With Manny Ramirez failing a second drug test, and subsequently retiring from baseball, there has been a lot of discussion as to how this will affect his Hall of Fame candidacy. In all likelihood, the BBWAA will climb upon their moral high ground, and refuse to vote him in, claiming that his admission would somehow cheapen and demean the Hall itself. Ramirez, and Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, and others, will fall into the same purgatory that Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro find themselves in - not enough votes to get in, and too many to fall off the ballot.
This stance is entirely hypocritical. Because the manner of cheating was an injectable substance, this is considered to be taboo and enough to immediately dismiss the candidate from the Hall? Gaylord Perry and Don Sutton made their careers off of cheating with the spitball and scuff ball respectively. In fact, Perry wrote a book called 'Me and the Spitter', which came out in 1974 - during the middle of his playing career! Yet, both pitchers managed to gain entry into the Hall. Why the double standard?
The steroid era was nothing more than another age in the history of baseball. Until Jackie Robinson broke into the Major Leagues in 1947, there had not been a black major league player since the 1880's. Does this mean that Cy Young, Ty Cobb, and Babe Ruth were not as great as they are considered to be? They did not have to face Satchel Paige, Cool Papa Bell, Josh Gibson, and the other stars of the Negro Leagues. But that does not matter - they were amongst the best of their era and competition.
During World War 2, quite a number of major league players were fighting in the war overseas. As such, a number of players had their career years during that time frame due to an overall decrease in the talent on the field. Hal Newhouser, inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1992, had his best three years from 1944 to 1946, when the players were just starting to come back to baseball. Yet, he made the Hall of Fame. The lack of talent then was not held against him.
In the 1960's through the 1980's, quite a number of players were hopped up on 'greenies', cocaine, and other various substances. In fact, baseball lore has it where Dock Ellis pitched a no-hitter while on acid. The voters have not held the drugs of that era against those playing during that time frame. In fact, prior to their ban in 2006, it was estimated that between 50% to 80% of baseball players were using greenies, yet it was an open secret in Major League Baseball. No one cared. The use of amphetamines has not affected anyone from reaching the Hall either.
So why the uproar over steroids when the other eras had their own issues? Yes, steroids can give an advantage to players, but how much of an advantage is it when roughly 50% of the league is on them? At this point, everyone that played during the mid to late 1990's through present is under a cloud of suspicion, even if there is absolutely nothing tying them to steroid use. Look at Jeff Bagwell, who should have been a first ballot Hall of Famer. However, since quite a number of writers think he was on steroids, despite a lack of any proof or any rumors that he was, he only received 41.7% of the vote.
The steroid era is simply another stage in the evolution of the game, and should be treated as such. Players like Ramirez, Bonds, McGwire, Clemens, and Palmeiro should be judged based on what they accomplished DURING THE ERA THEY PLAYED IN. After all, Manny Alexander was busted for steroids, and they obviously did not turn him into a Hall of Fame caliber player.
These players should be looked at in context of when they played. Aside from their statistics, there should be no other criteria.
No comments:
Post a Comment