Let's redefine baseball's HOF criteria

One morning around the age of 11 or 12 my father and I woke early one morning and made the 2 hour drive from our central Minnesota home to the Minneapolis Airport.  My old man had a business trip to Waterbury, Connecticut of all places and he took the opportunity to take me with and make a 1 day detour to the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown.  It is among the greatest moments of my life.  

If you havn't been to Cooperstown I suggest you go even if you aren't a baseball psychopath.  It's just a really pretty place.  30 years later my most vivid memory of the entire experience is pulling into Cooperstown in the early morning hours after a 3 hour car ride from Waterbury.  A fresh blanket of pristine, wet, February snow had fallen and our tracks were the first into the sleepy old town of Cooperstown.  

Now is the time of year when the Baseball Writers of America receive their Hall of Fame Ballots and submit, among eligible players, their choices for induction to the 2021 HOF class.  A player must have his name on 75% of the ballots to be selected.  

Recently I heard of a journalist who left his ballot blank and advertised on social media that among the players who he felt met the statistical standard needed to get elected he felt they fell far short in the character necessary to be deemed HOF worthy.  He was primarily talking about Curt Schilling, Roger Clemens, and Barry Bonds, all of whom have had their name connected to some sort of performance enhancing rumors, some more concretely than others.  

The writer in question has every right to apply his vote as he wishes but I think we've taken this thing too far.  It's time to open up the entire process and here's my argument why.  

First off the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum is 2 entities (3 if you include their commitment to baseball research) under 1 roof.  The Hall of Fame itself is a wing of sorts where all of the plaques are placed on the wall.  The bulk of the facility is a museum dedicated to telling the story of baseball.  This story includes the good and the bad including baseball's racist past, cheating scandals, and the evolution of the sport as a business.  

Secondly, the HOF describes in it's mission one of their roles as "Honoring, by enshrinement, those individuals who had exceptional careers, and recognizing others for their significant achievement's".  That's it.  Maybe there is something more written someplace about criteria and there is certainly larger discussions in the writers community that subjectively establish more detailed definitions of what is a hall of famer, but according to the HOF it is about having an exceptional career.  

Thirdly, baseball has evolved, often times not fast enough but it has evolved to now include a more thoroughly vetted system of justice.  Players caught using PED's for example are suspended 50 games for their first offense, 100 for their second, and a lifetime ban for their 3rd.  This includes accidental positives thus giving players a chance to redeem themselves.  Roughly half of the 400 plus homerun club who aren't in the HOF today are suspected PED users but who played under a system that didn't test or punish PED use.  What will we do when a player who tested positive and served a punishment hits 500?  It shouldn't have to extend in perpetuity.  

When you put all of this together the only fair and logical way to determine if a player is hall of fame worthy is to ask yourself if they had an exceptional career.  Barry Bonds, Curt Schilling, and Roger Clemens clearly meet this criteria.  Let the museum tell the story about how they were suspected of cheating and let the fans of baseball be the owners of each players legacy just as we own the legacy of other terrible human beings who are already enshrined.  Let Shoeless Joe have his day, we all know what Pete Rose did both good and bad, and we all know the racist history of Cap Anson (who is already inducted).  This gives the writers freedom to not have to be the moral judge of players.  

Roughly 20000 people have played Major League Baseball and only 263 players are in the hall of fame.  Widening our criteria won't damage the uniqueness of the achievement.  

Back to Blogging-Have I evolved?

The Covid-19 pandemic has left a lot of time for a person think, plan, and commiserate.  One thought I have had in this most unique of times is to get back to writing.  Suddenly, I remembered I was at one point in my earlier form an aspiring blogger.  Problem solved, this gives me a place to write and see if I can make it a regular habit.  My last entry was in 2009.  Let's see if I have evolved.  

My last post came in March of 2009.  I became a dad 7 months later.  Then I became a dad for a second time in 2012.  Having kids is crazy stuff.  I believe it is the scariest, most rewarding, most challenging, most infuriating, most fulfilling thing a person will ever experience.  It is the simply, the most of anything.  It's also the oldest activity mankind partakes in.  It is literally, the least new concept that exists on the planet, and yet, its like this huge adventure.  My sons are cool.  I'm a lucky guy and I'm married to the best woman on the planet so after that pretty much everything else is easy (except folding laundry, I can't stand folding clothes).  

