Consideration of Competition, Credentials, and the "Character Clause."
Image via National Baseball Hall of Fame / (https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-fame)
As America’s national pastime, baseball has turned George Herman, Denton True, and Jack Roosevelt into the legends of Babe Ruth, Cy Young, and Jackie Robinson. We also can’t forget about Three-Finger Brown, Old Hoss Radbourne, and Turkey Stearnes. In baseball, there is no higher honor than being enshrined in the hallowed halls of the National Baseball Hall of Fame, of which all the aforementioned are members.
Achieving this immortalization is no small feat - only 236 of the 20,272 players to reach The Show have earned a spot in Cooperstown (this number does not include the 35 Negro League players who were barred from MLB, yet inducted for their talents). So, that equates to approximately 1.17% of all players, for those counting at home (and I know you are!). The number will jump from 236 to 238 on July 23, 2023, as Scott Rolen and Fred McGriff will join the revered ranks. So, what does it take to get elected, and who serves as the electorate?
Election Criteria
Some criteria are straightforward and for the time being, non-negotiable. A player must participate in ten major league seasons and be retired for five years before they can be considered. Almost any player with a distinguished career will appear on the ballot, even if their chances of election are next-to-none (i.e. Bronson Arroyo, Sean Casey, and Adam Dunn).
To secure election to the Hall of Fame, 75% of voters must select a player on their ballot. In order to remain on the ballot for future consideration, a player must receive votes from at least 5% of the electors. If they continue to meet this threshold, players will appear on the ballot for up to ten years. This number was recently reduced from 15 years of consideration, much to the chagrin of many of my fellow Hall of Fame enthusiasts. If, after this ten-year period a player is not elected, the fate of their candidacy falls to the Veterans Committee - responsible for recent inductees including Fred McGriff, Harold Baines, and Jack Morris.
The voters for the traditional process are members of the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA), and they must have ten years of experience on the baseball beat to earn a ballot. The system is certainly imperfect, as some people hold votes who do not primarily, or even secondarily, cover the game of baseball. In my personal view, former players should have a stake in the voting process. It is safe to say that those who shared the field and clubhouse with potential inductees knew who the stars were among them - more so than those who write (myself included!). Despite the arguments of who should have a vote, I contest that usually - and I mean USUALLY - the right players earn induction.
The "Character Clause"
Here is the tricky part: according to the National Baseball Hall of Fame’s criteria, “voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.” Simple, right? What has been declared the “Character Clause” has put a dent in the Hall of Fame cases of many hopefuls. This explains why the likes of Barry Bonds, Rafael Palmeiro, and Roger Clemens - whose statistical accomplishments clearly warrant induction - failed to reach the 75% threshold before their time on the ballot expired. This also indicates that Manny Ramirez and Alex Rodriguez face an uphill battle in their quests.
All the names listed here were embattled with speculation, and sometimes confirmation, of performance-enhancing drugs. However, the Character Clause has injured the cases of more potential inductees whose career statistics are NOT plagued by PEDS - including one of the greatest postseason pitchers of all time in Curt Schilling, who was fired from ESPN’s broadcast team. Jeff Kent, who is also deserving of induction, had a less-than-stellar relationship with the media, who happen to comprise the voting bloc. Carlos Beltran underwhelmed in his first year on the ballot, likely a time-out from voters due to his supposed role in the 2017 Astros cheating scandal. It is difficult to say how iconic players such as Joe Jackson and Pete Rose would fare given a chance to be on the ballot - currently impossible due to their inclusion on baseball’s Ineligible List. The stats and achievements scream Hall of Fame, but would they fall victim to the Character Clause?
How heavily should the Character Clause be considered when casting a ballot for the Hall of Fame? Perhaps some weight for the character argument is lost knowing PED users are likely already in the Hall, such as David Ortiz, whose name seemingly escaped controversy. Roberto Alomar earned induction before he found himself on MLB’s Ineligible List. There have been calls for various baseball pioneers (such as Cap Anson) to be removed from the Hall of Fame due to their perpetuation, inaction, or alleged involvement in racial segregation of professional baseball. The point here is that the line has become incredibly blurry, and it becomes increasingly so as time goes on. Can we remove every person who has a stain on their legacy?
The answer is no, so the most talented players should still earn recognition. I think Barry Bonds used steroids to gain an advantage. I think Alex Rodriguez embarrassed the game and used his connections to bury evidence against him, likely with the backing of now-Commissioner Rob Manfred. I think Pete Rose knowingly broke baseball’s Golden Rule.
However, The Hall of Fame should tell the entire story of baseball. Induct all those who are deserving based on their statistics, and indicate their controversies on their plaques. If a player chooses not to attend their own induction because they lament their own actions being reflected on their plaque, they can make that decision, just like they made the decision to cheat the game. It is unfair to ask voters to serve as the morality police when conducting the tall task of determining who belongs in Cooperstown. Yes, enshrinement is an honor to be taken seriously, and everyone has their own line they can choose to draw. For the most part, we are talking about immoral actions that are simply baseball-related, and considering the state of the game and the Hall of Fame, it is senseless to keep the Homerun King and Hit King on the outs.
The Words of the Great #8
To conclude, I would like to highlight one opinion that would differ - at least partially, from mine. That is of the late, great Joe Morgan, who was rather vocal on the membership requirements for Hall of Fame status. If not the greatest second baseman of all time, Morgan is certainly in the top three. The Most Valuable Player in each of the Big Red Machine’s world championship seasons of 1975 and 1976, Morgan certainly knew what constitutes a “Hall of Famer.” In 2017, Morgan penned a letter to the voters of the Hall of Fame, asking them not to vote for “players who failed drug tests, admitted using steroids, or were identified as users in Major League Baseball's investigation into steroid abuse [The Mitchell Report].” Mr. Morgan noted the difficulty in determining who is deserving and who is not, but his message was clear.
Although I tend to disagree with the great #8 in this case, it feels strange. His masterfully written, passionate appeal might just be enough to sway certain voters. If I had a ballot, I would read those words each year before checking any names. Perhaps the greatest argument he makes in his letter is the damage that is done to the non-users, who are either unfairly roped into accusations, or whose careers were unnecessarily shadowed by their cheating peers.
I am certainly not going to contend that I am more correct than an actual Hall of Fame baseball player on this subject. I am what you would call a “big Hall” advocate. I do not think the Hall of Fame is reserved for the Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Bob Gibson type players. Hitting a baseball is the most difficult task in sports. With it being totally against the odds to have a sustained career in this game, I think it perfectly acceptable to continue honoring the fewer than 2% of players who get recognized. Forget the talk of a “watered down” Hall, or “Hall of Very Good” as some opponents say. Do you know how hard it is to be Very Good? Nobody knows this more than the players themselves - which is why I am sorry to disagree with Mr. Morgan in this case. Even with the help of performance-enhancing drugs, you still have to hit the ball!
On the topic of giving players a voice in the voting process, I would like to give a huge shoutout to Ryan Spaeder (@theaceofspaeder) for his initiative to collect votes from actual MLB players each year. With his 61,000+ followers on Twitter, fans and writers can learn from those whose opinions matter most. Of course, these votes currently do not impact the election results, but efforts like this are creating conversations to move the voting process in the right direction.
Blank ballot format via Ryan Thibodaux (@NotMrTibbs) on Twitter
My ballot would have included the following players. What would yours look like?
Bronson Arroyo
Carlos Beltran
Todd Helton
Andruw Jones
Jeff Kent
Manny Ramirez
Alex Rodriguez
Scott Rolen
Gary Sheffield
Billy Wagner
Comments