What is that old line? A rising tide lifts all boats?
Perhaps the opposite is happening with Saturday’s disclosure by two Sports Illustrated writers that then-Texas Rangers slugger Alex Rodriguez tested positive for steroids use in 2003.
For ex-St. Louis Cardinals first-baseman Mark McGwire, refusal to talk about the past may have been incriminating all right, but far less so than formal test results, if the SI report is true. Now, another prominent name may be sitting next to him in the ever-expanding baseball writers’ penalty box.
This disclosure makes me sad for several reasons:
1) As I understand it, the 2003 testing was to be anonymous and confidential. While I am not defending A-Rod in any way, even suspected juicers have rights and his were violated.
2) We know 104 players were tested and failed. That means there are at least 103 other supposed guilty players in the report. Yet, only the name of the biggest, juiciest juicer is leaked. It is a sad indication of the ambulance-chasing society we have become.
3) Accusations that Players Union COO Gene Orza tipped off A-Rod that a test was coming. The baseball culture is one of extreme sticking together, but there is no way to defend behavior that allegedly includes being an accomplice.
4) Yet Orza is likely just one big name of dozens, probably hundreds that could be fingered. Like A-Rod, he has a big name to knock down.
5) This further besmirches the already-tarnished image of a game that looked the other way for too long.
Yet Rodriguez has the chance to be bold where McGwire was timid. Much ink is already being spilled about how this disclosure will taint his pursuit of the all-time home run crown as well as scuttle what seemed a lock induction into the Hall of Fame.
A-Rod needs to learn from his former teammate Jason Giambi and fess up to past mistakes and try to let it pass. McGwire has proven the stigma will not go away even if ignored, and he was already retired when he bungled his House testimony, not an active player in New York, of all places.
Giambi, unlike Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens apparently did, did not lie and as a result, paid a small price compared to the other two. A-Rod has already disappointed so many. He needs to nip this in the bud.
With an apology, the self-righteous sportwriters that have drawn a line in the sand will be pulled one step closer to taking a middle ground position regarding an issue that simply cannot be treated as black or white any longer.
I hope Big Mac is watching.
A-Rod’s rights were violated? It sure is disappointing when people don’t follow the rules, isn’t it? Seems poetic enough to me.
If you don’t want to get caught cheating, don’t cheat. A-Rod made hundreds of millions of dollars in the process. I can’t imagine how I could feel even the least bit sorry for him.
A-Rod needs to fess up and minimize the damage. MLB needs to regularly screen all of its players and publically post the results if they want this circus to go away.
The overall story of PEDs in baseball has so many complicating aspects that are little known. It is probably a good thing that more and more information leak out into the light of day, so society can make sense of a bigger picture. The more the public knows, then the more things can be put in a fairer, more informed composite perspective.
As it is now, the issue tends to focus on just a few star athletes in baseball, avoiding many other sports, while also avoiding all the many average and below average players in baseball who also used steroids, knowingly or otherwise.
It has been reported in press stories that Bonds and now A-Rod were positive for testosterone. This is odd and has to really mean they had unnaturally high levels. Testosterone is a natural substance, produced in women, and at much higher levels in men, in the testes. Every man should test positive for testosterone, so the only way this could be considered a problem for A-Rod would be for him to have very high levels. Testosterone can be medically prescribed too.
At many grocery stores, there is an aisle with claimed health foods. A lot of this stuff has no testing for efficacy, in contrast to legal pharmacuticals. Who knows what stimulants or steroids may lurk in some of these snakeoil products which claim invigoration? A player not only needs to not take steroid shots, he also needs to stay away from any products with unknown ingredients.
When were steroids banned in baseball? Big Mac and Rodriquez’s careers didn’t overlap by much, if at all. I’m not sure these two stories are really the same.
If steroids were not prohibited when Big Mac used, then why wouldn’t he have just admitted it and moved on? In fact, they were banned as early as 1991 and reinforced again in 1997, but since there was no testing and no penalties, no one apparently paid any attention. Orza’s alleged behavior in the A-Rod situation is typical of the resistance put up by the Players Union for years and MLB didn’t push it, either.
The stories aren’t the same, but the resolution could be.
RedC, I think steroids (which ones I do not know) circa 1991, but there was no testing regieme, so the prohibition was nonenforced. I would imagine the Union wanted to keep the issue under the carpet.
In 2003, there was some kind of analysis of urine samples for 1,200 players. It would be interesting to know specifically what substances were sought for analysis. About 9 percent of the players, surveyed for an unknown number of substances, tested positive. A-Rod was said to test positive for testosterone, but all men have testosterone, so this has to mean he tested abnormally high. Testosterone is a natural substance in the human body and men with a deficiency can be given more, by physicians. Barry Bonds has also been said to have tested positive for testosterone. I hope I would.
There seem many oddly aspects to this entire topic of steroids in baseball.
A legal case is being waged in California against Barry Bonds. Bonds’ alleged crime is to have lied in saying he did not knowingly take steroids. So the immense legal “crime” is perjury. And Bonds’ testimony is ambiguous. Have other baseball stars been investigated? Or football players? (At least, one track star was successfully prosecuted.)
Meanwhile the Governor of the Great State of California began as a body builder. Schwartznegger would have used steroids back in the 1970s. Without them, he might still be back in Austria.
In 2003, 104 players including A-Rod tested positive (again I do not know what specific substances they analyzed for, maybe few, and you only find what you specifically seek, provided you have an analytic way to find it). The names of the other 103 have not been leaked to Sports Illustrated. Thus, fans are now led to focus just on A-Rod.
Maybe there were lots of other PEDs taken by players that were not even sought for analysis at all, so full PED use within baseball might have been broader than just the 9 percent detected.
Bonds’ trainer has declined to testify, so has already spent a year in jail, and the government has investigated his wife and mother-in-law, trying to apply even more pain to get the trainer to rat out Bonds. Unlike Clemens’ trainer, Bonds guy has stood firm.
PEDs have to have been extensively used in football; football players build bodies. But football fans want big, powerful players.
Baseball fans must be vulnerable to fearstheir sport is being corrupted by PEDs. There have been remarkable advances in baseball medicine (like TJ surgery), so many pitchers enjoy longer careers, but these kind of changes are socially acceptable. As are painkillers. But any substances that helps athletes build muscles in conjunction with weight-lifting, these have been deemed bad.
The US went into Iraq on grounds that were revealed to have been without merit. A lot of lives were lost, while Al Queda and the Tablban were allowed to regroup in Afghanistan and Pakistan. It was in about 2005, IIRC, Congress paraded McGwire, Sosa, Canseco and Palmeiro before the cameras. Maybe the baseball stars made a nice distraction for Congress and the public from serious and hard to solve issues.
Jumbo–
Try to keep the politics off the blog. Thanks.
Congressional interest and testimony magnified the issue of steroids in baseball.
Brian, I don’t mean to be cynical but I think the reason I believe Giambi ” paid a small price compared” to others has less to do with the “apology” (to unspecified infractions) and more to do with the fact he was able to continue to play and even more importantly be productive while supposedly “clean”.
Oquie, dontcha think one reason Giambi was able to continue playing was because his vague apology quieted the lynch mobs? He may not be out of the woods yet as one would think that he is likely one of the ten BALCO names that tested positive in 2003. Yet the word is that Giambi spoke honestly to the Grand Jury so that could be why he is not up for perjury as Bonds is. There are two courts to be concerned with – the court of public opinion as well as the legal system. As of now, both A-Rod and Big Mac are dealing with the public, something Giambi effectively managed to close the book on relatively quickly, while still continuing to play in the public eye in New York. I do think A-Rod could learn from that.
Not committing perjury to the Grand Jury was smart. By admitting to using steroids (without saying the word), Giambi did stop speculation in the press. And got the press off his back, for the most part. ARod should probably follow that example. ARod won his first MVP during the year he is accused of using steroids, but he has won two more since at a time when there has been testing. So he can point to being effective while “clean”.
But I don’t see the incentive for McGwire to “come clean” and confirm what almost everyone accepts. To me McGwire’s situation is more similar to Pete Rose’s than Giambi’s. Rose was told for years “just come clean” and then you can be inducted into the HOF, when he finally did “come clean” (all be it while trying to profit from it), it did not change his status.
I wish I could edit. The first word in the second sentence above should be “By” not “My”.
(Oquie, I fixed it for you. We don’t want readers to think you are admitting steroid use!!!! – Brian)
Jumbo,
I have to take exception to your characterization of nutritional supplements. If you are purchasing supplements from reputable companies (there are 4 or 5 that I could name off hand) then there should be no issue with what is in the product. Secondly, these products are all regulated by the FDA. There is a mechanism for reporting of adverse events as well as good manufacturing processes that these manufacturers are required to adhere to.
