1. lazy boy derivative
    Joined
    11 Mar '06
    Moves
    71817
    02 Aug '09 16:31
    James offers a surprisong viewpoint on baseball payers and steroids.

    "How, then, are those people of the future—who are
    taking steroids every day—going to look back on baseball
    players who used steroids? They’re going to look
    back on them as pioneers. They’re going to look back at
    it and say “So what?”

    Further, James sees steroid use as a common practice.

    "If we look into the future,then, we can reliably foresee
    a time in which everybodyis going to be using steroids
    or their pharmaceutical descendants. We will learn to
    control the health risks of these drugs, or we will develop
    alternatives to them. Once that happens, people
    will start living to age 200 or 300 or 1,000, and doctors
    will begin routinely prescribing drugs to help you live to
    be 200 or 300 or 1,000. If you look into the future 40
    or 50 years, I think it is quite likely that every citizen will
    routinely take anti-aging pills every day."

    So, Manram and Bonds as couragious pioneers...hmmm
  2. Standard membersh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    New York
    Joined
    26 Dec '07
    Moves
    17585
    03 Aug '09 02:15
    Originally posted by badmoon
    James offers a surprisong viewpoint on baseball payers and steroids.

    "How, then, are those people of the future—who are
    taking steroids every day—going to look back on baseball
    players who used steroids? They’re going to look
    back on them as pioneers. They’re going to look back at
    it and say “So what?”

    Further, James sees steroid use as a common p ...[text shortened]... inely take anti-aging pills every day."

    So, Manram and Bonds as couragious pioneers...hmmm
    He said pioneers. He didn't say "courageous pioneers." Pioneers can be cheating pioneers as well.

    I love reading Bill James. Word for word, he's among the most interesting authors I know.
  3. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    53306
    03 Aug '09 13:12
    It is true that cheating will never end and there probably will to tougher issues in the future where there are legitimate reasons to use performance enhancing medicines. However this in no way makes it Ok to forgive or look the other way on known cheaters. None of them should ever be honored in the Hall of Fame
  4. Joined
    08 Oct '08
    Moves
    5542
    03 Aug '09 13:56
    The Bill James statement does raise an interesting point.

    The main reason why steroids and other "performance enhancements" are so bad is because they have clear negative side effects that force the more honest players to make a terrible choice if they hope to compete on a level playing field.

    But what happens when someone finds a way to use steroids in a way that eliminates the bad side effects? They may still be dangerous if mis-used, but safe if used under the supervision of a responsible, competent doctor. They'd be no different than the wide array of other prescription drugs and would presumably be legally available to the public to treat a wide array of conditions.

    We would presumably want to still ban players from mis-using these drugs and we'd have to crack down on any doctor who knowingly allowed this. But how would you differentiate these players from others that were using them properly and safely? You could no longer rely on the types of tests we use today that simply detect the presence of a banned substance. But it would be hard to imagine an outright ban on using a drug that was being used by many in the general public.

    This bridge will have to be crossed.
  5. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    53306
    03 Aug '09 14:54
    At some point the player is no longer human. I don't think I am being over purist when I say we do not want to use non-humans in the major leagues.
    I know I would not go to the ball park watch a rocket pinch run or a cannons instead or a human catcher try to throw him out.
  6. Joined
    08 Oct '08
    Moves
    5542
    03 Aug '09 17:181 edit
    Originally posted by quackquack
    At some point the player is no longer human. I don't think I am being over purist when I say we do not want to use non-humans in the major leagues.
    I know I would not go to the ball park watch a rocket pinch run or a cannons instead or a human catcher try to throw him out.
    I understand

    But what happens if the general public is benefitting from the legal use of "performance enhancements" -- I can see steroids being especially beneficial for elderly people who have become frail, or in helping people recover from serious injuries -- But once this happens, how do you tell athletes they can't use them?

    Also -- no matter how pumped up his muscles were, Jose Canseco was still Jose Canseco -- as far as I know, he never turned into a robot or a rocketship.
  7. lazy boy derivative
    Joined
    11 Mar '06
    Moves
    71817
    03 Aug '09 21:24
    That is the problem, steroids help in recovering from injuries but how to define the line of abuse.

    If they were only used for injuries would any of you mind?
  8. Subscribershortcircuit
    The Energizer
    where you want to be
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    66503
    06 Aug '09 21:50
    Originally posted by quackquack
    It is true that cheating will never end and there probably will to tougher issues in the future where there are legitimate reasons to use performance enhancing medicines. However this in no way makes it Ok to forgive or look the other way on known cheaters. None of them should ever be honored in the Hall of Fame
    I am taking some liberties with your point to stress mine.

    Cheating has gone on in baseball since it's inception.

