Anybody that gets caught cheating is a dummy pure and simple. I hate every player that used because it's like using an aluminum bat. That's part of the reason I like the MLB channel so I can watch some regular sized ball players from the past who played the game fair.

 

 

There's a joke about John Kruk in here somewhere....

 

Hmmm. I kinda liked Kruk in his playing days. But I do find it funny he would be singled out for a joke about this and not a guy like Mike Lowell.

 

Not sure what you mean about Lowell? He said he likes watching regular size players on the MLB channel; I figured there's some joke about ESPN, the rival network, and John Kruk, who is a fatty, but I'm not clever enough to come up with it....

 

It's because I took it the wrong way. Sorry.

Mike Lowell probably used steroids. There, I said it. Pudge too!

 

 

 

I don't doubt either one. But Mikey would be the exception. It may very possibly have been perscribed to him before it became illegal in MLB to help him overcome cancer. The "quicker healing effects" of the drugs.

If baseball really wanted to rid itself of steroids....the first time a player is caught he should be banned for life....period.

 

 

Can't do that. Everyone makes mistakes.

He's referencing the fact that Kruk and Lowell have both had testicular cancer. That has nothing to do with penis size, so I don't see the point.

 

 

Anyway, Mike Lowell's 2005 season is the most perplexing phenomenon in Marlins history (for me). I desperately want to know if this was steroids induced. A lot of people have hypothesized that Lowell was juicing but I've never seen his name linked to anything.

 

 

 

Again, not where I was going. So just forget it.

Anybody that gets caught cheating is a dummy pure and simple. I hate every player that used because it's like using an aluminum bat. That's part of the reason I like the MLB channel so I can watch some regular sized ball players from the past who played the game fair.

 

 

Like guys like Hank Aaron and those of his era who used greenies?

 

Or guys like Gaylord Perry who doctored the ball?

 

Are those the "fair" players you miss?

We only hate some PEDs, not all of them, obviously.

 

Also, Gaylord Perry is by far the biggest cheater in the history of the sport and the media treats him like everyone's tricky uncle. "Oh that Uncle Perry, with his sill spitballs. He's so adorable, let's put him in the HOF".

 

Although you guys have a point, those weren't performance enhancing drugs. Perry cheated ( just to unfairly single one guy out) but it was also something that he could get caught on immediatly. It's not like something he could deny doing. If that makes any sense to you all.

 

So where do you guys want to draw the line? Obviously doing speed to be up for a game is out. Extreme prejudice? Excessive drinking/partying? Adultry? Murder? (know the rumors before you slam that one.) I doubt there were more than a handful of players that didn't do something back in the day to get an edge. Or do things in their off time that today would be so media hyped as to block them from the HOF or expelled from baseball all together. Some even in jail.

 

To me it's more like making excuses for what today's players, and some of those players that have recently retired, have done and some still continue to do just because they are/were "heros" of their time. And truthfully put, there is no excuse. Do the crime, do the time.

A few things:

1) You're mad if you think speed isn't a PED. (I hope I misunderstood that.) Not only do I believe so but so does the World Anti-Doping Agency.

2)I don't really understand the point of that second paragraph but the main thin here is that neither of us were trying to draw the line, we're talking about how arbitrary the line is.

3) I don't think it's unfair to single out the most prolific spitballer since the rule went into effect, who constantly flaunted the fact that he cheated and then got electing into the Hall of Fame. It's hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

1.) I'm mad. I don't. But I can see why it would be classified that way. I don't see how speed increases one's ability to run faster, throw harder, or hit further. It may make one feel like they can do that, but I doubt very much it does.

 

2.) So you guys want one of two things if I am reading this correctly. Either let the cheaters in that have knowingly broken the current rules on drugs, or go back through the HOFs list and eject those that did illegal things in the past. I suppose there is a 3rd. Upset because guys you grew up idolizing are being called out. "Well if he could make it, my hero should also make it", kinda thing.

