PDA

View Full Version : All is forgiven. McGwire admitted using steroids


gonzomax
01-11-2010, 03:25 PM
Mark McGwire shocked the baseball world by admitting using steroids and HGH for a decade. He says he regrets he played during the steroids era. So now we can all forgive him. Next year it is the H.O.F..

Oakminster
01-11-2010, 03:26 PM
Got a link?

Jack Batty
01-11-2010, 03:29 PM
First Palin ends up on Fox 'News' and now this. My entire world-view is being shaken to its core!

If someone tells me the Pope is Catholic I'm just going to shit!

jk1245
01-11-2010, 03:32 PM
Linky (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4816607)

Used roids and HGH "on occasion" for most of the 90's. This should end any HOF aspirations, if the writers don't have their heads up their @sses.

ReticulatingSplines
01-11-2010, 03:35 PM
I guess after four years of trying the "do nothing and hope my Hall votes increase" strategy, he's finally embraced the Andy Pettitte Approach.

garygnu
01-11-2010, 03:42 PM
His timing is good: right after failing to get into the Hall, even with ten more votes. It provides a whole year for people to get used to it.

Marley23
01-11-2010, 03:42 PM
And all across the nation arose a great cry of "No shit!"

This should end any HOF aspirations, if the writers don't have their heads up their @sses.
In the long run it's more likely to help him than hurt him. For four years he's gotten about 23 percent of the vote and everybody knew he did steroids, so he was not going to get in by himself. If he shows people he's sorry and takes some steps to rehabilitate his image, he could get more support. He may not get into the hall, but he wasn't going to get in anyway.

Munch
01-11-2010, 03:42 PM
Linky (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4816607)

Used roids and HGH "on occasion" for most of the 90's. This should end any HOF aspirations, if the writers don't have their heads up their @sses.

I disagree that it'll end his chances - it should only improve them. People can forgive, but they can't do that if you remain silent. There was talk by LaRussa of letting him pinch hit at some point this season, putting his HOF candidacy on hold for 5 years so this whole era can be put into a bit more historical context. Frankly, I don't see that as a bad idea at all.

Hamlet
01-11-2010, 03:50 PM
First Palin ends up on Fox 'News' and now this. My entire world-view is being shaken to its core!

If someone tells me the Pope is Catholic I'm just going to shit!Where, though? Because I've heard that .... gasp ... Bears shit in the woods!!!!

Hamlet
01-11-2010, 03:52 PM
I disagree that it'll end his chances - it should only improve them. People can forgive, but they can't do that if you remain silent. There was talk by LaRussa of letting him pinch hit at some point this season, putting his HOF candidacy on hold for 5 years so this whole era can be put into a bit more historical context. Frankly, I don't see that as a bad idea at all.Why? Either he cheated or he didn't. And he did. Voting on it 5 years from now shouldn't make a difference at all.

jk1245
01-11-2010, 03:52 PM
I disagree that it'll end his chances - it should only improve them. People can forgive, but they can't do that if you remain silent. There was talk by LaRussa of letting him pinch hit at some point this season, putting his HOF candidacy on hold for 5 years so this whole era can be put into a bit more historical context. Frankly, I don't see that as a bad idea at all.


What I mean is it should be obvious that he in no way belongs in the Hall. The only reason to put him there would his 563 career HR and his '98 season, both of which now are known to be inflated. By comparison, Bonds should still go in since even if you discount his numbers from 98 on ('98 is when he's alleged to have started the juice), he's still a HOF'er. If you discount McGwire's numbers post 93, he's Cecil Fielder. maybe even worse, since his career may well have been over in the mid 90's.

Marley23
01-11-2010, 03:54 PM
Why? Either he cheated or he didn't. And he did. Voting on it 5 years from now shouldn't make a difference at all.
Maybe it shouldn't, but that doesn't mean it won't. And he wouldn't be on the ballot as the unrepentant cheater who wouldn't admit anything. To tell you the truth I don't know why "I'm not here to talk about the past" hurt him so much. He wouldn't admit the obvious truth, but at least he took the session seriously enough that he wouldn't lie about what he did, unlike Palmeiro and Sosa.

Munch
01-11-2010, 03:56 PM
Why? Either he cheated or he didn't. And he did. Voting on it 5 years from now shouldn't make a difference at all.

Because it's becoming more and more apparent that nearly everyone cheated. The more we learn how pervasive the abuse was, the less egregious the violation was. Because at what point do you discount his accomplishments? What if every single one of his homeruns were against pitchers who were also juicing? What if it's revealed that Selig knew about the situation and didn't do anything? How can it really be against the rules if the commissioner said it was okay?

Airman Doors, USAF
01-11-2010, 04:04 PM
I never cared to begin with. They did it to themselves, and they and they alone have to live with the physical aftermath of their decisions. Since he did nothing unusual for that era and broke no rules in effect at the time, I think he should have been put in on the first ballot. I also think that this is manufactured outrage and has been from the get-go, as evidenced by attendance numbers and their increase since 1994. People had the opportunity to vote with their feet and chose to go to the ballpark.

Really Not All That Bright
01-11-2010, 04:06 PM
There was talk by LaRussa of letting him pinch hit at some point this season, putting his HOF candidacy on hold for 5 years so this whole era can be put into a bit more historical context. Frankly, I don't see that as a bad idea at all.
That's a ridiculous idea. He's been retired for 5 years. Unless he can still belt the ball - which I doubt - he's got no business stepping onto a baseball diamond, except wearing his coaching hat.

Not that I give two shits about the purity of baseball - just that that would be too much.

D_Odds
01-11-2010, 04:08 PM
I don't think the playing field was so uneven that allowing admitted steroid users in invalidates the Hall of Fame. If you remember from the last round, there were a bunch of small guys on the user list. Size and home runs alone are not an indicator of usage. It was pervasive, and while I have no proof, I'm fairly certain baseball management, maybe even up to the commissioner, turned a blind eye to the situation as long as it was putting asses every 18".