    Should I say it again? Cheating has gone on in baseball since it's inception.

    Can I prove it and support my claim? You had better believe it.

    First and foremost, within the premise of the games rules, it calls for cheating. Ever heard of a runner trying to "steal" a base? Granted, this is small potatoes compared to the rest of my arguement.

    Ever heard of an opposing player or players trying to "steal" the other teams signs? Happens all the time. It is cheating, but it is allowed. Then why do they come down on the home team for installing cameras or microphones to assist in this effort, since it is obviously okay to steal signs? Curious indeed!!

    Ever heard of a home team manicuring the field to give them an unfair advantage? Happens all the time. Letting the grass grow higher to keep ground balls on the infield against slower teams. Watering the dirt areas extra heavy against faster teams to slow their progress on the basepaths. How about dragging the foul lines so the bunts spin fair on the foul lines, or roll out into foul territory if they so choose?
    How about the compostion of the pitcher's mound? Slight elevation adjustments for power pitchers. Softening the landing zone for long striders or slide pitchers. happens all the time.

    How about illegal pitches. The spitter? How many verified cheats are in the HOF who openly cheated and were caught? Gaylord Perry is the crown prince. He even wrote a book on how he did it. Then you have the doctor's who use finger nails, files, emory boards, whatever to deface the ball. Scuffers are plentiful and they are in the HOF too, with many more yet to come.

    How about users of corked bats or loaded bats? Happens alot, although not as often now.

    How about excessive pine tar on the bat? The rule is clear, yet HOF'er George Brett hit a HR in a game with pine tar too far up the handle. When Billy Martin protested, laughing all the way because it was a technicality, the umpire correctly, tossed him out of the game and ruled the hit an out. It wasn't until the furor over the correct call that caused the commissioner to overturn the umpire's decision.

    Gambling? Oh baby, don't get me started here. There have been many who gambled, many who gambled on baseball, but only a few caught and crucified. Joe Jackson and Pete Rose are being persecuted and left out of the HOF for thier heinous crimes, but both should be in the HOF with the rest of the cheats.

    How about the drunkards, the wife beaters, the whoremongers?? Too many of them to list here, but why not start with Babe Ruth, Mickey Mantle and Whitey Ford. The list is long, but my point is made.

    Then you have the tax evaders. These are criminals against the governemnt, yet they are throughout the HOF. Mike Schmidt, Reggie Jackson, Willie McCovey, Willie Mays and Orlando Cepeda are just a few of the guilty here.

    Now we have steroids. I am so sick of listening to the rhetoric on this topic. Now we have people wanting to taint the record book because of suspected steroid use. Wake up and smell the coffee!! Equipment is better. Technique is better. Modes of travel are better. These reasons alone contribute to why there are differences between decades in player output and performance. The use of steroids is but on little part of the puzzle.

    Look at all of the ways there are to cheat mentioned above, and look how many cheats there are in the HOF, and tell me who in the heck these idiots think they are kidding? The whole arguement is a joke. Especially in light of the fact that the owner's were the ones who requested that players juice in the beginning, and in many cases, made the stuff available to them. Shocked? Don't be. The reason was they had lost the fan base due to the labor wars and the subsequent strike and lockout and they had to win the fans back. They figured the way to do it was with offense. They did everthing imaginiable to spur offense from shrinking the strike zone to shortening fences, to providing performance enhancing drugs to star players and many cusp players. Then, the pitcher's were forced to follow suit to try and stay on equal footing with the hitters. Bud Selig knew of this and he is as guilty as the other cronies in the billionaire boys club who control the game.

    None of this is conjecture. This is all fact. First hand knowledge fact. There are many in the know. The writers are a bunch of contempable scum for the most part too. They work the bribes for story angles and story lines. They can make or break players by what they write. They cut deals for exclusives and are basically a bunch of whores not worthy of wasting a bullet on. Note, that I said "most" not "all" There are some good guys out there that do it right. However, these are the ones who sit in judgement of the players who are considered for the HOF.

    The whole process and concept has become a mockery and a menagerie.
  9. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    53306
    07 Aug '09 13:12
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    I am taking some liberties with your point to stress mine.

    Cheating has gone on in baseball since it's inception.

    Should I say it again? Cheating has gone on in baseball since it's inception.

    Can I prove it and support my claim? You had better believe it.

    First and foremost, within the premise of the games rules, it calls for cheating. Ever ...[text shortened]... e HOF.

