YES Network.com

There's an interesting article on boston.com today (tinyurl.com/3zkoj5p) about how Manny Ramirez belongs in the Hall of Fame. Now, I tend to think that the Hall is sometimes cavalier about who gets in, but I just can't see Manny being a choice. It's not just the 3 PED tests he failed, though that alone should rule him out. He's a one dimensional player. He might be the best pure hitter in the history of the game, but he was never much of a fielder or base runner. Or, teammate, for that matter. And, even though he's from NYC, I could never see him in pinstripes. Even the Yanks have limits as to how much they'd tolerate just to get more offense.

My opinion is that he was very exciting to watch play, kind of like seeing a car wreck in motion, and I will miss him and his entertaining eccentricities, now that he's "retired". But he does NOT belong in the Hall. It's like the arguments about David Ortiz being a more worthy MVP than A-Rod a few years ago. A DH is a one-dimensional player, so how could he be MVP? A-Rod has all the tools, and deserved it.

Anyway, about Manny... agree?

If a player gets caught fails a test after MLB's steroid policy then they should not be considered, but they're fair game if it was done before.

Anything beyond those circumstances, whether they've taken HGH, other substances not tested for yet, or taken steroids before MLB instituted the testing/policy, those players should be considered for the HOF based on their statistics. If we do not allow for these players to be taken into consideration, there's this whole grey area that gets completely messed up. No one can prove whether players in the 80's or previously took PEDs of any form. Who knows how many players did this or that. The area is too grey and so we have to draw a line when MLB instituted the policy. 

My policy is - if there is a MLB rule against it, and you get caught doing whatever the rule is against, you shouldn't be considered for the Hall. If you did something "bad" prior to any rule against it, then I don't think that should count towards your consideration.

I continue to believe that when it comes to the Hall of Fame, you let everyone in ... but you put an asterisk on their plaque with an explanation that they used performance enhancing drugs and the information that is pertinent to that particular player in detail.  I also believe that every player in the entire era that enters the Hall of Fame should have a footnote on their plaque which states that they played in this particular steroid era.  Just because people weren't caught, doesn't mean they didn't use ... and for historical purposes, there should be clarification. 

Apr 14, 2011 -- 2:05PM, DC_Chillin wrote:

Apr 14, 2011 -- 2:04PM, GottaGoToMo wrote:

I continue to believe that when it comes to the Hall of Fame, you let everyone in ... but you put an asterisk on their plaque with an explanation that they used performance enhancing drugs and the information that is pertinent to that particular player in detail.  I also believe that every player in the entire era that enters the Hall of Fame should have a footnote on their plaque which states that they played in this particular steroid era.  Just because people weren't caught, doesn't mean they didn't use ... and for historical purposes, there should be clarification. 

Mo, I like that idea better than mine. Good call.

Thanks ... I expect a lot of people won't agree with it though ... saying that it punishes everyone for the sins of a few ... but that's just life ... to get it right, sometimes everyone has to deal with a degree of difference.

Apr 14, 2011 -- 2:10PM, DC_Chillin wrote:

Apr 14, 2011 -- 2:07PM, GottaGoToMo wrote:

Apr 14, 2011 -- 2:05PM, DC_Chillin wrote:

Apr 14, 2011 -- 2:04PM, GottaGoToMo wrote:

I continue to believe that when it comes to the Hall of Fame, you let everyone in ... but you put an asterisk on their plaque with an explanation that they used performance enhancing drugs and the information that is pertinent to that particular player in detail.  I also believe that every player in the entire era that enters the Hall of Fame should have a footnote on their plaque which states that they played in this particular steroid era.  Just because people weren't caught, doesn't mean they didn't use ... and for historical purposes, there should be clarification. 

Mo, I like that idea better than mine. Good call.

Thanks ... I expect a lot of people won't agree with it though ... saying that it punishes everyone for the sins of a few ... but that's just life ... to get it right, sometimes everyone has to deal with a degree of difference.

One thing though, I don't think you'd need a footnote for every player in the entire era that enters the Hall because the dates would imply it anyway, right?

That's true ... maybe just a plaque somewhere that delineates the dates and the era that those dates represent ... but it should be significantly shown ... because to be fair, there are many players who used, but were not outed.