It's not the Hall of Very Good

^

It shouldn't be easy to get in the Baseball Hall of Fame, so I don't feel "sorry" for anybody who didn't make it. Two guys I voted for didn't get enough votes: Tim Raines and Jack Morris. They'll have more chances, though Morris only has two more years on the ballot.

Meanwhile, congrats to Barry Larkin, a heck of a shortstop in his day and, from all accounts, a decent guy.

The buzz is already starting about The Juicer Class of '13. Lots of interesting debates to come!

^

Today's High Five: Bad News Bears, Tebow's Troubles, Hall of Fame & More

^

5. Well, Josh McCown wasn't awful against the Packers. And people say I'm negative about the Bears!

Actually, McCown was significantly better than anybody could have thought he'd be, given that he was an assistant high school football coach down here in North Carolina just a few weeks ago. His first interception was RB Kahlil Bell's fault and his second came on a heave with the Bears hopelessly behind.

All this makes me believe that if Jerry Angelo had given Lovie Smith a decent backup QB -- or if Smith had recognized earlier that Caleb Hanie was a lost cause -- the Bears might have won a couple of those games they lost and might not be playing next week just for funsies.

As for Bell, yes, he looked good running the ball against the Packers. But for those who think the Bears would have beaten the Broncos if only Bell had gotten the ball instead of Marion Barber ... you must have very short-term memory loss.

In addition to failing to block Clay Matthews (resulting in the aforementioned INT), Bell fumbled twice against the Packers, including once on the goal line. In other words, very Barber-like screwups.

Put it all together and it's pretty obvious that the loss of Matt Forte, not Jay Cutler, was the more fatal blow to a team that had little margin for error.

4. Got the presents I wanted: brass knuckles and nunchucks. Now I can go beat the hell out of people to steal their new Air Jordans. Happy Holidays!

3. I'll really be impressed with Chris Paul if he can lead the Clippers past the first round of the playoffs ... because it will mean he will have overcome Vinny Del Negro's coaching.

In other NBA news ... if you thought the Heat looked unbeatable in their season-opening smackdown of the Mavs, just wait until they get Eddy Curry healthy!

2. Finalized my Hall of Fame ballot: Barry Larkin, Tim Raines and Jack Morris.

My reasoning on Larkin and Raines was detailed in my previous post. As for Morris, I know he's borderline but I've voted for him in the past because of his performance in the 1980s and his postseason record, so I'm not going to deprive him now that I'm starting to think more about his shortcomings.

1. With his long wind-up, telegraphed deliveries, uncertainty in the passing game and extended stretches of horrid play, Tim Tebow still looks like more of a novelty act than an NFL quarterback.

John Elway's initial feeling that the Broncos wouldn't be able to build around Tebow was spot-on. If he follows through on his more recent, more emotional statements that Tebow is the long-term answer, Elway will regret it. As will Denver fans.

^

Mulling Hall choices

^

I'm in the process of sorting out my Baseball Hall of Fame ballot. It's the calm before the storm, so to speak, a year after Bert Blyleven finally got in and a year before a bunch of juicers hit the ballot.

There aren't any slam-dunk choices such as Robbie Alomar from last year. I'm considering only 8 former ballplayers -- there will be no Mark McLiar or Rafael Palmeiro on my ballot -- and each offers about as many cons as pros.

JEFF BAGWELL was a very good player for a very long time. His .948 OPS ranks 22nd all-time. But 449 HRs don't seem like quite enough for a first baseman, especially one from the Steroid Era, and he had poor postseason numbers for some talented Astro teams that might have made some noise had their best player come through. When I look at 1B stats, how do I choose Bagwell but not choose Fred McGriff? And I'm not choosing Fred McGriff.

BARRY LARKIN is one of the best shortstops I've seen: good glove, tough out, nice pop in his bat, extremely efficient baserunner, and by all accounts a good leader and solid citizen. Among SS from his era, he ranked in the top four in most offensive categories (along with Jeter, A-Rod and Ripken). Judged as a SS, he belongs in the Hall. Judged by numbers relative to all players, he falls short. He's a great example of a borderline case.

