Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 136

Thread: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

  1. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    592

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    My unoriginal $0.02:

    Let all those deserving based upon on-field performance in. Fairly/accurately describe baseball's steroid environment during the late 80's to mid 2000's in the hall of fame wing of this era, note failed tests on plaques of those officially caught (alongside their accomplishments), and finally, and most importantly, cease with the futile debates and moral arbitration by the writers.

  2. Likes:

    bigredmechanism (01-07-2014)

  3. Turn Off Ads?
  4. #32
    Member RadfordVA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    935

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    I feel it was MLB's job to police their business not ours. If they never served a suspension then they are clean to me. Bagwell and Thomas are no doubters for me.

  5. #33
    Beer is good!! George Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,773

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Was it a case where MLB turned a blind eye to players using performance enhancers or was it more so a case where the union would not allow testing so MLB's hands were tied?

    I remember the union fought testing but out of fairness I don't recall if Selig and MLB pushed for it very hard.
    "Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." Cal Hubbard

  6. #34
    Redsmetz redsmetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Winton Place
    Posts
    11,284

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Quote Originally Posted by George Anderson View Post
    Was it a case where MLB turned a blind eye to players using performance enhancers or was it more so a case where the union would not allow testing so MLB's hands were tied?

    I remember the union fought testing but out of fairness I don't recall if Selig and MLB pushed for it very hard.
    I think it's a situation of both/and - everyone knew there were loads of dollars in those powerful home runs and those pitchers mowing folks down. It really was that simple.
    “In the same way that a baseball season never really begins, it never really ends either.” - Lonnie Wheeler, "Bleachers, A Summer in Wrigley Field"

    The Baseball Emporium - Books & Things, that's Rallyonion.com

    The Baseball Bookstore

    http://tsc-sales.com/
    http://tscsales.blogspot.com/
    http://silverscreenbooks.com/

  7. Likes:

    Chip R (01-07-2014)

  8. #35
    Member kpresidente's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,316

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    I love all the righteous indignation directed at other people's righeous indignation. HA! Anyway, of course PEDs matter. They diminish the relative accomplishments of non-PED-users. Griffey had one of the greatest careers's ever and people just shrug because it became commonplace. Ditto for Thomas. And think about the fringe guys who don't make the Hall because the 5 guys ahead of them were juicers. Hardly fair to them.

    I say voters should try to determine what a prospect's numbers might have been minus the PEDs and vote based on those. Maybe an exercise in futility in some cases but take a stab anyway. Not too worried about precision...these guys were cheaters.

    That means Bonds gets in for sure, guys like Bags maybe not so much.

  9. #36
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,296

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Quote Originally Posted by westofyou View Post
    Laughable. if he's innocent you don't feel sorry for him... awesome.

    Baseball knew it had a problem, yet as a fan you came back to the well again and again right?

    Ya know blind eye and all that.
    Why should I feel sorry for a professional athlete who made $128M over the course of his career playing a child's game?

    You have an era of players who made their hey in the steroid era trying to get into the HOF now. They knew what was going on but remained silent. Now when it comes to getting into the HOF everyone is clean.

    Bagwell could have done it clean. He could done it by lifting weights and with better nutrition. He could have done everything clean. But we also said the same things about Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, Clemens, etc.

  10. #37
    Redsmetz redsmetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Winton Place
    Posts
    11,284

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Boswell weighing in on some of what we've been talking about here:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports...a3b_story.html
    “In the same way that a baseball season never really begins, it never really ends either.” - Lonnie Wheeler, "Bleachers, A Summer in Wrigley Field"

    The Baseball Emporium - Books & Things, that's Rallyonion.com

    The Baseball Bookstore

    http://tsc-sales.com/
    http://tscsales.blogspot.com/
    http://silverscreenbooks.com/

  11. #38
    Vavasor TRF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Amarillo, TX
    Posts
    13,837

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    I've been thinking on this topic for quite a few years, this may be the first time I have weighed in. Here is what I have come to on the PED era.

    I don't care.

    I didn't like baseball less then, I do not like it more now.

    Advantages in baseball are cyclical. PED's, greenies, juiced balls, higher mounds, grass, turf, domes. Big fields. Small fields. Coors Field.

    And through all that, while the effects are interesting, in the context of the times, I just don't care. In my head, Bonds is a HOF. So is Frank Thomas. So is Bagwell. The BBWAA that flat out KNEW something was going on and flat out IGNORED it is suddenly guided by morals of the HOF? the same HOF with Ty Cobb in it? really? (And Cobb of course absolutely belongs in the HOF, but he's the perfect person to point to about the "integrity" of the game.)