 

3.) Spitballers were around long before him. So were guys using sandpaper on balls. So were guys corking their bats. So were alot of things that in today's world would put players out of the games in every sport. It's different times.

PEDs are bad because they ruin the integrity of the game, but I still say the game is better to watch if the players are better, and PEDs make the players better.

 

 

that's a pretty depressing conclusion to reach.

I don't. I think the moral attitude about steroids is silly. Why does Mark McGwire get villanized for getting help from steroids but Josh Willingham get away with it when it's basically keeping him in the game.

 

Cortisone shots, which keep Hammer employed, are very much a steroid. It's by definition a drug that enhances his performance, so are tons of other supplements that players take these days without persecution. McGwire is getting killed for doing something that wasn't banned at the time and wasn't illegal (depending on how he got the steroids).

 

 

 

And Backin, you still haven't told me why you are championing the most PED infected time in the history of the game, the 70's and 80's, which were filled with greenies.

 

I disagree with that. Cortisone shots don't enhance one's performance. They mask the problem to allow the athlete (or anyone) to perform at their skill level, not improve their skill level.

 

Big Mac, Bonds, even Sosa aren't getting bashed so much for doing those things. They're getting bashed for doing them and then denying they did. The American public is very forgiving if their "heros" come clean. They move on. Would those guys get elected on their first year of eligibility? Probably not because they "cheatingly" broke the records of the "heros" of the folks that do the voting. But they would and most likely will down the road a bit. Is that fair? Maybe not. But is it fair ALL the guys from the Black Sox are banned? Is it fair Pete Rose is banned? No. But they were the big names and they were used to make an example that MLB will not tolerate that type of behavior.

 

Others not so famous are also being used to set examples. Or are we forgetting the title of this thread? Adam Kam cheated. Adam Kam got suspended. End of story.

Adam Kam was 0-1 with a BB for the GCL Marlins last year. I just wasted 20 minutes of my morning reading about him.

Mike Lowell probably used steroids. There, I said it. Pudge too!

 

 

 

I don't doubt either one. But Mikey would be the exception. It may very possibly have been perscribed to him before it became illegal in MLB to help him overcome cancer. The "quicker healing effects" of the drugs.

 

Steroids are not illegal, they are a "controlled substance". They can legally prescribed by a doctor for a legitimate medical reason. They are called Class 3 controlled substance I believe. So when folks say illegal, they are talking out of their arse. They are still legal to be used by any baseball player, as long as they have a legitimate medical reason.

 

Lowell's cancer scare came after he was a Florida Marlin in 1999, and had nothing to do with using steroids, if he ever used them. There was virtually no change to his body from 1999 to 2005, so if he ever did use steroids, it was probably in low dosages.

 

I personally doubt he ever used them.

I can say with confidence that Juan Pierre, Luis Castillo, Mike Mordecai, Andy Fox and Mike Redmond were clean in 2003.

the difference is, is that those things you mentioned applied to everyone in the league. All hitters didn't face black pitchers.

 

On the other hand, not all hitters used steroids in the steroid era. That then skews the perception of how good a hitter really was. Players that didn't cheat now don't look as impressive because the league numbers are skewed by those that did cheat.

 

I don't really care about roids, especially since individual cheating has always happened. But there's a big difference between cheating (which only improves the person who is cheating) and league-wide mandates that effect the entire league.

 

 

 

 

I see what you're saying. I think the point I was trying to make was that it's difficult to compare the stats from generation to generation because of the differences in the the players....transportation..........lights........and of course the Roids. 35 HR's today is sure more impressive then it was in 01 when Barry was lighting them up. That would make this yet another generation. One last thought. Even medicine has changed the game. How would a guy like Mantle who blew out his knee @ 21 have done with the techniques used today? Maybe he would have hit another 100 HR's. This is a guy who hit most of his 536 playing on one knee....just another thought and piece of the puzzle.

I can say with confidence that Juan Pierre, Luis Castillo, Mike Mordecai, Andy Fox and Mike Redmond were clean in 2003.

