Sunday, January 03, 2010

Considering the Hall candidates - Mark McGwire

Mark McGwire

Pro - MCgwire was the dominant home run slugger of his era, the main attraction for a sport reeling from a strike in 1994. Along with baseball's Michael Jackson [well, that is who Sammy Sosa resembles these days], McGwire helped reinvorated the game with their home run hitting exploits back in 1998.

He hit 49 home runs as a rookie in 1987.

He finished with 583 home runs and drove in 1414 RBIs.

His lifetime slugging percentage was .588 and his on-base percentage is .394.

Con - he may have always had the ability to hit for power, but through nine seasons and the age of 31, he only had 238 home runs, his lifetime batting average was .250 with only 834 hits.

After injuries in 1993 and 1994, which seemed to signify his Major League career was basically over - it was suspicious, he would enjoy a career surge seems suspicious for a guy who had all-star ability from the beginning of his Major League career, but not quite the sustained greatness expected from a potential Hall of Fame

There are fans, members of the media and baseball experts who probably believe while McGwire used something
- he never touched one PED that helped him put up seasons where he hit 39, 52, 58, 70 and 65 home runs from 1995 through 1999.

His reluctance to speak at the congressional hearing back in 2005 seems like a smoking gun as far whether or not he used - "I'm not here to discuss the past," or, "I'm here to be positive about this subject."

Yes/No - I'd lean towards 'no.'

Maybe the PEDS helped a player like McGwire sustain his health and a rational can be justified about wanting to be healthy to play a game one loves and is getting paid for
- on the other hand, any possible drug use may have propelled a player like McGwire's career into unnatural heights during the Steroid Era.

If baseball fans and the media are really interested in holding the players accountable for cheating
- someone like McGwire should probably be looked upon as the biggest fraud.

No comments: