Who from your favorite team will be on the Mitchell Report?

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

How many people do you know or have you met that have actually gotten bigger as they get older? The only ones I know that fit that description took something....and well, it wasn't legal.

Actually, I'm not sure I know anyone who worked out regularly who wasn't bigger in their mid- to late-20s than they were in their late teens or early 20s.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

Actually, I'm not sure I know anyone who worked out regularly who wasn't bigger in their mid- to late-20s than they were in their late teens or early 20s.

Yes, but what about when they hit late 30's into their 40's?

[watravaler]

Any chance in hell the MLBPA does the right thing and agree to olympic-style drug testing?

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

Yes, but what about when they hit late 30's into their 40's?

Are you kidding?

I entered the military at 19 years old at 6'2 weighing 145 lbs. When I got married at 24 I weighed 175 lbs. I turned 35 last month I weigh 252 lbs working out in the weight room and doing cardio six days a week. I don't take any supplements, don't have acne, damn sure can't hit a baseball 100 feet much less over any fence. I am stronger than I was at 19, I can run longer distances than I could at 19. I am in better shape now than I was at 19. If I can do that, while stuffing myself with fried foods, alcohol etc., I am sure a world class athlete can do it without using steroids.

[Fidatelo]

Doesn't pretty much _everyone_ get bigger between 18-45?

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I don't take any supplements, don't have acne, damn sure can't hit a baseball 100 feet much less over any fence.

Pussy

Seriously, if a person is working out religiously from age 10, they won't be much stronger past age 24 or so, but most people are not that dedicated enough in their younger years to make it implausible.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

To not lay equal blame on both the owners and the players is just naive. Why would the owners NOT encourage it? They had everything to gain by doing so, and nothing to lose. The players took all the risk and got the reward, the owners took no risk by encouraging yet still got the reward as well. It was a win-win situation for the owners. Take a look at some of the notes in the Mitchell report taken by the Dodgers. The proof is in the pudding.

This is ridiculous- again, tacitly watching vs actively participating are very different. Yes, there is *some* blame but not *equal* blame.

Also, to turn this around, why *would* the owners encourage it? The players were dumb enough to be doing it on their own. It's not as if they needed an extra push from management to be doing it.

What notes about the Dodgers are you talking about in the Mitchell report? (btw, this is pretty much an exhaustive list of the 54 mentions of "Dodgers" in the searchable PDF version of the Mitchell report but I could have missed something)
-The Dodgers who tried to require steroid testing for all new players that were shot down in 1985 in favor of a comprehensive league-wide plan without teeth because "the Players Association reiterated its opposition to mandatory drug testing"?
-Or the part where the Dodgers officials were talking about how they didn't want 'roided players on their team (Estalella, Gibbons) or how they wanted to trade away 'roiders (LoDuca, Brown)?
-Or the coach in the Dodgers system who rebuffed a player who went to him when a player (Donnels) asked about steroids and said “look it up on the computer” and said “I don’t need to hear anything about it."
-Or minor league conditioning coach "Seyler [who] did not tell anyone in
Dodgers management that he or any of these players were purchasing steroids."

I fail to see the culpability you described with the front office and it's much more on the players. Just because the owners in baseball have the worst PR in the history of any billionaires club in the world, doesn't mean you should just buy the crap that people are shoveling.

SI

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Everyone in baseball for the last decade+ should be considered as a potential juicer.

That said, Randy Johnson's career doesn't strike me as one that necessarily screams "juicer". Yes, he had tremendous performances into his late 30's and into his early 40's. But he didn't magically start throwing the ball harder in the early '90's - the abilities that propelled him to greatness were always present: the high 90's fastball, the wicked slider, a deceptive delivery and his height and length that meant his 97 MPH fastball arrived at the plate quicker than anyone else's due to it having a shorter path getting there.

What transformed Johnson's career in 1993 was a long talk with Nolan Ryan and a changed approach on the mound - he dramatically cut his walk rate and his strikeout rate jumped, because he started trusting his stuff more, throwing more strikes and taking a more intelligent approach in attacking hitters. That trend started in '93, and by '95 or so he'd refined his approach to near perfection, and his subsequent seasons were basically repeats of that season. The aberrations from that point were due to injury ('96, '03) and a combination of bad luck and his head being messed-up over contract issues ('98).

