8
2013
The Case Against Mike Piazza
An article by 
Murray Chass claims he knows Mike Piazza used steroids. Wait, before you start mumbling expletives at Chass under your breath, keep reading. The former New York Times reporter is not alone. Joel Sherman, a columnist for the New York Post, also raised suspicion about the Mets former catcher.
Both Chass and Sherman covered the Mets in the Piazza era. These guys spent a lot of time with the Mets – and Piazza. Both confirm Mets beat writers and veteran baseball scribes in general suspect Piazza’s name may be on that dubious decade-old unpublished list of 104 players who failed the MLB steroids test.
In his 2009 book The Rocket that Fell to Earth, Jeff Pearlman suggests Piazza used performance-enhancing drugs:
According to several sources, when the subject of performance enhancing was broached with reporters he especially trusted, Piazza fessed up. “Sure, I use,” he told one. “But in limited doses, and not all that often.” (Piazza has denied using performance-enhancing drugs, but there has always been speculation) … Writers saw his bulging muscles, his acne-covered back. They certainly heard the under-the-breath comments from other major league players, some who considered Piazza’s success to be 100 percent chemically delivered.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the truth will be revealed, not in what Chass or Sherman claim they know, but what the evidence reveals as fact.
After reading reports by Chass, Sherman and Pearlman, the evidence supporting Piazza’s PED use boils down to one common piece of evidence: acne. Yes, acne. You know, comedones, seborrhea, cysts. By the way, how’s your breakfast? According to both reporters, Piazza had a bad case of acne on his back, “… a generally accepted telltale sign of steroids use,” wrote Chass. “Teen-age kids never had such a problem.” Sherman added Piazza’s “physical quirks” raised a lot of eyebrows.
What other evidence exists that he used PEDs? Well, there’s the acne thing and the fact that Piazza was selected by the Los Angeles Dodgers in the 62nd round on the June 1988 draft as a favor to his father. Who can doubt the lingering suspicion created by that fact?
That’s it, and that, in and of itself, is a problem — a big problem.
Piazza never tested positive for steroids. There is no evidence that his name was on the infamous Mitchell Report, yet, he won’t make it to Cooperstown this year because at least 145 of the 581 ballots (75%) that were reportedly submitted did not place a check mark by Piazza’s name because members of the Baseball Writers’ Association of America have branded Piazza a suspect. Just so we’re clear: Mike Piazza, the greatest hitter of the last quarter century, is being dismissed as a first-ballot Hall of Famer because the evidence suggests he may have used performance-enhancing drugs.
When Sherman asked point blank if he was a clean player, Piazza replied, “Absolutely.”
Doesn’t matter, Piazza had bad acne and, furthermore, anyone drafted that low must be using PEDs, right? His words mean nothing, but we had to ask.
Over his 16-year career Piazza posted a .308 career batting average (.377 OBP and .545 SLG %) and hit more home runs (427) than any other catcher in MLB history.
Doesn’t matter, didn’t you hear me the first time: He had acne – bad acne – and he was drafted in the 62nd round. The evidence is clear, unlike Piazza’s skin.
The evidence is piling up, not against Piazza, but against Sherman, Chass and anyone who didn’t vote for Piazza. The greatest hitting catcher of the last quarter century is being dismissed as a first-ballot Hall of Famer because he had acne.
“The idea that you’re not going to vote for a guy based on something completely subjective and unproven doesn’t make sense to me,” said Morgan Ensberg, a former MLB infielder who now hosts a radio show on XM Sirius radio.
Ensberg makes a fine point. The Baseball Hall of Fame states, “Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.” Plain and simple, anyone not voting for Piazza questions his integrity and character and that judgment is being made around guesswork; circumstantial claims.
That’s the case against Mike Piazza.
Hall of Fame voting is not held to the same standards as a court of law, but maybe it should be. Leaving Piazza off the ballot, first-time or not, is a mistake. He should be judged one the six criteria defined by the HOF, not suspicion, whispers or off-the-record claims.
