(I still can’t believe Rafael Palmeiro – that’s the sad one for me).
So when do Pudge and Juan-Gone admit it?
Albert Belle was a scary dude… did he admit juicing?
Not that I recall.
Those guys don’t have any particular reason to come clean. Gonzalez hasn’t played in years and Rodriguez is at the end of his career. He lost a bunch of weight a few offseasons ago, which some people found very suspicious - after steroid testing began for real, I think.
They were “picked and chosen” on the basis of when he admitted to using PEDs. I agree that 2007 was his best year, with 1996 (his first full season with Seattle) a close second. In my opinion, it’s not his homerun numbers and slugging percentage that stand out from 01-03, it’s the fact that he only missed a single game in all three of those years. He missed significant time in Seattle in every season except for 1998. I would never argue that A-Rod, Bonds, or any of those guys weren’t naturally gifted hitters, but I do think they got attained an injury recovery advantage through the use of PEDs. That’s why Ken Griffey Jr.'s reputation is rock solid in my mind. I think the number of injuries he suffered is proof enough that he stayed clean.
This is hopeless. Steroid users have a reputation for breaking down, if you notice what happened to McGwire at the end. And Bonds, and Canseco, and Sosa.
I don’t know, I think Griffey is clean but Big Mac had plenty of injuries I thought. At least as many as A-Rod.
Yeah, they break down when they’re old. But during the prime of their careers, if they’re using PEDs they’re able to train more, get more out of training, and recover from training and injuries that much faster.
How do you explain all the time A Rod missed in the early part of his career, followed up by him suddenly becoming an iron man after he signed with Texas? How do you explain Bonds averaging 143 games played from age 35-40? Mark McGwire missed most of the 1993 and 1994 seasons, and according to his brother started juicing in 1994, after which he was able to average about 140 games per year over the next 5 seasons (the first of which was strike shortened).
Man, Lou Gehrig must have been on some good stuff.
Gehrig’s last full season was 1938, when he was 35.
I am not an expert, but I have been hearing the opposite for years. That hamstring injuries are typical of heavy steroid use, and and getting the bodies musculature out of natural balance. I have heard lots of people say the Griffey’s constant hamstring problems constitute near proof of roid use.
off to see if I can find any official stuides about 'roids and hamstrings.
An age that Arod hasn’t hit. How bout Cal Ripken?
These numbers are irrelevant. 2003 was his age 27 year - the point at which many players reach their peak. It also marks the last year in which he hit in the tiny confines of The Ballpark at Arlington for 81 games a year, and moved to a relatively less friendly venue.
Regardless, here are Ken Griffey’s similar numbers for his year 25-28 seasons, compared to his 10 other best seasons (minus SLG, because I don’t want to input all those numbers):
Games/season: 152.7 140.6
Batting average: .297 .299
HR/season: 53.7 33.1
RBI/season: 144 98.4
2nd column years: 1990-1994, 1999-2001, 2005, 2007
Also irrelevant. Too many factors to account for.
Ripken was an average hitter with a decent glove who played a bunch of games to secure a legacy for himself. What’s your point?
And then his production really dropped off. Dude must have been juiced.
No, if he had continued mashing the ball after the age of 35, I might believe he was juicing.
Oh, and if not for a little thing called Lou Gehrig’s disease.
Ripken was a fantastic hitter, and above average defender who played long enough for people to forget just how good a hitter he was in his prime. I don’t know the guy, but I’m guessing he played a lot of games because he liked playing baseball is. My point is if playing a lot games is a sign of steriod use, then Ripken must have been juicing.
He was a .276 lifetime hitter. He was such a great fielder that he won 2 Gold Gloves his entire career. And I never said games played alone was the key factor, it’s the ability to suddenly stay healthy and produce at a high level after your assumed “prime” despite your prior history.
Man, what’re the odds he’d get that?
You’re kidding, right? Barry Bonds, the guy who won an MVP award when he was FORTY?
The path the discussion has taken just goes to prove how “I think he’s on roids” is pointless. So far we have two distinct lines of thought:
- If you’re durable, you’re on roids.
- If you’re not durable, you’re on roids.
I think it rather obvious, at least to my eye, that 'roids help recover from injury - I believe steroids probably SAVED Mark McGwire’s career, which was going down the tubes midway through due to injuries - but it’s obviously going to depend on the individual and their particular reaction and roid of choice.
Talk about cherry picking stats. You’re using two not very useful ones.