Turn Off Ads?
Page 6 of 20 FirstFirst ... 234567891016 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 297

Thread: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

  1. #76
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,545

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    He has expertise in baseball performance.
    This actually begs the question concerning a great many individuals with voting responsibilities (that's not a snarky comment).

    And frankly, receiving a ballot by definition makes one the arbiter of whether a player is deserving or not. It's a significant burden. Whether one agrees with Fay's actions or not (and I dont), I think its clear he made his decision with this burden in mind and was trying to fulfill his obligation to the best of his ability.
    "This isnít 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

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #77
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,138

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by Raisor View Post
    Raisor's new rule for Hall of Fame consideration: if you aren't good enough to get in on your first try, you aren t a Hall of Famer.

    If you are a voter, and you think a player is a Hall of Famer, vote him in, don't make his wait out of some kind of caste system.
    Trust me. Raisor is good. Raisor is wise. :O)
    Last edited by _Sir_Charles_; 01-01-2013 at 11:49 AM.
    2014 predictions:
    99-63 WS champs (Cards take 2nd WC, Mil 3rd, Pit 4th, Chi 5th)
    Bruce/Votto neck and neck MVP race (neither takes it)
    Bailey CYA winner
    Hamilton ROY & GG

  4. #78
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    11,989

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    I just don't see how the HoF can set clear guidelines for PED use and non-use. It's about as muddy of an issue as you're ever going to see.

    What would those clear guidelines be?

    Pay attention to the open sky

  5. #79
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,803

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    This is exactly why Fay did the correct thing.

    What is he supposed to do with "smoke" providing speculation or innuendo that somebody used PEDs?

    Is Fay supposed to be the judge and jury as to whether somebody used PEDs based on public speculation?

    Fay is a baseball writer. He has expertise in baseball performance. He is not an expert on PED use. He is not a judge and jury as to whether each candidate used. He has no way of evaluating how much PEDs influenced a particular player's performance.

    I don't know how any individual sportswriter can deal with all these issues fairly. At minimum, the Hall must set out clear guidelines concerning PEDs and how they should be considered (or not considered) in the voting process.
    We are all intelligent human beings with the ability to use logic and reason. That's all that is needed to make an acceptable decision on most matters.

    No matter how thorough, rational and logical anyone is, they are going to be players who used PED's who get into the HOF, because they hid it well and were smart enough to not get caught. That is not a reason to include those who we know did use PED's to achieve their HOF numbers in the HOF. Just because we can't catch every criminal doesn't mean we shouldn't put anyone in jail.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  6. #80
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,138

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Tucker View Post
    I just don't see how the HoF can set clear guidelines for PED use and non-use. It's about as muddy of an issue as you're ever going to see.

    What would those clear guidelines be?
    Simple. Remove the character clause. Have it be on stats alone. However they were obtained. If MLB rules the guy eligible, just go by the stats. If he's done something so bad that it makes his stats unusable, it's up to MLB to remove him from eligibility.
    2014 predictions:
    99-63 WS champs (Cards take 2nd WC, Mil 3rd, Pit 4th, Chi 5th)
    Bruce/Votto neck and neck MVP race (neither takes it)
    Bailey CYA winner
    Hamilton ROY & GG

  7. #81
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    11,989

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    We are all intelligent human beings with the ability to use logic and reason. That's all that is needed to make an acceptable decision on most matters.

    No matter how thorough, rational and logical anyone is, they are going to be players who used PED's who get into the HOF, because they hid it well and were smart enough to not get caught. That is not a reason to include those who we know did use PED's to achieve their HOF numbers in the HOF. Just because we can't catch every criminal doesn't mean we shouldn't put anyone in jail.


    I agree.

    Unless the HoF or MLB on Congress or someone sets up an in-depth multi-million dollar investigation into PED use staffed by medical experts and scientists and lawyers (and what a rat's nest that would be), the information we have now is pretty much all we are ever going to get.

