Comments
Baseball’s Hall of Fame or Hall of Morality?
The Baseball Hall of Fame will honor three Class of 2024 inductees — Adrián Beltré, Joe Mauer and Todd Helton received enough votes from the Baseball Writers’ Association of America (BBWAA) to punch their tickets into Cooperstown. Jim Leyland, longtime manager of several teams, will join this impressive class of players on the dais, having been elected by the Hall’s contemporary baseball era committee, which examines the cases of managers, umpires, and executives whose greatest contributions came after 1980. These honorees will be officially introduced during a ceremony on July 21.
Those three on-field players have been deemed worthy of enshrinement by the 385 members of the BBWAA for their statistics, longevity, and periods of domination as being judged amongst the very best of their era (overall and at their position), post-season contributions … and, according to election rules, their “integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.” This last element of assessing the worthiness of admission to the Hall is referred to as “The Morals Clause.”
This begs the question, is baseball’s most esteemed institution a Hall of Fame or Hall of Morality?
This is a particularly thorny debate for baseball purists, significantly ramped up in intensity when assessing those who competed in what was deemed the “steroid era” in MLB. Unquestioned giants of the game, in any era of comparison, have been shut out of the Hall because a majority of voting writers have hypothesized that they used performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) to elevate their performance. Most notably not making the grade for enshrinement are Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa, and Mark McGwire.
I believe that each of these individuals should have a plaque in the HOF. My logic follows.
Intoxicating Data, Ducats, and Delirium
Were these four ballplayers superstars? By any definition of the word, unquestionably yes.
Statistics? Inarguably, amongst the best cumulative and single seasons in baseball history and, in some cases, THE BEST in the game’s annuls.
By their singular presence on the field, each of these ballplayers shined a considerably brighter spotlight on the game. This outcome was 100% embraced by the Lords of Baseball, fans of the game, and even those who didn’t closely follow the sport. Uniquely, they each directly contributed to driving considerably more:
- Fans and non-fans to the ballparks — theirs and on the road.
- Viewers to their televisions and listeners to radio broadcasts.
- Advertisers and their mega-dollars to ballparks and broadcasts.
- Sales of baseball jerseys, paraphernalia, and accouterments.
- A massive infusion of revenue directly into the pockets of owners.
- Hometown pride to their respective team’s community.
- And, ironically, readers to baseball writers’ columns.
I believe that the 385 members of the BBWAA who cast ballots in the 2024 Hall of Fame election should have singularly evaluated players’ statistics and contributions to the game. What was their worth to the National Pastime during their era? During their career? How did they stack up on the field compared to benchmarks set by the acknowledged greatest to play the game? Did they have “HOF careers”?
Crossing into the Neverland of speculation introduces too many slippery slopes. I do not deny that there was a steroids era in baseball. To do so would be foolish. My point is that sneaking suspicions supported by hunches, observations, and even fair investigative reporting don’t go far enough to decisively cull the guilty from the group as a whole. Casting aside the issue of burden of proof — which is in and unto itself an alarming concept — BBWAA members do not have the capacity, let alone the moral authority, to conclusively draw a line in the sand and dictate, “Okay, you’re over there. You … you’re over here on this side.” Piazza, Bagwell — over here. Bonds, Clemens — over there.
To me, that has too much potential to cheat the history of the game.
Does one generally know when someone is of high moral makeup, possessing the intangibles of “integrity, sportsmanship, and character”? I would answer yes. You can see it. You can admire it. However, you can’t grade it with 100% certainty because we all have predispositions and biases.
What you can measure, evaluate, and even critique with focused, analytical rigor across this great game’s history is on-field performance.
The Choir Boys HOF
Unquestionably, some men stood tall not only on the field but in life. Jackie Robinson jumps to the front of the line, at least in my mind, in courage, outstanding achievements, and noble qualities. Roberto Clemente is also on this list.
As well, others put up exceptional numbers who also have a rep of being good eggs. Cal Ripken Jr., Tony Gwynn, Willie Stargell, and Brooks Robinson come to mind.
As well, others put up exceptional numbers who also have a rep of being good eggs. Cal Ripken Jr., Tony Gwynn, Willie Stargell, and Brooks Robinson come to mind.
