Originally posted by poundlee you gotta be kidding steriods don't improve perfromance. I guess Ben Johnson just risked his career and health and set a world record in the 100 and it was a coincidence that he tested positive. McGwire and Bonds and Sosa just magically started hitting 60+ homers a season.
I seem to remember him running pretty fast before. There was an across the board statistical increase in home runs in the major leagues in the late 90's, probably related to yet another round of expansion and most teams now keeping 11 or 12 pitchers on the rosters (plus a number of small fields being built). If it was soooooooooooooooo simple to just start shooting up steroids and you automatically hit a ton of home runs, more than a handful of players would have shown such dramatic improvement. Steroids used with other measures can increase muscle mass (as can weightlifting and certain diets), but that alone does not a home run hitter make.
Most of these arguments are circular; McGwire et al starting hitting more home runs (though as mentioned, Mac set the AL record for home runs as a rookie) THEREFORE they must have used steroids THEREFORE their use of steroids was the reason they hit more home runs.
Originally posted by no1marauder That's "key" how again? Actually, steroids don't improve performance on the field either.
You should have told Rafael Palmeiro this before he got caught. What an idiot he was, taking a banned drug when it didn't even improve his performance.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem You should have told Rafael Palmeiro this before he got caught. What an idiot he was, taking a banned drug when it didn't even improve his performance.
What an idiot you are simply parroting the same claims over and over again. Here's Palmeiro's lifetime numbers: http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/palmera01.shtml
He never hit over 47 home runs and hit 37 as early as 1993.
Lets talk about Palmiero
(1) he actually tested positive for steriods
(2) he mysteriously developed power later in his career and changed from a a singles hitter to a power hitter
(3) he magically became better than peers who were always better than him. For example Will Clark and he were college teammates and Will Clark was always considered the better prospect. They enter MLB and early in their careers Will Clark is much better, but as time goes on Palmiero ends up better. Why? well, I think I said it already. He tested positive for steriods.
Steriods are the difference between guys careers declining as they get older (say Bernie Williams or Ken Griffey Jr. and guys improving inspite of age Sosa, McGwire, Bonds). It is a tremendous difference.
Originally posted by jofaz Lets talk about Palmiero
(1) he actually tested positive for steriods
(2) he mysteriously developed power later in his career and changed from a a singles hitter to a power hitter
(3) he magically became better than peers who were always better than him. For example Will Clark and he were college teammates and Will Clark was always considered the better pr ...[text shortened]... ey Jr. and guys improving inspite of age Sosa, McGwire, Bonds). It is a tremendous difference.
Nonsense. You obviously didn't bother to look at Palmeiro's stats that I provided.
EDIT: Hank Aaron had his single season high in home runs, 47, in 1971 when he was 37 years old. http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/aaronha01.shtml
If he was playing today, he'd be accused of being a steroid user.
Originally posted by no1marauder When Barry Bonds is replaced with an android, the analogy would make sense. For now, it doesn't.
Who said anything about replacement? The strongest CC player is the "centaur" - the combination of reasonably strong human and computer (e.g., Arno Nickel).
Originally posted by no1marauder What an idiot you are simply parroting the same claims over and over again. Here's Palmeiro's lifetime numbers: http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/palmera01.shtml
He never hit over 47 home runs and hit 37 as early as 1993.
Why did Palmeiro continue taking steroids, if they weren't helping his numbers?
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem Why did Palmeiro continue taking steroids, if they weren't helping his numbers?
Assuming he did knowingly take them (something he denies), I presume to help build or maintain muscle mass. But increased muscle mass alone does not translate to increased power in baseball. That's the point; something you continually ignore.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem Who said anything about replacement? The strongest CC player is the "centaur" - the combination of reasonably strong human and computer (e.g., Arno Nickel).
So what? A steroid can't swing a bat for you, so it's not like a chess engine. It can merely help you get increased muscle mass, something that is not a direct part of baseball like telling you what move to make is in chess.
Originally posted by no1marauder Assuming he did knowingly take them (something he denies), I presume to help build or maintain muscle mass. But increased muscle mass alone does not translate to increased power in baseball. That's the point; something you continually ignore.
How does one 'accidently' take steroids? I find his denial hard to believe.
Players take steroids to improve their performance. (I certainly haven't heard a good alternate explanation for why they'd take them.) The fact that it does not work for some of them is irrelevant. The intent is all that matters.
Originally posted by no1marauder So what? A steroid can't swing a bat for you, so it's not like a chess engine. It can merely help you get increased muscle mass, something that is not a direct part of baseball like telling you what move to make is in chess.
Steroid-enhanced muscles can help the ball go farther when you hit it, just like a chess engine can supplement a strong CC player's efforts by pointing out tactical flaws. Also, a centaur is more likely to play human moves in endgames such as N v. B with locked pawns. Not all engine users take their machine's suggestions on blind faith. I bet you still oppose engine use even if it is used for only some moves, or just as a blunder-check.
Originally posted by no1marauder So what? A steroid can't swing a bat for you, so it's not like a chess engine. It can merely help you get increased muscle mass, something that is not a direct part of baseball like telling you what move to make is in chess.
You think an Engine can win as an engine against a user who is 'good' at chess AND an engine user? Look at the idiots who get caught right away vs. users who finally get caught after long searches.
They use the engine like a drug to be much better... just like an MLB player who's good and switches to using steroids. Better power, quicker healing, longer time in the big leagues because they took steroids.
Please stop treating steroids like bubblegum. There would be no reason to risk your health over steroids if they didn't help you a lot.
Originally posted by no1marauder Nonsense. You obviously didn't bother to look at Palmeiro's stats that I provided.
EDIT: Hank Aaron had his single season high in home runs, 47, in 1971 when he was 37 years old. http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/aaronha01.shtml
If he was playing today, he'd be accused of being a steroid user.
It is nice of you to be rude, especially when you have a distinct minority opinion. But, Hank Aaron is VERY different from Palmiero and Bonds.
(1) Aaron always hit a lot of homers and broke the 40 homer mark regularly so even if his highest total was when he was 37. He was not a guy who was a slap hitter like Palmiero and Bonds who in their thirties started doubling their home run totals
(2) The largest honor you can possibly give a babseball player is to put him in the hall of fame. I just wouldn't bestow that honor on someone if there is overwhelming evidence that they cheated. Palmiero tested positive.
(3) Bonds got indicted. Both have huge circumstantial evidence. Both were arrogant on these issues and tehrefore do not deserve the benefit of any doubt. How much more evidence do you need?
McGwire in the Hall of Fame?
01 Dec '06 04:121 edit
Back to Top