DIAMONDS & HORSEHIDE: Call to the Bullpen

In the midst of the mess that was last week, the folks at the Baseball Hall of Fame had their annual election, and bestowed immortality and a lovely bronze plaque upon Bruce Sutter. He was the only player elected by the writers this year.

As some of you may recall, Sutter was one of the four candidates I supported this year. The writers typically induct one or two players a year, so I'm fairly pleased. Heck, I had a nagging suspicion that they wouldn't elect anyone at all, so in many ways, this year's election was a rousing success. As I clicked on the Hall's website to see the results, I muttered to myself, "Come on, guys. Pick somebody." So, like I said, they managed that much.

Of course, there's already a bit of controversy, because Sutter is not really the best relief pitcher on the ballot. I'd say that honor belongs to Goose Gossage, whose vote total increased significantly, and who ended up a single vote behind second-place finisher Jim Rice. The question that some are asking is, how could you vote for Sutter and not Gossage? At least 36 voters did, and that's a little screwy. Not as screwy as the one guy who voted for Walt Weiss, but still.

You have to feel for Goose. For nine years, reporters have called him up every year and asked him how he feels about not being in the Hall of Fame. It has to rankle. Even if he didn't think he belonged -- and he most certainly does think that -- it still must feel like poking at an open sore. And since he's not a "don't cry out loud" kind of guy, it's not surprising that he would get vocally upset about the process. Which he has.

But anybody who thought he was going to get elected this year just doesn't understand how the Hall of Fame works. There are a few different types of candidates: those who are obvious and get elected immediately, those who are widely appreciated but who need a few years to build a consensus, those who have a core of supporters that never really grow, and those who no one supports and who fall off right away. Gossage looks like a Type 2, and his case has built up slowly but surely over the years. I compare it to a jury. You don't usually get a unanimous verdict on the first vote, and the jury has to spend some time debating the merits of the case. If the guy is guilty, he's guilty. He doesn't get any less guilty just because it took the jury a week to deliberate.

There may be something weird going on, too, that will help Gossage's case. Sutter has been on the ballot a remarkable 13 years. Now, it may very well be that some voters will only support one relief pitcher at a time, and since Sutter was there first, he's had dibs. So with Sutter out of the way, does that mean Gossage's support will increase significantly next year? It certainly could.

Next year promises to be very difficult for any of the backlog candidates, thanks to the influx of Type 1 candidates. Cal Ripken, Jr. and Tony Gwynn join the ballot, and they're almost certain to be picked on the first ballot. The reason I say "almost certain" is because of one of the other new names on the ballot: Mark McGwire. Writers are already wringing their hands about his series of non-answers at the congressional hearing on steroids. Personally, I'd vote for him. Lots of guys on steroids never accomplished as much as McGwire (*ahem*JoseCanseco*ahem*). But a backlash is shaping up, so his chances have gone from "certain" to "oh boy". Meaning nothing is ever certain, and if we find out that either Ripken or Gwynn like to eat babies, that could hurt them at the polls.

Of course, the other thing the writers are doing is claiming the Sutter is going in alone. That's not going to be true, because there's one more chance to hand out plaques this year. That's the third vote I once mentioned, and that's a subject for a future discussion...