Mark McGwire Never Used Steroids and Should Be In The Hall of Fame

[BigandUgly]

Go ahead bash me. Where's the proof?

"I will say, however, that it remains a fact in this country that a man, any man, should be regarded as innocent unless proven guilty." - Mark McGwire

[Ace Venom]

Why the heck would anyone invoke fifth amendment rights in front of Congress if they never used? I'm not going to presume guilt, but that's a tough sell. I think both McGwire and Sosa belong in the Hall of Fame, but that's just me talking.

[brett]

Mark McGwire might not have used steroids. He may simply be refusing to indict teammates, but after the congressional hearings his lawyer said that "Mark has a story to tell, and at some point in the future he will be able to tell it" (paraphrased closely).

When he tells his story, he can be considered by me.

[BigandUgly]

"A player answers 'No,' he simply will not be believed; if he answers 'Yes,' he risks public scorn and endless government investigations." - Sounds reasonable.

"I cannot answer these questions without jeopardizing my friends, my family, and myself." - He either has to point the finger at other players or not talk. He has to admit he witnessed illegal activitie or not talk. He chose not to talk.

The fact remains that nothing has been proven.

[BigandUgly]

When he tells his story, he can be considered by me.

If his story is that steroids were rampant in baseball but he didn't use he'll be branded a lier and nobody will believe his story. If his story includes players X, Y and Z using roids he'd just be perpetuating rumors.

[PVNICK]

Nothing has been proven, but then again has anyone really tried beyond reading a label and findignout it said Androstenine? also, wasn't he in the Mitchell Report or am I mistaken?

[BigandUgly]

Nothing has been proven, but then again has anyone really tried beyond reading a label and findignout it said Androstenine? also, wasn't he in the Mitchell Report or am I mistaken?

Big Mac was not named in the Mitchell Report.

Andro was a supplement that you could buy at GNC at the time and was not banned by MLB. The vast majority of steroids used are injected. They do not absorb well if injested. The andro almost certainly weren't roids.

[ipitch]

I'd love to participate in this thread, but I'm not here to talk about the past.

[PVNICK]

We all know what Andro is and was, but still that's the extent of any searching. If an actual effort was made and turned up nothing ala the Loch Ness Monster then you could say nothing has been proven and feel confident that it's becuase there is nothing there. Andro was on the IOC banned substance list at the time and I think is now illegal w/o a prescription. At any rate but for the magic pill he would not have put up the numbers that he did is how I look at it, so if he goes into the hall than the GNC clerks should go with him.

[Ace Venom]

I'd love to participate in this thread, but I'm not here to talk about the past.

I don't care who you are. That's funny right there. :laugh

[BigandUgly]

We all know what Andro is and was, but still that's the extent of any searching. If an actual effort was made and turned up nothing ala the Loch Ness Monster then you could say nothing has been proven and feel confident that it's becuase there is nothing there. Andro was on the IOC banned substance list at the time and I think is now illegal w/o a prescription. At any rate but for the magic pill he would not have put up the numbers that he did is how I look at it, so if he goes into the hall than the GNC clerks should go with him.

At the time Andro was completely legal and not banned by MLB. He was doing nothing wrong. He was taking a legal, over the counter supplement. I'm sure the majority of professional athletes take supplements of some kind.

If they ban Flintstones Chewable Vitamins should my kid get suspended from little league because he's taken them for the last 10 years?

[Ace Venom]

At the time Andro was completely legal and not banned by MLB. He was doing nothing wrong. He was taking a legal, over the counter supplement. I'm sure the majority of professional athletes take supplements of some kind.

I agree with you on this one. One of the biggest questions on my mind is why he didn't say he just used OTC andro and be done with it? This is what raised red flags with the BBWAA. I'm not going to disagree that Big Mac belongs.

[JRH11]

I'd love to participate in this thread, but I'm not here to talk about the past.


"Steroids is.....is bad."

[PVNICK]

If they ban Flintstones Chewable Vitamins should my kid get suspended from little league because he's taken them for the last 10 years?