What gets me the most is the constant need for sports hacks to finally get a guy to say, "Yes, I did them." Does it matter? So many of that era will be tainted regardless of what they say. Let's suppose that Sammy Sosa and David Ortiz really didn't juice. Will anyone believe them? Players are now damned if they did and damned if they didn't. It's a no-win situation for them. Even now, there are so many designer PEDs that can slip through testing that the smart athlete (an oxymoron most of the time) can continue to use and not get picked up on the tests, and last I heard HGH still isn't testable. The best a player can hope for is that he is never linked with a PED investigation or usage.

Munch
01-11-2010, 04:13 PM
I don't think the playing field was so uneven that allowing admitted steroid users in invalidates the Hall of Fame. If you remember from the last round, there were a bunch of small guys on the user list. Size and home runs alone are not an indicator of usage.

Yup - lots and lots of middle relievers, who completely rely on their ability to heal/recover quickly from muscle strain. There are a lot of medical experts advocating for the allowed limited use of steroids to recover from injury in baseball (and other professional sports).

TruCelt
01-11-2010, 04:24 PM
I don't really understand what the story is here. didn't he admit to using Andro years ago? Is it that he's admitted to using other forms of steroid?

<3 <3 He'll always be my favorite player regardless. <3 <3

D_Odds
01-11-2010, 04:30 PM
McGwire admitted to using an over-the-counter supplement that, if I recall the story correctly, was banned in football but not baseball.

Seems I was right, here's the wiki:In 1998, after an article by Associated Press writer Steve Wilstein, McGwire admitted to taking androstenedione, an over-the-counter muscle enhancement product that had already been banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency, the NFL and the IOC. At the time, however, use of the substance was not prohibited by Major League Baseball and it would not be classified an anabolic steroid in the United States Congress until 2004.

Oakminster
01-11-2010, 04:37 PM
I vote we strike McGwire, Sosa, and Bonds from the record books. The last guys we're sure were clean are Roger Marris and Hank Aaron, so let the records revert to 61 for a season, and 755 for a career.

Awgrimm
01-11-2010, 04:45 PM
I vote we strike McGwire, Sosa, and Bonds from the record books. The last guys we're sure were clean are Roger Marris and Hank Aaron, so let the records revert to 61 for a season, and 755 for a career.

What do you consider "clean"? Players had been using amphetamines for decades before steroids became an issue.

D_Odds
01-11-2010, 04:46 PM
Oakminster, how about for players who have admitted use over a short period (1 or 2 seasons)? Do we just strike those seasons from the record, or is a player forever tainted?

The steroid 'scandal' is more important for the papers it sells and the advertisers it gets on sports radio than it is to the "integrity" of the game.

ElvisL1ves
01-11-2010, 04:48 PM
Ah, the idealism of youth ... Amphetamines were rampant in baseball then, too, and up to fairly recent years as well. That was just as open a secret as steroids were, pre-Canseco-book. Should Aaron's record come down if he admitted having popped greenies before every game, "like everyone else"? At least we know alcohol didn't help Ruth play baseball.

I'd really like to know how true it is that "everybody did steroids". If that's pretty much true, then there pretty much has to be a blanket amnesty for it, just like there's a tacit one for amphetamines. The best guys juiced, or amped, would still be the best guys clean, you have to assume. And it wouldn't have been poor sportsmanship to follow the same "rules" as most everyone else.

Munch
01-11-2010, 04:48 PM
What do you consider "clean"? Players had been using amphetamines for decades before steroids became an issue.

This. If HGH had been available, they'd have taken it.

Oakminster
01-11-2010, 04:49 PM
Oakminster, how about for players who have admitted use over a short period (1 or 2 seasons)? Do we just strike those seasons from the record, or is a player forever tainted?

The steroid 'scandal' is more important for the papers it sells and the advertisers it gets on sports radio than it is to the "integrity" of the game.

At the very least, any stats for years where there was steroid use should be thrown out. For McGwire, that includes 1998, so no record for him. I've never considered either of Bonds' records legitimate.

FoieGrasIsEvil
01-11-2010, 04:56 PM
I never cared to begin with. They did it to themselves, and they and they alone have to live with the physical aftermath of their decisions. Since he did nothing unusual for that era and broke no rules in effect at the time, I think he should have been put in on the first ballot. I also think that this is manufactured outrage and has been from the get-go, as evidenced by attendance numbers and their increase since 1994. People had the opportunity to vote with their feet and chose to go to the ballpark.

Do you feel the same way about the 1970's Steelers abusing steroids?

Hawkeyeop
01-11-2010, 06:16 PM
At the very least, any stats for years where there was steroid use should be thrown out. For McGwire, that includes 1998, so no record for him. I've never considered either of Bonds' records legitimate.

Can we throw out all stats from when baseball was segregated too? How bout the greenie users? Spitballers? What about the crazy numbers that happened the first years in Colorado. The numbers during WW2 in which the majority of players would not normally be mlb caliber? What if the pitchers facing Mcgwire were juiced. Throw out those too or just say they cancel out?

Throwing out numbers is beyond silly. There isn't a such a pure sterile stat, not Ruth's 714 and not Maris's 61. The numbers always are affects by the situation around them, and it is up to analysts/fans to determine what was the most impressive showing. Mcgwire hit 70 home-runs in a season. You may not like, but he did just the same, and no revisionist history changes that. Throw in the fact that steroids were against the rules much the same way that blocking the plate is against the rules (ie never enforced and often encouraged), we have no idea how much steroids helped (the evidence seems to suggest minimally overall), nor who took what when, we can't begin to imagine what a steroid free era would have looked like.

I'm glad Mcgwire came clean and hope this is the beginning of the process that will some day see him enshrined. He was a fantastic hitter doing the two most important things, getting on base and hitting for power as well as almost anyone in the history of the game. I'm interested in knowing more of the specifics of what he used when, not so I can determine how to punish him, but rather to get a better understanding of the affect of steroids on performance. I also find it interesting he took it to get over injuries. I suspect the majority of users used for that reason rather than a desire to become macho power hitting machines.

FoieGrasIsEvil
01-11-2010, 06:43 PM
Linky (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4816607)

Used roids and HGH "on occasion" for most of the 90's. This should end any HOF aspirations, if the writers don't have their heads up their @sses.

This whole "on occasion" thing always bugs me. Its like a teenager being caught smoking pot red-handed and then telling their parents the half-truth that they were "just trying it for the first time" or something, when in reality they smoke it every day.

I don't believe that for a second. Him, Bonds and Sosa ballooned to ridiculous sizes over a pretty short period of time. They became caricatures of themselves. I hope none of them gets in the Hall.

pseudotriton ruber ruber
01-11-2010, 06:51 PM
Why are we still talking about the past?

Munch
01-11-2010, 06:59 PM
Why are we still talking about the past?
To his credit, McQwire did say in his presser today "I'm ready to talk about the past". It acknowledges the ridiculousness of that stance versus Congress. (Also to his credit - at least he attempted to not lie to Congress, and wanted to move forward to make the game better. Unlike Sosa and Palmeiro...)

DSYoungEsq
01-11-2010, 07:47 PM
I also find it interesting he took it to get over injuries. I suspect the majority of users used for that reason rather than a desire to become macho power hitting machines.

While I agree with much of your post, this appears to be quite naive. While that may have been the start of why he used them, even he admits (if you read what he said carefully) to using them to "avoid getting injured again." That's just rationalization. "Man, I feel good on these things! I guess I'll keep using them! And maybe I'll even avoid further injury if I do!" :rolleyes:

He was using them because large numbers of players were doing so, ignoring the medical advice in their effort to try and (as he terms it) justify their large contracts and become better players. This doesn't make it right. But if he doesn't get into the Hall, then you might as well eliminate almost anyone who played during the 90s from the Hall. :smack:

Diogenes the Cynic
01-11-2010, 07:55 PM
From the clip I heard with Bob Costas, it sounds like McGuire is going with the "any one a you woulda done the same" defense.

gonzomax
01-11-2010, 08:46 PM
Users are not just the stars. If you were on the edge of getting into the bigs, would you take them to get over the hump.? Lots of regular players were using too. But there is no starting point. Who was the first user in the big leagues? Are they gone now? Until you can definitively answer those questions, it is a mess. pitchers used too. That sort of evens things out.

Jackmannii
01-11-2010, 09:24 PM
The "everybody did it but only some got caught so we can't punish anybody" argument doesn't resonate with me.

McGwire shouldn't be hurting for dough. He can coach and sign autographs at shows for people who think he's hot stuff. He and the others who have inflated power stats because they bloated up on steroids do not have a constitutionally guaranteed right to go into the Hall of Fame. Cheers to all the writers who feel the same way.

Or they can build a druggie wing onto the Hall, and include displays showing the abused substances and before and after photos of Bonds and the others.

Might be fun.

Munch
01-11-2010, 09:37 PM
The "everybody did it but only some got caught so we can't punish anybody" argument doesn't resonate with me.
Odd, you're the first to mention it. McGwire didn't get "caught". You might have noticed from the title of this thread that he came out and admitted it - he wasn't brought up on charges from a grand jury or suspended from the game from failing a piss test. You might have also noticed a number of posts in this thread detailing the widespread use of PEDs during both McGwire's career, as well as those of generations of baseball players. If you're so opposed, where do you draw the line?

FoieGrasIsEvil
01-11-2010, 10:53 PM
Why are we still talking about the past?

Because in terms of electing someone to the baseball HOF, its relevant, although it could be argued that the voting process is as efficient as the BCS is for collegiate football bowl games. Scratch that....it is LESS efficient and makes LESS sense than the BCS process.


"But I've written for the Toronto Blue Jays for 40 years, of course I deserve a vote, even if I've never been to a game in 25 years nor really watched the player I'm voting on!!!"

kenobi 65
01-11-2010, 11:30 PM
"But I've written for the Toronto Blue Jays for 40 years, of course I deserve a vote, even if I've never been to a game in 25 years nor really watched the player I'm voting on!!!"

I'd yank that guy's voting priviledge, if for no other reason than he can't even remember the fact that the Blue Jays are only 33 years old. ;)

gonzomax
01-12-2010, 12:24 AM
Canseco told the truth. The liars were the people who left him out to dry by denying everything he said.
McGwire only came clean because he was trying to get a job in baseball. He had to get the commotion over before spring training. A batting coach does not get all the press. He works more in the background.
The H.O.F. is a knotty problem. You almost have to start with the premise that everyone used. It was the steroids era. HGH and other chemicals were also used.

Hawkeyeop
01-12-2010, 12:39 AM
Canseco told the truth. The liars were the people who left him out to dry by denying everything he said.
used.

Canseco lied constantly. In his book many items could easily be proved wrong just from looking at game logs. The fact that he was right on some things (and Mcgwire's admission doesn't match what Canseco's account) does not make Canseco into a righteous hero.

FoieGrasIsEvil
01-12-2010, 12:57 AM
I'd yank that guy's voting priviledge, if for no other reason than he can't even remember the fact that the Blue Jays are only 33 years old. ;)

Tee-hee.
:D

Marley23
01-12-2010, 07:04 AM
McGwire only came clean because he was trying to get a job in baseball.
He already has the job: he's the Cardinals' batting coach. But yes, he needed to address this or people would have asked him all season.

China Guy
01-12-2010, 07:41 AM
This is a slippery slope. What about Catfish Hunter throwing that perfect no hitter will ripped to the gills on acid? Huh, you want to invalidate that accomplishment too?

Munch
01-12-2010, 08:38 AM
This is a slippery slope. What about Catfish Hunter throwing that perfect no hitter will ripped to the gills on acid? Huh, you want to invalidate that accomplishment too?

That was Doc Ellis, and it was just a no-hitter, not a perfect game.

pseudotriton ruber ruber
01-12-2010, 08:51 AM
Invalidate Ellis's no-hitter? The guy deserves a medal--do you have any idea how distracting an acid trip can be? It's like winning a marathon with your legs in a potato sack.

Marley23
01-12-2010, 09:15 AM
I don't think any human being could reasonably contend that LSD is a performance enhancing drug in sports. As an experiment I propose we dose the Washington Nationals and New Jersey Nets before games and see what happens.

KennerTheGreat
01-12-2010, 09:47 AM
Invalidate Ellis's no-hitter? The guy deserves a medal--do you have any idea how distracting an acid trip can be? It's like winning a marathon with your legs in a potato sack.

Check out the boxscore (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1970/B06121SDN1970.htm) from Ellis' no hitter. Eight walks, six strikeouts and a hit batter.

ElvisL1ves
01-12-2010, 11:02 AM
But you'd have to leave in Dock Ellis' (not Doc) game where he got totally wasted first, and thought it would be fun to just drill every Reds hitter. Now THAT was a fun one to listen to on the radio. :D

Philster
01-12-2010, 11:30 AM
First, you have a statistics issue:

If the statistics were recorded, and the game was complete, and the season, etc, then you have statistics to report on. Since all the games, at bats and seasons are done/recorded/official, the stats get recorded, too.

Easy enough.

Next issue: Hall of Fame (HOF)

The Hall of Fame, its own entity apart from MLB, has guidelines, one being that MLB banned players are not going to be inducted into the Hall. Baseball bans Rose, and the HOF won't induct him, even if Rose got 100% of the sports writers' to actually write-in votes for him.

Then you have all sorts of players, like the Macs, Bonds, spit-ballers, meth users, drinkers, gamblers, racists, and a host of others who have already been judged, and will be judged going forward, by the baseball writers of America. Guess what? It's subjective, and there are a host of issues about guys they did/didn't induct. Subjectively, steroids are just real bad karma right now, so the writers are staying away. 'round and 'round we go, because the writers of yore had no problems with all sorts of characters, including drug users. Their are some players with stats that don't scream "HOF" that are in there, and some guys with better ones not in there. Not perfect is the process.

Maybe the HOF will figure out better ways to induct players, but right now it's left to a very finicky and subjective vote by the writers.

Diogenes the Cynic
01-12-2010, 11:48 AM
It's not a personal character thing, it's a cheating thing. The other drugs are not PED's. Even amphetamines do not alter one's physical body or give an individual abilities he does not already possess. They don't make anybody faster or stronger. Steroids and other PED's like HGH are a completely different animal.

Asfar as I'm concerned, the records are still 61 (and I know Roger Maris allegedly used amphetamines. I don't care, for the reasons I've already stated) and 755.

ElvisL1ves
01-12-2010, 12:01 PM
PED = Performance Enhancing Drug. Amphetamines are drugs that enhance performance. Ergo ...

Hawkeyeop
01-12-2010, 12:07 PM
It's not a personal character thing, it's a cheating thing. The other drugs are not PED's. Even amphetamines do not alter one's physical body or give an individual abilities he does not already possess. They don't make anybody faster or stronger. Steroids and other PED's like HGH are a completely different animal.

Asfar as I'm concerned, the records are still 61 (and I know Roger Maris allegedly used amphetamines. I don't care, for the reasons I've already stated) and 755.

You think they were taking them for the taste? Of course they enhanced performance. Baseball has a long grueling season. Adding some energy and focus could make a major difference in ones ability to hit a little ball traveling 100 miles an hour.

Know what drug doesn't appear to have any scientific evidence of helping? HGH.

Diogenes the Cynic
01-12-2010, 12:13 PM
Amphetamines do not enhance performance.

Munch
01-12-2010, 12:25 PM
Amphetamines do not enhance performance.

Then why did they take them?

Diogenes the Cynic
01-12-2010, 12:29 PM
The same reason that people drink whiskey to "warm up" in the cold. Amphetamines give people an illusion of increased sharpness, alertness, reflex and energy that doesn't really exist, in the same way that alcohol gives a false sense of warmth in the cold.

Jack Batty
01-12-2010, 12:51 PM
I do believe you are talking out of your ass.

Munch
01-12-2010, 12:52 PM
The same reason that people drink whiskey to "warm up" in the cold. Amphetamines give people an illusion of increased sharpness, alertness, reflex and energy that doesn't really exist, in the same way that alcohol gives a false sense of warmth in the cold.

Ah, the placebo argument. It's false (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=2289509&type=story). In addition to that, your argument is demonstrably false considering that amphetamines are medically prescribed for things like ADD, epilepsy and Parkinson's. If all they did was give "an illusion" of increased focus, they'd be no better than an OTC homeopathic "remedy".

If you get a chance, check out "The Juice" by Will Carroll. Has an extensive section on amphetamine use in baseball and its effects on the field.

Jack Batty
01-12-2010, 01:04 PM
I suppose when I smoke pot I just think I'm high too.

Philster
01-12-2010, 02:04 PM
I am working from the premise that amphetamines act on the body to increase awareness and reduce fatigue. If anyone needs to understand (denies) how this is performance enhancing, then they don't know enough about sport to even chime in.

Cocaine isn't ''performance enhancing'' either, but I wouldn't want to play against Lawrence Taylor on cocaine when he was a pass rusher. I would much rather have played against a straight LT.

RickJay
01-12-2010, 04:45 PM
It's worth noting, in case we're losing sight of the subject of the thread, that McGwire's "apology" was fucking pathetic. He apologized for everyone being hurt but, when pressed, wouldn't admit that what he was doing was cheating.

I'll be impressed by the first HoF candidate who actually apologizes. Who says "I took steroids because it made me stronger so I could hit more home runs. I was cheating. What I did was underhanded and dishonest." So far I can't think of anyone who's had the sack to actually say that except... Jose Canseco.

Well, fuck Mark McGwire. It's not going to break my heart if he doesn't get into the Hall of Fame.

