Steroids and The Hall of Fame

Grant at McCovey Chronicles pens his opinion on the way the steroids issue has affected how we view the Hall of Fame. His opinion is that using players shouldn't be banned, but the steroid issue, which is complex, should be taken into consideration.

As a side note, the picture he uses is the one I mentioned in my last post showing Barry Bonds, of all players.

Big Macs Now Trans-Fat AND Roid Free

Okay, when the Mark McGwire steroid admission story broke, the photo used on my Yahoo homepage showed McGwire at the bag at first holding a runner on. The runner was in the picture. Purely by coincidence, and no other fate, the runner was Barry Bonds.

Cooperstown, Steroids and Bill James

Baseball stats entrepreneur Bill James, famous for his invention of new statistics and his ability to judge player ability based on those stats, has at long last commented on how steroids in baseball relates to the Hall of Fame. Read the four page .pdf file here. He believes that as we progress into the future, steroids will become a non-issue with respect to the Hall of Fame. He makes five basic arguments, in essence:

1. Steroids essentially keep us young. Many people outside of sports are taking these, and most people in the future will be doing so as well as life-lengthening drugs evolve. With society using them, they will look back on our time and wonder what the fuss was all about. The steroids users of today will be looked at as pioneers of a better life.
   
2. Some players who used steroids will make the Hall. Once these are discovered, an argument will arise to let the others in as well who were shunned.
3. History is forgiving, and statistics endure. He uses arguments from other players' faults and how they are viewed over time.
4. Old players play a large part in the Hall of Fame debate. They will not likely divide their ex-teammates into "users" and "non-users."
5. For the longest time there were no baseball rules against steroids, if there were they weren't enforced, and with a majority of players using them, was it really "cheating"? How then could players be kept out? And a great quote: "With the passage of time, more people will come to understand that the commissioner’s periodic spasms of self-righteousness do not constitute baseball law."
   

I agree with his assessment and have held many of these sentiments for a while now. James doesn't say all of these things by moral conviction, necessarily, but by how the future will shape the argument as time passes.

In addition to what James contends about baseball's Hall of Fame, I think the same thing will occur with respect to the use of these types of drugs, whether by athletes or not, and the decriminalization of drugs will follow.

Another thing I think should be debated. If a majority of players were taking steroids, who had any advantage over who? Who had the advantage when Bonds went to bat against Clemens? If pitchers were using steroids to be better pitchers, why did offensive statistics increase during the "steroids era?" Could the statistical change be due to other factors? With the Manny Ramirez issue, it is clear that performance enhancing drugs are still widespread, especially the ones undetectable by currently enforced urine tests.

Give the article a read. I think James has enough influence on baseball that the debate will change as a result.

TAINTED!

Everything the Dodgers have done since last August is now TAINTED!

Their playoff run, and victory over the Cubs; TAINTED!
Their signing of Manny this year; TAINTED!
Their all time winning record at home this year; TAINTED!
Their position in first place; TAINTED!

All their victories this year should be forfeited and they should be in last place. The Giants are in LA starting tonight. I can't be there, but I wish I were. I hope thousands of Giants fans show up and torch the place with chanting, heckling and making a scene. Slam it in their faces. We remember the Bonds era, so the Dodger fans should be forced to remember the Manny era.

Manny's Stick Turns Dodger Blue

Manny had a test. The stick turned blue. Dodger blue.

You know what would be an interesting suspension? Allowing the Giants to pick which 50 games Manny gets to sit out.

After all the Bonds hoopla, let's see how many Dodger fans treat Manny the same way.

Why The Continuing Steroid Issue

It's too late for baseball to have an immediate effect with banning steroids. They have left this issue untouched, yet with complete knowledge for two decades now. I would like to propose that many players are faced with the following difficult position consisting of three possible scenarios from which to choose:

Scenario #1 - I'm using steroids. If I stop using, my production will fall off, my career will be over, and I will be out of baseball.

Scenario #2 - I'm using steroids. If I keep using them and get caught, my career will be over, and I will be out of baseball.

Scenario #3 - I'm using steroids. If I keep using them, and somehow manage to avoid detection, either by inside information or just luck of the drug testing draw, my career will continue, I will have success, and baseball will still be part of my life.

This is not an argument for or against steroid use, but it shows why the problem continues and why players who continue to use steroids, even in the current climate and environment, are not as "stupid" as most people would like to believe. Does anybody see a similarity between the first two scenarios, and a difference for the third?

A-Roid Shocker?

I've never understood the argument that goes like this: Bonds put up such ridiculous numbers in obtaining his records; numbers that could have only been put up by using steroids. But now, there's a new breed of player in Rodriguez and Pujols that don't use steroids. I can't wait for them to shatter Bonds' records just to spite him and his cheating.

Uhhm, numbers that could only be reached by using steroids will be surpassed by even more astronomical numbers by players who never used steroids at all? This doesn't make sense. But now the "truth" is out, and nobody should be surprised in the least.