Andros not exactly a multi-vitamin. And that's not my point. It's not like it was a power bar, then again probably every third person was on Creatine so where do you draw the line if at all mine is just over a lot further than yours.

[BigandUgly]

Andros not exactly a multi-vitamin. And that's not my point. It's not like it was a power bar, then again probably every third person was on Creatine so where do you draw the line if at all mine is just over a lot further than yours.

I think the line is where the law and MLB rules says it is. Until someone crosses that line there should be no problem.

[KCGHOST]

One should refrain from arguing with trolls.

[Freakshow]

"one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."
-- Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.MLB and the players union believed the law against using steroids was unjust. Therefore, they fostered an environment that allowed for and encouraged their use. Players like McGwire, and hundreds of others, were free to go about using whatever they wanted, while the guardians of the game looked the other way. Now, predictably, McGwire and all the others used by the owners to enrich themselves are being scapegoated.

[BigandUgly]

One should refrain from arguing with trolls.


Huh? I don't get it.

[BigandUgly]

MLB and the players union believed the law against using steroids was unjust. Therefore, they fostered an environment that allowed for and encouraged their use. Players like McGwire, and hundreds of others, were free to go about using whatever they wanted, while the guardians of the game looked the other way. Now, predictably, McGwire and all the others used by the owners to enrich themselves are being scapegoated.

It's still never been shown that McGwire used steroids.

[jalbright]

One should refrain from arguing with trolls.

One should refrain from name-calling, saith this mod. Please don't repeat the offense. Thank you.

[Brad Harris]

It's still never been shown that McGwire used steroids.
Andro wasn't classified/banned as a steroid in 1998, but it is now. McGwire most certainly did use a PED.

[BigandUgly]

Andro wasn't classified/banned as a steroid in 1998, but it is now. McGwire most certainly did use a PED.

Correct, but he did not use a banned PED. Many players use Creatine now. If it's banned tomorrow does their previous use mean they did anything wrong?

I'm sitting here drinking a nice, cold beer. If the government brings back Prohibition next week am I criminal for drinking today?

(The beer probably explains me starting this thread!)

[Brad Harris]

Correct, but he did not use a banned PED. Many players use Creatine now. If it's banned tomorrow does their previous use mean they did anything wrong?

I'm sitting here drinking a nice, cold beer. If the government brings back Prohibition next week am I criminal for drinking today?

(The beer probably explains me starting this thread!)

Absolutely right, but what you said was that there's no proof McGwire ever used steroids (not banned substances). If you meant banned substances, then that's almost rhetorical since McGwire retired before the PED ban was implemented through collective bargaining.

The premise of your thread, I'm assuming, is something I've said many times before: McGwire's "persecution" by the BBWAA these days is almost entirely a combination of their disappointment in his congressional testimony (or lack thereof) and their own blind support for his exploits back in 1998.

[brett]

Andro wasn't classified/banned as a steroid in 1998, but it is now. McGwire most certainly did use a PED.

I'll check, but I do not believe that is correct. THG was not classified. Andro is a precursor. It is present in many legal herbs as well.

(I checked and it was banned as a steroid in the US starting in 2005).

I would never hold something against an athlete that was legal both in society and the game at the time they did it.

[BigandUgly]

Not only was Andro legal when he took it but there is no evidence that it has any effect on strength, muscles mass or body fat. There is very little evidence that it has any anabolic effect.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

I'd love to participate in this thread, but I'm not here to talk about the past.

nice one as always

[brett]

Not only was Andro legal when he took it but there is no evidence that it has any effect on strength, muscles mass or body fat. There is very little evidence that it has any anabolic effect.

I think that Tribulus is still on the market, and if I am correct it has naturally occurring andro. Maybe it is just a natural testosterone booster.

I saw one study that eating 3 whole eggs a day raised testosterone more than andro. Another that zinc raised testosterone more, and another that when people getting fewer than 6 hours of sleep increased their sleep time to 7 1/2 hours it had a greater effect.

