Ray will love this.

But I would argue that without steroids, and with adequate weight given to postseason performance—Pettitte played the equivalent of 1¼ regular seasons in his 13 postseasons—he should not be automatically ruled out.

I have no idea what he's saying here. "Without steroids... he should not be automatically ruled out"? The fact is, Pettitte is not only an admitted PED user, but he has lied about his usage. He could very well still be lying about it.

I also don't know what Pettitte did to "[stand] up to Clemens." He threw Clemens under the bus based on a half-remembered conversation from years earlier, and when Clemens disputed Pettitte's account of what had happened, Pettitte backed down.

Tom, you have this quaint notion that people's opinions should be based on facts not media memes.

Sure, it's still certifiably insane. Without steroids, he's just another HoVG lefty. With steroids, he's an HoVG lefty who stood up for truth, justice and the American way which equals HoF consideration. Have you forgotten about the character clause? It shouldn't be used just to keep scoundrels out but also to reward players of principle like Pettitte.

Somebody has to come out of this smelling like roses. Jimmy Key sure had lousy timing didn't he?

Here’s how the big-time names that are already before or soon to be before the BBWAA electorate would shake out using my “good-standing” test . . .

Bill Conlin has been a member in good standing of the BBWAA since 1966

I might suggest that being in good standing with the BBWAA is not all it's cracked up to be. I might further suggest that members of the BBWAA refrain from using the phrase "good standing" until such time as I am dead.

I should add that Tom obviously missed the news that scientific studies have shown that PEDs only work for people of low character so they couldn't possibly have helped Pettitte.

I think Cheaters is kind of an intersting show, but sometimes I think the scenes are obviously fake.

I never saw the Barry Bonds episode though. I hope it ended better than this one. That one made me feel kind of sad for the guy who gets knocked out.

I am so excited that we are starting early on this.

Pettitte’s cleansing contrition is worth something.

McGwire's complete confession and apology, on the other hand, is worth nothing.

Ray will love this.

Ray, hell. Even I've got to love this, and Pettitte's one of my all-time favorite Yankees.

Pettitte's going to play the part of Innocence Corrupted -- a 21st century Forrest Gump.

It's been heading this way for years.

How utterly silly.

I think this is an article so stupid, so wrongheaded, that all sides of the BBTF steroids chasm can come together and be as a family for a short while.

From TFA:

Alex Rodriguez: Tough case. He’s in the grayest of the gray areas. His discovered and admitted steroid use appears much more limited than that of Bonds, Clemens, McGwire and Palmeiro. We obviously can’t know that for sure, of course, but it certainly occurred much earlier in his career than that of the other users. And, I would argue, it “did not in a transformative way alter the general regard for the game by the custodians of it.” That makes A-Red different than Bonds Clemens, McGwire and Palmeiro. Tentatively “in.”

I'm no UN translator, but I take “did not in a transformative way alter the general regard for the game by the custodians of it” to mean "didn't break the home run record."

DB

Hey, he still could...

I think this is an article so stupid, so wrongheaded, that all sides of the BBTF steroids chasm can come together and be as a family for a short while.

I guess you didn't read far enough to see his blanket pardon to amp users and his endorsement of Rose. Not that I could blame you if that's the case.

I might suggest that being in good standing with the BBWAA is not all it's cracked up to be. I might further suggest that members of the BBWAA refrain from using the phrase "good standing" until such time as I am dead.

It's times like this when I really wish BBTF had "+1" or "Like" buttons. Anyway, thanks, Walt.

seriously. He votes for Pettite, a confirmed and admitted cheater, just because he broke the rule of the team, the same rule that None of the writers wanted to violate at the time, and he is getting his vote? (that rule is to talk about stuff happening in the locker rooms) I'm sorry but vote for Canseco then.

I haven't read the comments on here, but did see the word stupid at least once as I was scrolling down.

Why don't these numbnuts just be honest with us. Pettite gave him a handjob after a game, Clemens wanted a reach around.


Pettite is a borderline candidate at best, and the roids thing should put people up in arms, Not defend him.

