A 3,000-word treatise on Sam Snead

No, I’m not qualified to write a 3,000-word treatise on Sam Snead. I only know the name because it appeared in Peanuts strips. He was a golfer, apparently. That’s not my world.

But golf is the world of the good folks over at GolfersWest.com. So let’s see what they have to say about the legends of the game.

Many people believe, it’s my belief, that the baseball writers who vote annually for the Hall of Fame do so capriciously and with a substantial bias.

That’s half right. As for the capricious aspect, that’s no where near the truth. Speaking for all the baseball writers I know, we give this nomination process its deserved consideration. I know when I get the ballot the first of December every year it takes me the whole month to mull over my choices.

Wait ...

Here’s my bottom line: If a player has tested positive or admitted to taking PEDs, or been so strongly linked to PEDs that he created a greater stain on the game than the greatness he accomplished on the field, he didn’t get my vote.

Those aren’t the legends I was ...

In all the years I have voted for the Hall of Fame — 30 and counting — this was the most difficult of ‘em all.

Huh. Well, the folks at Golfers West aren’t shy about how they’re voting for the Baseball Hall of Fame. I applaud them for sharing their ballots, even if they were shared on a golf site.

And, to be fair, a writer I respect a lot, Tyler Kepner of the New York Times, vouched for the three writers from Golfers West. I might disagree with their choices and arguments, but the analogy involving me writing about Sam Snead isn’t valid. To vote for the HOF, you have to watch a ton of baseball in your career, covering the sport for 10 years or more.

But as a way to point out that, say, the Hall of Fame voting is kind of weird, this will do nicely.