4 Comments
⭠ Return to thread

In reading the part about the Hall of Fame today, it occurs to me that I cannot think of one guy in the other major sports where people say "Yeah, he's a Hall of Famer based on his accomplishments on the field/court/ice, BUT..."

There's no equivalent of a Barry Bonds, or Roger Clemens, or even Pete Rose; Paul Hornung, to cite a direct comparison, is enshrined in the Pro Football Hall of Fame despite his being suspended for a year for betting on NFL games.

I suppose the BBWAA would point to this fact with pride, proof that baseball is special, but it seems arbitrary to me.

Expand full comment

Would OJ Simpson have been included in Canton had the murders happened a decade or so earlier?

Expand full comment

Hard to say. He wasn't convicted for the murders, remember; he served time due to a robbery conviction for a crime committed in Las Vegas.

Expand full comment

Rhetorically, yes. Practically, no. Baseball almost put Pete in the Hall, he was going to have to jump through a few hoops and then Giamatti died unexpectedly and now he's being kept out because no one wants to lose face. The PED twins will eventually get in. Schilling will get in next year.

Baseball handwrings about morals a lot but it's usually pro forma. And it never works the other way. No one gets in based on being a good guy.

Expand full comment