The Register Citizen (Torrington, CT)
Mo an easy pick, others trickier
Just get ‘em in. Let’s get the PED guys into the National Baseball Hall of Fame, if they’re otherwise deserving, and move on. Please?
Steroids happened. It’s unfortunate, but they happened. They are part of the history of the game. They’re probably happening now. They happened in other sports, too, but no one seems to care. Or did you notice Brian Bosworth is in the College Football Hall of Fame?
There are almost certainly guys who used PEDs who are currently in Cooperstown. The annual debate is getting tiresome, and with David Ortiz and Alex Rodriguez coming up for eligibility in a few years, it won’t stop anytime soon. But I wish it would, so I vote for guys who essentially fill one or two criteria, steroids be damned: Were they dominant players for a significant amount of time, or were they excellent players whose postseason heroics push them over the top? Either way, were they transcendent figures in the sport? Could the story of baseball over the past quarter-century be told without them?
This year, I’m voting for two newcomers to the ballot (Mariano Rivera and Roy Halladay) and five holdovers (Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Manny Ramirez, Curt Schilling and Sammy Sosa).
Here’s why:
MARIANO RIVERA:
The easiest pick on this year’s ballot. All-time saves leader, greatest closer in history, a 0.70 ERA and 42 saves — just like the number on his back — in the postseason. Perfect.
In these jaded times, playing his entire career in the most jaded city of all, Rivera still became near-mythic figure. Growing up poor, the son of a fisherman, he’s almost a Panamanian version of Joe DiMaggio. Enter Sandman.
That said, I can respect the argument of Bill Ballou, formerly of the Worcester
Telegram & Gazette, who devalues the closer’s role so much that he won’t vote for Rivera. He won’t even cast a ballot, so as to preserve the chance for Rivera to become the first unanimous inductee.
I don’t agree with Ballou’s general thesis, though it’s fair to question the value of a closer. Like Rivera, most closers are, after all, failed starters (Mariano had a 5.51 ERA his rookie year, during which he started 10 of his 19 appearances. He did throw a no-hitter at Triple-A Columbus). The starter’s job is much more difficult, and there’s no way Rivera, great as he is, could have had a career as a starter throwing just one pitch.
Ultimately, I believe there is great value in a great closer, and disagree with Ballou. I also believe Ballou should stand by his conviction and cast his ballot. But his opinion is sincere — he’s been making this argument for over a decade — and I respect it. I disagree with voters who won’t vote for Bonds or Clemens because of their PED suspicions, but I respect their opinion, as well.
Plus, the over-emphasis on unanimous votes, whether for Hall of Fame, NL Cy Young or whatever,
is so 2018. It’s a way for sports talk radio or Twitter trolls to yell and complain about something or someone. Ultimately, who cares, so long as the right guys get in? If someone has a legitimate, reasoned opinion (like Ballou) for not voting for a guy, that’s his prerogative. It’s the people who won’t vote for a guy just because they don’t want him to be the first unanimous inductee who should have their votes taken away.
ROY HALLADAY: This one’s a little trickier. Typically, if I have to think too much about a candidate or go to his baseballreference.com page for validation, I don’t vote for him. I nearly went there with Halladay.
But I didn’t have to check his bio to know that he won a Cy Young in both leagues. Or that he pitched a perfect game, and threw only the second no-hitter in postseason history (along with Don Larsen). Or that the Yankees once postponed a game despite sunny weather, just to avoid having to face Halladay.
Yes, he only won 203 games, but the old wins standards for the Hall of Fame (300, even 250) no longer apply. Plus, wins aren’t important, as the sabermetric geeks ruining baseball will tell you. Halladay was a horse who routinely led the league in complete games. An eight-time all-star who finished top five in Cy Young voting six times.
Every season, there are four or five pitchers who elicit true fear in their opponents. The kind of guy opponents look at their upcoming schedule to see if they have to face him, or if they’ll luck out and miss him in a series. Max Scherzer, Jacob deGrom, Corey Kluber, Justin Verlander are those guys now. Roy Halladay, who died in 2017, was one of those guys for a decade. Hall of Famer, in my book.
BARRY BONDS AND ROGER CLEMENS: The ultimate package deal. The symmetry is pretty remarkable: Seven MVPs for Bonds, seven Cy Youngs for Clemens. Three MVPs for Bonds, three Cys for Clemens before they both allegedly started “enhancing” their performance. Both in their seventh year on the ballot, their chances running out.
I believe they will both get in two years from now. Not next year, when Derek Jeter will likely be the only newcomer, but the year after that, when there are no other obvious first-timers. Then Big Papi and A-Rod become eligible, and all hell breaks loose again.
I say get ‘em both in now. Sure, we know they almost certainly used PEDs. How do we know? Books have been written. Trainers have been depositioned. Reporters have hid in alcoves to hear private grand-jury testimony. If such tactics had been used against other players, we can pretty much guarantee a few other guys wouldn’t have been inducted in recent years.
Let’s get these guys in and move on.
MANNY RAMIREZ: Another tricky one. We know Ramirez used because he failed tests and was suspended. Twice. We know he once threw an older traveling secretary to the ground, among other bursts of temper. We know he was somewhat of a clown.
We also know he was a great high school player in New York City and a firstround draft pick. We know he once drove in 165 runs in a season, 145 in another, 144 in another. He was a World Series MVP. Was it all on steroids? We don’t know.
We know Manny was perhaps the greatest righthanded hitter of his generation. He finished with 555 home runs, 1,831 RBI and a .312 batting average. Again, was it all a product of PEDs? We just don’t know. And, we just don’t care.
(Plus, Manny’s induction speech alone would be worth voting him in, am I right?)
CURT SCHILLING: One thing we don’t like is how writers don’t vote for a guy one year then vote for him in another. Or vice versa. But we’re guilty of doing this exact thing with both Schilling and Sosa.
We didn’t vote for Schilling last year, shortly after he re-Tweeted a post suggesting that journalists should be executed. He’s had other offensive Tweets in the past, costing him his job at ESPN. But ultimately, it’s how great you were on the baseball field that matters. Schilling was borderline great in the regular season, finishing Cy Young runner-up three times and currently ranking 15th on the all-time strikeouts list.
What puts him over the top is his postseason heroics: three World Series rings, the bloody sock, the Curse reversed, the 2001 World Series co-MVP, even his dynamics in a losing effort with the 1993 Phillies.
SAMMY SOSA: We started voting for Sammy, then stopped, now we’re back again. Was he among the most transcendent, recognizable players in the sport for nearly a decade? Yes. Are his numbers — 609 homers, three seasons of 60 or more — Hall of Fame-worthy? Of course. Was all or most of it a result of PED use? Almost certainly. We feel more guilty voting for Sosa because we feel, more so than Bonds, Clemens or Manny, he’s the product of a syringe. But it would be somewhat hypocritical not to vote for him and to vote for those other three.
Sosa should be off the ballot in a few years, and we’ll no longer have this dilemma. But for now, we say just get these guys in and move on. Please?