 

 

I'm pretty sure you're joking, but we can't quite even say this. Wasn't it Josias Manzanillo, another little guy, who was suspended for steroids a while back? There have been a few small guys; they probably would have just been even smaller without steroids.

I want to just point out something that has been bugging me about these types of debates. I've read scores of steroid debates on message boards and a pretty common line used by people who support the juicers is the whole "greenie" argument. That is that you had players using "greenies" before and steroids, HGH, &tc. more recently, making it seem like there was some division between a "Greenie Era" and the Steroid Era. But that is a false distinction. Players never stopped using "greenies" during the Steroid Era.

 

Up to very recently, you had many ballplayers juicing and getting jumped up on amphetamines. The amphetamine abuse was probably more rampant than the steroid abuse.

 

For a little history, I recommend you read this article from 2006 in the Palm Beach Post. - http://www.palmbeachpost.com/sports/content/sports/epaper/2006/04/02/PBP_AMPHET_0402.html

I agree that there are some flaws with the "greenies" counter-argument and I've severely softened my opinion on steroid usage in MLB since the Mitchell report came out. I've become much more accepting.

 

I think the most objective way to look at this is with respect to how the substances were handled by MLB. Greenies were supposedly legal (by MLB) until recently so I can't readily fault Henry Aaron for using them. I can't fault MLB players for using steroids before they were banned. I do think that players who knowingly violate the rules, such as Adam Kam, should be treated differently than the majority of the MLB players throughout history who used greenies while they were acceptable in MLB.

PEDs are bad because they ruin the integrity of the game, but I still say the game is better to watch if the players are better, and PEDs make the players better.

 

 

that's a pretty depressing conclusion to reach.

I don't. I think the moral attitude about steroids is silly. Why does Mark McGwire get villanized for getting help from steroids but Josh Willingham get away with it when it's basically keeping him in the game.

 

Cortisone shots, which keep Hammer employed, are very much a steroid. It's by definition a drug that enhances his performance, so are tons of other supplements that players take these days without persecution. McGwire is getting killed for doing something that wasn't banned at the time and wasn't illegal (depending on how he got the steroids).

 

 

 

And Backin, you still haven't told me why you are championing the most PED infected time in the history of the game, the 70's and 80's, which were filled with greenies.

 

I disagree with that. Cortisone shots don't enhance one's performance. They mask the problem to allow the athlete (or anyone) to perform at their skill level, not improve their skill level.

 

Big Mac, Bonds, even Sosa aren't getting bashed so much for doing those things. They're getting bashed for doing them and then denying they did. The American public is very forgiving if their "heros" come clean. They move on. Would those guys get elected on their first year of eligibility? Probably not because they "cheatingly" broke the records of the "heros" of the folks that do the voting. But they would and most likely will down the road a bit. Is that fair? Maybe not. But is it fair ALL the guys from the Black Sox are banned? Is it fair Pete Rose is banned? No. But they were the big names and they were used to make an example that MLB will not tolerate that type of behavior.

 

Others not so famous are also being used to set examples. Or are we forgetting the title of this thread? Adam Kam cheated. Adam Kam got suspended. End of story.

 

 

If that's the case, why are McGwire and ARod being treated like crap for it? Funny how the bums who took steroids, however, are ignored for taking them.

Like guys like Hank Aaron and those of his era who used greenies?

 

Or guys like Gaylord Perry who doctored the ball?

 

Are those the "fair" players you miss?

 

We only hate some PEDs, not all of them, obviously.

 

Also, Gaylord Perry is by far the biggest cheater in the history of the sport and the media treats him like everyone's tricky uncle. "Oh that Uncle Perry, with his sill spitballs. He's so adorable, let's put him in the HOF".

 

Although you guys have a point, those weren't performance enhancing drugs. Perry cheated ( just to unfairly single one guy out) but it was also something that he could get caught on immediatly. It's not like something he could deny doing. If that makes any sense to you all.

