Should Mark McGwire make the baseball hall of fame?

Question

I say he should. Steroid use is purely speculative, as he has never admitted it or tested positive for it.

tell me why he should or shouldn't and without mentioning steroids.

Didn't the homerun race between McGwire and Sosa save baseball after the strike season?

you are right he admitted to using Andro, which at the time was Legal in MLB.

Answer 1

Everyone is bringing up steroids; I don't care if he used them or not - he's NOT a Hall of Famer.

His numbers just aren't there; this is the "Hall of Fame" - not the "Hall of Guys who were fairly good at ONE aspect of a game when there's '5 Tools' behind true greatness."

To me, Big Mac had TWO "HOF" caliber seasons; 1996 and 1998. The guy played 15 years and all he could muster was ONE season over .300 in which he played over 90 games.

.300 is the mark of a 'good' hitter; not even great. Big Mac has a career average of .263; that's average-to-below-average; Big Mac was a BELOW AVERAGE contact-hitter - playing a position that wasn't at a premium defensively - that almost makes him a liability.

583 - his homerun total - is impressive. Very good. Prodigal; even. As is his 10.6 At Bats per Home Run(good for best all time).

But his strikeout totals are pretty 'impressive' too; if you like big numbers. He's 23rd all-time(1596). Which doesn't contrast very nicely with the fact that he isn't in the Top 100 for all-time at-bats - I don't know what he ranks in that; only that it's over 1500 less than the guy who is 100th (Bid McPhee, 8291). What I'm getting at: He strikes out too much to be a hall of famer.

So, he strikes out too much; he doesn't hit for average. He's not even top 5 in home runs - but that's not the worst of it.

He's a choker. He has a .217 career average in the post-season. His prodigal power becomes timid in the post season; 5 HRs in 129 ABs. That's ONE homerun for every 25.8 at-bats; Which is rather pedestrain. So, Big Mac turns into a Kid's Meal under pressure. Hall of Fame? Pshaw - David Eckstein is more of a HOFer once October rolls around. This is a guy they needed to count on; he was a key part of the batting order; called upon to produce - he didn't.

You want to enshrine someone who lived and died(judging by his Batting Average and Strike Outs, mostly died) by the Home Run - an overrated statistic, if you ask me - who can't buy a hit in the post season - into the Hall.

No; just no.

Answer 2

As a fan of Mark McGwire, I was disappointed and devastated when he didn't answer the questions put before him in congress. He should have answered yes or no, but as it is often said, the absence of a response, is normally the admittance of guilt. They say that steroids or any other muscle enhancing products doesn't make a home run hitter because it also requires eyesight and hand coordination. Well, if you are going to play the game of baseball, even in little league, you have to have both, but when you add muscle enhancing products, it makes a double into a home run. To put it more mildly, someone who is not on the "juice" would hit a ball to the wall, while someone on the "juice" would hit it over it. Mark Mcgwire didn't answer the questions. If he had said yes, there would have been time to forgive him for this. If he had said no, while there would still be people wondering if he did, at least he answered it, under oath. He does deserve to be in the Hall, but in my opinion, not as a first time ballot. I would vote for him, but not this year, maybe not even next year, after that more then likely.

Answer 3

lets put this into perspective. Breaking the rules set by the MLB association is really what we need to address. Mark was a great home run hitter and an average first baseman. Without getting into all the other crap. He deserves to go by home runs alone. Now on the other hand Pete Rose (aka Charlie Hussle) also set records in hitting and was a much better defenceman. But he also broke the rules handed down by MLB. So the question should read do you allow some guys in and keep some out, does it depend on what rule they broke? This needs to be addressed. I guess I got of coarse. I say yes but I think all the greats should be there no matter what they did off the field. We need to remember they are ballplayers and role models. They are also humane beings and make mistakes lioke everyone else.

Answer 4

Absolutely NOT. I think his testimony in the Senate hearings were quite clearly a confession. There is no place in baseball for steroids, and there is no place in the Hall of Fame for Mark McGwire. It is impossible to say why he should not without mentioning steroids. As far as his numbers go, he should.
But the Hall of Fame is about more than the numbers you put up. It is about playing the game as it is supposed to be played. Pete Rose should never be in the Hall of Fame either. There are many things which are forgivable, but betting on baseball and cheating are not.
End of story.

