He was slow and a terrible hitter.

He was never "clutch", well, I take that back...He did lead the league in GWRBI the one year it was tracked...But, then it was fou nd to be useless when GWRBI happened in the 1st inning of a 10-0 win!!!

I never saw one guy hit so many solo shots in my life!!!

Mark should not get in...Period!

The guy was THE power hitter that defined the late 80's into the 00's. His shots were majestic and a beauty to behold. And if not for injuries, he would be the one that Bonds is chasing down right now.

The guy hit 49 in his rookie season - and even if he did use (I believe he did) he was still head and shoulders above most of this convaluted era (Other era's are just as convaluted with other Performance enhancers).

I just love it when the old timers speak out against PED's when it was chronicled how often greenies were abused in the 60's... and the "Red Juice" elixir that Willie Mays used was displayed prominitely in his locker everyday.

It's a new generation - new PED's - and new backlash from hipocrytical legends of baseball past.

And this is not even bringing into discussion Cal Ripken - as Blez mentioned he was also accused by Canseco for the use of Steroids - but somehow he has maintained his squeaky clean image? Is it because he isn't known as one of the great power hitters? He is best known for his durability - and how many consecutive games would he have played without PED's? It's impossible to answer - but it's a fair question.

McGwire was never tested positive for breaking any Major League rules. Never did anything that put him in legal troubles - all he did was not talk - and by doing so ensured that he wouldn't be part of any Congressional hearings moving forward that would ask him to testify against his peers and friends about observations made in the sanctity of the Locker Room. I believe that this was ingeniuos on his part - and he has endured alot of criticism - but he wasn't trying to grab headlines or make a quick buck.

He is a class act - and the voters and congress need to get over their moral diatribes, and do the right thing here. They may not like him for not talking - but the man is a legend - and needs to be properly recognized as so.

it would be kind of ludicrous to prohibit the person who is probably going to hold the home-run record from HOF induction. As much as some of us dont like the drug-use, the scandals are forever going to be a part of baseball history. So let em all in.. put them in their own room or somethin'....

He was a 15 time All-Star, and even won 2 Gold Gloves.

The only way that he shouldn't be in the hall would have to result in a positive steroid test or indicment and prosecution of a felony related to his baseball past - all of which have never happened.

Hall Of Famer - WITHOUT A DOUBT!!!!

He is a disgrace.

Anyone who followed McGwire's career with the A's closely knows exactly when he started using. And also knows, then, that steroids and supplements made the guy. Period.

McGwire's career Bottomed out in 1991. It had steadily declined every year since his rookie year. By '91 he was a player who could still draw walks, but just didn't have any ability to hit for average. His power suffered as well; it was his first year in five that he didn't hit 30 homers, I think.

Then, everything changed. A near MVP season in '92. And then during injury riddled campaigns before leaving Oakland he had suddenly become a guy who was on everything at the plate. They all look like that--all the users--the incredibly quick bat speed, the discipline at the plate, the ability to just be on top of every pitch. Bonds, of course, in the apex of this.

But McGwire certainly had it, too. And so he began hitting homers at a rate that projected over a full season would break Maris' record. He also began hitting .300 consistently. He drew even more walks.

This portion of McGwire's career is about as real as the Bret Boone .300+ AVG., 30+ HR portion of his own career. It's as real as the portion of Bond's career when he was from another planet.

McGwire's Hall of Frame years are a product of chemistry. He doesn't even deserve to be in the conversation of Hall of Famers.

You can have more women on the side than McGwire had needles hanging from his posterior and not go to jail. But you did cheat.

Baseball writers should kick him and the rest of the cheaters out of the house and make them beg harder that Pete Rose in order to be allowed back in.

Why don't those games count?

And why isn't anybody talking about it?

If someone already mentioned this fact on this thread, I apologize, I didn't read the 150 previous threads.

I just want to know why this isn't important to the bloodsucking contoversy-loving media.  If I made my living on the misery of others, I'd jump on this.  Or mabye I'm making all of this up, and it never happened.

Anyhow, what Ripken did for the game, barring any minor involvement in the recent steroid scandal, is simply amazing.  He broke what plenty thought was an unbreakable record, and of course, smashed it.  2600 straight games.  No doubt, first ballot HOF.  His numbers are nice, but the streak is what gets him in.

McGwire is a tough sell, because I watched the congressional hearing hoping for far more than a weasel.  He's a weasel, and it's unfortunate.  In fact, I'd hold him out just for being such an ass during the hearing.  I think it's clear he was juiced to a ridiculous level, and his numbers can't be the only deciding factor.  If you think his numbers were ill-gotten, then you can't vote for him.

Steroids do not make you a Hall of Fame hitter.  Being a Hall of Fame hitter makes you a Hall of Fame hitter.  Steroids give you the capacity, if you will, to grow your muscles.  So yes, with disciplined training and rigorous workouts, you can grow larger muscles.  None of which is going to hit you 500+ (whatever he ended up hitting) homeruns. And don't discount Canseco's brutal honesty: Big Mac had the best swing he'd ever seen, and hit those first 49 without his buddy's needle.  

It's easy to tag people a cheater, call them immoral and a bad influence.  It's difficult, and ultimately more human, to really look beyond what your favorite columnist wrote and decide how YOU feel.  Of course, this is why we debate.  I want you to believe as I do. McGwire was, arguably, the best player of his steroid-tinged era... which is not to say that being steroid-tinged is really a huge deal.

A fellow was lecturing me on the just rewards for those who break the law.  He seemed to feel that any one who was in jail deserved to be there, and furthermore, they were being "coddled" while they were incarcerated.  He was of the opinion that they had it far to soft and needed to be punished by the system.  Apparently that involved intense physical labor while being deprived of television and a palatable diet.  He was particularly outraged over the idea of prisoners being afforded "civil rights" while the rights of their victims seemed to be relegated to the dust bin.  

About a month later an odd thing happened.  The mans son was out late one night hanging around with his friends, having a good time like young men are wont to do.  Alcohol was involved, as it so often is.  His son was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which several teenage girls were seriously injured.  One of them came very close to dying.  Of course his son was arrested and locked up in the county jail to await his opportunity for justice.  Remarkably the mans point of view concerning the law and civil rights underwent a remarkable transformation.  Suddenly he placed an emphasis on due process and actual evidence.  He was adamantly opposed to heresay evidence as there was a possibility that another young man was behind the wheel that night.  He damn sure wanted the "civil rights" of his son protected.  He was also concerned because he did not particularly care for the method of police interogation used on his son.  Something about his son being under the influence of alcohol and pain medication as a result of the accident.  Apparently it was important that his son understand that what he was saying would have legal ramifications.

Hopefully you guys get the point.  What is really at issue here is exactly what is this HOF?  Is it a sacrosanct temple where we enshrine the demi-gods of baseball?  Are we going to hold these men up as standard bearers of all that we hold sacred?

Or is it a place to note the remarkable achievements of mortals who played the game of baseball at a level above that of their peers?  Mark Maguire was a great baseball player.  He did great things on the field.  Adolph Hitler did great things.  Unspeakably evil, but great none the less.  So did Ghandi.  Things that inspired the world and made it a better place for his having passed through.  The difference lies in the story behind the men.  The HOF is nothing more than a repository for those who did great things on a baseball field.  Mac's story deserves to be told.  Let the listener judge the man within the context of his times.