I will say that Andro did seem to have some of the "feelings of well-being" effect that is seen in moderate test supplimentation.

It does seem like McGwire might have been in a corner at the hearings because people were now starting to refer to andro as an anabolic steroid (which occurred in 2005) and he probably would have to have admitted to "taking steroids" under that definition.

My brother is 6-4 and went from 225 to 285 just by working out over about the same time and age frame as McGwire.

George Brett said that his trainers told him that he was not allowed to lift weights! That it could not help him. He says that that was one of his regrets.

If baseball players had been lifting weights more and earlier, we would have seen an offensive surge a long time ago. We had a 6-1 190 pound ripped shortstop at the highschool where I coached. How big was Mike Schmidt?

[davewashere]

MLB and the players union believed the law against using steroids was unjust. Therefore, they fostered an environment that allowed for and encouraged their use. Players like McGwire, and hundreds of others, were free to go about using whatever they wanted, while the guardians of the game looked the other way. Now, predictably, McGwire and all the others used by the owners to enrich themselves are being scapegoated.

That, or they're receiving a just punishment for their misguided views. Why did they believe the law against using steroids was unjust? The comparison to the civil rights movement is laughable.

As for McGwire's guilt, I think the testimony speaks for itself. If you can listen to that testimony and honestly believe the man is just trying to protect his teammates and isn't giving the ol' non-admission admission... well, then you're obviously more-easily convinced than I am. As far as I know McGwire has never gone to any media source after those Congressional hearings and said "I didn't use any illegal substances". He knows he's being ostracized because it's believed he was a steroid user, and he's not doing anything about it.

Despite all of this, I still think McGwire should be in the Hall of Fame. He was part of the steroid era, but he was also one of the best of that era.

[EdTarbusz]

I'm sitting here drinking a nice, cold beer. If the government brings back Prohibition next week am I criminal for drinking today?

!)

Consuming beer was not illegal during Prohibition. Buying and selling it was illegal.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

Mark McGwire Never Used Steroids

Dubious.

and Should Be In The Hall of Fame

True.

[ol' aches and pains]

Why didn't he take the opportunity to emphatically deny using when he had the chance in the Senate hearings? "I'm not here to talk about the past" is pretty weak, especially for someone innocent of any wrongdoing.

[willshad]

The proof is in the numbers. Never in the history of baseball has any player improved so drasically at such an advanced age, without the use of steroids. Are we supposed to believe that Mcgwire is the first? It is POSSIBLE that he is, but with absolutely no prececedence for anything remotely similiar to his career arc, one has to assume he had some help.

People forget that around 1994 or so, Mcgwire was seen as a guy nearing the end of the line, and when he did play he was basically a less durable version of Adam Dunn. Certainly not anything close to a hall of famer. Are we supposed to believe that Mark could hit 70 home runs naturaly , when Babe, Foxx, Mantle, etc could never even come close to that total? Again, possible, but , as with Sosa, the circumstancial eveidence is too overwhelming.

[SABR Matt]

Except it is well documented that McGwire did indeed get help. From a legal OTC supplement. Ruth, Foxx, Williams etc never had access to Andro.

And McGwire's career had hit the skids not from lack of monster power but from INJURY.

[willshad]

wow I gotta get me some of that stuff lol

[Berkman#17]

Are we supposed to believe that Mark could hit 70 home runs naturaly , when Babe, Foxx, Mantle, etc could never even come close to that total? Again, possible, but , as with Sosa, the circumstancial eveidence is too overwhelming.

Just playing devil's advocate, but Foxx, Mantle, and Babe never played 162 games. And never had the advantage of video tape of their opponents. And didn't have the many other benefits that the players of this current era (better lighting, better nutrition, planes vs. trains, etc..) have. Most importantly though, none of those 3 had weight lifting programs nor were 6'5.

[BigandUgly]

The proof is in the numbers. Never in the history of baseball has any player improved so drasically at such an advanced age, without the use of steroids. Are we supposed to believe that Mcgwire is the first? It is POSSIBLE that he is, but with absolutely no prececedence for anything remotely similiar to his career arc, one has to assume he had some help.

