HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Barry Bonds Not Elected T...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:18 PM

Barry Bonds Not Elected To Hall of Fame

Source: NBC Bay Area

Judgment day has arrived for former Giants slugger Barry Bonds to find out if his Hall of Fame fate and the vote was a big fat no.

Read more: http://www.nbcbayarea.com/blogs/the-cove/Barry-Bonds-Not-Elected-to-Hall-of-Fame-186198441.html



The news came over the wire just a few minutes ago. Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, and Sammy Sosa were not elected to the MLB Hall of Fame. In addition, no one on this years ballot was elected. Therefore, it seems no one will be inducted into the Hall of Fame this year.

66 replies, 7592 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 66 replies Author Time Post
Reply Barry Bonds Not Elected To Hall of Fame (Original post)
erpowers Jan 2013 OP
KatyMan Jan 2013 #1
Tempest Jan 2013 #5
KatyMan Jan 2013 #18
Tempest Jan 2013 #21
KatyMan Jan 2013 #25
Tempest Jan 2013 #2
klook Jan 2013 #29
Tempest Jan 2013 #33
frylock Jan 2013 #35
MADem Jan 2013 #39
klook Jan 2013 #43
Jimbo S Jan 2013 #65
klook Jan 2013 #66
a kennedy Jan 2013 #3
longship Jan 2013 #4
Brother Buzz Jan 2013 #6
Leopolds Ghost Jan 2013 #8
Brother Buzz Jan 2013 #9
trumad Jan 2013 #10
rivegauche Jan 2013 #16
Tempest Jan 2013 #23
trumad Jan 2013 #31
Tempest Jan 2013 #34
trumad Jan 2013 #44
groundloop Jan 2013 #37
trumad Jan 2013 #46
groundloop Jan 2013 #60
El Supremo Jan 2013 #49
MADem Jan 2013 #40
jeff47 Jan 2013 #41
trumad Jan 2013 #48
jeff47 Jan 2013 #55
trumad Jan 2013 #59
jeff47 Jan 2013 #61
trumad Jan 2013 #62
Are_grits_groceries Jan 2013 #42
trumad Jan 2013 #50
KamaAina Jan 2013 #15
hughee99 Jan 2013 #32
Renew Deal Jan 2013 #17
Brother Buzz Jan 2013 #27
Leopolds Ghost Jan 2013 #7
relayerbob Jan 2013 #11
ellisonz Jan 2013 #20
frylock Jan 2013 #36
BlueManFan Jan 2013 #12
BlueManFan Jan 2013 #13
rivegauche Jan 2013 #14
Sophiegirl Jan 2013 #19
KatyMan Jan 2013 #22
Tempest Jan 2013 #24
Initech Jan 2013 #28
Sophiegirl Jan 2013 #30
Initech Jan 2013 #26
Jenoch Jan 2013 #38
FSogol Jan 2013 #45
WhoWoodaKnew Jan 2013 #47
madrchsod Jan 2013 #51
AsahinaKimi Jan 2013 #52
Kalidurga Jan 2013 #53
WhoWoodaKnew Jan 2013 #63
Pachamama Jan 2013 #54
840high Jan 2013 #56
AngryOldDem Jan 2013 #57
dembotoz Jan 2013 #58
MrSlayer Jan 2013 #64

Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:29 PM

1. Disgusting.

Biggio deserved it. So did Bagwell. So did Piazza. Baseball writers are a bunch of hacks. The voting should be done by the players.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KatyMan (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:31 PM

5. The players?

What do they know about the stats of MLB players?

The writers are the ones who pour over stats and data, not players.

Under your system, it would become a popularity contest.

And Piazza is also on the list of steroid users.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tempest (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:59 PM

18. Well, those writers

were more than happy to vote a half dozen MVPs to Bonds and Cy Youngs to Clemens, and you'd have to have lived under a rock to not know there was a supplement issue in MLB in the 90s and beyond. Who didn't know McGwire and Sosa were juicing in 98?
I don't know about Piazza, but Biggio was certainly never implicated, and neither was Bagwell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KatyMan (Reply #18)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:05 PM

21. Doubt is not proof

The proof wasn't until after they finished their careers.

