Chuck Knoblauch's Active On Twitter Again, Takes Shot At Former Teammate

[h2oface]

Off topic, but I disagree strongly.

 

Betting on baseball,by baseball personnel, undermines the very integrity of the game in a way vastly worse than PEDs.

 

I don't care if Pete Rose only bet on the Reds to win. He still potentially did enormous damage to the game, and the HOF will be just fine without him, IMO.

 

As I understand the game, the purpose of every game is to suit up and do the best you can, and try to win.  Maybe this is still off topic, but please help me understand how betting on yourself to win changes anything if you are all trying to win - how betting on yourself to win can do enormous damage the game, or create a different outcome, than if you didn't bet on yourself to win and still tried to win. It seems to me, it is enormously different than betting on yourself to lose, and throwing the game.

 

Some in the game - great well respected players and managers included - even openly say "if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying". 

[h2oface]

Yankees want to honor a POS like that, fine.  But it's also good that people are reminded what a POS he is in the first place.

 

All this code....... what is a POS? An underground hip hop artist from Minneapolis? Position? Point of Sale? Positively Outstanding Service? What?

[jokin]

As I understand the game, the purpose of every game is to suit up and do the best you can, and try to win.  Maybe this is still off topic, but please help me understand how betting on yourself to win changes anything if you are all trying to win - how betting on yourself to win can do enormous damage the game, or create a different outcome, than if you didn't bet on yourself to win and still tried to win. It seems to me, it is enormously different than betting on yourself to lose, and throwing the game.

 

 

 

Really?  Rose was betting on games as the manager of his team.  A powerful position to control the course of the game.  But it's never been shown that he bet on every single game or how the odds or his dollar amounts changed from game to game.  Which opens up all kinds of possibilities for player and in-game strategic manipulations, consciously or unconsciously, to skew the outcomes of games,  both those with and without a bet placed by him.  And not only that, suppose underworld types learned of Rose's gambling habits, and found ways to "put the squeeze" on him?

[gunnarthor]

All this code....... what is a POS? An underground hip hop artist from Minneapolis? Position? Point of Sale? Positively Outstanding Service? What?

Piece of ----

[USAFChief]

Some in the game - great well respected players and managers included - even openly say "if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying".

 

Trying to win. At all costs. Nobody questions the outcome. The methods, maybe, but not the outcome.

 

Gambling on outcomes--by the participants--by definition calls those outcomes into question, which is a situation that eventually renders the game not worth our time.

[tobi0040]

Really?  Rose was betting on games as the manager of his team.  A powerful position to control the course of the game.  But it's never been shown that he bet on every single game or how his dollar amounts changed from game to game.  Which opens up all kinds of possibilities for player and in-game strategic manipulations, consciously or unconsciously, to skew the outcomes of games,  both those with and without a bet placed by him.  And not only that, suppose underworld types learned of Rose's gambling habits, and found ways to "put the squeeze" on him?

 

Seems like Pete the gambler with money on his team and Pete the managers interests are aligned.  In a similar way of the CEO that announces a large stock purchase in his own company.  Now, they should haves rules against it for the reasons you mentioned.

 

However, a player that cheats could be taking a job and money away from a player that does not cheat. In addition, a few players cheating could cause others to cheat to keep up, which I think happened in the 90's. Then you have GM's and owners wasting money on players who had inflated numbers as well. I think the degree of this wrong is worse, as you have actual people getting hurt.

 

So to me to have a hard and fast rule about gambling and a wrist slap for PED's is weird.

[jokin]

Seems like Pete the gambler with money on his team and Pete the managers interests are aligned.  In a similar way of the CEO that announces a large stock purchase in his own company.  Now, they should haves rules against it for the reasons you mentioned.

 

However, a player that cheats could be taking a job and money away from a player that does not cheat. In addition, a few players cheating could cause others to cheat to keep up, which I think happened in the 90's. Then you have GM's and owners wasting money on players who had inflated numbers as well. I think the degree of this wrong is worse, as you have actual people getting hurt.