I vote we strike McGwire, Sosa, and Bonds from the record books.
This, however, I think is just a silly (if common) sentiment (no offense, Oak.) A record is a fact, not a matter of moral opinion. Mark McGwire hit 70 home runs during regular season championship games during the National League's 1998 season. That is a matter of historical record. Excising it from the record book would be nothing more than denying reality. You can't pretend the Cardinals didn't havea first baseman that year or that the team somehow magically hit 70 homers more than the combined home run counts of all the players you're willing to acknowledge existed.

Munch
01-12-2010, 05:20 PM
So far I can't think of anyone who's had the sack to actually say that except... Jose Canseco.
Giambi and Pettitte? I can't think off-hand what their wording was.

Marley23
01-12-2010, 05:26 PM
Giambi and Pettitte? I can't think off-hand what their wording was.
Giambi apologized profusely but wouldn't say what he was sorry about, perhaps because he was afraid of being prosecuted for perjury. I'm sure it was lawyerly advice. Pettitte said he was sorry for using HGH but said he only used it to recover from injury and didn't cheat. Both were ridiculous in their own way. I don't think Alex Rodriguez made any excuses like that, though.

kevja
01-12-2010, 07:14 PM
It's not a personal character thing, it's a cheating thing. The other drugs are not PED's. Even amphetamines do not alter one's physical body or give an individual abilities he does not already possess. They don't make anybody faster or stronger. Steroids and other PED's like HGH are a completely different animal.

Asfar as I'm concerned, the records are still 61 (and I know Roger Maris allegedly used amphetamines. I don't care, for the reasons I've already stated) and 755.

As far as I'm concerned, Babe Ruth holds the single season home run record. He did it when it was a 154 game season. All the others who hit more than 60 did it in a 162 game season.:cool:

Munch
01-12-2010, 07:18 PM
As far as I'm concerned, Babe Ruth holds the single season home run record. He did it when it was a 154 game season. All the others who hit more than 60 did it in a 162 game season.:cool:

In game 154, Bonds hit #68.

Airman Doors, USAF
01-12-2010, 07:19 PM
As far as I'm concerned, Babe Ruth holds the single season home run record. He did it when it was a 154 game season. All the others who hit more than 60 did it in a 162 game season.:cool:

As far as I'm concerned Roger Connor still holds the record because he did it without juiced balls in 140 games.

FoieGrasIsEvil
01-12-2010, 08:40 PM
As far as I'm concerned Roger Connor still holds the record because he did it without juiced balls in 140 games.

Babe was juiced, not the balls!

:)


Do you have the same level of condescension for the 1970's-era Steelers dynasty and their known steroid issues (almost ushering in the era, if you must) as you do for the roid monsters in baseball?

kevja
01-12-2010, 09:20 PM
In game 154, Bonds hit #68.

LOL

I'm one of those fans who thinks the home run single season record is 73 and the career record is 762. Both held by Barry Bonds.

Airman Doors, USAF
01-12-2010, 09:25 PM
Do you have the same level of condescension for the 1970's-era Steelers dynasty and their known steroid issues (almost ushering in the era, if you must) as you do for the roid monsters in baseball?

That's the second time you've brought this up. I don't care that they did it to themselves, I don't care that baseball players did it, I simply DO NOT CARE. If players take their health into their own hands, it is their business, and I'm sick to death of the fake outrage.

Oakminster
01-12-2010, 10:16 PM
bleh...see post below

FoieGrasIsEvil
01-12-2010, 10:17 PM
That's the second time you've brought this up. I don't care that they did it to themselves, I don't care that baseball players did it, I simply DO NOT CARE. If players take their health into their own hands, it is their business, and I'm sick to death of the fake outrage.

You're right...it is the second time because I didn't get an answer the first time (not that you owe this lowly Bengals fan the time of day, let alone an answer to a question, you're a fan of football Godhood, after all).

I was curious because it is apparently well known that the Superbowl dominating Steelers team in the 1970's was highly roided out.

Just seeing if "Sixburgh" means the same or less to you in the same context as "71". Or whatever the steroid era homerun record is for Bonds and his comically enlarged cranium.

And the only reason I feel compelled to even pursue this issue is because despite our mutual military background, a framework in which I assumed we could be at least civil, you persist in being a prototypical Steelers fan, which in layman's terms means "being a jerk" about their team.

Anyway, stay safe troop.

Oakminster
01-12-2010, 10:17 PM
This, however, I think is just a silly (if common) sentiment (no offense, Oak.)

None taken. I realize it's an extreme position, and it's not even particularly objectively arrived at. Hank Aaron was a childhood hero. I watched (on television, sadly not at the ballpark) him hit #715 with my dad, and danced around the living room with joy as he circled the bases. I really hate that he's lost his record to a cheater. Marris was before my time, but still, he was a legit record holder as far as I know. Don't like him losing his record to a series of cheaters.

garygnu
01-12-2010, 10:18 PM
I saw video of him doing an interview. Dude's got red stretch marks on his neck.

Munch
01-12-2010, 10:24 PM
Marris was before my time, but still, he was a legit record holder as far as I know. Don't like him losing his record to a series of cheaters.
Dio seems to have abandoned his tenuous hold on "amphetamine use isn't cheating". What's your reasoning for actively ignoring it?

RickJay
01-12-2010, 10:43 PM
Maris.

And honest question; when did MLB ban amphetamines?

Oakminster
01-12-2010, 10:49 PM
Dio seems to have abandoned his tenuous hold on "amphetamine use isn't cheating". What's your reasoning for actively ignoring it?

Did Maris or Hammering Hank use amphetamines? I don't know. Do know McGwire did steroids, and think I have reason to believe Bonds and Sosa did as well.

Munch
01-12-2010, 10:51 PM
Maris.

And honest question; when did MLB ban amphetamines?
The testing began in 2006. Do a search on "amphetamines mlb will carroll" and you'll get quite a few articles on the subject. There was a lot of speculation that the game was drastically going to change - lower batting averages, better defense (greenies tended to give a bit more false confidence in your ability to throw the ball in without having to hit your cut-off man), LOTS more days off for players.