But Cooperstown is hardly the hall of charming, affable, good, or even in some
The HOF is strewn with individuals — players, managers, owners, commissioners — with socially unacceptable flaws. I’ll insert the word purportedly on this list of portrayals of HOFers:
- Ty Cobb (violent and sociopathic racist)
- Babe Ruth (womanizer and heavy drinker)
- Grover Cleveland Alexander (alcoholic)
- Mickey Mantle (hard drinker)
- Cap Anson (instrumental in forging baseball’s color line)
- Kenesaw Mountain Landis, MLB’s first commissioner (made sure baseball’s color line would not be crossed)
- Tris Speaker (a member of the Ku Klux Klan)
- Tom Yawkey (owner with clear resistance to signing black players)
- Gaylord Perry (one of many players who walked the line of duplicitous behavior on the field to gain an advantage)
- Commissioner Bud Selig (turned a blind eye to rampant amphetamine use and the PED era)
Dark blemishes all. The contemptible behavior of some of these men categorically deserves society’s scorn and moral indignation. The measure of these individuals’ character is a stain that will forever be associated with them, and their actions debated and discussed by future generations.
History paints a detailed picture of how society worked and what individuals’ makeup was “back in the day.” History is who we are. Baseball’s history is captured in the museum that is the sport’s Hall of Fame. All of its history.
In 2008, former baseball players’ union chief Marvin Miller, himself finally elected to the HOF in 2020, noted, “I think that by and large, the players, and certainly the ones I knew, are good people. But the Hall is full of villains.”
Moral qualities being recognized, if you accept my standard for admission — i.e., sterling on-field accomplishments — these superlative players all belong in the HOF. Regardless of how you assess these men and their actions and inactions, these ballplayers were Hall of Famers on the field.
I would be remiss if I didn’t address in this piece the lifelong bans of Pete Rose for betting on his own team’s games, and of the eight members of the 1919 White Sox after they threw the World Series. Confession: Rose, the game’s all-time hits leader, was my baseball hero when I was growing up.
Like many of my generation, I admired his fire, his love of the game, his consistency. By all accounts, his era’s children felt the same about Shoeless Joe Jackson, one of those players banned for his part in the Black Sox Scandal.
These are transgressions of the highest order and go to the fabric of the game.
Still and all, I believe that both of these individuals should have plaques in the Hall of Fame. It’s not the Hall of Shame. It’s also clearly not a shrine to honor character. They are amongst the game’s greatest players, and their on-field achievements should be acknowledged. Because baseball’s #1 rule concerns betting on the game, Rose’s and Jackson’s plaques (perhaps segregated within their own room?) should note their offenses and the fact that their actions dishonored the game and that the stiffest of all possible penalties were dispensed. Let the Hall contribute tangibly to educating its visitors about these wrongdoings.
But what of the alleged PED offenders who rose to the very top of the game with scintillating, year-after-year, hold-your-breath on-field accomplishments? Those who kept us glued to our seats and brought unquestioned thrills and great value to the game as played in that era as a whole? Were Bonds and Clemons, for just two examples, putting up HOF numbers before suspicion of PED use surfaced in the game? If no one was definitively caught and proven to be using steroids, are they genuinely guilty of staining the game? What percentage of juiced hitters were facing juiced pitchers? Were Bonds and Clemons and the others under suspicion competing against rosters full of fellow users? How much did rampant use of amphetamines, commonly used for decades, ratchet up the game performance in the prior era? Like most substances in question in this debate, greenies weren’t even against baseball rules for long periods when they were allegedly used to speed recovery time from physical exertion and get “up” for the game. We’ll never know the answer to these questions.
How do you gauge the ungaugable? You don’t. Instead, when assessing the greatest, you compare performance. You juxtapose the most outstanding players’ numbers against their on-field competition, as well as era versus era. Stats, including modern-day analytics, don’t lie. They don’t need a judge and jury assessing “evidence” and character.
So give them a pass? Hardly. Let generations — fans and non-fans — fuel the debate. That is how the past teaches future generations. History has always included the missteps, indiscretions, and lapses in judgment of any particular generation’s celebrated individuals. Great men and women who have made significant contributions have also made tremendous and sometimes grave mistakes. In baseball, as in life, let history paint the full picture of these athletes and men. It will not always be flattering. But it will always be worthy of a good, sometimes raucous, debate.
The statistically deserving of our greatest performers should be enshrined in the HOF. Once they are, they will have their morality or lack thereof scrutinized as any public figure who sets a bad example is remembered.
Legends aren’t saints. The purpose of Cooperstown is to house the history of the game, good and tainted. It’s inconceivable that the game’s hit king, its greatest home run hitter, and a seven-time Cy Young winner would not be worthy of admittance to the museum of the history of the game.
