OOTP Developments Forums - The "Steroids Era"

OOTP Developments Forums (https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com//index.php)

- Talk Sports (https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com//forumdisplay.php?f=49)

- - The "Steroids Era" (https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com//showthread.php?t=277545)

The "Steroids Era"

Joe Sheehan published my fave baseball article in ages today at FanGraphs. It's a rebuke to all the idjits who thumb their noses at the accomplishments of the great baseball players of the past quarter century and attribute it all to steroids abuse.

How now, yokels, to explain players bashing home runs at historic rates , as we speak, while being rigorously tested?

All those numbskulls who won't even consider voting for a player slurred by innuendo and bull#### need to do some 'splaining.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/starl...f-ped-testing/

Wow! How do you really feel about this? ;) :D

I have never been on board with the "Don't vote Player X into the HoF because his numbers are probably juiced" argument or the "His season record shouldn't count because he was probably juiced" argument because there is no way at all to determine if or how his numbers were effected.

This thread should be as entertaining as the last one!

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=271847

Yeah. I don't know what he hopes to accomplish with all the name-calling. Obviously he's NOT interested in a serious discussion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antonin (Post 4191405)

Yeah. I don't know what he hopes to accomplish with all the name-calling. Obviously he's NOT interested in a serious discussion.

Let's see. We have "idjits," "yokels," and "numbskulls." Did I miss anything? What should we call him in return, do you think?

Usually, people who pile on the insults are either not smart enough to argue intelligently and convincingly or are insecure about themselves and their argument. Or both.

Incidentally, that article did nothing to change my mind that the taking of performance enhancing drugs, if not sanctioned and available to all players in a league, is cheating.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru (Post 4191433)

Nobody disputes that but declaring guilt because you don't like a guy or he's not a real 'merican or some anonymous trainer saw acne, is idiotic yokel like and the height of numbskullery IMO. Too many people think that smearing people without evidence is ok. They must never be right.

Prove it!

Edit this poster nails it big time

Quote:

xxxxxxxx
Yeah, I’d be glad to, as someone whose familiar with this argument from reading BP for over 10 years.

The point isn’t that various PED’s don’t help players. They do. It’s that the sentiment against them is rooted in a fundamentally misleading argument that has little to do with them.

The primary benefit of PEDs from that era are better recovery times and stamina. You get stronger because you can work out more often for longer and recover more quickly to do it again. This leads to faster gains, but you have to work pretty hard.

The most visible scapegoats for the PED era were players who were already VERY unpopular and VERY good before they were ever suspected of taking PEDs. Bonds was a Hall of Famer before he bulked up in the late 90s. Alex Rodriguez was one of the least popular players in baseball from the day he signed his 10 year contract.

The benefits of PED drugs don’t just extend to getting stronger. Better recovery time from working out is a much larger advantage for pitchers than it is for hitters! Look how long one of the few pitchers to really be proven to have done something – Clemens – was able to go.

The testing didn’t exist and use was from all accounts widespread. There’s no evidence that PED drugs only helped hitters – there’s a lot of explaination for the rise in offensive levels that Joe explains here. What’s more likely is that both players and hitters were using and that overall they benefited equally. The main rise in offensive levels was due to a lot of AAA-quality pitchers getting innings due to the double expansion. The players who shone most were either already generational or all-time talents (Bonds/Rodriguez) or sluggers in environments VERY favorable to their skills. Bonds played 38 games a year AT Colorado and AT Phoenix, huge HR environments, before the humidor. Sosa and McGwire played in the NL central, a division at that time full of HR-friendly parks (Miller, Great American, Minute Maid, summertime Wrigley). You didn’t see anyone in the AL West hit 60+ HR, regardless of talent, because they didn’t have the confluence of events (strength+bad pitching+offensive friendly parks).

But it is the home run records – first the season record, but ESPECIALLY the career record, assaulted by baseball players hated by the media and consequently by many fans – Bonds, and with the anticipation of Rodriguez (who was for most of his career on pace to hit 850 or 900 HRs) that drove the outrage that lead Congress to investigate and testing to be implemented.

