Barry's World: Will Bonds Be Unanimous First-Ballot HOFer?

Barry's World is the FanHouse's look into the season that is Barry Bonds

In Sunday's LA Times, Barry's agent, Jeff Borris, let out a belligerent declaration:

"Barry better be unanimous, 100%, first ballot," Borris said. "If the Hall of Fame is what it stands for, how can the greatest player ever to play the game not be a unanimous selection?"

I understand that Borris is Bonds' agent, meaning his job is to best represent his client's interests, but seriously Borris, don't you think that edict is a little out of order?

Consider this, no player has ever been a unanimous selection to the Hall of Fame. Not the Babe, not Hank Aaron, not Mantle, not Mays, nor DiMaggio, Ted Williams, Nolan Ryan, none of them. On the 2007 ballot, Cal Ripken Jr. and Tony Gwynn received the 3rd and 7th highest percentages in history, 98.5% of the vote for Ripken, and 97.6% for Gwynn. Ripken had the iron-man streak, 2 MVPs, 19 All-Star games, a Rookie of the Year, and two Gold Gloves. Gwynn has eight batting titles, five Gold Gloves, and 15 All-Star games. They both played in what's considered the fringe of the steroid era and neither of them received a unanimous selection. Why would things be any different for Bonds? Especially consider that the Baseball Hall of Fame has a morals clause wherein character, sportsmanship, and integrity are all heavily weighed. Wouldn't that be enough to keep Bonds from garnering 100% of the vote?

There are more questions that must be asked: Is Barry the greatest player ever? Should Bonds be the first player to receive the unanimous distinction? Will voters snub him of a first-ballot Hall of Fame vote because of all the Game of Shadows allegations that surround him? Lastly, is there any player worthy of a unanimous selection to the Hall of Fame? These are all questions you must ask yourself and try to come up with the answer.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

4-10-2007 @ 8:59AM

sports bettor said...

If I had a vote, I would pass on Barry.

4-09-2007 @ 11:52PM

dbei5 said...

i dont think bonds should get in the first year, but the 2nd or 3rd year yes... to me the steroids isnt an issue other players used it to, uneless your going to put asterisks next to all the players who so called used and didnt, than for now lets judge the players for what they did here and now not whether they used or not... i dont think barrys the greatest player ever but one of the best yes... if these pictures were picthing to him instead of walking him all the time hed probaly be closer to 900 by now, i think hed have at least 100 more, so lets put an asterisk next to that stat also... these picthers are wimps picth to him if he hits it out oh well, better luck next time, it really bores me to see 20 millon dollar players not perform, if your paying both the picthure and player that kinda money picth the ball and let the hitter hit... if the games on the line than walk him, but these 4 walks a game should be illegal, its boring for baseball...

4-10-2007 @ 2:55AM

effsdfs said...

Barry should be a Unanimous First-Ballot HOFer, but he won't be. Who cares if it hasn't been done in the oast? Barry shouldn't be held accountable for that.

Not voting for Barry Bonds is pretty much idiotic - Even if you " ignore " everything he did since 2000.

4-16-2007 @ 8:31AM

MarkyMark said...

Barry is one of the greatest ever played. Steroid is not the issue here. The media hates him because he is not a nice person to talk to. HOF is his to take. He should be unanimously voted in. He is an incredible player. Only player with 700 hrs and 500 stolen bases. 7 MVPs. Forget it about the steroids. Everyone used it. Still have to hit the ball and take those walks.

4-26-2007 @ 6:55PM

barrybondsisgay said...

the best baseball player ever he is not. That would be Mr Babe Ruth. He would have the HR record if he hadn't been a pitcher the first four years of his career. Look it up. He is also third in walks for a career, which you others provide as a stat for why bonds has so low of a number.

4-28-2007 @ 11:57AM

Ray Nanney said...

Barry Bonds does not have the credentials for HOF
membership. Numbers, yes. Integrity, character,
esteem, ethics, NEVER. To put Barry Bonds in the HOF is
telling the youth of the sports world (and all over)
that unethical practices are ok. If Bonds goes in,
the face of Hank Aaron just got slapped. Too, make
room for Pete Rose, another shyster. They both are from the same mold.

5-18-2007 @ 4:33PM

Patrick Benson said...

It would be ridiculous to deny Barry Bonds entry into the Hall of Fame. Barry Bonds did not create steroids, he wasn't the first athlete to use them and certainly want be the last one to use them. Everyone keeps wanting to make steroids a Barry Bonds issue, but the question in which none of us will know is how many pitchers did he face that used steroids as well? There is no legitimate argument that can be made to deny Bonds entry just as well as Pete Rose should be in the Hall based upon what he did in baseball. Heck everyone wants to make a hero out of Babe Ruth but this guy was an alcoholic and I'm reading some of these other blogs and people are talking about morals? Where were his? And did I add he was a racist as well.

5-18-2007 @ 8:30PM

avidrammer said...

It amazes me how so few people think things out for themselves,and are so quick to jump on the bandwagon of conformity. Barry Bonds is, and has been repeatedly accused of using steroids. However, test have come back negative. Yet you still chastize the guy. All those that do are just as narrowed minded as a river that runs through the City of Los Angeles (familiar with Los Angeles? probably not!). Is anyone familiar with natural supplements, and specific diets, or anything out of the ordinary realm? How would you respond to others if you were in a situation like this? "You take a test, it comes back negative, and still no one believes you except those who know you personally." Just goes to show, people are going to believe what they wish regardless. Is it because their lives are boring, and they simply find it necessary to latch on to anything just to feel as though they have substance? Even through all this rhetoric Bonds is still hitting homeruns, regardless of age. ( another stupid issue...it's more about heart/interest) They have not found anything after this many years. Is there an underlying issue that you may be afraid to comment on for the mere fact you too might get labeled? You know like, sexuality, race, or any type of prejudice, or some form of jealousy? Remember, it's a free country, freedom of speech ( an invitation to be a targeted, so you choose to be "Politically Correct"...kinda sad!). GET A LIFE, LET IT GO!

5-18-2007 @ 8:42PM

REGARDING COMMENTS BY PATRICK BENSON 5/18/2007

Patrick, my hat is off to you man. Excellent comments, and that is all that needs to be said by me.
Thank you Patrick,

avidrammer