    The Thomas/Bagwell debate isn't even interesting. What is interesting is pundits suggesting that Alan Trammel is comparable to Barry Larkin and that Trammel should be in the HOF. I completely disagree with that. Trammel is more the Hall of Very Good. Defense was not as good as Larkin's (Trammel played on grass, Larkin on turf) Didn't have his speed. He did have better health though. I'd take Trammel on my team any day, but he isn't a HOF player.
    Suck it up cupcake.

  12. Likes:

    _Sir_Charles_ (01-07-2014)

  13. #39
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,448

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    I have no way of knowing if Bagwell used PEDs. There isn't any substantial evidence. He got cartoonishly large and had neckne. That seems to be the argument against him. Nobody ever suspected Thomas of PED use because he was naturally gigantic, but who's to say he didn't use PEDs to keep that big frame working later in his career.

    Point is, barring hard evidence no one knows. Thomas and Bagwell were two of the best 1Bs in baseball history. Ultimately both should get into the HOF, though it may take some time given the crowded ballot.
    Last edited by M2; 01-07-2014 at 01:19 PM.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  14. #40
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,918

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Quote Originally Posted by Norm Chortleton View Post
    Doug, were you around when Bagwell came up? He weighed about a buck fifty, soaking wet. And immediately bulked up to become one of the more-muscular players in the game. And, unlike Bonds, Bagwell is back to his slight build now that he is no longer playing.

    A lot of HOF voters think he used, as do many of his contemporaries, as do I. And you know what? I don't blame him. Baseball basically condoned PEDs in those days.
    Again, if you want to use that argument, go for it. I don't always agree with "he got bigger so he clearly used", but it is certainly better than pointing specifically to the minor league numbers of Jeff Bagwell without giving them any context at all. When given context, Bagwell actually showed good power in the minor leagues.

    I will say this, you probably should avoid the weight estimate game at carnivals. Bagwell certainly wasn't as big in 1991 as he was in 2001, but he was quite a bit more than 150. Heck, Billy Hamilton is 165 and he is as thin as a rail.

  15. #41
    Member Norm Chortleton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,517

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Note to self: Never use hyperbole again on RedsZone.

  16. #42
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    19,135

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Quote Originally Posted by UPRedsFan View Post
    I was just comparing them on baseball reference. I really didn't realize how good they were for so long!

    Just consider for comparison:

    Jeff Bagwell over 15 years had career numbers of .297/.408/.540
    Frank Thomas over 19 years had career .301/.419/.555
    both better than
    Ken Griffey Jr over 22 yrs had .284/.370/.538

    Granted Griffey added gold glove defense at a premium position. But how can Bagwell and Thomas be kept out of the hall with those career offensive numbers?

    Interesting fact: they were both born on the same day in 1968
    IMHO, the Big Hurt was the best right handed hitter in the game during his career which spanned the career of the best left handed hitter in the game-Barry Bonds. Who knows what Thomas' numbers might've looked like if he wasn't slowed by injuries.
    "This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  17. #43
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,918

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Quote Originally Posted by Norm Chortleton View Post
    Note to self: Never use hyperbole again on RedsZone.
    It's a good plan. Some of us (I won't look in the mirror to avoid throwing anyone under the bus) take things serious far too often and can't tell the difference.

  18. #44
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,448

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Quote Originally Posted by TRF View Post
    What is interesting is pundits suggesting that Alan Trammel is comparable to Barry Larkin and that Trammel should be in the HOF. I completely disagree with that. Trammel is more the Hall of Very Good. Defense was not as good as Larkin's (Trammel played on grass, Larkin on turf) Didn't have his speed. He did have better health though. I'd take Trammel on my team any day, but he isn't a HOF player.
    Trammell, for me, is an all-time top 10 SS. Larkin was better, but Trammell got criminally overlooked by national sportswriters. If you were a fan of an NL team or you lived in an NL city, you didn't hear that much about Trammell. My guess is he'd get a lot more support if the BBWAA hadn't botched the 1987 MVP vote, when Trammell got robbed in favor of George Bell.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  19. Likes:

    Always Red (01-07-2014), Red in Chicago (01-07-2014), RedsBaron (01-08-2014), Revering4Blue (01-07-2014)

  20. #45
    Member Superdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,807

    Re: How good were Frank Thomas and Jeff Bagwell?

    Quote Originally Posted by Norm Chortleton View Post
    Note to self: Never use hyperbole again on RedsZone.
    The whole implication, hyperbole or not, was that a 23 year old Bagwell was gangly. Google search tells me he absolutely wasn't.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25