[KurtBevacqua]

This is a really tough one for me. Pete Rose was my favorite player as a kid and I have actually met Pete Rose and liked him instantly. He was a very funny, engaging, kind person to me as a fan. He spent a great deal more time talking with me than I wanted or expected and certainly more than he had too. My personal memory of him is greatly at odds with the remorseless, bitter man he appears to have become.

On the field there is no question he belongs. While he wasn't one of the 10 greatest players of all-time, his onfield contributions to the game I feel could be argued that he merits of consideration of being one of the 10 most deserving players for enshrinement of all-time. He was probably the hardest working player of all-time, he cared greatly for the fans, he cared more about winning than perhaps any other player, maybe cared more about the game in general than any other player. All of which makes his crime all the more dissappointing. Does someone who cares so much about the game go out and trash it by betting on it while being directly involved in it?

OK, first off I thought Pete Rose was guilty of betting on baseball before he admitted to it. The evidence was clear. They had his handwriting and fingerprints on betting slips. Doesn't get much better than that. I wish he'd have come clean from day one. Had he done that I suspect he'd have been long since reinstated. The real tragedy may be his own stubborness and hubris.

All that said, I still think he belongs in the Hall of Fame because to the best of my knowledge there is no evidence he gambled on baseball while playing. The Hall of Fame is very peculiar in that it deliberately distinguishes on how you vote for someone. Joe Torre the manager will probably be voted in while Joe Torre the player has failed to make it. You don't vote for Joe Torre, lifelong contributor to baseball. You vote on him as either a player or a manager, not both. If we were voting on Pete Rose and his lifelong contributions to baseball, then no way would I even consider voting for him. But we are voting on Pete Rose, baseball player. Now if good evidence came forth that Pete Rose the baseball player gambled on MLB then I'd change my mind. I have heard unsubstantiated rumors that he did so, but that's nothing remotely like the evidence Bart Giamotti had on Pete Rose the manager. I also believe his placque should have a few lines discussing the disgrace of his post-playing gambling and tax evasion to serve as a reminder and lesson. It should reflect his on-field excellence while at the same time casting shame on what he did later.