Did Steroids Boost Rodriguez's Performance? [Archive]

View Full Version : Did Steroids Boost Rodriguez's Performance?

Domenic

02-10-2009, 07:01 AM

Ubiquitous

02-10-2009, 07:11 AM

For the sake of argument let us say that it is true that Rodriguez did only use in 2001 to 2003. Why would we assume that his numbers would deflate after 2003? ARod isn't some 40 year old man when he was taking this stuff. HE did in fact bulk up over those years and those muscles didn't deflate like a balloon after he stopped taking them. Those muscles existed for his 2005 season, his 2007 season, for every season after 2003. Secondly any workout program takes time to produce results. BArry Bonds started using in the offseason of 1998 and he didn't go batty until 2001. Finally it is also alleged that ARod has been using steroids since high school.

Domenic

02-10-2009, 07:20 AM

I suppose we could also argue that his using steroids deflated his performance. He claims to have stopped using in the Spring of 2003, which would mean that, from his first injection, his performance declined for four consecutive seasons. Prior to 2005, his two best seasons would have been pre-steroids, and remain his third and fourth best years, respectively.

The positive impact of steroids do not remain for a terribly long time after one stops using them. If you continue to be a workout warrior the muscle mass isn't likely to go away - but the results aren't permanent. In fact, you have to work out harder to maintain the gains made by steroids once you stop using.

In all honesty, I don't know exactly what to believe with Rodriguez. However, if he is being honest about the 2001-2003 range of use, I do believe an interesting case study can be made. It at least gives us a working assumption.

ShortStop

02-10-2009, 07:23 AM

We should also consider the fact that what A Rod is saying is only the tip of the iceberg. How can we so sure he only took tham in the 3 year span he claims he did?

Ubiquitous

02-10-2009, 07:30 AM

2001 to 2003 were not down years. We got 2000 (and really the guy could have very well been on in 2000, and if that is true then his "steroid" peak looks much more obvious) which was good but 2001-2003 were better then 1997 to 1999 and 1996 was a different kind of performance for ARod then all the rest of his years.

ARord worked out and put on muscle, if ARod isn't putting on muscle above and beyond what he could do naturally then it won't go away.

One could argue that ARod simply took a short cut to get to his peak physical frame or we could argue that steroids were basically like his blanky and it gave him security.

ARod as far as I can tell never got bigger then his frame so I don't really see why the muscle mass would disappear simply because he stopped taking. Sure he couldn't workout as often and he couldn't heal faster but again we are not talking about a 40 year old man.

Paulypal

02-10-2009, 07:34 AM

Assuming Rodriguez is being truthful about his steroid use, there is no reason to believe that the steroids made him a better player. Rather, his inflated home run totals were likely due to his playing half of his games in the Bandox in Arlington. I believe his OPS+ reflects this:

1996 - 160
1997 - 120
1998 - 136
1999 - 134
2000 - 162
2001 - 160
2002 - 158
2003 - 147
2004 - 131
2005 - 173
2006 - 134
2007 - 177
2008 - 150

Rodriguez's three best seasons came in 2000, 2005, and 2007. His steroid seasons were his fourth, sixth, and eighth best seasons.

The media is going to play up that those were his best HR seasons, ignoring the fact, like you said, he was in Arlington. By far the best hitters park in the AL.

In answer to your question its obvious that they didnt help him......assuming that he is accurate in his use.

Domenic

02-10-2009, 07:38 AM

We should also consider the fact that what A Rod is saying is only the tip of the iceberg. How can we so sure he only took tham in the 3 year span he claims he did?

We can't. I'm merely working under the assumption that he's being truthful, and looking at his numbers under that light.

2001 to 2003 were not down years. We got 2000 (and really the guy could have very well been on in 2000, and if that is true then his "steroid" peak looks much more obvious) which was good but 2001-2003 were better then 1997 to 1999 and 1996 was a different kind of performance for ARod then all the rest of his years.

ARord worked out and put on muscle, if ARod isn't putting on muscle above and beyond what he could do naturally then it won't go away.

One could argue that ARod simply took a short cut to get to his peak physical frame or we could argue that steroids were basically like his blanky and it gave him security.

ARod as far as I can tell never got bigger then his frame so I don't really see why the muscle mass would disappear simply because he stopped taking. Sure he couldn't workout as often and he couldn't heal faster but again we are not talking about a 40 year old man.

I didn't mean that they were down years. Rather, that from 2000 through 2004, his performance slipped a bit every year. Each season represented an elite level of production, but that doesn't change the fact that his numbers slipped from year to year.

