SEATTLE — Based on what I’ve seen on Twitter, this will be about as popular an opinion as calling for a national ban on puppies.
The consensus on that platform — which, as I often emphasize, doesn’t necessarily reflect the views of the public — is that Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds were robbed of their rightful place in Cooperstown.
On Tuesday, the Baseball Writers’ Association of America denied the former titans of the game entry into the Hall of Fame, as each fell about 10% short of the necessary 75% of the vote required for induction.
And though I understand the arguments for letting them in, I think the voters who refused their admission got it right.
One could contend that Clemens was the most accomplished pitcher in MLB history and Bonds the most accomplished hitter. The former won a record seven Cy Young Awards and the latter a record seven MVPs.
Clemens had the best ERA in his respective league eight times. Bonds’ 762 home runs are the most in MLB history.
But the mountains of evidence that both used steroids in the latter part of their careers are what has kept them out of the Hall.
A common argument among Clemens and Bonds advocates is that there was no MLB rule prohibiting steroids. This is true. But it was also illegal to use anabolic steroids without a prescription.
It’s not as though players were openly injecting the juice while waving their doctors’ notes. There’s a reason all the cheating — yes, cheating — was done in secret. Players knew it was wrong. As former Braves slugger Dale Murphy said: “Everyone understood that it was against the law. … It was also against the spirit of the game.”
And the benefits of juicing were undeniable. In a piece by Sports Illustrated writer Tom Verducci, former pitcher Dan Naulty — who called himself a “full-blown cheater” said steroid use caused his fastball to go from 87 mph to 96. Verducci also pointed out that before 1996, there had never been a season in which 12 players hit 40 home runs — then it happened in each of the next six seasons.
Think about the players that could have roided up but didn’t. Think about the honest minor-leaguers who were getting passed up by juicers.
This might sound like the height of moralizing to some, but cheating can’t be condoned with a Hall of Fame vote.
Of course, the argument for sending Bonds and Clemens to Cooperstown is that they had Hall of Fame résumés before they started juicing. This is true as well. Here’s what I would say: If a journalist was honest for the first 30 years of his career — winning Pulitzers and getting laws changed and the whole nine — but was discovered to have made stories up over the last five years of his career, should he get a lifetime achievement award? I don’t think so. His misdeeds wouldn’t erase his previous accomplishments, but they would serve as a permanent black mark.
Bonds and Clemens still have all their records and awards. Presumably, they still have the money from those massive contracts steroids helped land. Clemens’ two World Series titles weren’t vacated. Neither was Bonds’ National League pennant. The one thing the BBWAA voters could have done to hold the pair accountable for acts they had to know were wrong was keep them out of the Hall of Fame.
Yes, I know there are likely steroids users enshrined in Cooperstown. But as Verducci mentioned, none had a preponderance of evidence against them. That’s likely why David Ortiz just made it despite appearing on a list of positive tests in 2003 as part of an anonymous survey. No substance was identified, and the case against him is fishy.
The great Jeff Passan of ESPN recently wrote that Bonds’ and Clemens’ entrance into the Hall of Fame is necessary to preserve history. It’s a fair point in a very well-written column. But I don’t think posterity is going to forget these two, in the same way it won’t forget Pete Rose, whose absence from Cooperstown might have made him even more well-known.
Bonds’ statistics and awe-inspiring at-bats are there for everyone to see. Clemens’ numbers and video clips are there, too. The two belong in the conversation of the best to have ever played the game.
They just don’t belong in the Hall of Fame.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
Craig Ruttle
MLB and the MLB Players Association met in-person Monday in Manhattan for more than two hours, their second bargaining session since the lockout started in December and the most substantive talks yet. The league made a proposal to the players' union via Zoom on Jan. 13. Monday was viewed as the MLBPA's counter. They're also meeting again Tuesday, which represents progress.
Craig Ruttle
MLB and the MLB Players Association met in-person Monday in Manhattan for more than two hours, their second bargaining session since the lockout started in December and the most substantive talks yet. The league made a proposal to the players' union via Zoom on Jan. 13. Monday was viewed as the MLBPA's counter. They're also meeting again Tuesday, which represents progress.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
David Zalubowski
The MLB side included Rockies owner Dick Monfort, who's the chairman of baseball's labor policy committee, as well as deputy commissioner Dan Halem, executive vice president Morgan Sword and senior vice president Patrick Houlihan. Lead negotiator Bruce Meyer and free agent reliever Andrew Miller represented the MLBPA.
