Asian Fever

Steroids in baseball

H

Hardatwork

Mike Hawk said:
IF THE STEROID USE IS PROVEN.
I think that's one of the big problems though. How do you prove it? How long has it been a problem? What about amphetamines? Other performance enhancing drugs? There's been talk about certain pills and vials in Hank Aaron's locker and that was a long time ago. It would be difficult to prove who was on steroids and other performance enhancing drugs and who wasn't. Looking at Mark McGwire, I would swear that he was on 'roids, but there's no proof, same as Sammy Sosa.

I'm not a fan of Jose Canseco, but the one thing that I can say about him is that to date, he's been the most honest guy at that infamous Congressional hearing. Congress let McGwire off the hook, when they could have pinned him for a more damning answer, but instead let him skate with feeble answer about moving forward and not looking back. Same with Sosa... what do you mean your English isn't good enough to understand? Wasn't there translators there?

MLB secretly loves guys on steroids and the most blatent example of this is when they allowed Palmeiro to continue his quest for 3000 hits even though he had tested positive weeks earlier... pathetic.
 

timmy!

Member
Jun 1, 2003
84
0
6
victoria
Barroid Bonds is a joke, he never even hit over 50hrs in a season til he broke the record in his late 30's as a steroid user. It's a shame he's going to pass the Babe soon. When Ruth hit 60 in a season in 1927, Gherig was second with 48...then the next player dropped to 18. I think he may have even hit more homeruns that year then some teams entire lineup.
 

JustAGuy

New member
Jul 3, 2004
1,054
4
0
79
Manitoba
Mike Hawk said:
And then there's the entire underside of what younger kids are doing to themselves to try to get to the big leagues....and what they think is OK because "pros do it".
Excellent point, Mike. High school kids routinely take steroids now with the idea that it is the edge they need to eventually turn pro in whatever sport they're playing. And there's no shortage of unscrupulous people ready and willing to make a buck by selling them to these kids. I'm sure there are many cases similar to the one documented last year on NBC News of the high school kid in Texas who probably was good enough to turn pro simply on pure talent alone but who succumbed to the belief that taking steroids would guarantee success. He wound up undergoing severe mood swings as well as myriad physical problems that eventually resulted in him taking his own life. I'm sure it's a problem now that extends even to kids younger than high school age. And when they see juiced up athletes like McGwire, Bonds and Palmeiro achieving fame, riches and adulation, there's precious little incentive for them to do the right thing and eschew steroids.
 

BIGblackstudd

Member
Oct 6, 2003
307
0
16
Herb_The_Perb said:
This is incorrect -- the greatest hitters have been power hitters.
Ruth, Bonds, Williams, Gehrig, Mantle, etc. -- not Gwynn, Boggs, Carew, Ashburn, etc.
A high BA means little in itself. A home run is the best possible offensive outcome, and the best place to put a ball is where it can't be caught -- in the seats.
Contact hitters con't put the ball where they wish most of the time.
I think the greatest hitters were Pete Rose and Ty Cobb. Neither of them hit more than 160 career homeruns so maybe you might be incorrect?
 

ace85

Banned
Jan 30, 2004
740
0
0
50
So why do they not admitt it then

If there is nothing wrong with what they are doing why do they continue to lie.

BABE Ruth admitted to drink eat and fuck constantly, he did not hide his lifestyle.

The roid users are liars and pretend.

That is the reality.

I will whole heartedly support the athlete that stands up and says I use roids, this is why and doesn't hide behind some lie.

Right now they are cowards
 

JustAGuy

New member
Jul 3, 2004
1,054
4
0
79
Manitoba
The Lizard King said:
So who the goes to the Hall of Fame? Rose? Bonds? Both? Neither?
Apples and oranges, LK. The former is being punished for what he did off the field. His on field accomplishments definitely merit inclusion in the Hall of Fame. But off field, he besmirched the game and I don't think he has ever admitted that he actually did bet on baseball (we're supposed to believe he limited his betting to college and pro football and basketball? Give me a break!).

Bonds, on the other hand, is on the verge of becoming the all time leader in career home runs and there is no way the 178 pound outfielder who broke in with Pittsburgh could have become the musclebound creature he is now without using "performance enhancing drugs". Hell, he was little more than a slightly better than average player until his early 30's. Pro athletes (or amateur ones, for that matter) don't reach 31 or 32 and then get BETTER. The peak of an athlete's physical prowess is probably somewhere around 28 or 29, maybe even younger.

