Manny Ramirez Retires. Quits. Whatever, He's Done.

Oh, no question about that, but I'd argue against Manny having a weak arm in 1994. It was actually above average at the time.

But I'm not sure he EVER hit a cutoff man purposely. Thome or Sorrento would wander into the middle of the diamond hoping the ball somehow found their glove.

I stand by my assessment of Ben Grieve and the 1997 version of Kevin Mitchell who came to spring training about three bills being the worst outfielders I've ever seen.

 

The principle that I used is applicable to both. I'm not "equating" the use of PEDs to actual crimes (which they are, by the way). But I see no reason why the values we apply to our criminal justice system - i.e. we catch who we can or who is worth catching - are not also applicable to this.

 

I think Bonds, ARod and Clemens get in.

I think Manny does too.

 

Not exactly the point I was making, oh masterful deleter of posts.

I do think at some point we're going to start seeing "clean or not" as just another factor, not the only deciding factor, when a player comes up for a Hall of Fame vote. Some guys, like Bonds and Rodriguez, will be so overwhelming in their accomplishments that it will overcome the use of PEDs.

 

I agree that's how it'll go OOP. Why aren't the statistics guys doing research on how to quantify how much PEDs altered stats? That would be a real service.

 

I think this is probably true, and it drives some people crazy to have this kind of a totality of the circumstances test. I usually like black-and-white lines myself, because it's easier, but life is messy.

 

Oh, my God, they have. Tons of it. Tons and tons and tons. The BP and HBT crew usually claims that steroids had little to do with increased home run totals. That doesn't pass the giggle test to me, but that's what they say. Sabermetric people love steroids. They want to marry them. Look at any thread about steroids here the past five years. RickStain and some of the other really enthusiastic sabermetric adherents are adamant in defense of Bonds, Clements, et al.

 

Dick, my rough rule of thumb for hitters is to tone down their power stats 15-20 percent for the steroid era, and then assess. For pitchers, I have no clue. To deny that steroids had something to do with the homer explosion is insane on its face. Obviously, there were other factors (expansion, the new ballparks, etc.), but how do we sort it all out? I have yet to see convincing analysis.

 

I think it's going to be so hard for voters to just adjust stats 15 or 20 percent.

I agree with folks who say Bonds would have been a clear Hall of Famer without steroids, but his numbers are also incredibly inflated because of them. His numbers went up at a time they should have been going down. He broke long held, treasured records because of them.

Then, there's the physical appearance. Maybe it's stupid, but I think people are going to hold it against you more if your hat size increased.

And, he hasn't gained any good will the way he's battled the accusations.

 

Junkie, I agree with you on Shoeless Joe Jackson.

 

I meant to address Junkie's Pete Rose comparison before. I don't think it holds up. For all the noise and outrage, there are plenty of baseball people who respect a guy who wants to win so bad he will cheat. At the very least, cheating to win is far more acceptable to baseball people than betting on the game, which leads to fixing games.

I'm not saying they are right, but I do think that's how it is.

That said, I think both he and Shoeless Joe Jackson should be in the Hall of Fame, too. Don't ever let Rose work in baseball again, but he certainly belongs in the Hall.

 

This is a little out of left field, but I just saw Joe Maddon's reaction to this situation. I grow more impressed by him and the way he deals with the media and his team everytime I hear him speak. He's just refreshing.