What concerns me far more than A-Rod using steroids is the trust that was broken in breaking a promise of privacy concerning test results. That's the real crime. Baseball and its weasel leaders (read: Bud Selig) completely allowed this problem to go on for decades now, profiting from it all the way. Now they are more than happy to see all the blame go onto the players.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Bud Selig is alone in holding the dubious distinction of having a steroids scandal take place right under his nose; both as an owner and as a commissioner. He wouldn't even stand up out of his seat to acknowledge Bonds' tying of Aaron's record, yet he acts like the whole thing is a tragedy.

Mitchell on Steroids

So former Senator George Mitchell released his "independent" report on baseball's steroids situation. Independent? Yeah, right. Commissioner Bud Selig hires a politician who works for the Boston Red Sox to investigate baseball. His "findings" aren't in the least surprising, despite the attempt of the media to make it look like it. The "list" consists of mostly aging or retired players, or nobodies. No Red Sox and tons of Yankees at that. The "proof" comes from putting the squeeze on a former bat boy. So gossip and hearsay are okay to skewer players in the court of public opinion? That's why Selig is a spineless weasel and Mitchell is a wanker politician. But the players' "crimes" occurred mostly while steroids were completely legal in baseball.

And completely known. We've known about the rampant use of steroids since the 80's. Owners like Bud Selig and commissioners like Bud Selig purposefully ignored the "problem" as it certainly didn't hurt the ticket sales. Now, President Bush is troubled by the findings. He said, "The players and the owners must take the Mitchell Report seriously. I'm confident they will." It's too bad you didn't take the issue seriously, Mr. President, when you were the owner of the Texas Rangers. Remember your star player Mr. President? Jose Canseco? The player for whom the "steeee-roooids" chant became popular even before then? Maybe a member of your staff can remind you.

The biggest problems by far are the hypocrisy of baseball's leadership and the zealousness of the feds' prosecution Nazis. Leave Bonds, Clemens and F.P. Santangelo alone and take a look at Selig, Mitchell and the prosecutors. Spring training is a few months away. Let's have a cold beer and watch some baseball.

Why I'm Not Convinced That Bonds' Record Is Tainted Or That Steroid Use Is Cheating

A friend recently asked me why I didn't think Barry Bonds' home run record is "tainted." Here are some brief points. Also, I'll add a second set of brief points as to why I don't think his steroid use is "cheating" in the traditional sense of the word.

• The steroids Bonds allegedly took were not banned by baseball during the time he took them. It seems odd that people would retroactively apply the current ban to Bonds and others.
• There is an arbitrary standard as to which performance enhancing steroids are banned. Curt Schilling had radical surgery and received non-banned performance enhancing steroids prior to his famous "bloody sock" game, which led to the Red Sox' championship.
• Americans are biased toward hitting and offense, especially home runs. Last time I saw a list of players busted for testing positive, there were more pitchers than hitters. Over whom did Bonds have an unfair advantage? All the pitchers who were just as "juiced" as he was?
• Sosa and McGwire were both purported steroids users in their home run chase. But Bonds' rival for his record-breaking season, Luis Gonzales, vehemently denies using them, complete with character witnesses. How did a journeyman like him hit so many?
• I'm way too familiar with statistical fluctuations throughout baseball history - and the reasons for them (such as ballpark dimensions, baseball strategy fads, philosophy, weather, strike zone enforcement, rule changes, etc.) to believe that the offensive surge during the mid 90's to early 00's was caused by steroids. Again, why do people believe that steroids helped hitters and not pitchers?
• Baseball history (as well as life) is full of performance enhancing substances. Medicine, nutritional supplements, dietary aids, protein powders, etc. Heck, we've been told for fifty years that a bowl of Wheaties is a performance enhancing substance. Popeye's spinach?
• Bonds' steroids were illegal? The US government and its legal system is usually the last place I look for guidance in morality and ethics.

And as for steroids as "cheating":

• The arbitrary standard for performance enhancing substances, as listed above.
• Traditionally, "cheating" is a term applied to situations when personal performance is NOT enhanced. Using a cheat sheet in taking an exam, for example, is NOT an enhancement in personal performance. The test taker doesn't know the answers. It is a mere illusion to performance. Using a corked bat in baseball is NOT an enhancement in personal performance, it is an enhancement in the performance of the equipment. Cutting in front of a base when the umpire is not looking to get to the next base quicker is not an enhancement of personal performance. Applying a foreign substance to the pitched ball is not an enhancement of personal performance, but it is, again, an enhancement of the performance of the equipment. But steroids are not some magical pill, either. Benefits are only gained through hard work and exercise, which are part of being an athlete. The actual performance of the players themselves has been enhanced.

Maybe I'll post some additional thoughts some time soon.

Viagra Junkie

Given the infamous side affect of steroid use, it has now become obvious why Rafael Palmiero uses Viagra. He has to.