The most revealing ballot in the modern
history of the Baseball Hall of Fame has arrived. Finally, those who
have earned the honor of a vote will be able to make one fundamental
revelation.
Do they punish a player for trying to
win?
Or do they choose to punish a player
for being OK with losing?
That’s all. That’s what the ballot
that includes the usual steroid-era candidates and also one Gary
Sheffield is about. It’s about that choice.
Already, the electorate has spoken
about the steroid users. Barry Bonds has yet to be elected. He is the
all-time leader in a particularly significant baseball statistical
category. He belongs in the Hall of Fame. He should have been in on
the first try. He could open his own Hall of Fame directly across the
street from 25 Main Street in Cooperstown and it would be more
legitimate. But it feels good to enough voters to penalize Bonds and
Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire and Mike Piazza and anyone else thought
to have used designer sports vitamins to become better players.
That’s the system. OK.
But into the ring now fly hats from the
Brewers, Padres, Marlins, Dodgers, Braves, Yankees, Tigers and Mets
--- those ball caps disgraced during what should have been the a
tainted, rotten career of Sheffield. His 509 home runs, nine All-Star
Games, one batting title and .292 career batting average normally
would make him a serious contender. It’s just that while baseball
was obsessed over imposing a lifetime ban on Pete Rose for trying to
win, it pardoned Sheffield for the one misdeed that should have any
athlete at any level banished from a sport. He threatened to fail.
This is what Sheffield once told the
Los Angeles Times: “The Brewers brought out the hate in me. I was a
crazy man. I hated everything about the place. If the official scorer
gave me an error, I didn't think was an error, I’d say, 'OK, here’s
a real error,' and I'd throw the next ball into the stands on
purpose.”
That is the loser who is on the Hall of
Fame ballot --- the one who would purposely “throw the next ball
into the stands,” the one the Brewers once dumped into the minors
for “indifferent fielding.” And what greater sin could there be
against a sport and the customers who pay to watch it than to have a
rat like that announcing that he would deliberately fail to perform?
Yet that was fine with enough teams that Sheffield could earn more
than $168,000,000 to play.
That he was loosely brought into the
steroid coverage will not boost Sheffield's campaign. But it will be
fascinating to see how many votes he receives from those rejecting
players who tried only to strengthen their bodies in an effort to
succeed. Sheffield may or may not have used performance-enhancers.
That should not matter. But threatening to error is unforgivable.
Once he did that, the perception had to be that he was intentionally
failing every time he wandered near a ball in play. And, hey, isn’t
that the leading argument against Rose, who only bet on his team to
win games while a manager --- that it wasn’t necessarily the crime
but the perception that most matters?
Those who tried to become stronger,
better players should not be denied Hall access. Those who tried to
manipulate the equipment in order to gain an edge, including the
corked-bat-wielding Sammy Sosa, must be rejected. Those found to have
used mind-altering drugs should be considered, but very carefully.
And those who once threatened to fail, even if they would later claim
to have been misunderstood, must be exposed until they vanish from
the ballot.
The election is thick with worthy
candidates this year. At least 17 could be Hall of Fame players. But
a voter can only check 10 boxes. This, then, is my ballot for the
2015 induction class, in alphabetical order: Craig Biggio, Bonds,
Clemens, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, McGwire, Piazza, John Smoltz
and Alan Trammell.
And I scratched out Sheffield's name
and wrote in Rose's in that precise spot. Because determined winners,
not indifferent losers, belong in the Hall of Fame.
RSS
