ESPN Outside the Lines- New evidence that Pete Rose bet on baseball

[jncuse]

Apparently Next week's story "We have evidence that OJ killed Nicole"

Just when I thought they couldn't get any more useless.

 

[PeteCalvin]

Love that OTL team. Crack reporters they are. Still doesn't prove he bet AGAINST his team...but let's pretend he did.

 

[ImperialOrange]

Why are they searching for evidence of something he admitted? If they really want to go big they should dig into Michael Jordan's gambling habits and his suspension that was sold as him wanting to play baseball.

 

[jordoo]

My whole thing with Pete Rose is "in what way did his betting enhance his performance or statistics?" They will be letting guys in who took PED's but they are keeping a guy out who's rule breaking didn't really effect his performance unless he purposeless tanked which would hurt his performance not help it. I get why MLB and especially the players of his day are so mad at him. I'd never want a teammate doing that but again what does it have to do with being in the Hall of Fame? Keeping him out only makes the story bigger and keeps him in the baseball news more often if anything.

 

[donniesyracuse]

Still doesn't prove he bet AGAINST his team...

That distinction was never important to me. It still threatens the integrity of the game.

 

[PeteCalvin]

My whole thing with Pete Rose is "in what way did his betting enhance his performance or statistics?" They will be letting guys in who took PED's but they are keeping a guy out who's rule breaking didn't really effect his performance unless he purposeless tanked which would hurt his performance not help it. I get why bball and especially the players of his day are so mad at him. I'd never want a teammate doing that but again what does it have to do with being in the Hall of Fame? Keeping him out only makes the story bigger and keeps him in the bball news more often if anything.

Exactly. If you're going to let guys who used PEDs into the hall, then Rose and Shoeless Joe should be in too. Hell, OJ is still in the HOF, and the reasoning is that his athletic achievements as a RB are what got him in...and I have no problem with that stance. Kicking him out does nothing but give him more publicity. Just move his bust off the display. Kicking someone out of a HOF is like vacating titles and wins. What does it accomplish? Rose is the all time hitting champ. He had a nickname of Charlie Hustle. I don't think his gambling did anything to deter how he played the game...to WIN. There are proabably a ton of guys out there right now betting on the games, in all the leagues. It's time to put the Pete Rose saga to bed. Let him in the hall, don't invite him to speak, and be done with it. He's still making money off autographs, the they will still be worth something someday whether he's in or not. If PED guys get in, Rose should be in.

 

[jordoo]

That distinction was never important to me. It still threatens the integrity of the game.

I agree either way it effects the integrity of the game but you do realize that you are talking about a game who's integrity has always been extremely compromised and questionable. One pitch here or there, one whiff here or there, one bad ball/strike call here or there, one bad safe/out call here or there. That doesn't even touch on the history of cheating that has gone on in baseball. The most recent has been the PED's but lets be honest guys have been corking bats, taking amphetamines and doctoring balls since the beginning. I'd bet at least 25% (guessing thats way low) of the guys in the hall cheated in some way during their careers which compromised the integrity of the game. Its just funny because baseball of all sports has no integrity to me, they pretend to but really they don't. The only reason the Pete Rose betting thing is such a big deal is that betting shenanigans were a huge problem for baseball for a looooooooong time.

 

[PeteCalvin]

That distinction was never important to me. It still threatens the integrity of the game.

Fair enough. But so do PEDs.

 

[donniesyracuse]

My whole thing with Pete Rose is "in what way did his betting enhance his performance or statistics?" They will be letting guys in who took PED's but they are keeping a guy out who's rule breaking didn't really effect his performance unless he purposeless tanked which would hurt his performance not help it. I get why bball and especially the players of his day are so mad at him. I'd never want a teammate doing that but again what does it have to do with being in the Hall of Fame?

Fair enough. But so do PEDs.

I guess, but I think they are different. PEDs, corked bats, scuffing balls, are all done to give a player and a team an edge. The motivation is still to win the game and inevitably a World Series. Gambling changes the motivation in an individual game. Who knows how differently Rose might have managed a game in early July if he had money riding on it? Would he have used a reliever when he normally should have given him rest? Would he keep a pitcher in longer? He might sacrifice the long term success of the team in the interest of winning that game. When gambling is introduced, the team's and player's overall success might not be the most significant motivating factor; with PEDs and the like, success is still the goal.

Jordoo is right that gambling was disastrous to baseball near the turn of the 20th century. I think MLB's extreme stance on gambling should continue.

Another important point is that MLB and the Hall of Fame are separate entities. MLB has not said Rose cannot be in the Hall of Fame. The Hall of Fame just has a policy to not induct banned players.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Why are they searching for evidence of something he admitted? If they really want to go big they should dig into Michael Jordan's gambling habits and his suspension that was sold as him wanting to play baseball.