I'm a guy who thinks that the in season rules is the only punishment players should face for roid usage. But I can understand and I'll even defend certain logical and fair point of views, even if I think they are completely and utterly wrong. And I can at least comprehend other point of views that are clearly wrong (say refusing to vote for anyone who's ever played during the era) but this methodology is beyond f-cked up. This is the type of reasoning that makes people think that evolution and moronic design are equivalent theories...heck for that matter, aliens populated the earth(much more defensible theory than moronic design to be honest at least it has more scientific evidence backing it up) this is the type of thinking that makes people believe the moon landing was faked, that the president had a false birth certificate created because when he was six it was so obvious he was going to be the first black president, heck this type of thinking makes believing that if the loose change nutjobs had sex with Jennie McCarthy and their autistic offspring would still be more reasonable than this guy.

Roger Clemens and Andy Pettitte denied allegations that they had used performance-enhancing drugs, with Clemens saying he was angry and Pettitte saying he was embarrassed by a report that first appeared in The Times.

"I'm stunned, obviously," Pettitte said. "To tell you the truth, I would have bet my life that there was no way possible my name could even be on the affidavit."

Pettitte, 34, said he was especially disappointed because, "I absolutely killed myself over my career to work as hard as I possibly can to be as good as I possibly can and have it done natural."

Pettitte said he tried HGH on two occasions, stressing he did it to heal faster and not enhance his performance. He emphasized he never used steroids.

"If what I did was an error in judgment on my part, I apologize," Pettitte said Saturday in a statement released by his agent.

"I accept responsibility for those two days. I felt an obligation to get back to my team as soon as possible. For this reason, and only this reason, for two days I tried human growth hormone. Though it was not against baseball rules, I was not comfortable with what I was doing, so I stopped.

"This is it -- two days out of my life; two days out of my entire career, when I was injured and on the disabled list," he said. "I wasn't looking for an edge. I was looking to heal."

Pettitte also admitted his own use of HGH was not limited to 2002, as he previously said, but that he also took injections in 2004 after obtaining the substance from his ailing father.

"In 2004, when I tore the flexor tendon in my pitching arm, I again used HGH two times in one day out of frustration and in a futile attempt to recover. Unfortunately, I needed surgery on the arm later in the year. I regret these lapses in judgment," Pettitte said in his affidavit.

"My dad had been using it," Pettitte said in his deposition, describing his father's heart condition. "He ended up bringing me two syringes over to my house. And you know, I injected myself once in the morning and once at night. ... I did it for that day."

I have said it a couple of times before, but the line by the Max Mercy character (played by the great Robert Duvall) in The Natural is not far off from how some of these guys will see this upcoming HOF thing:

"I'm here to protect this game. And I do it by making or breaking the likes of you."

Of course, using substances to recover from injury faster, while most others do not use any such substance, is indeed giving yourself (and your team) an edge. This is why I think we should basically disregard steroid use in determining who should go in the HOF:

1) We have no idea who did and did not use PEDs, how often they were used, or even how much impact such use actually provides. I want to stress: Manny Alexander was a user, and he really sucked. It was not just big, bulky home run hitters doing this stuff - almost anybody could've done this.
2) The use of PEDs by some players clearly had some residual benefits for other non-PED players. Andy Pettitte coming back sooner from injuries, for example, would likely mean the relievers would pitch fewer innings, and/or lower-pressure situations. There are also players hurt by the same move - for example, the AAAA starter who would've gotten an extra start or two in Pettitte's non-PED place. To try to figure out the results of careers, games, and pennant races without PEDs is impossible.
3) Finally, and largely unrelated to Pettitte, is that I think it is a crock of #### that a player who obviously would be a HOFer, with or without PEDs, would not be elected. Barry Bonds could take away, what, 300 friggin' HRs from his career total, and he is still a HOFer. Roger Clemens was a HOF when he left the Red Sox. Gaylord Perry used a spitball. Players steal signs, and try to pretend to catch line drives that they know they didn't catch on the fly. Graig Nettles had superballs flying out of a broken bat, and Joe Niekro got caught with an emery board. Greenies for Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays. Whatever - it stinks that we're in for quite a year of angst on this topic, only to find Biggio and Morris the only ones that get in next January.

I knew this was going to be a galactically stupid column, but I wasn't prepared for the extent of things. I'm tempted to accuse him of trolling.

These fellows, these cheaters, they busted their humps, they sacrificed their bodies, and for what. TO WIN! They are heroes, not bums. The world (the BBWAA) will come to recognize this long about, oh, the year 2032, or thereabouts. Nostradamus told me, or Nosferatu, or somebody. Count on it. We will look back on all of this like women not having the vote and Jim Crow and stuff like that.

