Mike Greenwell demands 1988 MVP back from Canseco

moe.ron · #1 02-17-2005, 01:11 PM

Link to the Article

Talk about a random name from the past. Who will be the next random ex-baseball player to show up? Maybe Chris Sabo?

The1calledTKE · #2 02-17-2005, 01:22 PM

Mike Greenwell deserves it. He was only a good player for the Sox back in the day. 88 was his career year. Why should a cheater get the award when another player had just a good season and did it fairly?

KSigkid · #3 02-17-2005, 01:58 PM

Unfortunately, you can't just go back in history and start re-doing awards. If Jose was ineligible, who is to say all of those votes would have gone to Greenwell? Does Frank Thomas get one from the year Giambi won? Where do you draw the line?

If I were him I'd be upset about the whole thing, and it's not a good situation at all, but you can't go back correct what happened.

As an aside, that '88 Sox team had some other very good players. They had Wade Boggs, Roger, Mike Boddicker, Jim Rice, Ellis Burks, as well as a few others.

ETA: I love the Chris Sabo reference. Those goggles were out of control.

Steeltrap · #4 02-17-2005, 02:16 PM

In the Fort Myers News-Press article on Gator, there was a passage where he and Ellis Burks had a visit and talked about losing MVPs to 'roid users. Burks finished 3rd in the 1996 NL MVP voting behind the late Ken Caminiti, who admitted being on the juice.

KSig RC · #5 02-17-2005, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The1calledTKE
Mike Greenwell deserves it. He was only a good player for the Sox back in the day. 88 was his career year. Why should a cheater get the award when another player had just a good season and did it fairly?

It's hard to cheat by doing something that's not technically outlawed by the league. Canseco was a lot of things, but he wasn't technically a cheater.

Also, if you read the article, Greenwell really doesn't whine or beg - he's pretty candid about the situation.

Rudey · #6 02-17-2005, 03:30 PM

Darryl Strawberry is my hero.

-Rudey

BetteDavisEyes · #7 02-17-2005, 04:38 PM

Let's face it. It's the *asterisk* era. Whether they return the MVP awards or not is pointless. I don't think MLB will do that b/c by starting that trend, they'd then have to consider the possibility of giving the record back to Mark McGwire or even changing it back to 61 b/c we know Roger Maris did not juice up w/anything whether it be Balco or andro. It sucks for MLB but I think that what they should do is just let the records & awards stand as is & just put that little * by them w/the footnotes.

KSig RC · #8 02-17-2005, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BetteDavisEyes
Let's face it. It's the *asterisk* era. Whether they return the MVP awards or not is pointless. I don't think MLB will do that b/c by starting that trend, they'd then have to consider the possibility of giving the record back to Mark McGwire or even changing it back to 61 b/c we know Roger Maris did not juice up w/anything whether it be Balco or andro. It sucks for MLB but I think that what they should do is just let the records & awards stand as is & just put that little * by them w/the footnotes.

a.) we don't know Maris didn't juice

b.) we don't know McGwire DID juice, past the LEGAL ANDRO

c.) MVP awards are given by the BBWAA, not MLB (thus records are unaffected)

d.) "footnoting" or "asterisking" is absolutely ridiculous, on so many levels - people will recognize and decide on their own right how they should view these records, but the bottom line is that they are the records. Do we asterisk golf records because they didn't use a hickory shaft?

Thrillhouse · #9 02-17-2005, 07:23 PM

Wow, totally forgot about Mike Greenwell.

Where does Pedro Guererro fit into all of this?

KSigkid · #10 02-17-2005, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BetteDavisEyes
Let's face it. It's the *asterisk* era. Whether they return the MVP awards or not is pointless. I don't think MLB will do that b/c by starting that trend, they'd then have to consider the possibility of giving the record back to Mark McGwire or even changing it back to 61 b/c we know Roger Maris did not juice up w/anything whether it be Balco or andro. It sucks for MLB but I think that what they should do is just let the records & awards stand as is & just put that little * by them w/the footnotes.

This isn't really the "asterisk era;" the game is constantly changing. Should the 30's be the asterisk era because of better gloves? Should the 70's be the asterisk era because of changing the height of the pitching mound? Should we penalize a whole era because of a rule that is just going into effect this season?

I don't really know what an asterisk would do...a record is a record, and in 50 years people aren't going to care if there's a asterisk or not.

Also, there's no proof that McGwire took steroids...he took a completely legal supplement. What about athletes who have taken ephedrine, protein supplements, etc.? You just cannot start taking away records and awards like that.

BetteDavisEyes · #11 02-18-2005, 12:46 AM

I NEVER said that Mark Mcgwire took steroids. I mentioned andro. As for the whole asterisk thing, I didn't say it would be done, I said that for some, including me, regardless of the accomplishments these players may have, there will always be that doubt & the big question mark as to whether their accomplishments are b/c of their own power or juice.

As for the 30's comment about better gloves, times change so obviously the equipment & training is going to get better. In my book, steroids were meant for performance enhancement but in a sport like baseball, there is no place for it.

I love baseball but I have no respect or love for guys who juice up. Their accomplishments mean nothing to me. You may not agree & that's fine b/c we're all entitled to our opinions but this is what I believe. I will continue to watch my sport & root for my team but guys like Giambi, Canseco, etc. are just pathetic.
Too many fans don't care b/c they want to see homeruns & they don't care that an "athlete" is juicing up to hit those runs. Give me a good pitchers duel any day of the week.