EDGAR MARTINEZ was a DH just about his entire career. That alone doesn't eliminate him in my book but it means he must be exemplary otherwise. His career numbers pale in comparison to those of, say, Frank Thomas. Throw in the steroid rumblings, and I'll pass.

JACK MORRIS was the best pitcher in the 1980s, a nasty sumbitch who ate up innings and mostly excelled in big games. But he had neither a spectacular winning percentage nor an overly impressive ERA. I have voted for him in the past and now wonder if my coverage of the 1991 World Series weighed too heavily on my decision. Serious reconsideration going on inside my bald dome.

DALE MURPHY was a two-time MVP with good career numbers, but he falls short when compared to others of his era. He didn't dominate as long as Jim Rice, wasn't as good all-around as Andre Dawson, wasn't as intimidating as Dave Parker, didn't hit 400 HRs despite playing in a bandbox, batted only .265, and was decent-to-lousy statistically in his final six seasons as he hung around and compiled relatively meaningless career stats.

TIM RAINES is an interesting candidate because of his unique status as one of the best leadoff men ever. He was not Rickey Henderson, to be sure, but most of his stats are better than those of Lou Brock. I love this from ESPN's Jayson Stark: Raines reached base more in his career than Tony Gwynn did and had an almost identical on-base percentage; every eligible player who reached base as many times as Raines did and had as high an on-base percentage is in the Hall. I didn't vote for him in the past but I've really taken a close look at some of his more detailed numbers and am giving him more consideration this time.

LEE SMITH had lots of saves. But when you think of dominant relievers, you just don't think of him. Maybe it's because he put up his numbers just as saves became less-meaningful, one-inning stints ... or maybe it's because he played on lots of bad teams. Any closer I vote for must be in the Gossage/Fingers/Sutter/Rivera mold ... and Smith wasn't.

ALAN TRAMMELL was to the '80s what Larkin was to the '90s. Larkin has the edge in most stats, however, including pretty decisive edges in OPS, SB, batting average and runs. If I'm choosing only one SS on my ballot, I can't see how I'd choose Trammell over Larkin.

I'm leaning strongly toward putting check marks next to the names of Larkin and Raines. I'm less enthusiastic about Morris, but haven't eliminated the possibility. The others weren't Hall of Famers in my book.

I'm going to think this through a little more over the weekend before sending in my ballot.

^

Milton Bradley: 100th verse, same as the first

^
Can't wait for Milton Bradley to end his silence and blame Lou Piniella, Cubbie fans and Chicago media for running him out of Seattle.
^

Hall call was worth the wait for Blyleven, Alomar

^
As a Baseball Hall of Fame voter, I'm often asked how it's possible that a BBWAA member fails to vote for a guy one year but then changes his/her mind 12 months later. After all, the perfectly sane argument goes, the player's stats didn't change during those 52 weeks.

The newest enshrinees announced Wednesday, Bert Blyleven and Robbie Alomar, exemplify why it happens ... and demonstrate that it even makes some sense.

This was Blyleven's 14th year on the ballot, meaning he'd have had only one more try after this one. I didn't vote for him his first 10 years but became a convert four years ago. For the longest time, I had trouble reconciling the fact that if the likes of Jim Kaat and Tommy John weren't in, why should Blyleven? The three had similar stats and similar impact on teams.

Over time, however, several fellow voters made reasonable cases for Blyleven, and I finally saw their points. They emphasized his strikeouts, complete games and two World Series rings, as well as the relative weakness of many of the teams on which he played. And they correctly said that just because Kaat and John didn't get the votes, that was no reason to take it out on Blyleven.

I am not the least bit ashamed that it took me 10 years to come around. Justice was served in the end. (And not David Justice ... he ain't getting in!)

Alomar was the best second baseman I ever saw and, for more than a decade, one of the great offensive catalysts in the game. I enthusiastically voted for him last year, his first on the ballot.