The first time Bonds hit over 40 home runs was in his eighth big league season at the age of 29 (his first year with the Giants). The next time he did it, he was 32. He hit 73 home runs in his sixteenth big league season at the age of 37. WTF?? A corked bat? Baseballs manufactured on the moon? No, myself and millions of others attribute it to taking steroids and his association with Balco is pretty much the smoking gun.

In my opinion neither one them belongs in the Hall of Fame. But if Roger Maris got an asterisk in the record book because he broke Babe Ruth's single season record during a 162 game season as opposed to the 154 game season in Ruth's day, then every single record Bonds sets should have a half dozen asterisks alongside it. Rose's career hit total, however, will and should stand in the record books for the incredible accomplishment that it was.
 

Herb_The_Perb

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2005
2,011
1
0
Far South of the Border
BIGblackstudd said:
I think the greatest hitters were Pete Rose and Ty Cobb. Neither of them hit more than 160 career homeruns so maybe you might be incorrect?
The purpose of offense is not to hit singles. It's to produce runs. Cobb was good at that, but not the best.
Rose not very good at that, He made far more outs than anyone else, yet didn't score or bat in the most runs.
 

Herb_The_Perb

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2005
2,011
1
0
Far South of the Border
Mike Hawk said:
By any standards, Babe was the greatest offensive player ever. Williams and Mays may be next.
There's a good single-number stat for measuring offense -- Offensive Winning Percentage. It calculates how well a team of 9 clones of the player in question would do vs. a league-average lineup -- how often would that player win. Here are the top finishers (Mays finishes 23rd.)
Rank Player OWP
1 Babe Ruth .852 **
2 Ted Williams .832 *
3 Barry Bonds .814
4 Mickey Mantle .801
5 Lou Gehrig .797 **
6 Rogers Hornsby .787 **
7 Ty Cobb .781 **
8 Joe Jackson .780 **
9 Dan Brouthers .770 **
10 Frank Thomas .753
11 Stan Musial .752
12 Honus Wagner .749 **
13 Tris Speaker .748 **
14 Pete Browning .745 **
15 Billy Hamilton .744 **
16 Jimmie Foxx .743 **
17 Mel Ott .743 **
18 Johnny Mize .743 **
19 Joe DiMaggio .741 **
20 Mark McGwire .737

The older players on this list should be downgraded somewhat for playing against weaker competition (no Blacks and very few Latin-Americans, for instance). Two asterisks after a player's % mean that he played against relatively weak competition. One means he played against less weak competition, but still weaker than post-1960 standards.
This is the most competitive era in history.
 
Last edited:

sexaholic

Banned
Jan 30, 2005
77
0
0
read

I recommend highly that you people purchase and read jose canceco's book Juiced.
 

ace85

Banned
Jan 30, 2004
740
0
0
50
Herb_The_Perb said:
There's a good single-number stat for measuring offense -- Offensive Winning Percentage. It calculates how well a team of 9 clones of the player in question would do vs. a league-average lineup -- how often would that player win. Here are the top finishers (Mays finishes 23rd.)
Rank Player OWP
1 Babe Ruth .852 **
2 Ted Williams .832 *
3 Barry Bonds .814
4 Mickey Mantle .801
5 Lou Gehrig .797 **
6 Rogers Hornsby .787 **
7 Ty Cobb .781 **
8 Joe Jackson .780 **
9 Dan Brouthers .770 **
10 Frank Thomas .753
11 Stan Musial .752
12 Honus Wagner .749 **
13 Tris Speaker .748 **
14 Pete Browning .745 **
15 Billy Hamilton .744 **
16 Jimmie Foxx .743 **
17 Mel Ott .743 **
18 Johnny Mize .743 **
19 Joe DiMaggio .741 **
20 Mark McGwire .737

The older players on this list should be downgraded somewhat for playing against weaker competition (no Blacks and very few Latin-Americans, for instance). Two asterisks after a player's % mean that he played against relatively weak competition. One means he played against less weak competition, but still weaker than post-1960 standards.
This is the most competitive era in history.
More than Half your list wouldn't be considered BIG Time Home Run Hitters, more likely well balanced hitters. 2 are rampant steroid users (something should be said about their advantage over the competition.

Thanks for making my point Herb.

But please take into consideration the fact that the best hitters were situational hitters, and could do what the situation required. With out people on base in front of them their performance would be different.

I personally would take Teddy ballgame over anyone else in any situation he would simply do what needed to be done.
 

bonanzabob

Member
Nov 13, 2004
192
12
18
Burnaby
Idle Mid-day thoughts

Isn't professional sports just a form of entertainment ?

So what does it matter if people cheat, since it's all just a show?

I'm with Byson on this one.

The only thing I'm p****d off at is that they make more money than I do.