Tomorrow at 2:00 p.m. (edt) Jeff Idelson, President of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, will step to the podium and reveal the Class of 2013. I am hopeful Piazza’s name will be read, but I am not optimistic. That makes me sad, not just for Piazza, but for a game once again being stained by poor judgment.
Shame on you, Murray Chass. Shame on you, Joel Sherman. Shame on you, Baseball Writers of America.
About the Author: John Strubel
My name is John Strubel and I have been a Mets fan since 1972. Professionally, I have been a working member of the media since 1987. In addition to media relations and broadcast work for the Detroit Tigers and Tampa Bay Rays minor league affiliates, my career spans 25 years in the radio industry as a on-air personality, program director and sports-talk show host. You can reach me at john@johnstrubel.com or on Twitter @johnstrubel
25 Comments + Add Comment
Recent Comments
- Teddy Klein: on 2013 MLB Draft: Compiling & Analyzing 40 Mocks, Mets Consensus Picks: That was with Omar's administration. And Mejia...
- Hitman: on Braves vs Mets: Dillon Gee Opposes Mike Minor In Tonight’s Second Game: If Mets lose this one, they will...
- Seth Cohen: on Braves vs Mets: Dillon Gee Opposes Mike Minor In Tonight’s Second Game: Keith has to be joking. No way...
- Kyle: on Braves vs Mets: Dillon Gee Opposes Mike Minor In Tonight’s Second Game: Really? Yeah right! Collins is terrible with strategy...
- Russell Zanca: on Braves vs Mets: Dillon Gee Opposes Mike Minor In Tonight’s Second Game: My bad, we will lose two in...
Need Tickets To The Mets Game?
Check Out These Great MLB Links!
Photographs From Gordon Donovan
5394 Fans Follow Us On Twitter!
1269 Fans Like Us On Facebook!
2341 Fans Read Our Feed!
1702 Fans Subscribe via Daily Email!
“Sherman, a columnist for the New York Post, also raised suspicion about the Mets former catcher.”
“When Sherman asked point blank if he was a clean player, Piazza replied, “Absolutely.””
????
Every time I read about how Piazza is being treated after his astonishing hall of fame career I don’t know whether to get sad or mad or both. On top of that great career how easily everyone forgets that it was his home run that lifted a city and country after the 9/11 attacks. Never let it be said that we don’t know how to treat our heroes.
I’m so sick or reading about steroids, the players from that era, etc. etc.
There is just no way to know for sure who used, who didn’t, whose production was affected by someone else that used (pitcher vs. hitter). How in the world can you ever separate all that out and make an informed conclusion? IMO, you can’t.
Just vote based on production – pick a 15 year or so time frame and just annotate ‘players played during the steroid era’ in the HOF. Let fans draw their own conclusions.
Yeah, I was listening to Mike Schmidt, I tried to find the transcript, where he basically said that we are all covered up in this mess and that penalizing the players who put their health in jeopardy while not holding it against the writers, coaches, managers, owners, fans and other players who knew it was going on and whose response was to praise those players at the time is a larger crime than the player taking the roids.
And you know that ‘all’ includes the media. Which is why those that have a vote and have gone on their soapbox saying no one who used or even been suspected of using should be voted in – is just hypocritical.
Some of them had the perfect voice to blow the lid on that long before Selig did, if they felt that strongly about it. Most choose not to, for one reason or another.
Exactly, I believe that Mike’s first comment was the writers. The fact that they too covered it up for their own personal gains makes them no different than the offender.
Excellent post. I was wondering if I might ask a question because I think there must be more to why writers are not voting for Piazza. How was his relationship with the media? Was it as icy cold as it was with Eddie Murray and Bobby Bonilla, or was it as cordial as with Tom Seaver and Jerry Grote?
He had, for the most part, an excellent relationship with the NY media. He was always accessible after games, played his part as the face of the team, and was, according to most reports, liked and respected by reporters. There was talk he might have a career in the broadcast booth someday if he wanted it.
was it even illegal back in the mid-90′s ?
this makes no sense…
lets revoke Nolan Ryan’s HOF plaque because he was a 45 year old throwing 100 mph on pushups and protein bars
not sure about what MLB specifically banned (or not) at the time, but it was illegal to use them without a valid prescription, so from that standpoint it was against the rules.