"but Biggio was certainly never implicated, and neither was Bagwell."

Biggio I agree with you, Bagwell not so much. As far as their snubs, that is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tempest (Reply #21)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:07 PM

25. Why not Bagwell?

Played a large part of his career in the Dome, where home runs go to die.
If one thinks Frank Thomas is HoF'er, then you have to believe Bags is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:29 PM

2. It was more like a big fat HELL NO!

Bonds was one of several players who had a cloud of steroids shrouding his candidacy into the Hall of Fame. He received 36.2 percent of the vote. He needed 75-percent.

Former Oakland A's slugger Mark McGuire was also on the ballot. He only received 16.9 percent of the vote.

Also on the ballot for the first time were Sammy Sosa and Mike Piazza, power hitters whose statistics have been questioned because of the Steroids Era, and Craig Biggio, 20th on the career list with 3,060 hits all for the Houston Astros.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tempest (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:14 PM

29. "I'm probably in the minority, but...."

Last edited Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:04 PM - Edit history (1)




Biggio will get in eventually, although I'm surprised he wasn't a first-ballot choice. I doubt seriously he ever juiced.

Hardly anybody likes Bonds, and hardly anybody believes he didn't use steroids, so -- despite what would be a HOF career for most players, he may never get in. I always thought it was hypocritical of the Giants to keep him on the team and promote (and benefit from) his hitting prowess but then try to remove every trace of him after his career was over.

Maybe somebody will start a Hall of Infamy for guys like Pete Rose, Bonds, and Clemens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #29)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:22 PM

33. Can you imagine The Babe on steroids?

He'd have set every offensive record that would still be standing today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tempest (Reply #33)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:41 PM

35. he could have set those records if he just layed off the party lifestyle!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #35)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:50 PM

39. He used to eat hotdogs in the damn dugout!

He was a fan of beer and cigars, too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tempest (Reply #33)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:01 PM

43. LOL, really

What if some of these guys just didn't drink as much?


(George Steinbrenner recommends a remedy to Billy Martin)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #29)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 01:33 PM

65. The NIT pre-dates the NCAA

FYI

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jimbo S (Reply #65)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 01:59 PM

66. Ah, thanks -- I was mis-remembering my hoops history

about the Marquette decision to go to the NIT instead of the NCAA tourney. I'll correct my post above.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:29 PM

3. 1996 was the last year no one was inducted....

yikes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:29 PM

4. Asterisk* nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:34 PM

6. Was Pete Rose on the ballot?

Pete Rose should not be the only living baseball player on the permanently ineligible list.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Brother Buzz (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:36 PM

8. IMO what Pete Rose did is far less objectionable than cheating on the game by using steroids n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Leopolds Ghost (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:38 PM

9. I don't disagree

So, should other names be on that permanently ineligible list?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Leopolds Ghost (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:42 PM

10. Really?

Disagree 100 percent. Throwing games because you gamble on them. Do you know how fast the integrity of the game would fly out the window?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:55 PM

16. Agree with you here, it's intolerable. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:06 PM

23. No evidence he threw games

That is your opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tempest (Reply #23)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:18 PM

31. There is plenty of evidence that he bet on his own team.

Actually he admitted it.

Do you not see the problem with this?

Once fans think that the game is rigged, it's all over. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #31)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:23 PM

34. Once again...

No evidence he threw games. It's your opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tempest (Reply #34)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:31 PM

44. LOL---

Betting on your own team is a bannable offense in Baseball.

Always has been always will.

How do you know he didn't throw games? You know he bet on his team--- How do you know he didn't bet against?

And there is the quandry.

Guess what---it he never ever bet on his team--- then your argument holds much better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #31)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:44 PM

37. He only admitted to betting on his own team to win

Rose claims he never, ever bet on his team to lose.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #37)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:32 PM

46. He admitted after years of denial...

You really think he has credibility?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #46)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 08:39 PM

60. I never said he has credibility, I don't even like him

I was just stating facts.

And for the record, I do not think Pete Rose should be allowed in the Hall of Fame because he broke the rules.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to groundloop (Reply #37)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:40 PM

49. So he bets a lot when he lets them lose. And he bets a little when he helps them win.

Same difference.

