Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Bob Ryan: A No Vote For McGwire


[I don't have a fully formed opinion on this subject...even after reading...and reading...and reading ad infinitum on this subject. I do like Bob Ryan immensely so here are his thoughts on Mr. McGwire's HOF possibilities. - jtf]

For this voter, Cardinal's sins are unforgivable on election day
By Bob Ryan, Boston Globe
November 28, 2006

The time has come, and the answer is no.

Mark McGwire may get into the Baseball Hall of Fame on the first ballot, but it won't be unanimous. I know one vote he's not getting.

This is the voting hot potato we've been waiting for, and now it's here with the release of the ballot yesterday . A while back, I would have said "dreading." But I dread no longer. I'm comfortable with my decision. If someone wants to vote for him, fine. But I'm not going to do it. I'll also wager that more people are thinking my way than are thinking the other way. I doubt that he'll get in, at least this time.

To those who will ask, "Where were you in '98, when he was hitting baseballs into places baseballs had never been hit before?" I answer, "Watching and enjoying." I was sent to St. Louis for that Labor Day weekend when he was breaking the Roger Maris record of 61 home runs. I enjoyed it all. I told people it was the most fun event of its type I had ever been around.

It was a weekend celebration of baseball. The Cardinals were playing the Reds and the Cubs, and none of them were in a pennant race. It was all about Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa, and mostly about Mark McGwire, who had come home from a road trip with 59 home runs.

Would McGwire get your vote?

What I loved about that weekend was the way everyone was into it. McGwire was into it. Sosa was into it. Tony La Russa was into it. Reds manager Jack McKeon was so into it he proclaimed that he would deviate from his normal policy and pitch to McGwire, regardless of circumstance. Cubs skipper Jim Riggleman was into it, stating, "We have a fascination with power." We sure did.

Everything was temporarily subservient to McGwire's quest for the record. Aside from McGwire's at-bats, I remember nothing about the games themselves. Did the Cardinals win or lose? I'd have to look it up. I truly have no idea.

What I do know is that Mark McGwire hit No. 60 off Cincinnati lefthander Dennis Reyes , No. 61 off Chicago veteran righthander Mike Morgan , and the record-breaking No. 62 off Chicago righthander Steve Trachsel . I remember the strange nature of No. 62, a low liner that, at a measured 341 feet, was McGwire's shortest of the season. I remember him almost missing first base. I remember him being greeted by his son. I remember him embracing Sosa. I remember him going into the stands to be congratulated by the Maris family. I remember even the most cynical members of the press being enormously moved and entertained by the whole thing.
Steroids were not an issue.

That seems difficult to believe now; I realize that. I had read about Associated Press writer Steve Wilstein seeing the bottle of androstenedione in McGwire's locker, but I paid that story little attention. I just didn't follow up on it. Sorry. I do recall being struck by the size of McGwire's biceps and forearms during one of his news conferences, but I attributed that to weight training and went onto other matters.

Call that approach to the issue naive, and I won't argue. Call it ignorant, and I won't argue. Call it inexcusable and what am I supposed to say? It probably was. I'm neither cynical nor suspicious by nature, except when it comes to things people say. My long years of experience in this business have taught me that owners, administrators, coaches, and players far too frequently either lie or find nothing wrong with being laughably disingenuous. I must report to you that in the world of sport, honesty and candor are not exactly valued traits.

Anyway, Mark McGwire hit his 70 homers in 1998 and his 65 in 1999 before beginning his quick decline, which we came to learn was almost undoubtedly due to the harm he had done his body by use of something that turned out to be very bad for him. I don't know what he was on, but it became clear to me, and many others, that he was on something sinister.

I don't know for sure when he started going on the juice, but if you look at his record, you notice a dramatic increase in home run frequency in 1995, when he hit 39 homers in 317 at-bats, thus reversing a decline dating from 1992. You can either take it at face value that he just got healthy that year, or you can put 2 and 2 together. I opt for the arithmetic.

We will never know how many home runs he hit that would have died at the warning track absent the extra oomph provided by the juice. 10? 30? 50? 100? It's impossible to say. I know that some voters will do an estimate and say, "OK, we'll subtract that total from the 583 he hit and, hey, he still would have hit (fill in the blank) 450, 500, however many. That's a lot of homers, and I'm voting for him." And that's their call. It's just not going to be mine.

That glorious weekend in St. Louis eight years ago? I now feel I was used. And I'm sorry, but I cannot get past that sad day in March 2005 when Mark McGwire appeared before the House Government Reform Committee and became the first American citizen to invoke the 4 1/2 Amendment. Asked if he had used performance-enhancing substances, he said, "My lawyers have advised me that I cannot answer these questions without jeopardizing my friends, my family, and myself."

And then there was this classic: "I'm not here to talk about the past," he whimpered.

Well, Mark, if you can't bring yourself to talk about your past, I don't see any reason why we should waste time evaluating it. Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken, Jim Rice, Goose Gossage, Dave Concepcion, and perhaps one or two others will get my vote. You won't.

Bob Ryan is a Globe columnist. His e-mail address is ryan@globe.com.

No comments:

Post a Comment