I hope so, because I\u2019m about to dive into all of that. So let\u2019s get to it, starting with a slightly longer discussion of why a player like Andy Pettitte, with an admitted connection to performance-enhancing drugs, seems to be dodging the usual PED-guy stigmas.<\/p>\n
(Note: Questions were edited for clarity and length.)\u00a0<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/GettyImages-153732758-scaled.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n Andy Pettitte got 48.5 percent of the vote this year in his eighth time on the ballot. (Rob Carr \/ Getty Images)<\/p>\n
As we approach the end of the era of PEDs impacting Hall of Fame voting<\/a>, how does the Hall deal with Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, etc.? It seems unfathomable that Andy Pettitte is predicted to get in while his clearly superior teammate would be excluded. What are your thoughts about how MLB (and the Hall) can walk the line between the \u201cGreatest on the field\u201d voters and the \u201cNo Cheaters in the Hall\u201d voters? \u2014 Danny P.<\/p>\n Danny, let me tell you a story. A man came up to me at the Hall of Fame last week to talk about Andy Pettitte. His feeling was that there\u2019s a big reason Pettitte should be in a different category than Bonds, Clemens or any of the other PED scoundrels:<\/p>\n He confessed!<\/p>\n Unlike almost anyone else who has had these clouds hovering over their candidacy, Pettitte admitted what he did and why. I know there are people who don\u2019t totally believe that admission, because that\u2019s how we roll in this age we live in. But let\u2019s not analyze that part. Not today, at least.<\/p>\n That visitor to the Hall reminded me that there was a time when people used to say: We\u2019re a forgiving country. So if these guys would just admit what they did, we\u2019d forgive them.\u00a0If we truly believed that, he argued, we\u00a0should\u00a0be giving credit to Pettitte for admitting what he did.<\/p>\n I can\u2019t tell you for sure that that\u2019s why, just two years ago, only 52 voters were checking Pettitte\u2019s name and now he\u2019s up to 206 votes. But I think there are two other reasons he suddenly has a chance to get elected, even if it\u2019s still a long shot.<\/p>\n 1. The pre- and post-testing era.\u00a0One thing that I think helps Pettitte is that his PED \u201ccrimes\u201d happened before 2004, the year MLB\u2019s testing and punishments kicked in. The same was true, by the way, of Clemens and Bonds. And even though they didn\u2019t get elected, each did rake in more than 65 percent of the vote in their last year on the ballot (2022).<\/p>\n But that aside, it\u2019s now clear that most of us who vote have divided a clear line between those pre-testing and post-testing eras. If a player got caught and suspended after testing and punishment, he\u2019s going nowhere on this ballot. Ask Manny Ram\u00edrez \u2026 and Ryan Braun \u2026 and (of course) \u00c1lex Rodr\u00edguez.<\/p>\n In the era before testing, though, everything was a mess. We had so little clarity about who did what, we were stuck playing a giant guessing game, and we weren\u2019t good at that game \u2014 because it was impossible.<\/p>\n So that\u2019s one reason Pettitte is gaining ground<\/a>. The other was expressed by my friend Jon Paul Morosi, while we were doing a show on MLB Network this week.<\/p>\n 2. He passes the authenticity test.\u00a0Pettitte\u2019s career feels more authentic than the careers of so many other PED all-stars, Morosi argued. Pettitte\u2019s performance, before and after that human growth hormone \u201cincident,\u201d didn\u2019t change. Because it didn\u2019t, Morosi felt comfortable saying: \u201cI believe in Andy Pettitte\u2019s career.\u201d<\/p>\n Honestly, I don\u2019t know what I believe about that era. But it seems obvious that a lot of voters agree with that assessment. I also have mixed feelings about what \u201ccheating\u201d is.<\/p>\n Taking PEDs to break a record, as \u201cGame of Shadows\u201d tells us Bonds blatantly did? That feels like cheating.