Bonds. Clemens. Rose. Hall of Fame. Yes, let's talk.

Ok. I know your all bored about this topic (unless your name is Roger from Dayton, OH or Barry from Riverside, CA....). But let's talk about complicated legacies. Of ruined childhoods. Of records. Let's talked about steroids and the Baseball Hall of Fame.

This is what must be article number 340392 on this topic, or a number around that mark. So why this post? Why add yet another voice to the endless sea of articles discussing steroids in the Hall of Fame? Especially to a blog that has so little readers and interest? Well, first off, it's my blog. I'll talk about whatever the fuck I like. Secondly, I believe there is more nuance than the regular posts. See, when I started watching Baseball (see my post on getting into Baseball, decent read if I say so myself!), Barry Bonds was a big reason. I loved him, not as much as my undying love, Derek Jeter, or even as much as Derrek Lee. But watching Bonds just felt liberating. Seeing him hit balls further than anyone, with great regularity, all the while with the eye of the tiger and seeming lack of emotions, made him the perfect anti-hero heel character I never realised I loved. Sure, even 13 year old me knew of mutterings of steroids. But hey, who cares at that age. You just want to see things you haven't seen before. And becoming involved in a rush towards a record, at that early stage in my Baseball journey, was exhilarating. When everything else came out, the un-wavering feeling in my gut was to remember the Bonds I remembered first getting into baseball. Same for Clemens. I remember when he re-signed with the Yankees, how happy I was. Pitching isn't as sexy for 13-14 year olds getting into Baseball so I never had as much love for Clemens, but I could appreciate him, as I could Pedro Martinez or Randy Johnson. I knew his legacy.

Complicated Times

OK, so maybe I didn't know Clemens' legacy. Bonds' either. For, as time went on, they became pariahs, except ones still involved in Baseball. It was bizarre. Never before had people been effectively black-balled in something, yet still involved. That's the angle i'm approaching in this paragraph. Neither were banned for illegal substances. Neither served even a one game suspension. Does that make what they did right? No. But sports is a lot more nuanced than that. Should we remember the steroids? When exactly did they start using? For many, myself included, both were Hall of Famers, first ballot at that, before the accepted timeline of using steroids. We live in a time where the all time hits leader, the all time home run leader with more MVPs than anyone else and a man with more Cy Young Awards than any other, are not in, and never will be likely in, the Hall of Fame.

The moral question then becomes, do we forget the steroid question? What about the clean athletes who didn't have the numbers because they didn't take steroids? Well, let's look at that.

"The Best"

Let's ask a question. Are Bonds and Clemens (among others) black-balled unofficially due to steroids? Or because they were not great guys to the media? Look at David Ortiz. He has been implicated in steroid taking. Yet will be a first ballot Hall of Famer. Afforded a big send off season. Why? He has been implicated in taking steroids has he not? But, he is funny. Charitable. A good guy to be around. So it gets buried. Look at Curt Schilling. He is a Hall of Famer. Yet, is on the outside looking in. Because he has a personality not liked by the mainstream media. If Derek Jeter or Ken Griffey Jr had taken steroids, they would be in the Hall. Because they are good guys, period. Anyone thinking otherwise is not thinking straight. It is no co-incidence those linked with steroids, and also perceived as difficult guys to work with, or interview, are on the outside looking in. Bonds, Clemens, Palmeiro, Sosa. All Hall of Fame guys. McGwire, Giambi, Gagne, Tejada. Not Hall of Fame guys, even without steroids. The first list, are all Hall of Fame guys, even with steroids. There is a cut off, obviously. 2006. After that, anyone caught using steroids, and been suspended, should be made ineligible. So Ramirez, Braun, Cano, Rodriguez. Not Hall of Fame guys. But those who used and didn't get suspended? Let them in. They were the best at using steroids, clearly, at minimum. Or, heaven forbid, they were Hall of Fame guys even if you strip the steroid longevity or power away.

Moral Dilemma

The next argument is. How do we know, for definite, who took them? Pudge Rodriguez, Mike Piazza, Jeff Bagwell. All suspected users. All in the Hall of Fame. Do we ignore this too? Do we ignore that people who solicited steroid use, pretty much every player of the 90's and early 00's, who are now in the Hall of Fame? Guys like Thomas, Jeter, Biggio, Griffey, etc etc. Do we ignore that managers who solicited the steroid era, guys like Cox, LaRussa, Torre, are in the Hall of Fame? Do we ignore the guym who ignored the whole issue, Bud Selig, is in the Hall of Fame? We should not. So why ignore the players who we say cheated? They made the game of baseball easier to watch, made it exciting. Got new generations into the sport. Let people watch records fall they never thought they'd see. Let them in the Hall of Fame already.

Also, let's remember the Hall isn't lily white itself. They have Spitball pitchers, guys who corked their bats, guys with too much pine tar. Guys who took LSD, cocaine, greenies. Guys who systematically kept African Americans and dark skinned Latinos from the sport. The latter is a much worse problem than taking steroids. That kept multiple generations of stars from the sport, making it easier to be considered stars of the era when you don't have to pitch to African Americans, or hit against them. So, let's forget the moral superiority. Let them in. If not, let's revisit some of baseball's hallowed Hall members, and see if they stand up to the same moral high ground you have created over steroids and gambling (on a side note, just damn let Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose in already).