How do we navigate through the PED mess?
The topic of steroids is probably the most divisive topic in Hall of Fame circles. I suppose the Black Sox scandal impacts a few guys more directly and the recent death of Pete Rose has thrust that topic back to the forefront. Still, no topic impacts as many guys as the steroids topic. It will be impossible to talk about Mark McGwire or Rafael Palmeiro without it coming up.
Still, there is a systematic way to go about these things and we should start strictly on the numbers we do have. Are THOSE numbers good enough for these two guys to get in? We will evaluate them with our usual tests and compare them with the Hall of Fame median across the board.
I should talk about the median for a moment for those just joining the conversation. It is not the literal HOF median. What I have done in previous articles is separate the top six first basemen out because they came in at greater than 120 percent of the overall index median. I also separated out the bottom four Hall of Fame first basemen because they came in below 80 percent of the Hall of Fame median. The median that you will see here is the median of the remaining first basemen on the list.
As per usual, we begin with the counting numbers because those are the numbers most Hall of Fame voters look at. I imagine these numbers are part of the problem. We will get to the steroids problem in due course, but we should just take the numbers at face value for now.
Based on these numbers alone we would be inclined to say both players are Hall of Famers. They both surpassed 500 dingers and Palmeiro added 3000 hits to the conversation. He also outpaced the HOF median in runs scored and RBI. That seems simple enough.
The problem is that the steroids conversation never makes things simple. We know that steroids impacted these players some. We just aren’t quite sure to what degree. However, even if we just take players at their word, we would have to go with their excuse that PEDs help them recover. That means it extends their playing careers or helps keep them from breaking down physically.
So, either it added on years to the end of their career or possibly extended their peak some. Even if we just assume it extended their careers then we would need to look at the index differently. The totals for career value will probably be inflated, so maybe looking at the peak value will be more instructive.
I should note that my math skills are not off. The median index was the actual median from the totals for the group of first basemen I referenced before. So, yes if I add those numbers together I get a slightly higher number. However, we are more worried about the peak value scores. We are assuming that McGwire and Palmeiro experienced a few more seasons than they likely would have (which also impacts their counting numbers) but the peak value might be a more relevant.
We see here that Palmeiro sits on 104.0 for peak value, McGwire sits at 113.0, and the median sits at 106.5. We immediately see that McGwire actually comes out looking better. I imagine that will be the same when we look at the other tests. However, they are still close enough to be considered Hall of Fame worthy even if we ignore the career value and counting numbers.
Going into the conversation I had no idea it would be this stark. McGwire’s numbers clearly indicate he is Hall of Fame worthy. Palmeiro’s numbers not so much. It is quite possible that the steroids impacted them differently. You could claim that it made McGwire a superhuman while it simply made Palmeiro more durable. I suppose you could make that case.
The case I would make is that Palmeiro is likely a borderline Hall of Famer that got their through longevity. Others did the same. You could describe Eddie Murray that way and guys like Fred McGriff as well. So, this is not a method to shoot down Palmeiro necessarily and we haven’t run through all of the tests, but it would seem that McGwire has the upper hand right now.
These numbers would appear to even up the odds a bit, but we have to remember the relative value here. Value is not the same as important. It is not the same as difficult. No one is calling first base defense easy. No one is saying it is unimportant. However, the value as compared to the offensive value is negligible. Even if we talk Rfield then we are looking at a 7.5 win difference over the course of fifteen plus seasons at the big league level.
We are talking a little more four wins as compared to the median. However, given those four wins we could claim that the offensive gap between Palmeiro and the median has effectively been closed. As it stands, we should probably explain the differences between Rfield and DWAR. FG and DWAR are going to be similar and have similar methodologies.
Since DWAR compares all players at every position, first basemen normally have a disadvantage here. We should also note that Palmeiro did more DHing than McGwire. So, while Palmeiro was a better defensive first basemen, in terms of value they were similar. So, when looking at things sabermetrically, he was really not all that different from the median or McGwire.
Of course, I have used this test before, but there are always new folks reading for the first time. MVP awards are given ten points, top five finishes five points, and top ten finishes three points. The MVP vote itself is not proof of anything other than how the BBWAA felt about the player. In that vain, there isn’t a ton of difference here when we compare these players with the overall first base universe, but when comparing to a smaller number it is significant.
The BBWAA and the BWAR top ten lists just weren’t impressed with Palmeiro. McGwire was a lot closer to the median. These tests never prove anything on their own, but when taken in concert we start to see a more complete picture. Palmeiro is Hall of Fame worthy because he remained a solid to good player for a long time. That absolutely has value but that value is undermined when it is achieved through fraudulent means.
You could claim McGwire did the same here. What’s worse in his case is that it seems more likely that he used for the majority of his career. So, there is very little opportunity for a before and after. Still, these results when taken at face value would seem to argue that McGwire is definitely fit for the Hall of Fame while Palmeiro is more questionable.
Playoff performance does not officially play into the index at all, but I would be a fool to ignore it. For instance, Freddie Freeman will likely be a borderline Hall of Fame candidate when he finishes. The performance in the 2024 World Series will likely throw him over the top there and I can’t make a solid argument against that. This is where we get into a debate.
McGwire’s numbers look worse, but he was also a part of a World Series winning team. Palmeiro was not. So, does that make him better or worse as a candidate? It custs both ways. The 1988 and 1990 Athletics were heavily favored in their World Series and lost. If McGwire had played better that might have made the difference and maybe that team is viewed differently in history.
Palmeiro on the other hand never seemed to be a part of any of those teams. Those Orioles and Rangers teams were always competitive but never actually good. Is that his fault? I suppose if you argue he was the best player on those teams then maybe it is an indictment of him as a player. It is hard for me to make that case.
I could spend hours on the moral implications of PEDs. I’d rather just try to nail down what the effects were and whether a clean version of the player would have made it in. I am inclined to say maybe on both counts. It’s a murky picture, but this debate requires us to be pragmatic. I can’t just say yes or no across the board. I have to go case by case and in their case it is a coin flip.