May 14, 200917 yr http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4166083 Great thing for A-Rod, who else would you rather have in your corner during a HOF discussion? :ohbrother:
May 14, 200917 yr Rose knows that if one guy gets in the Hall of Fame that was on steroids. There is no way that he should not be allowed.
May 14, 200917 yr Pete Rose believes players who use steroids commit a transgression far worse than his admitted betting on the game ... Of course he does ... ------------------------ He later went on to say that steroid use is worse than someone such as himself betting on his own team to win. Fair argument, but the facts are that Major League baseball has had strong rules against gambling on the game for decades, and the rule is posted in every clubhouse. Baseball had no rules on steroids at the time that Rodriguez has admitted to using them. ------------------------- "When you take steroids you have a direct outcome of the game," Rose said. "That's the integrity of the game. And when you can change records when you do something illegal, it's just not right. ... Baseball records are sacred. If you do something illegal to surpass those records, it's just not good." Pete Rose, lecturing about integrity ... oh, that's rich. As I've pointed out elsewhere, Rose had a huge advantage in setting his hits record ... as player-manager, he had the power to put himself into the starting lineup. Edited May 14, 200917 yr by westsider
May 14, 200917 yr I've often heard the argument advanced that Rose only bet on his own team, so that made it okay. What about the (many, many, many) times that he didn't bet on his own team? What are the implications? I think that many of the power hitters from the "steroid era" will be inducted, in due course.
May 14, 200917 yr As I've pointed out elsewhere, Rose had a huge advantage in setting his hits record ... as player-manager, he had the power to put himself into the starting lineup. Come one Westsider. That's one of the weakest arguments I've ever seen you make. Pete only needed around 130 hits to reach 4192 when he came back to Cincinnati. He hit .365 from August till the end of the season in 84, and then hit .264 with an OBP over .390 in 85. He platooned himself with Tony Perez at 1B that year. Go back, and take a look at the roster. Who was going to play in front of him?
May 14, 200917 yr Come one Westsider. That's one of the weakest arguments I've ever seen you make. Pete only needed around 130 hits to reach 4192 when he came back to Cincinnati. He hit .365 from August till the end of the season in 84, and then hit .264 with an OBP over .390 in 85. He platooned himself with Tony Perez at 1B that year. Go back, and take a look at the roster. Who was going to play in front of him?I've stated my case in another thread. Rose had a .319 slugging percentage. That's atrocious for a SS and Rose was playing 1B, which is supposed to be a position that produces a lot of offense. Nick Esasky should have played 1B with Gary Redus and Eric Davis getting more time in the outfield. It's not a weak argument at all. Rose played himself over better players to get to the record and for a team that finished just 5 1/2 games out of first place.
May 14, 200917 yr I've stated my case in another thread. Rose had a .319 slugging percentage. That's atrocious for a SS and Rose was playing 1B, which is supposed to be a position that produces a lot of offense. Nick Esasky should have played 1B with Gary Redus and Eric Davis getting more time in the outfield. It's not a weak argument at all. Rose played himself over better players to get to the record and for a team that finished just 5 1/2 games out of first place. It is a terribly weak argument IMO.
May 14, 200917 yr It is a terribly weak argument IMO.What is weak about it? You think Rose should have played over those guys?
May 14, 200917 yr Of course Rose thinks AROD should get a second chance.... It;s the only way he gets in.
May 14, 200917 yr What is weak about it? You think Rose should have played over those guys? You arguing the last 130 hits of a guy who already had over 4,000 is extremely weak.
May 14, 200917 yr You arguing the last 130 hits of a guy who already had over 4,000 is extremely weak.So ... you're not challenging my point?
May 14, 200917 yr I've stated my case in another thread. Rose had a .319 slugging percentage. That's atrocious for a SS and Rose was playing 1B, which is supposed to be a position that produces a lot of offense. Nick Esasky should have played 1B with Gary Redus and Eric Davis getting more time in the outfield. It's not a weak argument at all. Rose played himself over better players to get to the record and for a team that finished just 5 1/2 games out of first place. Was Rose the GM also? How many days was Eric Davis on the roster? Everyone knows why Marge Schott brought Pete back to Cincinnati. Do you honestly think she was going to let him not play himself, and lose millions of dollars in ticket sales? By the way westsider, why don't you tell everybody how many hits Ty Cobb had as a player/manager? What a huge, huge advantage he had to pad his numbers. :sssh:
May 14, 200917 yr Was Rose the GM also? How many days was Eric Davis on the roster? Everyone knows why Marge Schott brought Pete back to Cincinnati. Do you honestly think she was going to let him not play himself, and lose millions of dollars in ticket sales?It says a lot about Marge Schott, doesn't it? Eric Davis was a year away from breaking out. He had already played a bit in the majors in 1984 and he was the top prospect in the Reds' organization. Esasky and Redus were also much more productive players than Rose at the time. So ... Rose reaching the hit record was more important than the team's ability to put their best players on the field? By the way westsider, why don't you tell everybody how many hits Ty Cobb had as a player/manager? What a huge, huge advantage he had to pad his numbers. :sssh:Big difference ... Cobb was still a very productive player, one of the better ones in the league, when he was a player-manager. Rose wasn't ... period.
May 14, 200917 yr It says a lot about Marge Schott, doesn't it? Eric Davis was a year away from breaking out. He had already played a bit in the majors in 1984 and he was the top prospect in the Reds' organization. Esasky and Redus were also much more productive players than Rose at the time. So ... Rose reaching the hit record was more important than the team's ability to put their best players on the field? Big difference ... Cobb was still a very productive player, one of the better ones in the league, when he was a player-manager. Rose wasn't ... period. You didn't answer any of my questions.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.