Gomez: How We Operate…at the BBWAA.
Let us begin with this tweet from ESPN’s Pedro Gomez on the intertwined subjects of Jeff Bagwell’s Hall-of-Fame candicacy and his whispered (and thoroughly unproved) use of possibly-performance-enhancing drugs:
You notice Bagwell has never denied using? “@Ben_Oehler: @pedrogomezESPN too many voters think like you. Keeping guys like Bagwell out wrong
25 Apr 12
When it’s pointed out to Gomez that Bagwell did, in point of fact, deny using PEDs, he comes up with this.
Bagwell DID deny. Fine. You join BBWAA for 10 years, you get to do what YOU want with your vote.
Even though Gomez’s stated reason for suspecting Bagwell of PED use is roundly disproven, he decides to, in essence, stick out his tongue and appeal to his own misplaced authority. (You may recognize this approach to argument from its formal title, “Rhetorical Techniques of the Chastened Pre-Schooler.”) As Hall-of-Fame voting privileges go, it’s a dereliction of duties.
...So what is Gomez left with? This: A player nebulously suspected of PED use in some “eyeball test” quarters must deny having done so in order to earn Gomez’s vote, but even if he does deny it he won’t earn Gomez’s vote. That’s the “logic” to be drawn from his recent comments.
The Hall of Fame is a wonderful place, but it deserves better gatekeepers than Gomez.