During the past few years, I’ve gotten into various discussions regarding prefessional baseball players that have played during the past 10 years and whether they should be eligible and voted for when hall of fame voting time comes. Well, during the coming weeks, baseball writers will begin voting for the baseball HOF, and names on the ballot include Cal Ripken Jr., Tony Gwynn, and Mark McGwire. For all intense and purposes, Ripken and Gwynn are locks to be voted into the HOF. However, the big question comes with McGwire, the infamously accused player of using steroids. Only Barry Bonds has a bigger black eye when the topic comes to steroids. Not that I’m getting the option to vote, but I do get to give my opinion, I would vote for McGwire to enter the HOF. Why? Well, there’s no proof. The quote below was taken from an ESPN article by Jim Caple and makes a very good point.
The point is, we just don’t know who did and who did not take performance enhancers, other than the players who have tested positive. To withhold votes on some players we suspect because they fit a certain profile is no more valid than arresting and convicting someone of a crime because they fit a profile. Fitting a profile is not proof of guilt, just as NOT fitting a profile is not proof of innocence.
We can and should, however, legitimately view the home run totals of the steroid era as inflated, just as we raise our eyebrows at the ERA figures from the dead-ball era. All baseball statistics should be viewed within the context of when they were achieved. If offensive numbers were high in a certain era – as they were in the early 1930s and much of the 1990s – we must take that into consideration. If offensive numbers were down in a certain era, we must take that into consideration as well. We do this all the time, not just with the steroid era.
I’ll admit, it’s a tough stance to take. However, my opinion tends to have some history for me. I also believe Pete Rose should be in the HOF because of his playing career, not withheld because of gambling during his coaching career. Not that Joe Jackson should be in the HOF due to a short career, but being labeled as guilty for fixing games when there was no proof he actually fixed any games probably kept him from further proving to be one of the best players in the history of the game. In the end, I agree with Jim Caple, people in all walks of life should not be judged based on a profile.
I respectfully disagree. Big Mac had the opportunity to come clean before Congress (??). All we heard was “I’m not here to talk about the past…” over and over. Well, sorry Big Mac, then I can’t consider your past when it comes time to consider the HOF (not that I mean anything).
It’ll never be proven if he actually was on the juice, but he did not deny it when he had the chance, nor come clean about the truth, so to me, that’s enough for me to cry “Foul Ball”….
Well, Joker, I always welcome different opinions. But, I have a question for you. If you did have a vote, how can you vote for anyone not knowing if they did or did not use ‘roids? It’s not up to the writers to make a decision on whether a person has used or not, if it hasn’t been proven, then that shouldn’t be taken into consideration. In other words, it’s up to the writers to use the stats and facts to make an opinion. Being that a big part of using performance enhancing drugs is the ability to recover faster, what’s to say Ripken didn’t use during his massive games played streak?!