Mark McGwire

NT03 · November 28, 2006

Any Baseball Fans ?

untgirl04 · November 28, 2006

I'm actually a bit conflicted on this one. He wasn't really solid throughout his career, and only hit all the home runs when he was on steroids. So, by that line of reasoning, I don't think he belongs in the HOF (of course, I don't think Barry Bonds belongs there either, and he should be stripped of his records if they can prove he was on steriods).

But on the other hand, I have Mark McGwire's rookie card, and although Bonds did beat his record, the card is still worth a decent amount, so McGwire in the HOF helps me out. However, I think the baseball purist in me would have to go with no, McGwire doesn't belong in the HOF.

CMJ · November 28, 2006

He hit a decent amount of homers early in his career when he was a relatively skinny guy though. I'm pretty conflicted on him too in all honesty.

Edited November 28, 2006 by CMJ

LongJim · November 28, 2006

Any Baseball Fans ?
←

Yes.

and No.

Eagle1855 · November 28, 2006

I'm not here to talk about the past

MeanGreengdub · November 28, 2006

While he did have HOF numbers, he cheated. Maybe if he would come out and admit he cheated like Pete Rose it would help but I say absolutely no to the HOF for Big Mac.

NT03 · November 29, 2006

Actually McGwire admitted to only of usingAndro , which at the time was legal by Baseball standards then. I used Andro when I use to work out and a person could buy legally over the counter. But other than just homerun power he didnt do anything else special.

But yes , his 85 Topps RC is a classic

Coffee and TV · November 29, 2006

yes. His stats are worthy and there is no proof that he did anything illegal. Of course I'm not stupid enough to believe he didn't do steroids, but there has been no proof so far. In my opinion its still all just speculation.

El Paso Eagle · December 8, 2006

yes. His stats are worthy and there is no proof that he did anything illegal. Of course I'm not stupid enough to believe he didn't do steroids, but there has been no proof so far. In my opinion its still all just speculation.
←

Agree for the most part. There are so many questions regarding this whole time frame – do you keep out all players from year “X” to “Y”?

The Fake Lonnie Finch · December 11, 2006

Dave Kingman hit a bunch of homeruns and isn't in. McGwire was just Kingman on hormone growth garbage.

SpaceMonkey · December 12, 2006

Kingman is hardly comparable to McGwire. He hit roughly 140 fewer homers in the same number of seasons.

Kingman never hit more than 37 homers in a season and didn't even reach that high until 5 and 6 season into his career . McGwire hit 49 his rookie year. And he did that hitting 4th and 5th behind Jose Canseco the vast majority of the season.

McGwire averaged 38.25 homers his first 4 years in the majors. He only dropped to a measly ( ) 22 when he had significant injuries in 1991.

McGwire has the highest HR to AB ratio of all time.

He's won at least one gold glove, maybe more I don't recall. He has a world series ring, several LCS titles, played in 12 all-star games, won the all-star home run derby in the mid 90's.

Those who say he only admittedly did andro are 100% correct. Subsequent evaluations have been shown that Adro doesn't really do as much as people thought it did. It is much less potent than supplements like creatine, which I might add Sammy Sosa (during the famous home run chase season) and a large amount of MLB players have admitted to using for many years.

People want to say he used roids with no proof of such useage. I'd say its likely, but most people also agree that a lrage amount of players use/used roids too. That essentially levels the playing field across MLB each season.

Maybe it tarnishes past records, but if McGwire hits 70 home runs off of pitchers who are also using roids, then why is he worse than them? I'd bet you money that Bob Gibson and a lot of those old time pitchers probably weren't throwing fastballs in the high 80s, low 90's in the 8th inning. And yet, McGwire, even if all juiced up, wasn't htting homers that went miles beyond those hit by Mantle. He just did it more efficiently.

You're going to say that the most prolific home run hitter in the history of baseball does not deserve to be enshrined in the hall of fame?

I don't think you can keep him out because what he did in 1998 for baseball is probably the biggest thing that has been done for baseball in my lifetime thus far, and will quite possibly stay that way until I die.

From a personal standpoint, he's one of the most humanitarian and giving stars that most professional sports have seen within the last 30 years.

Name another major athlete who has started his own foundation with his own money to help abused children.

Beyond all that, you really think that there's not a single player already in the hall of fame, who if I named them you would probably go to great lengths to defend their place in history, who didn't do drugs? I'm sure there's pot smokers, crack addicts, wife beaters, etc aplenty in Cooperstown.

Coach · December 12, 2006

I'm assuming that all of you who think McGwire should in the HOF feel the same way about Barry Bonds?

The Fake Lonnie Finch · December 12, 2006

Kingman is hardly comparable to McGwire. He hit roughly 140 fewer homers in the same number of seasons.
←

Like I said, McGwire was Kingman on hormone growth garbage. With hormone growth garbage, Kingman would have hit as many out as McGwire. Kingman and McGwire are the same player - one on juice, the other not on juice.

Also, the unjuiced Kingman hit 48 homers in 1979 with the Cubs. Usually 48 is more than 37, so Kingman did, in fact, hit more than 37 homers in a season. He just didn't do it all juiced up.

They are the same player, but from different eras.

Coffee and TV · December 13, 2006

I'm assuming that all of you who think McGwire should in the HOF feel the same way about Barry Bonds?
←

I think he'll eventually get nailed though. But yes I'd be hyprocite to say he didn't fall into the same category as McGwire.

But Bonds is a chump. I hate that arrogant bastard.

SpaceMonkey · December 16, 2006

Like I said, McGwire was Kingman on hormone growth garbage. With hormone growth garbage, Kingman would have hit as many out as McGwire. Kingman and McGwire are the same player - one on juice, the other not on juice.
Also, the unjuiced Kingman hit 48 homers in 1979 with the Cubs. Usually 48 is more than 37, so Kingman did, in fact, hit more than 37 homers in a season. He just didn't do it all juiced up.
They are the same player, but from different eras.
←

My fault, I missed that line in the career stats page. You're correct.

I think its disingenuous (not to mention presumptive) to think of them as the same player except McGwire was "juiced up", but I can see where that thought is derived from.

Fact is McGwire's numbers were still better than Kingman's before the alleged period of "hormone growth garbage".

There is in fact a lot of debate that Kingman should be in the hall. If Kingman were in the hall, would you say McGwire should be too?

And yes, I would say Bonds should be in the hall.