Appreciating Omar

[7foot3]

I'd think that Vizquel's great defensive play during the steroid era will prove to be viewed positively rather than negatively. Plenty of the old school voters - the purists and the players already in the HOF - hate the fact that steroid users now dominate the record books. Voting in a guy who played defense rather than hitting for 50+ home runs sends the message these old school guys want: Respect the game, play the right way.

I agree that the writers will think this way. Of course, this incorrectly assumes that steroids == hitting home runs. We have as many positive tests for Vizquel as we do for Bonds. Small guys like Alex Sanchez got busted, out of shape-looking guys like Rafael Betancourt too. And players in Smith's era (and before) were popping greenies left and right.

Also, while again I agree that the writers will think like you said, I think that defensive achievements should be scaled back some compared to the past. There are more at bats that result in home runs and strikeouts than there were 30 years ago, meaning it was more important (even if it was only worth a couple extra runs) back then to put out a good glove than it is today.

EDIT: And to make it clear, I'm not saying Vizquel shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame. But he wasn't Smith's equal offensively, and I can't stand the idea that we're just going to make random guesses on every player since Canseco came around, and ignore any drug problems MLB had before then. These will be the arguments used for Vizquel, but I think they're bad ones. There are good ones out there.

[Doc Shakalou]

Best play that I seen Omar make was as a young 20 year old Seattle Mariners fan living in Rochester...Chris Bosio pitching a no hitter against the Red Sox. I'm listening to the game from some station in Hartford, flipped it on after coming home from work. No hitter thru 5, 6,7,thru 8. ESPN flipped to no hitters back then and well...go to the 1:45 mark...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnjvlAWEI7o

Sure fire hall of famer. And he goes in with an Indians cap.

Saw.

[sgm405]

I just don't have respect for it. It's cheating the system. You can't go around pounding on shit while keeping a wife around to come home to in the offseason. And the girl isn't going to turn down a star athlete and millions of dollars, sort of puts them in a predicament.

I can respect your opinion on that...I'm just saying that 90% of professional athletes do it, their wives know they do it, and they choose to stick with their husbands...and it is a CHOICE for these women. If you don't respect a guy who does that, you're going to have trouble finding a favorite athlete.

[macbdog]

Player A

Career - .272 AVG, .336 OBP, .352 SLG, .688 OPS, 2877 H, 80 HR, 951 RBI, 1445 R, 404 SB, 11 Gold Gloves
162 Game Average - .272 AVG, .336 OBP, .352 SLG, .688 OPS, 157 H, 4 HR, 52 RBI, 79 R, 22 SB

Player B

Career - .262 AVG, .337 OBP, .328 SLG, .666 OPS, 2460 H, 28 HR, 793 RBI, 1257 R, 580 SB, 13 Gold Gloves
162 Game Average - .262, .337 OBP, .328 SLG, .666 OPS, 155 H, 2 HR, 50 RBI, 79 R, 37 SB

Player B, Ozzie Smith, was a 1st ballot Hall of Famer. Player A, Vizquel, has similar, possibly even superior offensive numbers and is very close defensively.

I can see Omar not getting in his first time on the ballot. But if he doesn't get in at all I'll be disappointed...he was just as good as Ozzie, he just had the misfortune of playing in the same offensive-shortstop-driven time period as Jeter, A-Rod, Nomar, etc.

Best because an exception was made once doesn't mean you make it again. Folks have tried to use Ozzie as a paradigm for Omar, but i don't see how. Two different eras, two different sets of expectations. Ozzie was awful offensively in an era when most shortstops were. Omar was awful offensively in an era when shortstop was becoming an offensive position. Being marginally better doesn't make up for being the worst offensive regular in several of his seasons. Ozzie got in because of the fame factor. Like it or not, Omar doesn't have it. That withstanding, you have to go based on numbers, and Omar fails that. Just because voters and fans overlooked Ozzie's poor bat doesnt mean that every slick fielding SS to come after needs to be elected. Omars best bet is a lifetime achievement election based on his longevity. He may get it , he's may not, but just because Ozzie got elected doesn't mean Omar's offense gets ignored.

[Dave K]

I can respect your opinion on that...I'm just saying that 90% of professional athletes do it, their wives know they do it, and they choose to stick with their husbands...and it is a CHOICE for these women. If you don't respect a guy who does that, you're going to have trouble finding a favorite athlete.

its a choice for a woman just like it is for rhianna to stick with chris brown. Weakness shouldnt be confused with some new age, evolved stance on marriage. These girls aren't happy

[MoFlo]

I can respect your opinion on that...I'm just saying that 90% of professional athletes do it, their wives know they do it, and they choose to stick with their husbands...and it is a CHOICE for these women. If you don't respect a guy who does that, you're going to have trouble finding a favorite athlete.