I suspect that the excuse that “it was in a supplement I was taking” was either from when androstene was still legal (and was prevalent in body-building supplements) or is a rather disingenuous response, ie Barry Bonds claiming that he was just rubbing Flax Seed Oil on his body.
As far as efficacy is concerned, particularly with herbs, you are dealing with substances that in many cases, mankind has taken for tens of thousands of years. To argue that 100 years of medical science trumps 10,000 years of human experimentation is the height of arrogance.
What bothers me the most is the lying. A-rod was asked point blank by Katie Couric “did you use steroids” and he said no, never, etc. Just like Palmeiro did to congress. That emphatically. Deny, deny, deny, is the oldest move there is and is rarely effective. But Rodriguez did nothing that 103 others weren’t doing. Pete Rose talks about the number of players who were strung out on speed in the seventies. Athletes operate under the constant threat of being replaced. And the rewards are millions of dollars if successful. It is hard to place blame on only one player when it is the culture that is at fault. Sure, some did not use and made it anyway, but those not as talented will use any means possible. How can a player stand by and watch the McGwire and Bonds shows, see all that money, and listen to his agent and others whispering “you could do that” and not go crazy from the stress? Until it becomes popular not to cheat and everything gets taken away from those who get caught, this culture will not change. Look at Madoff on Wall Street and all the government corruption and how can this culture of greed not bleed into baseball? It is a pitiful shame.
Oquendo, coming clean decades after everyone already realized that you were guilty just makes you look silly. Coming clean a few days afterward makes you look repentant. All of the lying and sneaking around seems to disgust people at least as much as the original action. Loudly denying the obvious insults the intelligence of the general public, which unsurprisingly angers them.
Good points, Kirotahoe. If the public doesn’t raise heck over steroid abuse, where is the deterrent? MLB certainly wasn’t going to take action until the masses backed them into a corner.
Oquie, Rose’s case is very different. His admission was not exactly sincere. It also followed years of often indignant denials and direct and sometimes vicious attacks against his accusers. He also directly broke a long-standing rule against gambling that has been enforced, unlike the steroids rules of the 1990′s. That is why he was officially banned while McGwire was not. At least Mac stayed quiet, so one might think he burned fewer bridges.
I do agree with Nutlaw that even if Big Mac came clean now, he would be attacked by some as just having waited until others took the spotlight away from him. By waiting so long, he doesn’t seem to have as clean of an out as Giambi did by acting quickly. We’ll have to see how A-Rod deals with it.
Chris: There is a common lay assumption that there must be a meaningful difference between natural substances versus molecules solely derived from human inventiveness. However, this assumption is not accepted within pharmacology (the science of how molecules influence the human body).
And we can see this general point from some specific illustrative examples. Diseases are natural. Thallium, lead, mercury are among elements on the periodic table not health-enhancing. Many infamous poisons are extracts from Nature, even some bioweapons. Tobacco is natural. On and on.
Thus it is prudent not to assume that many years of human experience with a substance thereby establishes it is healthful. Of course it could be, but if substances are not subjected to rigorous testing, there is not a scientifically justified basis for knowing.
Ironically, this comes into play with a topic like PEDs, when testosterone, human growth hormone, steroids extracted from animals, etc., are regarded as threatening. Many of these molecules come from Nature, yet many folks have fears about them.
The problem in many ways is society and our culture. So many people that are not world class athletes are taking all kinds of hormone and other concoctions etc. to look and feel younger.
Not to mention all the plastic surgery enhancements.
Some of the people do it to get an edge in dating or open up job possibilities or just to feel better about themselves.
MLB players have a 162 game schedule which is pretty darn rough I imagine, plus 6 weeks of spring training and if their team is good or lucky they have the playoffs. Personally I don’t have a problem with players ingesting substances to help them make it thru the long season. I do wish it was legalized so there would be medical supervision. Abuse is a real possibility otherwise.
However I do have a problem with young kids taking steroids for sports so I ‘m not consistent
in my thinking.
Where does the line get drawn? Let’s see–laser surgery improves vision for hitters, many surgical procedures have allowed pitchers to continue their careers, maybe some day soon there will be a computer chip in a batter’s brain so he/she can recognize the pitch coming as soon as it leaves the pitchers hand. How about transplanting various parts of the body so you can throw farther, harder or run faster.
