October 10, 200520 yr http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writ...ily/index.html/ The last line I think was the best one.
October 10, 200520 yr Wow. Stephen Cannella ripping on a Yankee. How surprising. [yawn] Sadly, the facts tend to get in the way of a good rant. How many times has Giambi tested positive for steroids? How many times has he been tested THIS YEAR for steroids and come up clean? If he had used steroids in the past - and I'm not saying he didn't but you can not assume he did - he has certainly not been taking them this year. Steroids or not - he had a petuitary tumor and that DOES hurt your body and sap it of its strength. [Rumors were that he used it as an excuse to explain his failing strength after coming off the juice - horse puckey!] The Guy wasn't even hitting his weight early in the year. For him to put up the numbers he did following the All-Star break? Steroids don't work THAT fast... I also find it a stretch to compare Giambi - who is alleged to have taken steroids in the past - to Palmeiro - who tested positive for steroids this year. Now, why would a sports writer take this particular stance on this issue? Hmm, interesting that Cannella grew up about 30 minutes from Fenway and went to school at Boston College. Gee - I wonder if there is any bias there? :mischief2 Oh wait a minute. Here's another rant about how upset he is that he isn't allowed to wear his "Yankees Suck" t-shirt to Fenway http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writ...rant/index.html Oh, and here's a rant from the All Star break where he decides the Yankees are in "tear-down mode" and wont make the playoffs: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writ...half/index.html :mischief Last year he ripped on Torre. He predicts the fall of the Yankee dynasty every year [eventually he will be right]. He predicts the Red Sox to win the World Series every year [1 out of 10 isn't exceptional, Steve-o]. I think he's got a Red Sox tatoo on his left butt cheek... [okay - that last one is pure speculation but clearly as valid as any of his points on Giambi because speculation carries weight at ESPN and should be considered fact] Yeah - the only thing hard to stomach is this article...
October 10, 200520 yr Wow. Stephen Cannella ripping on a Yankee. How surprising. [yawn] Sadly, the facts tend to get in the way of a good rant. How many times has Giambi tested positive for steroids? How many times has he been tested THIS YEAR for steroids and come up clean? If he had used steroids in the past - and I'm not saying he didn't but you can not assume he did - he has certainly not been taking them this year. Steroids or not - he had a petuitary tumor and that DOES hurt your body and sap it of its strength. [Rumors were that he used it as an excuse to explain his failing strength after coming off the juice - horse puckey!] The Guy wasn't even hitting his weight early in the year. For him to put up the numbers he did following the All-Star break? Steroids don't work THAT fast... I also find it a stretch to compare Giambi - who is alleged to have taken steroids in the past - to Palmeiro - who tested positive for steroids this year. Now, why would a sports writer take this particular stance on this issue? Hmm, interesting that Cannella grew up about 30 minutes from Fenway and went to school at Boston College. Gee - I wonder if there is any bias there? :mischief2 Oh wait a minute. Here's another rant about how upset he is that he isn't allowed to wear his "Yankees Suck" t-shirt to Fenway http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writ...rant/index.html Oh, and here's a rant from the All Star break where he decides the Yankees are in "tear-down mode" and wont make the playoffs: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writ...half/index.html :mischief Last year he ripped on Torre. He predicts the fall of the Yankee dynasty every year [eventually he will be right]. He predicts the Red Sox to win the World Series every year [1 out of 10 isn't exceptional, Steve-o]. I think he's got a Red Sox tatoo on his left butt cheek... [okay - that last one is pure speculation but clearly as valid as any of his points on Giambi because speculation carries weight at ESPN and should be considered fact] Yeah - the only thing hard to stomach is this article... well put :thumbup
October 10, 200520 yr If he had used steroids in the past - and I'm not saying he didn't but you can not assume he did is not an assumption, it is a fact. I have no problem with him winning the comeback player award, since baseball is not clean and he wasn't the first or the last to take roids. And one can't ignore what he accomplished this year
October 10, 200520 yr is not an assumption, it is a fact. Okay - prove it. :mischief if you wish to believe that he may or may have not done it, more power to you. I don't have to prove anything
October 10, 200520 yr is not an assumption, it is a fact. Okay - prove it. :mischief Well, he did describe injecting his "ass" to a grand jury...he's the only guy to come clean. But you know what, I have no problem giving the comeback player in the AL to Giambi. Who deserves it more than him? No one I can think of...what's more, Giambi, not Sheffield or Matsui, was the second most dangerous hitter behind ARod for the Yankees for most of the summer. To be honest, I think what writers resent more about this award is that Giambi is proving that the "steroid" era might actually be filled with players who were/are incredibly talented, even without steroids; putting to rest the whole nostalgic argument that the players of generations past were much better than those that play today. I know it's an unpopular belief, but I think that some of the worst teams in today's game would pretty handily whoop up on those teams of legend from the 20's, and Giambi's proving that all the talent today isn't simply pharmaceutically created.