Their HOF Plaques
When I visited Cooperstown and the Baseball Hall of Fame, I was awestruck. Indeed, the kid in the candy shop. I wish I could have spent days in this magnificent repository of the game’s history and shrine to its greatest players. I have zero doubts that when I return, I’ll get the same goosebumps.
I think back on standing in front of and reading Mickey Mantle’s HOF plaque. I saw him play in person only a few times when I was growing up, and those were the twilight years of his career. As I read his plaque, my mind leaped back to newsreels of this magnificent specimen of a ballplayer. Of his prodigious home runs from both sides of the plate. His speed. His enthusiasm for the game. His camaraderie with his Yankee teammates. His patrolling of center field. His World Series records.
Photo Credit: Baseball Hall of Fame
I poured over his HOF plaque but honestly didn’t have to do so. Embedded in my mind were his three MVP awards and his 20 All-Star games. His Triple Crown year in 1956. His four home run titles. His shared quest with the great Roger Maris in 1961 for the single-season home run record.
I also knew many particulars about Mantle that were not articulated on his plaque. That he was never quite 100 percent for so many years. That his dad named him after future HOF catcher Mickey Cochrane, and taught him the game. That I was sad when his last year’s performance dropped his lifetime batting average below .300 (to .298). That he was the heir apparent to Joe DiMaggio, whose last season was Mickey’s first … as a 19-year-old Adonis.
As I think back on that moment, I recognize now that The Mick’s HOF plaque was simply an extension of all of those baseball cards that I collected and studied as if my semester’s grade depended on it. Those Topps cards were de facto mini-plaques, presenting the facts that were his stats along with, on occasion, tidbits of the Commerce Comet’s life. I didn’t know it at the time when eagerly consuming the backs of those cards, but I know now that I was reading early versions of my hero’s HOF plaque.
Guess what was not on Mantle’s HOF plaque? There was no word about his self-destructive behavior — his hard-drinking lifestyle that eventually caught up with him and took him from us at the age of 63. There was nothing about my hero often failing to keep himself in game shape above and beyond the many legitimate injuries he suffered. Nothing about his after-hours activities; his carousing as, clearly, a high-functioning alcoholic.
It appears that those real-life characteristics and self-decisions were not what the baseball writers at the time included in their assessments of Mantle. They made him a first-ballot HOFer. Rightfully so.
The back of a player’s baseball card should be the sole admission ticket to stand with the game’s greatest players, all of whom were flawed in one manner or another. Call’em as you saw them. On the field.
Subscribe to receive a heads-up of posts via email!
John Besanko
I don’t disagree with much of this, but … I think what really hurts the players from the steroid era (like Bonds and Clemens) is that their physical appearance changed dramatically and yet they loudly and repeatedly denied the obvious (sometimes under oath). It’s hard for the voters to forget that.
Sam Dannaway
We all loved the summer of 1998 (including the owners, sports media and other parasites) when McGwire and Sosa singlehandedly saved baseball from its imminent demise. And now they spit on them. I was at Wrigley when the Cards came to town. McGwire hit one out, Sosa answered, and then McGwire hit another. The crowd, including me, went nuts each time. Baseball can never repay them, it is they who should spit on the “honored” HOF voters. If it is a Hall of Morality it definitely is very selective when it is applied. Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose also deserve to be in.
Jake
I think you left out the Hall of the Asterisk. There are quite a few players you mentioned that would not have gotten near the Hall if it were not for steroids, such as Bonds, Clements, Sosa and McGuire. They all might have had great careers, but do you really think Barry Bonds would have hit 500 homers? I understand that there were some bad people who did great things for baseball, but they didn’t cheat. So my opinion is that anyone found guilty of using PEDs should have an asterisk explaining how they got in. LOVE THE BLOG!!
LSomerbyCooke
hanks, Jake. I don’t often comment on comments, but I wanted to answer your direct question about Bonds. In short, yes, I believe he would have easily hit 500 HRs and, I believe. also crack the 600 level. He averaged 32 HRs from 1986-99, putting him at 445 before suspicion of PEDs. He played another seven years for SF. Even if he averaged 25 HRs during those years, he would have ended with around 620 HRs for his career. To me, a clear HOFer. Again, thanks for your opinion and for taking a read of my stuff! Much appreciated!