Chewing coca leaves would improve stamina.
What about cortisone shots? They help people recover from injury also and are a steroid. I’ve had two of them, one shot really helped me work thru a torn meniscus in a knee, the other shot didn’t help my foot at all (i think the doctor put it in the wrong place).
What’s my point? good question–I don’t get excited about PED use in world class athletes, I figure pretty much all of them take something to help out. So no surprise that A-Rod tested positive. I do agree that he and others should tell the truth about what they have ingested.
If I can accurately type the web link, here is an essay by Murray Chass (who I suspect is a long-time solid sports writer). Its from November 2005. It hints at some of the political links to this topic. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/sports/baseball/15chass.html
One person involved in the escalation of the “issue” of steroids within baseball is Kentucky Senator Jim Bunning. (Cards fans may remember Bunning fondly, owing to his being a member of the folding Phillies of 1964. )
Bunning must be a character, having voted against two of President G. W. Bush’s nominees, Sec. of Defense and Fed Reserve chairmen Ben Bernacke. Gates has made much progress in restoring order in Iraq, and Bernacke is well-qualified (though he has had the bad luck to inherit a finanacial emergency).
Chass notes Bunning helped cast steroid use as a big health risk for the nation, but showed less interest as regards the health harms caused by tobacco. Chass compared the steroid in baseball issue as a modern day manifestation of McCarthyism, a panic that looks for a few scapegoats.
For perspective, back in the 1920s, alcohol was prohibited in the US, hard though that is now to imagine. Alcohol is a toxic substance. In due course, the ban on alcohol in any amount was lifted, in favor of consumer choice, moderation, warning labels, and responsible use. This illustrates how fears about a chemical can arise, be vastly overhyped, and in due course settle out and be regulated in an effective way.
Each of the two major political parties will draw on fears of certain substances among voters. It is not just one party, by any means.
On the Democratic side, there will be politicians who will raise hue and cry over, for instance, a molecule that is an ingredient in a plastic. This is said to be an “industrial” chemical and “toxic”. Activists will claim people are being poisoned, based on very little. Democrats who must rely on such folks within their coalition of supporters will hoot and hollar at the Food and Drug Administration or Consumer Product Safety Commission and evil industries, based on very incomplete understanding of relevant science.
Hello all. I’m a long-time listener, first-time caller…
A few points about the ARod/steroid issue…
1) In the 2003 survey test, they were only looking for a specific list of steroids, largely because that’s the way testing worked then. So the only way to come up positive was to be using what they were looking for.
2) while elevated levels of testosterone are the red flag, what ARod tested positive for was methenolone. Bonds tested positive for both methenolone and nandrolone. When Palmeiro was busted, he tested positive for stanozolol. The labels that are most used in the news reports (Primobolan, Deca-Durobolin, Winstrol) are just brand names.
3) The steroids that the doctors prescribe to you are mostly cortico-steroids. The stuff the players were using are anabolic steroids. The two types are significantly different in both use and potency.
4) While the substances in question do occur in nature, the amount these guys are using compared to the amount that occurs naturally is roughly the same as comparing a battleship to a bass boat. For example, the amount of nandrolone that is naturally present in an average human male body (5 liters of fluid) is about .000002 milliliters. It is intellectually dishonest to suggest that only a few molecules of testosterone seperate someone who is clean from someone who is using.
On a more subjective note, hopefully the greatest impact of the last decade of steroid-mania will be a re-examination and greater appreciation for the careers of players like Fred McGriff, Tim Raines, Andre Dawson, Dwight Evans, etc.
Welcome, oh Bodhisattva of Baseball!
I especially like your last point, but how can one ever adjust the steroid era stats to level out the analysis? And is it fair to level all players, whether accused users or not, just because they had the misfortune of playing when cheating by others was rampant?
I like the thought, but I don’t know what to do with it…
longghandi:
1. I tend to agree: “the only way to come up positive would be to be using what they are testing for.”
Yet there is an important uncertainty: what did they NOT test for or even technologically know how to analyze?
There are likely many other PEDs, known and little known, available to those who wish to improve their bodies via the combination of chemicals and exercise. 9 percent of ML players in 2003 tested positive for certain PEDs. Do we know if the other 91 percent of players were using other PEDs? No, because it seems likely MLB and the MLPU did not or could not analyze for every possible PED. They were just doing an initial shake-down cruise of how to institute a testing program.