Steroid gains do disappear quickly. It's medical fact. I'm sure that, due to Rodriguez's youth, he could very well have maintained everything well with diligent weight training and the like.

Again, I'm giving Rodriguez the benefit of the doubt with his confession, and am annoyed by ESPN trotting out his Texas home run numbers as 'proof' of his steroid use.

Ubiquitous

02-10-2009, 07:40 AM

If you take steroids and then stop you do not revert back to your physique pre steroids. This isn't popeye with spinach.

Domenic

02-10-2009, 07:45 AM

If you take steroids and then stop you do not revert back to your physique pre steroids. This isn't popeye with spinach.

I'm not saying that. However, to maintain your steroid physique post-steroids you have to work out harder than you did before to maintain that physique. Gains from steroids aren't permanent, and working out less than before, or even to the same degree as you did when on steroids would not allow you to maintain said gains.

Most of the muscle gained from steroids is water-based, and atrophy much quicker than regular, old-fashioned muscle gain.

Paulypal

02-10-2009, 07:54 AM

I'm not saying that. However, to maintain your steroid physique post-steroids you have to work out harder than you did before to maintain that physique. Gains from steroids aren't permanent, and working out less than before, or even to the same degree as you did when on steroids would not allow you to maintain said gains.

Most of the muscle gained from steroids is water-based, and atrophy much quicker than regular, old-fashioned muscle gain.

Dominic you cant maintain steroid muscle post steroids. Let me explain why. One of the big advantages to taking steroids is that your body recovers very quickly. This unnatural recovery allows you to workout harder and longer. If your not on the juice your workouts need to be spaced to allow recovery, if they arent then overtraining and lack of progress occurs. You can actually atrophy by overtraining.

You will not lose all of your roid muscle, but you can never keep all of it or anywhere close.

tommybaseball

02-10-2009, 11:24 AM

Dom, please stop embarrassing yourself. You really cannot seriously be asking this question in 2009. Take your head out of the sand.

Pfffffffft. Pop!

A-Fraud's super-human-paul bunyan-he did it the clean way persona is a hoax. His numbers are inflated.

The roids he used disguised the usual traits of a roider.

One of the particular steroids that A-Roid put into his body was Primabolin, one which would disguise the well known, tell-tale physical signs of a user. “A Steroid Popular for its Limited Side Effects”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/sports/baseball/10steroids.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
In the article, Dr. Gary Wadler, an anti-doping expert states, “The injectable form of the drug could be detected for just short of two weeks, and the oral drug might be detectable for less than a day, depending on the dose. The performance-enhancing effects can last for months.” Terry Todd, a former power champion power lifter said, “The drug is “known for building muscle strength without much muscle bulk.”
Read it and weep A-Rod lovers. This is the type of steroid that would best fit in with A-Frauds disingenuous personality.

Badge714

02-10-2009, 11:58 AM

You are correct, Sir! Why did he take them in the first place? That's why they're labeled PEDs, Performance Enhancing Drugs. That moon-faced visage of Ruth looms ever larger. What Ruth accomplished is absolutely astounding. These cheats are disgusting. And please, no more nonsense about the biggest cheat of all, Barry Bonds. No one will ever convince me that a few extra reps in the gym accounted for 73 dingers at the age of 38. Pure balderdash, considering his previous high of 46.

bob

02-10-2009, 11:59 AM

We should also consider the fact that what A Rod is saying is only the tip of the iceberg.
Either you have secret knowledge of other tests he has failed or you are just guessing its the tip of the iceberg.

Honus Wagner Rules

02-10-2009, 01:08 PM

Here are A-Rod's career home/road home run splits. his Texas seasons are highlighted.

Domenic

02-10-2009, 05:42 PM

SamtheBravesFan

02-10-2009, 05:53 PM

So you're saying they disguised the trait of improved performance? Or that they only work in the hot weather or Arlington?

What tommy is trying say is that the particular steroid that Rodriguez used is effective and doesn't come with the usual "giveaways" of steroid use. He says that Rodriguez was able to keep the same size he always had.

"The roids he used (primabolin) disguised the usual traits of a roider (let's say Barry Bonds)."

Imgran

02-10-2009, 06:57 PM

Worth mentioning that he moved from SS to 3B between 2003 and 2004 and bulked up accordingly as he no longer had to maintain SS level athleticism.

Ubiquitous

02-10-2009, 07:06 PM

Worth mentioning that he moved from SS to 3B between 2003 and 2004 and bulked up accordingly as he no longer had to maintain SS level athleticism.

