Juicing: Who Would Make you Sad?

[Karlifornia]

Yeah, I guess the only person I'd be disappointed to find out was on the juice would be Bo Jackson. Bo Jackson was pretty much the best mainstream athlete ever. It seemed like he could do anything, and the makers of Tecmo Bowl definitely were reverent.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

So a careeer high of 45 is eclisped four years later by 11 (25% above his career high) and repeated two years in a row and that isnt an outlier, really?

No, not at that age. Most home run hitters hit their peak in their late 20s and early 30s, so for Griffey to go from 45 (at 23 years old) to 56 at 27 and 28 years old would be seen as a pretty normal maturation of a hitter. If you look at the great HR hitters in non-steroid eras (I used the top 15 HR list and threw out the 'roid era guys), their best seasons we're all about in that range.

Aaron's top season of 45 was at age 28.
Ruth's top season of 60 was at age 32 and his 59 was at 26.
Mays had his top year at 34.
Frank Robinson had his best HR year at age 30.
Killebrew had his best years at ages 28 and 33.
Schmidt had his at age 30.

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

I've stated here numerous times before, I experimented with both illegal and legal at extreme dosage supplements largely in the mid 90s. My opinion does not come from someone who has watched athletes be accused, I personally know no less than 50 anabolic users personally that I either played with or lifted with.

I think the numbers are much closer to 100% than anyone wants to believe, but just watching Griffey Id say it a damn near lock.

I've already said that I believed Caminiti and most of what Canseco says, so I'm right there with you. That's why it doesn't bother me much. If most everyone did it, no one had an advantage.

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Also AS abuse is tied directly to ligament deterioration and excessive stiration over an extended period, I have read numbers as high as 1000% more likely to sustain injury during and immediately following a cycle. Susceptibility to injury is a marker of abuse not a witness to the contrary.

But Griffey wasn't all that susceptible to injury when he was at his peak. It's just as reasonable of an explanation to suggest that his breakdown was simply due to playing 1,700 games with his play style and his lack of conditioning. I'm not saying he wasn't doing 'roids, but there is another plausible explanation.

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

One other name that keeps coming up is Rickey Henderson, and that shocks me as well. Just his presence on the late 80s A's should cast doubt on him, and again his longevity and career track coupled with outward appearance certainly suggest there is at leats reasonable suspicion.

The bigger problem is how long did the steroid era last?
I'd suggest that it extends into the early 80s and possibly even late 70s.

The formulations certainly improve in recent years, as did their effectiveness but their presence has has been there.

I wholeheartedly agree with you.

Hey, Griffey may very well have juiced. But I don't think the chance for him is appreciably higher than it was for any other top player. That's still a pretty good chance, though.