What do you consider “clean”? Players had been using amphetamines for decades before steroids became an issue.
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.
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.
This. If HGH had been available, they’d have taken it.
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.
Do you feel the same way about the 1970’s Steelers abusing steroids?
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.
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.
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…)
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:
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.
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.
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.
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?
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!!!”
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. 
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.
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.
Tee-hee.