Several of my BBWAA colleagues who shunned him last year checked the box next to his name this time - and I have absolutely no problem with that. Keeping Alomar from being a first-ballot Hall of Famer was perfectly fitting punishment for a jerk who spat on an umpire.

As for other Hall tidbits ...

++ The only other player to earn my check mark this year, Jack Morris, got 53.5 percent of the vote - far short of the 75 percent every Hall of Famer needs. I fully respect the fact that Morris is a borderline case, a big-game pitcher with an excellent winning percentage who excelled for a decade but lacked an eye-popping win total and ERA.

++ The only other guys I seriously considered this time were Barry Larkin and Tim Raines. Maybe I'll change my mind about one or the other someday. Or maybe not.

++ Mercy! Harold Baines finally fell 2 votes shy of remaining on the ballot for future years. He simply isn't a Hall of Famer, despite the arguments on his behalf by my SouthtownStar buddy Phil Arvia.

++ Jeff Bagwell, Alan Trammell, Larry Walker, Dave Parker, Don Mattingly and Dale Murphy were all very good players for a very long time but it's unlikely that any will make the Hall. That shows how difficult it is to get in - which, of course, it should be.

++ Mark McLiar actually lost support from last year to this. Good. He did one thing well ... and did that well only because he made a pin cushion out of his buttocks for years and years. One-dimensional idiots do not belong in the Hall of Fame.

++ I can understand why some of my peers voted for Rafael Palmeiro, who had very good stats over the years (but was a juicer who rarely helped his teams succeed). That 30 of them voted for Juan Gonzalez, a steroid-swilling clown whose numbers relative to his era were unimpressive, is more of a head-scratcher.

++ Two voters checked the box next to B.J. Surhoff's name, one gave Bret Boone a vote and another chose Benito Santiago. Something there helps explain why both Dubya and Blago each got elected to major executive offices ... twice!
^

Mark Prior: From perfect to unemployable, just like that

^

The Bald Truth

Before he ever threw a big-league pitch, Mark Prior was heralded as a once-in-a-generation talent. He had the size, the demeanor, the poise, the mound presence, the intelligence, the command and the maturity of legend. And oh, did he ever have the stuff.

His mechanics? Perfect. One expert after another said that with his mechanics, he'd never get hurt.

When the Twins passed on him to draft their hometown boy, Joe Mauer, they were ridiculed for being stupid, cheap or both. (I guess now is as good a time as any to say their decision has turned out OK.)

The Cubs gave Prior such a huge signing bonus after they selected him in 2001 - $10.5 million - that it's still a record today.

Think about that. Think about how salaries in sports - baseball especially - have escalated. And yet this guy's bonus of eight years ago remains the gold standard.

The first time Mark Prior pitched for the Cubs, it was obvious he had "it" - that special something separating the superstars from everybody else.

Fans had such high expectations for him that I took to calling him Messiah Mark. Some ripped me for "making fun" of Prior, but the more observant readers realized I was poking fun at the worshippers, not the faux deity. (Besides, I liked how Messiah Mark Prior sounded. Kinda rolls off the tongue, no?)

He went 18-6 in 2003, his first full year in the majors. In the second half of that season, he was 10-1 with a 1.52 ERA. He was simply the best pitcher in the world, A SURE THING.

Prior continued to shine in the postseason and was only five outs away from a shutout victory that would have vaulted the Cubs into their first World Series in six decades. Though he, like his teammates and manager, choked away that game, his potential obviously was limitless.

More than a few surveys of GMs, managers, scouts and sportswriters concluded that, after old-timers Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson and Tom Glavine reached the 300-win plateau, it wouldn't happen again until Prior got to 300 some 15 or so years down the line.

Then came the injuries. One after another after another.

As the injuries piled up, experts began blaming flaws in his pitching mechanics for his plight. Some were the same experts who just a few years earlier had said his mechanics were perfect.