But I don't believe him anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #31)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:51 PM

40. Bet ON is fine--bet AGAINST would be a problem... nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #31)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:51 PM

41. There's evidence he bet for is team, not against it.

So where's the conflict of interest in that? He's trying to win as both a player and a bettor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #41)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:36 PM

48. Wow---you guys just don't get it.

He denied for years that he didn't bet on his team---and now you all are in that he's honest Pete.

Who is to say that if good old Pete didn't get caught---he kept on betting, ran up big gambling debts to loan sharks, and then was told to throw games to make up for his losses.

When you are a degenerate gambler, you're much more susceptible to that kind of shit.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #48)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:36 PM

55. No, I'm not saying that at all

Your claim is he could have thrown a game to win a bet.

He didn't bet against his team.

His incentives to win the bet and win the game were aligned.

Who is to say that if good old Pete didn't get caught---he kept on betting, ran up big gambling debts to loan sharks, and then was told to throw games to make up for his losses.

And he could have raped innocent virgin puppies while guzzling Mad Dog and shooting heroin into his eyeballs.

He didn't do that. Nor throw a game.

So why should we punish him as if he had?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #55)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 08:05 PM

59. How do you know he didn't bet against his team?

Because Pete said so?

Again---he was a degenerate gambler...yes? You would think the chance of losing his legacy---knowing that betting on your own team would be the end of you....which it was--- would be the deterrent. It obviously was not.

Why---because he was a gambling addict.

And again---there lies the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #59)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 12:36 AM

61. Same reason I know he hasn't murdered anyone

No one has produced any evidence that he has.

Perhaps we should just execute him? After all, he could have murdered a bus load of nuns. Sure, he says he hasn't, but are you gonna take his word?

The guy was a hall-of-fame quality player, didn't harm the sport like the steroid abusers or the black socks, and nobody has provided any evidence his bets changed how he played or managed. The fact that people are shocked - SHOCKED I tell you - by his behavior says a lot more about them than him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #61)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 06:13 AM

62. And no has produced any evidence that he hasn't.

Buth there is plenty of evidence that he broke a major bannable rule in baseball.

Again---the reasons I listed above in mho are sufficient.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Leopolds Ghost (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:59 PM

42. Rose is much worse IMHO.

What Rose did cuts to the heart of the game and anybody's ability to believe in it. By betting while managing, he could directly manipulate the outcome. He might swing it one way or the other without even realizing it.
I am no fan of steroid users. However, they still have to have a modicum of talent to hit the ball. In addition, the outcome they can consistently produce is not guaranteed.
Rose couldn't guarantee an outcome, but with the ability to move and/ or remove players, he could really affect it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Are_grits_groceries (Reply #42)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:40 PM

50. I'm stunned that some don't get it.

Again---You know at the end the guy was addicted to gambling---betting on his own team and risking the chance of losing his legacy.

So---when you become a degenerate, you act like a degenerate. You begin to double, triple your bets, and eventually you will be so far down you will be forced to change up your tactics to try and cover your losses.

Bookies, loan sharks, etc..... they'll sink you teeth into you so fast you won't know what hit you.

That right there is why there is a strict no gambling rule in Professional sports.

Once you hit that slippery slope there no putting on the breaks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Brother Buzz (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:54 PM

15. Easy solution to the Rose conundrum

there are several men who are in as managers but not as players, e.g. Sparky Anderson. Induct Rose as a player only, and make it clear why he is not a member as a manager right on his plaque.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KamaAina (Reply #15)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:21 PM

32. He wouldn't be a member as a manager because he wasn't a HoF manager anyway.

He managed from 84-89 and didn't win the World series, pennant, or even the NL West (their division at the time) once.

