Why not unanimous?

What has two thumbs and didn't vote for Gwynn and Ripken on his hall of fame ballot? This guy.

Writer who turned in blank ballot says it's not a sign of disrespect

Paul Ladewski is likely to make some enemies this week. Maybe millions of them.

In signing his Hall of Fame ballot without checking the name of a single candidate, the Chicago sportswriter has ensured that neither Tony Gwynn nor Cal Ripken Jr. can be elected unanimously.

“I sent in a blank ballot,” Ladewski confirmed in a telephone interview Thursday. “I didn't vote for anybody. It's nothing personal against Tony Gwynn or Cal Ripken Jr., who have numbers that speak for themselves. ... (But) to me, the steroid era is not worthy of my vote. Anyone who played in that era makes me reluctant to jump on bandwagons.”

Ladewski, a columnist for the Daily Southtown who acknowledges he may be a “dinosaur,” announced his steroid stance in a column published Aug. 4, 2005, and he has yet to redraw his relatively hard line. In separate polls by The San Diego Union-Tribune and Baltimore Sun, Ladewski was the only eligible voter to acknowledge opposition to either Gwynn or Ripken.

“I'm somewhat surprised to hear that,” Ladewski said.

I'm surprised that he's surprised.

“I'm not the kind of person who will rant and rave,” Ladewski said. "(But) I want to make a conscientious vote on this. I don't want to go in half-cocked. I'd rather vote for someone one year too late than one year too early.”

Huh? So he will vote for Gwynn and Ripken in the next election? It will be a year to late, won't it?

The above story is from January 7. The below column is from Ladewski on January 8. It is his defense of his position.

'Dew' tell: Ripken, Gwynn votes won't be unanimous

So I've turned Cal Ripken Jr. and Baltimore baseball fans into a bunch of crabs, huh?

Same with Tony Gwynn and San Diego diehards, it seems.

Well, I can assure you that wasn't my intent when I turned in a blank Hall of Fame ballot and thus bypassed the two most eligible candidates the other day.

Rather, after much serious thought in the last year, my decision was based on this belief: At this point, I don't have nearly enough information to make a value judgment of this magnitude. In particular, that concerns any player in the Steroids Era, which I consider to be the 1993-2004 period, give or a take a season.

This isn't to suggest that Gwynn or Ripken or the majority of the other eligible candidates padded his statistics with performance-enhancers and cheated the game, their predecessors and the fans in the process.

In fact, from the contact I've had with Gwynn and Ripken over the years, I like them as players and people. And, no, this has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Gwynn and Ripken helped deprive Chicago of two World Series appearances. In consecutive years, no less.

But tell me, except for the players themselves, who can say what they put into their bodies over the years with any degree of certainty.

Tell me, except for the writer himself, who can say if what he put into his column over the years with any degree of certainty was what he really thought or just a way to get on Around the Horn.

If it seems that I am being sarcastic and implying that the writer is an attention seeker. Well, I can assure you that wasn't my intent when I turned in a the above paragraph.

Rather, after much serious thought in the last five minutes, my decision was based on this belief: At this point, I don't have nearly enough information to make a value judgment of this magnitude. In particular, that concerns any columnist in the RattlerRadio Era, which I consider to be 2006-present, give or a take a month.