Monday, August 01, 2005


After violating the league's drug policy, it'll be interesting to see what will happen to the support that had been building for Rafael Palmeiro in regards to his credentials for the Hall of Fame.

The whole story is here.

I'm going to do my little dance now: until they prove something definitive as far as how large an advantage is gained by using steroids, I think Palmeiro's accomplishments can't be erased, and on the merits of the numbers he is still worthy of the Hall of Fame.

But if I were to have a vote, would I have trouble voting him into the HOF?

Yep. Lots.

Raffy says "he didn't know", which of course is eerily similar to what Barry Bonds said, but the only ingredient missing is Bonds actually testing positive under a drug test. Say whatever you will beforehand and while your guilt is still unproven, but once the gig is up, please just admit it and deal with the backlash. Because it'll only be that much worse if you deny it -- no one will believe you.

So, after the media stir around Bonds has quieted to a large degree over the last couple of months and the struggle of the Giants who are actually playing this year had come to the fore, now it'll all start back up again -- the only difference, oddly enough, will be the resurgence of Jason Giambi, which of course should slow down the "he wouldn't have done any of that without steroids" argument just a bit, but of course will not slow it down at all.

Everybody, let's get together and have a group sigh.


Here we go again.


Gamesix said...

I'm thoroughly enjoying the tarnishing of the Raffy "legend"...the way I see it, this guy was nowhere near a first ballot hall of famer, was pretty much never even the best player on his OWN team, but had great big numbers with lots of zeroes next to them that blinded the masses. Hopefully, this sheds light on what is an unspectacular at best ball player, who stuck around long enough to put up some numbers.

Pops said...

Once again, Giants management have proven they care not one tiny little bit about winning a World Series Championship. They only want to be seen as "competitive in the Division", because that's the place with the most bang (butts in the seats) for the buck (non-management payroll). They have constantly traded interchangeable players whose flaws can be offset by strengths of other players in the hope that the whole will be greater than the sum. Look at the teams they put on the field. Every year they are picked 2nd, 3rd or 4th based on the players available, and every end-of-year we all agree they played their asses off, over-achieved -- and then we expect the team to be even better the following year. I've said it before, I'll say it again...the Giants are and have always been (except this year)a .500 team, by design. The only reason they move up or down in the standings is the relative strengths/weaknesses of the rest of the Division. Need proof? How many times have the Giants successfully competed in a playoff format? Success is defined as winning at least one playoff series and winning at least two games at the next level. The philosophical difference between the A's and the G's??? Money ball says go out and find players who will help you win. Sabean/McGowan ball says be seen changing parts on a team that will continue to sell-out the stadium...

Aaron said...

ok not sure how pops comment was relevant to Rafeal Palmeiro, but I guess he just needed to let of some steam. But just to respond the A's have not made it past the 1st round of the playoff in any of their last 3 appearences, and the Giants did make it to the WS, and were 6 outs away from winning it. And God I wish they did, not just because it would have been 10x as great as the 49ers winning the SB in '94, but so Giants fans would have less leverage to bitch about the last 3 years. Yeah they have sucked, '03 was a letdown against the fish, and last year was a let down not beating the 'Stros out. This year is of course much more painful, but given the fact the best player in the universe has, and now most likely won't, take a swing I don't see how Giants fans could have expected much better. Bonds has been the reason for our unlikely success,over the past 6 years. With him in the lineup this year, this team is most likely at .500 or maybe better. I can't believe Giants fans don't realize how much Barry affects every game outcome. Our record in one run games is 14-14 and in two run games 10-7. That's not bad but say w/ barry we go 18-10 and 12-5 instead. Then throw in a game or two where barry goes crazy or gets walked 4x and scores 3 runs. That brings our record right to .500. And guess what that leads the division. And of course that's not saying much, but it's 1st place instead of 4th and there are still 58 games left in the season, if we played .600 baseball the rest of the way our record would be 87-69, which is just 4 games worse than '04's 91-71. Taking into consideration the team era is 4.86(factoring in the final 58 games it probably wouldn't end up much less than 4.75) compared to last years 4.29 I'd say that's not to bad in such an off year for our pitching staff. Just look at our runs scored this year as well, currently 451 that projects out to 702. That's 148 runs less than last years total. I don't think you can say this year's non-barry lineup is that much worse than last years. It might actually be better w/ Alou replacing Tucker/Mohr and Vizquel for Cruz/Perez. Only A.J. and Grissom had better numbers in place of Matheny/Ellison but not by much. But still 148 less runs, that's staggering. I could go on but everyone would probably stop reading. My main point is stop the bitching, if you want a team with a moneyball philosophy be an A's fan. Maybe when Bonds leaves things will change, but as long as he's here this team will continue along the same path as the last 6 years.