Yesterday, for just the sixth time in MLB history, the Baseball Writers Association of America failed to elect a single candidate to the Hall of Fame. While I certainly disagree with this result, there was one player in particular for whom this result was an absolute travesty. No, not Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens. While I don’t agree for a number of reasons I won’t bother getting into, I can see why many elected not to cast votes for these two. Their case is about more than performance. Looking strictly at the numbers, they would have been unanimous first-balloters, but the steroids issue prevented such an occurrence—and I’m more or less okay with it, if for no other reason than because there is a bigger fish to fry.
Mike Piazza was the best catcher in the history of baseball. There, I said it. But if you saw how the voting unfolded yesterday, you may think I’m crazy for it:
The rest of this article is restricted to Baseball Prospectus Subscribers.
Not a subscriber?
Click here for more information
on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get access to the best baseball content on the web.
Edgar Martinez was the best DH in baseball history (Ortiz pending) and he was ignored for reasons that have nothing to do with PEDs. Edgar cost his teams fewer runs on defense than Piazza because he wasn't out there.
As a Met fan I will always love Piazza. As a baseball fan I have to ask: how does a player--in the steroids era--go from being a 63rd round courtesy pick to the greatest offensive catcher in history without any assistance? If I had a vote, I'd vote for Piazza--but I'd also vote for Bonds and Clemens, because they dominated the game in their time.
There was more to the line of thinking than that. It's pretty easy to believe that a 5th or 6th round pick turns out to be a quality major leaguer,Brandon Belt for example. But you can count the number of undrafted (and that's essentially what Piazza was) first ballot hall of famers on the fingers of one foot.
He was picked as a 20 year old. Did he get picked out of community college? I can't tell based on his baseball-reference page. It's safe to say that he wasn't really scouted.
I'd equate him to a Latino player who signed for pennies. I can't think of any good recent examples, but I'm sure there have been some. Are they automatically under suspicion too?
Sorry to say that everybody, great, good, and not so good, in the steroid era is under suspicion. That's not fair to the players that never used anything stronger than caffeine, but that's reality. We don't know who used and who didn't and unless the Federal government and MLB wants to offer blanket immunity to anybody willing to testify fully and truthfully under oath, we never will. Hopefully the BBWAA haven't gotten their symbolic gesture out of the way and will vote Bonds, Clemens, and Piazza in next year.
Corrections, on checking the records of Hall of Famers from the post draft era, I find one,Tom Seaver. I couldn't find any position players in the Hall that were draft eligible and not drafted and most Hall of Fame position players were drafted in the first 4 rounds. There is ample reason to be just as suspicious of Piazza. FWIW, Jose Canseco never failed a drug test either. IMHO, Bonds, Clemens and Piazza all belong in the Hall.
Ah,Bruce Sutter... he was drafted in the 21st round, didn't sign and sort of gave up baseball, then was found and signed in a semi-pro league a year later.
Thanks for all the intelligent responses, I feel Met guilt for even impugning Piazza. Seaver went to the Marines, bulked up there, then went to USC where he made his mark--not before having to drain his own knee of fluid--yuch. Sutter would have to be an outlier though, no, considering he practically invented a new pitch. I'm confident Piazza will get in soon. Along with Aaron Sele.
No one who saw the entire careers of Fisk, Bench and Piazza would deny that Piazza should be in the HOF. Most of us would still rank Bench way above the others for his on-field leadership and intimidating arm. Bench was also a good pitch caller and more than willing to block the plate against anyone. Neither Fisk nor Gary Carter were considered to be the equal of Bench at the time of their respective careers and for good reason. Bench was a great post-season player who stole as many bases in the post-season as he allowed - seven each! Yep. Bench was also a team leader, which is not quantifiable. Fisk was a tough son-of-a-gun who was not the clubhouse leader Bench was but was much like Bench as an on-field force and also played long enough to accumulate more HR.
Those observation aside, Piazza was good enough to be voted in first ballot and frankly the idea that first ballot entrance is "special" is part of what is messing up the HOF voting. If the guy is worthy, vote him in right away! Good Grief! Piazza is the best hitter of all full-time catchers ever, vote his butt in there!
For Bonds and Clemens, there's not "some" evidence; there's overwhelming evidence.
For Piazza, there is, in fact, no substantive evience. But I am troubled by his (non) response. I would love to see Piazza come out and say something along the lines of "This is insane. I never used PEDs, never cheated, and I'm being unfairly tarnished due to the era I played in." I'm not saying that all players can do this, but that *is* how I would expect a completely clean player with no-doubt HOF numbers to behave. I understand that that's not a good enough reason not to vote for him, but I also understand why many people suspect him.
Put it this way: Lance Armstrong behaved like someone who cheated despite all the non-denial denials. And guess what? What many termed a "witch hunt" turned out to be justified.
I suspect that there's a strong correlation between those that think Piazza didn't cheat, and those that six months ago thought Armstrong didn't cheat. And I do think this should give some people pause before criticizing these voters.
I'd suggest that one reason for Piazza's silence is that he doesn't want to run his mouth and possibly make enemies (justified or not) when he's pretty close to getting elected anyway.
Possible. But I also think that someone whom by all accounts is one of the best ever at his position who was clearly kept out because of steroid suspicions would speak up vociferously about it, if he was clean.
Bottom line: Piazza's silence is not what I'd expect from someone who never cheated.
I wonder how much behind the scenes talk there is about these guys, nothing public, where certain writers get what they consider is trustworthy information, and then vote NO, on say Piazza. Suppose a teammate of HOF Candidate , a teammate with a good reputation, whispers to a writer that the candidate did do PEDs, he knows it for sure. Of course the teammate will not go public, but in his opinion, PED users do not belong in the Hall. Do these guys talk? If they do, no way a writer can cite the conversation, he just votes "no". So while there is no evidence to us, maybe others do have more to go on than increased hat size.
I can't imagine too many sportswriters being given trustworthy information on the subject but then not choosing to make money and rep off of it, especially in the current climate. I also can't imagine too many writers who would take an unattributable conversation as ironclad fact. Well, other than Gordon Edes... Conspiracies take a lot of thought and energy, and many of these BBWA guys seem a bit short on both counts.
The Keeper Reaper: Sta... (01/10)
Pebble Hunting: When t... (01/10)
23 comments have been left for this article. 
Surprise Me!
Sorry, but what happens in a vote for who gets a plaque dedicated to them in a museum is not a tragedy.
The author said travesty, not tragedy. The two words are not the same.