Raines and Blyleven would be my ballot, with Trammell coming extremely close.

Henderson is a no-brainer, yes. But Raines could very well be the best leadoff man in baseball history but for Ricky. He was a great hitter, an excellent fielder, and a phenomenal baserunner. Raines’ overall numbers are way better than those of Lou Brock, who of course is in the Hall. Raines managed a .293/.385/.425 line over a 21 year career (compare to Brock’s .293/.343/.410), walked almost 400 more times than he struck out over his career, and stole 808 bases while only getting caught 146 times (an insane 85% success rate) – Brock stole 938 bags but at only a 75% success rate, still solid, but Raines’ is ridiculous. And Raines’ power numbers were also good for a leadoff man.

As for Blyleven, much virtual ink has been spilled, but that doesn’t make him any less deserving. 5th on the career strikeout list, and 8th in shutouts. He played for horrible teams and still manages to rank in the top 20 all-time for wins, in part due to the fact that he won more 1-0 games than anyone since 1900. His career ERA+ of 118 is better than plenty of Hall of Famers, and his counting stats are right up there as well. It’s no answer to say that he didn’t win a Cy Young, since he should’ve, more than once. He was consistently overlooked in the Cy voting for much less deserving pitchers. And one can hardly hold it against him, knowing how these votes are selected. For those who say that Blyleven wasn’t “dominant,” I don’t know – how does one measure pitching dominance? Strikeouts and shutouts would seem to be decent indicators, and Blyleven ranks 5th and 8th in them, respectively, all-time. And Bert’s curve is one of the best curveballs of all time.

I’m somewhat torn on McGwire. But if there was a Hall of Fame for lawyers and I built my legal career on cheating, winning every case, I think I would understand that I would be forfeiting my right (were I ever caught) to be singled out for special recognition as a lawyer – even if: 1) I was good enough to be elected to the legal hall of fame even if I had not engaged in cheating; and 2) the cheating in which I engaged was of dubious benefit to my overall legal work (but obviously I thought it was helping at the time).

I have nothing personally against McGwire and I understand him to be a decent person. But the Hall of Fame is where people are singled out for special recognition for their contribution to the game. You don’t have to be a shining example of humanity, and I would vote for someone regardless of their personal morality. But I think you either believe in fair play, or you don’t. I do, and therefore don’t think someone who knowingly and unrepentently cheats for many years deserves to be in the HOF. However, since the facts aren’t out I’m open to reconsideration as evidence continues to present itself (if he took steroids one time, obviously, he should be in). That said, Mac hasn’t been very forthcoming, so I don’t think it makes sense to give him the benefit of the doubt in this regard.