Should David Ortiz Be In The Hall of Fame?

The other day I noted on our FB page that Ortiz is likely to end his baseball career with the following numbers, should he play next year:

500+ HR
1600+ RBI
600+ 2B

You can also throw in the following two lines:

1100+ Extra base hits
1250+ BB

Should that come to pass, David Ortiz would be only the third player in Major League history to have those numbers. The other two are Hank Aaron and Barry Bonds. Which, in its own way, is supremely fitting. One man did it clean and was a first-ballot Hall of Famer. The other used PEDs and may never get in.

So should David Ortiz retire with the above numbers, should he get in the Hall of Fame?

First, let's remove the "No DH" argument from this discussion. The DH is here. It is a recognized position. And punishing a player for that is like not voting for a pitcher in the MVP race. Which is to say, it's stupid. So, forget he is a DH.

On the numbers alone, does David Ortiz have the resume?

To the above stats, add in nine All-Star Games, the 2004 ALCS MVP, the 2013 World Series MVP and three World Series rings. Also add in the 2005 AL Hank Aaron award for best hitter and six Silver Slugger awards. Never mind the clutch hits year-in and year-out.

I would say that, on the numbers alone, that David Ortiz should make the Hall of Fame.

But it is never that easy, is it?

David Ortiz was also named as being on the infamous 2003 list of MLB players who tested positive for one (or more) of a number of substances in the "Survey Test" that ultimately forced the MLBPA to agree to drug-testing in Major League Baseball. And in a time where players like Bonds and Roger Clemens may very well never be voted into the Hall of Fame, a time where a current player like A-Rod will also likely never be in the Hall of Fame because of his admitted PED use, why would it be any different for David Ortiz?

Allow me to be the Devil's Advocate for a moment.

The 2003 list of substances...no one knows exactly what was on that list of substances beyond the fact that it was more than just steroids or what we commonly refer to as PEDs nowadays. Widely thought to be on that list as well as steroids were recreational drugs and amphetamines.

Amphetamines should be of particular note because they have been pervasive in baseball for decades. The infamous "greenies" in Jim Bouton's book Ball Four were taken by countless players, including many Hall of Famers.

So could David Ortiz have been using steroids or another PED? Yes, that is possible. But it is also equally possible he took a stimulant that was accepted as a part of baseball culture or a substance that was added to a supplement without his knowledge.

Barry Bonds and the Hall of Fame

Here's something about me you may not know: I have littered the blogosphere with flaming wreckage left and right. I have discarded blogs out there the way Shawn Kemp has illegitimate children. This one right here is the longest one I have ever kept at one...and we took a three-year hiatus.

I bring this up because of the Hall of Fame voting, which we will find out the results of on Wednesday. On that ballot is one Barry Lamar Bonds, who cheated his way to numerous records. So way, way, way back in 2005, when Game of Shadows came out, I considered whether or not his achievements prior to his juicing should still allow him into the Hall. So what is below is what I wrote in 2005.

--------------------

It's pure insanity that it took this book to force baseball to undertake an investigation into who used steroids in baseball. But why should we be surprised? The owners and management of MLB turned a blind eye to the increasing use of PEDs, reveling in the increased home run totals and matching gate receipts. Meanwhile, the players swelled to Michelin Man proportions.

And none more than Barry Bonds

When Barry broke upon the scene in 1986, he was a recognized five-tool player. A star in the making. And he fulfilled that promise. Between 1986 and 1998, Bonds was a 8-time All-Star. A three-time MVP. Eight Gold Gloves.

But that wasn't enough. In the late 90s he saw sluggers like McGwire and Sosa capturing the eyes of America while he, the complete player, was left to the side. So he decided to do something about it. And that something was steroids and the rest.

And it was so obvious. So I compiled some numbers.

When Barry Bonds denies using PEDs, you have to look beyond his slowly expanding head. You have to look at the stats. And when you do, you see a very interesting pattern.

As some background, remember that Bonds entered the National League in 1986. He will be 41 on July 24, 2005.

Here are the five best years for Barry Bonds' career in OPS, AVG and HRs:

* OPS: 2004, 2002, 2001, 2003, 2000

AVG: 2002, 2004, 2003, 1993, 2001

* HRs: 2001, 2000, 2002 and 1993, 2003 and 2004

You'll notice that in each category, all the years are post-1999 with the exception of 1993 in both AVG and HRs. 1993 is the last year Bonds won the National League MVP before his streak of four straight MVP awards began in 2001.

So Bonds' best years have all occurred after the age of 36, with the exception of 1993. And his overall best year was 2002, when he was 38 years old.

If you look at his career stats, the improvement after 1999 is shocking. And completely at odds with the basic way human biology works. It makes no logical sense that Bonds should improve yearly starting in his late 30s. And increasingly so. You could easily make the argument his second best year was 2004.

So his two best years in his 18-year career were when he was 38 and 40?? Only if he was juicing, because the human male doesn't age that way.

It was 1999 when he started using PEDs. That year was cut short after 102 games because of an elbow injury he blamed on the steroids. But when he adjusted his schedule for the 2000 season...well, we know what happened.

And is it that surprising that five years later, injuries cost him most of a season? Or that his head grew in size, which shouldn't happen in the normal course of events

Let's be blunt - batters don't get better as they get older. There is some statistical evidence that pitchers can maintain quality into their 40s. But not batters.

Compare Barry's increasing stats with the last full year of another great Giant, one Willie Mays.

In 1971, at the age of 40, Mays played 136 games. His batting average was 32 points below his career average. He struck out 123 times, the highest one-year total in his career. He had 201 total bases, the lowest total in his career when he player 120 games or more. He hit only 18 home runs, again the lowest total for Mays when he played 120 games or more.

That is what happens to the great players as they age. They don't outslug and outhit players 10-15 years younger than them. It just doesn't happen.

Let's take another great player, the legendary Hank Aaron. He played three seasons where he was 40 or older. Those three seasons his home run totals were the three lowest in his career. His batting averages were the three lowest in his career. And that shouldn't be surprising. That is the normal progression of aging.

So when Bonds so blatantly flaunts that progression, it shouldn't take years, two books, a Congressional hearing and grand jury testimony to finally do something about it.

--------------------

Heads aren't supposed to grow like this.

So yeah, the guy cheated. Anything after 1998 is ridiculously suspect. But here's the thing; if someone's career prior to that is still Hall of Fame caliber, should they get in?