January 3rd, 2014 at 6:00 am 
by Ron Cervenka A few nights ago Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) Secretary-Treasurer Jack O’Donnell was a guest on MLB Network Radio’s Round Trip on SiriusXM. During the interview (which was very enlightening), O’Donnell was asked his opinion about voting members of the BBWAA openly writing about who they voted for on their Hall of Fame ballots before the winners are announced. Although O’Donnell was clearly opposed to this practice, he is in favor of Hall of Fame voters indicating how they voted after the winners are announced and should feel obligated to justify their selections to their readers.
The reason I even mention this is because a number of BBWAA voting members have already revealed who they voted for from the list of 2014 Hall of Fame candidates. And while this may make for interesting or even controversial reading and discussion, one has to wonder if it is/was done to try to influence other BBWAA voting members. (Note: HOF voting officially ended on December 31, 2013 and per O’Donnell, any ballots received after that date will not be counted).
In reading the articles and/or blog posts of several BBWAA members who chose to disclose their Hall of Fame selections, I noticed something that I personally found quite disturbing – some of these guys voted for both Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, both of whom are directly tied to PED use.
What message will the BBWAA be sending to kids if Bonds and Clemens are voted into the Hall of Fame?
(AP photos)
As we all know the BBWAA voting membership overwhelmingly chose not to elect anyone into the Hall last year – a move that put their credibility in serious jeopardy. Even though there were many who felt that Craig Biggio and Mike Piazza or certainly longtime candidates like Dale Murphy, Lee Smith, Alan Trammell or Jack Morris who played before the so-called ‘steroid era’ could have justifiably been voted into the Hall of Fame in 2013, the BBWAA instead chose to send a message to Major League Baseball and to the MLB Players Association that confirmed or even suspected PED users would not be allowed into the sacred Halls of Cooperstown, with some voters even saying that the MLBPA should have done more to rid itself of PED use instead of condoning it.
My, what a difference a year makes.
Of those BBWAA writers who have ‘gone public’ with their 2014 HOF ballots, a number of them have openly admitted that they voted for both Bonds and Clemens in only their second year of eligibility.
Are you kidding me? What message does this send to kids around the world – that the BBWAA will cast shame on PED users – but only for one year? This is ridiculous.
Never before (at least not in my lifetime) have there been more worthy and well-deserving first-ballot Hall of Fame-eligible guys than the Class of 2014 – guys like Greg Maddox, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas and Mike Mussina (to name only a few), along with returning candidates like Piazza, Biggio, Smith, Trammell and Morris. Are you (the BBWAA writers who voted for Bonds and Clemons) telling me that you couldn’t find ten other eligible candidates with no connection to PED use? Come on.
Granted, it is impossible to ignore what Bonds and Clemens accomplished in their respective MLB careers, but how many Bonds home runs or Clemens wins were the result of their cheating? I’m guessing quite a few.
Certainly the Hall of Fame voting is not a matter of life or death for us common folk. but making decisions like voting known cheaters into the Hall of Fame could very well bring about a major overhaul of the voting process – perhaps even eliminating the BBWAA as the voting body. It could also have a huge impact on the turnstile numbers at the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum.
In the words of the great Voltaire: “Common sense is not so common.”
Posted in 
So are you saying that Clemens and Bonds should never be voted in? I think it’s safe to say that both had Hall of Fame credentials before they cheated. You know I despise Bonds with a passion as I’d be the first to induct him into the “Jerk” Hall of Fame, but there’s no denying that he was the best player in the game before he started juicing.
The HOF has a history of voting in some nefarious characters (Cobb, Tris Speaker and Cap Anson-both KKK leaders). Then there were people like Judge Landis who kept the game from integrating for years. And then there are admitted cheaters like Gaylord Perry. It certainly isn’t a club made up of a bunch of choir boys.
So I can understand why some members lifted their protest and voted for Bonds and Clemens this year. Those guys should get in eventually. It won’t happen this year, because they don’t have the 75% support, but one day it’ll happen. Very interesting subject and I’m sure there will be a lot of opinions bandied about.
If it were up to me Bonds and Clemens would never be in the Hall of Fame, and neither would Pete Rose.