Hawkeyeop
01-13-2010, 12:12 AM
Maris.

And honest question; when did MLB ban amphetamines?

When did they ban HGH?

Superhal
01-13-2010, 03:45 AM
Given his Popeye physique, how could this be a surprise to anyone?

Check out Giambi's rookie year and current photos too.

Bijou Drains
01-13-2010, 08:31 AM
Gaylord Perry admitted cheating with spitballs and other ways of doctoring the ball and he's in the HOF. I wonder if anyone who voted him in will not vote in steroid users?

Jack Batty
01-13-2010, 08:56 AM
In game 154, Bonds hit #68.

I do believe that was the day that his hat size hit 9-3/4 as well.

D_Odds
01-13-2010, 09:17 AM
Giambi apologized profusely but wouldn't say what he was sorry about, perhaps because he was afraid of being prosecuted for perjury. I'm sure it was lawyerly advice. Pettitte said he was sorry for using HGH but said he only used it to recover from injury and didn't cheat. Both were ridiculous in their own way. I don't think Alex Rodriguez made any excuses like that, though.Rodriguez story, IMNSHO, is the best so far. Basically he said that he did it for 3 years in order to live up to his contract. He named his supplier (his cousin, who was able to get the drugs legally outside the country). Whether you choose to believe him or not is another story. I'm firmly in the "I don't give a shit" camp, and still think people are focusing too narrowly on a single group of users. It wasn't just home run hitters shooting up - it was also utility infielders on the major/minor cusp, pitchers, aging players trying to extend their career another year or two. Just because they didn't look like Mr. Atlas doesn't mean that they were clean.

Really Not All That Bright
01-13-2010, 09:30 AM
Amphetamines do not enhance performance.
Then why did they take them?
The same reason that people drink whiskey to "warm up" in the cold. Amphetamines give people an illusion of increased sharpness, alertness, reflex and energy that doesn't really exist, in the same way that alcohol gives a false sense of warmth in the cold.
I do believe you are talking out of your ass.
I do believe you're correct.

You want to know how long the performance-enhancing properties of amphetamines have been known for? The British Army, Royal Navy and RAF issued amphetamines (methedrine, specifically) to combat personnel throughout World War II due to the measurable resulting improvement in their reflexes, stamina and overall performance, especially under conditions such as sleep deprivation.

Tom Scud
01-13-2010, 10:00 AM
Personally, I think we should throw out all the records of players who competed in a segregated league; far more morally culpable as a policy, and it definitely had an effect on the level of competition. Sorry about that, Cy Young and Babe Ruth.

Airman Doors, USAF
01-13-2010, 10:05 AM
And the only reason I feel compelled to even pursue this issue is because despite our mutual military background, a framework in which I assumed we could be at least civil, you persist in being a prototypical Steelers fan, which in layman's terms means "being a jerk" about their team.

I can be perfectly civil to you...as long as we're not talking about football. You are a fan of a hated division rival, so by extension during football season I hate you. Don't take it personally, it's just business. My wife is a Cowboys fan and she gets it far worse than you, yet we're still married, because she understands what I just said to you. On football Sundays she doesn't even attempt to talk to me, she knows it's time for Steelers football and that's that.

Anyway, stay safe troop.

Same to you.

Munch
01-13-2010, 10:23 AM
I do believe that was the day that his hat size hit 9-3/4 as well.

Heh. I remember several years ago some yahoo on the radio trying to defend Bonds against charges of steroid use ("it's all exercise and hard work!"), and someone calling in and wagering a year's salary if he could be shown the exercise that increases your hat size.

Really Not All That Bright
01-13-2010, 10:31 AM
Wouldn't surprise me if P90X includes some sort of reverse trepanning procedure. I hear that shit is really unpleasant.

gonzomax
01-13-2010, 12:33 PM
McGwire says that steroids had nothing to do with him hitting homers. I am glad that is finally settled. He says" the man upstairs" gave him the ability. I guess he lived in an apartment complex.

Munch
01-13-2010, 01:25 PM
McGwire says that steroids had nothing to do with him hitting homers. I am glad that is finally settled. He says" the man upstairs" gave him the ability. I guess he lived in an apartment complex.
I saw that. It just makes me shake my head. McGwire apparently also called Joe Posnanski up out of the blue to talk about the past. Joe described that conversation (which focuses a lot on this "bulking up to Popeye level did nothing for my numbers" angle) here:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/joe_posnanski/01/12/mcgwire.cardinals/index.html

I don't know if this gives McGwire any more credibility on this topic (that he really did work a lot harder at making contact, and thus had more balls in the air, which led to more dingers) or takes credibility away from the "steroids make you hit it farther - they don't help you make contact" argument. I think there will be plenty of conversation around that, and I'm eager to hear about it from the experts.

Really Not All That Bright
01-13-2010, 01:28 PM
Increased strength means you can generate more power with a more compact swing, meaning it's easier to make useful contact, as opposed to just making contact.

gonzomax
01-13-2010, 02:48 PM
Apparently the "man upstairs', helped a lot of baseball players at the same time. Player after player were stretching personal records and league records. The " man" helped Sosa and Bonds a lot too. I guess I have to accept that the "man" has a great interest in sports and has chooses his favorites.

RickJay
01-13-2010, 02:48 PM
I don't know if this gives McGwire any more credibility on this topic (that he really did work a lot harder at making contact, and thus had more balls in the air, which led to more dingers) or takes credibility away from the "steroids make you hit it farther - they don't help you make contact" argument. I think there will be plenty of conversation around that, and I'm eager to hear about it from the experts.
As RNATB points out, there's no way to separate the skill of making contact from power hitting ability. One feeds the other. There's no doubt in my mind McGwire was a more technically proficient hitter later in his career, but we don't know to what extent extra strength helped him.