 

So to me to have a hard and fast rule about gambling and a wrist slap for PED's is weird.

 

I never talked about PEDs, both of these vices inevitably lead to tainting the game. The MLB has a lot to account for in their past hypocrisies on the PED front.  But you are fooling yourself if you don't see that a manager gambling on his own team is fraught with dangers- "alignment-wise".... in point of fact, Pete the manager betting on his team to win in isolation is quite different than Pete the manager sometimes betting to win and Pete the manager taking nights off from a wager- the two Pete's actions in the latter case are inevitably and inextricably intertwined, and can only lead to threatening the integrity of the game.

 

And then the inevitable outside forces come in, as they always do, and lead to compromising the guilty parties who get in too deep, no matter which side of the bet they are on.  The game almost went under in the wake of the 1919 World Series, the point-shaving scandal of NCAA basketball games in the 50s sidetracked the growth of that sport for many years afterwards....  any hint of proof that the outcome of each and every individual game is being manipulated, and not an honest result, would prove to be disastrous for both the gambling industry and baseball.

[biggentleben]

Forgive Pete Rose.

 

Not before Joe Jackson is forgiven and in the Hall.  There's a lot more evidence of Rose actively betting than Jackson, who has some conflicting reports, but generally it is accepted that he returned every dollar he was given by the gamblers and was the only one named that actually played his heart out.

[JB_Iowa]

Okay, Pete is forgiven.  I still don't want him in the Hall.  PED's users either including Andy Petitte.

 

And the Yankees are insane to retire all these numbers.

[Squirrel]

Okay, Pete is forgiven.  I still don't want him in the Hall.  PED's users either including Andy Petitte.

 

And the Yankees are insane to retire all these numbers.

I'd say that was succinct.

[USAFChief]

I'd say that was succinct.

concur.

[tobi0040]

Not before Joe Jackson is forgiven and in the Hall.  There's a lot more evidence of Rose actively betting than Jackson, who has some conflicting reports, but generally it is accepted that he returned every dollar he was given by the gamblers and was the only one named that actually played his heart out.

 

I don’t see how a guy throwing a game (Joe Jackson) is on the same page as a guy betting on his own team (Rose).  You lost me there.

 

I would just say that people that used PED’s took jobs and an enormous amount of money from players that paid the game straight up.  Guys didn’t make teams took jobs making $30K a year instead of 500K or a few million. Others involved jourey guys juicing in a contract year and stealing money from owners, which could have been devoted to other players.  From the perspective of the obvious, skewed stats, world series winners, MVP awards, the actual amount of people hurt is way, way more by using PED’s in my opinion.  Same things from an integrity perspective.  Just my opinion.

 

The last point I will make is that Rose was addicted to gambling.  He has acknowledged this as well. Had he been addicted to hard drugs like Strawberry or Doc Gooden, MLB would have paid for his rehab and I think he would be in the hall of fame.  Certainly, playing the game high on coke has an integrity/negative headline issue as well.   I am not sure why gambling is worse and why those guys, had they had long enough careers would be okay for the hall of fame but Pete Rose not.

 

The issue for me is not that gambling is illegal, but why it is viewed as the holy grail versus PED's, hard drugs, etc.  I find the others worse and have a hard time seeing why betting on your team is worse than PED's, etc.

[jimmer]

Well, Shoeless Joe batted .375/.394/.563 in that W Series.  If that's trying to throw a game, I wonder what trying to win would look like.

[tobi0040]

Well, Shoeless Joe batted .375/.394/.563 in that W Series.  If that's trying to throw a game, I wonder what trying to win would look like.

 

He was just that good!  Okay, no idea he played that well.  Just that he was suspended for throwing the WS. 

 

I forgive him!

 

http://www.shoelessjoejackson.com/about/biography.html

[h2oface]

Pete Rose, the player - Hall of Fame.  Just elect him in as a player. Some go in as a manager. Some as an executive. Some as and umpire. Pete Rose, the player....... Hall of Fame.  

