The 2005 Veterans Committee Hall of Fame Ballot can basically be broken down into three categories: Guys who just aren’t Hall of Famers, Guys for whom there’s no reason to honor them now, and Guys that really belong in the Hall. When I break it down, I get 9 Unworthies, 8 Too-lates, and 8 Why-aren’t-they-already-ins.
The Unworthies:
This group is made up of Bobby Bonds, Rocky Colavito, Mickey Lolich, Marty Marion, Minnie Minoso, Don Newcombe, Luis Tiant, Maury Wills, and Smoky Joe Wood. Most of these players excelled for three or four years and then became very average. Bonds was the first 30/30 guy, Marion was the premier defensive shortstop of his day, Wills stole 104 bases in 1962, and Wood won 34 games in 1912. These are excellent accomplishments, but when you look at their whole careers, it’s hard to say they belong with the greats. In all fairness, I think a number of these players are better than some players already in the Hall of Fame, but that is not the standard. To that argument, I suggest that those players probably shouldn’t be in the Hall either.
The Too-Lates:
All of these players have been dead for 10 years or more, except for Curt Flood, who died in 1997. The list: Ken Boyer, Wes Ferrell, Elston Howard, Curt Flood, Roger Maris, Carl Mays, Thurman Munson, and Vada Pinson. Some of them might debatably be worthy of election, but why elect them now? All of them, except Munson had numerous opportunity to be elected while they were living, so that they could enjoy the honor and tribute of enshrinement. In the next group, I have two players that have been dead for some time, but I feel that the case for them is rather compelling, whereas this group just isn’t.
The Should Already-Bes:
If I could vote for this honor, I would be able to name 10 players on the ballot. In this group, I would name 8: Gil Hodges, Tony Oliva, Ron Santo, Dick Allen, Joe Torre, Joe Gordon, Jim Kaat, and Spary Lyle. Here’s a brief case for each:
Gil Hodges (1B 1943-1963): In a functionally 18-season career, mostly with the Dodgers, Hodges was the heart and soul of the team and the anchor of the 1950’s “Boys of Summer” Brooklyn teams. He was also the favorite of the Brooklyn fans. He played in 8 All-Star games, won 3 Gold Gloves, finished in the Top 10 of the MVP race 3 times, and managed the 1969 Miracle Mets. Career Vitals: .273/370/1274 in 2071 games. Three Best Seasons: 1954 - .304/42/130, 1953 - .302/31/122, 1951 - .268/40/103. Died 1972
Tony Oliva (OF 1962-1976): Oliva won the AL batting title (.323) and the Rookie of the Year in 1964. He would win two other batting titles in his 15-year career, all with the Twins. He also led the league in hits 5 times, and doubles 4 times. He made 8 All-Star teams, won a Gold Glove, and finished in the Top-10 for MVP 5 times. Career Vitals: .304/220/947/1917 hits in 1676 Games. Three Best Seasons: 1964 - .323/32/94, 1970 - .325/23/107, 1969 - .309/24/101
Ron Santo (3B 1960-1974): Santo spent 14 of 15 years with the Cubs, and most of them as the premier third baseman in the NL. He led the league in OBP twice, and walks 4 times. He made 9 All-Star teams, won 5 Gold Gloves, and finished in the Top-10 for MVP 4 times. Career Vitals: .277/342/1331 in 2243 games. Three Best Seasons: 1964 - .312/30/114, 1966 - .312/30/94, 1969 - .289/29/123
Dick Allen (1B/3B 1963-1977): 15-year career, most of it (9 seasons) with the Phillies. Generally considered to be a trouble-maker, and thus his transaction line looks like he played in the 90’s rather than the 60’s. He led the NL in home runs twice, and slugging 3 times. He made 7 All-Star teams, was NL Rookie of the Year in 1964, and NL MVP in 1972 (3 total top-10’s). Career Vitals: .292/351/1119 in 1749 games. Three Best Seasons: 1964 - .318/29/91, 1966 - .317/40/110, 1972 - .308/37/113
Joe Torre (C 1960-1977): Torre will get in as a manager in few years, regardless of what happens in this vote. Before he managed, he had an 18-year career, mostly with the Braves (often as the protection for Hank Aaron), but he also spent 6 years with the Cardinals. He led the league in hitting (.363), hits (230), total bases, and RBI’s in 1971, which also earned him the NL MVP for that year. He made 9 All-Star teams, won one Gold Glove, and 1 MVP (2 total Top-10’s). Career Vitals: .297252/1185/2342 hits in 2209 games. Three Best Seasons: 1971 - .363/24/137, 1966 - .315/36/101, 1964 - .312/20/109