    If a baseball writer doesn't feel adequately equipped to make judgements on the complex issue of a ballplayer being in the HoF, well, OK. I'd say that that writer needs to step aside and give his slot to someone who does feel "comfortable" making the call.

    Sometimes, decisions are hard. Sometimes, you don't have all the facts. Sometimes the morals and ethics are complex and confusing. But a lot of life decisions are like that. Either step up to the plate and take your cuts or else ask the coach to pinch hit for you.

    Pay attention to the open sky

  8. #82
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    11,989

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_ View Post
    Simple. Remove the character clause. Have it be on stats alone. However they were obtained. If MLB rules the guy eligible, just go by the stats. If he's done something so bad that it makes his stats unusable, it's up to MLB to remove him from eligibility.
    I think its safe to say there was considerable steroid use in MLB the last 20+ years. Are you saying we turn a blind eye to that?

    Pay attention to the open sky

  9. #83
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    42,215

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Tucker View Post
    I think its safe to say there was considerable steroid use in MLB the last 20+ years. Are you saying we turn a blind eye to that?
    Longer, Tom Houseman used and states that steroids were around during his career, 1971-1978.

    Then of course there's this article from 1969

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...2583/index.htm

    High Time To Make Some Rules
    With the help of his doctor and his conscience, the average citizen makes most of his own decisions about drugs. But the athlete, a participant in organized games, cannot be permitted this luxury. If the pleasures of competition and joys of victory are worth keeping, sport must realize that it is HIGH TIME TO MAKE SOME RULES
    We have turned a blind eye to it, for most of our lives, probably all of our lives if we include Red Juice and post WW2 Dexedrine use

  10. #84
    Member Strikes Out Looking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,427

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    If I had a vote, I wouldn't vote for those known to have taken PEDs.
    If I had a vote, I wouldn't vote in Rose. He violated a simple baseball rule.
    If any PED users or known gamblers are going in, first Joe Jackson should be put in.

    John Fay really shouldn't have a vote, even if he is classified by some as a "baseball writer."
    Win the Division

  11. #85
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,138

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Tucker View Post
    I think its safe to say there was considerable steroid use in MLB the last 20+ years. Are you saying we turn a blind eye to that?
    Yes. If they're in already, so be it. If MLB has decided to look the other way (as they have thus far), then so be it. The damage is done, no amount of fiddling with things is going to change that. The players who did cheat have inflated numbers, the players who didn't cheat have deflated numbers (facing juiced pitchers or pitchers facing juiced batters). I think the only reasonable option is to put players into the Hall based on the numbers alone because we'll never be able to remove the steroid factor from the equation. Now going forward, if MLB punishes a player by banning him....then exclude him from the ballot. (but I'm really not fond of that idea. I think if their numbers warrant admission, then admit them with some statements condemning their actions)

    Simply put, I can't see any other reasonable way to deal with the hall. If you start excluding players based on suspicion where does the line get drawn? If you start excluding players who were found guilty but MLB still decides that their numbers stand, where do we draw that line? Simply take that emotional aspect OUT of the voting.
    Last edited by _Sir_Charles_; 01-01-2013 at 01:13 PM. Reason: typo
    2014 predictions:
    99-63 WS champs (Cards take 2nd WC, Mil 3rd, Pit 4th, Chi 5th)
    Bruce/Votto neck and neck MVP race (neither takes it)
    Bailey CYA winner
    Hamilton ROY & GG

  12. #86
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,138

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by Strikes Out Looking View Post
    If I had a vote, I wouldn't vote for those known to have taken PEDs.
    So how would you vote for guys who don't have stat lines as high as they should be due to the juiced competition they were facing?

    If I had a vote, I wouldn't vote in Rose. He violated a simple baseball rule.
    True. But I really think people are putting too much of a connection between MLB and the HoF. They're separate entities. Banishment from baseball means MLB doesn't want him in the organization and doesn't want to tarnish anything worse moving forward. The HoF can't ignore the game's history, that's what it's purpose IS. It can't (or shouldn't) decide what part of the game's history should be ignored. State the facts and let the visitors decide for themselves what they think of that part of the game's history.

