Excuse me while I pull my hair out

The baseball Hall of Fame is a joke, its election process is a farce, and anyone who tries to defend it is a moron. Now that I have that off my chest, let me attempt to explain why I feel that way.

(Empty your bladder before proceeding)

As a lifelong Astros fan, I am obviously angered by the fact that two (in my completely objective opinion) players deserving of first ballot induction continue to sit on the sidelines awaiting their turn. I’m talking about Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio, of course. And while I am in the midst of forming a mob of Houstonians to march on Cooperstown wielding torches and pitchforks, I will say that that I am looking at a bit of a silver lining. While most people look at it as the possibility that they still have the chance to go in together, I am not as concerned with that.  Since the Astros currently have no representation in the HOF, I wouldn’t mind having someone represent them on two separate years. No, what I am more pleased about is the fact that when they finally do get in, they won’t have to share the stage with Greg Maddux or Tom Glavine. The hatred I have for them cannot be construed through words alone. While some of my contempt for them does come from the fact that they contributed to the Braves’ ability to prevent further Astros postseason success, I have a real problem with why they were able to do it back then. And now with the current Hall of Fame vote, I am more furious than ever that they are ushered in on a red carpet while Biggio and Bagwell are made to suffer for reasons that may have largely been created by Maddux and Glavine themselves (more on that later). Frank Thomas also got in on the first ballot despite being an inferior player to Bagwell, though their careers are very similar, so I have an issue with that, too.

First off, let me begin with what the Hall of Fame has gotten wrong outside of this year’s inductions. The omission of Pete Rose from the HOF is ludicrous. The guy has the most hits in the history of the sport and is one of the most recognizable names and faces (and haircuts) that it has ever had. He bet on games, so he has been banned for life. He’s not allowed to manage, coach, or be otherwise affiliated with MLB in any capacity.  That’s fine. I agree that there has to be some sort of punishment for breaking one of the game’s sacred rules, but to pretend that he doesn’t exist when you go to the baseball museum is lunacy. Does the record now belong to that bastion of moral clarity, Ty Cobb? Would anyone who knows the slightest thing about baseball name anyone other than Pete Rose as the all-time hit leader? Of course not. Thus, to completely omit him rather than to acknowledge his on-field accomplishments (while also pointing out his transgressions and subsequent banishment) makes absolutely no sense. So there’s that. And while it doesn’t really affect me either way, it’s a good illustration of how irrationally the HOF treats the representation of the game’s history.

Which leads us to the election process of those players that MLB has deemed eligible to be inducted. Any mildly useful scrub that was able to hang around the game for ten years is eligible. That’s the criteria. And the election of those players has been turned over to the Baseball Writers Association of America. To vote on the HOF players, you have to have been a member of the BBWAA for 10 years. Once you have been a member for 10 years, you have a ballot for life. It doesn’t matter if you are currently retired, selling real estate, painting houses or living in a shack in the mountains completely removed from all civilization with no access to radio or television and haven’t cared about baseball in years… your voice carries as much weight as everyone else. For that reason, there are around 600 voters for the HOF every year, many of whom have lost all touch with the game and ceased being relevant years ago. Consequently, you have hundreds of people making up their own rules about who should be in the HOF or not because there are no real guidelines other than having played for 10 years and being retired for five. It’s anarchy.

Because of the lack of oversight on who is doing the voting and no minimum criteria of what should qualify an inductee, the BBWAA has been able to hijack the process and allows its members to use their own ambiguous reasons to hold certain players out of the HOF. There are a few that should be no-doubt first-ballot HOFers, like Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds, who are being withheld because of accusations of performance enhancing drug (PED) use. Barry Bonds I do not have as much of a problem with since he testified under oath that he did use some substances (though he claimed he did it unknowingly. Clemens, however, was accused with no real evidence and denies his use to this day. Not only that, but he was taken to court over the allegations and was acquitted. So not only has he denied use, but our judicial system has declared him innocent of the charges. Why is that not good enough for the BBWAA?