October 10, 200520 yr Wow. Stephen Cannella ripping on a Yankee. How surprising. [yawn] Sadly, the facts tend to get in the way of a good rant. How many times has Giambi tested positive for steroids? How many times has he been tested THIS YEAR for steroids and come up clean? If he had used steroids in the past - and I'm not saying he didn't but you can not assume he did - he has certainly not been taking them this year. Steroids or not - he had a petuitary tumor and that DOES hurt your body and sap it of its strength. [Rumors were that he used it as an excuse to explain his failing strength after coming off the juice - horse puckey!] The Guy wasn't even hitting his weight early in the year. For him to put up the numbers he did following the All-Star break? Steroids don't work THAT fast... I also find it a stretch to compare Giambi - who is alleged to have taken steroids in the past - to Palmeiro - who tested positive for steroids this year. Now, why would a sports writer take this particular stance on this issue? Hmm, interesting that Cannella grew up about 30 minutes from Fenway and went to school at Boston College. Gee - I wonder if there is any bias there? :mischief2 Oh wait a minute. Here's another rant about how upset he is that he isn't allowed to wear his "Yankees Suck" t-shirt to Fenway http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writ...rant/index.html Oh, and here's a rant from the All Star break where he decides the Yankees are in "tear-down mode" and wont make the playoffs: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writ...half/index.html :mischief Last year he ripped on Torre. He predicts the fall of the Yankee dynasty every year [eventually he will be right]. He predicts the Red Sox to win the World Series every year [1 out of 10 isn't exceptional, Steve-o]. I think he's got a Red Sox tatoo on his left butt cheek... [okay - that last one is pure speculation but clearly as valid as any of his points on Giambi because speculation carries weight at ESPN and should be considered fact] Yeah - the only thing hard to stomach is this article... A Yankee fan blindly supporting a cheater. [Yawn] Giambi doesn't deserve it regardless of how great of a season he had. He's the comeback player of the year... exactly what is he coming back from, getting sick because he was on roids? Please. He doesn't deserve this award at all and the only f/ckin reason he got sick and got the petuitary tumor in the first place was because of a direct result of being jacked up on roids and he ADMITTED THIS AND APOLOGIZED TO THE FANS. What more proof do you need? Are you so blinded by the pinstrips that you cannot see things for what they really are? The only reason he won the award is because the massive Yankee fanbase voted en masse for him and no other player stood a chance, he doesn't deserve it and it's a disgrace that he was even a nominee. And why are you sitting here trashing the author of the article? Every sportswriter on PTI, ATH, and and a few other shows all agreed while Giambi had a great season, he doesn't deserve the award on the principle that the only reason he got sick in the first place was, you guessed it, roids. The only thing hard to stomach is your blind homerism.