If I was Sparky Anderson, I'd be pissed if there was a plaque that said the only reason Rose wasn't a HoF manager was because of the gambling. Rose was no more a "HoF manager" than Bob Uecker was a "HoF catcher", he just wasn't that good at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Brother Buzz (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:57 PM

17. At some point he will be off that list.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #17)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:09 PM

27. When he dies, he'll join a larger list of permanently ineligible players

Today, he is the only living baseball player on the permanently ineligible list. I suggest there should be other players on that list to keep Pete Rose company.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:35 PM

7. Barry Bonds had a cloud over his head WHILE he was becoming famous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:43 PM

11. Yawn ... it's a freaking children's game

Played by people making far too much money. NHL lockout could stay on indefinitely too ASFAIC, too violent.

Stick with Olympic sports and be done with it.

(besides, I'm more impressed with people like Babe Ruth who performed his feats with performance degrading drugs)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to relayerbob (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:02 PM

20. The Freakin' Olympics



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to relayerbob (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:43 PM

36. no, it's a men's game played by children..

and lol at "Olympic sports." can't wait for the big marathon being televised this weekend!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:49 PM

12. No Big Deal

his swollen steroid engorged head wouldn't fit through the doorway anyhow! Allegedly....ha ha ha!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:53 PM

13. BALCO BALCO BALCO BALCO BALCO BALCO

balco balco balco balco balco.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 02:54 PM

14. All of them could be in the 'Roids Hall of Shame.

I think any athlete who used steroids should never even be considered for the HOF. It shoul dbe an automatic disqualifier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:00 PM

19. Babe Ruth's Vices...

...were hotdogs and beer!!!!!

No better performance enhancing drug than a good ballpark frank with lots of mustard, onions and relish. And one's beer of choice.

A player can be a..uhm...drunk...but one might think that if he laid off the booze, his stats would be completely unreachable. On the other hand, maybe some good intestinal pressure and the "relaxation" caused by the beer actually made him play better. Relaxed when batting and a great big ole fart when swinging may have given the ball a reason to escape...and the best place to hide was in the centerfield stands.

Runaway.....Flee!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sophiegirl (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:05 PM

22. Ty Cobb, Tris Speaker, Cap Anson...

Klansman and racists. Why are they still in the Hall?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sophiegirl (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:07 PM

24. Hot dogs, beer and women. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sophiegirl (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:10 PM

28. I like what Lewis Black said: forget the performance enhancing drugs...

And bring back the performance hindering ones!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Initech (Reply #28)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:15 PM

30. Yeah....the downfall of many ML players. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:08 PM

26. Excellent, fuck the sterioud abusers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:49 PM

38. I think this was

Biggio's first year on the ballot. Jack Morris has only one more year on the ballot before he goes to the veteran's committee. Although he didn't win 300 games, he was a dominant pitcher throughout most of his career. I hope he gets in next year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:32 PM

45. A long as you get 5% of the vote each year, you remain on the ballot for 15 years. n/t

All of them got over 5%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:34 PM

47. I choose not to do roids when playing Triple A. Many other players did.

They made the show. I started selling insurance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:42 PM

51. why in the hell did`t they elect other players?

there`s a few players that deserve the hall of fame.

the people who vote should be ashamed of themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:50 PM

52. I seem to remember this...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:58 PM

53. Get ready to throw your peanuts and Cracker Jacks at me...

But, I don't think the steroid use is a big deal. I think it's wrong as far as the players health is concerned. There are estimates that up to 50% of MLB players use steroids. I doubt it is that high myself, I would think the most would be 40% but it's probably closer to 25%. But, here is a theoretical for you. If half the players are using how is it an advantage to be using? It's very likely half the players on the other team are using as well, so then what, you still have to rely on your skill as a player. So, why don't we do this. If a player wants to use they have to disclose their use to the world. They also have to agree to have their stats adjusted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kalidurga (Reply #53)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 06:37 AM

63. It's an disadvantage to players trying to make the team that choose not to use.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 05:00 PM

54. *Good n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pachamama (Reply #54)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:47 PM

56. Yes it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 07:53 PM

57. Good.

None of them deserve to go. It would be a huge slap in the face to every player who has been inducted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 08:02 PM

58. who the hell cares

its only a fricken game

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to erpowers (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 07:11 AM

64. Roids or not, Bonds is a first ballot.

 

And I hate that guy, absolutely hate him. This is a joke. Rocket is a first balloter too.

The whole steroids controversy is idiotic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread