The problem is the system. If a player is not voted in by the writers after a certain number of years, he is not taken out of consideration, as he should be. His credentials are filtered down to a biased, non-stuctured group of former players and the like for a second chance. If the player is well-liked, or aided by persistent lobbying by the right people, the Veterans Committee can, in effect, overturn the decision of the writers. This cheapens the Hall of Fame.
With this system in place, any player could get into the hall. Sure, sometimes numbers alone do not fairly quantify a player's value, but this argument only goes so far. A solid defensive shortstop with a .230 career average has no business being considered, but it could happen one of these days. The veterans committee is not monitored by anyone.
Some of the people on the committee (like Yogi Berra) are respected baseball men, or even Hall of Famer's themselves. But they should not be allowed to tinker with tradition. The Hall of Fame is not about second chances, it's about greatness. It's about the best baseball people ever, the ones that we knew would be enshrined all along. If it takes more than 25 years to decide whether or not someone is Hall-worthy, then the decision has already been made. He should not be in.
Shoeless Joe Jackson is turning in his grave right now. Pete Rose is probably wondering why he can't be introduced as "Hall of Famer Pete Rose" on his Home Shopping Network specials. In a sport based so much on tradition and grace and playing fair, what is Bill Mazeroski (or Phil Rizzuto, for that matter) doing receiving its highest honor?
I like that. Tradition, grace, and playing fair. According to baseball, Rose and Jackson may have had grace, but they didn't play fair (and that broke tradition). Mazeroski played fair, but not with much grace, and his enshrinement breaks tradition.
The Veterans Committee breaks tradition, and it is definitely not fair. Coming soon: Welcome to the Hall, Mike Gallego.
Go To Page: 1
