Nobody for the Hall
For the first time since 1996, nobody was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. Many had thought there would be some backlash for possible PED use for first-time candidates Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, but none? The outrage from the players and from the public has been loud. And the problem in Cooperstown is that they may throw a party in July and have nobody show up.
I've been fortunate enough to do some research at the National Baseball Library, which sits behind the Hall of Fame Museum pictured here. The museum and library are owned not by Major League Baseball but by the trust of Stephen Clark, a Cooperstown lawyer who wanted to build something for tourism and put the museum in an old gym on Main Street. It's a private organization, and the trust empowers the Baseball Writers Association of America to conduct the election of players to the Hall. His granddaughter now chairs the trust.
So if you were running a private museum and wanted to maximize your visitors to the museum, would you or would you not want steroid users enshrined in your building? Or to put it another way, would you want sportswriters to choose who gets a ceremony and a plaque?
(I assume some Ricocheti will want to discuss the candidacies of individual players, and that's fine; I would have voted for some of those on the ballot and not left it blank as, for example, Howard Bryant of ESPN did. But I'm interested in what readers think of the process rather than what you think of this particular outcome.)
- Comment (46)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (16)
Comments:
Dec '11
Re: Nobody for the Hall
The problem is the "no-brainer" "all-time greats" on the list (Bonds and Clemens) are the two most notorious steroid users. I do believe there are hall of famers on the list, and do think some will get in, but remember very few actually get in on the first ballot. Clemens, Bonds and Piazza probably would if not for the issue of PEDs. I don't take issue with that. No need to rush anyone in if you have reasonable doubts.
For the rest, none of them are slam dunk first ballot hall of famers IMO (I take issue with the notion of leaving people off the first ballot "just because", but the practice is still widespread).
The Hall of Fame has had other years with no one voted in. As I recall its something like 7 or 8 times before that this has happened. Its not a big deal, though I'm sure it will cost them some visitors this summer.
The only real regret I have here is Kenny Lofton being dropped off the ballot, because I really do believe there was a case to be made for him.
Sep '12
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Although sportswriters know sports, I don't believe that they're in tune with the prevailing sentiments of museum-goers or reason.
Regarding reason, if doping were not banned, it would be qualitatively indistinguishable from extreme physical training. Imagine that MLB banned weight training and suspended any player who could not prove that his bulging muscles were purely genetic gifts. Nonsense, right? Not so fast: If one guy improves his hitting power by lifting weights, then all guys have to lift weights to remain competitive. This is competitive escalation, and doping is simply a chemical form of it and hence qualitatively indistinguishable from extreme physical training.
Sportswriters aren't usually the sharpest tools in the shed, and few are inclined to undertake basic moral reasoning (e.g. the idiot sportswriter who called RGIII a liar and blamed him for the Redskins' loss to my Seahawks, who were clearly the better team). Therefore, I object to the process as King Banaian described it.
Edited on January 10, 2013 at 8:35amRe: Nobody for the Hall
I'd have voted for Tim Raines. Twice.
Apr '11
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Did ya hear? Nobody got into the Hall!
Well it's about galldarn time! Nobody was a swell right fielder.
Who?
Who finally got in?!?
I just told you - Nobody! Nobody got into the Hall!
I know! You also said Who got in!
I already told you Who: Nobody! That's It, and that includes I Know.
Okay, so the new members are Who, Nobody, That's It and ... what the hell kind of name is I Know for a ballplayer???
Apr '11
Re: Nobody for the Hall
I find it very hard to come to a firm position on doping, statistics and who deserves to be in the Hall (another thing I love about sports is that I can remain ambiguous on some issues; well, besides the fact that the Red Sox and Mets [stink]!!.
Clearly the use of dangerous drugs cannot be tolerated in baseball, and I understand the reluctance to celebrate players whose statistics may be padded because of them. However, unfortunately, rampant drug use was rampant for more than a decade in the MLB and all of the statistics of the era could be considered tainted. There are non-steroid using pitchers who have more wins and hitters with more RBIs because Bonds and other juicers were on their teams, etc. That was, unfortunately, the condition of the game - just as outfields were once deeper, etc. Unless you want to airbrush the past 20 years you kind of have to work with the numbers on the book.
That said, I'm fine with punishing Bonds and Clemens by putting off their admission. Also, I hope voters will take the inflated stats into account when considering non-doping players on the bubble.
Apr '11
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Oh, and for God's sake, can we just let Pete Rose in already??? It seems silly to even discuss Bonds, Clemens, et al while Rose remains banished.
Whatever his "crimes," at least we know that all those runs he put up were pure sweat and hustle.
Jun '12
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Not quite true that noone was admitted, veterans committee voted three "veterans" in to the hall, though it is true that all of them are dead, since 1936? I believe.
I'm OK with noone getting in from the current crop, if that were not possible then the hall would not be worth much. Use of PEDs is tricky because when many of these players were using, baseball had not specifically banned them, did not have policy of drug testing etc. and practice was unfortunately widespread.
May '11
Re: Nobody for the Hall
The problem is that 1996 simply isn't that long ago so what's the big deal?
