Pete Rose's Hall enshrinement still not a sure thing

Commissioner Rob Manfred didn't put Pete Rose in Cooperstown last week.

Maybe that sounds obvious to some, but based on the seismic reaction across the baseball world, it’s worth clarifying that being eligible for the Hall of Fame is light years away from actually getting your own plaque in the museum.

Just ask Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. Despite being painted as two of the greatest villains in the sport’s history, largely because of outlawed performance-enhancers that a high percentage of players used, both were permitted to go through the standard process for induction.

Bonds, a seven-time MVP, is the home run king (762) yet never received more than 66% of the BBWAA vote (75% is required for the HOF) before his 10-year window expired in 2021. Clemens, a seven-time Cy Young Award winner, is third on the career strikeout list and peaked at 65.2% before dropping off the general ballot the same year as Bonds.

In that final try, Bonds and Clemens were considered by a BBWAA electorate of 394 qualified members, including myself. I voted for both during all 10 years of their eligibility. As far as second chances go, Bonds and Clemens also were denied the following year by the Contemporary Baseball Era committee — a 16-member panel composed of Hall of Famers, team executives and media members/ historians — when they received fewer than four votes (12 is required for induction).

For candidates who fall short, the exact totals are not given, further shrouding how the panel votes (Fred McGriff was a unanimous pick in that same 2022 election).

In addition, the Hall of Fame subsequently made changes to the special committee process, stating that any candidates who get fewer than five votes are not eligible for the next three-year cycle. If a dropped candidate does make it back on the ballot and again fails to meet that five-vote threshold, he is barred from future ballot appearances.

Judging by those early returns, the Hall’s rule adjustments instantly pushed Bonds and Clemens to the back of the line, perhaps indefinitely. And while the historical overview committee that chooses the names on the ballot is appointed by the BBWAA, the committee itself must be approved by the Hall’s board of directors, a further guardrail for Cooperstown’s decision-makers.

Which brings us to Rose, whose banishment in 1989 prevented him from ever appearing on the BBWAA’s general ballot or being considered by any of the veterans committees. What Manfred did Tuesday by reinstating Rose from the permanently ineligible list certainly removed a decades-long obstacle to the Hit King’s potential induction, but that hardly was a rubber stamp for Hall enshrinement.

Also, Manfred deftly walked a tightrope between defying any of his predecessors and placating Rose’s supporters, including President Donald Trump, who discussed the issue during the commissioner’s visit to the White House in March. Manfred just tweaked the wording of Rose’s sentence, turning a “permanent” ban into more of a “lifetime” penalty. And because Rose passed away in September, the ineligible part was made to sound redundant, in Manfred’s view.

“Obviously, a person no longer with us cannot represent a threat to the integrity of the game,” Manfred wrote in his ruling. “Moreover, it is hard to conceive of a penalty that has more deterrent effect than one that lasts a lifetime with no reprieve. Therefore, I have concluded that permanent ineligibility ends upon the passing of the disciplined individual, and Mr. Rose will be removed from the permanently ineligible list.”

Furthermore, Manfred emphasized that he was not in fact undoing any actions by a previous commissioner, in this case A. Bartlett Giamatti, as Rose wound up on the banned list as a result of a settlement struck between the disgraced player and MLB over the lengthy and damning gambling allegations.

Manfred’s edict doesn’t scrub Rose’s resume of any wrongdoing. Considering that Rule 21 is meant to protect the integrity of the game against its deadliest poison — gambling on the outcome by the participants — just the idea of letting Rose spend eternity enshrined with baseball’s most honorable icons is repulsive to many.

But others could view Rose’s lifetime ban as time served, and there was a groundswell of support this past week for his Hall candidacy, a sentiment ranging from former teammates to more recent stars.

Under the current rules, the earliest Rose can be voted on is December 2027, when the Classic Baseball Era committee will consider players who made their greatest contributions before 1980.

“To me it’s great news because I always want to see Pete in the Hall of Fame there with us,” Tony Perez told Sirius XM this past week. “This coming maybe in two years, but I take it because he should be in the Hall of Fame already.”

Before Manfred’s ruling, that wasn’t possible. But it also would be unwise to think a few players saying publicly that Rose should be in Cooperstown means he’ll get the necessary votes behind closed doors. Seeing as it’s become increasingly popular to back Rose’s reinstatement — from baseball’s Sixth Avenue headquarters to the White House — there’s little value for people inside the game to rail against him on the record.

But if Hall of Fame voting has taught us anything, it’s that some people prefer anonymity when it comes to checking those boxes, and the Hall’s board is fine with keeping that option, whether for the general electorate or the 16-member panels. Given that protection, you can expect Hall of Famers to be among the toughest voters, and the veterans committees typically are the highest hurdles to clear, as illustrated by the meager support for Bonds and Clemens.

Rose likely would have a better chance with the BBWAA’s 300-plus voters, although those ranks will swell in the coming years with MLB.com employees, who are reaching their required 10-year membership to get a ballot. That’s probably a moot point. Rose won’t get that opportunity. Instead, he’ll have to run a Cooperstown gantlet that’s designed to bar his Hall entry regardless of Manfred’s landmark policy change.

Big W for WBC

It’s still 10 months away, but the WBC scored another big victory this past week when Pirates phenom Paul Skenes announced that he will pitch for Team USA, joining captain Aaron Judge on the 2026 roster.

The recruitment of elite starting pitchers always has been a stumbling block for Team USA. Interrupting spring training routines is no small thing for the most fragile talents in the sport. But the addition of Skenes, with maybe Garrett Crochet and Tarik Skubel to follow, would put the U.S. on par with 2023 champion Japan, which rode Yoshinobu Yamamoto, Roki Sasaki, Shota Imanaga and Yu Darvish (Shohei Ohtani closed out the title game by whiffing then-Angels teammate Mike Trout).

“Growing up watching the World Baseball Classic as a kid, I never thought I would have the opportunity to play in one,” Skenes told reporters. “So I told myself if I did get the opportunity to do it, I couldn’t pass it up. Here we are.”

Skenes won’t turn 23 until the end of this month, so last season’s Rookie of the Year still is a kid by MLB standards. But this is a big commitment for a Pirates ace who’s very early in his career and yet to land a big payday. It’s different for someone like Crochet, who just signed a six-year, $170 million extension with the Red Sox last month. Participating in the WBC is not without risk, as the Mets and Edwin Diaz certainly can attest.

By David Lennon

dave.lennon@newsday.comDPLennon

David Lennon is an award-winning columnist, a voter for baseball's Hall of Fame and has covered six no-hitters, including two perfect games.