MLB fans won’t have much to talk about the next few months as a lockout has officially been put in place.
Free agency has stopped in its tracks and unless one likes talking about labor issues, baseball is effectively in hibernation.
But there is the topic of Hall of Fame voting to keep everyone busy.
Unfortunately, that topic is not always the most fun to discuss.
The voting process remains broken and a select group of writers get to pick and choose who deserves enshrinement.
One MLB insider, Jon Heyman, revealed his ballot and inherently showed the problem with the process.
Sent my Hall of Fame ballot today (Will provide explanations later. Many close calls.) pic.twitter.com/Fz5uGxLG1A
— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) December 3, 2021
Two main problems arise from his ballot.
No Consistency In Hall Of Fame Voting
So Heyman selected Barry Bonds, but left both Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa off his ballot.
So does he believe Bonds did not use steroids?
Or that his steroid use is less of a bad thing than what Clemens and Sosa did?
Based on stats alone, all three belong in the Hall of Fame.
Some folks don’t mind drugs and cheaters. We who believe in fair play don’t complain about that choice. But it’s interesting that many of the folks who don’t mind cheating are offended by those who do.
— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) December 3, 2021
Picking and choosing among those who used performance-enhancing drugs makes this a subjective process where favorites get more votes among writers.
Selecting Bonds but not Clemens, who won seven Cy Youngs, makes no sense.
And let’s continue on with another problem illustrated by Heyman’s ballot.
That is the fact he could have selected up to 10 players, but only went with five.
This means there is never a consistent amount of votes per year.
It is entirely possible for zero players to get any votes based on how this process works.
Maybe a writer wants to make a statement for some reason and votes in zero players.
Hall of Fame voting should be a simple process without controversy.
But Heyman’s ballot illustrates several inherent problems.
A Hall of Fame ballot should not require some intricate explanation.
The stats should speak for themselves and if steroid users provide so much controversy, that should be addressed by the Hall of Fame itself and not left up to interpretation.
NEXT: 3 Free Agents The Dodgers Can Still Sign
I agree. If a name is on the ballot, then the hall already decided he was worthy enough of a vote. Therefore, the choices by those select few who actually get to choose should be based on stats alone.
Here’s my question. Is Tom Brady a first ballot hall of famer? My guess is that you didn’t hesitate at all on that one, with a quick yes. However, Tom Brady was suspended, for cheating, for four games. Bonds never even failed a drug test, let alone be suspended for anything.
Also, the guy who was overseeing baseball when baseball was looking the other way IS in the hall of fame.
Things that make you go hmmm…