illegal substance in the US. Babe Ruth's heydays were from 1919-1932. Therefore, by admitting he more often than not played drunk, he admitted to taking an illegal substance. Therefore, during those years, he cheated.

Err... I completely got your arguement. You plainly said:
"I believe that Mark McGwire cheated and I don't think a cheater should be rewarded with the very highest honor in the game."

However, now you just said:
"Clemens undoubtedly belongs in the Hall."

So which is it... if he is a cheater then according to you he should not be rewarded with the HOF. You didn't say a thing about him missing a ballot; you said no HOF, period.

K-State Spur

12-20-2007, 06:05 PM

From 1920 to 1933, alcohol was an illegal substance in the US. Babe Ruth's heydays were from 1919-1932. Therefore, by admitting he more often than not played drunk, he admitted to taking an illegal substance. Therefore, during those years, he cheated.

Not exactly apples and apples. Performancing enhancing drugs are what is going to hurt players today from being in the hall of fame. Alcohol during Prohibition would be better compared to recreational drugs today. We have guys like Ferguson Jenkins whose drug use was not condoned, but since the drugs can't be given credit for his stats, he still makes the hall.

FromWayDowntown

12-20-2007, 06:09 PM

"I believe that Mark McGwire cheated and I don't think a cheater should be rewarded with the very highest honor in the game."

However, now you just said:
"Clemens undoubtedly belongs in the Hall."

So which is it... if he is a cheater then according to you he should not be rewarded with the HOF. You didn't say a thing about him missing a ballot; you said no HOF, period.

Did you even bother to read the rest of my post? Show me where I said no Hall of Fame, period.

What I said is that a cheater shouldn't get the highest honor in the game -- I also said that election on the first ballot is that highest honor.

Election to the Hall of Fame is certainly a high honor and, as my posts throughout this thread demonstrate, I have no doubt that Mark McGwire belongs in the Hall of Fame. But I don't think he deserves the highest honor -- election on the first ballot.

In fact, earlier in this thread I wrote:

I think there's a perfectly valid argument supporting the notion that while McGwire is a likely Hall of Famer, entry on the first ballot was never realistic.

and

I'm not saying that McGwire didn't (or doesn't) warrant induction. I'm saying that McGwire wouldn't be a first-ballot Hall-of-Famer if I had a say in that matter.

If you take all of that to me an assertion on my part that McGwire should never be enshrined, you have, in fact, completely missed my argument.

Strawmen aren't very becoming. . . .

MajorMike

12-20-2007, 09:39 PM

Did you even bother to read the rest of my post? Show me where I said no Hall of Fame, period.

What I said is that a cheater shouldn't get the highest honor in the game -- I also said that election on the first ballot is that highest honor.

Election to the Hall of Fame is certainly a high honor and, as my posts throughout this thread demonstrate, I have no doubt that Mark McGwire belongs in the Hall of Fame. But I don't think he deserves the highest honor -- election on the first ballot.

In fact, earlier in this thread I wrote:

and

If you take all of that to me an assertion on my part that McGwire should never be enshrined, you have, in fact, completely missed my argument.

Strawmen aren't very becoming. . . .

I think there was a tremendous cynicism about McGwire before he retired -- at least in terms of his qualifications to be a first ballot Hall of Famer. I think I've laid out that argument and stand by my belief that even without a steroids controversy, McGwire is, historically, not a first ballot sort of player.

But it also seems clear to me that as the steriods scandal has unwound itself, long after the summer of 98, McGwire has been an understandable suspect to most people with regard to that issue.

I don't think it matters to most people that he's never admitted to anything (Bonds and Clemens haven't admitted to anything, and there's obviously a wide-spread belief about their cheating) or that nobody's ever directly implicated him in anything (other than Canseco, of course; nobody had implicated Palmeiro other than Canseco, IIRC). I think the issue is that McGwire sure appears to be a model suspect for someone using steroids or HGH (along with Andro). When McGwire gave his wishy-washy, Fifth Amendment-clouded "testimony" before Congress, I think those who wondered about his use of steroids or HGH became convinced of Canseco's allegation.

