Turn Off Ads?

View Poll Results: Clemens and the HOF

Voters
50. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    22 44.00%
  • No

    28 56.00%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23

Thread: Should Roger Clemens Make the Hall of Fame?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    130

    Should Roger Clemens Make the Hall of Fame?

    If the allegations are true that clemens used steroids from 97-2001 ( and possibly longer) does he deserve to get into the HOF?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Centerville,OH
    Posts
    680

    Should Clemens Make the HOF

    There is a similar thread in the ORG and I wanted to add my opinion.

    If you look at Clemens career stats, three out of his last four years with the red sox were very poor in terms of ERA and wins between 1992 and 1996. However, if his stats drastically increased when he went to Toronto and allegedly started using steroids and/or HGH to enhance his performance. He became a 20 game winner in Toronto compared to a 10 game winner previously and his ERA dropped 2 points. The rest is rather well known then about his 7 Cy Youngs and time with the Yankees and Astros. Before Clemens went to Toronto he had 192 wins over 13 seasons, average of 14.7. If Clemens had only averaged 10 wins over the next 10 years he would have only ended up with 292 wins through 2006, assuming he could have lasted that long without being chemically engineered.

    Would you put a pitcher into the HOF that averaged 10 wins a season during the last half of his career. In my opinion the answer is no. But would Clemens have been a HOF pitcher had he retired in 1996 and my answer is yes. He had a series of 7 consecutive seasons that could be considered nothing short of dominant from 1986 through 1992, especially 1990 season which ranks right up there with Doc Gooden's 1985 season. While his career totals pre-steroids may not have added up to typical HOF stats I think you have to look at series of dominant performance and I consider a series of 6 or more seasons of dominant play to justify serious consideration for the HOF.

    I would vote to put Clemens into the HOF based on the first half of his career. Since you can't avoid mentioning the stats of the chemically engineered Clemens there should be an asterik or notation indicating that his later achievements are under suspicion for performance enhancers.

    If we refuse to put players into the HOF who are believed to be steroid users then the only HOFer for the next 20 years may only be Griffey.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    130

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    Quote Originally Posted by steig View Post
    There is a similar thread in the ORG and I wanted to add my opinion.

    If you look at Clemens career stats, three out of his last four years with the red sox were very poor in terms of ERA and wins between 1992 and 1996. However, if his stats drastically increased when he went to Toronto and allegedly started using steroids and/or HGH to enhance his performance. He became a 20 game winner in Toronto compared to a 10 game winner previously and his ERA dropped 2 points. The rest is rather well known then about his 7 Cy Youngs and time with the Yankees and Astros. Before Clemens went to Toronto he had 192 wins over 13 seasons, average of 14.7. If Clemens had only averaged 10 wins over the next 10 years he would have only ended up with 292 wins through 2006, assuming he could have lasted that long without being chemically engineered.

    Would you put a pitcher into the HOF that averaged 10 wins a season during the last half of his career. In my opinion the answer is no. But would Clemens have been a HOF pitcher had he retired in 1996 and my answer is yes. He had a series of 7 consecutive seasons that could be considered nothing short of dominant from 1986 through 1992, especially 1990 season which ranks right up there with Doc Gooden's 1985 season. While his career totals pre-steroids may not have added up to typical HOF stats I think you have to look at series of dominant performance and I consider a series of 6 or more seasons of dominant play to justify serious consideration for the HOF.

    I would vote to put Clemens into the HOF based on the first half of his career. Since you can't avoid mentioning the stats of the chemically engineered Clemens there should be an asterik or notation indicating that his later achievements are under suspicion for performance enhancers.

    If we refuse to put players into the HOF who are believed to be steroid users then the only HOFer for the next 20 years may only be Griffey.
    Uh, Maddux? Pedro? Johnson? Arod? Piazza? Come on.

  4. #4
    Member mroby85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    2,282

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    I have one question, and this should be what the question is based upon...

    Are his stats good enough?

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    544

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    Clemens.... Yes
    Bonds..... Yes

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,189

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    id probably have to go with no

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Milford, Clifton
    Posts
    1,585

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    If Pete Rose didn't, then definitely not.
    Follow me on twitter @EricLilly7

  8. #8
    Member mroby85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    2,282

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    pete rose should be in too!
    it's not a group of good doers, it's a group of great baseball players, at least it's supposed to be, but that is becoming a joke in my opinion.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    407

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    no

  10. #10
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    11,431

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    His stats up to the time he started using steroids (291 Wins, 2,500 K's) are not as good as Bert Blyleven's, who is not in the hall. The key is that he stats were in a free fall until he started using steroids. So it is doubtful that he would come close to HOF numbers if he had not used steroids. Boston let him go because they thought his best years were behind him. Looks like the were kinda right, now.

    He probably would end up with 210 wins and 2700 K's. There are a few pitchers with stats similar to those who are in the Hall, but most are not. The one's that are in, had a reputation for winning and great character. Clemens has neither. He had a history of choking in key games and not being a team player. So even without the steroids problem, he had a lot against him in terms of character. Steroids use really puts it over the top.

    No way he deserves to get in.

  11. #11
    1st pick 2022 B.B. draft George Foster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Ky
    Posts
    5,959

    Re: Should Roger Clemens Make the Hall of Fame?

    If you would not vote for Bonds, then you can't in good conscience vote for Clemens either...right?

    If you think Bonds deserves to be in the hall then Clemens also deserves it.