It isn’t that PEDs aren’t bad for a lot of reasons listed here – bad social influences on minor league players who feel they have to do it to compete, long-term health effects, etc.

It’s that the reasons cited for PEDs being so bad likely had nothing to do with said PEDs, and had everything to do with assault on ‘sacred’ records by players who were rude to the media and covered like villians by the national press.

Witness the fact that most suspensions you see now are from pitchers. Starling Marte isn’t a power hitter. PED benefits aren’t about power and really have never been unless you were already about power. It just became a thing because of the incredible sanctity of the numbers 61 and 755, and the universal unpopularity of the players who challenged those numbers or were expected to do so.

No PEDs made Barry Bonds able to have the incredible plate discipline, batting eye and contact skills he kept late into his life. They don’t do that. They probably got him a lot more home runs instead of doubles, but they didn’t give him the ability to do what he did. He already had it because he was one of the 5 best players ever. And unlike most great players (and most baseball players), he was a flaming asshole to the media and fans most of the time, so people hated seeing him eclipse as popular a player as Hank Aaron.

The point isn’t that PEDs should be excused. It’s that the outrage stems from things that have little to do with them and largely forgives the whole demographic of players who probably benefitted the most – PITCHERS, especially ones who magically remained great until they were 40 years old or more.

As much as I appreciate the idea of innocence, I'm confident in the post adult age skull growth and visible to anyone with eyeballs bone malformations in for the purpose of this post, Barry Lamar Bonds.

Edit after reading Rich's edit: Just wanted to be sure...I'm saying Bonds for example is a cheater. No more. No less. I wouldnt vote for a cheater to be in the HOF of the game in which he cheated his way to success, no matter how much hard work and talent he had, because it wasn't apparently good enough in the cheater's own eyes and because no one can credibly argue guys like Bonds didn't have cheating enhanced numbers.

Think of if this way... how many guys didn't make it because they didn't cheat? Not just at the top of the ladder, but at the bottom. There are cheaters there too. How many clean 4th outfielders couldn't get over the hump or clean middle relievers' bodies couldn't heal their arm fast enough to compete with a few unclean ones? On their backs, I'll rest my principled case for not supporting cheaters in the HOF.

Those men took those substances surreptitiously, in order to gain an unfair edge on their competition. Whether it can be proven statistically that they were successful in that regard is ultimately irrelevant. In their hearts and minds they did something underhanded that hurt the game's integrity. By their actions and by their intentions, they CHEATED.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru (Post 4191469)

Do you include David Ortiz in the list of cheaters? If not why not?

"...a couple hundred guys didn’t wake up on January 1, 1993 and start popping homer pills — was ignored, as was evidence indicating that the baseball, the strike zone, the style of play, and the double expansion were all to blame."

Umm yeah a couple hundred guys did start taking homer pills but started doing so prior to 1993. I gave up reading this after this paragraph. Many of these guys admitted to taking various PED's, some of which were legal at the time.Still cheating when it was banned by many other sports and illegal to buy them in the US.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RchW (Post 4191452)

Edit this poster nails it big time

Nice presentation & he makes good points.

I still say what good is a rule if there are no consequences for breaking them? Without consequences it is just a waste of ink & paper.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr (Post 4191519)

Nice presentation & he makes good points.

I still say what good is a rule if there are no consequences for breaking them? Without consequences it is just a waste of ink & paper.

When you have proof I agree. When you have speculation innuendo and dislike fueling a determination of guilt without proof that goes against everything our society stands for. Why have trials at all just pick the people you don't like and punish them for any and all grievances.

It seems to be a new American way. It's a bad thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RchW (Post 4191529)

I agree with you. I've said the same things b4. I think Jeff Bagwell having to wait is a terrible omission.

You know what the real problem here is, don't you? Our standards of behavior have become so low that many of us don't mind that these players cheated. More important is whether their artificially inflated feats thrilled us at the time, filled ballpark seats with fannies, and sold merchandise.

