His article reads as if he rarely adds on the first ballot and likes to rethink players each year. A thoughtful voter is better than one who just goes by their gut and he indicates he is very close to voting for Raines and Biggio. Sadly, that matters little in 2014 if no one gets in this year as next year he'll need 3 more slots at least (most likely - hard to see someone voting for Edgar but not Thomas and Clemens but not Maddux, while Glavine seems hard to ignore if you are someone who thinks about it) and has just one open.

His reason for not voting Biggio is so incredibly flimsy. It's a shame he couldn't see past the 'Hits' column to find out where Biggio really shines.

At this point I'm willing to accept a vote for Morris if it also has a vote for Biggio. Any ballot without Biggio means we are just one step closer to an O'Day/Ruppert/White only induction ceremony.

An extremely reliable source—with no ties to Palmeiro—told me an off-the-record story at the Winter Meetings that convinced me that Palmeiro was indeed a clean player and was tricked into using the steroid when he thought he was taking a shot of vitamin B-12 that led to his suspension and end of his career in 2005. Unfortunately, there would be too many legal ramifications to make the story public.

An extremely reliable source repeated to me Palmeiro's years-old explanation of his positive test. I am convinced, but I will not actually do any reporting on this highly interesting topic.

I mean, in context, it's a very good ballot. As JN says, this is a thoughtful guy generally doing his best. So you give credit. But that paragraph was full of things that annoy me.

And I don't know if this is fair, but when I see the "Baseball Prospectus" masthead, I expect reasoning that goes well beyond what's listed in this article. On Biggio:

Meanwhile, I realize that 3,000 hits means all but automatic induction into the Hall of Fame, but I want more time to think about Craig Biggio. As much as I admired him as a player, his 3,000 hits seem to me to be partially a product of playing 20 seasons, as he only surpassed 180 hits in a season four times.

If you need "more time to think", what thinking have you done so far, beyond dividing 3000 by 20? It's not like column space is limited on the Internet. And Craig Biggio has walks and doubles and defense and stolen bases - there's a wide body of information out there to dig into.

On McGwire and Sosa:

I also have reasons for voting for Bonds but not fellow mashers Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa. Bonds was a complete all-around player, while McGwire was a one-trick pony and Sosa was a great player for only a short time.

McGwire of course had two tricks. It's just not clear to me what Perrotto's actual reasoning is. From a sportswriter not affiliated with BPro, this is pretty much the usual logic-by-adjective, but I expect more from Prospectus.

Agreed Matt - the article is missing a lot and reads like one forced to fit into a certain number of words/column space. Biggio needs to have people think about how he played 3 of the 4 most difficult positions in CA/2B/CF on a regular basis making the All-Star team (plus getting a silver slugger) at CA and 2B. I like that he played 2 innings behind the plate in his 2nd last game. He also was a top 5 MVP finisher twice, led in stolen bases once and doubles 3 times suggesting more than a singles hitter (as the writer suggests). His postseason was poor at 234/295/323 with his teams going 3-6 overall for playoff series won with no WS titles to show for it. FYI: His OPS was over 700 the 3 series they won, sub 600 in all but one that they lost (the one time he had a 182/471/273 line thanks to 4 walks + 2 HBP in 17 PA). If Biggio was on his team won, if not they lost.

An extremely reliable source says that Scarlett Johansson considers RMc to be, quote, "the bees knees". Unfortunately, there would be too many legal ramifications to make the story public.

Someone with no ties to the man is an extremely reliable source? Exactly who has a motive to trick someone into using steroids against his will?

I want to talk to this man about a bridge I own.

Remember when BP was a fledgling sabermetric based website and not a regular mainstream media outlet?

I agree with Matt that this is disapointing article coming from a BPro guy. At the very least I would have liked to see 10 names (unjustifiable not to with this class and future backlog, IMO). Biggio, Lofton, Raines, c'mon... at least one of those guys is worthy (if not Sosa and McGwire too).

6. Double-Spin Mechanic Posted: January 03, 2013 at 09:00 AM (#4337773)
Someone with no ties to the man is an extremely reliable source? Exactly who has a motive to trick someone into using steroids against his will?