Not to derail the thread, but I guess I don't have a favorite athlete. I have absolutely zero respect for a guy who cheats and/or beats on his wife/gf/whatever (Not saying Omar did the latter, just sayin'). Just because "every athlete does it" or "the opportunity is there everyday" doesn't make it right in the least bit. As dave alluded to, choice doesn't always just come down to whether or not they want to be in that situation.

Anyway, back on topic, I've always loved Omar & his play. In a lot of ways, he was the heart & soul of those Indians teams with the way he played the game.

[Bill Walton.]

http://baseballhall.org/news/museum-...-biggest-honor

2013 BBWAA Candidates
Candidate

MLB seasons

Yrs on BBWAA ballot
Sandy Alomar Jr. 1988-2007 1st
Jeff Bagwell 1991-2005 3rd
Craig Biggio 1988-2007 1st
Barry Bonds 1986-2007 1st
Jeff Cirillo 1994-2007 1st
Royce Clayton 1991-2007 1st
Roger Clemens 1984-2007 1st
Jeff Conine 1990, 1992-2007 1st
Steve Finley 1989-2007 1st
Julio Franco 1982-94, 1996-97, 1999, 2001-07 1st
Shawn Green 1993-2007 1st
Roberto Hernandez 1991-2007 1st
Ryan Klesko 1992-2007 1st
Kenny Lofton 1991-2007 1st
Edgar Martinez 1987-2004 4th
Don Mattingly 1982-95 13th
Fred McGriff 1986-2004 4th
Mark McGwire 1986-2001 7th
Jose Mesa 1987, 1990-2007 1st
Jack Morris 1977-94 14th
Dale Murphy 1976-93 15th
Rafael Palmeiro 1986-2005 3rd
Mike Piazza 1992-2007 1st
Tim Raines 1979-2002 6th
Reggie Sanders 1991-2007 1st
Curt Schilling 1988-2007 1st
Aaron Sele 1993-2007 1st
Lee Smith 1980-97 11th
Sammy Sosa 1988-2005, 2007 1st
Mike Stanton 1989-2007 1st
Alan Trammell 1977-96 12th
Larry Walker 1989-2005 3rd
Todd Walker 1996-2007 1st
David Wells 1987-2007 1st
Rondell White 1996-2007 1st
Bernie Williams 1991-2006 2nd
Woody Williams 1993-2007 1st

a lot of guys on that list I grew up watching. would love to see Kenny and Sandy make it in


says numbers to how great the Indians were in the 90s. A ton of ex-Indians on that list

[Randolphkeys]

I agree that the writers will think this way. Of course, this incorrectly assumes that steroids == hitting home runs. We have as many positive tests for Vizquel as we do for Bonds. Small guys like Alex Sanchez got busted, out of shape-looking guys like Rafael Betancourt too. And players in Smith's era (and before) were popping greenies left and right.

Also, while again I agree that the writers will think like you said, I think that defensive achievements should be scaled back some compared to the past. There are more at bats that result in home runs and strikeouts than there were 30 years ago, meaning it was more important (even if it was only worth a couple extra runs) back then to put out a good glove than it is today.

EDIT: And to make it clear, I'm not saying Vizquel shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame. But he wasn't Smith's equal offensively, and I can't stand the idea that we're just going to make random guesses on every player since Canseco came around, and ignore any drug problems MLB had before then. These will be the arguments used for Vizquel, but I think they're bad ones. There are good ones out there.

Well, I don't think we can turn a blind eye to the correlation between steroid use and increased power numbers. You can try to play the "Bonds never got convicted" game with me, but I'm a Giants fan and follow the team daily. Ummm, everyone knows he was juicing and that he had friends go to jail for him rather than testify against him. I'd imagine they are going to be very financially comfortable when they get out of jail.

Brady Anderson admitted to juicing when he pulled a 50 homer season out of his ass, then went right beck to sucking when he got off the juice. Sosa and McGuire quantified their power numbers on the juice. Now I'd say these guys were all great hitters before the steroids, but performance enhancers did, in fact, enhance performance.

I also agree that there are better arguments for Vizquel aside from the steroid issue. His defensive records at a defensive position will eventually get him in. I just hope it isn't a Bert Bryleven situation where he has to wait an inordinate amount of time for no good reason.

[7foot3]

Well, I don't think we can turn a blind eye to the correlation between steroid use and increased power numbers. You can try to play the "Bonds never got convicted" game with me, but I'm a Giants fan and follow the team daily. Ummm, everyone knows he was juicing and that he had friends go to jail for him rather than testify against him. I'd imagine they are going to be very financially comfortable when they get out of jail.