This isn't a court of law; such inferences from vague testimony and Fifth Amendment assertions is perfectly understandable in the court of public opinion. Hall of Fame voting, when you get right down to it, is largely a matter of opinion (at least the opinions of baseball writers) and those are the very people who may have been most offended by McGwire's evasiveness in Washington.

Personally, I don't see McGwire's non-election in 2007 as some sort of unprecedented omission or a hideous injustice. I would see it that way if the Congressional hearing had never happened, but I'm particularly inclined to see it that way after that hearing. Whether it was permissible or not at the time, it seems clear to me that using steroids or HGH (at any time) is cheating. I believe that Mark McGwire cheated and I don't think a cheater should be rewarded with the very highest honor in the game.

Yes, I did read your entire post.

No where, that means, not in it, inside it, during it or with in, did you once say, "I also said that election on the first ballot is that highest honor."

That means you didn't say it. So therefore, you can understand why I was confused after you waffled on what you did and didn't say.

FromWayDowntown

12-20-2007, 11:51 PM

Yes, I did read your entire post.

No where, that means, not in it, inside it, during it or with in, did you once say, "I also said that election on the first ballot is that highest honor."

That means you didn't say it. So therefore, you can understand why I was confused after you waffled on what you did and didn't say.

Hmmm, here's what I wrote:

To me there is no greater honor for a major leaguer than to be a first ballot hall of famer. Fewer than 40 men have achieved that honor. It's an elite group.

BeerIsGood!

12-21-2007, 03:06 AM

Does anyone believe Clemens in all of this? I definitely don't want to, but what bugs me is that there is only one person who has pointed the finger at Clemens, and that person has his ass in the fire and could easily give a high profile name if he realizes that there is absolutely no way to prove or disprove what he says. It could be very possible that he had a falling out with Clemens at some point and this is a bit of retribution or vengence, I would be interested in knowing what the status of their relationship has been prior to his information being given to Mitchell. Pettitte and others admitting using at at least one point in time gives him credibility, but again he could have added Clemens if he has some beef with him over something in the past. Not much substantial evidence involved in this whole thing that is smashing people's reputations.

mikejones99

12-21-2007, 04:53 AM

Clemens is huge compared to his early days, just like barry but barry is black so more people went after him.

Extra Stout

12-21-2007, 09:02 AM

From 1920 to 1933, alcohol was an illegal substance in the US. Babe Ruth's heydays were from 1919-1932. Therefore, by admitting he more often than not played drunk, he admitted to taking an illegal substance. Therefore, during those years, he cheated.
:lmao Oh, this is rich. Now booze is a performance-enhancing drug?

For your next performance, are you going to claim that stuffing your face with hot dogs enhances performance?

You are starting to push T Park for the "Most Risible Cardinals Homer on SpursTalk" crown.

MajorMike

12-21-2007, 09:11 AM

Hmmm, here's what I wrote:

Ok... now you are waffling again.

10:39 you wrote:
"I believe that Mark McGwire cheated and I don't think a cheater should be rewarded with the very highest honor in the game."

2:54 you edited:
"I'm saying that McGwire wouldn't be a first-ballot Hall-of-Famer if I had a say in that matter."

3:09 I said:
"Therefore by default, Roger Clemens should receive no consideration into the HOF, as well."

3:33 you said, for the 1st time:
"To me there is no greater honor for a major leaguer than to be a first ballot hall of famer."

Then the rest of the time you proceeded to tell me what you didn't say earlier. Maybe you MEANT to say it, but I doubt it.

:lmao Oh, this is rich. Now booze is a performance-enhancing drug?

Once again, stout COMPLETELY missing the point. We need to get you one of those headbands with a springy/glittery airplane on it.