Of course, using substances to recover from injury faster, while most others do not use any such substance, is indeed giving yourself (and your team) an edge. This is why I think we should basically disregard steroid use in determining who should go in the HOF:

agree. but unfortunately in the real world you have to deal with bbwaa guys. basically guys who have received tenure in a profession that if barely breathing.

I knew this was going to be a galactically stupid column, but I wasn't prepared for the extent of things. I'm tempted to accuse him of trolling.

You mean like this?

Sammy Sosa: His performance in his relatively late baseball years can’t lead to but one conclusion – He was using. Out.

WTF? If you want to talk about Sosa's level of achievement, that's one thing. But "in his relatively late baseball years"?

"I'm stunned, obviously," Pettitte said. "To tell you the truth, I would have bet my life that there was no way possible my name could even be on the affidavit."

To be fair, he was right.

Ray will love this.

Yes, I've been pointing out for some time that a significant swathe of anti-steroids crusaders feel this way about Pettitte. That he was the "honest" one, and therefore his HGH use helps him - or at least doesn't hurt him.

That's why I've called him Honest Andy.

He lied through his teeth even in his "confession." But for some reason he gets labeled as the honest one.

Ray will love this.

Yes, I've been pointing out for some time that a significant swathe of anti-steroids crusaders feel this way about Pettitte. That he was the "honest" one, and therefore his HGH use helps him - or at least doesn't hurt him.

That's why I've called him Honest Andy.

He lied through his teeth even in his "confession." But for some reason he gets labeled as the honest one.

Perhaps we might agree that Pinstripe Love and Pettitte's non-abrasive personality help to fuel this rather transparent spin, much of which seems to emanate from Yankee Nation.

And BTW while I like Pettitte, I root for A-Rod and Giambi, and I liked Palmeiro and Manny, I wouldn't vote for any of them for the HoF. AFAIC the Hall of Merit is good enough for all of them, for the same reason it's good enough for Bonds.

"Cheaters" was a really good TV show. Kind of a combination of Cops and The Bachelor.

And BTW while I like Pettitte, I root for A-Rod and Giambi, and I liked Palmeiro and Manny, I wouldn't vote for any of them for the HoF. AFAIC the Hall of Merit is good enough for all of them, for the same reason it's good enough for Bonds.

Understand, Andy, that even if steroids is cheating, the HOF never cared about cheating before.

But "in his relatively late baseball years"?

Part-timer at 20.
Regular at 21.
30 homers at 24.
DIDN'T PEAK UNITL HE WAS 29!!!!!! OBVIOUS JUICER!!!!!!!!!

People who weren't paying attention like to pretend Sammy came out of nowhere. He was always ahead of schedule.

Understand, Andy, that even if steroids is cheating, the HOF never cared about cheating before.

Translation: You don't agree with the BBWAA's interpretation of the term as it might apply to a player's disqualification from induction.

To each his own, but unfortunately the BBWAA isn't made up of 700+ Ray DiPernas. Maybe in your next reincarnation.

Translation: You don't agree with the BBWAA's interpretation of the term as it might apply to a player's disqualification from induction.

To each his own, but unfortunately the BBWAA isn't made up of 700+ Ray DiPernas. Maybe in your next reincarnation.

How is this responsive? Do you agree that the BBWAA never cared about cheating before with regard to the HOF voting?

Understand, Andy, that even if steroids is cheating, the HOF never cared about cheating before.

Degrees and magnitude.

And impact on the statistical record.

Every sport concerned with fair competition bans the use of anabolic steroids by competitors. It's been noted here many times, but one more can't hurt -- the presence of the baseball players' union has meant that rules that promote fair compettion couldn't be implemented strictly for competition's sake. To some extent, that reality cuts in favor of your argument and that HOF voters should accept the results of collective bargaining at face value and not substitute their judgment as to what should have been bargained.(**) I point it out only to note that baseball didn't really have fair competition in the Steroid Era, and deviated from that ideal far more materially than in previous eras.(***) Moreover, the competition was not fair as between the Steroid Era and other post-Jackie R eras. I don't believe Mark McGwire proved himself a better single season HR hitter than Roger Maris and I don't believe Barry Bonds proved himself a better career HR hitter than Henry Aaron.(****) No test that controlled for steroid use exists by which this could have been proven, and it can't be proven without a test that controls for steroid use.

Any system that doesn't take these truisms into account is inadequate to the task.

(**) Prior to the CBA that ocntained testing, that is.

(***) Eras postdating Jackie R., anyway.

(****) Which isn't to say, necessarily, that the Platonic ideal of Mark McGwire wasn't a better HR hitter than Roger Maris, but we never got the opportunity to see.

I point it out only to note that baseball didn't really have fair competition in the Steroid Era, and deviated from that ideal far more materially than in previous eras.

The steroid era was clearly one of the fairest eras in baseball history. You could compete regardless of skin color or ethnic persuasion. You could use PEDs freely like all of your competitors, and clearly most, if not the vast majority, did.

I don't believe Mark McGwire proved himself a better single season HR hitter than Roger Maris and I don't believe Barry Bonds proved himself a better career HR hitter than Henry Aaron.

Mark & Barry proved themselves better than the best HR hitters in history, the players from their era. Players from their era hit more HRs than in any other time in baseball history, and after testing was instituted STILL HIT MORE HOME RUNS THAN AT ANY OTHER TIME IN BASEBALL HISTORY.

The rote steroid pushers in Hall advocacy arguments.

Although it's established that steroid use was rampant through the steroid era (must be why it was called that) meaning roughly 50+ % usage, anyone who's not absolutely proven (meaning beyond a reasonable doubt standard like depriving Hall induction is equivalent to depriving someone of his freedom) to have used steroids should get a clean slate. Thus only about .1 % would be eligible to be barred anyway That would be those unlucky enough to be hauled before Congress, forcing them to take the 5th (a implied confession forcing a real one), or careless with their dope sources being exposed, forcing some kind of confession with emphasis on mitigating factors, concocted or otherwise.

About that .1 %. You know, there's no proof steroids are peds. All the so-called evidence is anecdotal...anecdotal stuff like 72 homeruns requiring systemic 400 foot blasts in a home stadium that rivals Petco from a geriatric left-handed newly minted slugger. And all these fringe mlbers taking steroids who couldn't scratch a hole in a doughnut. What about them? Nevermind of course, maybe they would be playing in A ball without the kick. Like minor leaguer + roids = fringe mlber doesn't compute.

Ok, assuming that maybe steroids are slight peds (a baseless assumption, see above). No different than amphatemines. Heck, no different than any form of cheating. Nevermind that legitimate sports competition evolves in its perception of fairness, and the issue of chemical enhancements as it relates to steroids was effectively resolved at least 2 decades in all sports except baseball leading to the baseball steroid era. Verdict: steroids are disqualifying. Performances assisted thereby don't exist, ie, not recognized.

Bottom line, these steroid apologists don't give a flyin frick about steroids per se. It wouldn't concern them if the Hall was absolutely chocked full of druggers. The more the better. Asking them to resolve the really insoluble quaqmire which baseball through it's own volition has thrust itself is like asking a coyotee to guard the chicken coop. Simply don't care whether chickens are made off with or not. In defiance to world-wide and sports-wide 70 + years sustaining the verdict above, would give steroid cheaters en masse the ultimate recognition.

The only solution (and it's not actually one) is to make every effort to keep steroid users out. That's what the writers appear to be doing, and it's fair to say that the Hall is grateful with the thrust of their efforts since it has said so.

Translation: You don't agree with the BBWAA's interpretation of the term as it might apply to a player's disqualification from induction.

To each his own, but unfortunately the BBWAA isn't made up of 700+ Ray DiPernas. Maybe in your next reincarnation.

How is this responsive? Do you agree that the BBWAA never cared about cheating before with regard to the HOF voting?

I'll agree that according to your definition of cheating, it's been varied in its reaction to cheaters. But the operative word there is "your", which leads to a definition that you either insist or assume that everyone else buys into.

But since that's not the case, that's why I think you'd be better off when you're reincarnated as a Saint Bernard with a big enough barrel of brandy to help you survive a reading of the 2013 Hall of Fame results.

What definition of cheating excludes doctoring baseballs?

The only solution (and it's not actually one) is to make every effort to keep steroid users out.

Or you know treat events that happened on the field like they really happened and vote accordingly. Let baseball's PED penalties (or lack there of) function as they do. And stay out of the business of trying to figure who used, who didn't, and how much effect it had, especially when juiced pitchers pitched to juiced batters.

I don't know why this is hard. But of course many feel the need to shoehorn morality into it after the fact. SO I guess I do know it, it just annoys me.

What definition of cheating excludes doctoring baseballs?