People forget that around 1994 or so, Mcgwire was seen as a guy nearing the end of the line, and when he did play he was basically a less durable version of Adam Dunn. Certainly not anything close to a hall of famer. Are we supposed to believe that Mark could hit 70 home runs naturaly , when Babe, Foxx, Mantle, etc could never even come close to that total? Again, possible, but , as with Sosa, the circumstancial eveidence is too overwhelming.

Improved at an advanced age? He still holds the record for homeruns by a rookie (49). Is 23 an advanced age? In his rookie year many people thought he'd have a chance to break the single season homerun record at some point in his career. He only had one complete season with less than 30 homeruns.

In 93 and 94 he was injured. in 92 he had 42 home runs.

In 1997, at the age of 37 Tony Gwynn has his career high in homeruns. His second highest total came in 1998 at the age of 38.

The only time Cal Ripken hit more than 30 was 1991 at the age of 30.

George Brett had his highest homerun total in 1985 at the age of 32.

Babe Ruth's highest HR season was when he was 32.

These players all showed increased performance "at an advanced age." Should we suspect them of steroid use? I think that a better explanation is that after a few years in the league they learned a thing or two and became better hitters. I think the same explanation can be given for McGwire.

Yes, Mcgwire's numbers came back in 1995 when he was 31 years old. But I don't think he had a "drastic improvement." He was always good.

As far as the Adam Dunn comparison, I think that you're only stated a better case for McGwire. Dunn is 29 years old and has had 5 consecutive 40 HR seasons, on pace for his 6th. Many players become better hitters in their early thirties. Even without improvement there is a very good chance that Dunn will have 500+ HR if he stays healthy. 600 is not really out of the question. If Dunn spent any time in a big market he'd be recognized as a superstar despite his .250ish career average.

[Brad Harris]

What difference does any of that make? McGwire didn't do anything "wrong" from the perspective of MLB. There's absolutely no justification for how he's been treated by the voters.

[PVNICK]

Updated: January 23, 2009, 8:21 AM ET
Book proposal implicates McGwireComment Email Print Share ESPN.com news services

A new book proposal, submitted by the admittedly estranged brother of Mark McGwire, claims the former major league slugger used both steroids and human growth hormone during his career.

In the proposal, first reported Wednesday on Deadspin.com, Jay McGwire alleges that Mark used Deca-Durabolin and that he introduced Mark to performance-enhancing drugs in 1994.

“
Deca-Durabolin helped with his joint problems and recovery, while growth hormone helped his strength, making him leaner in the process. I became the first person to inject him, like most first-timers he couldn't plunge in the needle himself. Later a girlfriend injected him.

”
-- Jay McGwire, talking about his brother Mark in reported book proposal

Jay McGwire writes in his proposal that his brother "began to use, but in low dosages so he wouldn't lift his way out of baseball. Deca-Durabolin helped with his joint problems and recovery, while growth hormone helped his strength, making him leaner in the process. I became the first person to inject him, like most first-timers he couldn't plunge in the needle himself. Later a girlfriend injected him."

Jose Canseco, in a book he wrote in 2005, claims he and McGwire, former Oakland A's teammates, used performance-enhancing drugs as far back as 1988. Jay McGwire disputes that in the book proposal.

The McGwire brothers reportedly haven't spoken to each other for years.

The book, "The McGwire Family Secret: The Truth about Steroids, a Slugger and Ultimate Redemption," is reportedly being sent by Jay McGwire to several publishing houses in New York. Deadspin.com said that it has been turned down by "many" publishers.

Jay McGwire is a bodybuilder. He writes in the proposal that he took his brother to his supplier and trainer after a 1994 bodybuilding championship, which Jay won. He says McGwire started using performance-enhancing substances then.

The New York Times reported Friday that several publishers who have seen the proposal for the book have passed on it.

