It used to be that filling out the Hall of Fame ballot every winter involved sorting through statistics and awards and All-Star honors. Now it involves Congressional testimony, the Mitchell Report and failed drug tests.
It used to be about RBI. Now it's about PEDs.
It used to be a challenge. Now it's almost impossible.
And it used to be fun. Now it's more thankless.
This isn't just about evaluating a player's career, as if that weren't already a formidable responsibility. It's now about ethics and morals and right and wrong and accountability. It's being asked to make tough decisions because others failed to make easy ones.
After much deliberation, I voted for two players on the 2014 Hall of Fame ballot: Curt Schilling and Jeff Bagwell.
Those choices came after some soul-searching and not a little deliberation on my part.
I voted for Schilling despite the fact this his win total -- 216 in the regular season -- is rather slight compared to others. I gave plenty of weight to his postseason performance (11-2 record and a 4.38:1 strikeout-to-walk ratio, the best since 1900).
I also voted for Schilling because of his place in baseball history. He was a central figure in both the 2001 and 2004 postseasons, two of most dramatic in modern baseball history. And finally, beyond all the statistical achievements, I voted for Schilling because it's impossible to tell the story of baseball from 1990 through 2007 without referencing Schilling. And that should count for something.
I voted for Bagwell because of his remarkably consistent and productive career, which features eight 100-RBI seasons, nine seasons with 30 or more homers, and a lifetime OPS of .948.
I do so, of course, knowing that Bagwell was the subject of plenty of speculation during his career. The same player who hit four homers one season at Double A with the Red Sox went on to hit 449 in his major-league career.
But while there have been allegations of PED use with Bagwell, there's been nothing concrete. He wasn't named in the Mitchell Report and there are no eye-witnesses who saw him inject anything.
I had two tough omissions: Craig Biggio and Mike Piazza.
Biggio, who was never linked to PED use, collected 3,060 career hits -- a figure topped by just 20 others -- and is fifth in career doubles. But in 20 seasons, Biggio had just two seasons in which he finished with more than 80 RBI, one season in which he hit 25 or more homers, and hit over .300 just four times. In those two decades, he finished in the Top 10 of MVP voting only twice.
And there is this: As impressive as his career totals are, I never considered Biggio one of the best players in the game.
Piazza was trickier. The case could be made that he's the best offensive catcher in modern history, better even than Yogi Berra and Johnny Bench. But he was below average as a catcher, and there are the persistent suggestions that Piazza's greatness as a hitter was aided and abetted by PED use.
These same concerns initially prevented me from voting for Bagwell in his first year of eligibility, until I decided that there was no hard evidence against him. In time, I may feel the same about Piazza. But for now, those nagging concerns, coupled with his defensive shortcomings, kept him off this year's ballot.
Meanwhile, I left a number of others off my ballot, including Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds, all of whom unquestionably posted Hall of Fame-worthy numbers. But to me, there's overwhelming evidence that all three used PEDs and as such, I cannot in good conscience vote for any of the three -- or anyone else whom I have good reason to believe used PEDs.
Obviously, this leads to some questions and counterpoints, some of which I've anticipated below, along with my responses.
1) "You're acting as judge and jury!"
Why, yes -- yes I am.
That's part of the process. As a longstanding member of the Baseball Writers Association of America, I'm being asked to give my informed opinion. And I have.
It's the same stance I had more than a decade ago, before the ballot was full of tainted and allegedly tainted players. In those innocent times, I was judging a player's career and his worthiness for Cooperstown.
It's no different now, except that there are mitigating circumstances. And those circumstances are, to me, part of equation.
On the ballot, there's reference to a player's "record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship (and) character . . . '' I find it impossible to dismiss those factors.
And, if you've ever voted in any sort of election -- local, state-wide or presidential -- you, too, have acted as "judge and jury.'' It's unavoidable.
2) "Everybody did it!''
No, everybody didn't do "it" - "it" being the use of performance enhancing drugs.
While PED use certainly appears to have been far more widespread than we initially imagined, many players didn't succumb to the temptation.
To suggest otherwise is every bit as naive as suggesting that PED use was non-existent.
Many -- perhaps even most -- players cheated. But not all. And to look the other way with those who did is to excuse that behavior and offer no consequences.
3) "But Bonds and Clemens were already Hall of Famers before their alleged use began.''
This is probably true. Before Bonds began using -- and remember, Bonds has acknowledged using the Clear and the Cream, but insisted he didn't know what they were -- he had already won three MVPS and finished second in another season. He had won eight Gold Gloves and had hit more than 400 career homers.
If you put Clemens' before-and-after date at 1996, he had won three Cy Young Awards, an MVP and had tied Cy Young as the winningest pitcher in Red Sox history.
But to me, ignoring the fact that both cheated in the second half of their careers is akin to looking the other way on a golfer who insisted he only started to cheat on the back nine and would have won his round anyway.
4) "Clemens was found innocent in a court of law.''
Clemens was found "not guilty" on charges of perjury. The fact that the government failed to convict him of perjury doesn't necessarily mean that Clemens never used PEDs.
Look at the overwhelming evidence against Clemens -- his career renaissance after first meeting Brian McNamee in Toronto; his admission that McNamee adminstered PEDs to both his wife, and his closest friend in the game, Andy Pettitte; and the documentation in the Mitchell Report -- and it's virtually impossible to come away believing he was clean.
If the PED era has taught us anything, it's that the period -- or our knowledge and understanding of it -- is constantly evolving. Perhaps in a year's time, we'll have definitive proof, one way or another -- about some of the players left off ballots, and some whom we've already elected.
Context is important and in time, I may reconsider my approach.
But for now, that's how I feel.
Tags: Hall of Fame, Boston Red Sox, Sean McAdam, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa, Curt Schilling, Jeff Bagwellrand paul mark kirk florida gop debate freddie mac kristin cavallari oscar nominations rough riders
It's six o'clock in the evening. Do you know where your spice jars are? Three bloggers certainly do, as they have invented and built cost-and-space-efficient spice storage solutions. These three solutions use wall and pantry space to the fullest. Are you ready to make the most of your kitchen? Let's go!