October 10, 200520 yr Wow. Stephen Cannella ripping on a Yankee. How surprising. [yawn] Sadly, the facts tend to get in the way of a good rant. How many times has Giambi tested positive for steroids? How many times has he been tested THIS YEAR for steroids and come up clean? If he had used steroids in the past - and I'm not saying he didn't but you can not assume he did - he has certainly not been taking them this year. Steroids or not - he had a petuitary tumor and that DOES hurt your body and sap it of its strength. [Rumors were that he used it as an excuse to explain his failing strength after coming off the juice - horse puckey!] The Guy wasn't even hitting his weight early in the year. For him to put up the numbers he did following the All-Star break? Steroids don't work THAT fast... I also find it a stretch to compare Giambi - who is alleged to have taken steroids in the past - to Palmeiro - who tested positive for steroids this year. Now, why would a sports writer take this particular stance on this issue? Hmm, interesting that Cannella grew up about 30 minutes from Fenway and went to school at Boston College. Gee - I wonder if there is any bias there? :mischief2 Oh wait a minute. Here's another rant about how upset he is that he isn't allowed to wear his "Yankees Suck" t-shirt to Fenway http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writ...rant/index.html Oh, and here's a rant from the All Star break where he decides the Yankees are in "tear-down mode" and wont make the playoffs: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writ...half/index.html :mischief Last year he ripped on Torre. He predicts the fall of the Yankee dynasty every year [eventually he will be right]. He predicts the Red Sox to win the World Series every year [1 out of 10 isn't exceptional, Steve-o]. I think he's got a Red Sox tatoo on his left butt cheek... [okay - that last one is pure speculation but clearly as valid as any of his points on Giambi because speculation carries weight at ESPN and should be considered fact] Yeah - the only thing hard to stomach is this article... A Yankee fan blindly supporting a cheater. [Yawn] Giambi doesn't deserve it regardless of how great of a season he had. He's the comeback player of the year... exactly what is he coming back from, getting sick because he was on roids? Please. He doesn't deserve this award at all and the only f/ckin reason he got sick and got the petuitary tumor in the first place was because of a direct result of being jacked up on roids and he ADMITTED THIS AND APOLOGIZED TO THE FANS. What more proof do you need? Are you so blinded by the pinstrips that you cannot see things for what they really are? The only reason he won the award is because the massive Yankee fanbase voted en masse for him and no other player stood a chance, he doesn't deserve it and it's a disgrace that he was even a nominee. And why are you sitting here trashing the author of the article? Every sportswriter on PTI, ATH, and and a few other shows all agreed while Giambi had a great season, he doesn't deserve the award on the principle that the only reason he got sick in the first place was, you guessed it, roids. The only thing hard to stomach is your blind homerism. i wholeheartedly agree. ill copy and paste my arguement from another thread (which is not much diff from your response). yes he had a great year but why win comeback player of the year when your coming back from something you did to YOURSELF! its like giving the comeback player of year award to Quincy Carter b/c he got out of the Betty Ford clinic. im sorry but any player who has done something in the form of cheating while playing baseball does not deserve any awards and should simply be happy he is still allowed to be putting on a uniform and playing for a major league team. :thumbup
October 10, 200520 yr I find laughable that some here are questioning the authenticity of documented testimony transcript from Federal Court. (I guess the San Francisco Chronicles came up with all that crap themselves and fabricated the documents?). But we are to accept as fact that he is no longer taking anything illegal, when Giambi told the court that he used "undetectable" steroids from BALCO.
October 10, 200520 yr its like giving the comeback player of year award to Quincy Carter b/c he got out of the Betty Ford clinic. :lol Or it's like Jamal Lewis winning the award because he spent the entire offseason in prison.
October 10, 200520 yr I still don't understand the logic being used. If steroids were so important to Giambi, why were his past two seasons statistically inferior to this season? Ignoring the names, what kind of player made the kind of jump numbers wise that Giambi did when talking 2004-2005? Who deserved it more than Giambi? And finally, a question that hits closer to home: If Mike Lowell has a good 2006 and wins the come-back player of the year, will you guys demand that someone else win the award?
October 10, 200520 yr Giambi was sick the two previous years, some say due to Riod use what does Lowell have to do with this?
October 10, 200520 yr Giambi was sick the two previous years, some say due to Riod use what does Lowell have to do with this? Lowell was bad the previous year and a half, some say due to 'roid use (or lack thereof). Assuming Lowell has a good '06 (pretty big assumption) he's a come-back candidate. If he wins, is it OK? But it's not OK for Giambi...right? I mean, both have the same number of positive drug tests...