"There are so many things about it that I find suspect," David Hirshey, the executive editor of HarperCollins, told The Times. "If Jay McGwire is to be believed, he says he is setting the record straight out of quote love unquote for his brother, although a cynic might say it's out of love for a big payday."

Jay McGwire claims in the proposal that Mark McGwire used androstenedione in 1998 to allow Mark "to avoid all the potential adverse side effects that could occur from using anabolic steroids, such as water retention, hair loss, and liver, heart, or kidney stress. In addition, he wouldn't have cholesterol problems or testicular atrophy. And there were no problems with the law."

McGwire hit 70 home runs in the 1998 season, breaking Roger Maris' single-season record. It has since been eclipsed by Barry Bonds.

Jay McGwire, in the proposal, also says he wished his brother would have confessed at the famous congressional hearing, instead of saying he wasn't going to talk about the past. Jay McGwire also writes that he doesn't believe missing out on the Hall of Fame will affect his brother.

"Mark is a man I think most would like to forgive because his reason wasn't nefarious -- it was for survival," he wrote, according to the proposal. "My bringing the truth to surface about Mark is out of love. I want Mark to live in truth to see the light, to come to repentance so he can live in freedom -- which is the only way to live. "

The Deadspin.com report does not say if it asked Mark McGwire for comment on the proposal. Attempts by ESPN to reach McGwire on Thursday have been unsuccessful.

McGwire has been out of the public eye since retiring from the St. Louis Cardinals in 2001. He is now 45 years old.

Mark McGwire repeatedly has denied using illegal performance-enhancing drugs. When he testified under oath before Congress in 2005, however, he wouldn't discuss whether he did.

"Who knows what might have happened if I didn't get Mark involved with all the training, supplements, the right foods, steroids, and HGH?" the Web site quoted Jay McGwire as writing. "He would not have broken any records, and the congressional hearings would have gone on without him. Maybe Barry Bonds wouldn't have ever gotten involved with the stuff, either."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

[BigandUgly]

A new book proposal, submitted by the admittedly estranged brother of Mark McGwire, claims the former major league slugger used both steroids and human growth hormone during his career.


His brother that he hasn't talked to in years, who happens to be broke wrote a book to make a few bucks. It doesn't prove anything. I can write a book that states Eleanor Roosevelt was actually a man, doesn't mean it's accurate.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Except it is well documented that McGwire did indeed get help. From a legal OTC supplement. Ruth, Foxx, Williams etc never had access to Andro.

And McGwire's career had hit the skids not from lack of monster power but from INJURY.


Athletes today are the beneficiaries of advancements in medicine and technology. They are also the beneficiaries of more scientifically targetet workout programs and nutrition programs, and they have tremendous financial incentive to adhere to these things and not get fat, lazy, etc.

McGwire's a no-brainer HOFer for me; a Gold Glove 1B who was the most talented X-treme power/base-on-balls guy in history. The moralizing about his testimony in Congress, quite frankly, makes me want to retch. He was one of the greatest 1B in the history of MLB, and he ought to be recognized as such by induction to the HOF. The BBWAA has had their moralizing hissy fits; now it's time for them to be true to the history of baseball, and stop whining themselves.

[davewashere]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't MLB had a rule against players using substances that are illegal under federal laws? I thought it was just a matter of their not being any official testing program that prevented players from getting suspended for using those PEDs that are illegal (which would include most steroids, but exclude stuff like andro and creatine).

[BigandUgly]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't MLB had a rule against players using substances that are illegal under federal laws? I thought it was just a matter of their not being any official testing program that prevented players from getting suspended for using those PEDs that are illegal (which would include most steroids, but exclude stuff like andro and creatine).

It was against the rules to use illegal substances for a long time. Not just PEDs but other drugs as well. Even the cocaine and amphetamines that were popular for so long were against the rules.

[Ace Venom]

The big problem with MLB is that it did not police itself. If they had clamped down on amphetamines earlier, they could have dealt with the steroid issue a lot earlier. It's the whole "give an inch, take a mile" mentality.

