Piazza Might Not Make The HOF This Year

[Paulie6986]

Welcome back buddy, we all missed you and your wit.

X2....

[fanofclendennon]

Eating fried chicken is a stereotype for black people... They even make jokes about it themselves You're wrong in your quote. Chinese food and Jewish people don't go together either

You've obviously never been Jewish on Christmas.

[blueman2424]

I was trying to come up with a worthy response to this thread and then just started laughing at how it derailed into...Whoopi Goldberg.

On the topic, I think this is just as ridiculous as everyone else. Piazza's name has always been left out of the bulk of discussions on steroids. To opt not to vote for him on conjecture is to essentially say, "guilty until proven innocent, or I get around to it next year."

[Dugmet]

But a smoking gun existed (and still sort of does) with the Wilpons.

I have always been on the fence about their innocence because there was never concrete proof that they knew it was a ponzi scheme, even though they profited substantially from the crime.

As far as I know, there is no concrete proof that Piazza even had acne on his back, let alone that he took steroids.

Yet you can emphatically state that one was a victim, while speculating on the other. You don't see that as hypocritical?

No. The Madoff affair was investigated thoroughly. They were not charged or indicted or tried. They are victims.

I have no idea if Piazza did or did not use PEDs. Nor do I assert he did or did not use them. The possibility exists, but I make no claims whatsoever as to guilt or innocence.

Regardless, people can have different opinions on different topics. Like I said, you can evaluate the quality of the smoke. I always felt strongly ownership was not guilty of prior knowledge, as for Piazza, I don't have an opinion either way. My position is neutral.

[Dugmet]

So because he reads, we must dismiss his abject stupidity when it comes to Piazza? I don't think so. How he makes a decision to not elect Piazza for the Hall of Fame is beyond me. He is now officially 1 of the 2 founding members of my no read list. Since the HOF is what prompted this, I am going to rename my list, the Hall of Infamy, presented for pure stupidity, complete disregard for facts or for just being totally out of touch. Initial honorees. Ken Davidoff & Adam Rubin. Congrats guys.

I don't agree with him at all on Piazza - especially since Bagwell's name comes up in discussions as well. But I won't stop reading his columns because of one article. He is one of the better sports writers that covers the Mets.

[IndiansFan337]

The voting is a joke. It is way too subjective and getting ridiculous. Piazza has never been found to have used PED's, but if he gets voted in and then admits to using them what do you do with Clemens and Bonds? I don't think speculation or even proof of using PED's should affect the HOF voting whatsoever. It wasn't against the rules at that time and what they did still counted. It's not like these select few were the only ones using PED's. Their competition was too. Clemens had to get out hitters who were using them and Bonds and Piazza faced pitchers who were using them too.

[Spartanfitness]

So when I was in college, I had been practicing mixed martial arts for about 10 or so years - one summer my junior year in college, I came back home and attended a session with the head instructor at the dojo where I had been training for 5 years up to that point in time. I skipped warmups and went right into split stretches. As I switched to the left side, I decided not to use my hands to stretch, and to then come up out of the stretch relying on my legs to do the work. The result? A third degree tear of the medial (middle of three muscles) of my hamstring muscles.

No I was not on PEDs, but I did tear a muscle.

As for back acne, i actually had back acne until my early 30s, but have never been on steroids or anything similar.

To say that whoever tears a muscle ("clean off the bone" is a misnomer, as tendons connect muscles to bones) is a steroid or PED user is ludicrous - ditto to say the same for folks who have back acne, or who have male pattern baldness, etc.

I call BS on this guys rationale.

I have friends who employ the same type of logic as this writer, and they are pot heads; therefore, because he is employing the same logic they have employed, this makes him a pot head - smoking gun - fire him now.

Thanks.

- JT

[eltwo]

I just take exception to the mentioning of only half of a Jewish Christmas; everybody keeps forgetting it's 'a movie and Chinese food.'

[5+7=DYNASTY!!!]

Looks as of right now Piazza will not be getting in (or anyone for that matter).

Adam Rubin didn't vote for Piazza just as a sidenote. I found that interesting.

