FEB 9th,
2012-OK, I know this is old news now, but I've been thinking
about it lately and it's kind of getting under my skin.
The
irritant in question: current rationale regarding the (possible) PED
use by retired HOF candidate and former Houston Astro Jeff
Bagwell.
You hear it
everywhere: "Well, everyone else is doing it, so why wouldn't
he?", "He's way too big not to be using PED", "He
played with users, so of course he did it, too", et cetera, et
cetera, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.
Nowadays,
it seems like all it takes is a little suspicion or rumor
and suddenly not only is a player on steroids, he also murders
kittens, steals his granny's social security checks and was the
mastermind behind 9/11. And it's understandable that most fans would
take that point of view; after all, the Mitchell Report saw to it
that what faith and trust we had in professional baseball and the
players in it was quite nearly destroyed completely. But the logic
behind the whole "he's a big guy, so he shoots up" argument
is beyond laughable.
Here's the
thing, and it's pretty simple: either prove it, or vote him in. In my
mind, he's a HOF first baseman, and I can't imagine that I'm alone in
this.
Not a lot
of awards, here. Four All-Star appearances, 1991 NL ROY, 1994 NL MVP
and TSN Major League Player of the Year. Not bad, but not
outstanding. However, his 162 game average certainly helps his case,
as does the .408 career OBP. Not too shabby. In terms of career
numbers, he's most definitely worthy of serious HOF consideration.
It's a simple equation: he was one of the best at his position from
1994-2003. Off the top of my head, and minus the BA and defense, the
first comparable player to come to mind is Johnny Mize.
Despite the
decided lack of evidence, it seems that the "We can't prove he
didn't use PED" argument has won out among HOF voters. The thing
is, anyone can take that stance and it would be near impossible to
prove them wrong.
The
evidence suggests that Bagwell did not use PED, simply because he's
never been officially named in any investigation. In fact, if there
is anything going against him now it's basically limited to personal
opinion. Well, that and the impression he makes in terms of his
physical appearance. But we have to have more than just innuendo and
personal bias to go on if we're going to shut him out of the Hall,
don't we?
For my
part, I say if they can't find any dirt on him, he's a HOFer. No
doubt, in my mind. But the voters have no right (from an ethical
standpoint) to simply wait for evidence to surface, especially when
said evidence might not even exist in the first place.
Despite my
humble point of view, there's nothing I can say that would even begin
to top Ken Rosenthal's statement on Bagwell's chances:
"When
voting, one should only consider the facts at hand. If Bagwell is
later revealed to have been a user, maybe I will stop voting for him,
if he isn’t already in the Hall. There is little doubt that he is
deserving otherwise, unless you’re somehow unimpressed by his .408
on-base percentage and .540 slugging mark, not to mention his
baserunning, defense at first base and leadership of the Astros
during his 15-year career … For now, all I know is one
thing: I’m not withholding votes based on hearsay and
innuendo."
Well said,
Mr. Rosenthal. And absolutely right. Until and/or unless the voters
find proof of Bagwell's malfeasance, I sincerely hope that he
receives the respect for his career he so richly deserves.
So to all
those who would suggest that Jeff Bagwell has somehow cheated the
game and its fans, I have only this to say:
Prove it.