Steroids WERE banned in the 1980s and 1990s, under the MLB collective bargaining agreement. They were on a list of banned substances included in the agreement. There was just no testing, and no established penalties for getting caught using. In addition, it was illegal to obtain and use steroids without a prescription for a medical condition, and outside the direct supervision of a doctor. Steroids are controlled substances. So users WERE breaking both MLB rules and U.S. law, there was just no system of discipline in place in MLB for using them and no way to get caught.
Seriously, I think Piazza will not get in tomorrow. It’s a damn shame too.
what about the other guys that might get in? Wasn’t there ever a whisper? questionable association? Coming to camp 1 year looking buffed and stronger?
Just shut the damned place down, since you can not be 100% sure any guy in the last 20 years did not use something.
if you won’t go that far, unless someone admitted it, or was convicted of something (heck, at least failed a drug test), they get the benefit of the doubt. And Piazza, unlike A Rod or Bonds, certainly should get that.
I think its time for the HOF to appoint a new committee to vote players into the HOF. Why do a bunch of guys who never played the game get to vote on weather or not a person who played the game gets into the place that celebrates the accomplishments of that players profession? Shouldn’t you have played to understand fully the accomplishments of a player? What, because you hung around after the game and asked a bunch of inane questions and pretend to be friends with the players so you can use what they have told you in confidence against them later to either advance their career or stop them from entering what players consider the crowning achievement of their careers? Its suppose to be about stats that qualify you for the hall, right? So why is it that now if a sportswriter doesn’t like a guy or suspects a guy used (no evidence) he decides a player can’t be in the “BASEBALL PLAYERS” Hall of Fame. Why not have a committee of former players vote on all potential players, not just players who didn’t make it during their regular opportunity. If fellow former players say a guy should not be in or not has more credence to me than a guy who wrote down what I just saw at the game or on TV.
I agree, and suggested something similar a few days ago. the writers is like the electoral college. made sense at the time, no longer does.
In the old days, the writers were probably the only ones that really saw a lot of these guys play. So it made sense that they would have the best overall perspective. Today, they probably see less action than a lot of other people, especially the ones that are retired and doing it all on memory, if that.
so yeah, it makes sense for the HOF to appoint a committee. maybe rotate guys off in shifts after a couple of years, so there is always new blood coming in. Some writers, other insiders, some former players (including current members). heck, even some blogger types that are obsessed. make it as big or small as you want, figure out the voting protocol, and let them pick. Can’t possibly be any more biased and illogical than the current set-up.
There’s a bunch of HOF voters who have decided it’s their job to keep all steroid users out of the Hall. They won’t vote for anyone who is “suspected,” like Piazza or Jeff Bagwell (who didn’t get in last year for the same reason) because they’re afraid that one of these guys will get in and then it’ll come out for sure that they were using and the argument for keeping Clemens, Bonds, McGuire, etc. out will fall apart, because some known users will already be in the Hall. So they’re just going to blackball anyone from that era about whom there are any suspicions.
We’d all like to see Mike get in because of what he means to the Mets franchise. However, this is not a criminal matter – it’s the HOF vote. Frankly, the back acne is pretty damning under the circumstances, which include the weight loss, reduced bat speed and especially that torn abdominal muscle during the first season after random testing for steroids was included in the CBO. Freak muscle tears are a symptom of HGH and steroid withdrawal.Circumstantial? Absolutely. Convincing? Kind of, considering everything.
I have to wonder and maybe MMO should do a piece on this….
What actually constitutes cheating where roids are concerned?
Doctors prescribe them for many ailments (even alergies) does having taken them once in your life really constitute dirty cheat?
What about a player who uses one of those supplements that have pre-cursors during the offseason while he keeps his conditioning and to help speed up repair of injuries incurred during the previous season but stops using them long before Spring Training, Testing and games are played?
What if he never plays a game DIRTY but will use when he is on a season long rehab to get himself back quicker? Does that really constitute cheating?