David Zalubowski
The MLB side included Rockies owner Dick Monfort, who's the chairman of baseball's labor policy committee, as well as deputy commissioner Dan Halem, executive vice president Morgan Sword and senior vice president Patrick Houlihan. Lead negotiator Bruce Meyer and free agent reliever Andrew Miller represented the MLBPA.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
Matt Slocum
MLBPA changed its tune on two things it hopes will spur momentum in talks: time before free agency is reached and the amount of money funneled to small-market teams (like the Pirates) via revenue sharing.
MLB players can currently become free agents after six years. The union had been arguing for a system that got some there in five depending on age — 30 1/2 to start, then eventually reaching 29 1/2 .
The union had previously asked that the revenue-sharing process was decreased by $100 million, but on Monday it dropped that ask to $30 million.
Matt Slocum
MLBPA changed its tune on two things it hopes will spur momentum in talks: time before free agency is reached and the amount of money funneled to small-market teams (like the Pirates) via revenue sharing.
MLB players can currently become free agents after six years. The union had been arguing for a system that got some there in five depending on age — 30 1/2 to start, then eventually reaching 29 1/2 .
The union had previously asked that the revenue-sharing process was decreased by $100 million, but on Monday it dropped that ask to $30 million.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
LM Otero
Tough to say, although a return to the bargaining table 24 hours later obviously isn't a bad thing. It's also important to consider context or the rotten relationship that exists between these two parties; common ground or positive vibes are hard to find.
Furthermore, the owners have certain things that they've described as non-starters in negotiations: any tweaks to the revenue-sharing model, plus how soon players can reach free agency and the timeline to arbitration.
Accepting the current system for free agency is a concession. The union's adjusted revenue-sharing figure was, too, although the owners might not care if they're truly unwilling to discuss a change here.
MLB players can currently become free agents after six years. The union had been arguing for a system that got some there in five depending on age — 30 1/2 to start, then eventually reaching 29 1/2 .
The union had previously asked that the revenue-sharing process was decreased by $100 million, but on Monday it dropped that ask to $30 million.
LM Otero
Tough to say, although a return to the bargaining table 24 hours later obviously isn't a bad thing. It's also important to consider context or the rotten relationship that exists between these two parties; common ground or positive vibes are hard to find.
Furthermore, the owners have certain things that they've described as non-starters in negotiations: any tweaks to the revenue-sharing model, plus how soon players can reach free agency and the timeline to arbitration.
Accepting the current system for free agency is a concession. The union's adjusted revenue-sharing figure was, too, although the owners might not care if they're truly unwilling to discuss a change here.
MLB players can currently become free agents after six years. The union had been arguing for a system that got some there in five depending on age — 30 1/2 to start, then eventually reaching 29 1/2 .
The union had previously asked that the revenue-sharing process was decreased by $100 million, but on Monday it dropped that ask to $30 million.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
Sue Ogrocki
A lot, frankly.
Crossing free agency off the list, there's currently a sizable gap when it comes to how the two sides view the Competitive Balance Tax (or CBT) threshold.
It's currently $210 million. Owners have proposed a system starting at $214 million and reaching $220 million over a five-year period. The players are asking for $245 million. This alone tells you how far off these two groups can be.
Another key issue is minimum salary. The union wants to take the current number ($570,500) to $775,000 and $875,000 by 2026. Owners want to start at $600,000 and have it split into thirds: under a year of service, between one and two years and more than two, the latter two earning $50,000 and $100,000 more.
Those numbers, in theory, would jump $10,000 annually to reach $640,000/$690,000/$740,000 in 2026. None of this has been seriously discussed, which matters because minimum salary has a bigger impact than you might think.
Say a different minimum salary applies to 10 players per team. A jump from the current figure to, say, $650,000, would mean $79,500 per player, $795,000 per team and $23,850,000 across all 30 clubs.
Sue Ogrocki
A lot, frankly.
Crossing free agency off the list, there's currently a sizable gap when it comes to how the two sides view the Competitive Balance Tax (or CBT) threshold.
It's currently $210 million. Owners have proposed a system starting at $214 million and reaching $220 million over a five-year period. The players are asking for $245 million. This alone tells you how far off these two groups can be.
Another key issue is minimum salary. The union wants to take the current number ($570,500) to $775,000 and $875,000 by 2026. Owners want to start at $600,000 and have it split into thirds: under a year of service, between one and two years and more than two, the latter two earning $50,000 and $100,000 more.
Those numbers, in theory, would jump $10,000 annually to reach $640,000/$690,000/$740,000 in 2026. None of this has been seriously discussed, which matters because minimum salary has a bigger impact than you might think.
Say a different minimum salary applies to 10 players per team. A jump from the current figure to, say, $650,000, would mean $79,500 per player, $795,000 per team and $23,850,000 across all 30 clubs.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
Ross D. Franklin
This might be the wackiest topic discussed, in that it seems MLB wants to give some, but how the owners have done that is funky.
Service time in MLB, loosely, works like this: The first two years are team-controlled, where clubs set salaries a hair over the league minimum. The final three are decided by arbitration. The issue is the third one, where the top 22% of players in that class achieve what's called "Super 2" status and earn a fourth whack at arbitration.
Clubs manipulating service time to prevent this has long been a thorny topic, especially in Pittsburgh, and it's something the MLBPA would like to improve in the next CBA. The issue becomes how to do that.
Owners have proposed a formula-based system netting increased compensation for players with between two and three years of service time. They've also discussed a system that could net draft picks if teams place a top prospect on the opening day roster and that player thrives.
Teams would could earn a first-round pick if said player won Rookie of the Year or finished in the top three in MVP or Cy Young voting, a second-rounder for thresholds below that. One issue: Whose top 100 list are we using? Another: award voters might determine whether a team gets a first-round pick? Odd.
The formula-based system has also gained little traction. MLB previously offered to have salaries determined by WAR, and that was quickly scrapped. A concern over this latest ploy is that better compensation for players with between two and three years of service time would ultimately eliminate arbitration — something the union would like to avoid.
Some good ideas, sure, but plenty of work ahead.
Ross D. Franklin
This might be the wackiest topic discussed, in that it seems MLB wants to give some, but how the owners have done that is funky.
Service time in MLB, loosely, works like this: The first two years are team-controlled, where clubs set salaries a hair over the league minimum. The final three are decided by arbitration. The issue is the third one, where the top 22% of players in that class achieve what's called "Super 2" status and earn a fourth whack at arbitration.
Clubs manipulating service time to prevent this has long been a thorny topic, especially in Pittsburgh, and it's something the MLBPA would like to improve in the next CBA. The issue becomes how to do that.
Owners have proposed a formula-based system netting increased compensation for players with between two and three years of service time. They've also discussed a system that could net draft picks if teams place a top prospect on the opening day roster and that player thrives.
Teams would could earn a first-round pick if said player won Rookie of the Year or finished in the top three in MVP or Cy Young voting, a second-rounder for thresholds below that. One issue: Whose top 100 list are we using? Another: award voters might determine whether a team gets a first-round pick? Odd.
The formula-based system has also gained little traction. MLB previously offered to have salaries determined by WAR, and that was quickly scrapped. A concern over this latest ploy is that better compensation for players with between two and three years of service time would ultimately eliminate arbitration — something the union would like to avoid.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
LM Otero
Amazingly, yes. MLB has agreed to remove draft-pick compensation from free agents, which the union thinks could spur more offseason activity. The sides also seem aligned on having the designated hitter in both leagues and creating a draft lottery, though they differ on how to structure the latter.
To this point, the owners want to limit the lottery to three teams, with participants ineligible to draft that high in three consecutive seasons. Players want the draft lottery to expand to eight, a move they believe will at least partially address tanking.
Seems both sides are OK expanding the postseason, with owners lobbying for 14 teams and the players saying they will go to 12 — but play more games to try and match the revenue generated from a 14-game system. Advertising patches on uniforms are another thing where a solution seemingly exists.
LM Otero
Amazingly, yes. MLB has agreed to remove draft-pick compensation from free agents, which the union thinks could spur more offseason activity. The sides also seem aligned on having the designated hitter in both leagues and creating a draft lottery, though they differ on how to structure the latter.
To this point, the owners want to limit the lottery to three teams, with participants ineligible to draft that high in three consecutive seasons. Players want the draft lottery to expand to eight, a move they believe will at least partially address tanking.
Seems both sides are OK expanding the postseason, with owners lobbying for 14 teams and the players saying they will go to 12 — but play more games to try and match the revenue generated from a 14-game system. Advertising patches on uniforms are another thing where a solution seemingly exists.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
Ashley Landis
Here's the crazy part of this whole thing. The DH has been the only on-field issue they've discussed. Nothing about pace of play, robot umps or shifts. No talk about tackier baseballs, roster limits, the use of replay or legitimately trying to grow the sport, either.
They'll hopefully get there, but neither side seems appropriately concerned with things that really do matter to fans. Would be nice to see them figure out the economic issues quicker and then concentrate on this stuff.
Ashley Landis
Here's the crazy part of this whole thing. The DH has been the only on-field issue they've discussed. Nothing about pace of play, robot umps or shifts. No talk about tackier baseballs, roster limits, the use of replay or legitimately trying to grow the sport, either.
They'll hopefully get there, but neither side seems appropriately concerned with things that really do matter to fans. Would be nice to see them figure out the economic issues quicker and then concentrate on this stuff.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
Charles Rex Arbogast
Baseball has endured eight work stoppages between 1972-1995 but none since.
The backdrop here is unique, too. Teams have been spending less and less on players, dragging the total number of salary dollars down to a level not seen since 2015 (a little over $4 billion). And while that won't net sympathy from regular folks, it has only made things more contentious between players and owners, who have received an increasingly larger piece of the financial pie.
That said, everyone was affected by COVID-19, which shortened the 2020 season to 60 games and delivered to owners virtually no gate revenue.
Owners contend they incurred around $3 billion in operating losses due to the pandemic-shortened season, and while it would be impossible to independently verify that figure, this much is true: Missing more games would not be good for business.
Charles Rex Arbogast
Baseball has endured eight work stoppages between 1972-1995 but none since.
The backdrop here is unique, too. Teams have been spending less and less on players, dragging the total number of salary dollars down to a level not seen since 2015 (a little over $4 billion). And while that won't net sympathy from regular folks, it has only made things more contentious between players and owners, who have received an increasingly larger piece of the financial pie.
That said, everyone was affected by COVID-19, which shortened the 2020 season to 60 games and delivered to owners virtually no gate revenue.
Owners contend they incurred around $3 billion in operating losses due to the pandemic-shortened season, and while it would be impossible to independently verify that figure, this much is true: Missing more games would not be good for business.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
Ashley Landis
This part has been sometimes overblown. Spring training is scheduled to start on Feb. 16, so an agreement would have to come in the next two weeks to hit that deadline.
It's also entirely possible for spring training to be shortened. As long as they figure something out by late February, it should provide enough time for everyone to get to Florida and Arizona, clear COVID protocols and for pitchers to build up enough arm strength for a March 31 opening day.
Ashley Landis
This part has been sometimes overblown. Spring training is scheduled to start on Feb. 16, so an agreement would have to come in the next two weeks to hit that deadline.
It's also entirely possible for spring training to be shortened. As long as they figure something out by late February, it should provide enough time for everyone to get to Florida and Arizona, clear COVID protocols and for pitchers to build up enough arm strength for a March 31 opening day.
Matt Calkins: Here’s why Baseball Hall of Fame voters got it right with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens
Paul Kitagaki Jr./Bay Area News Group/TNS
The San Francisco Giants' Barry Bonds (25) watches career home run No. 756 to break Hank Aaron's home run record at AT&T Park in San Francisco on Aug. 7, 2007. (Paul Kitagaki Jr./Sacramento Bee/TNS)
Paul Kitagaki Jr./Bay Area News Group/TNS
The San Francisco Giants' Barry Bonds (25) watches career home run No. 756 to break Hank Aaron's home run record at AT&T Park in San Francisco on Aug. 7, 2007. (Paul Kitagaki Jr./Sacramento Bee/TNS)