Joe Jackson as the example.... I believe he had the change of heart and didn't go through with what he had agreed to. Isn't that like saying you will take a job, and then deciding not to? I don't see Joe Jackson as part of the guilty. He thought about it, but didn't do it. Not Guilty...... just like being married, looking, maybe even fantasizing, but going home to the wife.  

 

Chuck Knoblauch........ not a Hall of Famer, but as a player on the Minnesota Twins only?  He was a star. 

[ashbury]

just like being married, looking, maybe even fantasizing, but going home to the wife.  

And if she finds out even that little.... BANNED.

[jimmer]

And if she finds out even that little.... BANNED.

depends on the wife ;-)

[h2oface]

Not before Joe Jackson is forgiven and in the Hall.  There's a lot more evidence of Rose actively betting than Jackson, who has some conflicting reports, but generally it is accepted that he returned every dollar he was given by the gamblers and was the only one named that actually played his heart out.

I was remembering that it wasn't that he returned any money, but that he wasn't paid 3/4 of it. I have never, or can I find, anything about returning the money.

 

"Not debatable is that Jackson clearly did accept the money of gamblers ($5000, after demanding $20,000, according to Cicotte) and having the batting star's name mentioned in connection with the fix gave the scheme credibility.  Jackson admitted in his 1920 grand jury testimony to accepting the money.  In his 1920 "confession," Jackson would testify that he was promised $20,000 for his participation, but only got a quarter of that amount."

 

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/blacksox/blacksoxaccount.html

[nicksaviking]

Seems like Pete the gambler with money on his team and Pete the managers interests are aligned.  In a similar way of the CEO that announces a large stock purchase in his own company.  Now, they should haves rules against it for the reasons you mentioned.

 

This is generally true, although if Rose is putting 5K down on the Reds when they are facing Neal Heaton and Andy Hawkins, but only 50 bucks or "forgets" to bet when the team is facing Dwight Gooden or Nolan Ryan, some might interpret that as hedging his overall bets.  Those that interpret the bets that way then may question Rose's level of commitment to competiveness in those games.

 

Not saying that I'm one of those people.

[gunnarthor]

Well, Shoeless Joe batted .375/.394/.563 in that W Series.  If that's trying to throw a game, I wonder what trying to win would look like.

It's generally considered that he played pretty badly in the games they had to lose (6 for 21 as opposed to the 6-11 in the games they tried to win) and played pretty passive defense.  

[tobi0040]

This is generally true, although if Rose is putting 5K down on the Reds when they are facing Neal Heaton and Andy Hawkins, but only 50 bucks or "forgets" to bet when the team is facing Dwight Gooden or Nolan Ryan, some might interpret that as hedging his overall bets.  Those that interpret the bets that way then may question Rose's level of commitment to competiveness in those games.

 

Not saying that I'm one of those people.

 

I have heard that logic and I think it is pretty circumstancial, this could lead to that, or it may be implied that....It also assumes he needs money on a game to be motivated. I don't neccesarily agree with that part either.

 

In the case of PED's, people were actually hurt by it.  If 15% of the league was using, that is 112 players.  Let alone those in the minors juicing to try and get there. Those are a lot of jobs set aside for cheaters.  Some guys would have never made it, others hung on for years longer because they cheated.  This was a zero sum game.

[h2oface]

It's generally considered that he played pretty badly in the games they had to lose (6 for 21 as opposed to the 6-11 in the games they tried to win) and played pretty passive defense.  

I wish a lot of Twins would have played that badly (6 for 21, .286) in their playoff appearances.  They might have even won some games, then. 

[Dr. Evil]

People in all walks of life make mistakes, get addicted to gambling, alcohol etc..and people make it right, admit to their mistakes, get help, ask for forgiveness and are granted it.

 

Pete's banishment from participation in the game of baseball to me is punishment enough. It's way more harsh than what penalties are given to PED users who arguably did the same or more harm to the game and to other people. That's a separate debate though.

 

What he did on the field as a player was not PED bolstered and is a real part of baseball history. IMHO, he deserves to be recognized in the hall of fame.