What else happened....later in 2009 I stopped scouting fulltime and went to a part-time role while starting a new career in the oil and gas sector.  This gave me an opportunity to be home more often and have a little more stability in life.  I knew (maybe still don't know) much about the oil and gas industry.  I essentially approached my job like it was a baseball department.  I started developing assessment tools to and depth charts of our team, I kept stats on who was working where, and built development plans to improve the employees we had and how to get the best new employees.  It was a lot of fund and apparently people liked it.  I was given management opportunities and even delved into other areas of the business.  I kept scouting with Minnesota on a part-time basis until 2019 when the front office changes eventually caught up to me and my contract wasn't renewed.  I left the oil and gas company this past summer and am back in college trying to finish up a long overdue masters degree that I abandoned back when I started scouting.  Luckily I live in a place where this is very doable. 

In 2016 I became a Norwegian citizen.  I kept my U.S. citizenship which normally isn't allowed by Norway but they have a few exceptions and I was fortunate enough to qualify.  It was actually a pretty emotional and thought provoking exercise.  I realized in the process that one's citizenship is really just a matter of geography, kind of arbitrary really, but yet it still has this immense pull on your identity.  I'd recommend to anyone, just as a personal introspective to ask themselves what makes you (insert your citizenship)?

I'm going to try and give this blogging biz a shot.  Feel free to drop me a line with topics.  A few things I plan on writing about moving forward: 

-Houston Astros vs the Black Sox

-My perception of the Trump movement. 

-Life in Norway during the pandemic. 

-Raising an athlete

-Why bacon may save the world. 

-Why bacon my end the world. 

-Why melted cheese is usually a good idea. 

-What I love about manicured baseball fields. 

-Is driving a Zamboni the worlds greatest job?

Pride in the WBC

I'm a big international baseball guy and for me the WBC is about as good as it gets right now. A little while back I read a piece mentioning that the WBC isn't all its cracked up to be because of the conflict with spring training. This is a good point and I used to take the same perspective.

Looking at the teams present in the WBC however got me thinking about the various leagues around the world and the impact that the WBC has on those leagues.

The Cubans shut down their league to prepare for the WBC. I know it isn't the financial juggernaut that MLB is but regardless the entire country's baseball addiction is put on hold for this event. Japanese players Matsuzaka, Ichiro, and Kenji Johjima have made the sacrifice to play for their clubs including preparation that began in December. The lucrative Japanese league also sacrifices their top talent to attend the WBC rather than stay and participate in league play.

Every country must face different challenges just to field a team and you can never please everyone. Assuming that the point of this tournament is to determine which country has the best baseball team I think it is fair to say that a country's ability to field the best team is part of that determination. Rather than slam the tournament for not having the best players participating in it why not applaud the teams which have success and are able to get better players.

Today I read a quote from Davey Johnson basically saying that if the U.S. team ran out of players at a position he would forfeit games rather than risk future injury to players who would have to play out of position. The Japanese coaching staff would be lynched if they were quoted saying such things. The big league mentality needs to be removed from the picture when it comes to the WBC. Up to now it seems the U.S. assumes it is the dominant baseball country and that when or if they don't win, it's because they couldn't field the best team.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda! Not being able to field the best possible team is a sign to me that maybe that country isn't the best.

Leading up to the WBC all the players asked to participate always talk about all the pride and honor of wearing USA across their chest. Yet when push comes to shove they will leave a game at the slightest twinge of pain because they don't want to be damaged commodities when the season rolls around. This to me says they are putting their team (employer) before country. We should applaud the countries that take the opposite appoach and recognize that the team that wins is indeed the best. The WBC is the best event baseball has ever had to determine a true global champion. The results of it shouldn't be slighted because some guy making $10 million a year pulled a hamstring.

If you can't vote right, you shouldn't count!

Many of you are already aware of the Senate contest in Minnesota which resulted in a very close race. For those of you in places far away from Minnesota I'll give you a brief rundown. Incumbant Senator and Republican Norm Coleman finished on election day with only a few hundred votes more than his Democratic challenger and former Saturday Night Live actor Al Franken. This triggered an automatic recount of the 2.9 million votes cast by Minnesotans on election day. With the balance of power in congress at stake lawyers from each party descended on Minnesota to ensure the recount was performed to their satisfaction in each district. The result has been a pretty remarkable and idiotic display of democracy with thousands of ballots being challenged by each side and numerous questions of voting procedures brought to the forefront. How close is this race? As of today Coleman unofficially leads by 2 votes with many more to be analyzed and debated over. That's just insane, 2 votes differentiate these two clowns after 2.9 million were cast. One may ask, what's so hard about counting a bunch of ballots and determining who won. The answer to that question rests in the hands of court officials now but the examples of improper votes has been ridiculous if nothing else. The ballot one fills out is much like a multiple choice test. You simply fill in the box next to the name of the candidate you support. If you want you can write in the name of someone you want to vote for. Some examples:

• A voter filled in a box for Franken but added to the end of his name -stin....so it said Al Frankenstin. This is funny. But should we allow a vote to be counted if someone is so ridiculous as to make a mockery of the ballot? The argument in court was that the individual did not vote for Franken, but someone named Frankenstin.
• A voter filled in a box for Franken but had written on various parts of the ballot Flying Spagetti Monstor or FSM....what the hell does that mean and who in their right mind would think that this is an acceptable means to fill out a ballot? The vote went to Franken.

Now I voted for one of these two people. I won't reveal who but want to make something known. Voting is a privilege not a right. Much like a drivers license is a privilege. You need to be able to do certain things in order to drive and you should have to be able to do certain things to vote. Disagree with this perspective? Then why don't we let kids vote? Why have any rules, regulations, or procedures at all? Why not simply have people go to any voting station and simply fill in a ballot and cross their name off a list, or mail them the ballots like they mail tax returns?

Voting is a serious activity. The results determine who we become as a society and to know that a person who feels their ballot is a good place to write things like Flying Spaghetti Monster determines how collective fate makes democracy a joke.

My Favorite Character in Baseball History

On December 11th, 1854 Charles Gardner Radbourn, better known as Old Hoss Radbourn, was born in Rochester, New York. Shamefully I had never heard of him until his name popped up on my MLB birthday calendar. It turns out this Hoss may be one of the most colorful characters to ever disgrace a baseball field.

His accomplishments are many. In only 12 years of baseball (1880-1891 and 11 seasons as a pitcher) the 5 foot 9 inch righthander amassed 309 (or 310 depending on who you ask) wins and 195 losses. He never started less than 24 games in a single season, had an ERA of 2.65, and struckout 1830 batters.

The intrigue runs deeper with Old Hoss. In 1884 he was credited with 60 wins, the most ever by a pitcher. However there are discrepencies with some sources stating that Old Hoss actually only had 59 wins, while his Hall of Fame plaque in Cooperstown claims 62 wins.

Radbourne seems to have been quite the character. Roger Kahn quoted Radbourne in The Head Game as saying; "'Tired out tossing a little five-ounce baseball for two hours?' Radbourn asked incredulously. 'I used to be a butcher. From 4 in the morning until 8 at night I knocked down steers with a 25-pound sledge. Tired from playing 2-hours a day for 10 times the money I used to get for 16 hours a day?'"

His colorful personality also lead him to such dubious recognition as; being the first person photographed giving the bird as shown in his 1869 team photo (look closely at the left side of the back row, to the right of the sitting players ear). Radbourne is also considered the namesake of the term Charley Horse for some reason and credited with being the first to actually use the curve ball as part of his arsenal of pitches.

Hoss even has his own myspace page on which an audio file claims he taught Clark Griffith how to throw the curve. Years later of course Griffith went on to own the Washington Senators eventually passing the team on to his son Calvin who moved the team to Minnesota.

Radbourne died in Bloomington, Illinois where he was born on February 5th, 1897 of paresis which in his day was symptomatic of untreated to syphilis. His gravestone is located about 150-200 feet east south-east of well known American politician Adlai Stevenson.

Talk about leaving a mark on the world.

Revisiting The Past

We all have memories of a time in our life was ideal, or at the very least we remember it as ideal. I would venture to say these idealistic periods of a persons life usually involve a pretty girl or handsome young man, travelling, or great success in one's professional life.

I'm lucky, I've had a few idealistic periods in my life and yes they mostly surround a pretty girl, travelling, and professional success.

Oddly, all of my idealistic periods take place in the 90's or early 00's. I don't idealize much of anything in the 80's. Mostly we just make fun of those periods. It makes me wonder sometimes if we are indeed living in a current version of the 80's. My guess is that the internet will never allow a period to be so bland as the time when a BETA seemed like a good idea or ATARI was cutting edge.