3. All molecules are toxic in sufficient dose, though health outcomes and potencies vary. All substances vary in toxicity along a spectrum from effectively non-toxic to highly poisonous. What matters is whether a given dose is efficacious for a purpose. If one kind of steroid is more potent, an appropriately safe dose will be smaller than it will be for another less potent kind of steroid.
4. Some news stories have been amusing. A-Rod and Bonds are said to have tested positive for testosterone. This is all that is reported, nothing is reported about a relatively massive level, so this has to be guessed by a thoughtful reader. Many men should be cheered to test positive for testosterone.
IIRC, knowledge of molecules that can speed muscle development in conjunction with exercise dates back to the WWII era. Maybe it was an area for military research. Accordingly, it seems possible that baseball players of the 1970s and 1980s, good and bad alike, were harnessing PEDs as known and available in their day. Tony Rasmus has acknowledged using steroids, but did not rise above the low A level, when-ever that was, the mid to late 1980s probably.
The ubiquitous availabililty of PEDs for a long time is a fundamental point. They would have been used by both bad players and by good ones, during an long era of ZERO testing of baseball players. If PEDs helped Bonds, they also helped Clemens and other pitchers. It will always be unanswerable whether PEDs have influenced any baseball records.
Should we really give so much credence to anonymous sources?
Well, I’m not sure what can be done with it from a statistical standpoint, but since when do the HoF voters look at stats? Isn’t their main criteria that they know a HoFer when they see one?
JumboShrimp:
The Sports Illustrated article specified ARod tested positive for Primobolan. The unsealed testing results for Bonds specified that he tested positive nandrolone and methenolone.
As for your final point, it is answerable whether PEDs have influenced baseball records; of course they have. It is true that the extent to which they helped each individual will vary depending on what they were using and if they were using it properly and their own physiology, but being able to swing a bat faster or throw a ball harder are clear and obvious benefits. There have been at least a dozen medical studies proving improved physical performance from their use.
In the case of Bonds, he was able to hit the ball 40 feet farther than he ever had before. This is measurable and provable and it is not the only physical aspect of his evolution that was measurable. The problem isn’t that the effects on baseball performance aren’t measurable, but that it would take so much time to gather the data for every player and that the reward for doing so would probably not be very financially rewarding.
It strikes me Pete Rose presents a certain kind of problem, hopefully one that is uncommon. He called into question which side he was on: his team’s or the team he was betting on. This is a turn off for HoF voters.
The problem of PED use for HoF voters seems very difficult, because there may be so much that is unknown beyond a handful of stars who have drawn media focus, so far. For these few, what information is known has been unevenly collected, with a few teams zeroed in on by investigators and most others teams not getting the same attention.
Whatever McGwire took, it may have been par for the course for his era of competition. If there had been a testing program in existance during the 1970s-90s, then it seems likely McGwire and others would have not taken substances that were prohibited and tested, so it would have been a non-issue. Unfortunately, there were no enforced “rules of the game” for PEDs after 1991, instead it was just lip service, dont take this stuff to make your body stronger, however we will not be checking up on you, wink-wink.
The only way for baseball to operate in future is to have a testing program. If players know its parameters, they have a fair chance to comply. A testing program protects players who would like to comply with rules that are taken seriously. And if a new molecule becomes a fevered topic someday, it too can be added to the testing program and all players will be on guard to avoid it, or pay the consequences with a suspension and bad publicity. Henceforth, both the players union and MLB have a common interest in having a testing program. A testing program alone can protect players and teams against rumors and sensationalism.
long-ghandi: Yes, it would be surprising if players who combine muscle-healing PEDs with weight-lifting would not gain some strength.
Top baseball players are competitive, strivers to improve, within the enforced rules of the game.
What is the net effect when a PED enhanced batter competes against a PED enhanced pitcher? This question is why I am not confident there has been any net PED effect on records.
Gary Bennett supposedly took some PEDs; he has never been much with the stick. Minor leaguers like Troy Cate or a generation Tony Rasmus took steroids and never reached the majors. Proper steroid use might enhance everyone an extra 5 or 10 percent, I will imagine, but PEDs should not turn a mediocre player into a star. Maybe steroid shots were a fountain of youth shots to help great players defy time? So where is a line drawn between a great player versus sophisticated body building methods?