[tobi0040]

People in all walks of life make mistakes, get addicted to gambling, alcohol etc..and people make it right, admit to their mistakes, get help, ask for forgiveness and are granted it.

 

Pete's banishment from participation in the game of baseball to me is punishment enough. It's way more harsh than what penalties are given to PED users who arguably did the same or more harm to the game and to other people. That's a separate debate though.

 

What he did on the field as a player was not PED bolstered and is a real part of baseball history. IMHO, he deserves to be recognized in the hall of fame.

 

I would vote for Rose as a player if I could.    The "separate debate" was what I was trying to get it.  Relatively speaking, baseball has picked and chosen some odd things to come down on and others to look the other way or slap on the wrist.

 

Players that have acknowledged PED use will eventually get into the hall of fame.  A few are still drawing a paycheck like Mcgwire.

[nicksaviking]

It's generally considered that he played pretty badly in the games they had to lose (6 for 21 as opposed to the 6-11 in the games they tried to win) and played pretty passive defense.  

 

But what was his UZR?  Not that it matters, I wouldn't trust it anyway, so I think this is a good candidate for crowd sourcing.  Cheif you were at the games no?

[nicksaviking]

Pete's banishment from participation in the game of baseball to me is punishment enough. It's way more harsh than what penalties are given to PED users who arguably did the same or more harm to the game and to other people. That's a separate debate though.

 

 

I might argue the opposite, he should be allowed back into the game, even if the HOF wants to keep him out.  No one's putting up much of a stink these days about Mark McGwire coaching and by all accounts, Jason Giambi is bound to become a coach if not a a manager in short order.

 

It could be argued that reinstating Rose may either encourage other players/coaches to gamble, or Rose may do it all over again, but the same could be said about the steroid users as well.

[USAFChief]

  Cheif you were at the games no?

No. I wasn't home from the World War yet.

[biggentleben]

He was just that good!  Okay, no idea he played that well.  Just that he was suspended for throwing the WS. 

 

I forgive him!

 

http://www.shoelessjoejackson.com/about/biography.html

 

Yeah, he was accused, and he reportedly was given the money under his pillow and did not realize it was gambling money until after he got threats from the gamblers for his play.

 

I'm not saying he was perfectly innocent as there's really not evidence, but he was quite confused on the stand and admitted in the grand jury to keeping the money left in his hotel room, not directly taking money from the gamblers.  He requested more than his annual salary at the time if he was going to do anything, and then he backed out even at that amount.

 

As far as his lackadaisical defense in losses, I think it's hard to be sure as there are eyewitnesses to both sides, some saying he played well in every game, others saying he loafed, but not just in losses.

[Dr. Evil]

I would vote for Rose as a player if I could.    The "separate debate" was what I was trying to get it.  Relatively speaking, baseball has picked and chosen some odd things to come down on and others to look the other way or slap on the wrist.

 

Players that have acknowledged PED use will eventually get into the hall of fame.  A few are still drawing a paycheck like Mcgwire.

And A-Rod.

[USAFChief]

Seems like Pete the gambler with money on his team and Pete the managers interests are aligned.  In a similar way of the CEO that announces a large stock purchase in his own company. 

.

I don't think the CEO analogy holds up very well.

 

The CEO is announcing his purchase, and it's governed by regulation and monitored. His actions are known, and other investors are free to decide whether they want to invest along with him or not.

 

For a similar situation, the CEO would be buying stock on the sly, hoping to parlay inside knowledge into advantages of when to sell. Perhaps making decisions that boost the stock in the short term, but hurt the company in the long term...similar to burning through your bullpen to win a game you have money on, at the expense of the next few days games, which you don't care as much about.

 

If Rosé only bet on the Reds to win (which, lets be honest, is doubtful), it doesn't make it any less bad. His decisions as a manager still come into question, which is a situation no sport can allow. Even if untrue, the perception that he (or anyone) isn't making decisions in an honest effort to win is just as bad as the actual thing.

 

That's why baseball has hardcore rules against gambling, and are very concerned about it. It's just about the worst thing that can infest a sport.