October 10, 200520 yr Giambi was sick the two previous years, some say due to Riod use what does Lowell have to do with this? Lowell was bad the previous year and a half, some say due to 'roid use (or lack thereof). Assuming Lowell has a good '06 (pretty big assumption) he's a come-back candidate. If he wins, is it OK? But it's not OK for Giambi...right? I mean, both have the same number of positive drug tests... yeah but that is all based on assumptions. lets just say he was on steroids for the sake of this thread. well you will be damned sure i would not accept him winning a comeback player of the year award or any award including gold glove simply b/c he has cheated at one point in his career. i just dont like cheaters whether they play for the Marlins or any other team. im a homer but that not badly. :thumbup
October 10, 200520 yr Giambi was sick the two previous years, some say due to Riod use what does Lowell have to do with this? Lowell was bad the previous year and a half, some say due to 'roid use (or lack thereof). Assuming Lowell has a good '06 (pretty big assumption) he's a come-back candidate. If he wins, is it OK? But it's not OK for Giambi...right? I mean, both have the same number of positive drug tests... two completely different cases, one is a proven roider. I have never seen any serious speculation or rumor about Lowell being on the juice ever.
October 10, 200520 yr Why are you bringing Lowell into this? That is just asinine. It doesn't matter if Giambi took a drug test or not, because he ADMITTED TO CONGRESS THAT HE USED STEROIDS. Mike Lowell is innocent until proven guilty and this steroid talk is a bunch of horseshit and nothing but a bunch of morons trying to spread rumors and stir up trouble, Giambi on the other hand used steroids and this is a proven fact. FACT: Jason Giambi used steroids and admitted this to congress. So exactly what evidence do you have against Mike Lowell? A couple of idiots trying to spread baseless rumors? Please.
October 10, 200520 yr I have used direct links to the author's own articles to prove that he is an unapologetic Yankee basher. He would admit it. The reason for pointing this out? You need to consider the bias of your source. This source clearly comes from a biased author. Can we concede that this point has been proven? We can move forward from there.
October 10, 200520 yr I have used direct links to the author's own articles to prove that he is an unapologetic Yankee basher. He would admit it. The reason for pointing this out? You need to consider the bias of your source. This source clearly comes from a biased author. Can we concede that this point has been proven? We can move forward from there. Did you not even read my post? Nobody here gives a sh*t if the author of the article hates the Yankees, so because you think the author of the article hates the Yankees that means nobody is allowed to agree with the article? It doesn't matter if he hates the Yankees or not, this does not change the factual information contained in his article and how RIDICULOUS it is that Giambi was nominated, let alone actually won this award which he does not deserve. How about arguing the facts and points brought up in this thread rather than just crying about the article which none of us are even talking about.
October 10, 200520 yr Giambi was sick the two previous years, some say due to Riod use what does Lowell have to do with this? Lowell was bad the previous year and a half, some say due to 'roid use (or lack thereof). Assuming Lowell has a good '06 (pretty big assumption) he's a come-back candidate. If he wins, is it OK? But it's not OK for Giambi...right? I mean, both have the same number of positive drug tests... two completely different cases, one is a proven roider. I have never seen any serious speculation or rumor about Lowell being on the juice ever. So Giambi, Sosa, Brett Boone, Clemens, Pudge, Brown, Sheffield, Bonds and McGwire are all guilty until proven innocent (and even when they're "proven" innocent, it's simply explained because they're using undetectable steroids), yet Mike Lowell is innocent until proven guilty? Puh-lease, he's had a more drastic drop in production than any of the "sure" steroids users in this age of drug-testing. Here's something to think about, look at that list, none of those guys were exactly "chummy" with the media; they were all considered loaners or intoverted people; Lowell on the other hand is loved by the local media. For those who don't know where I'm going with this, I'll be as overly simplistic as possible: players are "linked" with steroids by the local media, not by the drug-testing agencies employed by MLB. Why wouldn't the South Florida media want to speculate about Mike Lowell's obviously shady decline with the advent of drug testing? Why, it's simple! He's such a curmudgeon in the club-house when things are bad that he's always easy to get an "anonymous" quote from describing the absolute disdain felt by the player for the (now departed) coaching staff. Why would you betray the best tool you have when it comes to creating a perceived circus which in turn sells papers...as a writer you wouldn't. That is why Lowell's name hasn't been linked, and quite frankly, Mike Lowell isn't a good enough player to generate the national buzz that a guy like McGwire or Giambi did. PS: Accord, Giambi never admitted to Congress that he used steroids, he admitted it to a Grand Jury; you or I could be on a grand-jury. What's more, the testimony was "leaked" by a member of the media, it's not part of public record, so anything reported by the paper should be taken with a grain of salt. I'm not denying he said it, because he never vehemently fought the Chronicle, but it isn't exactly the word of God we're talking about here, it's the word of a writer trying to sell papers.