Jake
I do admit you are correct that Bonds would have made the Hall without PEDs. He was a great hitter and did a fine job at the family business. So then why? I can think of a lot of reasons, some good some bad, but he didn’t use steroids to heal; he used them to compete at a higher level than he was able. Asterisk, HOF career till 99? Your thoughts?
Ric Joyner
As usual, it was jammed pack with such interesting reading, I had to go back twice to finish it. It was great. I don’t have the intellectual background skills like you but I can say as usual it was a good read and a great writing epitaph of your skills.
Tim Thomas
A fascinating and insightful perspective. As usual, thoroughly entertaining and educational.
Gary “Count” McCorkle
Lee, I have taken this long to respond because I am all over the place on this one. Maybe by the conclusion of my reply I’ll have a definitive position. Let me say first that most friends know me as a basketball man but baseball was the sport of my youth and remains my favorite. Yes, baseball – the sport where catchers “framing” of over 90% of pitches per game (an attempt to cheat), the sport where the “phantom” touching (cheating) of second base on an infield double play is accepted but a player must always touch home, first base, or third base, and the sport where an umpire usually expands his strike zone on 3-0 pitches (cheating) to avoid walks because even though the pitch was a ball, it was “too close to take.” The ole hand grenades and horseshoes philosophies. My beloved baseball has always struggled with a sense of morality, inconsistent with what’s acceptable and unacceptable, permissible and not, encouraged and not. I guess I’m a purist who desires the black and white versus the gray, or dare I say, balls and strikes?
I went to Merriam Webster and saw this:
Definition of Hall of Fame
1 : a structure housing memorials to famous or illustrious individuals usually chosen by a group of electors
2 : a group of individuals in a particular category (such as a sport) who have been selected as particularly illustrious
Definition of fame (Entry 1 of 2)
1a : public estimation : REPUTATION
b : popular acclaim : RENOWN
Definition of renown (Entry 1 of 2)
1 : a state of being widely acclaimed and highly honored : FAME
Without my 2 cents on the controversy with the electors (no, I’m not related to Dick Allen or Gary Sheffield who never met a sportswriter they met), to me all of the players mentioned in your post and in the comments of posters deserve HOF status or at least serious consideration. I think a concern might be is “fame” the only criteria to be included in the HOF or does “morality” need to be factored in as you so aptly addressed? Perhaps if criteria is clearly stated before players start a MLB career, that would help. 10-12 year career minimum; if a batter, .310 lifetime batting avg. or 500 HRs, 400 stolen bases, 150 outfield assists, etc. would be automatics. As a pitcher, 250 wins, 3,000 Ks, .700 winning %age, 450 saves, .630 winning %age, etc. Criteria like the record industry uses – 500k sales = Gold certification; 1M = Platinum; 2M = Multiplatinum; 10M+ = Diamond. Takes all the subjectivity out of the equation. 499K sales? Sorry, that’s not Gold! Wanna add morals clauses? No felonies, 3 or less DUI/DWI convictions, 0 rapes/sexual assault convictions, 0 child pornography convictions, 0 drug charges, etc. Struggling with convictions versus allegations, make criteria for allegations, too (OJ, Cosby, etc.) [Side bar: how was the late Steve Howe ABLE to earn 7, count ’em 7, MLB suspensions for drug-policy violations???)]. The HOF should make a clear decision on the type of Hall it wants to be. As much as I did not like Pete Rose (the way his Big Red Machine demolished my Yankees), I’ve NEVER seen a player play as hard as that Ray Fosse career-ender did. A switch-hitter at that (partial for obvious reasons!! 🙂 Our buddy and former classmate Sam Dannaway raised a great point about the salvation of baseball during the Sosa-McGwire seasons. Clemens, Bonds, A. Rod, Palmeiro, Pettite – I watched play, some in person, and they excited me as great ballplayers. But how much of their greatness was legit, from a level playing field?
Bear with me as I share my points of consternation. First, as a parent if I set boundaries or limitations or expectations for my children and if they willingly violate them, do I administer consequences? Yes I do; some of the consequences they know ahead of time, others I surprise them, usually based on any repeat “violations” or exceptionally egregious ones. When I was a principal, I often told my students, “For every action you do, there is a reward or a consequence.” I still believe that.
