King Kaufman's Sports Daily
Hall of Fame voters snub Mark McGwire, meaning we'll be arguing about him again next year. Here's a vote for just moving on.
Read more: Sports, Baseball, Hall of Fame, Steroids, King Kaufman, Sports Daily
Jan. 10, 2007 | I like to argue. You like to argue? Oh come on, you do too. Want to see?
Cal Ripken Jr. doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame.
All right, all right, settle down. I was just testing you. But you see what I mean?
Arguing is one of the best things about sports. Was that pass interference? Would Ali have beaten Louis? Was that a good trade? Is the designated hitter rule a necessity or an abomination? Should college athletes get paid?
But an interesting thing seems to be happening to me. At least interesting to me, and what else matters? Nothing else matters and I don't want to hear any arguments about that.
I find that I've lost interest in a lot of the arguments that have provided hours of fun for me over the years. Twice in a row now, the story that's bubbled to the top of the sports world has been at heart about an argument that's no longer able to get me all het up.
The results of the Baseball Writers Association of America voting on the latter question were released Tuesday, and this year's Hall of Fame class is Ripken and Tony Gwynn, both slam-dunk candidates, no doubters. A big part of the headline, though, is that, as expected, Mark McGwire didn't get in and didn't get close.
Wonky baseball know-it-alls -- that is, the type of person I pretend to be despite falling short in the hyphenated part of that description -- can cobble together an argument that McGwire isn't a legitimate Hall of Famer because he was one-dimensional and didn't have enough really great years, but the fact is that absent allegations that his achievements were fueled by steroids, McGwire would have gotten in with something north of 90 percent of the vote.
He's seventh on the home run list. Hall of Fame voting isn't rocket science for the BBWAA voters. If you're seventh on the home run list, you're in. Other than McGwire, the eligible candidate with the most home runs who isn't in the Hall is Jose Canseco, who is 30th on the all-time list.
So there's been a lot of chatter over whether McGwire's alleged steroid use and his handling or the matter, especially his stonewalling performance before Congress in 2005, should affect his Hall of Fame candidacy. The voters have spoken, and they've resoundingly said yes. McGwire got 23.5 percent of the vote. You need 75 percent.
There are good arguments on both sides. I favor the ones that say look at what happened on the field, that steroids were just part of the context of the day, the same as not having to face black players was part of Babe Ruth's context. But I understand the opposing arguments, which favor discounting results that derived, or may have derived, from illegal drug use.
And I don't care about any of them. I don't care if Mark McGwire gets into the Hall of Fame.
Next page: Why did I ever get so worked up about whether Don Sutton belongs in Cooperstown?
