Palmiero tests positive for steroids? - Page 11

Jack of Arcades · #**101** 08-01-2005, 04:16 PM

Because there's nothing worse in any sport than when a game is thrown.

Patrick del Poker Grande · #**102** 08-01-2005, 04:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
What Rose did was worse in many ways, but he did not undermine his individual stats with his wrongdoing. Taking steroids invalidates career accomplishiments IMO. So neither should be in the hall, but for different reasons. Rose is a better candidate for the hall of course, although I would sooner let palmiero work for a team, which my understanding of the ban from baseball prevents Rose from doing.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with all of this, with the option to haggle over which is exactly "worse". They are each worse in different ways.

trying2learn · #**103** 08-01-2005, 04:19 PM

but you know the sport as well as anyone, and you HAVE to know that Pete would never throw a game.

the problem comes because he would only bet on them on days when he thought he had a good chance to win...still horrible, and I don't want him in the hall of fame, but to his credit - he never would have thrown a game. he was quite possibly the most competitive to ever play the game.

the difference between the two to me - is that Pete did a ton with not much talent, palmeiero did a ton with not much talent and a bunch of juice.

Jack of Arcades · #**104** 08-01-2005, 04:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
but you know the sport as well as anyone, and you HAVE to know that Pete would never throw a game.

the problem comes because he would only bet on them on days when he thought he had a good chance to win...still horrible, and I don't want him in the hall of fame, but to his credit - he never would have thrown a game. he was quite possibly the most competitive to ever play the game.

the difference between the two to me - is that Pete did a ton with not much talent, palmeiero did a ton with not much talent and a bunch of juice.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the fact is, it brings up the possibility. If Pete Rose builds up a gambling debt, what do you think the bookies are going to suggest?

It introduces people associated with gambling WAY too closely to the heart of the game. The worst thing to ever happen the baseball was the 1919 scandal. Bringing in bookies only helps to increase the chances of that happening again.

West · #**105** 08-01-2005, 04:31 PM

Thanks for the link. Regardless of the accuracy of the mumbo jumbo they are claiming, I don't believe their conclusion, "It is quite unlikely that corking the bat will produce any appreciable effect, either of a beneficial or a detrimental nature, on the distance of a long fly ball. It is likely to result in higher batting averages for contact-type hitters."

Even if the distance gained by hitting a fly ball with increased bat speed is exactly offset by the loss of weight/mass, I think the increase in bat speed/bat control is going to give the hitter a better chance of making "better contact" and thus he is going to be more likely to "get a hold of one", and thus, corked bat=more home runs. Again, if it didn't actually help, I think players would know. I suspect that their conclusion that it would only help "contact type hitters" is highly dubious.

BeerGolfPoker · #**106** 08-01-2005, 04:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
but you know the sport as well as anyone, and you HAVE to know that Pete would never throw a game.

the problem comes because he would only bet on them on days when he thought he had a good chance to win...still horrible, and I don't want him in the hall of fame, but to his credit - he never would have thrown a game. he was quite possibly the most competitive to ever play the game.

the difference between the two to me - is that Pete did a ton with not much talent, palmeiero did a ton with not much talent and a bunch of juice.

[/ QUOTE ]

While it is certainly true that Rose was one of the most competitive players ever, and if I HAD to guess I'd say he probably didn't bet against his own team, don't underestimate the power a gambling addiction can have.

Cubswin · #**107** 08-01-2005, 04:58 PM

Diehard cubs fans know the history between Sandberg and Palmeiro... what timing on this news coming out a day after Sandberg gives a speech about players respecting the game....

alta_chuttes · #**108** 08-01-2005, 05:07 PM

is this really more than an out of contol rumor? I know sandberg got divorced and raffy traded but is that generally regarded as why in chicago?

Cubswin · #**109** 08-01-2005, 05:14 PM

i know someone who worked for the cubs back then.... and it was not a rumor. raffy was boning cindy sandberg. do your eally think he was traded because they thought mark grace would end up a better power hitter then raffy???

mrbaseball · #**110** 08-01-2005, 05:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The worst thing to ever happen the baseball was the 1919 scandal

[/ QUOTE ]

In a way it was the best thing that could have happened. They brought in Landis and cleaned things up and turned it around. Of course Ruth helped too.

If MLB only had the balls to bring in a Judge Landis type now to clean up this juicing crap and really lay down the law. But it won't happen. Too much money involved. And that damn union. We can only hope all juicers get their records asterisked (*known steriod abuser) and absolutely no consideration for the hall. I think that most juicers will not get HOF admission because the writers are a picky bunch and enough of them will just say no.