Secondly, as a Christian I immediately thought of 2 bible characters as I read your wonderful article; Moses and David. Both were great men of God who achieved much “fame.” As humans, as we all are, they also messed up as we do. Both suffered major exclusions due to their “morality.” David was a stalker and an adulterer, got a married woman pregnant, made arrangements for her husband to come home from war to sleep with his own wife so everyone would think the husband impregnated his wife whom David slept with. When the husband refused to sleep with his own wife because he felt he shouldn’t enjoy the sexual pleasures of his wife when his fellow soldiers were denied similarly pleasures from their wives because they were on the battlefield and not in the bedroom. David then had him killed on purpose. Top that Clemens and Bonds!! Moses did great things in leading the Israelites out of captivity yet he also murdered a man and hid his body in the desert and while leading the people in the wilderness he disobeyed God and took credit for himself and did not give it to God by striking the rock that provided water. Top that Sosa and A. Rod! Their consequences — David was forbidden to build God the Temple (“bloody hands”) yet his son was. Moses was not allowed to enter the promised land; his AAA understudy and replacement Joshua was! Those must have been heart-breaking consequences, but get this – BOTH Moses and David are mentioned prominently in the Book of Hebrews, chapter 11 known as … the HALL OF FAITH!!!! Generations after their “disqualifying behaviors,” they made it in!
So my conclusion is this: if the Baseball Writer’s Association of America does not want to modify its Hall of Fame eligible candidates requirements with some of my aforementioned suggestions, after a generation from the players “sin” that led to the player’s exclusion, players whose stats and career clearly warrant inclusion by the very definition (above) of “fame” should be let in. Mr. Rose, Mr. Bonds, et al.
Lee, I apologize for the length of my reply but now you know of my struggle to come to a conclusion. But then again, my verbosity and long-windedness is YOUR fault; you were my sports editor when we both wrote for our high school newspaper!!! 🙂
LSomerbyCooke
Thanks for your excellent, thought-provoking comment, Gary. For us lifetime baseball devotees, this is a confounding subject, indeed. It took me a looonnnggg time to take a stand — i.e., history is all-encompassing, not pick and choose, especially in gray areas. You have offered elegant, intriguing ways to confront this particular dilemma, and I appreciate your thoughts. You should know that when I came up with my Mantle-focused conclusion, I thought, “Gary will like that.” 🙂 Again, thanks, my friend.
Jake
WOW!! I like that. Like Gary, I’m going to have to read that again before responding.
P.S. Did Lee know this piece would bring such responses?!?
Gary “Count” McCorkle
Jake, from our high school Echo days, we knew Lee was a talented writer. He’s only gotten better now!! I’ve never known Lee to be controversial; he’s a peacemaker at heart. He’s always been one to politely cause us to look introspectively at tough issues. So many more could benefit from his style and approach. It’s sickening and heartbreaking to read so many vitriolic comments on social media platforms today. Be it politics, racial issues, etc., people spew such hatred. It’s the Lee Cooke’s of the world who can lead us to a point of mutual respect and even admiration!!
Reed Sprague
What he said.
David Wolf
Someone very wise once wrote, “Character Counts, First, Last, and Always”. I couldn’t agree more. While there are plenty in the Hall who I do not think are worthy, we shouldn’t lower our future measure stick because of it. If it makes the Hall smaller and more elite, what would be wrong with that?
I’d support an actual Hall of Morality, where we could celebrate those who lived up to high character ideals and contributed to society. That’s a place I’d love take my kids and show them people to look up to.
Debbie Cooke
David, I happen to know that your children don’t have to “go somewhere” to see the one of the best examples of morality I know…they live with him every day. Keep living your life, Sweetie…and they will grow up knowing exactly who to look up to. oxoxox
Reed Sprague
Thank you, Lee, for another well-written, thought-provoking and interesting blog post. I really appreciate your writing. You are fair and objective. Few writers are.
Here’s my problem with MLB HOF PED and so on: I do not blame the juiced players at all, and I realize that the vast majority of people (probably ninety-eight percent plus) who have an opinion about this problem do blame them. I place all of the blame on the managers, coaches, owners, team executives and, especially, the commissioner, who served just prior to and during the PED era. I realize my take on this is waaaay outside the norm, so I put it out there with the risk that all who read this will rip and tear into me (probably a tad too much drama, but man did it feel good).