Does that mean that he didn't at some point in there also start juicing to counteract the effects of aging, or to recover from injury or fatigue quicker? Not at all. But unlike someone like Joel Pineiro (who is widely considered locally to have been a juicer) who gained a significant bump in velocity, Johnson always had the fastball, and I don't recall ever hearing that his velocity jumped in his later years - in fact it clearly started to fade a bit, and he relied more and more on his slider and developed a forkball/changeup to add to his repertoire.

I think you can look at his career progression and find a plausible explanation that doesn't include performance-enhancers.

I can take a look at the stats and see what you are saying about a transformation in approach back in 1993. That's fine. However, while he had some outstanding seasons throughout the 90's, he essentially "peaked" at the age of 37(!) in 2001, when he posted his best K/9 and second lowest WHIP and that year wasn't just an aberration as it was preceded and followed up by very strong seasons.

I'm not saying it's impossible that he wasn't on the juice, however to me, looking at his career numbers (playing in the era he did), they scream performance enhancement. Steroids aren't just about getting bigger and stronger, there are other factors such as quicker recovery times, etc.

[rowech]

Randy Johnson is interesting to me because I think he did but I also think he just got some better control.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

This is ridiculous- again, tacitly watching vs actively participating are very different. Yes, there is *some* blame but not *equal* blame.

Also, to turn this around, why *would* the owners encourage it? The players were dumb enough to be doing it on their own. It's not as if they needed an extra push from management to be doing it.

What notes about the Dodgers are you talking about in the Mitchell report? (btw, this is pretty much an exhaustive list of the 54 mentions of "Dodgers" in the searchable PDF version of the Mitchell report but I could have missed something)
-The Dodgers who tried to require steroid testing for all new players that were shot down in 1985 in favor of a comprehensive league-wide plan without teeth because "the Players Association reiterated its opposition to mandatory drug testing"?
-Or the part where the Dodgers officials were talking about how they didn't want 'roided players on their team (Estalella, Gibbons) or how they wanted to trade away 'roiders (LoDuca, Brown)?
-Or the coach in the Dodgers system who rebuffed a player who went to him when a player (Donnels) asked about steroids and said “look it up on the computer” and said “I don’t need to hear anything about it."
-Or minor league conditioning coach "Seyler [who] did not tell anyone in
Dodgers management that he or any of these players were purchasing steroids."

I fail to see the culpability you described with the front office and it's much more on the players. Just because the owners in baseball have the worst PR in the history of any billionaires club in the world, doesn't mean you should just buy the crap that people are shoveling.

SI

Management created and participated in an environment which rewarded players some players who would not have been major leaguers without the juice and punished some players who would have been good enough if no one juiced. To me that is not just tacitly watching.

Honestly, does it matter? I say 50/50 blame. You say more blame on the players. Fine, the players are 75,85, 95 percent to blame and the owners get the leftovers. The blame game is what got the MLB is the position it is in now. If the players, coaches, managers, front office had spent as much time trying to deal with the issue as they have trying to blame everyone else for for the issue, the sport would have been better off.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

I can take a look at the stats and see what you are saying about a transformation in approach back in 1993. That's fine. However, while he had some outstanding seasons throughout the 90's, he essentially "peaked" at the age of 37(!) in 2001, when he posted his best K/9 and second lowest WHIP and that year wasn't just an aberration as it was preceded and followed up by very strong seasons.

I'm not saying it's impossible that he wasn't on the juice, however to me, looking at his career numbers (playing in the era he did), they scream performance enhancement. Steroids aren't just about getting bigger and stronger, there are other factors such as quicker recovery times, etc.

Well, that's the shame of it all isn't it - we can't know for sure who was and who wasn't juicing without the player admitting it or some compelling evidence.

It may well be that Johnson juiced, and for him (as it appears to be for Clemens) it was more about maintaining his dominance than it was about clearly exceeding his prior established performance (as seems to be the case with Bonds).

On the other hand, maybe Johnson simply dedicated himself to physical training and once he'd figured out how to pitch and harnessed his control, it was simply a matter of staying healthy until his physical dominance finally started to fade.

It's important to note that physical training and legal nutritional supplements have progressed a great deal in the last couple of decades; a player who is already physically gifted can, with dedicated strength training and watching their diet, achieve and stay in high-level physical condition for many years.