Answer 5

it's like this..............whether or not mark mcgwire took performance enhancing drugs doesn't even matter. from 1986 -2001, the years mark played baseball did not have a rule against steroids. how can you break a rule when there isn't one??? he has 560 career homers, he was one of the most popular players in the 1990's. if you deny him his place in the hall, deny everyone that played in the 1990's. you don't think cal ripken ever gave roids a shot once or twice? he was always hurt, needed to recover just to break a record he never could have broke if gehrig woudn't have gotten sick. okay back to big mac...........
you took a test in highschool that was open book. you scored an A. let's say 98 out of a 100. that grade gets you into the college you wanted the most. you graduate college and now have a great job. meanwhile, that same highschool, now bans open book tests. you got an A from an open book test, now the school wants to erase all of the grades obtained from open book tests. now your grades were illegally obtained, now your boss wants to fire you for cheating................................
baseball had no rule about not using steroids. they were not illegal in baseball. football had the same thing going on. they neglected this problem for years. don't blame the players.
every player that played in the 1990's probably tried steroids once. whether to heal from injury faster, to increase power or muscle, or just curiosity. except for john kruk and boomer wells. it's safe to say they never used.
big mac is more derserving of a first ballot election than lamo cal jr. cal was nothing special. a gimmick.
by the way, lou gehrig never had to switch positions in order to play everyday. if he was unable to play first, you know he never would have said, hey coach, put me in right. cal should have taken a seat the game before breaking lou's record. lou would have kept on going for atleast 5 or 6 more years. cal or anyone never could have touched that. and the whole time, he was winning championships. cal probably cost the orioles in the long run, playing hurt so much, costing his team games.
i'll put tony gwynn and big mac in this year. and mayb ehopefully, ron santo finally gets in. please put ron in. he is more derserving than any person eligible this year or any year.

Answer 6

If you do not mention steroids, that he definatley should.
He hit 70 HRs in the greatest HR race since Mantle/Maris in 1961.
He hit 568 career HRs.
He hit 49 as a rookie.
He had multiple 50 plus HR years.
So yes, without mentioning steroids, he should be in the HOF. But that is a huge w/o mentioning to leave out.

Answer 7

He may one day be elected into the HOF but not now. Your information is not exactly correct in that he did admit to a certain over the counter performance enhancing drug that at the time was not on the list of restricted HGH. It is now on the list. I think his greatest problem was during the senate hearings. It seems to me that if he had nothing to hide then the most logical answer to the steroid issue would have been......"No". He never said it and nearly broke out into tears due to the pressure of the moment.

As far as his stats, with the exception of home runs his numbers are very unremarkable. He was never more than an average fielder and played his prime home run years during the era of the "live" baseball.

There are ball players out there right now that are more deserving of the HOF than McGwire. Players such as Jim Rice, Dwight Evans, Goose Gossage, Lee Smith, Don Mattingly, Alan Trammell, Bert Blyleven just to name a few.

Answer 8

Absolutely. He is likely to have taken steroids. MLB and all sports in general if they want to take it seriously should have an intensive testing program. He was an incredible player on the field, and based on his performance should get elected. If he was allowed on the ballot. He should get elected. Do you know how many famous athletes have been on steroids but never got caught? Loads.

Answer 9

he was clearly juicing. I read juiced by Jose canseco and it had some facts that pretty clearly tell me he used steroids. he came into the league 220 and he set the rookie record for hrs with 49. needless to say he was a great hitter. He then became a monster. He weighed in at 270 with most of it in muscle in 1998 when he hit 70 hrs. 21 inch arms. You can't tell me he didn't use steroids with evidence like that.

Answer 10

Yes, there were so many players using illegal substances during that era. It is hard to say who was or wasn't. Are we now going to not let anyone between 1985-2000 in the HOF because they are potential roiders and were probably hyped up on meth? Easy to speculate, but hard to prove. That being said, Mark is a Hall of Famer.