Roberto Alomar's terrific career has been tainted by this confrontation with an umpire. AP

Is a little bit of saliva enough to keep Roberto Alomar out of the Hall of Fame? Fans haven't forgotten (or apparently forgiven) Alomar's spitting incident with umpire John Hirschbeck in 1996. When Alomar's name does go on the Hall of Fame ballot one day, you can bet the debate will start all over again.

Character has often been used to justify the denial of Hall of Fame election for a number of players. Do you think that Alomar likely will be another player where character will overshadow ability? Surely no one has forgotten Alomar's disgusting display of childishness when he spat in an umpire's face? -- Chris Wallace, Ottawa

My head says that Alomar is a definite HOFer but after watching him spit in an umpire's face and (literally) quit on his team late in the 1995 campaign, my heart says no way. -- Frank Egan, Toronto

I agree that many voters do take into account character when they receive their ballots. I know people have said that there are rogues and racists already in the Hall, but that doesn't mean an individual voter now has to disregard character because of what was done by others in the past. In fact, the ballot does charge the voter with considering all aspects of a player's contribution to the game. I do think there will be some voters who may hold that against Alomar, though I think that's a small minority. As for other players, how about Albert Belle and his corked bat? (Remember, all of his bats were corked, so the Indians, when they stole it from the umpire's room, substituted a Paul Sorrento model.)

Besides Alomar and George Foster, were there other "star" players who have gone to the Mets and seen their skills appreciably diminish, seemingly overnight? -- Mark Godofsky, Princeton Junction, N.J.

The Mets seem to have a knack for getting players at the wrong time. You also have Bobby Bonilla, Vince Coleman, Juan Samuel, Jim Fregosi, Ellis Valentine, Mike Marshall, Tommy Herr, Mo Vaughn, Cliff Floyd, and last year anyway, Tom Glavine. Now try to name an established player who was better with New York than he was elsewhere, at least since their last world title in 1986. One year of Bernard Gilkey?

I gotta side with Curt Schilling on his assessment of the Bambino. Personal trainers? Protein drinks? Anyone who has read anything about the Babe knows he lived life to excess. That was part of his larger-than-life charm. For those who weren't alive to see the Babe play look no further than John Kruk. Finally, whenever I look at those older era stats I always think to myself -- color line. Who knows what baseball's real records would be if we hadn't had two leagues divided by race? -- Reggie Newton, Chicago

MAILBAG Tom Verducci will answer select questions from SI.com users in his Baseball Mailbag. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

There's no question you're talking about diminished competition when you look at pre-1947 baseball. But you have to remember that Ruth was so much better than everybody else he played with that you have to believe he had tremendous skills that would translate into any era. And the hyper-coverage of sports these days almost makes it impossible for a player to live to the excess Ruth did. I mean, what athlete today lives like that? David Wells? He's no Babe.

Is it possible for the Cubs to make the playoffs, let alone win the World Series, if Mark Prior is out for the season? -- Alex Esposito, Aurora, Ontario

I do think the Cubs still have a chance to get to the Series without Prior, though obviously it's much more difficult. They do have the kind of pitching depth to hold the staff together. I figure the Cubs lose about one game for every month Prior is out (about five starts per month go to somebody else). That's six wins over the course of the year. But you really miss Prior in the postseason, when power pitching seems to carry the day. The ideal scenario for the Cubs is that Prior gets about two months off, comes back healthy, and by the time you get to September and October you have a pitcher who is rather fresh compared to other guys who've made 35 starts. That really helped Josh Beckett last year.

I'll agree with you that Barry Bonds is a better hitter than Willie Mays, but not a better player. Barry was never the defensive force that Willie was nor could he match him on the basepaths. -- Doug Goodman, New York

Correct on both counts, of course. And Mays did it in center field, not left field. What I find so amazing about Bonds, though, is that his offense is so far beyond anybody else that he changes the rules of engagement for the game (the intentional walks, the absolute fear he strikes in pitchers, his ridiculous on-base percentage). At what point does somebody's offense begin to overwhelm whatever advantages another player has on defense and on the bases?

Look at it this way. You've got a pickup game in Central Park. You're a captain with the first pick. Are you picking Bonds or Mays (assuming both are in their prime)? You may have to take Bonds for that game. OK, now say you're playing 162 games. Maybe you take Mays there because his other skills may be more apparent over the long haul. Hitting -- or the opportunity for it -- impacts every single game. Whole games can pass without a player's defense or baserunning skills having any meaning whatsoever.

Sports Illustrated senior writer Tom Verducci covers baseball for the magazine and is a regular contributor to SI.com.