(.........he thinks as he puts on his flame resistant armor)
 

ace85

Banned
Jan 30, 2004
740
0
0
50
The worst part

Is they are all liars, as are tons and tons of celbrities.

They are chasing the buck, willing to cheat to get ahead, but afraid to admit it.
 

Herb_The_Perb

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2005
2,011
1
0
Far South of the Border
ace85 said:
But please take into consideration the fact that the best hitters were situational hitters, and could do what the situation required. With out people on base in front of them their performance would be different.
I personally would take Teddy ballgame over anyone else in any situation he would simply do what needed to be done.
Tell me one situation where hitting a home run is not the most effective possible thing.
You seem to believe that contact hitters can do exactly what they intend. If that were so, they would be hitting 1.000.
 

Herb_The_Perb

Senior Member
Jan 4, 2005
2,011
1
0
Far South of the Border
ace85 said:
Is they are all liars, as are tons and tons of celbrities.

They are chasing the buck, willing to cheat to get ahead, but afraid to admit it.
What's with your obsession with celebrities? And now jocks?
It sounds like you're a victim of pop culture values and mass media.
And you're appartently not very successful in your own life, so you resent those who are.
Turn your wrath against the political thugs who are engaged ib undermining western civilization -- the terrorists living and working at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Oh, I forgot, those are your heroes.
 
Last edited:

ace85

Banned
Jan 30, 2004
740
0
0
50
Success

I am quite comfortable in my life thanks.

I actually have issues with segments of the modern day professional athlete.

The me first attitude in team sports is wrong, and the "entertainment" versus sports argument is wrong too.

A guy on Sunday, Chad Johnson for the Bengals actually shooed away a teamate so he could do his endzone dance alone. This is wrong on so Many Levels.

As a paying customer of the NFL, I object to that. Act like you have been there before. It is your job to catch the ball. And before you spout off to me about something racial, Jeremy Shockey (NY Giants white) is a scourge to society as well.

The entire look at me culture we live in. How you act and what you do to be an example doesn't matter, live your own life damn the concequences, me, me, me lifestyle, is problematic to me.

Sorry that world isn't coming from the White House Herb. But nice try.
 
Last edited:

ace85

Banned
Jan 30, 2004
740
0
0
50
Herb_The_Perb said:
Tell me one situation where hitting a home run is not the most effective possible thing.
You seem to believe that contact hitters can do exactly what they intend. If that were so, they would be hitting 1.000.
Herb what do you really know about Baseball.

Do you realize pitchers are less effective pitching out of the "stretch" with men on base. Do you realize that there are more holes in the infield when a first baseman has to cover first base.

Do you realize that hitters get more fastballs (easier to hit especially when you can expect it) when someone who is a threat to steal or score from second or go first to third is on base.

You do realize that hitters are better when they are surrounded by good hitters, becasue they get more pitches to hit.

The ability to manufacture runs in tight games when you are facing specialized pitchers is all that matters in the POST season. The big home RUN doesn't win games.

Look at Barry Bonds last world series appearance. He did squat, he is not a clutch hitter, and when you look at his numbers many are hollow, hitting home runs in 7-3 games or when his team is getting blown out. He readily admitts he is all about his numbers, that matters more to him that winning.

How many World Series has he won.

As you list showed. More than 1/2 of the top 20 were considered cotact / average / balanced hitters. Who didn't simply swing for the fences.

Baseball is about getting on base, advancing runners, situational hitting and knocking guys in. Home Run Hitting may appear to be the best out come.

Lets look at an example. Bottom of the ninth none out down by 2 or 3 runs.

Is a solo home run the best outcome. Should every batter be swinging for the fences? In your world obviously yes. In anyone actually knowledgeable about baseball would say no. You need to get some one on base. In the case of trailing by 2 runs you want to get the tying run to the plate.

And you are at an advatage of accomplishing positive things if men are on base.

Why wasn't Dave Kingman a very good baseball player. All he did was hit home runs or strike out, or ground into double plays with men on base.

See with you HERB you seem to suffer from trying to Debate something you don't really understand. You actually appear to be a dangerous guy, you know the kind of guy that thinks his small amount of knowledge about lots of things makes him smart.

You are in over your pay grade on this one Herb.
 

The Lizard King

New member
Jul 8, 2003
1,272
0
0
After checking out some of the clips from the McCain grilling today, I cannot believe after all the bullshit, MLB and their union still have no plan on the immediate horizon let alone in place already.

See the way Hank Aaron handled himself in comparison to the "superstars" of this generation? What a gentleman, all class. Think of all the bigotry he encountered throughout his career, especially early on and as he was approaching the Babe's record. It will be a real shame if or when Bonds passes him.
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts