MLB thread

[MTK]

With regard to Bonds and Clemens, I'm kind of on the fence. On one hand baseball has a pretty storied history tied to cheating and guys doing whatever they can to get an advantage, and on the other I understand those that have no tolerance for what went on during the steroid era. Bonds and Clemens both would have had Hall worthy careers, roids or not.

I don't know how you can tell the story of baseball in the 80s and 90s without talking about those guys, so I guess I'd lean towards putting them in at the end of the day.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by MTK

With regard to Bonds and Clemens, I'm kind of on the fence. On one hand baseball has a pretty storied history tied to cheating and guys doing whatever they can to get an advantage, and on the other I understand those that have no tolerance for what went on during the steroid era. Bonds and Clemens both would have had Hall worthy careers, roids or not.

I don't know how you can tell the story of baseball in the 80s and 90s without talking about those guys, so I guess I'd lean towards putting them in at the end of the day.

Early on in their retirement I was definitely an F them guy. I think mostly do to their defensive posturing. I have grown soft over time, but still have some conflicting emotions. If they get in should we revisit Pete Rose? imo he should be in as a player but MLB has always been strict with gambling.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

Early on in their retirement I was definitely an F them guy. I think mostly do to their defensive posturing. I have grown soft over time, but still have some conflicting emotions. If they get in should we revisit Pete Rose? imo he should be in as a player but MLB has always been strict with gambling.