I don't expect Mark McGwire to be a genius and he's being heavily managed by Ari Fleischer's firm in all this, so we needn't be surprised if the apologies aren't all that honest. But this illustrates the fundamental problem of a loss of trust; it puts everything to question.

Some sabermetricians have made an effort to try to quantify how much steroids have increased home runs, with answers ranging from "some" to "none." They all miss the point; it's impossible to replay history, so it's impossible to tell just what steroids meant for Mark McGwire. Perhaps he would have hit 70 homers without steroids. Perhaps he would have hit just 44. Perhaps he would have hit 53 but also batted .340. Perhaps his injuries would have knocked him out of baseball by then. Perhaps he would have remained in baseball longer and hit more homers than he did. There's no way to know.

There's also no way to know his intent. Nor, to be honest, is there any point. He cheated, full stop. It's irrelevant whether he did so to prevent injury (which, at least initially, is quite plausible) or to hit more homers, or both. Once you have violated a state of trust, you can't be trusted anymore.

The comparison I always like to draw is with corporate conflict of interest guidelines. If I secretly make corporate purchasing decisions that benefit my wife's company, and am found out, I'll be fired. No muss, no fuss, no question about whether I was harming the company or not; I'll be walked out the door. Once I place myself on a position of conflict of interest, I have acted unethically just by putting myself in that position. The details aren't relevant. My responsibility is to ensue that the question "but why did he do it?" doesn't need to be asked.

McGwire's error, in my humble opinion, is that he is trying to prevaricate, to avoid the simple truth; he cheated, and once you cheat you've blown it. WHY he cheated doesn't matter. "But" is not a word that belongs in an honest apology.

FoieGrasIsEvil
01-13-2010, 03:43 PM
I can be perfectly civil to you...as long as we're not talking about football. You are a fan of a hated division rival, so by extension during football season I hate you. Don't take it personally, it's just business. My wife is a Cowboys fan and she gets it far worse than you, yet we're still married, because she understands what I just said to you. On football Sundays she doesn't even attempt to talk to me, she knows it's time for Steelers football and that's that.



Same to you.

Fair enough. Interesting marriage! To be a fly on the wall when the Cowboys and Steelers play one another!

Clothahump
01-13-2010, 03:49 PM
First Palin ends up on Fox 'News' and now this. My entire world-view is being shaken to its core!

If someone tells me the Pope is Catholic I'm just going to shit!

Head out into the woods. You'll be right next to the bear. Or the pope.

Airman Doors, USAF
01-13-2010, 03:53 PM
McGwire says that steroids had nothing to do with him hitting homers. I am glad that is finally settled. He says" the man upstairs" gave him the ability. I guess he lived in an apartment complex.

He set the rookie record for home runs. He was one shy of cracking 50 when 50 homers in a season meant something, and he was a rookie! Was he juicing from day one?

RickJay
01-13-2010, 04:09 PM
He set the rookie record for home runs. He was one shy of cracking 50 when 50 homers in a season meant something, and he was a rookie! Was he juicing from day one?
Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. We don't know.

McGwire was certainly an awesome power hitter, but his 49-homer rookie season was, remember, his career high for nine years. There would certainly be nothing especially remarkable about someone peaking at age 23. Then, after his two injury-plagued seasons, he suddenly became the best home run hitter of all time for about five years. He was a very different hitter from 1995 on than he had been before.

BigT
01-13-2010, 04:13 PM
I still say it was a lot of fun as a casual fan when they first broke the record, and the competition afterward. It's the only reason I ever learned anything about baseball. I actually enjoyed watching.

Airman Doors, USAF
01-13-2010, 04:34 PM
Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. We don't know.

McGwire was certainly an awesome power hitter, but his 49-homer rookie season was, remember, his career high for nine years. There would certainly be nothing especially remarkable about someone peaking at age 23. Then, after his two injury-plagued seasons, he suddenly became the best home run hitter of all time for about five years. He was a very different hitter from 1995 on than he had been before.

The point is, he clearly had the ability. I expect that his ability to play the game of baseball is not in dispute, otherwise there's no reason to continue this thread at all.

Tom Scud
01-13-2010, 04:52 PM
There would certainly be nothing especially remarkable about someone peaking at age 23.

Actually, it would be quite unusual, especially for a position player at McGwire's level; the only players I can think of off-hand who peaked at an all-star level by age 23 are Cesar Cedeno and Ruben Sierra.

Really Not All That Bright
01-13-2010, 04:59 PM
The point is, he clearly had the ability. I expect that his ability to play the game of baseball is not in dispute, otherwise there's no reason to continue this thread at all.
Sure. He could play baseball. That's why nobody is asking him to return his paychecks to the Cardinals; we're just saying his name should be stricken from the record books, and he shouldn't get into the Hall.

People always talk about "putting an asterisk by the record" as though it's some sort of unprecedented deal, or silly. It's not, though - do you think anyone cared about Ben Johnson's dirty record when Carl Lewis set a new clean one?

RickJay
01-13-2010, 06:03 PM
Sure. He could play baseball. That's why nobody is asking him to return his paychecks to the Cardinals; we're just saying his name should be stricken from the record books, and he shouldn't get into the Hall.

People always talk about "putting an asterisk by the record" as though it's some sort of unprecedented deal, or silly. It's not, though - do you think anyone cared about Ben Johnson's dirty record when Carl Lewis set a new clean one?
Johnson's record being "stricken" doesn't mean leaving a yawning hole in the record of the major leagues from 1986 to 2001. You can't excise a baseball player from the facts the way you can just disregard one sprinter. McGwire helped a team win a World Series; are you going to strike that from the record books? How could you?

RickJay
01-13-2010, 06:06 PM
Actually, it would be quite unusual, especially for a position player at McGwire's level; the only players I can think of off-hand who peaked at an all-star level by age 23 are Cesar Cedeno and Ruben Sierra.
Eddie Mathews peaked at 21. Al Kaline had his best season, arguably, at 20. Vada Pinson peaked between 20 and 23. It does happen.

