No one's worthy

I used to enjoy picking apart the Baseball Hall of Fame ballots -- how will guys on the cusp like Goose Gossage, Jim Rice and Bert Blyleven fare; and how many votes marginal players on the ballot such as Bobby Witt, Scott Brosius and Tony Fernandez will get.

But the fallout from this year's election had me grateful that I'm on vacation this week and thus more interested in watching the numerous commentaries from my Freaks and Geeks DVD box set than listening to the usual sports radio blather.

The Mark McGwire situation is obviously a touchy one, and while I think he deserves election, I can understand the moral outrage that's behind many people's votes. At least he got enough to remain on the ballot for another year -- as opposed to Surreal Lifer Jose Canseco (remember when there was a fear that he might be elected despite being a vagabond DH the last few years of his career?).

But the bit that gets me is arguing that the stats don't support McGwire's candidacy. If you want to be suspicious of the "before" and "after" stats, go ahead. But at the time of his retirement, weren't we ready to believe he might be a unanimous choice (which will never happen -- see Cooch's column for more on that), given his home run numbers? So he's a one-dimensional home run hitter, are we also going to eliminate Bruce Sutter, Rollie Fingers and eventually Mariano Rivera for being one-dimensional as well?

At the same time all the hand wringing over McGwire's much debated credentials, it was even odder to hear on Mike and the Mad Dog, "If it weren't for the Streak, Cal Ripken isn't in the Hall of Fame." It is a debatable point, but it's a big part of his resume. In fact that statement starts to sound like Lewis Black's "If it weren't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college."

Which got me thinking that baseball, more than I think any other sport, tries to make excuses for why someone isn't good. I'm as guilty of it as anyone else, but whether it's fantasy prospects or Hall of Fame choices, we have to come up with as long a list of cons as we do pros. At some point, analysis has given way to being a devil's advocate.

And yet that might be the way we have to approach things to motivate today's athletes, if those postgame comments from Florida after the Corn Chip Championship Contest. "We get no respect." "No one gave us a chance." Blah blah blah. Maybe we should just predict everybody to lose every game. It jives well with the "X sportswriter has a bias against your favorite team" as well the perfectly generic "your team sucks."