Only if he gets in under the name Aroid.

Because two wrongs are better than one?

Because I'd prefer consistency from the voters?

So based on some bullshit principle of consistency, you'd be saying A-Rod shouldn't be in the hall of fame, which you know is wrong.

No, I'm saying both Barry Bonds and Alex Rodriguez should be in the hall of fame. And I think ultimately that is what will happen.

But if Barry Bonds doesn't make the hall, then A-Rod is no longer a hall of famer in your view?

No, just that I think it would be unfair for the voters to deny people like Bonds and Clemens, but accept ARod.

Tek and Benny going at it like the old days. Feels like 2012 again.

Well I can see where both of you are coming from.


If the voters did not put Bonds in the HoF because of the steroids then they won't vote ARod in. It really isn't fair to either since they both had hall of fame careers. It isn't right to say just because Bonds did not get in ARod should not get in either. It wouldn't be wrong to say ARod shouldn't get in because he used steroids. That is what I feel Benny is trying to say that he is using Bonds as an example and it is worded weird.

Just my thoughts on this subject.

Kind of on-topic, do you look at his grand slams as a product of Arod's talent or more as a product of the talent he had around him? 25 grand slams is such a crazy high number, but it's only possible because those bases were loaded.