The hottest topic in baseball today is the controversial Hall of Fame ballot that includes many players that have been linked to performance enhancing drugs (PEDs). Due to the incompetence of the sports writers, no players were voted in. The sports writers are allowed to vote for as many players as they deem appropriate, but the only way you get the nod into Cooperstown is if you get over 75% of the vote. The sports writers came together and looked at a ballot that contains a former all time saves leader, a few 3000 hit club members, a couple guys who have hit more than 500 homeruns, the third best catcher of all time, a bunch of Cy Youngs, a couple of world series MVPs and decided that no one was worthy enough to put on the yellow blazer.
The sports writer made two huge mistakes. First, is the ludicrous idea of the “first ballot hall of famer.” The difference between Duke Snider, who took eleven ballots to get voted in, and Tony Gwynn, a first ballot hall of famer, is a mythical distinction recognized only by the sports writers. Their talents and accomplishments can be argued, but in Cooperstown their plaques can rest next to each other both appreciated as one of the best players of their era. If you believe someone deserves to be in the hall of fame, you should vote for him on the first ballot and every one succeeding.
My second problem with the sports writers coincidentally has been the main topic on sports center all morning. The Hall of Fame is a representation of the best players of their era. Unfortunately, the era representing the new players on the ballot is filled with controversy over the use of performance enhancing drugs. Players like Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds can statistically be considered the best players of all time, but because of their link to steroids it’s unlikely that they will ever be voted in.
I disagree with the premise that if you have been linked to performance enhancing drugs you should be excluded from the hall of fame, for a few reasons. A former major leaguer, who is close a close family friend, told me that he estimates that 95% of the players he encountered were on PEDs during that era. There is no telling who was on what, and in my personal experience being around steroid users, it doesn’t always make you bigger. It’s impossible to detect who was on what from the naked eye and I refuse to make every player guilty by association. I am comfortable accepting that it was simply apart of the game and I still appreciate the great players for what they were, even if they had a little help. If the sports writers maintain the stance that they are not voting for anyone linked to steroids then many great players will be left out and the fans will be left with a bunch of Pete Rose like travesties. The sports writers should have enough confidence in the fans to be able to form their own opinions and let history define the player’s legacies. Their job as voters is to vote for the players who are deserving of baseball immortality, not shield a club from potential character issues. If they only allowed squeaky-clean backgrounds then Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb (just to name a few) would be sitting in baseball purgatory with Pete Rose.
How would I have voted this year if I had a say?
1. Craig Biggio
2. Jack Morris
3. Mike Piazza
4. Lee Smith
5. Curt Schillings
6. Roger Clemens
7. Barry Bonds
8. Fred McGriff
9. Mark Mcgwire
10. Sammy Sosa
11. Rafael Palmero
That’s how wrong you got it sportswriters; there are still ten very worthy candidates on the ballot that you clearly missed. By the way, next year it doesn’t get easier, Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and Frank Thomas all jump in the waiting game.
I’ll be sure to keep a running list of all the Hall of Fame snubs, that way when I take my future kid to Cooperstown I’ll be able to explain to him that it’s not actually the best players of all time.
-Blake Dale Lepire
*I in no way condone PEDs I simply accept them as an aspect in history and I support any efforts to eliminate their use from America’s pastime.