Does using ONCE mean anything you do clean after is really the product of the use and not your own ability?
There are probably more players (in the past 30 years) who have USED at one point in thier career than have NOT used….
The question that should be asked is ONE use enough to offset an entire career’s achievement because one use is enough to make you better for the rest of your life?
Because the truth of the matter is it isn’t enough…
Those who use DURING the season are cheating (IMO) those who may use it when they are not playing and stop before they are really are not CHEATING….Just taking the easy path medicine has provided to get them at full health.
I don’t really know the answer to that myself but I won’t throw away an entire career over someone who used them just once, Sparingly, and only at times where no baseball was being played while the PEDs were coursing through thier veins where they could affect performance….
and in the end the truth of the matter is if what they did THEN was important to you and you want to hold people accountable then you should have been testing then to stop them, not making a rule AFTER the fact and then prosecuting them for a law that didn’t exist at the time they commit the crime!
They let it happen at the time and if the Reporters KNEW and thought it was bad they should have exposed it then…They chose not to because it wasn’t REALLY against the rules there were none….
And I find it hypocritical to hold a rule that didn’t exist and they didn’t think was worth reporting about THEN against someone NOW!
The case against Piazza is so woefully weak, it embarrasses the reporters more than Piazza. Leaving the decision to reporters is a lousy system and should be changed. Based on flimsy rumors, they get some pleasure out of demonstrating their power. It’s scandalous to let these bums decide. I remember years ago when a couple of reporters left Ted Williams off their ballot because he treated them rudely. It’s all so sick.
My wife has bad acne on her back. Won’t make it to the hall of fame. Should I be suspicous of steroid use?
LOL Tom….No you should not suspect steroids but I do suggest you sex her up more because I hear that can clear up acne issues….LOL
This is defamation of character. If he was not proven guilty in a court of law who are these guys to say so. What about all of the old timers in the Hall that were alcoholics, I am sure back in the day they were doing illegal stuff, but it was kept quiet. Mike belongs in the HALL, if he doesnot get in the hall, then the Mets need to retire his # and place him in the Met hall of fame ASAP
This is the most ludicrous argument I have ever heard. I am close to 60 years of age, and I have suffered from back acne most of my adult life. I have never taken any form of steroid period. To make such a foolish suggestion, because this is the tell tale sign of steroid use is not only riddled in bad science, if we can call it that, but also saddled with nonsense. As I noted I have had bad-acne on my back and neck for over 40 years, have tried everything and nothing has really helped. If I eat chocolates, I break out, so maybe the chocolates are laced with steroids. Listen Mike has never been publicly accused, never failed a drug-test, and the here say of any one is not evidence. He deserves to go in first-ballot.
I kept on reading analysis of the non-vote that he was suspected of using but it was never proven. So I googled and found this from a New York Times article from 2002 when the steroids was first breaking open where Mike admitted to “briefly” using Andro early in his career. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/30/sports/baseball-steroid-use-becomes-a-topic-of-discussion-in-clubhouses.html
A look at his stats shows that with the exception of 1994 from ’93 to ’02 he hit 30 or more HR’s. In 2003 with the scandal blown wide open and players being he hit 13 and no more then 24 there after. He was also getting injured more. Both symptoms can be plausibly attributed to advancing age as well as coming off ‘roids. If he went off ‘roids from ’03 on he could definitely say he never tested positive for it. The Pearlmen book uses “vague” sources not much there but actual quotes from named opponents who believed he did it. I did not “prove” he did it during his time here but I made a strong enough circumstantial case that automatic dismissal is far from warranted just because he was the 2nd most popular Met of all time and all around class guy. Maybe as with Andy Pettite another admitted “brief” user being and all around class guy should mean something but that is a judgement call for you but that judgement call should be made with all the information possible. .
If any of you people actually focused on what Chass wrote you might not be so quick to jump off a cliff. He never said that his reason for believeing Piazza used was because of his back acne. It was because the back acne “miraculously” disappeared at exactly the same time MLB started testing for PED use. Yes, thousands of people have back acne, but how many of them just happen to completely clear up when drug testing began.