I want to talk to this man about a bridge I own.

Who has motive? Could be various people. If he was a sanctimonious jerk in the clubhouse and really making a stink about his suspicions that others were using . . . Thing with Palmiero is his denial story sounded sincere. He sounded truly surprised and his "the only thing it could be was . . ." was such a goofy explanation that I started to think anyone who was using would have come up with a better story in case they were ever caught (ala Melky). Doesn't really matter since, barring an admission from whomever may done it, no one will ever believe him. I'm not in the "he's innocent" camp, but I am in the "who the hell knows" camp.

If he was a sanctimonious jerk in the clubhouse and really making a stink about his suspicions that others were using

So if that's your premise, follow it through -

"He was a sanctimonious jerk in the clubhouse and really making a stink about his suspicions that others were using, so he took a syringe from one of the guys he had been giving a hard time and stuck it in his ass, no questions asked."

I agree with Matt that this is disapointing article coming from a BPro guy.

Perrotto isn't really a "BPro guy", as such. He's a longtime beat reporter from the Pittsburgh area.

Back in the early '00s, he was the only guy worth reading when it came to the Pirates, even if his accuracy wasn't always 100%.

I'd like to see Biggio on the ballot and Edgar off of it, but this isn't bad.

Biggio-doubt is a weird affliction. Even granting that 3,000 hits is an arbitrary round number, the man scored 1,844 runs – more than Eddie Collins or Carl Yastrzemski. He was superior at the main thing he was asked to do offensively. I understand that he suffered more from the perception of hanging on to get to his milestone than most elder ballplayers. But for crying out loud, the ability to bat .250 and slug .400 in the major leagues in your forties is not, for all that, a minus. There are quite a few active players who have not been able to do that over the course of an entire career – IOW, the shell of Craig Biggio's former self could still outhit some career journeymen. That's actually impressive.

I don't understand "I'd like more time to think". He's had 5 years and knew the deadline that far in advance. Maybe we can think about the 2013 MVP ballot for a while and award it in 2020 when our hindsight is better.

I'd like to see Biggio on the ballot and Edgar off of it, but this isn't bad.

No need to kick off Edgar. He only voted for 9 players. I too would like to see Biggio on it. If I were to rank the candidates on this ballot, I'd probably have Biggio as the 8th to 12th best player. But he's one of the few who actually has a chance to get in, so come on voters, show him some love!

Remember when BP was a fledgling sabermetric based website and not a regular mainstream media outlet?

I'd say its readability has improved in recent times. I'm not really sure about its sabermetric product, since I've basically gotten too old and "burdened" by real life to keep up, but I'm back in the fold as a gift subscriber because they have enough stuff that interests me. For example, Sam Miller and Jason Parks are both fascinating and informative in their own ways and I'd pretty much read anything they write. Lindbergh and Carleton tend to keep my attention over the course of an article. To the extent that they've branched out to former mainstream guys (Perotto, Miller, Levine), that's probably necessary to some extent -- and Perotto's work could be viewed as something akin to a loss leader.

I don't understand "I'd like more time to think". He's had 5 years and knew the deadline that far in advance. Maybe we can think about the 2013 MVP ballot for a while and award it in 2020 when our hindsight is better.

Matt started this theme upthread, and I don't think it's fair. Are there not players you are unsure of? For me those players are guys like Edgar and Walker (leaning yes on both), and Bernie and Lofton (leaning no on both).

That said, I don't read BP anymore since Sheehan left and he was the only one there I was still reading (though I still subscribe because I like access to their player comment archives), but I understand Perrotto was brought on mainly to fill the role of "mainstream beat reporter." So it's kind of odd that people here are complaining that he sounds like a mainstream beat reporter. I don't think these people understand what BP is trying to do. Again, I've passed BP by by now -- actually the only columnist I really read anymore is Sheehan -- but Perrotto is filling exactly the role he was hired to fill. They're trying to appeal to various subsets of fans: statgeeks, mainstream fans, and fantasy types. They started out as a statgeek site but over a decade ago they made peace with Peter Gammons (at one point they had a weekly column dedicated to critiquing his Sunday column) and they went back on their practice of taking W/L/RBI/Saves out of various of their stats presentations because they realized they needed the fantasy crowd also.