    If any PED users or known gamblers are going in, first Joe Jackson should be put in.
    Agreed.

    John Fay really shouldn't have a vote, even if he is classified by some as a "baseball writer."
    Is he a poor writer? Sure. But there are worse out there. And despite what we may think of him, he is knowledgeable about the game. He does take it seriously, he's just not as talented as others. Replacement level beat writer. :O)
    2014 predictions:
    99-63 WS champs (Cards take 2nd WC, Mil 3rd, Pit 4th, Chi 5th)
    Bruce/Votto neck and neck MVP race (neither takes it)
    Bailey CYA winner
    Hamilton ROY & GG

  13. #87
    The rest is drama. marcshoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    In the woods, with a shovel
    Posts
    5,101

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    I have no problem with what Fay did.

    By not sending in a ballot naming a few people he considers less deserving than Bonds or Clemons, he's not actually voting against them, as he would be otherwise doing. he seems to realize, to paraphrase someone recently elected to another Hall, that by choosing not to decide he's still made a choice. I actually applaud his actions.

  14. #88
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    11,989

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_ View Post
    I think the only reasonable option is to put players into the Hall based on the numbers alone because we'll never be able to remove the steroid factor from the equation.
    I think this is the nut of the issue here. Either we do just say "oh well, we didn't catch them, let them in" or "these look like inflated numbers to me". And, like with a lot of other things in life, the truth lies somewhere in-between. Which makes it a very difficult call.

    I don't have a great issue with letting superstar guys highly suspected of using PEDs. Guys like Bonds or Clemons were going to be in. PEDs gave them cartoonish numbers but they were damn good anyhow. Guys like Palmeiro or Sosa or McGuire, weeellllll, in my opinion, I think PEDs boosted them to HoF levels of numbers. I'd give a skunk eye to them. Guys like Fred McGriff are difficult calls too. You evaluate them on a one-by-one basis and make your best stab at it.

    My hope for the voting is that enough writers vote what their opinions are on these issues based on the information and somehow out of the mess, a consensus appears. Messy and not definitive, yeah. But I don't see any relealistic and practical solutions out there.

    Pay attention to the open sky

  15. #89
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,136

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    This is what happens when sub-mediocre writers like John Fay get a ballot mailed to them: they get all wrapped up in their personal incompetence.

    I kind of applaud the instinct of some writers to take the decision out of their hands. They're no good at this and never have been. Still, Fay's got no excuse for not having sorted out whether he thinks Bonds and Clemens deserve induction, other than he's not a terribly bright or capable guy.

    I still think there should be a HOF Supreme Court and there should be televised cases for and against everyone on the ballot.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  16. #90
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    13,179

    Re: John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Tucker View Post
    I just don't see how the HoF can set clear guidelines for PED use and non-use. It's about as muddy of an issue as you're ever going to see.

    What would those clear guidelines be?
    The guidelines would address the following factors:

    1. Whether PED use is a pertinent factor.

    2. Whether speculation about PED use (as opposed to clear information) should be considered.

    3. Possibly a statement by the Hall as to the standard to be used in considering PED use. For example, a statement that PED use is only relevant if the voter has good reason to think that PEDs had a significant impact on performance.

    These are not exhaustive. There are many approaches the Hall can take to bring more clarity to this subject. I think voters would welcome these guidelines.

    As to the comment by a poster that all this requires is "logic and reason" I completely and entirely disagree. This is an issue of science and, in some cases, an issue of evidence.

    If I were a player, I wouldn't want a major league beat writer deciding if I used PEDs and what impact PEDs might have had on my career. The least the Hall can do is address the issue for its voters in some manner.
    Last edited by Kc61; 01-01-2013 at 03:30 PM.


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