But here is the real problem with holding players out of the HOF because of PED use. The Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) has been one of the most powerful unions, not just in sports, but in the entire nation for a while. Why have they been so powerful? Because team owners have constantly caved to their demands.  Because the MLBPA (and by their representation, the players themselves) did not want testing for PEDs, the owners agreed that there would be no testing. Because the union was so powerful, it was vey hard for individual players to speak out against them. Now when it comes time to honor individual players for their career achievements, it seems they are being penalized for the power held by their union or the weaknesses of their employers. Since there was never any program in place to test players for PEDs prior to 2005, it makes no sense to hold those players in judgment because of unjustified suspicions of individual writers. I would have less of a problem if they wanted to withhold players from induction that had tested positive for PEDs through the established process that was put in place later. To me, that would be the proper way to handle it.

What really gets me is the way that everyone holds Maddux and Glavine in such high regard, and perhaps they should.  While not necessarily cheating, they got into the HOF with more than a little outside help. About 9 inches outside. The way MLB umpires adjusted their strike zones for Atlanta’s pitchers is one of the most obvious instances of game manipulation that nobody ever wants to discuss.  Because they were excellent at locating their pitches, those guys slowly moved the strike zone farther and farther off the plate. Umpires should not adjust their strike zones for individual pitchers. And, for that matter, individual umpires should not have their own strike zones, but they do. (Do you see any correlation here?) So when you’ve got strike zones gradually drifting farther and farther off the plate, what are hitters supposed to do? They have to make sure that the few balls they get a chance to hit get hit… hard. Though it may be through no direct fault of their own, the two players that everyone believes have the cleanest hands in this election cycle are likely the major catalysts for the PED era.

Now, because PEDs became rampant in the 90’s, anyone who played in that era (except for the miraculous saints Maddux, Glavine and Thomas) is automatically excluded from consideration. Although that not one hint of suspicion ever surfaced during their playing careers (and no serious questions outside of the sportswriters themselves), Biggio and Bagwell do not get their much deserved recognition. This ignores the fact that Biggio was an All-Star at the two demanding positions of catcher and second baseman. He is one of only 28 players to collect 3,000 hits, 15^th  all-time in runs scored and 5^th place all-time in doubles (and most by a right-hander) including 56 in 1997, the most in the modern era. He has too many milestones to list, and too many to keep him out of the HOF.

Perhaps more egregious is the omission of Bagwell, perhaps mostly because of the ease with which Frank Thomas was ushered in. The two players being born on the same date, and playing the same position (at the beginning of their careers, anyway) and winning an MVP in the same year were always very similar players at first glance. Despite playing his first 10 years in the notoriously pitcher-friendly Astrodome, Bagwell was able to but up comparable offensive numbers to Thomas. The biggest difference between the two was that Bagwell was a far superior defensive player and baserunner than Thomas. Bagwell was the first full-time first baseman to have 30 homeruns and 30 stolen bases in a season.  He has a career WAR that is 6 points higher than Thomas's despite playing two fewer years. Thomas would be on the bubble for me even as a two way player because his defense was actually a detriment to his team. The fact that he was a DH for two-thirds of his career means that he should have to put up near-record numbers for me to vote for him. Had Bagwell been in the AL, there is no doubt he could have prolonged his career and gotten to the numbers Thomas eventually reached. He should be recognized for his defensive contributions, but he seldom is.

The HOF obviously needs to do something about their voting process. Yesterday, Deadspin announced that they had obtained a ballot from a voting member of the BBWAA and would be voting on his behalf. Deadspin polled their readers and voted according to their input. The ballot looked completely reasonable. It looked very close to what mine would have looked like, but I don't trust turning the voting over to the fans. Look at the NBA All-Star selections each year. There is no way to regulate fan voting. The ballot turned out to be that of ESPN’s Dan Le Batard. So the BBWAA is already a joke and now they banned Dan Le Batard from voting for life and suspended for one year as credentialed media for what he did with his vote. If you go to Deadspin you can see the ballot and Le Batard’s explanation for why he did it that is definitely worth a look.  The guy that voted only for Jack Morris because he refuses to vote for anyone in the PED era is the one that should have his vote stripped. I just don't understand what they think they are accomplishing. If everyone followed that guy's lead, then nobody would have gotten in this year other than Morris.  Would that really be preserving the integrity of the Hall of Fame? It is a mind-numbingly ignorant stance. I'm not sure what the solution is, but they need to come up with something. And I'm sure they banned Le Batard for life because they think he made them look foolish, but in my opinion, banning his completely defensible selections while letting the people who voted for Armando Benitez and J.T.Snow is what really makes them look like idiots.