If I had to rank the best periods of my life (excluding the present and future as I am an optimist) number one would no doubt be living in Brisbane, Australia. I had virtually no responsibilities outside of playing baseball and having fun. I met my wife there, enjoyed fairly cheap beer, and dipped into the ocean for the first time (I found he last bit frightening to be honest. It makes me wonder, who was the first person to paddle away from a shore line into a 10 foot break thinking, This will be fun?).

The second best period had to be my two seasons in Germany. Again, very little responsibility outside of playing baseball and finding time for flights up to Norway to visit my future (now current) wife. The first season I lived with two very zany individuals who were equally devoted t baseball and extremely more interested in drinking, but I did my best to keep up. I virtually laughed for 5 months.

My second season in Germany was a little more tame. I was the manager of the team that year and lived on my own in a hotel. I was privy to a fantastic breakfast each morning, pool and sauna access whenever I wished, and a russian made service which cleaned my room each morning....maybe that should be number 1?

So I'm off on a series of visits to local coaching clinics over the next few weekends. First stop Vienna which spawned these thoughts. I'm hoping to cross paths with a lot of my friends from my not-so-distant past and hopefully build on my current strides toward a new ideal period in my life.

Baseball and Economic Philosophy

Baseball is always idealized as being about soft values like family, fun, sunny days in June, and the rebirth of spring. You know what I'm talking about. You sit down to watch a game on television and the opening music plays with shots of youngters in awe with ice cream smeared all over their face. This is supposed to be baseball.

Behind all of these fluffy images are people, people performing a job. Baseball my dear readers, is a business (insert sarcastic gasps here). One aspect of the business of baseball that I never understood is the Rule V Draft which takes place well under the radar each December. The low key baseball fan and certainly not the kid with ice cream on his face understand this method of player aquisition. The truth however is that this one event can make or break a team. Johan Santana and Roberto Clemente are the most well known Rule V picks, hell they might be one of the best picks anywhere. Johan or not, many good players have come from the Rule V draft. So, what is it?

Basically, according to Baseball-Reference.com a player is eligible for the Rule V draft if he meets any of the following criteria:

1. He isn't on a MLB 40 man roster
2. He has been in the minors at least 4 years if signed or drafted after age 19.
3. He has been in the minors at least 5 years if signed or drafted before 19.

Upon being drafted, the club that has drafted the player has to keep him on the Major League Roster all season. Before they can send him to the Minor Leagues he has to be offered back to his previous organization.

Minor League clubs can also participate in the Rule V Draft with AAA teams able to pick AA players and AA teams able to pick A ball players. Here they don't have to be offered back.

Right now many of you are saying to yourselves...huh? Don't worry, me to.

The Rule V draft is a glaring example of how baseball is ironically counter-intuitive to America's other national pastime, capitalism. It is a tool used to create balance for your competitors and opportunity for players. I like it for these reasons but find it humorous in many ways.

In these times of financial crisis you hear a lot of discussion and debate over governmental bailouts. Throughout the presidential campaign I heard screams about Barack Obama being a socialist, as if it were a swear word. Yet there, resting in the friendly confines of America's most beloved of sports is Socialism. Let me break it down for you.

Socialism defined: (more or less, obviousley this is up for some debate)

1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

Based on these definitions the recent government bailouts are possibley acts of socialism, but this doesn't make the U.S. a socialist country. I live in Norway, a country which claims to be a social democracy. This doesn't mean my paycheck is put into a big pot and distributed amongst everyone. Actually, my taxes here are comparable if not lower than many Americans. The point here being that socialism, capitalism, communism whatever, are not definitive terms. They are measured in degrees. So Norway is probably more socialist than the U.S. but it isn't 100% socialist (stay tuned for cries from Marxist supporters please).

Back to baseball....I don't have a problem with socialism. Nor do I have a problem with leveling the playing field in small ways for other teams we play against. It's actions like these that seemingly make it so the Yankees don't buy everything.

From an international perspective however, less socialism would serve the game better. In addition to things such as the Rule V draft, revenue sharing, and uniform minor league contracts the means in which MLB organizes itself is like a corporation with 30 board members. The contradiction is that the 30 board members compete against one another making it stifling for innovation and expansion. This would let the game grow as clubs would seek to expand their market appeal more aggressively than they are now. This would mean academies all over the world, partnership with foreign companies, and games being played outside the North American continent.

On a lighter note; Happy Birthday to Wayne Garrett who was born on this day in 1947.