<\/p>\n But trying HGH to quicken recovery from an injury? I\u2019m convinced dozens of players \u2014 maybe hundreds \u2014 were doing that. It wasn\u2019t any more legal than Bonds\u2019 PED use, but I feel like it belongs in a separate category.<\/p>\n That\u2019s a long way of saying we have so little idea about who the \u201cclean\u201d players were before testing that there\u2019s no \u201cscientific\u201d way to vote on these guys. So was there an air of authenticity to a player\u2019s career? If we answer yes, I think it\u2019s OK to consider that.<\/p>\n Listen, I\u2019ve said many times it\u2019s strange to have a Hall of Fame that doesn\u2019t include the man who hit more home runs than anyone who ever lived (Bonds) \u2026 and the man who won more Cy Young awards than anyone who ever pitched (Clemens) \u2026 not to mention the guy who broke Roger Maris\u2019 storied home run record (Mark McGwire), and so many more.<\/p>\n But the era committees will have to decide what to do about those men, because their time on the writers\u2019 ballot is over. And how\u2019s that era-committee route working out for all of them? Not well<\/a>.<\/p>\n So thanks for your question and for making such a logical argument on so many levels. But the fact is, the Hall is\u00a0dealing with those players and walking that line \u2014 through those era-committee votes. And we both know where that\u2019s leading.<\/p>\n One more thing: Yes, Pettitte is still on the writers\u2019 ballot \u2014 for two more years anyway. But I actually would not\u00a0assume he\u2019s going to get elected. Here\u2019s why:<\/p>\n Despite his big surge to nearly 50 percent, even Bonds\/Clemens voters aren\u2019t sold on him. According to data supplied by Anthony Calamis, who works with Ryan Thibodaux at the Hall of Fame Vote Tracker site<\/a>, only slightly more than half of the writers who voted for Bonds and\u00a0Clemens in their final year were also casting votes for Pettitte this year, at least among publicly revealed ballots. Is that enough? I don\u2019t think so.<\/p>\n And what about writers who voted for\u00a0neither Bonds nor Clemens? We don\u2019t have all that data yet. But if we look just at the public votes so far, Pettitte was only getting 29 percent (9 of 31) from that group, which also doesn\u2019t bode well for his electability in the next two cycles.<\/p>\n But I actually think the most interesting group is writers who voted for David Ortiz but\u00a0not\u00a0Bonds or Clemens, because we know they\u2019re not PED hard-liners. Again, the data isn\u2019t complete, either, but what we\u2019ve seen to this point also looks ominous for Pettitte.<\/p>\n According to Calamis, Pettitte has gotten just three of the 17 public votes from those voters so far. That\u2019s only 17.6 percent. To get elected, he would need to flip a massive percentage from all of these groups in the next two elections. And would you bet on that? I\u2019m not feeling it.<\/p>\n What five past players (excluding PED issues) top your list of players who absolutely should be in the Hall? \u2026 As an add-on, do any of those players look to have improved chances, as the old standards seem to shift away from career milestones and more toward sustained dominance during a focused period? \u2014 Jason L<\/p>\n \n Will Lou Whitaker one day join Alan Trammell in Cooperstown? (Lennox McLendon \/ Associated Press)<\/p>\n Hey Jason, this is such a fun question. My list is longer than five, but I take requests, so five it is!<\/p>\n Before I start \u2026 I\u2019m following your orders and leaving off everyone with PED clouds. I\u2019m also not going to include Pete Rose, because he\u2019s a column unto himself<\/a>. Finally, I\u2019m excluding every player who was on the Contemporary Baseball Era Committee ballot last month, because I served on that committee<\/a> and I\u2019m not permitted to reveal how I voted.<\/p>\n Is that too many exclusions? Sorry! That still leaves a slew of players I could put on this list. But you asked for only five, so here are the five players I think most deserve to be in the Hall of Fame but aren\u2019t:<\/p>\n 1. Curt Schilling \u2014 It\u2019s not the Hall of Facebook. It\u2019s not the Hall of X. It\u2019s the Hall of Fame. So it\u2019s absurd to keep out a three-time Cy Young Award runner-up like Schilling, who was a certifiable October monster (11-2, 2.23 ERA in 19 postseason starts, averaging seven innings a start). If you\u2019re interested, I wrote more about Schilling in my ballot column in 2022<\/a>, his final year on the writers\u2019 ballot.