Basketball and the Baseball Hall of Fame

The Wolves got whipped last night at OKC. I still like typing OKC but I did not like that game at all.

Better? The number 8 Gophers clobbered the 11th ranked Illini last night AT Illinois. The Gophers may move up in the rankings again. This is going to be a team I start watching for.

I should mention that the Gopher HOCKEY team is ranked number ONE in the country. I sure wish I liked hockey more. I tried watching the game against number 4-ranked Notre Dame on Tuesday night and simply had no interest. I'm hoping that IF the Wild are as good as projected this season that I can muster some interest there.

Onto better sports.


Baseball writers ignored everybody eligible yesterday for the Hall of Fame.

Now that would make sense if nobody good was eligible, but that simply wasn't the case. Guys like Biggio, Morris, and Bagwell had good stats while playing, and it could be argued that they were not good ENOUGH to make the Hall of Fame. I'll give you that. I don't think guys who are just "good" belong in the Hall.

But Sosa, Bonds, and Clemens WERE eligible for the FIRST time and they were won't voted in either.

Bonds (with the possible exception of Ruth) may be the best player of all-time. Roger Clemens is by far the best pitcher in the last 60 years.

I know the argument. They "cheated." Really? And your proof is...

See, that's the point. There is no proof that ANY of those three did PEDs knowingly. The old, uninformed sportswriters merely THINK these guys did something wrong because of the way they LOOK. If you're thinking the same thing right now ("are you nuts casual sports fan, of course they used steroids, just look at them") you are just as  ignorant as the ancient sports' writers.

My proof?

Just so you know, it's logically impossible to prove a negative. In other words you can't prove that Big Foot does not exist. You can only factually prove a positive. If someone ever finds a living, breathing Big Foot, you will have undeniable proof. But you can't do the opposite. By not finding him, you can't say he doesn't exist. It may simply mean that you haven't looked hard enough. You can make the assumption he's not real, but there's no way to ever prove that side of the argument.

So what's my "evidence?" I can only offer logical arguments to get you thinking differently. I'll start with two names for you, Bartolo Colon and Melky Cabrera.

Those two guys are the last two major league players to get nailed for PED use. Just LOOK at them, can't you just TELL they were using steroids?

Well, actually, no. If anything, both look out of shape and pudgy. You'd never dream that either of these players were doing PEDs. In fact, if they had GREAT careers and had never been caught, most sports writers would vote them in on a first round ballot because they LOOK like baseball players. I'm 53-years old and I LOOK in better shape than both of them. I'm not saying I'm in better shape, I'm saying I LOOK like I'm in better shape. My point to all of this is that LOOKS can be deceiving. (That's why I typed the word "LOOK" in capital letters every time I typed it in the last paragraph.)

Something wonderful was discovered in the world of sports 50 years ago, it was called weightlifting. Up until the early 1960's most athletes were told that if they lifted weights that they'd become slower, muscle-bound, and less flexible. That's why most never did it.

Baseball players were especially careful not to lift weights because they were afraid it would "affect their swing." But a few players, who were just average anyway, decided they had nothing to lose by at least trying. They either somehow got "better" or  they were going home. These guys were the pioneers. They did get stronger. They did get faster. They started becoming everyday regular players. And others noticed.

Before long, many of the players started lifting weights on a regular basis and the LOOK of a major league player started to change. Dare I say it? For the first time ever, baseball players actually started LOOKING like athletes. The better players, who started lifting even more actually started looking muscular.

There's STILL the mistaken notion out there that looking really muscular is achieved by simply doing steroids. If that were the case, most of the NFL would be suspended from playing the game, and football players would look like baseball players from the 1940's and 1950's.

Tim Tebow, at the beginning of the season, was caught running off the field with his shirt off. Did you SEE that picture. He's just a quarterback and he's built better than bodybuilders from the 1950s. This guy is only in his early 20s, he must be doing steroids, right? Well, no. And that's been my point all along.

If you have the genetics, and you train hard for a while, you can get really muscular, especially if you have a trainer that knows HOW to efficiently put all of that effort into maximum results.

Is Adrain Peterson a steroid-freak or is he a genetic-freak who trains better and harder than anyone else in the game?

Have you seen the movie Thor? Did you see the the first Dark Knight Batman movie? The actors in the lead roles didn't look like this from doing steroids. They trained. And they went from athletic-looking guys to huge rock-hard bodybuilders in a matter of MONTHS. The same goes for the actor who plays the lovable doughboy Andy (Chris Pratt) on Parks and Recreation. He transformed his look to play a special forces soldier in the new movie that shows how Osama Bin Laden was taken down. Again, the transformation was amazing AND he did it quickly.

My question to you is this: If football players can do it, and even ACTORS can do it, why can't baseball players?

Especially baseball players who are every bit as driven as Adrian Peterson?

I'm not saying that PEDs don't exist in pro sports. Someone would have to be naive to say that it never happens.

What I'm saying is that you can't tell by just looking. And if you can't tell by just looking, then you shouldn't let your own prejudices allow you to play judge, jury, and executioner for players who are merely guilty of LOOKING like athletes.

Biggio, Morris, and Bagwell ALL played in the steroid era, how do you, OR the sports writers, know that THEY didn't do steroids? Especially Bagwell, just LOOK at him. Look at his home run totals. If not for the strike shortened season, Bagwell might have broken Ruth's all-time single-season record before McGwire or Bonds. Bagwell left the game early because of injuries. Wasn't that the same reason that McGwire left? Doesn't heavy steroid use cause your body to break down?

The above paragraph was written with the same view that sports writers take when considering players for the Hall of Fame. They trust their eyes and their gut, which quite frankly is the very definition of prejudice.

Eventually SOMEONE else will be voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. And whoever it is will have played in the steroid era. That alone means that every single modern day player from now on will have to be suspected of steroid use. Short of a confession from the player himself we will never know.

Since that IS the case, and we can never be sure, greats like Sosa, Bonds, McGwire, Clemens, and Thome should be there, too.

Oops, did I say Thome? Well just LOOK at him...