Royals Who would you vote for on the Contemporary Era ballot?

The National Baseball Hall of Fame has its Contemporary Era Committee's vote on eight candidates this Sunday at the Baseball Winter Meetings in San Diego. This is the modern day Veterans Committee for those familiar with the HOF. All eight candidates have fallen off the writer's ballot.

A candidate must receive 75% for induction into the Hall of Fame. Voters can't vote for more than three.

Who would you vote for?
[Reply]

Bonds, Clemens, and Schilling.

Just bizarre that the first two never got in while David Ortiz did.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Bonds, Clemens, and Schilling.

Just bizarre that the first two never got in while David Ortiz did.

Rob Manfred essentially said that Ortiz's positive test during the 2003 exploratory testing, which was reported by the New York Times, was essentially a false positive because there was no process for him to refute the result. Tom Verducci, a steroid hardliner, used this proclamation by the Commish to make an exception for Ortiz and vote for him.

I totally agree it's bullshit.

Ortiz is an ambassador for Boston baseball. He used the political game to his advantage. He's beloved. Bonds and Clemens are villains and have become the pariahs of the steroid era.
[Reply]

Murphy, Mattingly
[Reply]

Bonds, Clemens, McGriff
[Reply]

Originally Posted by the steam:
Murphy, Mattingly

Both were the best players in their respective leagues at one point in their careers, which should count for something. They were also high character players.

The Contemporary Era ballot for the Hall of Fame will be voted on this Sunday ⚖️

BK digs in and serves up some Cooperstown justice on three players he thinks are deserving of entry. #MLBNow pic.twitter.com/V9hhxVlLpy
— MLB Now (@MLBNow) November 28, 2022

[Reply]

Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Bonds, Clemens, and Schilling.

Just bizarre that the first two never got in while David Ortiz did.

Those three are white.
[Reply]

Murphy and Mattingly.
[Reply]

Pete Rose for sure.
[Reply]

Bonds, Clemens, Schilling

If Ortiz got in, then Bonds and Clemens should too. Bonds is the greatest hitter in baseball. Schilling is getting fucked over because of his off field political views.
[Reply]

The only people on that list that deserve any consideration are Mattingly, Murphy, and McGriff.

The rest of them can go make their own HoF for roided up pieces of shit.
[Reply]

Only Mattingly...

Murphy: Rather pedestrian numbers to me ---> .265 BA, striking out 1 of every 5 ABs, just under 1,000 walks, only 5 seasons with 100+ RBIs, & no post-season highlights
[Reply]

Cheating shouldn't be a long-term win, so no cheaters allowed.

That said, do steroids help pitchers as much as they do batters?
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Ocotillo:
Rob Manfred essentially said that Ortiz's positive test during the 2003 exploratory testing, which was reported by the New York Times, was essentially a false positive because there was no process for him to refute the result. Tom Verducci, a steroid hardliner, used this proclamation by the Commish to make an exception for Ortiz and vote for him.

I totally agree it's bullshit.

Ortiz is an ambassador for Boston baseball. He used the political game to his advantage. He's beloved. Bonds and Clemens are villains and have become the pariahs of the steroid era.

Asking a Red Sox Exec to manage the steroids investigation was so ludicrous
[Reply]