Has Baseball Watered Down the Hall of Fame?

The mere words “Hall of Fame” inspire visions of the best of the best, the greatest to ever take the mound and step into the batter’s box.

Walking the hallowed halls of Cooperstown, marveling at the achievements of the legends of the game, no fan can argue with the vast majority of the players enshrined there.

But there are questions.  What constitutes a Hall of Fame career?  What standards should be applied? Do certain milestones stand as definitive thresholds to the Hall?

I am not even speaking of the steroid controversy that seems destined to keep Mark McGwire out of Cooperstown and will no doubt cast a shadow over the likes of Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, and Sammy Sosa when they come before the electorate.

Instead, I refer to the trend in recent years to elect what I consider “borderline” players.  This year, it was Jim Rice.  In recent seasons, players such as Bruce Sutter and Tony Perez also fit the bill as being questionable selections. 

Even Ryne Sandberg and Kirby Puckett are on the fence. 

They were all very good players, All-Star caliber—even a couple MVP awards between them.  They had their share of great moments and great performances throughout their careers.

But did anyone ever think to themselves that these players were among the greatest of all time?  I know every person views the Hall of Fame differently, and there is no standard to categorize a player as a Hall of Famer or not.

But to me, the Hall is for the best, not just the very good—and I personally don’t know why Jim Rice was deemed good enough for entry on his 15th and final try this year.

Blame the baseball writers if you want for holding back until the 11th hour to let him in, but if a player was good enough, his numbers will speak for themselves. 

I realize there is a hierarchy of Hall of Famers.  The greatest ever, the legends, will be elected on the first ballot.  It is an honor that few have achieved.

But in the end, it doesn’t matter if someone passes through on the first ballot or the fifth one or the 15th or by a veterans committee vote later on (don’t get me started).

They all get the same plaque in the same room, and there is nothing to distinguish Babe Ruth and Willie Mays from Tony Perez and Jim Rice.  And that’s a damn shame.

What’s worse, it can’t be fixed now.  Once the honor has been given, it lasts for all time.  Or at least until Bud Selig finally runs baseball into the ground.

Let’s look at Rice as a case study: 382 home runs, 1,451 RBI, a .298 career hitter, 1978 AL MVP, eight-time All-Star, two career postseason appearances, zero World Series wins. 

A very fine list of credentials, no doubt.  They would have been even more impressive if he didn’t have to retire at the relatively young age of 36. 

But just going by the sheer numbers he accumulated in his career, it puts him in the territory of recently retired players like Andres Galarraga and Ellis Burks. 

Still, the Baseball Writers Association of America saw it fit to admit Rice.  Now they cannot possibly justify leaving out Andre Dawson, who accumulated comparable offensive numbers to Rice and was a superior defensive player.

So the slippery slope continues as the Hall opens its doors to more and more very good, but not great, players.

While the trend can’t be stopped, that doesn’t mean we can’t have some fun on our own when we talk about who should and who shouldn’t get the Hall call.  And I’ve cooked up just the formula.

Here is a list of achievements for position players and a corresponding point value, with 100 points being the gateway to Cooperstown:

- Lead league in hits, batting average, home runs, RBI, runs scored, or stolen bases: five points each

- All-Star selection: two points

- Rookie of the Year Award: four points

- Gold Glove or Silver Slugger Award: three points

- MVP Award: 10 points

- LCS or World Series MVP Award: four points

- 300 career home runs: five points (plus five points every 50 home runs after 300)

- 2,000 career hits: five points (plus five points every 250 hits after 2000)

- 1,000 career RBI: five points (plus five points every 250 RBI after 1000)

- 1,000 career runs scored: five points (plus five points every 250 runs after 1,000)

- 300 career stolen bases: three points (plus three points every 100 steals after 300)

- World Series Ring: three points

So plug these in and see which side of 100 your favorite player comes in at.  And yes, I know that it’s too simplistic and doesn’t take a player’s position or other factors into account.

Regardless, I know that baseball or any Hall of Fame would never go for this, since this method eliminates all subjectivity and the fun of holding grudges, preconceived notions, and outdated ideas that are the hallmarks of sportswriters everywhere, not just the BBWAA.

So I ask you, has baseball watered down the Hall of Fame?  Is Cooperstown too easy to get into nowadays?  Are Jim Rice and company credible Hall of Famers?

Maybe the writers are just trying to prove a point by electing the “good guys” of yesteryear to serve notice to today’s players that you have to play nice off the field in addition to putting up solid numbers on the diamond.

To be clear, I never said any of these players were unworthy.  I just believe that the pantheon of greatness should be attainable only for the few.