\u00a0<\/p>\n 2. Lou Whitaker \u2014 I\u2019m big on the idea that Chase Utley and Jimmy Rollins should go into the Hall together (and then be given plaques right next to each other on the wall). So it would bring me so much joy to see Alan Trammell and Whitaker finally be able to keep each other company in the plaque gallery. Whitaker\u2019s 75.1 career wins above replacement are the seventh-most of any second baseman in history, according to Baseball Reference. Guess what the six above him have in common?<\/p>\n 3. Jim Edmonds \u2014 Andruw Jones just got elected to the Hall. I think Edmonds actually had a better career. Edmonds won eight Gold Glove Awards, had a 132 career OPS+ and didn\u2019t even make it to a second year on the ballot. Jones won 10 Gold Gloves and had a 111 OPS+. Edmonds\u2019 case has been bugging me since he got bounced off the ballot 10 years ago. Let\u2019s hope he shows up on an era-committee ballot soon. He hasn\u2019t been eligible before now.<\/p>\n 4. Lance Berkman \u2014 Like Edmonds, Berkman was one-and-done on the writers\u2019 ballot. He might even be our worst one-and-done ever. Do you know who owns the best career OPS of any \u201cclean\u201d retired player who is eligible for the Hall? If you guessed Berkman (.943), you\u2019re my kind of astute reader.<\/p>\n 5. Johan Santana \u2014 Timing is everything. So\u00a0if Santana had debuted on the writers\u2019 ballot this year, instead of the overstuffed 2018 ballot, I bet he\u2019d be raking in more votes than F\u00e9lix Hern\u00e1ndez. How about this for a seven-year peak: 106-48 won-lost record, .688 win percentage, 2.86 ERA, 156 ERA+, two Cy Youngs, four top-three Cy Young finishes, three strikeout titles, three ERA titles and four straight years leading his league in WHIP. Wow.<\/p>\n Santana is another one of our most embarrassing one-and-dones. But he, Edmonds, Berkman and Whitaker could tell you there\u2019s nothing more overrated than a spot in the One-And-Done Hall of Fame.<\/p>\n Do I think an era committee will undo all these injustices and elect these guys someday? Not impossible. But connect those dots from the writers\u2019 election to the era-committee elections at your own peril!<\/p>\n Cole Hamels and F\u00e9lix Hern\u00e1ndez have identical numbers. Why is Hern\u00e1ndez a cinch and Cole a (question mark)? \u2014 Tony W<\/p>\n Hey Tony, great question. I wrote about this in my column explaining my Hall of Fame ballot<\/a>, but I\u2019m happy to lay this out again, just a little more succinctly.<\/p>\n Isn\u2019t it possible for two pitchers to get to the same career numbers in two different ways? It obviously is, because Hamels and King F\u00e9lix did that.<\/p>\n I voted for Hern\u00e1ndez because there was a period \u2014 of six, eight, maybe even 10 years \u2014 where, if you asked, Who\u2019s the best pitcher in baseball?, you\u00a0had\u00a0to include the King\u2019s name. He had four top-four Cy Young finishes \u2014 and three top-twos \u2014 in a span of six years. Everyone who ever did that is either a Hall of Famer \u2026 or Clemens \u2026 or F\u00e9lix. So I think he has a claim to historic greatness.<\/p>\n I think Hamels falls into a different category. To me, he\u2019s more like Roy Oswalt, Tim Hudson or Josh Beckett. He was great, but was he historically great? Was he Hall of Fame great?<\/p>\n With \u201conly\u201d 163 career wins and just one fifth-place Cy Young finish, I couldn\u2019t find any Hall of Famer who had a parallel career to Hamels\u2019. So I just couldn\u2019t get there. But I\u2019m glad he\u2019ll be back on the ballot next year, because the debut of Jon Lester<\/a> will be a great reason to think about this again.