Roger Clemens, though I do not like the personality, was a great pitcher, in his own right. Bonds was great at Arizona State U and moved quickly to the majors; an exceptional player. Mark McGwire, ditto at USC and hit 49 homers as a rookie. It becomes very difficult to separate a suspected PED factor from great players.
I would be uncomfortable to look back at players from the 1970s and 1980s and assume none took PEDs, when PED were already much used in body building and Olympic competitions.
Before 1968, baseball had a high mound and deader baseballs, helping pitchers. On the other hand, Maris benefited from being a pull hitter in old Yankee Stadium, helping him to 61 homers. Pitchers have lately had much better medical care and longer careers, factors in their favor. Through the dimension of time, there have been many changing factors that influence records.
someone said something that made me think ( I know scary thought me thinking )Cant remember who said but they said that if Arod were to just come out and come clean and apologize like andy pettite did that he would be somehow “forgiven”. Now dont get me wrong pettite is a great player in his own right but Arod was the face of Mlb for awhile a “superstar” not just an allstar player.Now my question is if Arod knowing peoples feelings about him (as far as not be very well liked in many circles of the game)where to come out ala andy pettite and say yeah i tryed it and im sorry would it kinda just go away like it did with pettite?
I say no way this just goes away hes gonna be answering questions about this for the rest of his life anytime he is seen or out in public the questions will be asked and deservedly so.Also did anyone else hear the clip of canseco from the boston radio station from 2007? While Jose maybe a major a#$hole he has yet to be proven wrong. Ok i think that is the end of my first novel I think i’ll call it “When tired people try to think” lol
Bubby
——————————————————————————–
A mediocre player who became a star because of steroids? Ken Caminiti comes to mind. Largely a decent player before beginning his use in June of 1996. His example becomes more complicated because a) he used improperly by not cycling which caused his body to stop producing testosterone and break down badly, and b) he developed other substance abuse issues. But his performance from June on that year is legendary.
The biggest problem in identifying the quantity and quality of the performance boost is that players are usually reluctant to divulge when they began and what they were using. But once those two data points are available, it becomes pretty apparent if they had any effect or not and by how much.
And I agree with you that external factors do influence how and when records are broken… which makes it all the more surprising that you state that steroids didn’t have any impact in that regard.
Caminitti was a switch-hitter, who played quite a few years in the majors, before taking it up a notch in San Diego when 32 to 35 years old, before a fall-off. Glancing at his career stats, they do not jump out at me as very unusual. Terry Pendleton was a switch-hitting 3Bman who played pretty well for years, before going to the Braves and winning an MVP. Did Pendleton take it to another level with PEDs, available in his time? I would like to give Terry the benefit of the doubt and not assume so. Both Camintti and Pendleton seem pretty good players, able to lift their games, after a number of years of ML experience. Its hard for me to think of either as mediocre (in keeping with your calling Caminiti “decent.”) I was trying to suggest that a combination of muscle-healers plus weight-lifting does not turn a mediocre hitter, like a Cesar Izturis or Abe Nunez type, into a strong hitter. A strengthening program is only going to add a bit.
I earlier agreed that judicious use of steroids in company with weight lifting/exercise regimens should yield more strength. This should have happenned not only in body building but across many sports, including baseball, where athletes have aspired to develop their bodies to achieve more. I would expect this has gone on pervasively.
I endorsed the combination of PEDs and weight lifting/exercise as akin to a fountain of youth for veteran stars. PEDs must help their sore muscles heal faster and enable them to play at a high level for more years. Therefore, the healing effects of HGH and steroids, often natural body substances, should boost the career stats of players by potentially adding years to their careers.
What I was trying to say, not successully, is a guy like Bonds did not have a unique advantage, more unique talent. He would likely have been one among many during the era of his playing days who developed their muscular strength via the state of the art knowledge of strength coaches and trainers. He competed against pitchers who had done the same and played with position players who had done the same. Many were helped to be more effective athletes. Because Sosa, Bonds, and McGwire for three were great talents, additional strength and rejuevenation helped them to do great things, yet their underlying base of talent was imperative too.
To help the game manage its image, including the reputations of players, prohibited substances need to be tested for. Baseball has suffered on account of innuendo and rumors, backed by scanty facts.