I have to ask you Evan – How can you say that Bonds and Clemens were Hall of Famers before they used PEDs when you (nor anybody else) knows when they began using them? I can guarantee you that Bonds was using them when he hit 73 home runs in a season and when he hit his final 200 (or more) career home runs; and that Clemens used them when he picked up his last 50 or 60 (or more) wins.
To be quite honest, I don’t really care what kind of characters these guys are off the field, but when they cheat on the field (or gamble on games being played when they are in a position to affect the outcome of the games) they are cheaters – period. Neither Bonds or Clemens (or McGwire or Sosa or Palmeiro, or Braun etc.) would have put up the numbers they did without cheating and how you can argue otherwise or try to justify it is an absolute mystery to me.
Using Gaylord Perry as an example is weak – guys have been throwing spitballs since the game was invented and was actually legal until Preacher Roe retired. I even have a problem with pitchers getting tossed for having pine tar or Stick Em on their hands (or wherever). It doesn’t make the ball do anything different, it gives the pitcher a better grip of the ball for better control. This is a safety issue, not a cheating issue.
Again, I am truly surprised (and disappointed) that you bought into the whole bullshit theory that Bonds and Clemens belong in the Hall of Fame. I will never vote for these guys – not ever.
We disagree. I’ve taken a stand after thinking this through and though you think my reasoning is flawed, I think that we could possibly be omitting an entire era of baseball by not voting in players from the 90s and 00s. Cheating is cheating. There are different eras and ways to do it, plus there are levels of severity, but cheating has always gone on. And as crafty as Gaylord Perry was…loading up the ball was illegal in his era, so why reward him with the HOF and not the steroid guys. Seems a bit hypocritical to me that voters would do that.
I have reiterated that I despise Bonds, by I’m not blinded by the fact that he was he greatest hitter I ever saw, and that was early in his career. “Game of Shadows” chronicles when he started juicing, and it was when he became jealous of McGwire and Sosa, and he knew they were cheating. He gained 30 lbs of muscle in the off-season between 98 and 99. So its fairly easy to pinpoint when he began to use PEDS. Take away 250 of Bonds career homers and he’s still a Hall of Famer. Take away 80 of Clemens wins and he’s a HOF’r.
Amphetamine use has existed in the game for years. And the abuse of greenies has been chronicled. So should Aaron, Mays, Mantle, Stargell, Yaz, Kaline and others from that era be disqualified from HOF consideration? The game has taken a stand and now restricts PEDS. Had they done the same with greenies, then maybe some of those numbers that had to do with longevity (3,000 hits, 500 HRs in the pitchers era) wouldn’t have been eclipsed.
We will have to agree to disagree on this Evan. I cannot and will not ever justify cheating.
Although I can’t imagine what would happen if a Bonds or a Clemens type was elected to the HOF and that it’s understandable that not caring if it would happen would add to a world of arguments. But whether it happens or not I keep knowing that they have not been blackballed like Pete Rose, which does give the BBWAA the right to vote for them.
I hate the thought of voting for cheaters and didn’t on IBWAA. However, I thought seriously about it.
I wish the issue would just go away. Only two ways to do that. Declare them ineligible and never include them on a ballot again or vote them in. Declaring them ineligible is risky without definitive proof on all cheaters or even possibly none on some. Character is not sufficient to keep players out – Babe Ruth for instance – so I think Evan is right. One day they will be voted in. I see Pete Rose as more eligible for the HOF than Clemens and Bonds.
I also think Ron is right that disclosing how one votes is an attempt to sway others, if not this year, next year. Voting preferences should never be disclosed by members of the BBWAA.
I would agree with Evan and Harold on this one. The HOF is full of questionable individuals for various reasons in life. Either send a message you’re not eligible or accept the possibility that they may get in at some point. I think the issue that bothers most of us is seeing guys like Gil Hodges etc.. not getting in while others like Bonds are being considered. At the end of the day I feel the voting body is what needs to change. I feel those that vote should be directly associated with the game and should pass a more stringent qualification process.
To deny Pete Rose consideration and allow these DOCUMENTED cheaters to get votes is ludicrous. In my opinion Rose, Bonds, and Clemens all belong in based on their accomplishments BEFORE their “indiscretions”. Thanks for mentioning Gil, Gary. I know I’m prejudiced, but I truly believe that he, Rose, and Tommy John all deserve to be enshrined and should have been years ago.