    The whole process and concept has become a mockery and a menagerie.
    Everything you say may be true but that does not change the importance of this issue. While I think you bring up an excellent point on what is the beginning of cheating or what minor acts may no longer be gamesmanship, I believe we are in a dimension that it is undisputable. Average players or severely flawed players are putting up all time great numbers. It is not legitamite; it goes to the core of what we are watching; to me it is a huge concern.
    I'd put your issues is four categories:
    (1) Baseball does not have uniformity rules so certain advantages are permitted (high grass, short outfield walls, pitchers park, wetting down the base passes). I would argue that it is permitted as home field variations that are the same for both teams. I understand arguments for uniformity but this is both tradition and "flavor of the game" and I fully accept it.
    (2) Stealing signs is more against "unwritten rules" It does not bother me one bit; if you are dumb enough to have obvious signs and think they are secret than I cannot imagine why you complain. Perhaps technology could eliminate this problem if it really bothers you.
    (3) Corked bats, sand paper, cutting baseballs, spit balls are unacceptable. The advantages you get are not permitted. I think it was a huge mistake to put Gaylord Perry in the Hall of Fame. I do not think society would have accepted his cheating today and I think that it is one of the few things I could actually site as improvement in the game. I would recommend harsher penalties for these acts.
    (4) Performance enhancing drugs are a complete joke and you seem to imply that I should accept them because of the all the other catergories. I personally cannot accept that Sosa hit more homeruns than Mantle when he could barely be a starting out fielder before performance inhancing drugs or the Giambi went from an MVP candidate to a .240 hitter when he stopped using performance enhancing drugs. That Palmiero could be a college teammate of Will Clark and no one in the wourld thought Palmiero was a star but he uses drug to get him over 500 homeruns or that mark McGwire can jump from 200 to 583 homeruns because he cheated.

    Instead of enjoying Puljos greatness, I question his legitamacy. People don't (although perhaps they should) ask is it possible that Michael Jordan really was so good? But it is a huge problem for baseball that people question every great event they see. Your a big baseball fan, I would think it bothers you too.
  10. Joined
    08 Oct '08
    Moves
    5542
    07 Aug '09 14:332 edits
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    I am taking some liberties with your point to stress mine.

    Cheating has gone on in baseball since it's inception.

    Should I say it again? Cheating has gone on in baseball since it's inception.

    Can I prove it and support my claim? You had better believe it.

    First and foremost, within the premise of the games rules, it calls for cheating. Ever e HOF.

    The whole process and concept has become a mockery and a menagerie.
    The big problem with steroids and other performance-enhancers is that they pose a significant long-term health risk. No one should have to feel they need to take some drug that could kill them, just so they can compete with players who use these drugs. This is an especially big concern at lower levels like college, high school, and even little league. If the pros are allowed to get away with using these drugs, how many kids will feel they need to risk their life just to make the varsity team?

    The issue will become much more difficult once the medical community finds safe ways for these drugs to be used, and when they are commonly used by many people for legitimate purposes.

    Other issues include

    1. Players that commit crimes or otherwise violate the laws governing all of society. In general, I don't want the HOF to be concerned with judging players' personal lives. I don't want to hear endless debates over whether a given player was drunk often enough to disqualify him, or whether he was abusing his kids or merely disciplining them. The HOF is about celebrating a player's on-field accomplishments, it's not about canonizing them as saints.

    2. The HOF should be concerned with behaviors that directly threaten the integrity of the game -- such as people who gambled on baseball games while they were playing or managing - people like Pete Rose and the Black Sox. Steroid users also undermine the game's integrity and set a terrible example for young people in the sport. You can make a strong case for keeping out Gaylord Perry and other admitted illegal spitball users.

    3. I doubt that George Brett intentionally violated the rule with his pine tar bat, and the league itself realized the rule had become a useless technicality. It was originally imposed because pine tar could be used to hide a "doctored bat". There's zero evidence that Brett's bat was "doctored". No one was cheating here.

    4. The stealing of signs is one of those things that everyone agrees is part of the game. The reason they ban electronic equipment is that it would give the home team a huge advantage. As for things like manicuring of the grass, these are considered just parts of the homefield advantage. I suppose you could argue the same for sign-stealing cameras, but the league can make whatever rules it wants about these things. As long as everyone is abiding by the rules, none of this is cheating.

    5. stolen bases? come on.

