The MLB Hall of Fame (HoF) will announce their Class of 2017 next week, an event that will reveal as much about the writers who elect them as it will about the former players themselves.
If baseball’s so-called “steroids era” is largely over, the steroids-punishing era may be winding down as well.
For the most part, in recent years, the voting members of the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA), myself included, have judged steroid-tainted stars to be unworthy of the HoF honour.
Now, maybe, not so much. Last year’s election of catcher Mike Piazza was one turn of the page. This year’s forecasted selection of first baseman Jeff Bagwell is another.
Neither player ever tested positive for a performance enhancing drug, nor had any credible accusations levelled against them. Both simply looked the part, and had rumours follow them around.
The suspicion showed up in Hall voting.
Piazza was arguably the most productive, power-hitting catcher the game has ever seen and should have been a first-ballot selection in 2013. Instead he appeared on only 57.8 per cent of ballots, way short of the 75 per cent required.
By 2015, Piazza had meandered up to 66.9. Then, last year, he rocketed to 83 per cent — a landslide!
Bagwell’s career Wins Above Replacement (WAR) is sixth all-time and his traditional numbers put him head-and-shoulders above the average HoF first baseman. Yet he did not even make half the ballots his first year of eligibility in 2011, and crept up to a mere 55.7 per cent by 2015.
Like Piazza, Bagwell got a huge boost last year, just short of Hall election at 71.6 per cent.
So what was so magical about 2016? The Hall changed its voting eligibility rules.
Instead of having lifetime voting privileges, BBWAA members who were at least seven years away from actively covering MLB were dropped from the rolls.
The total number of ballots cast dropped from 549 in 2015 to 440 last year. In short, the voters skewed much younger, as scores of retired writers, including many who covered the 1990s-centered steroids era, lost their ballots.
What us BBWAA types have known anecdotally for years came clear in 2016: older writers are harder on drug cheats than younger writers, perhaps because it was more personal for us. We lived through the inflated performances, the lying and the suspicions.
Voting does not line up completely along generational lines. Even many veteran writers have grown weary of the chore, trying to figure out who was naughty or nice.
For myself, it is an agonising process. I have not voted for Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens — statistically as Hall worthy as any players of any century, but saddled with overwhelmingly credible evidence of pharmaceutical help.
Performance enhancing drugs use compromises the integrity of the sport. Worse, the success of juicers is a signal to young players that it is worth the risk. Cheats should suffer a consequence: not get a spot in the HoF.
Piazza and Bagwell? They got my vote. Rumours were not enough for me to deny them. Yes, I know. We may already have a cheater we never even suspected in the Hall, and I may have helped. I can live with it.
Neither will I waste time crying if Bonds and Clemens eventually make it. Bonds jumped from 36.8 in 2015 to 44.3 in 2016, and Clemens from 37.5 to 45.2.
They both have five more years on the ballot after this one. I suspect they may hit 60 per cent or more on Wednesday.
The only thing I know for sure is that this used to be fun, not a walk down a dark, creepy alley.
Follow us on Twitter @NatSportUAE
Like us on Facebook at facebook.com/TheNationalSport