If PEDs were extending playing careers, then it may have made selfish sense for the Union to resist a testing program during the 1990s, because players make the most money near the end of their careers. However, players and the Union should by now have come to realize that they can be targets for sensational attack, without a testing program to establish a reputational shield.
Pendleton is not a good comp for Caminiti because his jump in production is directly attributable to a change in ballpark, from one that depressed hitter’s numbers to one that was one of if not the most beneficial to hitters. Caminiti’s 25% jump in production came while playing at the same ballpark.
I guess I was not clear on your definition of mediocre player. Mine is one that is largely replacement level, perhaps a little better than average. It seems the example you are looking for is a player who was a bench warmer/scrub who decided to take steroids and suddenly became a Hall of Famer. You won’t find that. The drugs are powerful but they aren’t miracle pills. They can, however, put Brady Anderson in the record books and make Jason Giambi an MVP.
That said, it’s a bit disingenuous to describe anabolic steroids as “muscle-healers”, suggesting that they are simply restorative, taken in order to maintain the status quo. That’s an aspect of their effect, but they are primarily muscle and bone builders. And there is nothing natural about the quantities of these substances found in the users. As the evidence shows, they are not just a fountain of youth; they can make players far better than they ever were.
As for Bonds, I’m not sure I understand your statement that he was not a unique talent. I also don’t understand your remark about him developing under strength coaches and trainers. It is widely known that as early as 1992, he was a gym rat. That’s why his jump in production in 1999-2000 was so suspicious because he wasn’t doing anything dramatically different in the gym, yet he was getting substantially stronger despite his age.
And the argument that it’s all ok because both pitchers and hitters were doing it doesn’t hold water unless you are asserting that 100% were doing it. Otherwise, it’s like allowing some players to use aluminum bats or to pitch from 10 feet closer.
Lastly, I’m not convinced that baseball has suffered because of innuendo and scanty facts. Positive tests aren’t exactly innuendo, and the 104 positives from the survey testing and the 201 positives for which players have been punished since testing began isn’t exactly scanty.
A very interesting discussion on both sides. FWIW, lg’s points seem more aligned with my personal views. Yet, the issue of PEDs is an especially polarizing one and since opinions have been set and fortified over a number of years, one side isn’t likely to convince the other at this point (even if there were only two sides to what is clearly a multi-faceted issue).
A-Rod quickly fesses up. Carefully-crafted 1-1 with respected Peter Gammons. Said all the right things and didn’t say any of the wrong things. I predict this is going to blow over, just as it did with all the Mitchell Report users.
Predictably, Orza denied any wrongdoing and there is probably no proof against him other than hearsay.
link to ESPN
I bet Big Mac wishes he could have a do-over…
I imagine my views of PEDs are similar to those of some folks within the Cards.
McGwire served the team wonderfully! He gave a huge morale lift, with terrific seasons making mediocre teams fun, bringing people to the ballpark.
Like many athletes in modern times, McGwire worked out hard to increase strength and we can infer took hormone supplements to help, in part because there was no testing program to discourage this.
The Cards have obtained players AFTER linked with PEDs: Glaus, Bennett, Franklin, Troy Cate. It must not be regarded as a flaw, suggesting team executives knew well how pervasive PED use has been: its not just A-Rod, Clemens, Sosa, Bonds, Pettite, McGwire, Canseco, Palmeiro, and lots of other guys whose names have been leaked or not leaked, but also many more players who would have been unidentified by the very limited testing program in 2003. Chemists only detect what they choose to analyze.
Jose Canseco made money via a book saying baseball players were juiced. If there had been a proper testing program, Canseco would not have had this chance. Of course, Canseco knew of team-mate McGwire, whose celebrity made him a great target. Big Mac’s brother, Cain, has realized the same thing.
Use of hormone supplements must have been pervasive across many sports. For many decades. Because athletes are self-interested and competitive and will do things to improve.
Because baseball has had high visibility records, there may be sensitivity among fans to the idea someone has breached a home-run record via an unfair advantage. Yet any idea baseball players uniquely have encouraged steroid over-use by kids, if this is a genuine problem, gives a pass for instance to Arnie Schwartznegger and football players.
TLR respects McGwire, and would like Mark to coach during spring training. Schumacker and Holliday work out with McGwire, because he knows a great deal about hitting. McGwire walked away from millions of dollars in income, by not playing out a contract. This suggests rare integrity.