Jan '11
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Cricket One-Day International series, Australia-Sri Lanka starts Friday, after a cracking Test Series, hot on the heels of an even better Test series against South Africa, and at the same time as the finals of the 20-20 Big Bash.
Just in case any of you want to get on board with a proper summer contest of bat and ball - you've just missed the retirement of Mike Hussey, all round good guy and (drug free) legend, and the best calendar year batting performance by Australian captain Michael Clarke.... but there's still time to get with the strength, people.
May '11
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Jake Beckley. Chief Bender. Dan Brouthers. Jack Chesbro. Sam Crawford. Never heard of them? They're all in the Hall of Fame. But not baseball's all time leaders in hits, home runs, MVP awards or Cy Young awards.
Vicious thugs like Ty Cobb. Boozers and womanizers like Babe Ruth. They are in the Hall and they should be. But political correctness has taken over the Hall, as it has the Nobel Peace Prize and Time's Man (pardon me, person) of the Year. The Hall of Fame is a joke.
Sep '10
Re: Nobody for the Hall
They should hold an induction ceremony for the Human Growth Hormone.
Mar '11
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Cutlass: Oh, and for God's sake, can we just let Pete Rose in already??? It seems silly to even discuss Bonds, Clemens, et al while Rose remains banished.
Whatever his "crimes," at least we know that all those runs he put up were pure sweat and hustle. · 2 hours ago
You beat me to it.
Mar '11
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Larry3435: Jake Beckley. Chief Bender. Dan Brouthers. Jack Chesbro. Sam Crawford. Never heard of them? They're all in the Hall of Fame. But not baseball's all time leaders in hits, home runs, MVP awards or Cy Young awards.
Vicious thugs like Ty Cobb. Boozers and womanizers like Babe Ruth. They are in the Hall and they should be. But political correctness has taken over the Hall, as it has the Nobel Peace Prize and Time's Man (pardon me, person) of the Year. The Hall of Fame is a joke. · 27 minutes ago
Just a point on Cobb, much of his reputation comes from a slanderous biography that the author spun out of whole cloth. Character assasination after Cobb and anyone who knew him was dead.
Aug '12
Re: Nobody for the Hall
I don't like the idea they chose sports-writers to elect who goes in. It's time to change it. They can be too biased (and now too stupid, racist, political and full of themselves, from the way they've been this year). Maybe professional umpires who have completed at least 8 seasons doing MLB should be voting. They see the real sights and sounds, without being identified with one team or city.
Oct '12
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Craig Biggio should be elected. He's a beacon of clean team player in a sad era. He had speed, lots of singles and doubles, stolen bases, played two positions as an all star.
Oct '12
Re: Nobody for the Hall
skipsul
Cutlass: Oh, and for God's sake, can we just let Pete Rose in already??? It seems silly to even discuss Bonds, Clemens, et al while Rose remains banished.
Whatever his "crimes," at least we know that all those runs he put up were pure sweat and hustle. · 2 hours ago
You beat me to it. · 49 minutes ago
Rose, Bonds, Clemens, and those who have documented cheating or rule breaking, should be elected to the HOF, but only after their deaths. They shouldn't get to stand up in front of the building and have a party. But their accomplishments should be ackowledged.
Jan '13
Re: Nobody for the Hall
I find the process deeply flawed. It gives writers too much power over players' legacies, and I don't think writers always have players' or the games best interest at heart.
A lot of writers probably resent the lifestyle and adulation these players get. Most players live an adolescent and decadent existence with tons of money, women, and night life. Many are not very bright and are oblivious to the world outside the game. It would be tough as a fairly well educated and talented writer to cover these guys with what is, lets face it, a pretty meaningless physical skill, and have to pander to them on a daily basis.
I'll bet many writers see this as their chance to balance out the scales and show players they aren't the center of the universe. I also think a lot of writers just like to get on a soapbox and give into the temptation to be self-righteous about the purity of nobility of something they love. This turns the hall into something of a hallowed idol and elevates the inductees who do get in to a status that they aren't due, in my opinion.
Edited on January 10, 2013 at 3:58pmRe: Nobody for the Hall
Quick question: Would electing Rose to the HoF increase or decrease the price of his signatures that he sells in Las Vegas? http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:7925114
Jun '10
Re: Nobody for the Hall
My instinct is to take the purist position, in which only those players who excelled in the game (by evidence of stats), played by the rules (no cheating), and otherwise earned a significant consensus of acclaim deserve to be in the Hall.
Still, I wonder whether this approach is best for the game, and the Hall. The Hall ostensibly celebrates the game, and the men who played it well. Baseball is a game that attracts the gentleman and the cad alike, both competitors seeking to master a game like no other. Yes, I think the Hall is rarified air, and should be reserved for only the best of the best. But adding a sort of morality clause to the game's list of unwritten rules to use as a bar for Hall induction takes away an important facet of the game. The game is played by men, men with faults. Their crimes aren't as much against baseball, as against its fans.
So what do you do with the PED class? Asterisks? Exclusion? Scarlet Letter? I don't know. Greats are greats, be they cad or gentleman. Maybe the game, and the Hall, should have room for both. Somehow.
Jan '13
Re: Nobody for the Hall
Do you find him selling his signature and memorabilia unseemly, King?