Barry Bonds is getting his 12th shot at the Hall of Fame, but no one has changed their mind on steroids

Bonds is on the Contemporary Era ballot this weekend for the second time after 10 tries on the BBWAA ballot

The committee for the Contemporary Era Hall of Fame ballot meets this coming weekend at MLB's Winter Meetings. From this group, we'll likely see at least one new member of the Hall of Fame. It won't be Barry Bonds, barring a drastic shift in the stance of the voting body. 

Now, this voting body is comprised of different individuals than the last time Bonds was on the same ballot, but he fell well short -- getting somewhere between zero and three votes (the Hall didn't specify) -- on the 2023 Contemporary Era ballot. My hunch is it'll be similar this time around. Unless there's a change in the voting process, he then wouldn't be eligible again until the 2032 Contemporary Era ballot. 

I'm left wondering: what's the point? 

Bonds is such an inner-circle all-time great that it's utterly impossible to know anything about baseball without knowing everything about him. Even people who aren't baseball fans know of Bonds. There's been so much Hall of Fame discussion about him since his career that people who didn't even watch him play know the story. 

Bonds won seven MVPs in his 22-year playing career. No one else has ever won more than four. There's an easy argument that Bonds deserved at least two more awards and maybe even three more. He's the all-time leader in WAR, home runs and walks. He led the league in OPS nine times. He's one of a small handful of players to ever have a 40-40 season (that is, 40 home runs and 40 stolen bases). He's tied with his dad for the most 30-30 seasons with five. He won eight Gold Gloves. He won two batting titles. 

You get the picture. He was awesome at everything and is statistically one of the three or four greatest players ever. It's possible to argue he was No. 1.  

What's the point of leaving him out of the Hall of Fame? 

Well, that's where PEDs enter the equation. Bonds was tied to BALCO via the Mitchell Report, meaning the absurd four-year run he had from 2001-04 was likely fueled, in part, by performance-enhancing drugs. 

Of course, MLB implemented a testing program in 2004 and Bonds won MVP that year, also hanging on for three more seasons in which he was a very productive hitter (he was hurt for nearly all of 2005, but led the majors in OBP in both 2006 and 2007 while also hitting 54 home runs in 707 at-bats in the two seasons combined). He never tested positive. 

Many people are vehement that no player who is connected to PEDs should be in the Hall of Fame. Bonds was on the BBWAA ballot for 10 years and topped out at 66% of the vote in his final year. This year makes his second shot at the Era Committee and 12th overall. It seems very obvious at this point he's just not going to make it. So, again, I ask ... 

What's the point? 

What's the point of even having Bonds on the ballot? 

It takes a spot from someone the committee will actually consider. He'll very likely be a hard "no" right from the start while the committee instead spends time discussing the merits of players like Fernando Valenzuela, Don Mattingly and Dale Murphy. 

I'm all for discussing these other players (Jeff Kent and Carlos Delgado deserve longer looks too). 

As for Bonds, he's already been discussed to death. We know where everyone stands and nothing is going to change for a long time, if ever. 

One side knows that Bonds is a top-five all-time player and believes he should have a plaque in Cooperstown. The other side probably agrees that he's a top-five player, but is steadfast that he doesn't deserve a plaque in Cooperstown due to the PED ties. Neither side is going to relent. 

So why does he even need to be on any more ballots? There's nothing else to discuss. What's the point of any discussion where neither side will change their mind? 

The only answer I can find here relates to Bonds as a person. The pro-Bonds side believes he as an individual human being deserves to be recognized with a ceremony while the anti-Bonds side thinks he does not deserve this. That's it. 

But, again, no one is changing their minds here. 

There isn't a need for this discussion any longer. I'm of the mind that Bonds should be in the Hall of Fame, but I also don't think there's any reason to keep discussing it. Everyone who cares about baseball knows how amazing he was on the field. We don't need to see a plaque to know it.