Brady Anderson admitted to juicing when he pulled a 50 homer season out of his ass, then went right beck to sucking when he got off the juice. Sosa and McGuire quantified their power numbers on the juice. Now I'd say these guys were all great hitters before the steroids, but performance enhancers did, in fact, enhance performance.

I also agree that there are better arguments for Vizquel aside from the steroid issue. His defensive records at a defensive position will eventually get him in. I just hope it isn't a Bert Bryleven situation where he has to wait an inordinate amount of time for no good reason.

First off, Anderson never admitted to juicing. Despite that, let's presume that he actually was juicing in 1996. Brady Anderson was picked in the 10th round of the MLB draft, and spent more than a couple years in the minors, including significant time bouncing back and forth between AAA and the majors. He then proceeded to put up pretty pedestrian numbers for his first few years in the majors. Despite the fact that he could have significantly benefited, say getting picked higher, moving through the minors quicker, or putting up big numbers in the majors immediately, in any of the 10 or so years prior to his usage, he decided to pass. Then one day, at 32, coming off one of his better seasons, he realizes how much steroids can help him. He takes them and puts up monster numbers. The next year, the last year of his contract, he decides to get off them and go back to being just a pretty good hitter. Of all the time for Anderson to use steroids, he probably chose the worst one possible. And it's not like he would have gotten caught, no one was.

The mountain of evidence suggests one, and only one, thing. Steroids did not make Anderson the hitter he was in 1996. If they did do that, he would have certainly used them in 1997, his contract year, and almost certainly would have experimented with them before when he had to deal with being a lower round pick and riding around on the AAA team bus. To assume that Anderson only used steroids in 1996 is laughable.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Sosa and McGuire [sic] quantified their power numbers on the juice". I don't think quantify is the verb you mean to use there. I'm assuming you mean something like "boosted". Sure, PEDs probably make you a better ballplayer, but considering that the pitchers juiced too, and ballparks getting smaller, and the livening of the ball, there's a lot of factors flying around here, and we should at least try to pin some things down and not just go "steroids = home runs". I'd love to see that study that shows the correlation between steroid use and home runs, because the fact of the matter is that we have no idea who was using before the current system was put in place, and that positive tests since then show that at least as many pitchers are using as hitters, and that smaller, skinnier hitters are using as frequently as the big boppers. If we dig a little deeper, it seems that there actually isn't much correlation between steroids and home runs. Steroids show up all over the place in MLB, and not just home run hitters.



All that said, the best argument for Vizquel is that it's a hall of fame, and not merit. Based on his total value between the lines, I don't see how he makes it. But he has certain intangibles, and contributed enough to the popularity of the sport that I have no problem giving him the boost necessary to get over the top.

[Dave K]

youre out of your goddamned mind if you dont think steroids = homeruns. Pitchers throwing faster doesnt mean the ball doesnt go as far. And the disparity between homerun leaders 15 years ago vs. now is terrific.

Everyone. EVERYONE was on steroids. They still are! Lance Armstrong just got busted. one of his teammates said out of 20 bikers, 20 of them all would have tested positively in general.

[Bill Walton.]

Steroids can also mean withstanding injuries and healing faster. Obviously steroids helped boost numbers but the same argument could be made for avoiding injuries. Because less injuries = more at bats.

[7foot3]

youre out of your goddamned mind if you dont think steroids = homeruns. Pitchers throwing faster doesnt mean the ball doesnt go as far. And the disparity between homerun leaders 15 years ago vs. now is terrific.

Everyone. EVERYONE was on steroids. They still are! Lance Armstrong just got busted. one of his teammates said out of 20 bikers, 20 of them all would have tested positively in general.

No doubt steroids lets you heal quicker, and hit the gym harder. But there are enough guys who have been busted who can't hit home runs that it's just not that simple. There are other factors we have observed, like I said above - smaller parks and livelier balls, and also a couple expansions. And oddly enough, home runs are only up by one per team, 166 to 165 compared to 15 years ago. They peaked around 2000, which had about 190 per team. Meanwhile MLB didn't put testing into place until 2004. HRs per team in 2003 - 174, 2004 - 182. HRs dipped down in 2010 and 2011 to ~150 per team (but were still 168 in 2009) before bouncing back up again this year. Steroids certainly could help you hit home runs, but I'll be damned if you find any sort of correlation here.

[sgm405]

its a choice for a woman just like it is for rhianna to stick with chris brown. Weakness shouldnt be confused with some new age, evolved stance on marriage. These girls aren't happy

How do you know they aren't? I'm sure some are fine with not working and doing their own "side" thing at home.

Back to Omar now though...