Pete Rose.... in or out ?

#27
#27
Rasputin_Vol said:
Was it ever shown that he did that? Unless something has been revealed in the last 20 years or so, I last recall that his bets were in favor of the Reds.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard that argument. The problem with that is even if he’s only betting on the Reds to win, he still manages differently. Maybe he puts the closer in earlier, puts a guy in the lineup that really should take a day off, rides the starter a little further than he normally would, throws a reliever 3 days in a row, etc. In a long season, there are times when a manager has to think about tomorrow.
 
#32
#32
Out. At the very least, he must stop betting on baseball games. That should not be too much to ask
 
#34
#34
GroverCleveland said:
Out. He knowingly broke the rules.
Click to expand...

In. Do you know how many players have been inducted that knowingly broke one rule or another? Probably all of them. Hell, any pitcher that ever doctored the ball knowingly broke the rules.
 
#35
#35
GAVol said:
I’ve heard that argument. The problem with that is even if he’s only betting on the Reds to win, he still manages differently. Maybe he puts the closer in earlier, puts a guy in the lineup that really should take a day off, rides the starter a little further than he normally would, throws a reliever 3 days in a row, etc. In a long season, there are times when a manager has to think about tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Pete Rose only knew one way to play the game. All out. I think he probably managed that way too, regardless if he bet on the game or not. He played to win, always.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#38
#38
Off topic because everyone else is also, but Mark Grace was my favorite player growing up and I recently read he smoked cigs and drank beer before games.
 
#39
#39
GAVol said:
I’ve heard that argument. The problem with that is even if he’s only betting on the Reds to win, he still manages differently. Maybe he puts the closer in earlier, puts a guy in the lineup that really should take a day off, rides the starter a little further than he normally would, throws a reliever 3 days in a row, etc. In a long season, there are times when a manager has to think about tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Meh, I see what you're saying, but that is a very weak argument because the assumption is that he was making an extra effort to win a game... which I thought was the purpose of playing the game.? I guess I always thought you play to win, not play to lose.
 
#41
#41
Weezer said:
In. Do you know how many players have been inducted that knowingly broke one rule or another? Probably all of them. Hell, any pitcher that ever doctored the ball knowingly broke the rules.
Click to expand...

Okay, I will clarify. He broke the one rule that has, as far as I know, kept anyone in the history of the game out of the HOF.

Your second point about pitchers is wrong. At end of the dead ball era, there were a number of pitchers who relied on the spit ball. One of the astounding things about Cobb was his averages during a time when a pitcher's ERA hovering around 1.00 was not unusual.
 
#42
#42
I heard that Pete rose will be at a Knox high school (grace or Hardin valley, maybe?) soon for a meet and greet
 
#43
#43
Rasputin_Vol said:
Meh, I see what you're saying, but that is a very weak argument because the assumption is that he was making an extra effort to win a game... which I thought was the purpose of playing the game.? I guess I always thought you play to win, not play to lose.
Click to expand...
My other problem is that all he ever had to do was follow the path MLB laid out for him and he would’ve been reinstated. He chose to double down on his lie and spent years doing card shows and being a martyr. Then 15 years after the fact, he changed his story to get publicity for a book.

Frankly, it's not something that bothers me either way, I just don't think his "I didn't do it" or "Yeah, but look at those other cheaters" arguments he has tended to use are particularly compelling.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Creekcat, Plecoptera, zjcvols and 1 other person
#44
#44
GroverCleveland said:
Okay, I will clarify. He broke the one rule that has, as far as I know, kept anyone in the history of the game out of the HOF.

Your second point about pitchers is wrong. At end of the dead ball era, there were a number of pitchers who relied on the spit ball. One of the astounding things about Cobb was his averages during a time when a pitcher's ERA hovering around 1.00 was not unusual.
Click to expand...

Maybe I should have specified modern era pitchers.
 
#47
#47
GAVol said:
My other problem is that all he ever had to do was follow the path MLB laid out for him and he would’ve been reinstated. He chose to double down on his lie and spent years doing card shows and being a martyr. Then 15 years after the fact, he changed his story to get publicity for a book.

Frankly, it's not something that bothers me either way, I just don't think his "I didn't do it" or "Yeah, but look at those other cheaters" arguments he has tended to use are particularly compelling.
Click to expand...
That's ultimately what it comes down to. He isn't a HOFer because he didn't follow that path you described, not because he bet on games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Plecoptera
#48
#48
Rasputin_Vol said:
Meh, I see what you're saying, but that is a very weak argument because the assumption is that he was making an extra effort to win a game... which I thought was the purpose of playing the game.? I guess I always thought you play to win, not play to lose.
Click to expand...

Baseball is a 162 game marathon. You have to protect your players, pitchers specifically. You can’t just throw a reliever every night. He could have pressured players that was hurt or injured to play because he bet on the game. It’s downright shameful what he did as a manager. Not only that, he’d purposefully not bet on some games when a weaker starter was going, which presents its own problems also. What if they are down 2-1 but because he has no money on it he uses his worst reliever?

Either way, as GA stated, had he shown contrition and immediately accepted responsibility he’d be in the HOF. It’s Pete and only Pete’s fault he isn’t in.

(And he was overrated anyways)
 
  • Like
Reactions: GAVol and TBrown
#50
#50
In. As a player.

Prove he threw games like Joe Jackson and it's a different story. He didn't. Anybody who actually saw him play knows he gave all he had every single game and held his teammates accountable to do the same. With all the gambling that is accepted everywhere today, seems a bit over the top to hold him up as the bad boy.

In before the roids supporters bring up Bonds, Clemens, McGuire, Sosa, etc.

Schilling is not in because of his politics. So let's not paint the HOF as the paramount of baseball purity. There are some renegades and scoundrels in it already. Pete is one just like a number of others. His playing career justifies his inclusion.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top