Mark McGwire is getting more HoF support. As he should.

0 Comments

Let’s make it a Hall of Fame trifecta. I missed this over the weekend, but here’s Ken Davidoff of Newsday, explaining why, after years of resistance, he has decided to vote for Mark McGwire on his Hall of Fame ballot:

Every era has its taint, whether it’s gamblers, steroids, racism or
something less pernicious such as ballpark dimensions. Our job is to
sift through the nonsense, take the emotion out of the conversation and
determine the best players of the era.

A McGwire induction in Cooperstown wouldn’t be the most uplifting or heart-wrenching. That’s all right.
Life is complicated. We can discuss what happened and what it means.

My thoughts exactly. The guy is a product of his era, and there’s no basis for me thinking that he was any better or any worse a person than hundreds of others in the game during that time or during previous eras when gambling and segregation made a mockery of the competition.

Within the context of his era, Mark McGwire was a superior player. To blackball McGwire is to deny that reality. Likewise, to vote for him is no capitulation to cheating. History will do a better job of judging the era and its players than a quorum of writers who lived through the era can.

I know a lot of you will disagree. Before you do, however, I recommend that you give Davidoff’s reasoning a look first.

(thanks to reader Rick Bender for the heads up)