They had a list of probable inductees on ESPN after Henderson and Rise were inducted. It included Edgar Martinez, Robin Ventura, Kevin Appier, etc. The list was a joke, and that made me smile. They’re aren’t many deserving individuals that remain outside of those who used steroids. If baseball wants to be smart, they’ll wait as long as they have for Rose to inducts guys like Bonds, McGwire, Palmeiro, and Sosa. Still, I don’t think they’ll be inducted in during their lifetime. At least I hope.

What I’m trying to say is that these next few years is a time when baseball can distance themselves from this era by not letting any of these players in. It’d be fine with me if nobody was inducted for the next 3-5 years. Judging by that list (and the unnamed steroid users), the only person off the top of my head that is deserving is Roberto Alomar.

I think the difference here is that I can separate Rose the player from Rose the manager. Rose the player deserves to be in the Hall. But the question becomes: Does Rose the manager take away everything Rose the player accomplished on the field? You say yes, I say no.

But hey look, again, I’m not defending what Rose did. If this is his lifetime punishment for gambling on the game, then so be it. I’m not going to lose sleep over it, nor do I think him not being in the Hall is some grave injustice to the game of baseball.

Had Rose admitted he bet on baseball back in 1990, I may have a bit more compassion for him as a person, but I don’t think I would feel he belongs in the hall of fame any more than I do now. Ok…so he hypothetically admitted it. Now what? Unfortunately Rose the player and Rose the manager are the same guy. Great…he bet on his team to win. Would that have zero effect on how he manages his team? Or do you think with money riding on it he might leave a pitcher in for one more batter than he normally would. Or Bring a reliever in when normally he might not. He’s not managing with a clear head, he’s managing with the monkey of debt on his back if he loses, and that can effect your decision making, which effects the games. What if he continued to get deeper in debt…do you think a guy with his lack of character would be immune to throwing his own games to win back his money and pay his bookies off? Or maybe they would threaten to expose his gambling habits if he didn’t start managing to lose, or forgive all of his debt if he threw the games they told him to?

Gambling and roids…I don’t think one is any worse than the other. Apparently MLB does or there would be both rules on the wall of every lockerroom, not just one of them.

How so? I’m not defending a manager gambling on games because what Rose did was wrong. But he wasn’t injecting performance-enhancing drugs to gain an edge over his opponents. He wasn’t cheating to break records. I’m not defending what Rose did, but you think gambling in baseball is worse than steroids? At the very least, they’re on the same level.

T-Bone – as always, great points. I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said on this post, even though we’re on slightly opposite sides.

But I’ve got to ask you: Had Rose admitted right away that he bet on baseball and came clean right from the start, would you still feel the same way? What if he begs for forgiveness right away and pleads that his on-field accomplishments aren’t wiped away because of his decision to break a rule while he was a manager?

In other words, would you feel as passionately as you do now if Rose didn’t lie through his teeth for 15-plus years? Would you be more willing to say, “Hey, he was wrong but at least he didn’t lie like these players on roids. His on-field accomplishments shouldn’t be taken away.”

If you still say yes “he still broke a rule no matter what,” then so be it. But then I better hear you campaigning that Gaylord Perry be taken out of the Hall because he used to doctor baseballs…