Hawkeyeop
01-13-2010, 06:08 PM
There's also no way to know his intent. Nor, to be honest, is there any point. He cheated, full stop. It's irrelevant whether he did so to prevent injury (which, at least initially, is quite plausible) or to hit more homers, or both. Once you have violated a state of trust, you can't be trusted anymore.

The comparison I always like to draw is with corporate conflict of interest guidelines. If I secretly make corporate purchasing decisions that benefit my wife's company, and am found out, I'll be fired. No muss, no fuss, no question about whether I was harming the company or not; I'll be walked out the door. Once I place myself on a position of conflict of interest, I have acted unethically just by putting myself in that position. The details aren't relevant. My responsibility is to ensue that the question "but why did he do it?" doesn't need to be asked.

McGwire's error, in my humble opinion, is that he is trying to prevaricate, to avoid the simple truth; he cheated, and once you cheat you've blown it. WHY he cheated doesn't matter. "But" is not a word that belongs in an honest apology.

I don't think the fact that he cheated is as clear as you seem to believe. Let's say that you sign a contract with a company (not at will employment) that requires you to dress professionally. Every day you and your colleagues come to work in jeans. Your boss and the higher ups are clearly aware. Then one day, 5 years later, they decide to fire you for dressing casual. You would sue for wrongful termination and you would win.

The why is important, because this isn't remotely black and white. It is essential for understanding the mindframe of players, and, most importantly, in discouraging future players from taking steroids. Talking about the limits of steroids is much better than treating steroids as a magic pill.

pseudotriton ruber ruber
01-13-2010, 06:25 PM
One thing I find appalling about McGwire's apology is that he admitted to wrongdoing, noted how deeply ashamed he was of his actions, etc. but is no way prepared or willing to accept any material punishment for the things he did, including dissembling for years and years on the subject of his steroid use.

I'm cool with McGwire's new position if only it included an explicit statement to the effect of "And if this horrible mistake that I made means that I'll never get into the HoF, or that I'll never, never be hired in MLB again in any capacity, or that I've lost my credibility forever, well, then that's the price I'm prepared to pay."

But as it stands it seems he's saying "Yes I did a terrible thing, but why can't you forget about it already and treat me as if I were an honest, respectable, admirable sportsman again?"

gonzomax
01-14-2010, 11:33 AM
McGwire also admits to HGH. There is no doubt he became bigger and stronger through the use of drugs. It also made him a stronger hitter. He would not have hit 70 without the drugs. We will never know what level he would have reached.
Since Sosa has never been caught, and never admitted a drug boost, how could we deny him a trip to the H.O.F.? It is pretty damn obvious that he and a lot of other players did. Now he does not understand English well enough to discuss it, and HGH and steroids are not in his vocabulary. It would be wrong to let cheaters who did not get caught in, while denying cheaters that did get caught or admitted it. We have never found a way to deal with that thorny problem except by not voting for them. Without a set policy, it will just be ugly for them to fall short every year. Then what about Bonds? Who could deny him? What about Arod? There is much ugliness in the future . Yet no one in baseball wants to set a policy. They would wind up in court for a due process violation.

Really Not All That Bright
01-14-2010, 02:08 PM
The why is important, because this isn't remotely black and white. It is essential for understanding the mindframe of players, and, most importantly, in discouraging future players from taking steroids. Talking about the limits of steroids is much better than treating steroids as a magic pill.
McGwire admitted to using illegal drugs. He may not have cheated according to the letter of MLB's rules, but that's irrelevant. He committed a crime in order to gain a competitive advantage.

I bet MLB doesn't specifically ban sneaking into an opposing pitcher's house and dosing his breakfast with sedatives, either, but I bet nobody would say, "it's not cheating because it's not in the rules!"

Hawkeyeop
01-14-2010, 02:22 PM
McGwire admitted to using illegal drugs. He may not have cheated according to the letter of MLB's rules, but that's irrelevant. He committed a crime in order to gain a competitive advantage.

I bet MLB doesn't specifically ban sneaking into an opposing pitcher's house and dosing his breakfast with sedatives, either, but I bet nobody would say, "it's not cheating because it's not in the rules!"

The illegal part is a red herring. Do you care if a player used cocaine? Beat his wife? It is the performance enhancing part that people care about not that it is illegal. If "steroids" were legal would you be okay with Mcgwire taking them? Some were. Some still are. HGH is legal with a prescription. If he had a valid prescription would you be okay with his use?

Marley23
01-14-2010, 02:25 PM
McGwire admitted to using illegal drugs. He may not have cheated according to the letter of MLB's rules
It was against MLB rules. The problem is that the league was not enforcing its own rules, and that's what makes baseball ultimately culpable in this mess as far as I'm concerned. Things were going well, so from the top down, the steroids situation was ignored for a long time. So I think there's no sensible way to strip the steroid-affected stats from the record books, as satisfying as that would be. It would also be unfair and nonsensical to get rid of only the cheaters we know about from the '90s and 2000s and to ignore the fact that there was lots of other cheating in prior eras. It's not like the steroid guys invented cheating.

Really Not All That Bright
01-14-2010, 02:30 PM
The illegal part is a red herring. Do you care if a player used cocaine? Beat his wife?
I am finding it difficult to concieve of a way in which cocaine use or wife beating confer a performance advantage.

Hawkeyeop
01-14-2010, 02:34 PM
I am finding it difficult to concieve of a way in which cocaine use or wife beating confer a performance advantage.

Which goes to show that you don't care about illegal. You care about performance enhancing.

gonzomax
01-26-2010, 08:42 PM
The question that remains unanswered, is what happens to the rest of the alleged and assumed users when HOF time comes. McGwire is being kept from the hall. He has the numbers. He is not close to admission. When Bonds comes up, there will be a huge outcry if he does not get in. Arod too. But the consistency demands that we keep them out too. It is a lot of ugly in the future.

Diogenes the Cynic
01-26-2010, 09:18 PM
I think it could open the door for some of the perennially snubbed and overlooked candidates. The ones who didn't use are going to start looking better and better by comparison.