He never admitted to betting on baseball while he was playing, and that's what this evidence is saying. He's never going to get into the hall now, because given all the opportunities to come clean, he still keeps lying. Which makes you have to question whether he ever bet against his own team and did something to throw the game.

 

[jordoo]

I guess, but I think they are different. PEDs, corked bats, scuffing balls, are all done to give a player and a team an edge. The motivation is still to win the game and inevitably a World Series. Gambling changes the motivation in an individual game. Who knows how differently Rose might have managed a game in early July if he had money riding on it? Would he have used a reliever when he normally should have given him rest? Would he keep a pitcher in longer? He might sacrifice the long term success of the team in the interest of winning that game. When gambling is introduced, the team's and player's overall success might not be the most significant motivating factor; with PEDs and the like, success is still the goal.

Jordoo is right that gambling was disastrous to baseball near the turn of the 20th century. I think MLB's extreme stance on gambling should continue.

Another important point is that MLB and the Hall of Fame are separate entities. MLB has not said Rose cannot be in the Hall of Fame. The Hall of Fame just has a policy to no induct banned players.

That argument doesn't line up. You are basically saying that if anything Rose's gambling would have made his career numbers look worse while PED's and all the other cheating was to improve performance. So again why should they be in the HOF while Rose is not. The HOF should be about how you performed on the field and not having Rose in makes the whole thing a joke to me. He is one of the greatest hitters ever plain and simple. That should certainly qualify him for the HOF.

Of course MLB knows that the HOF doesn't consider banned players and that's why they banned him. So in my mind they are banning him not the HOF. Rose will be even more famous and have a longer lasting legacy because they kept him out. We all know who Shoeless Joe Jackson is only our grandparents would have been old enough to see him play.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

That argument doesn't line up. You are basically saying that if anything Rose's gambling would have made his career numbers look worse while PED's and all the other cheating was to improve performance. So again why should they be in the HOF while Rose is not. The HOF should be about how you performed on the field and not having Rose in makes the whole thing a joke to me. He is one of the greatest hitters ever plain and simple. That should certainly qualify him for the HOF.

Of course MLB knows that the HOF doesn't consider banned players and that's why they banned him. So in my mind they are banning him not the HOF. Rose will be even more famous and have a longer lasting legacy because they kept him out. We all know who Shoeless Joe Jackson is only our grandparents would have been old enough to see him play.

Part of Rose getting in is for his performance as a manager as well, and what Donnie is saying is completely right. Plus, there is still no way for us to believe he didn't tank games he had money on. Or even if his won them, maybe he did something to keep them from scoring additional runs so he could beat the spread, etc...

 

[jordoo]

He never admitted to betting on baseball while he was playing, and that's what this evidence is saying. He's never going to get into the hall now, because given all the opportunities to come clean, he still keeps lying. Which makes you have to question whether he ever bet against his own team and did something to throw the game.

I would say he surely did bet on his team, possibly against his team and possibly made managing decisions to help the team lose. The guy was so competitive on the field though that I find it hard to believe he could have ever brought himself to throw an at bat or make an error.

I'm not arguing what he did with the betting. I'm arguing that his miss deeds did not in any way improve his performance so his performance as one of the greatest hitters ever should get him into the HOF especially when they are letting guys who took PED's in and there is a long history of players being admitted that were known cheaters in ways that surely did enhance their on field performances.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I would say he surely did bet on his team, possibly against his team and possibly made managing decisions to help the team lose. The guy was so competitive on the field though that I find it hard to believe he could have ever brought himself to throw an at bat or make an error.

I'm not arguing what he did with the betting. I'm arguing that his miss deeds did not in any way improve his performance so his performance as one of the greatest hitters ever should get him into the HOF especially when they are letting guys who took PED's in and there is a long history of players being admitted that were known cheaters in ways that surely did enhance their on field performances.

What guys who took PEDs and admitted to it are getting in? Which ones specifically? Eventually they will let those guys in, but not yet.

I agree his exploits on the field were clearly good enough to get in, but he knew the rules, chose to break them, and then has lied about them for decades. It ain't happening.

 

[donniesyracuse]

He is not being left out of the hall of fame because his numbers are in question. He is left out because he broke the biggest law in baseball. You do not think it is a big deal; I do; agree to disagree.

 

[jordoo]

Part of Rose getting in is for his performance as a manager as well, and what Donnie is saying is completely right. Plus, there is still no way for us to believe he didn't tank games he had money on. Or even if his won them, maybe he did something to keep them from scoring additional runs so he could beat the spread, etc...