 

So where do you guys want to draw the line? Obviously doing speed to be up for a game is out. Extreme prejudice? Excessive drinking/partying? Adultry? Murder? (know the rumors before you slam that one.) I doubt there were more than a handful of players that didn't do something back in the day to get an edge. Or do things in their off time that today would be so media hyped as to block them from the HOF or expelled from baseball all together. Some even in jail.

 

To me it's more like making excuses for what today's players, and some of those players that have recently retired, have done and some still continue to do just because they are/were "heros" of their time. And truthfully put, there is no excuse. Do the crime, do the time.

A few things:

1) You're mad if you think speed isn't a PED. (I hope I misunderstood that.) Not only do I believe so but so does the World Anti-Doping Agency.

2)I don't really understand the point of that second paragraph but the main thin here is that neither of us were trying to draw the line, we're talking about how arbitrary the line is.

3) I don't think it's unfair to single out the most prolific spitballer since the rule went into effect, who constantly flaunted the fact that he cheated and then got electing into the Hall of Fame. It's hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

1.) I'm mad. I don't. But I can see why it would be classified that way. I don't see how speed increases one's ability to run faster, throw harder, or hit further. It may make one feel like they can do that, but I doubt very much it does.

 

2.) So you guys want one of two things if I am reading this correctly. Either let the cheaters in that have knowingly broken the current rules on drugs, or go back through the HOFs list and eject those that did illegal things in the past. I suppose there is a 3rd. Upset because guys you grew up idolizing are being called out. "Well if he could make it, my hero should also make it", kinda thing.

 

3.) Spitballers were around long before him. So were guys using sandpaper on balls. So were guys corking their bats. So were alot of things that in today's world would put players out of the games in every sport. It's different times.

1) You don't see how having more energy that one wouldn't normally have would enhance their performance?

 

2) I don't want to draw the line. I'm commenting on what other people want, which I think is ridiculous and arbitrary. Steroids weren't banned from the game during the 90's and "the guys grew up idolizing" didn't actually do any cheating (assuming they got the steroids legally, which wasn't that difficult before 2004).

 

3) The spitball was made illegal 42 years before Perry joined the league and 17 years before he was born. It's cheating period. You calling it "different times" is kind of a joke if you're defending him like that. The 90's was a different time too, ey? And so you're against cheaters who broke only certain rules?

I agree that there are some flaws with the "greenies" counter-argument and I've severely softened my opinion on steroid usage in MLB since the Mitchell report came out. I've become much more accepting.

 

I think the most objective way to look at this is with respect to how the substances were handled by MLB. Greenies were supposedly legal (by MLB) until recently so I can't readily fault Henry Aaron for using them. I can't fault MLB players for using steroids before they were banned. I do think that players who knowingly violate the rules, such as Adam Kam, should be treated differently than the majority of the MLB players throughout history who used greenies while they were acceptable in MLB.

 

This is exactly what my argument is.

I disagree with that. Cortisone shots don't enhance one's performance. They mask the problem to allow the athlete (or anyone) to perform at their skill level, not improve their skill level.

 

Big Mac, Bonds, even Sosa aren't getting bashed so much for doing those things. They're getting bashed for doing them and then denying they did. The American public is very forgiving if their "heros" come clean. They move on. Would those guys get elected on their first year of eligibility? Probably not because they "cheatingly" broke the records of the "heros" of the folks that do the voting. But they would and most likely will down the road a bit. Is that fair? Maybe not. But is it fair ALL the guys from the Black Sox are banned? Is it fair Pete Rose is banned? No. But they were the big names and they were used to make an example that MLB will not tolerate that type of behavior.

 

Others not so famous are also being used to set examples. Or are we forgetting the title of this thread? Adam Kam cheated. Adam Kam got suspended. End of story.

 

 

 

If that's the case, why are McGwire and ARod being treated like crap for it? Funny how the bums who took steroids, however, are ignored for taking them.

