Hall of Fame Tuesday Morning

williewilliejuan said:
Bonds and Ortiz pissed dirty in the same test. Maybe they crossed the streams and Bonds inadvertently got some of Ortiz’s tainted piss in his sample.
Click to expand...
Bonds' positive came on a retest. The first test supposedly came back negative.
 
1643141972089.png

1643141997508.png

Oops I guess it's Texas Burnt French Toast now.

Gonna have to take it off the recommend list for @PnkPanther.
 
williewilliejuan said:
Ortiz probably dipped his dick in Bonds’ sample.
Click to expand...
I mean, Bonds was 10000000% using, but I'm not trusting that retest, because he was on that fancy Balco shit. The positive test was for some Mickey Mouse stuff that dumbasses like Manny Ramirez took.
 
Guy Incognito said:
I mean, Bonds was 10000000% using, but I'm not trusting that retest, because he was on that fancy Balco shit. The positive test was for some Mickey Mouse stuff that dumbasses like Manny Ramirez took.
Click to expand...
To be fair to Ortiz's case, there were over 10 false positives or inconclusives in that batch of testing. But because of legal rights, or some shit, they can't say exactly who had the false positives. Those names weren't allowed to be leaked in the first place. And Manfred has alluded in the past that Ortiz may have been apart of those false positives.

Although, you can't trust Manfred worth a damn.
 
SlinkyRedfoot said:
Aliens or not, that's good news, dog.
Click to expand...
It is. Her birth defect manifests itself in strange ways. A lot of her body's self regulators are haywire. She's has went septic on us, no root cause found. She has been diagnosed insulin-dependent diabetic although she may go normal sugar levels for 2-3 days straight. Gets fever spikes, no infections found. Every medical issue has it's own unique thing.

Keeps everyone on alert status.
 
RubinRock said:
To be fair to Ortiz's case, there were over 10 false positives or inconclusives in that batch of testing. But because of legal rights, or some shit, they can't say exactly who had the false positives. Those names weren't allowed to be leaked in the first place. And Manfred has alluded in the past that Ortiz may have been apart of those false positives.

Although, you can't trust Manfred worth a damn.
Click to expand...

good point.

It’s not just about the tests though.

Bonds got caught because of his connection to Greg Anderson who was Bonds personal trainer and who was later hired by the Giants. Anderson kept detailed notes of the “program” he had Bonds on. Anderson’s distribution of steroids to Bonds and other athletes was uncovered during the Balco investigation.

Clemens got caught when the guy who injected him turned over a needle which contained steroids and his DNA. His strength coach (Brian McNamee) stated he injected Clemens. McNamee was also Andy Pettitte’s strength coach who admitted to taking steroids provided by McNamee.

Arod had the infamous press conference where he claimed he took stuff but didn’t know what it was. The press conference went like this:

A-rod: my cousin would bring me this stuff that he said would help me play better. He would sneak it into the clubhouse and give it to me. We didn’t tell anyone about it and I didn’t know what it was. I didn’t know it was bad or banned stuff

Yankees press sec: ok… we will now take questions.

reporter: A-rod if you didn’t know it was bad or a banned substance why did your cousin sneak it in? Why didn’t you tell anyone about it?

A-rod: <<pauses>>…. That’s a very good question… <pauses more>> look we knew we weren’t taking tic-tacs!!

yankees press secretary: ok… that’s enough. Press conference over.

LMFAO. After that Arod admitted that he knew what he took was steroids. Additionally, after that he got suspended for his connection to ANOTHER steroid investigation.

Ortiz: was on that list you mentioned which both MLB and the players union says isn’t reliable. When Ortiz asks “what did I test positive for” nobody can tell him. They can’t even tell him if it was a banned substance. It very well could have been part of a supplement he took.

Also, where’s the evidence from the person supplying Ortiz with these steroids? All three guys above had people helping them get the stuff. They had suppliers. Where’s the evidence from Ortiz’s “supplier”? He didn’t just get them on his own. Somebody had to be supplying him. Where’s the evidence? There isn’t any.

Lastly, baseballs steroid era is commonly regarded as years 1998-2003. Ortiz played for a decade AFTER that era, was tested over 80 times and never failed a test.