So they really do try to appeal to all stripes now. You guys still think this is 1996.

You may disagree with their business model but you might want to try to figure out what it is first.

Matt started this theme upthread, and I don't think it's fair. Are there not players you are unsure of? For me those players are guys like Edgar and Walker (leaning yes on both), and Bernie and Lofton (leaning no on both).

I didn't say I had a problem with being unsure, I said I had a problem with writing an article in which you say you're unsure and don't say anything meaningful about why you're unsure.

You may disagree with their business model but you might want to try to figure out what it is first before you do that.

I don't believe anyone has made any claims that Baseball Prospectus will be less profitable with Perrotto writing articles like this. I said I hold Prospectus to a higher standard of quality and I'm disappointed they now publish articles like this. Maybe this article will make them money, but that's not the issue I'm talking about.

No need to kick off Edgar.

Yes, there is - Edgar didn't accomplish enough to deserve induction, in my opinion. Perrotto isn't applying an adequate DH penalty for Edgar, which is sort of the flip side of him undervaluing Biggio's defensive contributions at up-the-middle positions.

At least that's internally consistent, I guess.

An extremely reliable source—with no ties to Palmeiro—told me an off-the-record story at the Winter Meetings that convinced me that Palmeiro was indeed a clean player and was tricked into using the steroid when he thought he was taking a shot of vitamin B-12 that led to his suspension and end of his career in 2005. Unfortunately, there would be too many legal ramifications to make the story public.

An extremely reliable source repeated to me Palmeiro's years-old explanation of his positive test. I am convinced, but I will not actually do any reporting on this highly interesting topic.

I'd have to go back and review the Palmeiro saga, but I think the "new" charge here is that Palmeiro was actually "tricked" into taking the steroids. I thought his story was simply, "I don't know how I tested positive; the only thing I took was a B-12 shot from Tejada, so maybe that shot was tainted." IE, a mistake, not an intentional sabotaging of his B-12 shot.

Are there not players you are unsure of?

Yeah, but I give it my best guess at the due date.

I actually think the story is actually viable, and I thought so at the time. From what I have read B12 shots were the code used for a PED. Tejada was caught doing roids , so maybe this would not work in a court of law, but I actually am on his side. How stupid would you have to be to wag your finger at Congress and, under oath, state that you never used steroids, then take them and be dumb enough to get caught by a blood test? Just as ludicrous as the story itself?

Yeah, and an anonymous but very reliable source told me that Obama was born in Kenya, too. Nonsense, and what a coincidental moment to bring this matter up.

Snipping now from the committee's report in which they concluded not to charge Palmeiro with perjury. A few things to note. First, when the MLBPA informed Palmeiro of his positive test, they asked him what might have triggered it, intentionally or unintentionally, and he didn't bring up the B12. Later he brought up the B12. Also remember that during the arbitration, the MLBPA did not contend that the B12 shot that Palmeiro took caused his positive test result. However, during the grievance later, this did become Palmeiro's best guess.

In any event, from the below portions of the committee report, Palmeiro never says that Tejada "tricked" him. To the contrary, he says that he trusted Tejada and Tejada was like a brother to him and a good family man and teammate, etc. The closest Palmeiro comes to suggesting anything like a "trick" or sabotage is in the one portion below at the very end, when he says this:

"But I feel that the B-12 was probably the thing that might have done it. I could not prove it. I have no way of proving whether you know this was an unintentional thing that I did or something that somebody did to me. I couldn’t prove it."

FWIW, Palmeiro passed every other steroids test he ever took, including the 2003 survey testing, including the testing in other years, including a test he took on his own accord after learning that he had tested positive. Obviously that doesn't mean he didn't take steroids this one time (or others) -- and he failed the test so I have always presumed he intentionally took steroids at least that one time -- but it's something a fair person would consider. Also the fact that Ivan Rodriguez and Juan Gonzalez both disputed Canseco's allegations including those about Palmeiro and said they had no knowledge of him ever taking anything - for what it's worth.