<\/p>\n The big names next year are Lester and (Buster) Posey. Of those who carry over, who has the best chance to get in? \u2014 Brian O<\/p>\n \n Will Chase Utley, who got 59.1 percent of the vote this year, make another big jump, to election, in 2027? (Nick Laham \/ Getty Images)<\/p>\n That\u2019s a fascinating question, Brian \u2014 because none\u00a0of those returning candidates\u00a0is knocking at the door. And we haven\u2019t had an election quite like that in a long time.<\/p>\n Chase Utley (59.1 percent) will be the leading returning vote-getter \u2014 but he hasn\u2019t even reached 60 percent yet in his march toward the necessary 75 percent. How long has it been since we had an election in which nobody\u00a0on the ballot has ever cleared 60 percent? It\u2019s been over two decades \u2014 since 2004, when Bruce Sutter was coming off a 53.6 percent showing the year before.<\/p>\n Behind Utley, you won\u2019t even find anyone who made it to 50 percent this year. Pettitte (48.5) and F\u00e9lix Hern\u00e1ndez (46.1) were the next two in line. So that makes it even more rare. We haven\u2019t had an election like that \u2014 with only one returning player who had topped 50 percent \u2014 since 2001, when only Jim Rice (51.5) had done that.<\/p>\n So what does history tell us about what that portends for next year? I think it\u2019s saying that nobody from this year\u2019s ballot is likely to jump enough to get elected next year. At least that\u2019s how it went in 2001 and 2004, when all four of the players who got elected those years were first-timers.<\/p>\n On the other hand, both Sutter and Rice did get elected eventually \u2014 Sutter two years later and Rice eight years later.<\/p>\n So if I were prognosticating, I\u2019d predict that only Posey makes it to Cooperstown next year<\/a>, in his ballot debut, with Utley just missing election and Pettitte and Hern\u00e1ndez somewhere in the neighborhood of 60 percent. But \u2026 next year will be unusual in one other respect.<\/p>\n That\u2019s because the average ballot contained just 5.8 names this year, even though the writers are allowed to vote for 10. So with both Beltr\u00e1n and Jones exiting the ballot (plus Manny Ram\u00edrez), that means the average voter next year won\u2019t even have four returning players whom they voted for in the past.<\/p>\n When that happens, it normally leads to big surges for multiple players, because even most \u201cSmall Hall\u201d voters are looking for someone to vote for. Could that bring us a surprise, with Utley maybe making one more giant leap to election? Don\u2019t rule out anything!<\/p>\n If you were told only one of these two players eventually gets into the Hall: Rollins or Hamels, which one gets in, and why? \u2014 Michael L<\/p>\n Why is Utley getting ready to waltz in, but his double-play partner, Rollins, is getting less than half of his vote total? And why is he behind Bobby Abreu? I watched those Phillies teams and Abreu is the definition of an empty stat. They got better the day they traded him, and Jimmy was the ringleader of that run, with an MVP, 4 Gold Gloves and the most hits in franchise history. What am I missing? \u2014 Randy D<\/p>\n Let\u2019s get all the Phillies questions out of the way in one answer!<\/p>\n Utley \u2014 He\u2019s the poster boy for how modern voters vote. We don\u2019t care about stuff like 2,000 hits anymore. So if Utley\u2019s 1,885 hits aren\u2019t a thing that disqualifies him anymore, of course\u00a0he\u2019s a Hall of Famer. For about six years \u2014 and maybe as long as 10 \u2014 he was The Best Second Baseman in Baseball, period. He was a winner and a culture-changer. And he\u2019s the only regular second baseman in the last 85 years who had five straight years with a .900 OPS. So I get it.<\/p>\n Rollins\/Abreu\/Hamels \u2014 I still think Rollins has a legit chance to get elected because he\u2019s the only shortstop in history in the 2,400-Hit, 200-Homer, 400-Steal, 800-Extra Base Hit Club. And\u00a0he won an MVP.\u00a0And\u00a0he won four Gold Gloves.\u00a0And\u00a0he was an elite defender, no matter what those unreliable, retroactive defensive metrics say. He has the best case of all of these guys as a historically significant player.