None. What of it? But the question is what forms of cheating are considered to be Hall of Fame disqualifiers.

And that's where it becomes up to each writer to decide whether the line is drawn at spitballs, goat testicles, racism, greenies, steroids, or lasik surgery. There's no magic instruction that's going to do the writers' work for them, and while I guess that lack of specific guidelines seems to bother some of you, I'm afraid there's not much you can do about it except continue to piss and moan.

I don't why it bugs me that my favourite player of all time, Alan Trammell, keeps getting overlooked in HOF balloting, given that so many of the voters are sanctimonious, know-nothing dipshits like this guy. But it still rankles.

None. What of it? But the question is what forms of cheating are considered to be Hall of Fame disqualifiers.

Most of these articles don't make any sort of distinction that steroids are a special form of cheating. One would get the impression that Jose Canseco invented cheating in the 80's.

I guess this particular writer is safe, because he makes a distinction about off-field conduct. Presumably it would be okay to inject steroids in-between pitches.

What definition of cheating excludes doctoring baseballs?

None. What of it? But the question is what forms of cheating are considered to be Hall of Fame disqualifiers.

No, that was not the question. It was my question, so I'll ask it again:

Do you agree that the BBWAA never cared about cheating before with regard to the HOF voting?

Now you're talking about "forms" of cheating. Okay: what "form" of cheating did they care about before steroids?

We've gone through this before. There's a long list of Hall of Fame pitchers who were not only known to cheat, but were famous for it. Andy has no problem with them.

Degrees and magnitude.
And impact on the statistical record.

I dare say that SBB speaks for Andy on this, even if Andy will never admit it.

Is Andy refusing to admit that the writers never cared about cheating until we got to steroids? That the writers elected known cheaters, such as Gaylord Perry?

If Andy is arguing for cheating to suddenly matter, that's one thing. But it seems that he is denying altogether that the writers never cared about cheating -- in any "form" -- before steroids.

Now you're talking about "forms" of cheating. Okay: what "form" of cheating did they care about before steroids?

Gambling / game fixing. Were you not aware of this?

And of course even there you can point to inconsistencies, since the early days of baseball and the early Landis years were rife with accusations of gambling / game fixing that extended way beyond the Chicago Eight.

And impact on the statistical record level playing field of competition.

That's more like it.

I dare say that SBB speaks for Andy on this, even if Andy will never admit it.

And I dare say that you speak for the Barry Bonds Chowder and Marching Society, even if your folks back home might snicker at your orange and black pantyhose if you ever left it lying around in the laundry room.

Bottom line, these steroid apologists don't give a flyin frick about steroids per se. It wouldn't concern them if the Hall was absolutely chocked full of druggers. The more the better. Asking them to resolve the really insoluble quaqmire which baseball through it's own volition has thrust itself is like asking a coyotee to guard the chicken coop. Simply don't care whether chickens are made off with or not. In defiance to world-wide and sports-wide 70 + years sustaining the verdict above, would give steroid cheaters en masse the ultimate recognition.

I agree, I don't give a flyin frick about steroids. The rule is now there, and baseball has clearcut method of punishment.Leave the punishing to MLB.

Bottom line of course is the point about baseball through it's own volition, ignores the massive culpability that these writers themselves played in creating the situation. They don't have a higher ground to stand on. Any writer who covered baseball in this era, should have their votes taken away if they think roiders is a reason to not vote for someone.

And I dare say that you speak for the Barry Bonds Chowder and Marching Society, even if your folks back home might snicker at your orange and black pantyhose if you ever left it lying around in the laundry room.

I'm an Angel fan. All my hoisery comes in Angel red.

Now you're talking about "forms" of cheating. Okay: what "form" of cheating did they care about before steroids?

Gambling / game fixing. Were you not aware of this?

These go to game _throwing_, not cheating. They are trying to lose, or trying to perform worse, instead of trying to perform better.

Please articulate a distinction for HOF purposes between doctoring the baseball (Perry) and taking steroids (McGwire).

Bump. Andy didn't want to answer this when I asked a similar question before. Perhaps he'll see it today. Perhaps.

Please articulate a distinction for HOF purposes between doctoring the baseball (Perry) and taking steroids (McGwire).

Sure.

Perry's cheating is "trying to get an edge" and should be lauded by all.
McGwire's cheating is "an affront to all that is holy in baseball" and is punishable by (historical) death.





Oh, you wanted a reasonable distinction?

Sorry, it can't be done.