Discussion:
Yes, but . . . (Johnny's pet peeve)
(too old to reply)
Johnny
2012-09-14 15:48:39 UTC
Permalink
http://losangeles.angels.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120913&content_id=38355732&vkey=news_ana&c_id=ana

" Pujols, 32, is the first player to hit 30-plus homers in
each of his first 12 seasons -- even though his first in an
Angels uniform didn't come until May 6. He's the fourth to
hit 30-plus homers in a run of 12 straight seasons at any
point in his career, joining Barry Bonds (13 straight, from
1992 to 2004), Alex Rodriguez (13 straight from 1998 to
2010) and Jimmie Foxx (12 straight, from 1929-40)."

Yes, but The Machine and Double-X did it legitimately. I do
not recognize the legitimacy of numbers put up by juicers in
the steroid era; and I do not consider it fair, appropriate,
or proper to compare the suspicious numbers with legitimate
numbers.

BTW, IMO: Unlike juicers, who should not be eligible for
the Hall of Fame, Charlie Hustle should be in the Hall
because his transgressions did nothing to improve his
performance unless, of course, betting on his team to win
gave him added legitimate incentive to perform, which, as
made clear by his well-deserved nickname as the ultimate all
out all the time player, would hardly have been possible,
and it is unthinkable that a player of his incomparable will
to win would throw a game. While I am on the subject, Joey
No Shoes (as Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel once "gangsterized"
his nickname on Letterman) belongs in the Hall for reasons
those knowledgeable of the history of the game know well,
and pitchers who doctored the ball ought to be removed from
the Hall, starting with Don Sutton, who bragged about it and
laughed about how his catcher aided him by sharpening a
buckle on his shin guards and using it to put a gash in the
ball, giving a whole new meaning to a "cut" fast ball.
Eric Ramon
2012-09-14 18:53:56 UTC
Permalink
BTW, IMO:  Unlike juicers, who should not be eligible for
the Hall of Fame, Charlie Hustle should be in the Hall
because his transgressions did nothing to improve his
performance unless, of course, betting on his team to win
gave him added legitimate incentive to perform, which, as
made clear by his well-deserved nickname as the ultimate all
out all the time player, would hardly have been possible,
and it is unthinkable that a player of his incomparable will
to win would throw a game.
No betting on baseball. He knew it was the rule. He broke it. He lied
about it. You dismiss the "throwing a game" possibility because it's
"unthinkable". And that's that!

But if he had a bet on a game, as manager, and did what he could to
win, *even if it jeopardized future games*, then the net effect would
be one win and however many losses after the fact *because* he made
decisions to help his bet, rather than to help the long-range
prospects for his club.

You seem to think the rule is "no betting against your team". The rule
is "no betting".

But yeah, I don't like juicers, either.
red floyd
2012-09-14 19:54:54 UTC
Permalink
BTW, IMO: Unlike juicers, who should not be eligible for the Hall of
Fame, Charlie Hustle should be in the Hall because his transgressions
did nothing to improve his performance unless, of course, betting on his
team to win gave him added legitimate incentive to perform, which, as
made clear by his well-deserved nickname as the ultimate all out all the
time player, would hardly have been possible, and it is unthinkable that
a player of his incomparable will to win would throw a game.
I agree with what Eric said. Remember, at the time, baseball had
exactly ONE commandment, but it was written in stone.

*** THOU SHALT NOT BET UPON BASEBALL ***

Rose decided that it meant, "unless you really, really want to". Sucks
to be him, but he knew the rule.
RMJon23
2012-09-15 08:45:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by red floyd
BTW, IMO: Unlike juicers, who should not be eligible for the Hall of
Fame, Charlie Hustle should be in the Hall because his transgressions
did nothing to improve his performance unless, of course, betting on his
team to win gave him added legitimate incentive to perform, which, as
made clear by his well-deserved nickname as the ultimate all out all the
time player, would hardly have been possible, and it is unthinkable that
a player of his incomparable will to win would throw a game.
I agree with what Eric said. Remember, at the time, baseball had
exactly ONE commandment, but it was written in stone.
*** THOU SHALT NOT BET UPON BASEBALL ***
Rose decided that it meant, "unless you really, really want to". Sucks
to be him, but he knew the rule.
I'm with Eric and Floyd. I agree with all of you about juicing.

I also think Rose is an unsavory character, but hey so was Ty Cobb. Rose bet on baseball and he knew that was the One Thing that MLB didn't want. The Black Sox moment was maybe a make or break for the game as far as legitimacy.

At the same time, even if Rose never makes it to the HoF, we all know that mutha was one stupendously great player.

Johnny: Shoeless Joe hit over .400 that Series, right? To paraphrase Ring Lardner, I could look it up.
Johnny
2012-09-15 12:49:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by RMJon23
Post by red floyd
BTW, IMO: Unlike juicers, who should not be eligible for the Hall of
Fame, Charlie Hustle should be in the Hall because his transgressions
did nothing to improve his performance unless, of course, betting on his
team to win gave him added legitimate incentive to perform, which, as
made clear by his well-deserved nickname as the ultimate all out all the
time player, would hardly have been possible, and it is unthinkable that
a player of his incomparable will to win would throw a game.
I agree with what Eric said. Remember, at the time, baseball had
exactly ONE commandment, but it was written in stone.
*** THOU SHALT NOT BET UPON BASEBALL ***
Rose decided that it meant, "unless you really, really want to". Sucks
to be him, but he knew the rule.
I'm with Eric and Floyd. I agree with all of you about juicing.
I also think Rose is an unsavory character, but hey so was Ty Cobb. Rose bet on baseball and he knew that was the One Thing that MLB didn't want. The Black Sox moment was maybe a make or break for the game as far as legitimacy.
Yes, indeed, on all three points.
Post by RMJon23
At the same time, even if Rose never makes it to the HoF, we all know that mutha was one stupendously great player.
He sure was fun to watch..
Post by RMJon23
Johnny: Shoeless Joe hit over .400 that Series, right? To paraphrase Ring Lardner, I could look it up.
Here, you lazy you :-D

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/jacksjo01.shtml

Loading...