Unanimous?

Michael Jordan is a finalist for the Basketball Hall of Fame this year, the first that he is eligible, and will clearly be included when the list of inductees is announced in April.

I don't know the voting procedures for the Springfield shrine, but here's that occurred to me when I read the news story announcing Jordan's candidacy: if baller Hallers were voted on in a way similar to their baseball counterparts (I'm pretty sure they aren't), would Jordan be the first player ever to be voted in unanimously?

That's one of the things about Cooperstown: no one has ever received every single vote (aside from Lou Gehrig, I believe, but that was a special election for a very sick man; anyone who didn't vote for him needed an immediate soul check). Observers thought Rickey Henderson might have had a chance this year - right up until 28 people failed to include him on their ballots. If Rickey, with his remarkable career totals, wasn't unanimous, maybe no one will ever be (the new sexy pick for unanimity? Greg Maddux).

But Jordan...Jordan is a special case, a unique blend of some of sports' best attributes in one mind and body. He has the numbers of Barry Bonds (without the steroid controversy), the championships of Joe DiMaggio, the defensive wizardry of Ozzie Smith, the competitiveness of Pete Rose. He was a great player in high school, a great player in college, a great player in the NBA. He was, without question, one of the top two or three players to ever pick up a basketball.

Yet somehow, in a baseball-style vote, I'm guessing at least five writers would find some reason to leave him off the first ballot. Call it a hunch.