Quoting now portions from the committee report:

During the arbitration, Mr. Palmeiro was questioned extensively regarding the B-12 he received from Mr. Tejada and whether the B-12 could have led to Mr. Palmeiro’s positive steroid test. When asked whether Mr. Tejada would have any reason to give Mr. Palmeiro a substance containing steroids, Mr. Palmeiro answered, “I wouldn’t think so. I mean that’s why I got it from him. I didn’t suspect that he would be on anything. I mean he’s Miguel Tejada, he’s a teammate. He’s like a brother to me.”76

As part of his testimony, Mr. Palmeiro explained that he thought Mr. Tejada may have offered the B-12 because Mr. Tejada saw that Mr. Palmeiro went through a stressful spring training and that Mr. Tejada may have seen that Mr. Palmeiro was “tired and rundown.”

Mr. Coonelly and Mr. Weiner each questioned Mr. Palmeiro as to how the stanozolol could have entered his body. Mr. Palmeiro testified that he had “no idea” and “no explanation” for how stanozolol entered his urine.82 Further, Mr. Palmeiro stated, “I have never ever in my life used any type of steroids, any drugs, anything that’s illegal,”83 “I have never used an illegal steroid,”84 “I have never used an illegal drug in my life,”85 and “[y]ou know, like I said before, under oath twice now, I have never taken steroids in my life. I have no idea how this got into my system.”86 When asked whether Mr. Palmeiro believed his positive test was a result of taking the B-12 provided by Mr. Tejada, Mr. Palmeiro responded, “I don’t know that, no.”87

Throughout the arbitration process, Mr. Palmeiro was represented by Mr. Weiner and the Players Association, not private counsel. The Players Association did not argue the substance in the B-12 vial taken by Mr. Palmeiro resulted in his positive test result.101 In fact, Mr. Weiner argued just the opposite, stating in closing arguments, “The Players Association does not contend that the B-12 shot that Mr. Palmeiro took caused his positive test result. We have no evidence to suggest that. As a matter of fact, all of the evidence that exists runs in the other direction.”102

Attached to the arbitration documents was a Polygraph Examination Summary by W. Ronald Lilly of Lilly Polygraph Services, dated June 14, 2005.106 Mr. Lilly administered a polygraph examination to Mr. Palmeiro on June 13, 2005. The arbitration documents included the following two questions:

Q: When you received that B-12, did you know that it contained a steroid?
A: No.

Q: When you received that B-12 this past April, did you know that it contained a steroid?
A: No.107

Q: Did you unknowingly receive a B-12 supplement that contained a steroid?
A: Yes.

Q: Did you unknowingly receive a B-12 supplement
that contained a steroid?
A: Yes.

Mr. Palmeiro described his relationship with Mr. Tejada as “close,”166 that the two men are “pretty good friends,”167 and that he feels like Mr. Tejada is like a “brother.”168

Contrary to Mr. Palmeiro’s defense during his arbitration, Mr. Palmeiro informed Committee staff that it is his belief that the B-12 injection resulted in his positive test for steroids. He stated: A: My best guess would be the B-12, it could have been contaminated, but I can’t prove it. It could have been something else. It could have been something else, any other supplement that I took. But my best guess would be the B-12.

Q: You believe it was the B-12?
A: I believe it was, but I wish I could prove it.179

Q: How in your mind do you think this was contaminated? What do you think? Do you think it was inadvertently not B-12 but a steroid?

A: No, I’m not sure. I don’t know how to answer that, because obviously I didn’t take the proper steps to look into it, but when I got it, I feel sure that it was B-12. And I’m not saying that that’s not what it was. I’m just saying that could have been what got me contaminated. I can’t say for sure that is what it was, but that is the thing I can pinpoint to that is different than anything else that I have done in the past.180

Q: [W]hat you are saying here is that you believe, your best guess is that your positive test was as a result of that B-12 shot?
A: That is my guess.181