 

Probably because their "apologies" were viewed by many as being nothing more than PR moves filled with evasion and half truths. That and these players were held up as being amongst the greatest to ever play the game. Millions of fans took an interest in their careers. So when they do something that is viewed as cheating, then it is viewed as tarnishing the game. Guillermo Mota? Not so much.

I can say with confidence that Juan Pierre, Luis Castillo, Mike Mordecai, Andy Fox and Mike Redmond were clean in 2003.

 

 

I'm pretty sure you're joking, but we can't quite even say this. Wasn't it Josias Manzanillo, another little guy, who was suspended for steroids a while back? There have been a few small guys; they probably would have just been even smaller without steroids.

 

And Alex Sanchez.

 

I remember being happy when we signed Alex Sanchez and thinking he was gonna be awesome lol...

 

amazing how much has changed in a few years

I disagree with that. Cortisone shots don't enhance one's performance. They mask the problem to allow the athlete (or anyone) to perform at their skill level, not improve their skill level.

 

Big Mac, Bonds, even Sosa aren't getting bashed so much for doing those things. They're getting bashed for doing them and then denying they did. The American public is very forgiving if their "heros" come clean. They move on. Would those guys get elected on their first year of eligibility? Probably not because they "cheatingly" broke the records of the "heros" of the folks that do the voting. But they would and most likely will down the road a bit. Is that fair? Maybe not. But is it fair ALL the guys from the Black Sox are banned? Is it fair Pete Rose is banned? No. But they were the big names and they were used to make an example that MLB will not tolerate that type of behavior.

 

Others not so famous are also being used to set examples. Or are we forgetting the title of this thread? Adam Kam cheated. Adam Kam got suspended. End of story.

 

 

 

If that's the case, why are McGwire and ARod being treated like crap for it? Funny how the bums who took steroids, however, are ignored for taking them.

 

Probably because their "apologies" were viewed by many as being nothing more than PR moves filled with evasion and half truths. That and these players were held up as being amongst the greatest to ever play the game. Millions of fans took an interest in their careers. So when they do something that is viewed as cheating, then it is viewed as tarnishing the game. Guillermo Mota? Not so much.

 

 

So basically it's a double standard. That's my point.

I disagree with that. Cortisone shots don't enhance one's performance. They mask the problem to allow the athlete (or anyone) to perform at their skill level, not improve their skill level.

 

Big Mac, Bonds, even Sosa aren't getting bashed so much for doing those things. They're getting bashed for doing them and then denying they did. The American public is very forgiving if their "heros" come clean. They move on. Would those guys get elected on their first year of eligibility? Probably not because they "cheatingly" broke the records of the "heros" of the folks that do the voting. But they would and most likely will down the road a bit. Is that fair? Maybe not. But is it fair ALL the guys from the Black Sox are banned? Is it fair Pete Rose is banned? No. But they were the big names and they were used to make an example that MLB will not tolerate that type of behavior.

 

Others not so famous are also being used to set examples. Or are we forgetting the title of this thread? Adam Kam cheated. Adam Kam got suspended. End of story.

 

 

 

If that's the case, why are McGwire and ARod being treated like crap for it? Funny how the bums who took steroids, however, are ignored for taking them.

 

Probably because their "apologies" were viewed by many as being nothing more than PR moves filled with evasion and half truths. That and these players were held up as being amongst the greatest to ever play the game. Millions of fans took an interest in their careers. So when they do something that is viewed as cheating, then it is viewed as tarnishing the game. Guillermo Mota? Not so much.

 

 

So basically it's a double standard. That's my point.

 

They are judged differently, sure. But that is only because fans have more invested in the stars than the scrubs. It is akin to someone in your family dieing in a hospital room on the same day some stranger down the hall died. Obviously you are going to mourn for your relative more than the person who died down the hall, if you mourn for them at all. Because you are emotionally invested in your relative and not the stranger.

I don't think there is a double standards. Either you cheated or you didn't. I think of Guillermo Mota, Gary Matthews Jr and Jay Gibbons the same way that I think of Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire and Andy Pettitte.