It’s easy to blame young, over-confident – even arrogant – over-paid players. I get it. Who among us has not secretly wished for A-Rod to “get the karma he deserves” for making so much money for doing so little for society and for acting deserving, or even cocky, while doing it? And what about Bonds, the guy who insisted on being treated like royalty (literally) just because he was capable of hammering a baseball with a bat like few others could hammer a baseball with a bat? And just who does The Rocket think he is, taking PEDs just so he could continue to throw a fastball 95 mph well into his late thirties, and even into his early forties, while arrogantly throwing a broken bat at a well-loved catcher? And, is it not human nature to want Mark McGwire to be knocked down several hundred pegs for his display of arrogance when he worked out with two-hundred-pound dumbbells for all the world to see — publicly displaying his bloated (and artificially made) muscles? These players, and others similar to them, are our scapegoats. What a bunch of rogues! So, get the whips and let’s get to whipping, and whatever you do, do not bring up our sacred Hall of Fame for these miscreants!
Or maybe not …
Just as we have a group of imperfect human beings involved in this mess — the players — who are easy to identify as deserving of our wrath for the staggering and inexcusable baseball PED nightmare, if we look closer, we quickly find that we also have some old guys who are much sneakier than the young bucks. And sneaky is what brought us the PED era in baseball.
So, let’s look closer at sneaky …
Is it sneaky to change the rules of baseball without writing the changes into the rule book? Yes, it is. Is it wrong if the players play by the new rules even though the bosses do not write the new rules into the rule book? No, it is not wrong. Baseball players, as well as practitioners from all professions, conduct themselves by many unwritten rules, and that practice will continue (although it really should not continue in any professional sport). Was it sneaky when managers, coaches, owners, executives and, yes, the commissioner, all said they “didn’t know” about PEDs in baseball when there is zero chance that they didn’t know? Those players who eventually told us about “the secret” through their books, interviews and articles, told us that for nearly a decade (some say longer), the PEDs were piled on the tables in every clubhouse in every MBL stadium for players to take as desired. A decade! In all clubhouses! Was it some miracle that the bosses did not see the PEDs sitting openly on the clubhouse tables? Is that really possible? No, it is not. The total of all the bosses combined — say, around 5,000 people or so over a ten-year span — did not know? For ten years? Seriously?! So, let’s not be silly and say the bosses “didn’t know.” Of course, they knew.
If we were challenged the same way …
If any of us mortals were offered (either directly or indirectly) millions of dollars by our bosses to take PEDs for a few years in order to make our profession “more exciting” (although I personally do not believe power makes the game of baseball more exciting) and at the same time extend our career by another very productive four to eight years, probably ninety percent of us would take PEDs. It’s human nature, and human nature always wins out. Would we be wrong to partake? No, we would not (unless the behavior were illegal). Would we be cheaters if we partook? No, we would not. We would simply be following the rules set forth by our bosses, even though our bosses didn’t write down the new rules and even though our bosses told all who asked that they “didn’t know” what we were up to.
Hall of Fame or of Hall of Shame …
Baseball writers should formally place blame for PEDs squarely where it belongs, with the BBB (baseball’s big bosses). Players should be voted into the BBHOF based on their level of play during all eras of play. Sammy Sosa played elite baseball during the steroid era and throughout his career. As did Barry Bonds. And A-Rod. Mark McGwire, and the others on such a list. You know who they are. In my opinion, all of them should be in the Hall of Fame. No asterisk.
Scapegoating helps no one, hurts many, and, worst of all, it always lets the guilty off the hook. We humans are simple-minded. We will place blame on the group that the “experts” point to, and write endless narratives about, while ignoring all other groups. The narrative takes over. Reason and objective analyses are nowhere to be found. The elephant in the room is ignored. But this ain’t smart to do. Because, sometimes the experts are sneaky. Sometimes they not only point away from the elephant, they also tell you that there is no elephant to ignore. Additionally: “The best defense is a good offense.” A better way of putting it might be: “The best defense is a good first offense.” Whatever you do, start the narrative. Then control it. “I didn’t know” again and again is a great way to gently steer the narrative. Don’t wait for someone else to gain that insurmountable advantage!
Baseball writers have the opportunity to do a much greater good for us all by refusing to honor the inexcusable actions of the baseball bosses with regard to PEDs. They can and should send a clear message: Do not scapegoat even an unpopular group of imperfect human beings in order to deflect blame from yourselves. We all should place blame on the guilty (PED-Era baseball bosses placed into the Hall of Shame, maybe?) and honor on the achievers (PED-Era elite players placed into the Hall of Fame). It really can, and should, be that simple, except that we can’t do it if we’re fooled by the sneaky people.
Sam Dannaway
The HOF voters seem to have no problem allowing alcoholics and racists to enter the Hall.
Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose should be in the Hall.
Also, players like Ron Santo.