Attempts to equate Ortiz alleged steroid use with that of Bonds, Clemens and Arod is laughable.
 
Last edited:
dbldwn711 said:
good point.

It’s not just about the tests though.

Bonds got caught because of his connection to Greg Anderson who was Bonds personal trainer and who was later hired by the Giants. Anderson kept detailed notes of the “program” he had Bonds on. Anderson’s distribution of steroids to Bonds and other athletes was uncovered during the Balco investigation.

Clemens got caught when the guy who injected him turned over a needle which contained steroids and his DNA. His strength coach (Brian McNamee) stated he injected Clemens. McNamee was also Andy Pettitte’s strength coach who admitted to taking steroids provided by McNamee.

Arod had the infamous press conference where he claimed he took stuff but didn’t know what it was. The press conference went like this:

A-rod: my cousin would bring me this stuff that he said would help me play better. He would sneak it into the clubhouse and give it to me. We didn’t tell anyone about it and I didn’t know what it was. I didn’t know it was bad or banned stuff

Yankees press sec: ok… we will now take questions.

reporter: A-rod if you didn’t know it was bad or a banned substance why did your cousin sneak it in? Why didn’t you tell anyone about it?

A-rod: <<pauses>>…. That’s a very good question… <pauses more>> look we knew we weren’t taking tic-tacs!!

yankees press secretary: ok… that’s enough. Press conference over.

LMFAO. After that Arod admitted that he knew what he took was steroids. Additionally, after that he got suspended for his connection to ANOTHER steroid investigation.

Ortiz: was on that list you mentioned which both MLB and the players union says isn’t reliable. When Ortiz asks “what did I test positive for” nobody can tell him. They can’t even tell him if it was a banned substance. It very well could have been part of a supplement he took.

Also, where’s the evidence from the person supplying Ortiz with these steroids? All three guys above had people helping them get the stuff. They had suppliers. Where’s the evidence from Ortiz’s “supplier”? He didn’t just get them on his own. Somebody had to be supplying him. Where’s the evidence? There isn’t any.

Lastly, baseballs steroid era is commonly regarded as years 1998-2003. Ortiz played for a decade AFTER that era, was tested over 80 times and never failed a test.

Attempts to equate Ortiz alleged steroid use with that of Bonds, Clemens and Arod is laughable.
Click to expand...

Let's just keep it simple

Rank these 4 players

Ortiz
Bonds
Clemens
A Rod
 
stakesarehigh said:
Let's just keep it simple

Rank these 4 players

Ortiz
Bonds
Clemens
A Rod
Click to expand...

I agree… let’s keep it simple.

here’s the criteria that MUST be taken into consideration when voting for induction into baseballs Hall of Fame.

Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Are you suggesting that voters should ignore the bolded factors which are listed above? Your question seems to suggest that.
 
dbldwn711 said:
I agree… let’s keep it simple.

here’s the criteria that MUST be taken into consideration when voting for induction into baseballs Hall of Fame.

Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Are you suggesting that voters should ignore the bolded factors which are listed above? Your question seems to suggest that.
Click to expand...

Yes for steroids absolutely. It was a poorly kept secret that everyone conveniently chose to ignore because it sold tickets.

If Andy flipping Pettite was on steroids we have zero idea who was or was not.

Bonds only went down that road to prove what a fraud Sosa/Mcgwire was.
 
Last edited:
stakesarehigh said:
Yes for steroids absolutely. It was a poorly kept secret that everyone conveniently chose to ignore because it sold tickets.

If Andy flipping Pettite was on steroids we have zero idea who was or was not.

Bonds only went down that road to prove what a fraud Sosa/Mcgwire was.
Click to expand...

i disagree. They are ALL factors to be used in determining who is eligible and who is not eligible. It is definitely subjective because HOW MUCH weight you give to each factor and under what circumstances (ie gambling, steroids, sign stealing, doctoring baseballs, etc) is up to each voter.

I’ll add this about voting for the HOF and steroids. The voters have been consistent. If there’s a “body of evidence” and/or an admission of steroid use those players have been consistently left out. However, if there isn’t a direct “body of evidence” they are let in. A good example of this is Jeff bagwell. One of his best friends was Ken Caminiti who has admitted to steroid use. However, that closeness/relationship on its own didn’t keep Bagwell out. My post which you quoted attempted to illustrate that the “body of evidence” regarding alleged steroid use is very different for those 4 guys I listed. It’s much more than “this guy failed the same test that the other guy did”.

