There are a lot of things with which I disagree. I do agree Selig should not be in the hall of fame. But with the nature of the original test, it is not definitive Ortiz took PEDs. There is a possibility, but that’s not definitive. Other PED users may not have failed a test, but either there is a paper trail or a stack of witnesses who demonstrate Bonds, Clemens, etc. took PEDs. Consider it like a trial. There is enough evidence to prove Clemens and Bonds took PED, Ortiz is below that threshold. The whole concept of opening up the hall of fame to anyone regardless of cheating is off base. Why water down today’s already questionable ethics and character? I agree the hall of fame is a hall of fame and not a hall of top character citizens. But Schilling’s bloody sock is in the hall of fame, I’m sure Bonds and Clemens have bats or balls or gloves there too. So their story is being told without needing them to be elected to the hall of fame. The answer to a grey area in terms of character isn’t to remove the bar entirely. It is to best determine where it should be. And proven (the key word being proven, not just suspected) PED users do not meet any reasonable character limitations.
" He’s arguably the most important Red Sox player since Ted Williams." I largely agree with both your general points and your arguments for them. But gosh, unless we delete Carl Yastrzemski from history, this isn't true. I realize you're not saying he *is* the most important player since Ted, only that he "arguably" is. But still, for those of us who were actually alive when Yaz was playing, your claim seems wildly implausible. Anyway, thanks for the post and the new substack. I look forward to reading more.
"Arguably" is a key word, as is the word "important."
I very deliberately didn't make a judgment on the "best" player, it's about the impact they had. Yaz has a great case for "most important since Ted Williams," as does Boggs, Clemens, and Pedro. But tough to argue with Ortiz's three rings.
Yes, agreed. You did write "important," not "best," and given that, there *is* something to be argued. I'll just note that in an era when there were no playoffs, and when the regular season therefore meant a lot more, and after years of mediocrity, the Red Sox made it to the World Series in 1967 (even getting to a 7th game) thanks almost single-handedly to Yaz in one of the greatest performances in history. We can count rings, sure. But the Red Sox getting there after a 21-year drought made Yaz important. Mind you, I was a Yankee fan then, not some Red Sox fanatic. What Yaz did was incomprehensible, and arguably makes him more important than Ortiz.
There are a lot of things with which I disagree. I do agree Selig should not be in the hall of fame. But with the nature of the original test, it is not definitive Ortiz took PEDs. There is a possibility, but that’s not definitive. Other PED users may not have failed a test, but either there is a paper trail or a stack of witnesses who demonstrate Bonds, Clemens, etc. took PEDs. Consider it like a trial. There is enough evidence to prove Clemens and Bonds took PED, Ortiz is below that threshold. The whole concept of opening up the hall of fame to anyone regardless of cheating is off base. Why water down today’s already questionable ethics and character? I agree the hall of fame is a hall of fame and not a hall of top character citizens. But Schilling’s bloody sock is in the hall of fame, I’m sure Bonds and Clemens have bats or balls or gloves there too. So their story is being told without needing them to be elected to the hall of fame. The answer to a grey area in terms of character isn’t to remove the bar entirely. It is to best determine where it should be. And proven (the key word being proven, not just suspected) PED users do not meet any reasonable character limitations.
" He’s arguably the most important Red Sox player since Ted Williams." I largely agree with both your general points and your arguments for them. But gosh, unless we delete Carl Yastrzemski from history, this isn't true. I realize you're not saying he *is* the most important player since Ted, only that he "arguably" is. But still, for those of us who were actually alive when Yaz was playing, your claim seems wildly implausible. Anyway, thanks for the post and the new substack. I look forward to reading more.
"Arguably" is a key word, as is the word "important."
I very deliberately didn't make a judgment on the "best" player, it's about the impact they had. Yaz has a great case for "most important since Ted Williams," as does Boggs, Clemens, and Pedro. But tough to argue with Ortiz's three rings.
Yes, agreed. You did write "important," not "best," and given that, there *is* something to be argued. I'll just note that in an era when there were no playoffs, and when the regular season therefore meant a lot more, and after years of mediocrity, the Red Sox made it to the World Series in 1967 (even getting to a 7th game) thanks almost single-handedly to Yaz in one of the greatest performances in history. We can count rings, sure. But the Red Sox getting there after a 21-year drought made Yaz important. Mind you, I was a Yankee fan then, not some Red Sox fanatic. What Yaz did was incomprehensible, and arguably makes him more important than Ortiz.