Who would have thought the BALCO and other PED controversies would have such an impact 20 years later? With each coming year, a list of names who either used PED's, or been accused/suspected comes across the table of the BBWAA. Voting, as one would expect, is inconsistent and stocked full of individual differences and viewpoints on this subject.
Who should I vote for, the guy who was suspected and didn't get caught? What about the players who were on a Hall of Fame track before admitted or suspected use (Clemens, Bonds)? Should we just say the hell with it and vote for anyone who has the numbers because "everyone was doing it"? What about Palmeiro and Sheffield, those "bastards" denied their PED use in court and/or TV and subsequently were "outed" later? How close do we look at guys who had a meager amount of HR's in college or in minor league baseball (Bagwell)?
The answer(s)...I'm not sure, ok fine, yes the hell with it, off with their heads, I don't care about the minor leagues, bodies get stronger, they mature.
I don't have an answer that is 100% justifiable. Does anyone? I know with many awards and honors, if a determined set of criteria are not agreed upon prior to voting, it's just a frenzy for personal agendas. There's no Baseball Player (possible/admitted PED users) Hall of Fame Voting for Dummies book! Writers are human, like the rest of us, presumably with their own allergies and irritations towards any number of things.
Here's Jon Heyman's ballot for example. He voted for Bonds, but not Clemens or Ortiz. He had 10 votes to cast, he chose to check 5. He said "he'll revisit Billy Wagner's case next year"? What exactly is going to change from this year to the next?
Here's Peter Botte, he apparently went with "if you were suspended, I'm not going to vote for you" method. This might be the closest opinion I could stomach.