McGwire seemed to value privacy when an active player. Now that he is retired, he may see no reason to offer public apologies for strength-building methods used by many athletes. He should and of course will make his own choices about his life and reputation.
Fine by me. I support McGwire.
In 2005, there was a fad about a health threat posed by hormone supplements. An true expert suggests there is little scientific basis to buttress such fears. http://stlcardinals.scout.com/2/601884.html
Hormone helpers have been available for decades. It would seem wrong to assume players in the 1970s and 1980s did not help themselves hormonally.
Players certainly liked to partake of chemicals in those bygone days. Jim Bouton’s Ball Four was full of tales of greenies during the 1960s. Keith Hernandez got a trip out of town for drugs. Long-ghandi recommends Raines for the Hall of Fame. From Wikipedia:
“Raines performance dipped in 1982,[12] as he hit .277 with a .353 on base percentage.[13] At the end of the season, Raines entered treatment for substance abuse, having spent an estimated $40,000 that year on cocaine.[12] To avoid leaving the drug in his locker, Raines carried it in his hip pocket, and slid headfirst when running the bases.[14] He used cocaine before games, in his car, after games, and on some occasions, between innings in the clubhouse.[15] “
As a role model, did Raines send an unhelpful message to impressionable youth?
Or it could be reasoned Raines only hurt himself via cocaine addiction, so it should not influence views of his career.
Hard to say and a matter of personal choice. What is more clear is it is best not to make rosy colored assumptions about chemical free yesteryears.
Well, at least A-Rod is doing something intelligent.
A skeptical article by Newsday’s Anthony Rieber: “Shooting holes in A-Rod’s apology”
http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/yankees/ny-sprieber0210,0,4868365.column
The A-Rod “apology” seemed carefully orchestrated to me. Admit the minimum, have reasons.
Andy Pettite did that: he just used some helpers once or twice, because he was injured. Appeals to the sympathy voters.
Its all a P.R. spin city soap opera.
Ex big leaguer Doug Glanville has a fine column, Understanding A-Rod.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/opinion/09glanville.html
Glanville tends to have acute insights into the minds of ballplayers. I trust him to be honest.
Glanville is bothered by something that bothers me: 4 sources ratted on A-Rod. That seems like a lot of leaks.
To me, its almost like the union knew A-Rod’s name would going to come out in the Bonds trial, so the Union may have decided to steal thunder from the government’s prosecution of Bonds. A-Rod was suspiciously all prepped and ready to do his best Jimmy Swaggart beg for foregiveness.
This Bonds trial is shaping up to be like that one for Dick Cheney’s aide, Libby, the guy who was Mark Rich’s attorney. Libby got convicted of perjury, though everything was so convoluted, it beats me how. Maybe the jury just wanted to go home. And then I think the President pardoned Scooter, which was allright by me.
I agree it was orchestrated. They did it in the setting and manner in which they could maintain control. I wouldn’t have been surprised to see your buddy Boras playing Geppetto even as A-Rod’s nose grew longer. I bet there were full-blown rehearsals. I do think he made a mistake attacking the reporter looking for sympathy though. Overall, it seemed to accomplish its objective – if and only if A-Rod stops talking about it.
A-Rod claiming a female reporter was a threat to his family seemed nutso.
Clarification: The Boras blog guy seems Boras-besotted, but this blogger has some good insights too. I am unemotional about Boras. He is a tough sharpie. But there are plenty of other sharks in the sea. I do not buy into Boras’ self-promoted reputation as tougher or smarter than anyone else. But I do buy that Scott is a legacy, Cards family member, but there are good reasons no one would ever admit this openly.
He and his family are going to court over Ankiel in about 36 hours.
The Union has got to be really mad about the government grabbing those urine samples and squeezing the names out of the analysis company.
And mad about prosecutions of Bonds, Tejada (mentioned today), and upcoming Clemens.
I dont see how it would help the Bonds prosecution to leak A-Rod’s name. So the first leaks are probably from the Union. The Union knows who the 104 are.
The Union and Boras cooked up the leaks!!
Lets see…
Boras and the Union are known to be as thick as thieves.
The Union resisted drug testing for a long time.
Dubya was a baseball exec and green-lighted a plague of investigations that has led to a testing program.
With a pro-labor administration that thinks there are more genuine priorities for our society, the Union is fighting back.