Many fans who once worshipped Messiah Mark suddenly were all over him. Baseball people, including some in the Cubs organization, were calling him a wimp.

He didn't know the difference between soreness and injury, they said. He had a low pain threshold. He was too selfish, too worried about his next contract, to man up.

What a wuss!

I wasn't Prior's friend or fan - that's not my job - but I did feel sorry for him, and I said so in several columns back then.

I didn't feel that way because of his ailments. After all, injuries are part of sports. And certainly not because the money train had stopped pulling into his depot. With the millions he made, he should be set for life.

No, I felt sorry for him because total strangers were questioning his integrity, passion, manhood and will to compete. These idiots somehow felt qualified to look into his brain and his heart. It wasn't until the surgeries began that people finally acknowledged: "Hey, you know what? This guy actually might be hurt."

As it turns out, he threw his final big-league pitch in 2006. The Cubs let him go a year later. The Padres signed him. More surgery followed. Last week, Prior was cut loose.

He is a 28-year-old has-been.

Although it has anything but a happy ending, his is among the most interesting stories of recent times. The cautionary tale to end all cautionary tales.

Whenever some young gun is compared to the all-time greats, I always think of Mark Prior.

And whenever a team drafts the next Can't Miss Kid, I say: "Hey, if Messiah Mark can miss, anybody can."

The Balder Truth

Pirates rookie Andrew McCutchen was so incredible Saturday - 4 hits, 4 runs, 3 HRs, 6 RBI - that he was honored as Future Red Sox Or Future Cub Of The Day.

THE BALDEST TRUTH

I promise. I'll never capitalize the "w" in Dewayne again.

The White Sox media guide lists the now-famous Perfect Game Preserver as DeWayne Wise. So do the lineup sheets and press notes that the team publishes on game days. But Wise says he wants the "w" lower-cased.

His wish is my command: Dewayne Wise, it is.

By the way, I really would have been impressed had Wise preserved a perfect game for Mark Buehrle on Sunday against the Yankees. Considering that Buehrle allowed seven runs on 12 hits in 4 1/3 innings, the Sox would have needed about 14 Dewaynes on the field (and maybe a couple on the other side of the outfield wall).

You know, there's only one word to describe this latest Buehrle performance: aWful.

Rose isn't Selig's bud

^

The Bald Truth

Despite reports to the contrary, don't bet on Bud Selig ever reinstating Pete Rose. 

Selig would rather make do with 98 percent of his $18 million salary (so MLB.com could pay its interns) than lift the ban on Gamblin' Pete.

Rose has cheated and lied and broken sacred rules and acted the fool, and he's done much of it on Selig's watch. Bud isn't about to reward Pete by letting him have a shot at the Hall of Fame.

Still, I say they are separate issues. 

Gamblin' Pete shouldn't be allowed anywhere near baseball now. Not as a manager, not as a GM, not as a coach, not as an ambassador.

But Charlie Hustle should be in the Hall for his accomplishments as a player. There has been no proof that Rose ever gambled on baseball during his playing days, and he certainly was an all-time great.

At the same time, I have little sympathy for Pete Rose. He made his bed ... and he called his bookie from it.

The Balder Truth

Apparently, $136 Million Cubbie Alfonso Soriano isn't allergic to the No. 6 spot after all.

Everybody has known forever that the man isn't a leadoff hitter. And now he's killing the ball from the 6-hole - including Monday's game-winning grand slam against the 'Stros.

Looking back on it now, you wonder what Lou Piniella was so afraid of for 2 1/2 years.

THE BALDEST TRUTH

I set up my Facebook account Monday afternoon and I'm still trying to decide if I like it or hate it. 

Sure, it feels good to be at least up to 2007 levels of technology. But who needs that many so-called friends? I haven't been this popular since I coated myself with kibble and went to the dog pound.

So please don't take it personally if I don't accept you as a friend. I mean, I don't take it personally that my kids have rejected my i-friendship.

"Facebook," Ben informed me, "isn't for old dudes like you."

Ouch.