I’ll end with this point (which will also answer the question you posed to me). If I were to “rank” those 4 players I would say Clemens and bonds are clearly 1/2. I personally give the slightest of edges to Clemens simply bc pitchers control the game more than an outfielder. However, I could see myself being convinced that Bonds is 1 and Clemens is 2. Then Arod. Then Ortiz. [If I “rank” them on clutchness and/or postseason performances then Ortiz is far and away number 1 and all three of the others are a distant 2,3,4.] However, overall rank that’s how I have them. It’s pretty clear that the majority of baseball writers feel the same way. Bonds and Clemens got over 60% of the vote to be inducted into the HOF but under the rules, that’s not enough to get in. Under the rules and the voting criteria that all players knew about and hasn’t changed in decades Ortiz is in and so far the other three are out. The other three knew those rules (and the risks) when they did steroids. They knew the potential consequences if they got caught. I suspect that’s why they all initially denied it until the “body of evidence” became overwhelming such that they could no longer deny it. I’m not in favor of changing the rules just to pacify those players and/or their supporters. They still have chances to get in that don’t involve just the writers. Let’s see what they say. Several HOFers like Joe Morgan say they shouldn’t be in

Also, I’m not swayed by the argument that “everyone was doing it” or it was “conveniently ignored”. Jeter wasn’t using. Mariano Rivera didn’t use. They both got in on the first ballot and Rivera was a unanimous selection. It’s a disservice to players like them to simply say “everyone was using so let’s allow these guys in”.
 
Last edited:
dbldwn711 said:
i disagree. They are ALL factors to be used in determining who is eligible and who is not eligible. It is definitely subjective because HOW MUCH weight you give to each factor and under what circumstances (ie gambling, steroids, sign stealing, doctoring baseballs, etc) is up to each voter.

I’ll add this about voting for the HOF and steroids. The voters have been consistent. If there’s a “body of evidence” and/or an admission of steroid use those players have been consistently left out. However, if there isn’t a direct “body of evidence” they are let in. A good example of this is Jeff bagwell. One of his best friends was Ken Caminiti who has admitted to steroid use. However, that closeness/relationship on its own didn’t keep Bagwell out. My post which you quoted attempted to illustrate that the “body of evidence” regarding alleged steroid use is very different for those 4 guys I listed. It’s much more than “this guy failed the same test that the other guy did”.

I’ll end with this point (which will also answer the question you posed to me). If I were to “rank” those 4 players I would say Clemens and bonds are clearly 1/2. I personally give the slightest of edges to Clemens simply bc pitchers control the game more than an outfielder. However, I could see myself being convinced that Bonds is 1 and Clemens is 2. Then Arod. Then Ortiz. [If I “rank” them on clutchness and/or postseason performances then Ortiz is far and away number 1 and all three of the others are a distant 2,3,4.] However, overall rank that’s how I have them. It’s pretty clear that the majority of baseball writers feel the same way. Bonds and Clemens got over 60% of the vote to be inducted into the HOF but under the rules, that’s not enough to get in. Under the rules and the voting criteria that all players knew about and hasn’t changed in decades Ortiz is in and so far the other three are out. The other three knew those rules (and the risks) when they did steroids. They knew the potential consequences if they got caught. I suspect that’s why they all initially denied it until the “body of evidence” became overwhelming such that they could no longer deny it. I’m not in favor of changing the rules just to pacify those players and/or their supporters. They still have chances to get in that don’t involve just the writers. Let’s see what they say. Several HOFers like Joe Morgan say they shouldn’t be in

Also, I’m not swayed by the argument that “everyone was doing it” or it was “conveniently ignored”. Jeter wasn’t using. Mariano Rivera didn’t use. They both got in on the first ballot and Rivera was a unanimous selection. It’s a disservice to players like them to simply say “everyone was using so let’s allow these guys in”.
Click to expand...
One small point. There was no rule stating they would lose eligibility for the HOF by using steroids.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top