Last true ballot

Debate the merits of Tim Raines' candidacy for the Hall of Fame with zeal this weekend. Make your arguments for or against Larry Walker, Barry Larkin, Jack Morris, Fred McGriff and Alan Trammell. Stake out a position on where closer Lee Smith and DH Edgar Martinez stand.

Just make sure to savour the conversation, because Monday afternoon's announcement of the 2012 inductees to Cooperstown will likely be the last for a long time where the conversation is primarily centred on joyful baseball deliberations, not the difficult and touchy issue of steroids.

Yes, Mark McGwire is back on the ballot for a sixth time and his continued poor showings - he garnered just 19.8 per cent of the 2011 vote, nowhere near the 75 per cent needed for election - offer us a litmus test. Rafael Palmeiro (11 per cent) and Juan Gonzalez (5.2 per cent) return, too.

And sure, people will be closely watching how voters handle Jeff Bagwell this time around, given that the 41.7 per cent he collected last year is largely attributed to unsubstantiated and unfair suspicions of performance-enhancing substance usage.

But the 2013 ballot will be defined by the first-time eligible Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa, and Mike Piazza, and that will make the decisions of voters much more difficult (full disclosure: this writer votes for the first time in '13 after reaching his 10-year mark with the BBWAA this season).

---

Top of the 49th: Kirby Puckett in the Hall of Fame, but no Larry Walker? The numbers show another Canadian should adorn the hallowed halls. Read it here

---

Bonds and Clemens, in particular, were the dominant players of their era and the contextualization of the so-called steroid era really hits a critical juncture with how their achievements are judged by hall voters.

Bonds holds baseball's hallowed all-time home run record of 762 and also owns the single-season mark of 73, while Clemens is third all-time with 4,672 strikeouts and sits ninth with 354 wins. Rejecting McGwire is one thing, shutting out two of the game's greatest players, even with their polarizing personalities and checkered past, is another.

While some voters have staked out black and white positions on steroids - some ignore it while others shun anyone tied to their use - there is lots of grey area to muddle things with Bonds and Clemens.

Both enjoyed tremendous careers before their alleged use of performance-enhancing substances is said to have started, and it's difficult to judge how much of their tainted success afterwards may have been against players just as chemically-altered as they are accused of being.

Two wrongs don't make a right of course, but in this case, do they at least make for a level playing field? Does that make the numbers of less accomplished players who were as best we know clean more substantive?

Maybe they do.

Though much has been revealed, there are still many skeletons buried deep in this baseball closet, which makes delivering a fair and accurate historical reckoning even more complicated.

If they don't get elected, Bonds and Clemens are virtually assured of getting the five per cent they need to remain on the ballot, meaning their cases will be front and centre every year until they are either elected or lose their eligibility after 15 years.

And really, that will be a difficult conversation to have over and over since no one likes to publicly rehash their most delicate troubles on a regular basis.

That is what lies ahead, and it will overshadow the pure baseball arguments that are front and centre right now.

For instance, is Raines being punished for not being Rickey Henderson? Why are numbers similar to Hall of Famer Lou Brock (Raines: .294/.385/.425 with 2,605 hits, 1,571 runs and 808 stolen bases in 2,502 games; Brock: .293/.343/.410 with 3,023 hits, 1,610 runs and 938 stolen bases in 2,616 games) not good enough?

Will Larkin (62.1 per cent last year), one of the best shortstops of his generation, be the only player voted in this year? Can Morris (53.5 per cent) continue to gain momentum, and does he merit it? Are Trammell (24.3 per cent) and McGriff (17.9 per cent) unfairly on the fringes? Did Walker (20.3 per cent) suffer because some feel his numbers were inflated by Denver's thin air? Are Smith and Martinez being punished for their roles?

Discuss, and enjoy it while you can.

Names on the 2012 ballot

The 2012 BBWAA ballot features 27 players - 13 new candidates and 14 returnees. A player must be named on 75 per cent of all ballots cast to earn election to the Hall of Fame.

New candidates: Jeromy Burnitz, Vinny Castilla, Brian Jordan, Javy Lopez, Bill Mueller, Terry Mulholland, Phil Nevin, Brad Radke, Tim Salmon, Ruben Sierra, Bernie Williams, Tony Womack and Eric Young.

Returnees (with 2011 total): Jeff Bagwell (41.7 per cent), Juan Gonzalez (5.2 per cent), Barry Larkin (62.1 per cent), Edgar Martinez (32.9 per cent), Don Mattingly (13.6 per cent), Fred McGriff (17.9 per cent), Mark McGwire (19.8 per cent), Jack Morris (53.5 per cent), Dale Murphy (12.6 per cent), Rafael Palmeiro (11.0 per cent), Tim Raines (37.5 per cent), Lee Smith (45.3 per cent), Alan Trammell (24.3 per cent), Larry Walker (20.3 per cent).

Shi Davidi is the MLB Insider for sportsnet.ca. Come back to read his insight and opinion regularly.