[So Co Jo]

I heard way back in 2000 that piazza was juicing along with a bunch of other mets, so Id have to agree to not vote him in. some of you posters here are acting really naive, as if to say you have to get caught to have juiced. plenty of people get away with crimes

[wdwyer]

What we need is proof that these writers have already voted in a Steroid user. Something to knock the sense into these people. We all know the voting process needs to be tweaked as it is. Numbers be damned, a lot can go wrong with this type of subjective vote. Did he? Didn't he? Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if some of these writers hold this vote over certain players they plain just didn't like. Albert Belle comes to mind, whose controversies list is longer than his accomplishments.

Does Piazza get in as a first ballot? Probably not. Which is a shame, but these writers hold "First Ballot" way too seriously. No one is going to care if Piazza gets in on the first ballot, or his tenth (except the guys who write about this stuff)...just that he got in. In my mind there is no difference between first or second ballot for that matter. So the simple fact that Rubin won't vote for him until next year...is silly at best.

What the greater problem in all of this still stands...for something as important as the HOF...the process is WAY too subjective...and susceptible to bias.

[Dugmet]

What we need is proof that these writers have already voted in a Steroid user. Something to knock the sense into these people. We all know the voting process needs to be tweaked as it is. Numbers be damned, a lot can go wrong with this type of subjective vote. Did he? Didn't he? Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if some of these writers hold this vote over certain players they plain just didn't like. Albert Belle comes to mind, whose controversies list is longer than his accomplishments.

Does Piazza get in as a first ballot? Probably not. Which is a shame, but these writers hold "First Ballot" way too seriously. No one is going to care if Piazza gets in on the first ballot, or his tenth (except the guys who write about this stuff)...just that he got in. In my mind there is no difference between first or second ballot for that matter. So the simple fact that Rubin won't vote for him until next year...is silly at best.

What the greater problem in all of this still stands...for something as important as the HOF...the process is WAY too subjective...and susceptible to bias.

It is very difficult to know how or where to draw the line, but...

If the suspicion (or direct proof) is extremely strong to the point that a player likely used steroids, HGH, etc, and his stats show a sudden and dramatic spike and/or previously unreachable heights during the era, I would not vote for him.

But there are still extenuating circumstances. For example I would not vote for Bobby Bonds if I had a vote even though he was a HOFer anyway. And I would not count using HGH against Andy Pettite because I believe him that he used it for only one very brief period, and that it did not affect his career stats dramatically. Still, Pettite is guilty by his own testimony. So that contradicts my first statement.

As you say, so much is up to subjective reflection, interpretation, etc. It's a mess.

[nymetsrule]

I heard way back in 2000 that piazza was juicing along with a bunch of other mets, so Id have to agree to not vote him in. some of you posters here are acting really naive, as if to say you have to get caught to have juiced. plenty of people get away with crimes

But you can't say someone did a crime just because there were other people committing a crime.

[fanofclendennon]

So when I was in college, I had been practicing mixed martial arts for about 10 or so years - one summer my junior year in college, I came back home and attended a session with the head instructor at the dojo where I had been training for 5 years up to that point in time. I skipped warmups and went right into split stretches. As I switched to the left side, I decided not to use my hands to stretch, and to then come up out of the stretch relying on my legs to do the work. The result? A third degree tear of the medial (middle of three muscles) of my hamstring muscles.

No I was not on PEDs, but I did tear a muscle.

As for back acne, i actually had back acne until my early 30s, but have never been on steroids or anything similar.

To say that whoever tears a muscle ("clean off the bone" is a misnomer, as tendons connect muscles to bones) is a steroid or PED user is ludicrous - ditto to say the same for folks who have back acne, or who have male pattern baldness, etc.

I call BS on this guys rationale.

I have friends who employ the same type of logic as this writer, and they are pot heads; therefore, because he is employing the same logic they have employed, this makes him a pot head - smoking gun - fire him now.

Thanks.

- JT

PED usage in professional sports -- especially baseball -- has run rampant. Suspicion of any player is warranted. It's not so much guilty till proven innocent as it is guilt by association.

In Piazza's day, the MLBPA and all players protected every player who ever used. If the players were truly concerned about their reputations, they would have taken steps to out the cheaters to protect the innocent.

Instead, the innocent protected the cheaters which, in effect, placed themselves under suspicion as well.

[fanofclendennon]

But you can't say someone did a crime just because there were other people committing a crime.

No, but if you run around with a bunch of people who commit crimes, it's fair to suspect you committed them too.