Committee staff questioned Mr. Palmeiro about the discrepancy between the arbitration proceedings and the interview with Committee staff concerning Mr. Palmeiro’s belief that the B-12 caused his positive test result. Mr. Palmeiro stated: I know, but that is because the way that I understood it was I could not prove what did it. But when I think back on it, my best guess would be the B-12. Now, I may be wrong. It could be something else. But if I have to guess, if I have to pinpoint something, that is the logical thing.182 During the arbitration proceeding, Mr. Weiner stated, “The Players Association does not contend that the B-12 shot that Mr. Palmeiro took caused his positive test. We have no evidence to suggest that. As a matter of fact, all of the evidence that exists runs in the other direction.”183 In the Committee staff interview, Mr. Palmeiro was asked about Mr. Weiner’s statement:

Q: So do you disagree with that statement?
A: I disagree with what he is saying. He is speaking on the Players Association behalf; but I feel that the B-12 was probably the thing that might have done it. I could not prove it. I have no way of proving whether you know this was an unintentional thing that I did or something that somebody did to me. I couldn’t prove it.

How stupid would you have to be

But isn't that the staple of so many true-crime stories? Burglars who call home from a house they've just looted, or robbers who leave their wallets at the scene, or any number of ironic stupidities? At least as psychologically plausible is "they'll never catch me because I'm so smart, I'm using the undetectable PED, I can wag my finger all I want."

Who knows, really; it's just that the argument from intelligence, or lack thereof, is never very strong.

The committee report is kind of funny because Coonnelly takes it as a given that Palmeiro's home run production increased after he became teammates with Canseco. But that isn't true. Palmeiro's home runs increased (to 26) in 1991 when he was 26 years old and entering his peak. Nothing unusual there. They took another jump in 1993 when he was 28 years old - and when offense went up across the league. Meanwhile, Canseco doesn't get to Texas until late in 1992, so after Palmeiro already had his first jump in 1991.

For what it's worth:

When questioned about his increased performance, Mr. Palmeiro responded:

Well, the only reaction to that is obviously they are not giving me any credit for my abilities that God gave me. But if you go back beyond my professional career, and I do not think that you have it, I hit home runs everywhere. I was a three-time All-American in college. I was freshman player of the year. Summer ball I hit more home runs than Barry Bonds and McGwire and all those guys when we played summer ball. So I have always been a guy that’s hit home runs. And if they choose to think that I did this illegally, that is fine, but I know in my heart that everything that I have done in baseball is done with my hard work, the talent that God gave me, and what my dad taught me. You go beyond those numbers, ‘82, ‘83, ‘84, ‘85, when I
was a kid, and you can see that I hit a lot of home runs. So for them to say that I was not going to be any good or that I had to do something better, you know, that is fine, but to
me, you know, I worked hard. I am not one of these guys that hits — I don’t know if you guys follow my career, but my home runs are barely going over the wall. I just happen to have a nice, smooth, steady swing. I can’t hit the ball out the other way. My home runs are all pretty much regular, you know. But I have always had success all the way back to when I first started. 185

It always fascinates me that players seem to have no concept of offensive levels (offense increased in 1993) or of the fact that a good young hitter in the majors can expect to see his power increase as he ages. Power is an old ballplayer's skill.

FWIW, I seem to recall George Mitchell thought Palmeiro was sincere in his denials and Mitchell had every reason (professionally speaking) to cast the widest net possible.

"I hit home runs everywhere" is just a laughable statement from Palmeiro. The Cubs kept Mark Grace over him because he had zero power, in their estimation.

"I hit home runs everywhere" is just a laughable statement from Palmeiro.

Yes, he clearly didn't hit them his first few years in the majors, which is why I said that ballplayers really have no clue of the broader context, that there is nothing unusual about a young hitter who hit for a lot of power before he got to the majors see a drop in his power numbers until he reaches his peak.

So an informed Palmeiro might have said "Despite hitting a lot of home runs before I got to the majors I didn't hit a lot of home runs in my first few years in the majors, but, you know, that is not unusual."

Palmeiro actually had a good track record for power in the minors before having a weird power outage at ages 23-25. At 21, he was playing in the super-low-offense Eastern League, where his 12 homers put him 7th in the league and only six behind the league leader. At 22, he hit 11 homers in 240 PA in AAA and 14 homers in 240 PA in the majors, a full-season pace of about 30 HR. Then the power disappeared for a few years.