    I doubt that the voters will be as honest. The writers hate Bonds and Clemens gives good interviews.
    Not this year...maybe a Wild Card

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4

    Re: Should Roger Clemens Make the Hall of Fame?

    Baseball cant have no cheaters in the Hall!!!! Both Bonds and Clemens should be excluded

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    544

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    His stats up to the time he started using steroids (291 Wins, 2,500 K's) are not as good as Bert Blyleven's, who is not in the hall. The key is that he stats were in a free fall until he started using steroids. So it is doubtful that he would come close to HOF numbers if he had not used steroids. Boston let him go because they thought his best years were behind him. Looks like the were kinda right, now.

    He probably would end up with 210 wins and 2700 K's. There are a few pitchers with stats similar to those who are in the Hall, but most are not. The one's that are in, had a reputation for winning and great character. Clemens has neither. He had a history of choking in key games and not being a team player. So even without the steroids problem, he had a lot against him in terms of character. Steroids use really puts it over the top.

    No way he deserves to get in.
    You really think he won 140 more games due to roids? Your going to say, he would have done ....w/e.... YOU CAN'T DO THAT, YOU DON'T KNOW! If roids suddenly adds 140 wins why do so many pitchers not even have 50 wins and are users. Where are all the 300 win guys if 50+ pitchers have done roids. You don't know if roids did or didn't help. You would think it would, but what would have happened if he didn't take them. You really think he suddenly loses 10 YEARS off his career, retiring at age 34. You.. can honestly say, this pitcher has won 200+ games, but the moment he decided to do roids he wouldn't even be good enough to play? Roids are not some magical thing that suddenly makes you better. It may help improve recovery and strength, but not suddenly make someone great. Look at all the bad players named, roids just enhance a little but its not who that person is.
    Same thing with Bonds. You can't say... if he didn't do roids he wouldn't be worthy of the HOF. My argument is simply, he was possibly the best player in baseball, with or without. Same with Clemens. Assigning arbitrary numbers is ridiculous and pointless, it happened and thats the way it is.
    Here's a stupid analogy...
    Your working and your getting tired towards the end of the work day. It becomes frequent and starts to affect your job. You want to do something about it so you take sleeping pills, multi-vitamins, concetration pills, and popping some caffeine pills while your working. All this stuff makes you the best at your job you've ever been. But if you never did that stuff would you have suddenly been fired? You would have just stay with the same routine and went along normally. Obviously all that extra stuff helped, but did it really suddenly change your baseline?
    And don't talk about "illegal" crap since thats not the point. Your point is performance.
    Also Clemens has won a WS before, so he is a "winner" and his 354 W makes him a "winner'. What role does SP have in being a "team player" He's pitching once every 5 days and only pitches. Pitching is a single person thing, and there have never been conflicts with his catchers.

  14. #14
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    11,431

    Re: Should Clemens Make the HOF

    Quote Originally Posted by mlbfan30 View Post
    You really think he won 140 more games due to roids? Your going to say, he would have done ....w/e.... YOU CAN'T DO THAT, YOU DON'T KNOW! If roids suddenly adds 140 wins why do so many pitchers not even have 50 wins and are users. Where are all the 300 win guys if 50+ pitchers have done roids.....
    And don't talk about "illegal" crap since thats not the point. Your point is performance.
    Also Clemens has won a WS before, so he is a "winner" and his 354 W makes him a "winner'. What role does SP have in being a "team player" He's pitching once every 5 days and only pitches. Pitching is a single person thing, and there have never been conflicts with his catchers.
    You are correct that I do not know what Roger Clemens would have done without steroids, but I can make some pretty good educated guesses. Isn't that what we should be doing? Looking at the evidence and trying to figure out, player by player, how each one was affected by their steroid use?

    In regards to Clemens. the key is to look at the last four years before he started taking them. That is a very large sample size, he clearly was in decline in each of those four years. His WHIP went up, his ERA went up, and most importantly, his innings pitched per game went down.

    Before steroids, he was averaging close to 8 innings a start. in those last four years, he was closer to 6 innings a start. This is very important since by not lasting as long, he was getting many less victories. That decline is very normal for someone his age. I think a fair estimate, based on how other pitchers his age faired, that he would continue to decline and last maybe a two to three more years, without steroids.

    Even if he lasted 10 more years, they would have been mostly as a crowd draw, and I doubt he would have had much success. Most power pitchers burn out at around 35-38. Clemens showed all the signs of that up to when he started using steroids.

    But you are right, I am just guessing, but guessing based on evidence.


    Now in terms of him being a team player and a winner. You really are making yourself look bad here. First, Clemens has a long history of not getting along with catchers. It is very well documented. The biggest being when he was with Boston. Rich Gedman is the one who accused Roger of pulling himself out Game 6 of the 1986 World Series, even though he was the teams best chance to win the game. No on knows if it is true, but the mere fact that his catcher is telling that story to the press is proof that he does not get along with his catchers.

    Second, yes he did win a World Series, when he was on steroids. And he won 140 of those 354 games, while on steroids. So he is a winner, when he cheats.

    Third, I never mentioned "illegal", but it is not just a matter of performance in terms of the Hall. In terms of being on my fantasy team, yes performance is all that matters. But the Hall of Fame is about more than numbers, it is about what you brought to the game, and Roger Clemens brought cheating.

    By the way, I think Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker should be removed from the Hall, since there is now proof that they threw games.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Midland Texas
    Posts
    553

    Re: Clemens and the HOF

    If he does, the so does Pete.


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