Joe Gordon (2B 1938-1943, 1946-1950): Gordon played the first part of his career for the Yankees and the second part with the Indians. His career totals would certainly be better had he not missed three seasons in the war. He was the best second baseman of his day, and the first second baseman with power, all for a very good Yankees team. He made 9 All-Star teams, and won the 1942 AL MVP (5 total Top-10’s). Career Vitals: .268/253/975 in 1566 games. Three Best Seasons: 1942 - .322/18/103, 1948 - .280/32/124, 1940 - .281/30/103. Died 1978
Jim Kaat (P 1959-1983): This is Kaat’s first time of the VC ballot after 15 frustrating years on the writer’s ballot. He had a long 25-year career, 14 of them with the Twins. He made 3 All-Star teams, won an astonishing 16 Gold Gloves, finished in the Top-10 for MVP once, 1 Top-10 Cy Young, and had 3 20-win seasons. Career Vitals: 283 wins/ 3.45/2461K. Three Best Seasons: 1974 – 21-13/2.92, 1966 – 25-13/3.61, 1975 – 20-14/3.11
Sparky Lyle (P 1967-1982): Lyle was one of the first stud closers when the idea of “closer” came about, he even won the first Cy Young Award for the position in 1977. He also held the all-time saves record, but for only part of one season. He passed Hoyt Wilhelm, held the record for a few months, and then was passed by Rollie Fingers. He made 3 All-Star teams, won 1 Cy Award (2 Top 10’s), 2 MVP Top-10’s, and led the league in Saves twice. Career Vitals: 99/76, 2.88, 873, 238 Saves. Three Best Seasons: 1977 – 13-5/2.17/26 Saves, 1972 – 9-5/1.92/35 Saves, 1974 – 9-3/1.66/15 Saves.
If you’ve followed any sports talk in the last week, the conversation has been almost exclusively limited to steroids. The matter has become very complex, and if you’re new to the discussion, search words like Giambi, Bonds and BALCO to get the whole story. I have a number of thoughts on the matter. Some questions I think I can answer and other questions that still need answers.
First of all, what is the effect? How much difference do steroids really make? In the 1988 Olympics, Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson was stripped of his gold medal in the 100 meters. In that race he set the world record, and a few weeks later the steroid scandal came to light. Carl Lewis was awarded the gold. As a culture, we have made a number of assumptions about this case and about steroids in general. Did steroids actually make Johnson run faster? Obviously he was fast from the very beginning. It’s not as though he shattered the record. He broke it by a “normal” margin. If he hadn’t been on steroids, might he have still broken the record? If he hadn’t been on steroids, might he have still run a better race than Carl Lewis? We don’t know, yet as a group, we always assume that it is so. How much difference does it make in baseball? We definitely know that steroids won’t put the bat on the ball, it won’t put the ball in the glove, and it won’t put a pitch in a particular location. We (the sports fans) believe that steroids will make a batted ball travel farther, will increase speed (thus allowing a defensive player to get to balls that would have other wise passed him by), and will increase the velocity of a thrown (or pitched) ball. The question is, how much of a difference, if any, does it make?
This might seem like a trivial issue, after all, aren’t the records tainted either way? Well maybe, but maybe not. Are we talking about adding 5 feet to a batted ball, or 100 feet? Are we talking about a .005-second difference in getting from one base to another or a whole second? Are we talking about .25 mph added to the fastball, or 5 mph? If the difference is really small, then so what?
The reason these substances are illegal (from a civil standpoint) is that they destroy the body in various ways, but if they were safe, would it make a difference? Lots of athletes use other supplemental substances in their workouts. Why aren’t these substances banned? The International Olympic Committee has spoken on this issue: they don’t allow anything. No Tylenol, no Sudafed, no caffeine – nothing. No other sports have drawn that line, so where should it be? Should it be limited to those things which are determined to be harmful by the FDA? If “steroids” could be made safe, would it be okay then? Creatine is allowed. Various fat burners are allowed. Cortislim is allowed. None of these things have quite the effect of anabolic steroids, but they all have and effect on the results of person’s body shape and the productivity of their workouts.
I am not arguing that the steroid issue has no bearing on the recent baseball records; I am saying that we have no idea how much, if any. This fact, however, cannot be denied: Barry Bonds and Jason Giambi and others did not cheat. This leads us to the next vital question: who is really to blame?
I maintain that it is not at all the fault of the particular players. The simple fact is that baseball has not had, until 2004, any rules against it. I have heard some analyst and talk show callers say that the burden of integrity falls on the shoulders of the players, but that is just ridiculous. Why should players in general not go for an edge in their game that the game itself, by its silence on the matter, says is okay?
Consider the stakes: A player like Reggie Sanders, who has averaged 27 home runs a year for the last four years, typically signs 1-2 million dollar one-year contracts, often with bad teams. Gary Sheffield hits 34 homers a year (over the last four years), and he gets long multi-year deals with the best teams in the 9-13 million dollar a year range. That’s the difference between being a slightly better than average hitter and being a superstar. If you are Sanders, and you can take steroids, which MLB says is legal, and boost your home runs and find yourself among the premier power hitters of the game, with the payoff being a 6 or 7 time increase in salary, why wouldn’t you do that?
Ultimately the blame lies with Major League Baseball, however, it’s not Bud Selig that can make the change. It’s not the owners either. The group that can make the difference is the players association (MLBPA). The MLBPA has long used this issue as a bargaining chip, and has even said that imposed testing by MLB would be a matter worthy of going on strike. They have made the typical “privacy” argument, but in the end it really comes down to the dollars. The attorneys that negotiate for the MLBPA get a percentage of every contract of every player in the union, which is every player. They believe that have a few of the best players on steroids will increase their value, and you can follow the logic from there.
The owners have turned a deaf ear to the matter for similar money reasons, but they at least recognize the potential backlash from fans, so they have made at some effort over the years to implement a real program. The Commissioners Office has no real say on the matter at all. The Commissioner has lost more and more power with each subsequent administration to the point where all Bud Selig can really do is make recommendations and be labeled as the scapegoat for the game’s problems.
Thus we have one more question: What can and should be done now? First of all there’s no recourse for Bonds or Giambi or anybody else. No MLB authority figure has any grounds upon which to asterisk a record, fine them, or suspend them. At this point, it’s just an unfortunate fact that taints the public perception of the players that have been exposed.
Ultimately the MLBPA must make changes in the rules to which they’ll submit, and the rules must be tight. I think a policy in which every player is tested every week would be a good start. Follow that with a hefty fine and a one-month suspension for first time offenders. For second offenses, players should be suspended for a season. A third offense results in a permanent, Pete Rose-esque ban. No Hall of Fame, no other baseball jobs – you’re through.
The MLBPA will never propose such a measure, but they had better come up with something that tough, lest the federal government step in, and if something doesn’t happen soon, they will. If the MLBPA will put forth a tough policy, Selig and the owners will sign off on it in a second – they understand the public ramifications.
If the MLBPA refuses to make move toward a tough policy, the other option short of federal intervention would be for a sizeable group of players to break the union. The Union has accomplished a lot for the players in the last thirty years, but refusing a steroid policy has and will continue to hurt the majority of the players. If you are a clean player, regardless of your skill level, it is a distinct disadvantage from both a personal and team standpoint for that player to face off with a juiced player. There is an unspoken pay scale in baseball, and if you’re an average player in a league where half the guys ahead of you are doped up, those doped up guys are getting your money. If you are a player on a clean team, and a rival team is full of juiced up players, the juiced team is winning your division title and taking your playoff spot.
Between the 2002 and 2003 season MLB implemented a plan in which they would randomly test players for the 2003 season. If the results showed that 7% or more tested positive, MLB would implement an anti-steroid policy with discipline attached in 2004. The system itself was a joke, but in spring training of 2003, the majority of the Chicago White Sox had a plan: they said, “We are clean, and we don’t want to play against players that are not.” The details of the 2003 plan said that any player that refused a test would be seen as having a positive result. The White Sox knew that a plan would be implemented in 2004 if the league crossed that 7% threshold, so they decided as a group to refuse taking their tests so there would be more positive results. The MLBPA kicked and screamed to keep them from doing this, and they ultimately won. 7% or more tested positive anyway, but this is the kind of thing it will take to break the union. If all the clean players stood up, they could make a difference.
John Smoltz and Curt Schilling have taken public stands before. Baseball needs more stars to stand up and lobby for testing. If three or four teams would all take a stand like the 2003 White Sox, something would get done. I’m convinced there are other clean superstars in the game. Stand up, Derek Jeter! Speak up, A-rod! If the MLBPA won’t take a stand, you can do it anyway. The clean players can make this happen, regardless of the wishes of any other group. It’s ultimately in their best interest to do so.