Then put him in as a player only and x out the years as a player/manager or just a manager. You guys are basically saying what he did was really bad but again if anything your argument makes the case that what he did limited his performance rather than enhance it. Its a moral judgement of one grip over another where mine is based on the logic of what did you do on the field and they have guys in the HOF who were known to break the rules specifically to enhance what they did on the field.

 

[jordoo]

What guys who took PEDs and admitted to it are getting in? Which ones specifically? Eventually they will let those guys in, but not yet.

I agree his exploits on the field were clearly good enough to get in, but he knew the rules, chose to break them, and then has lied about them for decades. It ain't happening.

Have they not put Bonds, Clemens, McGuire and their ilk in yet? I honestly don't follow it that much, I have to admit. When the best hitter isn't in there you have to wonder about the process after all.

There are tons of guys who knew the rules, broke them and made it to the HOF. Baseball hasn't banned any known admitted PED users. So they are eligible while they are blocking Rose from being eligible. The lying again to me is meaningless, I already know Rose is a jerk and a cheater so it doesn't matter. Again though bringing it up shows that a lot of this is moral judgement that what he did was worse than what others have done. I would tend to agree with that moral judgement but IMO it should have no baring on whether or not he was one of the best players ever specifically because his on field performance did not benefit from it.

 

[jordoo]

He is not being left out of the hall of fame because his numbers are in question. He is left out because he broke the biggest law in baseball. You do not think it is a big deal; I do; agree to disagree.

I think if thats the case than no rule breaker ever should be in there. If we are going to be sticklers about the rules then how can we pick and chose which rule breakers are allowed in and which are not. Every guy who ever doctored a baseball, corked a bat, took speed or any other banned substance.

 

[donniesyracuse]

It would not bother me if the hall of fame changed their policy and inducted him to honor his performance. They could do the same for Shoeless Joe.

I do not think MLB should lift Rose's lifetime ban. The ban and the hall of fame are separate issues to me.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Have they not put Bonds, Clemens, McGuire and their ilk in yet? I honestly don't follow it that much, I have to admit. When the best hitter isn't in there you have to wonder about the process after all.

There are tons of guys who knew the rules, broke them and made it to the HOF. Baseball hasn't banned any known admitted PED users. So they are eligible while they are blocking Rose from being eligible. The lying again to me is meaningless, I already know Rose is a jerk and a cheater so it doesn't matter. Again though bringing it up shows that a lot of this is moral judgement that what he did was worse than what others have done. I would tend to agree with that moral judgement but IMO it should have no baring on whether or not he was one of the best players ever specifically because his on field performance did not benefit from it.

None of them are in. Even guys who were rumored to be users have been kept out.

Election to the National Baseball Hall of Fame includes a number of rules, including No. 5, which reads: “Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.” Steroid use — or suspicion of it — is keeping players out of Cooperstown.

Integrity and character are keeping Rose out now.

 

[donniesyracuse]

I think if thats the case than no rule breaker ever should be in there. If we are going to be sticklers about the rules then how can we pick and chose which rule breakers are allowed in and which are not. Every guy who ever doctored a baseball, corked a bat, took speed or any other banned substance.

I don't believe all laws and rules need to be punished equally. I doubt you do either.

 

[jordoo]

I don't believe all laws and rules need to be punished equally. I doubt you do either.

No but the distinction was made in this thread that he knowingly broke the rule and thus should not be allowed. I was countering saying if that is the criteria then we need to get a lot of other guys out as well.

 

[jordoo]

It would not bother me if the hall of fame changed their policy and inducted him to honor his performance. They could do the same for Shoeless Joe.

I do not think MLB should lift Rose's lifetime ban. The ban and the hall of fame are separate issues to me.

I am actually fine with the idea of keeping him away from baseball. My issue is that the ban means he isn't eligible for the HOF.

 

[jordoo]

None of them are in. Even guys who were rumored to be users have been kept out.

Election to the National Baseball Hall of Fame includes a number of rules, including No. 5, which reads: “Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.” Steroid use — or suspicion of it — is keeping players out of Cooperstown.

Integrity and character are keeping Rose out now.

Interesting criteria and if going just by that it seems in the past that player's record and playing ability are the most highly rated because there are some pretty low character, integrity, sportsmanship guys in there right now. I have to say though you make an excellent point with this as a reason IF he had ever been on the ballot. The thing is he's blocked from the ballot because his play was so good he likely makes it even with all his other faults.

So they haven't voted any of those guys in yet and they have come up for consideration. That's pretty interesting. Do you think they will eventually get in? I mean they will start running out of players after a while since most on the ballot will all be at least suspected.

 

[jordoo]

One of the things going on here might be that I just don't care all that much about baseball. So for me this obvious breaking of the cardinal rule doesn't effect me as much as it does those who are big fans or played more in their youth.