    One interesting issue involves players that used steroids etc BEFORE the league officially made it illegal to do so. As such, these players were not technically "cheating" - some may well have considered them to be no different than any other kind of supplement. On the other hand, it was officially illegal for these substances to used in society at large, so the honest players could argue that they were forced to "break the law" if they wanted to compete on a level playing field.
  11. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    53306
    07 Aug '09 15:39
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    The big problem with steroids and other performance-enhancers is that they pose a significant long-term health risk. No one should have to feel they need to take some drug that could kill them, just so they can compete with players who use these drugs. This is an especially big concern at lower levels like college, high school, and even little league. If ...[text shortened]... re forced to "break the law" if they wanted to compete on a level playing field.
    I agree with you on just about everything especially the Pine Tar (rule violation) as opposed to the Black Sox/ Pete Rose betting on the game (cheating).
    I do however, have clear feelings on your "open issue"

    Steriods and HGH with bogus/ no perscriptions were always illegal and not permitted. The fact that at a later time leagues started testing and/ or specifically banning these substances in no way makes them acceptable beforehand. The actions of the athletes themselves indicate that they believed they were cheating.
    A-Rod for example claims that his cousin went to a different country to get a drug that would help his performance. If it were legitimate he would have gotten them for free from his team doctor (I'm guessing he does not pay for his cousin to go to another country to get batting gloves) or an American doctor. You only sneak around and pay out of your own pocket for things that you know are not permitted.
  12. Joined
    08 Oct '08
    Moves
    5542
    07 Aug '09 17:392 edits
    Originally posted by quackquack
    I agree with you on just about everything especially the Pine Tar (rule violation) as opposed to the Black Sox/ Pete Rose betting on the game (cheating).
    I do however, have clear feelings on your "open issue"

    Steriods and HGH with bogus/ no perscriptions were always illegal and not permitted. The fact that at a later time leagues started testing and/ only sneak around and pay out of your own pocket for things that you know are not permitted.
    I agree -- ultimately, they were violating the law by using illegal substances. They should have known the law and they should have followed it.

    As for A-Rod's story, if it indeed happened the way he says it did. In the New York metro area, there's a radio station WOR. Back in the 90's, I was listening to a lot of talk radio programs, and when nothing else was on, I'd turn on WOR -- and it was usually someone hawking some "magical supplement" (I remember one of them was "arctic root" ). It was funny listening to some of this - I soon was referring to the station as Weird Organic Remedies.

    Now I can easily imagine A-Rod's cousin telling him all about some amazing "arctic root" stuff he found that does all sorts of amazing things. Now the smart thing would be to say "I'm not taking some strange herb that could kill me for all I know -- what's in it? -- has anyone done any tests on this stuff -- is everything legal -- why don't my trainers know about it? But it's clear that athletes don't always use their brains. Plaxico Burress's decision to bring a gun to a nightclub is exhibit A.

    So did A-Rod knowingly take an illegal substance and thus cheated, or was he just being stupid. But ignorance of the law is no excuse, so either way, he must accept the consequences.
  13. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    53306
    07 Aug '09 18:222 edits
    Baseball players have easy access and are used to getting treament from doctors. In fact, they have somany dealing with doctors it is very difficult for me to belive that any athlete would feel that treatment from non doctors is legimate treatment. Certainly athletes continually get medicines from private labs (Bonds) injections from personal trainers (Clemens) medicine from your cousin in the Dominican Republic (A-Rod), medicine that Bonds told me help me (Sheffield). These athletes know it is not a legimate alternative medicine; they are working hard to get people who will cheat to give them an edge.
  14. Joined
    08 Oct '08
    Moves
    5542
    07 Aug '09 20:23
    Originally posted by quackquack
    Baseball players have easy access and are used to getting treament from doctors. In fact, they have somany dealing with doctors it is very difficult for me to belive that any athlete would feel that treatment from non doctors is legimate treatment. Certainly athletes continually get medicines from private labs (Bonds) injections from personal trainers ( ...[text shortened]... e alternative medicine; they are working hard to get people who will cheat to give them an edge.
    Clemens brings up an interesting issue. Players are generally not medical experts. So they place a lot of trust in their doctors and trainers to prescribe what's best for them (and presumably based on sound medicine). But what happens if a trainer decides (secretly) to give players illegal supplements? Maybe he calls it a B12 shot. The trainer can then proclaim that his "superior workout regimen" is making his players stronger than other trainers' programs. That trainer's services are suddenly very popular and he's able to make a lot of money. And if someone tests positive, the trainer can act dumb and say "I never gave him any of that" - and the player is honestly in disbelief about how steroids got into his body.
  15. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    53306
    07 Aug '09 20:49
    I think it is far more likely that Clemens knew that (1) a legitimate doctor would not give him performance enhancing drugs (2) it has hard to find a dirty doctor who would give him performance enhancers
    (3) so he found an illegitimate "trainer" who would give him what he wanted.

    I do not believe that professional athletes are all stupid and/ or niave. Clemens did not win Cy Youngs by being ignorant about in the ins and out of the game. He knew all about training (both legal and illegal) and decided the risk of illegal was worth it. I would simply be inaccurate to claim in any way that Clemens was naive or just was unluck to get a "dirty trainer" Clemens sought a "drug dealer" and used the drugs. To e Clemens should get the same amount of respect as any other junkie.
Back to Top