Tuesday’s question: Will Mark McGwire’s admission help his Hall of Fame chances?

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

Will Mark McGwire’s admission help his Hall of Fame chances? Reporters from around the Tribune family tackle the question of the day, then you get a chance to chime in and tell them why they are wrong.

Bill Shaikin, Los Angeles Times

It’s highly unlikely that McGwire’s admission of using steroids will lead to his admission to the Hall of Fame. If a voter decided McGwire’s career batting average of .263 was too low for a Hall of Fame first baseman in an offense-first era, nothing has changed. If a voter decided not to vote for McGwire because of steroid use, nothing has changed--indeed, that use has gone from suspected to confirmed. And it is not as if McGwire gets credit for sharing his story out of the pure desire to come clean--he ‘fessed up because the St. Louis Cardinals told him he could not dodge the media if he wished to accept his new job as the Cardinals’ hitting coach.

Kevin Cowherd, Baltimore Sun

No. Big Mac – now there’s an ironic nickname in the midst of the steroid controversy – was only getting about 24% of the votes needed to make the Hall before he admitted to juicing.
On the contrary, given his often vague and incredible answers to Bob Costas on the MLB Network Monday night, he might have damaged his Hall of Fame chances even more.
He didn’t really think steroids helped him hit more and longer home runs?
He didn’t remember the names of any steroids he took, when most pro athletes won’t even swallow a Tic Tac unless they know what effect it’ll have on their bodies?
He only took steroids to come back from injuries, not to bulk up so he could smack tape-measure shots and reap ever-bigger paychecks and become the darling of the home run derby that was baseball in the 1990s?
Please. The Hall of Fame voters aren’t dumb enough to fall for that.