As I noted, Randy Johnson is a physical freak - a 6'10" lefty with a somewhat deceptive delivery and great mechanics and fantastic arm speed generating a high-90's fastball and a wicked slider. With his height and delivery, his fastball probably got to the plate as fast or faster than just about any pitcher in history. Now, perhaps he juiced for the purposes of combating the natural wear and tear on his arm, allowing him to stay on top of his game well into his late 30's and early 40's - wouldn't surprise me. But, he may also just be a guy with the right genetics and the right mechanics to allow himself to avoid excessive damage to his arm.

What complicates things (for me) is Nolan Ryan - when he continued to dominate batters well into his 40's, it seemed to establish that it was possible for guys with the right mechanics and physical gifts to be very effective power pitchers for 20+ years, and so seeing guys like Clemens and Johnson follow similar paths in his wake, it didn't necessarily seem so odd. Now that we have confirmation of what many suspected, that Clemens was juicing, it makes you wonder whether Ryan may have as well. If he didn't, he provides an example that shows that what Johnson has done can be achieved without illegal supplements.

[clintl]

Looking over his stats, I think it's not really true that Johnson peaked at 37. He was about 31 when he established his dominance, and was very consistent over the next 6-7 years except in years when he had injuries or was trying to get traded.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by clintl

Looking over his stats, I think it's not really true that Johnson peaked at 37. He was about 31 when he established his dominance, and was very consistent over the next 6-7 years except in years when he had injuries or was trying to get traded.

Yep, that's how I look at it. When you consider the difference in leagues and no DH in the NL, I don't think his numbers with Arizona are really any better than his numbers with Seattle in '95 & '97 (he was injured in '96) outside of the innings pitched.

[Atocep]

Pettitte has come forward to admit using HGH. I don't see how Clemens can continue denying now.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3156305

[rowech]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3156305

Makes Clemens look the worse now that Pettite's admitted using...even if it's under the situation it is, I'm sure he went to Clemens to ask.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Pettitte has come forward to admit using HGH. I don't see how Clemens can continue denying now.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3156305

I imagine a lot of these players will come out now and say, "ya, I took something 7 years ago for a couple of weeks when I was rehabbing an injury".

Then it'll become like the "Pete Rose only bet to win" myth.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Ok, the headline was too much for me:

hxxp://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3160548

I can't tell tell if thats really ESPN or if its an Onion article.

[RomaGoth]

These players must think that all of us fans are complete morons. Brian Roberts says he only used it once in 2003. Yeah. Right. Andy Petitte says he only used it to rehab faster to help his team. What a complete joke. They are cheaters and should be labeled as such. As a Yankees fan i am completely and utterly embarassed. I would give back the 2000 World Series if we could get rid of Giambi and Petitte and erase all record that any of the other players that took this stuff ever even existed.

[molson]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

These players must think that all of us fans are complete morons. Brian Roberts says he only used it once in 2003. Yeah. Right. Andy Petitte says he only used it to rehab faster to help his team. What a complete joke. They are cheaters and should be labeled as such. As a Yankees fan i am completely and utterly embarassed. I would give back the 2000 World Series if we could get rid of Giambi and Petitte and erase all record that any of the other players that took this stuff ever even existed.

I don't even mind the cheating so much as these bullshit denials, and then half-denials (I only used it once).

Getting caught doing something, and then admitting the absolute minimum is such a chickenshit move, and unfortuantely, it's one that very effective in the public eye. I've already heard at least one sports radio guy saying - "Why are cruicfying Petitte, a guy who only used a few times". Same deal with Rose. He admits, but admits the absolute minimum, "I bet to win!!" Bullshit.

What's the point anymore? Why is every single player, without fail, making the whole MLBPA look like a bunch of assholes?

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by molson

I don't even mind the cheating so much as these bullshit denials, and then half-denials (I only used it once).

Getting caught doing something, and then admitting the absolute minimum is such a chickenshit move, and unfortuantely, it's one that very effective in the public eye. I've already heard at least one sports radio guy saying - "Why are cruicfying Petitte, a guy who only used a few times". Same deal with Rose. He admits, but admits the absolute minimum, "I bet to win!!" Bullshit.

What's the point anymore? Why is every single player, without fail, making the whole MLBPA look like a bunch of assholes?

Well said. I agree except for the cheating part. Once we accept cheating on a large scale as a society, everything will turn to shit for the future. I think about my son playing sports (he is 6 right now), and how if cheating is accepted in baseball, then he will have to endanger his life by taking HGH and steroids just to be able to compete with others his age. That would be a shame and a travesty.