So instead of concentrating on honesty and integrity, we dismiss the issue with arcane analysis trumpeted by people like the opening poster. We say "everybody was doing it, or they should have been" and we drag in other examples. "What about him? He was successful. Ya think he was doin' it too?" We recuse ourselves, saying "Who are we to judge?" because it is EASIER to do that.

When there are low or no standards of behavior, the quality of our society suffers. This explains why we were willing to have as president a man who repeatedly demonstrated that he is a lying, racist, misogynist but who got elected anyway.

I am tired of this debate, much like I am tired of the first 100 days with another 1,360 to go, if we make it. People get what they deserve, ultimately. If enough of them think Barry Bonds should be in the Hall of Fame despite what I have said above, then so be it. On this very small stage, I indeed have had my say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru (Post 4191554)

Yes standards of justice have fallen. Accusation now presumes guilt. There are death penalties for minor crimes, yet criminals can be elected to high office and/or take charge of institutions.

You're barking up the wrong tree.

I agree with Bru. As a fan it was especially disappointing to me. Bonds was my favorite player until he miraculously gained about 40 pounds of muscle at the age of 38 over the offseason (those numbers based on my bad memory, so sorry in advance if they're not correct). All of a sudden instead of reaching 30+ homers a year he's bashing 60 and 70+. And like was said before, most fans enjoyed every moment of it and the powers that be in MLB turned a blind eye because they were cashing in. But in all honesty who can we say didn't use PED's? Personally (and I believe I said this before somewhere else), it wouldn't surprise me if it came out that greats like Ripken, Maddux, Barry Sanders, Michael Jordan, etc. used PED's. I like to think that they didn't but it wouldn't surprise me if they did just because that is the reality of this generation of sports. Palmeiro didn't have none of the physical signs that he used and still yet he popped on his test. Just my two cents worth. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru (Post 4191469)

Have to agree. The bottom line is that they cheated. Doesn't matter to me that the advantage can't exactly be quantified. You cheat, you cheat, and you don't deserve the highest possible recognition in baseball, the HoF.

The PED thing always makes me laugh. If you want to chastise Bonds and the like for PED's, then you need to do the same to Mantle and Ford.

Those guys gobbled "greenies" back in the day before most games. And don't tell me it's different. They took them because they gave them an advantage. So if you want to get on your high horses about cheating, then you better make sure you include a lot more players than just the ones the media has told you to hate.

"I have no problem with it. They would have made it there anyways" I don't think ANYONE who cheated in any way should be in the HOF. I am appalled at the attitude some have towards it. No problem with it? Really? So if your child was attempting to get into a really prestigious school, and was working hard his entire life, but cheated on the entrance exam, you would be OK with that? Especially if he was smart enough to do it on his own anyways ? Really? What if your kid DIDN"T make it in because the last spot went to someone ELSE who cheated? You would be fine with it? I doubt it.

"There's no proof steroids helped." Of course they helped. Steroids gave them an advantage in recovery from injuries and in stamina, to name 2 areas where it helped.. So many wouldn't take anything that did nothing for them. It's a stupid argument.

"They didn't fail any drug tests." Drug tests are a joke. You think someone making MILLIONS can't figure out a way to beat a $5 drug test? You don't think they can afford drugs that DON'T show up in todays blood or urine tests? They need to come up with tougher tests and they need to test frequently, and especially by surprise.

The biggest issue though is the punishment. Suspension? So what. When utility players are making millions a year, the risk is well worth it. $30 million dollars a year for high end pitchers and players are here already. Failing a test should void the contract. League minimum salary begins and stays for the ENTIRE length of the contract you have. Fail again, lifetime ban. Of course, stringent testing methods along with strict tests should be used to avoid false positives. A re-test would be automatic, with the SAME original blood sample saved so another test can be performed, along with a new test to make sure BOTH tests match. They do, bye-bye. The only way to eradicate it is to make it not worth it if you get caught. Right now, it's well worth the risk.

Edit: Double post. Don't know why. Hit respond only once.