<\/p>\n I just explained my feelings about Hamels. And Abreu is another one of those players who was great at a lot of stuff \u2014 just not historically great. Randy, you clearly remember, as I do, that when Pat Gillick became the Phillies\u2019 general manager, he decided he needed to trade Abreu to let Rollins and Utley take over that team \u2014 because he wanted his two best players to be men who were driven by winning. Gillick never said Abreu wasn\u2019t\u00a0a winner, but when he traded him to the Yankees \u2014 for four non-prospects \u2014 I always felt he was telling me something, and I\u2019ve never forgotten that.<\/p>\n Is it time to have a \u201cWriters Re-Do\u201d ballot for guys who may or may not have (been part of era-committee) discussions, as the writers have seemingly reassessed stats (for certain players and eras)? I think guys like Whitaker, Bobby Grich, Don Mattingly, etc., might benefit from the writers re-looking at their candidacies \u2014 more so than (having that done by) a relatively small committee. \u2014 Adam L<\/p>\n Hey, Adam. I actually love this idea. It\u2019ll never happen, but there\u00a0is\u00a0precedent for it.<\/p>\n In 1985, the Baseball Writers\u2019 Association of America and the Hall agreed to give a second look to 11 players\u00a0who had fallen off the ballot earlier in their careers. Dick Allen and Ron Santo \u2014 both of whom were later elected by era committees \u2014 were on that list.<\/p>\n So were nine other players who were never elected: Ken Boyer, Curt Flood, Vada Pinson, Denny McLain, Dave McNally, Wilbur Wood<\/a>, Harvey Haddix, Ron Fairly and Clay Carroll.<\/p>\n But that was in a time when no one seemed happy with the way the former Veterans Committees went about voting on players like that. The Hall now loves the era-committee process, so there\u2019s pretty much no shot of it implementing your idea.<\/p>\n Too bad, though. Don\u2019t you think players like Whitaker and Mattingly would sail in if the writers were voting on them? I do.<\/p>\n Do you see F\u00e9lix\u2019s vote trajectory over the next couple of years as a template for future pitchers from the post-steroid era who lack many traditional Hall of Fame stats (wins, innings pitched, World Series\/playoff appearances) after the no-doubt (elections) of Clayton Kershaw, Justin Verlander and Max Scherzer? Most guys of the last decade do not have anywhere close to 150 wins or 100 wins \u2026 or even 1,000 innings pitched, but they have advanced analytics instead. \u2014 Lee B<\/p>\n Lee, you couldn\u2019t be more right. I don\u2019t know what a Hall of Fame starting pitcher is going to look like in 10, 15 or 50 years, but he definitely won\u2019t look like, say, Old Hoss Radbourn.<\/p>\n Will 100 wins be the new 200? Will we even look at the wins column at all? That will have to be the direction we go in, or we\u2019ll never see a Hall of Fame starter again.<\/p>\n But I have one point to make about this. I think this standard should only apply to pitchers whose careers began in, say, the last 10 years. I\u00a0don\u2019t\u00a0think it should apply to pitchers whose careers began 20 years ago, like Hamels, for instance.<\/p>\n I talked about this on MLB Network a couple of times last week. Is the win \u201cdead\u201d? If it isn\u2019t, it\u2019s in the intensive care ward. But it wasn\u2019t dead when men like Hamels, or Jake Peavy, or Beckett, were pitching, just to pick three examples. It was alive and well.<\/p>\n So I don\u2019t think we should get ahead of ourselves and start holding the pitchers of yesterday to the standards of tomorrow. Should 140 to 170 wins earn a starter from\u00a0that\u00a0era a Hall of Fame plaque? I\u2019m having a hard time with that. Am I wrong? If you think I am, you know where to drop your helpful comments.<\/p>\n The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame added a \u201cFan Vote\u201d to the process (years ago), as many of the fans\u2019 favorite artists who provided significant contributions were (being) overlooked. \u2026 Is it time for the Baseball Hall of Fame to adopt a similar process? \u2014 Shawn F<\/p>\n Shawn, this is brilliant. It\u2019s also one of those ideas that is never, ever happening \u2014 at least until they put you and me in charge (which seems unlikely).