My comments were in jest to another line of comments by someone else, but figuring that out would require you to have more linear thought; something I haven't seen from you yet.

FromWayDowntown

12-21-2007, 09:38 AM

Ok... now you are waffling again.

10:39 you wrote:
"I believe that Mark McGwire cheated and I don't think a cheater should be rewarded with the very highest honor in the game."

2:54 you edited:
"I'm saying that McGwire wouldn't be a first-ballot Hall-of-Famer if I had a say in that matter."

3:09 I said:
"Therefore by default, Roger Clemens should receive no consideration into the HOF, as well."

3:33 you said, for the 1st time:
"To me there is no greater honor for a major leaguer than to be a first ballot hall of famer."

Then the rest of the time you proceeded to tell me what you didn't say earlier. Maybe you MEANT to say it, but I doubt it.

From my very first post on this subject, my contention was that McGwire didn't deserve to be a first-ballot Hall-of-Famer. Throughout, I've admitted that McGwire deserves to be a Hall-of-Famer. I'm quite confident that anyone who bothered to actually read all of my posts in this thread would see that I've been completely consistent in those two thoughts. If, in your Quixotic effort to build up McGwire by believing that others are beating him down, you choose to put words into my mouth to allow yourself to think that you've somehow gotten over on me, I can't help that. I know what I said and I'm quite sure that you either haven't read what I wrote or have willingly chosen to misconstrue my words.

By the way, my 2:54 edit -- cited above -- was to add this paragraph, not what you have chosen to believe that I added:

Ultimately, the point of adding my comments was to echo the idea that it's not some ridiculous thing that McGwire didn't get into the Hall on the first ballot. Whether that's because he's suspected of ingesting performance enhancing substances or because his numbers don't qualify him for induction on the first ballot, the result, it seems to me, is perfectly understandable.

Merry Christmas.

Extra Stout

12-21-2007, 09:40 AM

Once again, stout COMPLETELY missing the point. We need to get you one of those headbands with a springy/glittery airplane on it.

My comments were in jest to another line of comments by someone else, but figuring that out would require you to have more linear thought; something I haven't seen from you yet.
No, I understood EXACTLY what you said. You're so desperate to stave off cognitive dissonance against your McGwire worship, as you kneel before the altar to him of baseball cards, figurines, and a shred of cloth from a game-worn jersey you set up in your parents' basement, that you started flinging up spaghetti noodles against the wall to see what would stick.

It's also funny that you're so wound up, typing as you clutch your Fredbird doll tight against your chest with your free arm, that you failed for two pages to understand FWDs point about being elected to the Hall of Fame on the first ballot as opposed to being elected ever at all. Once you realized your mistake, you devolved into this ridiculous argument about whether he clarified himself soon enough for your liking, in a vain attempt, which nobody is buying, to make it seem as though you didn't just make a complete ass of yourself.

Please just stop. You are shaming the memory of all the great Oklahoma State graduates and RPI experts.

MajorMike

12-21-2007, 10:04 AM

No, I understood EXACTLY what you said. You're so desperate to stave off cognitive dissonance against your McGwire worship, as you kneel before the altar to him of baseball cards, figurines, and a shred of cloth from a game-worn jersey you set up in your parents' basement, that you started flinging up spaghetti noodles against the wall to see what would stick.

Ok, brainzilla.... whatever gets you thru the night.

johngateswhiteley

12-21-2007, 11:23 AM

Once you realized your mistake, you devolved into this ridiculous argument about whether he clarified himself soon enough for your liking, in a vain attempt, which nobody is buying, to make it seem as though you didn't just make a complete ass of yourself.

Please just stop. You are shaming the memory of all the great Oklahoma State graduates and RPI experts.

wow...nice.

johngateswhiteley

12-21-2007, 11:34 AM

imo, mark mcgwire never deserved to be in the hall...he was always a one trick pony. i never understood how fans put him in the all star game over Bagwell, whom unlike mark, was a complete player.

steroids or not, and mcgwire did use steroids, i think he was borderline HOF material to begin with...and when you factor in the roids...hell no.

aside from that, i was relieved not to see Bagwell and Biggio's names on the list....though that doesn't necessarily clear them.

