Tue May 06, 2008 11:02 am EDT
It used to be that the only debate over Roger Clemens' Hall of Fame induction was what cap he'd be wearing on his bronzed plaque — Red Sox or Yankees? (Sorry, Jays and 'Stros fans.) Yet even that wasn't much of an argument. With Boston fans long since over his departure, it seemed a foregone conclusion he'd be wearing a Bomber hat on the big day.
All of that changed, of course, after December, when Clemens' name dominated the Mitchell Report headlines and he prepared to defend his image against former trainer Brian McNamee on Capitol Hill.
Now, in the wake of last week's allegations over his personal life, it seems like Clemens has one more factor working against his election on a first ballot — and maybe even in elections after that one.
Since the Stew strives to be a good melting pot of ideas and opinions, I solicited views from four different baseball bloggers and had them offer a few ideas to my questions.
Will the latest allegations add even more obstacles to his Hall of Fame path? Did his image take an even bigger hit than it did back in December? Was such a thing even possible? Answers and ideas are below:
David Chalk, Bugs & Cranks: "Have they discovered Roger’s ties to that polygamist cult in Texas yet? I'm pretty certain of two things — There will be more revelations (Crikey! He did what to Greg Norman's wife?) — and nothing will keep him out of the Hall for more than a ballot or two.
"Why? It's what Jose Canseco said — it's the Bushes, stupid. If they can steal a presidential election or two, you think they can't get some reporters to vote in Roger Clemens? Plus, I bet those Steinbrenners still have a soft spot for him, and that Astros owner too. People barely care about Clemens now, will any of this really be a big deal six years from now? It’s not like we’ve seen any nefarious Internet referendums to get the Hall Of Fame to accept desecrated memorabilia from his proudest career achievements. Plus, can you imagine the ratings and print sales the induction ceremony would generate?"
Rob Iracane, Walkoff Walk: "Dozens of sanctimonious baseball writers are waiting with bated breath to exercise their veto power on the best pitcher of my generation. They did it to Mark McGwire, they'll probably do it to Barry Bonds and they'll definitely do it to Roger Clemens. We're living in a new era of Hall of Fame voting; where every single aspect of a baseball player's lifestyle can be evaluated and every single allegation against a player is taken at face value without the truth ever coming out. Did Roger Clemens pitch better than anyone in the past 25 years? Yes. Did Roger Clemens do steroids? Probably. Is Roger Clemens a total jerk? I certainly don't want to be friends with the man. Will Roger Clemens be voted into the Hall of Fame after all of Brian McNamee's sordid accusations? Hell no.
"Clemens stands no chance against a small but vocal minority of angry writers and will probably have to wait to be voted in by a future incarnation of the Veterans Committee. Probably once all the noise about steroids has been drowned out by some new controversy, like performance-enhancing brussels sprouts. Oh, the horrors of Vitamin A!"
Dan Lamothe, Red Sox Monster: "Five years ago, when the educated baseball-loving public thought about Roger Clemens, his thorniness and temper were largely overwhelmed by his undeniable greatness on the diamond. I think I speak for many when I say that while I didn't like him as a fan, it was hard not to admire him — to look at those legendary leg workouts and marvel at the way he rejuvenated his career.
"Over the last six months, that has all changed. The problem for Clemens is that the skeletons that have come out of the closet to haunt him make it difficult to see him as anything but Mr. Pants On Fire, as a guy who wouldn't only take the wimp's lunch money during high school, but shank him in the back for daring to complain about it.
"I think there's little doubt that Clemens won't get into the Hall of Fame on the first rounds of voting, at the very least. The best he can hope for is that he avoids criminal charges (perjury, for one) and becomes a sympathetic figure in his later years. It's a tall order, to say the least."
Maureen Ryan, The Yankees Chick: "Of all the players (or managers ... or owners ... or fans ... no one is safe) I make fun of, no one since Carl Pavano has made it as easy as Roger "Just Like OJ, I Didn't Do It" Clemens has this year. In just a few short months we've been treated to everything from steroids allegations to the latest sex scandal, and even the most hardcore Rocket fans such as myself are finding themselves incapable of stifling their laughter with each new development at this point.
"I really am a big Rocket fan and honestly tried to give him the benefit of the doubt at the beginning of all this — what hard evidence does Trainer Boy have, after all? — but the deluge of allegations that keep raining down upon him are enough to make any apologetic fan (or voter) take a defensive stance. He made an ambiguous and multi-purpose apology for un-named "personal mistakes" yesterday, but he left it up to our curious little brains to decide just which allegations he was apologizing for.
