Chris Archer's strong take on the Hall of Fame vote

Former Tampa Bay Ray and current Pittsburgh Pirates pitcher Chris Archer had a strong take yesterday on players eligible for induction into the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, N.Y.

If you ever failed a test, got suspended, or admitted to using performance enhancers you should NOT be in the hall of fame. No hard feelings but you disgraced the integrity of the game, your stats are tainted. You don't deserve the honor.

-- Chris Archer (@ChrisArcher22) January 18, 2019

Many will agree with this opinion. But at the same time, the Hall of Fame voters collectively seem to be softening a stance against performance-enhancing drug users and players that were suspended for using PEDs.

While Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens never failed a test, got suspended nor admitted to use of performance enhancers, the strong suspicion of many fans and reporters links the duo to PEDs.

But both players seem to get closer to the Hall of Fame each year. In 2013, Bonds got 36.2 percent of the vote and last year that was up to 56.4 percent. In 2013, Clemens got 37.6 percent and last year that was up to 57.3 percent. A total of 75 percent or more is needed for induction at Cooperstown. Both players have gotten listed on about 73 percent of the ballots collected by Ryan Thibodaux, who posts updated results on Twitter. He has received ballots as of yesterday afternoon from about 45 percent of eligible voters. I am a member of the Baseball Writers' Association of America, but not yet eligible to vote. My colleague, Roch Kubatko, is a Hall of Fame voter.

Credit to Archer for a strong stance and one that may not be popular with some of his fellow players. If I were voting, the issue of PEDs would be complicated for me, as it must be for every voter now. Exclude everyone connected to PEDs in any way? Exclude only those we have proof about or that have failed tests?

There are so many issues here and almost none have definitive answers. Former big league pitcher Dan Plesac said on MLB Network yesterday there were more players using enhancers during his playing days than he realized at the time. He now believes a majority of players were taking something. So how do you judge a player getting help beating another player also getting help?

For me, I think I would have to decide on a player-by-player and case-by-case basis. You take in all the information you have on that player and this is just one element. I side with Archer, but I can't say I'd never vote for someone who doesn't pass his test.

If you had a Hall of Fame vote, how would you handle this?

Want a quick look at where Baseball HOF candidates are tracking? I made this just for you: https://t.co/4Tq9qIVwW5

Of course, the full Ballot Tracker with all the glorious details will always be available at: https://t.co/8ISx82oWgM

-- Ryan Thibodaux (@NotMrTibbs) December 1, 2018