BeerIsGood!

12-21-2007, 11:44 AM

Clemens is huge compared to his early days, just like barry but barry is black so more people went after him.

I'm not saying that Clemens didn't use anything, but you can't compare his case to Bonds at this point in time. Bonds has an absolute mountain of evidence including a federal charge against him while Clemens has one former trainer pointing the finger and nothing else tangible. It's still very possible that the one source is disgruntled and malicious and basically made a false statement knowing there was absolutely no way to prove or disprove his statements. How can anyone prove to the feds that he was lying when he said he stuck Clemens with steroids when it was just he and Clemens in the room? There's no one to either verify or disprove his statements, so they aren't really credible at this point. There needs to be an investigation into Clemens and into the source of the steroids to see if any paper trail or a credible witness can verify what the trainer said.

Extra Stout

12-21-2007, 12:25 PM

aside from that, i was relieved not to see Bagwell and Biggio's names on the list....though that doesn't necessarily clear them.
Bagwell:

Sudden, dramatic change in body shape in mid-1990's? Check

Growth of facial hair to conceal acne? Check

Any of that true with Biggio? No.

MajorMike

12-21-2007, 01:52 PM

Clemens is huge compared to his early days, just like barry but barry is black so more people went after him.

I hate it when whiners play the race card.

People went after Barry because he is a dick. Dick to the press, dick to his teammates, dick to the press. Nobody likes him because he is a very unlikable guy. Dispite his exploits, he has never paid homage to the players of yesteryear that were not related to him.

Clemens is simply a liable guy. I hate the yankees and astros, and Red Sox for that matter... but I can't help but like Clemens. He's always been a good guy, open and accessable, in funny commercials, and just not a dick.

People went after Bonds because of him, not because of his color.

K-State Spur

12-21-2007, 02:13 PM

Clemens is huge compared to his early days, just like barry but barry is black so more people went after him.

not to defend clemens (i definitely believe that he did) - but clemens added some fat over the years. not 30 pounds of pure muscle.

K-State Spur

12-21-2007, 02:16 PM

I hate it when whiners play the race card.

People went after Barry because he is a dick. Dick to the press, dick to his teammates, dick to the press. Nobody likes him because he is a very unlikable guy. Dispite his exploits, he has never paid homage to the players of yesteryear that were not related to him.

Clemens is simply a liable guy. I hate the yankees and astros, and Red Sox for that matter... but I can't help but like Clemens. He's always been a good guy, open and accessable, in funny commercials, and just not a dick.

People went after Bonds because of him, not because of his color.

clemens also has that whole thing where he'll throw at a guys head if he thinks he was looked at wrong, but what the hell, he's a good guy...

FromWayDowntown

12-21-2007, 02:18 PM

Clemens is simply a liable guy.

Typo, I'm assuming; perhaps a Freudian slip, though.

mikejones99

12-21-2007, 05:07 PM

Barry Bonds is likeable and they went after him because he is breaking records of people old people like more. Cunt

johngateswhiteley

12-21-2007, 07:24 PM

Bagwell:

Sudden, dramatic change in body shape in mid-1990's? Check

Growth of facial hair to conceal acne? Check

Any of that true with Biggio? No.

i don't remember a sudden dramatic change in Bagwell's shape. the facial hair is stupid, i understand what you are saying and i understand the era of doubt we now live in...but come on bro.

i have Bagwell's rookie card and his body type doesn't look drastically different than it did a few years ago....in fact his weight is almost the exact same. Bonds gained a bunch of weight, Bagwell didn't. furthermore, Bagwell's production was consistent and body improvement well within the normal capacity to improve lean muscle mass.

...of course, i am not saying he didn't use at some point, just that your insinuations are baseless.