Selig’s election may open Hall of Fame to Bonds, Clemens
Say this for Baseball Hall of Fame voting – it’s never boring.
Earlier this month, a veterans committee voted to enshrine Bud Selig, the former commissioner whose tenure gave us expanded playoffs, a controversial twist to the All-Star Game, video replay and revenue sharing. Any one of those would be considered revolutionary in a game as steeped in tradition as baseball.
Selig also was boss when the use of performanceenhancing drugs ran rampant in the game. This is not to say it was his doing. He presided over an era during which team owners, management and players either supported PED use or turned a blind eye to what was
happening – and the media was too slow to recognize it or hold baseball accountable. That’s not news. But this might be: Selig’s invitation to Cooperstown has caused many hall of fame voters – the Baseball Writers Association of America – to throw in the towel and vote for Barry Bonds and Rogers Clemens.
Their logic: It’s hypocritical to ban suspected PED users when their commissioner is now a Hall of Famer, so throw open the doors and let ’em all in.
After a decade of hand-wringing over this, I admit it’s a compelling argument.
It echoes a sentiment already held by many who have been voting for Bonds, Clemens and others right along. Bonds and Clemens received just shy of 200 votes apiece on the 440 ballots cast last year. If your bent is to vote for the best players in the game’s history, you acknowledge that they were simply the greatest from their era. It just happens to be the Steroids Era.
Doing so also removes the burden of the “did-he-or-didn’t-he” exercise in frustration.
Every year more players with PED whispers appear on the ballot. And they are getting elected. Case in point: Mike Piazza last year.
A new name with new whispers has appeared on the ballot – Ivan Rodriguez, arguably the greatest defensive catcher in major-league history. Like others, he admitted to using androstenedione in the 1990s, before it was banned by Major League Baseball. Beyond that, like Piazza before him, there is no actual evidence damning him, just the ever-popular eye test and guilt by association. There’s no failed drug test, no mention in the Mitchell Report, only an unsettling passage in Jose Canseco’s book where he claimed he personally injected stuff into Rodriguez.
Is that enough “evidence” to keep voters away from Pudge?
Better yet, is that even the question anymore?
From the start, I’ve said I would keep an open mind about voting for any of these players. Start with a presumption of innocence (which seems laughable given the percentage of players suspected to have used PEDs at some point) and selectively dismiss from consideration those where there is a preponderance of circumstantial evidence.
Manny Ramirez, another newcomer to the ballot, is one of those players. He failed two drug tests and was suspended for a total of 150 games. He not only hurt himself, he hurt his team. He does not get my vote.
Rodriguez, however, does not fail that test – as far as can be reasonably determined. I checked his name. Yet, it all still gives me pause. I don't believe I have had time to fully process the Selig Effect, certainly not in the weeks before my ballot was due.
So for this election I’m taking it all under advisement. No rash decisions. No rush to vote for players who I'm confident put their self-interests way ahead of the game. None of those players should be in danger of falling off the ballot this time around, anyway.
We’re allowed to vote for as many as 10; as was the case last year I only went with seven: Rodriguez, Jeff Bagwell, Tim Raines, Trevor Hoffman, Edgar Martinez, Mike Mussina and Vladimir Guerrero.
The relaxation of the steroids hardline that assisted Piazza last year also should make this election Bagwell’s time, in his seventh year on the ballot. He’s got my vote again.
I have never wavered in my support for Raines, who is in his 10th and final year of eligibility and who certainly deserves to be enshrined. One of the greatest leadoff hitters of all time, Raines was fifth all-time in stolen bases with an incredibly high success rate (nearly 85 percent) and was a seven-time all-star. Raines was somewhat overshadowed by his peer Rickey Henderson both in stolen-base numbers and outsized personality, but this should be Tim’s time now.
Hoffman is a third holdover candidate I vote for who should have a reasonably good shot at election. He needs 34 more votes than he got his first time around last year and that seems reachable. Many voters are ambivalent about closers, it seems. No one knows that better than Lee Smith, who will not be elected in his final year of eligibility. We can debate the value of closers all day long, but let’s face it, the role is a firmly established cornerstone of the game and teams will pay top dollar to get a good one. When Hoffman gets to Cooperstown, he can hold open the door for Mariano Rivera in a few years.
In terms of ballot newcomers, the only other vote I cast was for Guerrero. Vlad’s an interesting case – he was Mike Trout-like in his early seasons, ended with a .318 batting average but doesn’t project quite so shiny with some of the new metrics. That said, he seems to have been completely untouched by the PED stain, and that’s worth a lot in my book.
Oh, and I dropped Curt Schilling from my ballot this year. If his plaque ends up hanging, so to speak, in Cooperstown one day, it will be without the help of this journalist.
Results of the voting will be announced Jan. 18.
Faller is director of azcentral sports. Reach him at mark.faller@ arizonarepublic.com. Follow him on Twitter: @falleraz