ARod was bulking up before 2003. It is definitely a good thing (and might even mean ARod is telling the truth) that ARod admitted to more then just a single year or a single instance of steroid use because if he had done that people would have been jumping on him even more. All throughout the 2000's he was getting bigger and bigger.

White Knight

02-11-2009, 12:05 AM

We should also consider the fact that what A Rod is saying is only the tip of the iceberg. How can we so sure he only took tham in the 3 year span he claims he did?

There's no way he used in 2007, and he still hit 54 HR's.

White Knight

02-11-2009, 12:10 AM

You are correct, Sir! Why did he take them in the first place? That's why they're labeled PEDs, Performance Enhancing Drugs.

They're not labeled anything. The media labeled them that, and it's a recent term.

hudsonharden

02-11-2009, 12:17 AM

They probably did, but league pitching performance was boosted by all the pitchers who were juicing. Was he doing it to keep up with better pitching, or were pitchers doing it to keep up with better hitting? Probably both simultaneously. Needless to say, A-Rod was the top cheater in a league full of cheaters. Whether you think cheaters belong in the HOF is a moral judgement for you to make individually.

White Knight

02-11-2009, 12:30 AM

Needless to say, A-Rod was the top cheater in a league full of cheaters.

So A-Rod from 2001 to 2003 (when he said he used) was the top? You think A-Rod's numbers those years were better than Bonds' numbers? :ooo:

quinnystar27

02-11-2009, 10:24 AM

I do think steroids improved Arod to the point were he could heal quicker and not spend time on the bench. If Ken Griffey jr. hadnt been hurt he would be in the 700 club. AROD isn't the best player right now, he is clearly the most watched and puts up high numbers. So 2001-2003 assuming those were his only steroids years, you noticed those are not his best years. He was in a hitters park but I believe he would have missed more game if he hadn't done steroids. So i believe his steroid production add a max of 10 HR a season. But it allowed him to play more games and probably increase his RBIs. Arod gained muscle over the years but not a great deal like bonds or Mcgwire. But I do think it helped him stay healthy and play more games. AND NO I DONT NOT THINK HIS RECORDS LIKE BONDS SHOULD BE REMOVED.

White Knight

02-11-2009, 11:57 AM

Arod gained muscle over the years but not a great deal like bonds or Mcgwire. But I do think it helped him stay healthy and play more games.

It all has to do with genetics and a workout routine. Big Mac was an animal in the gym, a couple of hours a day, six days a week. He got massive. A-Rod had a totally different routine, and had a thinner, muscular build. Jose Canseco was at the gym far less than Mac, but was way more cut. This is due to him being a natural athelete, better genes, and more steroids for a longer time. But more cut or not, Mac was likely the strongest in the league.

Seattle1

02-11-2009, 12:09 PM

Q: "Did Steroids Boost Rodriguez's Performance?"

A: Yes, that is what they are used for.

White Knight

02-11-2009, 12:29 PM

Q: "Did Steroids Boost Rodriguez's Performance?"

A: Yes, that is what they are used for.

They're also used for looks, and A-Rod is VERY, VERY metrosexual.

mwiggins

02-11-2009, 12:58 PM

Q: "Did Steroids Boost Rodriguez's Performance?"

A: Yes, that is what they are used for.

They're used towards that goal, but that's not what they do. They help you work out harder and longer, and help your body recover faster. Taking them doesn't mean you're going to perform better.

Seattle1

02-11-2009, 01:57 PM

He hit more homers...

White Knight

02-11-2009, 03:05 PM

He hit more homers...

No, he didn't, he hit less.

mwiggins

02-11-2009, 03:17 PM

He hit more homers...

He also moved from Seattle to Texas. From a pitchers park to a major hitters park. He would be expected to hit more home runs. Look at his road home run totals, they don't show a spike during his time in Texas when he claims to be using.

1999 - 22
2000 - 28
2001 - 26
2002 - 23
2003 - 21
2004 - 19
2005 - 22

He didn't see a spike in his road HR production when he went to Texas, nor a drop when he moved to New York. The spike in his raw HR numbers are mostly due to park effects. In 2000 he hit 13 HR's at home. In 2001, he hit 26. That's the home run increase you're seeing.

csh19792001

02-11-2009, 03:53 PM

Q: Did Steroids Boost Rodriguez's Performance?

A: How are we to judge? We don't know what he was (or wasn't) taking the other 15 years of his career.

west coast orange and black

02-11-2009, 05:10 PM

domenic: ...there is no reason to believe that the steroids made [Rodriguez] a better player.

agree with this part of your post, man.