Was it the juice use? The alleged relationship with a 15-year-old future country star? The beaning of his son in a batting practice session a couple years ago? I like to think it was for disappointing the Yankees Chick."
Big League Stew is an MLB blog edited by Kevin Kaduk. Email him, and follow him on Twitter.

Posted Nov 18 2009
Scioscia gets top manager honors
Posted Nov 18 2009
Rockies skipper is NL manager of the year
Posted Nov 18 2009
Edited by MJD
Edited by 'Duk
Edited by J.E. Skeets
Edited by Greg Wyshynski
Edited by Matt Hinton
Edited by E. Brennan
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Steve Cofield
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Andy Behrens
53 Comments
1 - 25 of 53
Report Abuse
Keep Rose out.
Report Abuse
Let's jsut assume he did steroids, HGH and whatever else. Haven't we basically agreed that all the batters did the same as well? WOuldn't that then make all performances relative and render his dominance pretty impressive nonetheless.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Pete Rose, since he never bet on his own team to lose, hasn't done nearly as much damage to baseball's reputation and ethics as these juicers.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Sorry no, keep him out. You don't make the hall of fame by throwing a world series for some cash. Long since dead, and famous enough for it occurring, he won't need the hall to live on through history.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
- 2 cy young awards.
talk about batting 1.000!
wear a jays cap roger, think outside the box.
Report Abuse
Pete Rose: My personal feeling is you put him in, as a PLAYER. want to keep him away from the fields after, so be it. he wouldn't be going in as a manager, period, anyway.
Shoeless Joe: Ted Williams wanted him in, and he was a baseball historian more than any of us. There were no errors commit by Joe, his fielding wasn't tainted from what I have read. There was suspicion he played his position different than usual, but when things are going awry, any little thing that seems different gets magnified tenfold. Also, he hit for an incredible average in the series, as well as the only HR in the series.
Barry Bonds, and Clemens. This is where it gets a little sticky. I used to think, heck, no they don't belong if they did. A little more looking over things and I have changed my mind because of a couple of things.
1. They, according to the BASEBALL rules, did nothing wrong. There was nothing in the rulebook saying they COULD NOT take the stuff. Morally, yes, it's a crap deal. According to MLB at the time though, they were within the lines. ( Think back to basketball and weed during the late 80's, with their rules. That wasn't written in either for NBA players). Another thing. If you gave Spike Owen or Julio Lugo the same amount of Roids that any of the others supposingly did? Their HR ratios never would spike so much. the guys suspected were great already,and it probably helped, yes, but if it did, it seems not by much. from what research has said? It can't help a batters eye any better, or a pitchers control.
If they can't get in, other cheaters should not, and be removed. First on the list is Phil Niekro, who had a whole battery of lubricants and gels on the baseball that probably can't be listed here.
Personal life? Take Ty Cobb, Babe Ruth, Rogers Hornsby (KKK, I think they said), Joe Cronin ( sold off Pee Wee Reese's club to the Dodgers because he was a Catholic, for one) Mickey Mantle (Drink AND womanizing) and, well, ect...
And just to argue for arguements sake. Burt Blyleven belongs in, if All the other pitchers with over 3,000 K's can get in. Not his fault he had crap teams to back him up.
Oh, and Clemens Vs Walter Johnson, for best pitcher? Johnson, by far. A pitcher is supposed to make sure the other team never scores, and his record of shutouts: 110. No one even close. Blyleven, for instance had 60, and clemens had 'only' 46.
It could be argued that Maddux is just as good as roger, too, of not better.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Regardless of his " extramarital " brouhaha which have NOTHING to do
with the issue of HGH or steroids, time will tell you whether or not
Clemens took them. Frankly, the media are terrible in giving their bad
" hypocritical " views on Clemens. There were several athletes ,who were
guilty of different felonies or misdeamnors , still got in the H O F for some
whatever reasons. For Pete Rose, sadly he will never get in.
For Barry Bonds, he probably will get in by the votes of the Veterans
Committee instead of by the vote of ' jaundiced ' sportwriters who hate him.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Pete Rose was left out for something unaffecting his play- and yet he'll never see the hall;
Why should Clemens be in?
Beyond that, I hate pedophiles......
1 - 25 of 53