October 10, 200520 yr Okay - so that sounds like a yes to me. Moving on: A link to this article http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=1936592 is probably what you could have used to support your argument. My question is simply, where did this transcript come from? This is NOT an official transcript from the Grand Jury as dissemination of that information would be unlawful. Also, this transcript is sent to the San Francisco Chronicle but not the New York Times or Washington Post? You have to admit, there is justification for questioning the authenticity of this transcript considering the amount of money that the newspaper had to gain by publishing an article of this nature. None of this would be admissible as evidence in a court of law. Therefore, I maintain, you can not accept as fact that Giambi has taken steroids. Again, any opinions on weather he took steroids or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is factual evidence. An example of factual evidence: Palmeiro has tested positive for the same drugs that Giambi is alleged to have taken ? Giambi has not tested positive for these drugs. These are facts. I would like to see conclusive evidence that proves that Giambi?s pituitary tumor is the direct result of his using steroids as alleged in the article. That would prove that his injury is self-inflicted and would give your arguments more weight.
October 10, 200520 yr If he had used steroids in the past - and I'm not saying he didn't but you can not assume he did statements like that really undermine the argument you're trying to make. seriously, when i read a rant and come across a line like that one, i just stop reading and attribute everything to the kool-aid.
October 10, 200520 yr Giambi was sick the two previous years, some say due to Riod use what does Lowell have to do with this? Lowell was bad the previous year and a half, some say due to 'roid use (or lack thereof). Assuming Lowell has a good '06 (pretty big assumption) he's a come-back candidate. If he wins, is it OK? But it's not OK for Giambi...right? I mean, both have the same number of positive drug tests... two completely different cases, one is a proven roider. I have never seen any serious speculation or rumor about Lowell being on the juice ever. So Giambi, Sosa, Brett Boone, Clemens, Pudge, Brown, Sheffield, Bonds and McGwire are all guilty until proven innocent (and even when they're "proven" innocent, it's simply explained because they're using undetectable steroids), yet Mike Lowell is innocent until proven guilty? Puh-lease, he's had a more drastic drop in production than any of the "sure" steroids users in this age of drug-testing. Here's something to think about, look at that list, none of those guys were exactly "chummy" with the media; they were all considered loaners or intoverted people; Lowell on the other hand is loved by the local media. For those who don't know where I'm going with this, I'll be as overly simplistic as possible: players are "linked" with steroids by the local media, not by the drug-testing agencies employed by MLB. Why wouldn't the South Florida media want to speculate about Mike Lowell's obviously shady decline with the advent of drug testing? Why, it's simple! He's such a curmudgeon in the club-house when things are bad that he's always easy to get an "anonymous" quote from describing the absolute disdain felt by the player for the (now departed) coaching staff. Why would you betray the best tool you have when it comes to creating a perceived circus which in turn sells papers...as a writer you wouldn't. That is why Lowell's name hasn't been linked, and quite frankly, Mike Lowell isn't a good enough player to generate the national buzz that a guy like McGwire or Giambi did. PS: Accord, Giambi never admitted to Congress that he used steroids, he admitted it to a Grand Jury; you or I could be on a grand-jury. What's more, the testimony was "leaked" by a member of the media, it's not part of public record, so anything reported by the paper should be taken with a grain of salt. I'm not denying he said it, because he never vehemently fought the Chronicle, but it isn't exactly the word of God we're talking about here, it's the word of a writer trying to sell papers. The entire post you just wrote was a result of you stuffing words into my mouth that I never said except for your last paragraph. I never said any of those things you brought up in the first two paragraphs, yet you're arguing with me as if I did, what the hell? ANYWAYS, so Giambi admitted it to a grand jury and not congress, my mistake. It doesn't matter if the testimony was leaked by a shady reporter, because the fact of the matter is Giambi acted like a man and came out and admitted and apologized to the sport, his fans, etc. which is comendable instead of taking the Barry Bonds approach of admitting he took steroids, but didn't realize it at the time or whatever his excuse was.
October 10, 200520 yr FYI - here's the information I currently have on the causes of pituitary tumors: The causes of pituitary tumors are unknown, although some are a part of a hereditary disorder called multiple endocrine neoplasia I (MEN I). Source: United States National Library of Medicine http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000704.htm
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.