<\/p>\n I love being a Hall of Fame voter, and I\u2019m aware of the weight of every vote, for an honor that is literally life-changing. But for years, I\u2019ve also been open to the idea of letting other people have a vote.<\/p>\n Why shouldn\u2019t Bob Costas have a say? Or Joe Buck? Why shouldn\u2019t a broadcaster like Brian Kenny, who emcees the induction ceremony and spends hours breaking down Hall candidates on MLB Network, have a vote?<\/p>\n So are fans next? I know how much you care about this stuff. Nothing I write about all year generates the passionate responses that my Hall columns inspire. So if there was a reasonable way to give fans a voice, I\u2019d gladly consider that if I were ever appointed the emperor of the Hall of Fame.<\/p>\n But here\u2019s the bad news: There\u2019s a better chance that I\u2019ll someday be the emperor of Mars than the emperor of the Hall of Fame.<\/p>\n Because I loved Zack Meisel and Sam Blum\u2019s article from earlier in the week: Do you have a favorite case of a player receiving a single Hall of Fame vote? Is there a one-vote getter who you think maybe isn\u2019t a Hall of Famer, but should\u2019ve gotten a lot more love from voters? \u2014 Andrew M<\/p>\n \n Starting at second base for the All-\u2018I-Got-Exactly-One-Vote-for-the-Hall-of-Fame\u2019 team: Bret Boone. (Ronald Martinez \/ Getty Images)<\/p>\n Hey Andrew, thanks for this question. I loved that piece by Zack and Sam<\/a>, too. For years, I\u2019ve been rolling out the All-\u2018I-Got-Exactly-One-Vote-for-the-Hall-of-Fame\u2019 team<\/a> every time I get a chance. Thanks for giving me another shot to do that.<\/p>\n I\u2019m not going to claim these guys are the best players in that pool, but are they the most fun? The most entertaining showmen? The guys I enjoyed being around and\/or watching the most? Yep! So here they come, the one-vote legends.<\/p>\n 1B \u2014 John Kruk Starting rotation \u2014 Ron Darling, Mike Krukow, Jim Deshaies, Bronson Arroyo, Barry Zito<\/p>\n Cy Young relievers \u2014 Mark Davis, Steve Bedrosian<\/p>\n Legendary bullpen characters \u2014 Jesse Orosco, Al Hrabosky<\/p>\n \u00a0I don\u2019t know if that totally answered your question, Andrew. But what the heck, at least I had fun. Just one more way that Hall of Fame season is a reminder of everything that makes baseball great.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"COOPERSTOWN, N.Y. \u2014 I could do a subscriber mailbag column on the Hall of Fame 12 months a…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":114476,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[31976,3472,2589,35073,37072,16861,20,9,11,10,49,51,50,321,5389,7580,44602],"class_list":["post-114475","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-new-york","tag-arizona-diamondbacks","tag-boston-red-sox","tag-detroit-tigers","tag-houston-astros","tag-los-angeles-angels","tag-minnesota-twins","tag-mlb","tag-new-york","tag-new-york-headlines","tag-new-york-news","tag-new-york-state","tag-new-york-state-headlines","tag-new-york-state-news","tag-new-york-yankees","tag-philadelphia-phillies","tag-seattle-mariners","tag-st-louis-cardinals"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/114475","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=114475"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/114475\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/114476"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=114475"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=114475"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=114475"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Whitaker-and-Trammell-7.3.18.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/GettyImages-92618495-scaled.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/GettyImages-3466899-scaled.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
2B \u2014 Bret Boone
SS \u2014 Shawon Dunston
3B \u2014 Terry Pendleton
LF \u2014 Adam Dunn
CF \u2014 Darin Erstad
RF \u2014 Jay Buhner
C \u2014 Darren Daulton
DH \u2014 Ra\u00fal Iba\u00f1ez<\/p>\n