As for the lying and deception, I really just want to walk up to each of these guys that has denied or admitted very little (you know who you are, Clemens, Bonds, Petitte, Roberts, Vina, etc.) and punch each one right in the neck. That's all.

[dawgfan]

I'm not sure if he's playing anymore, but this is an interesting read from C.J. Nitkowski regarding Brian McNamee (one of the primary sources of info in the Mitchell report and the guy that fingered Clemens). Also refreshing to see Nitkowski admit he seriously considered juicing, and not because he was trying to recover from injury - he'd had a bad year and was looking at ways to bounce back.

The article:
http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/12533581.html

[JS19]

This whole "I only used to it once, blah blah blah" is a bunch of BS. IMO, it's obvious that since they were caught, they now to try and save face, they admit it, so they seem like the good guys now, but, as the other guys already said, admit to the minimum. I honestly had no real big problem with this whole "steroids problem". IMO, it happened, it was part of the era, rules are now in place which will continue to get stronger...let it go. However, I know have a problem with the fact that guys like Pettitte and such will be looked at with no hard feelings since "it was only twice to help rehab". Bunch of crap.

[miami_fan]

How did this not get posted? An actual headline from the Trentonian on the 14th of Dec.

[molson]

That's tremendous. Something you're going to notice on the newstand.

[Logan]

So proud to have that be the paper of my home state's capital.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

These players must think that all of us fans are complete morons. Brian Roberts says he only used it once in 2003. Yeah. Right. Andy Petitte says he only used it to rehab faster to help his team. What a complete joke. They are cheaters and should be labeled as such. As a Yankees fan i am completely and utterly embarassed. I would give back the 2000 World Series if we could get rid of Giambi and Petitte and erase all record that any of the other players that took this stuff ever even existed.

They fingered 10% of the league with 2 trainers. You get all 32 trainers, and chances are, its almost the whole league. Pettite, etc, aren't any worse than the rest of them, they just happen to have a trainer who talked.



They all used it. Move on. We'll be much better off, if like Mitchell said, we look to fixing this, instead of going on a witch hunt.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Synovia

They fingered 10% of the league with 2 trainers. You get all 32 trainers, and chances are, its almost the whole league. Pettite, etc, aren't any worse than the rest of them, they just happen to have a trainer who talked.



They all used it. Move on. We'll be much better off, if like Mitchell said, we look to fixing this, instead of going on a witch hunt.

No witch hunt. Just disappointment. I always had suspicions that Clemens did the stuff, but the fact that he is clearly lying about it now despite the evidence is disconcerting. MLB is dead to me.

[DanGarion]

Did anyone see Clemens youtube video?
http://www.baseballmusings.com/archives/024308.php

[molson]

Clemens is a liar.

Why do MLB players insist on the charade? "I didn't use" or "I only used once". What a bunch of pussies.

[Young Drachma]

Changed my mind.

Read about steroids in the animal kingdom.

[Thomkal]

Surprised there's been no talk yet about Clemens on 60 Minutes last night, or the fact that's he's now suing McNamee-after an hour long phone conversation with him apparantly. Plus he has a news conference later today. Only saw a tiny part of the 60 minutes piece so can't really comment on it. I thought having a phone conversation with McNamee though, especially for as long as it went on was a bit strange. What were they talking about? Making a deal?

From what I've heard about the lawsuit, it seems like Clemens lawyer is making it sound like McNamee was coerced into saying stuff about Clemens taking steroids. Makes little sense why the government would do that to me, but then little of what the government does makes sense to me these days.

[rkmsuf]

it was obvious clemens was full of it in that 60 minutes interview.

whenever someone answers a question with "think about it, why would I do that." you know he's lying his ass off.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

The fact that McNamee's claim about Pettite was corroborated by Pettite himself gives McNamee all the credibility I need to see. Not to mention McNamee goes to jail if it ends up he lied about Clements to federal investigators. Here's a question for you Roger, "why would McNamee tell the truth about Pettite but lie about you?" In fact, Roger was asked that very question in the 60 minutes program. Roger's answer was "Andy's case is totally separate." I'm sorry, come again?

[dawgfan]

You guys might want to check out Shysterball.com - Clemens' case is looking better and better: http://shysterball.blogspot.com/