#31, I actually didn't realize that his 14 home runs in 1987 came in only 240 PA but I attributed it to 1987.

"I hit home runs everywhere" is just a laughable statement from Palmeiro. The Cubs kept Mark Grace over him because he had zero power, in their estimation.

Sure, but the Cubs were wrong... not for the first time.

The Cubs kept Mark Grace over him because he had zero power, in their estimation.

As I remember it, they kept Grace because he was not a minority (unless creepiness is considered being in a minority). Andre Dawson thought the same thing.

I thought it was because Palmeiro slept with Cindy Sandberg.

I'm generally of the opinion that all these guys knew what they were doing and knew they were gaming the system (yet should go into the HOF), but the Palmeiro story has always run weird to me as well. Stories about burglars calling the police because they hurt themselves in the house they were robbing are incredibly rare, which is why we remember them. Palmeiro would have to be extremely stupid to be so adamant about not doing anything and then to be so quickly caught afterwards, especially for a PED that was not a designer/"untraceable" as with some other guys - every PED test in the world would pick up on stanozolol, and he doesn't seem extremely stupid in any of his testimony or other interviews. I think he might have gotten screwed.

Biggio-doubt is a weird affliction. Even granting that 3,000 hits is an arbitrary round number, the man scored 1,844 runs – more than Eddie Collins or Carl Yastrzemski. He was superior at the main thing he was asked to do offensively. I understand that he suffered more from the perception of hanging on to get to his milestone than most elder ballplayers.

This is what bothers me, Biggio was pretty clearly a hofer before he got 3000 hits, heck before he got his 2600th hit, the 3000th hit is just a milestone that had meaning to him, but anyone that doesn't see he was a hofer before then, is not really looking at the player correctly. If you are an offense first type of guy, he is a guy who had a 116 ops+ over 16 years of his career while playing nearly every game at a premium defensive position. Here is a guy who outside of 2000, played in over 90% of his teams games, every full season of his career.(Heck from his sophomore year until he retired, he played in 93% of his teams games...From 1990-2007...a span of 18 years, he missed 185 team games--61 of them in 2000) This was a guy who was a plus hitter, plus defender(either relative to position or just by positional adjustments when he played center) plus baserunner(400+ career stolen bases at a 77% clip) A player that the team can expect to be healthy enough to play everyday.... To think you need to look deeper into his candidacy is a joke of monumental proportions.

Is he the best name on the ballot? No, but it's a stacked ballot, but he is clearly in the group that deserves the vote. More so than Edgar/Walker or Raines.

so he took a syringe from one of the guys he had been giving a hard time and stuck it in his ass, no questions asked."

More like "he took a syringe from one of the guys he had been giving a hard time and stuck it in his ass after he found out it was B-12".

Just because you may have been wrong about what you took, it does not mean you just take random things.

Meanwhile, I realize that 3,000 hits means all but automatic induction into the Hall of Fame, but I want more time to think about Craig Biggio. As much as I admired him as a player, his 3,000 hits seem to me to be partially a product of playing 20 seasons, as he only surpassed 180 hits in a season four times.

As MWE sorta notes, Biggio has "only" 3000 hits for essentially the same reason that Raines has "only" 2600 hits -- they both added over 1000 walks. Biggio reached base over 4200 times -- that's more (in counting stats) than Raines, Gwynn, Carew (who also added 1000 BB). Now he also took 2000 more PA to do it so he's (in terms of OBP) still well behind those guys.

On the one hand, I'm glad to see folks not just automatically ticking Biggio's name because his counting stats really are a function of a ridiculously long career (without adding much those last years). On the other hand, he deserves to go in for a lot more reasons than counting stats and he shouldn't be penalized (in any major way at least) for sticking around too long.

But he'll go in soon enough if not this year.

I thought it was because Palmeiro slept with Cindy Sandberg.

That's crass. Please use the code for that: "a shot of P-12."

I thought it was a shot of Viagra?

What is the rate of false positives on these types of tests? Just curious.