[BigandUgly]

I like baseball better with amphetamines and steroids. Strong hyper guys belting homeruns. What's not to love?

[Brad Harris]

I like baseball better with amphetamines and steroids. Strong hyper guys belting homeruns. What's not to love?
"Hyper"?!? The last time I saw someone on the field I'd use "hyper" to describe, Dusty Baker's son was running out of the dugout.

[BigandUgly]

"Hyper"?!? The last time I saw someone on the field I'd use "hyper" to describe, Dusty Baker's son was running out of the dugout.

That's why we need the drugs back.

[Captain Cold Nose]

That's why we need the drugs back.

So more children could run onto the field at inappropriate times?

[baseball junkie]

Mark McGwire Never Used Steroids and Should Be In The Hall of Fame ...

:reporter: In a related story, while none of you were looking I passed Cy Young in career wins and should also be in the Hall of Fame ...

I think these statements have an equal truth value. I can't believe I wasted my 900th post on this!

[Brad Harris]

Mark McGwire Never Used Steroids and Should Be In The Hall of Fame ...

:reporter: In a related story, while none of you were looking I passed Cy Young in career wins and should also be in the Hall of Fame ...

I think these statements have an equal truth value. I can't believe I wasted my 900th post on this!
:laugh :laugh :laugh
But the entertainment value was well worth the effort! :highfive:

[JDD]

Let me know when we get to the funny part.

[White Knight]

Andros not exactly a multi-vitamin. And that's not my point. It's not like it was a power bar, then again probably every third person was on Creatine so where do you draw the line if at all mine is just over a lot further than yours.

Wanna know where the line is drawn? Legality. If you can but it in GNC, it doesn't affect your HOF chances.

[White Knight]

Why didn't he take the opportunity to emphatically deny using when he had the chance in the Senate hearings? "I'm not here to talk about the past" is pretty weak, especially for someone innocent of any wrongdoing.

No it isn't weak. To me I look at it as defying an intrusive, out of control federal government, and Ron Paul or any Libertarian would be proud.

[four tool]

No it isn't weak. To me I look at it as defying an intrusive, out of control federal government, and Ron Paul or any Libertarian would be proud.

It's very weak! If that's all he planned to say, why did show up? Fear of jail time? He either knew what the hearing was about, and choose not to speak, or was an idiot--which is it?

[BigandUgly]

It's very weak! If that's all he planned to say, why did show up? Fear of jail time? He either knew what the hearing was about, and choose not to speak, or was an idiot--which is it?

He showed up because he had to. At the time there was no way for him or any Major League player to discuss illegal PEDs without admitting to break the law. It is still against the law to witness a crime and not report it.

[four tool]

He showed up because he had to. At the time there was no way for him or any Major League player to discuss illegal PEDs without admitting to break the law. It is still against the law to witness a crime and not report it.

So it's still weak, he didn't want to do the right thing or take the consequences of blowing the whistle. If that was his reasoning, my opinion of him is lowered.

[Seattle1]

Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, etc.: one can only hope that the Hall of Fame will never be disgraced by having them inducted.

:pray:

:crossfingers:

[White Knight]

It's very weak! If that's all he planned to say, why did show up? Fear of jail time? He either knew what the hearing was about, and choose not to speak, or was an idiot--which is it?

Or is against government intrusion. You left out that option.

[four tool]

Or is against government intrusion. You left out that option.

He's against intrusion but he went to the hearing anyway--why? Is he a scary-cat or just a wimp who won't stand up for what he beleives in?

[Brad Harris]

Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, etc.: one can only hope that the Hall of Fame will never be disgraced by having them inducted.

:pray:

:crossfingers:

:yawn::yawn::yawn::yawn::yawn::yawn::yawn::yawn:

[White Knight]

He's against intrusion but he went to the hearing anyway--why? Is he a scary-cat or just a wimp who won't stand up for what he beleives in?

1) Perhaps he had to?

2) The out-of-control government tricked and lied to him. They told him before the hearings it would nbot be about him, yet one socialist Senator asked him anyway.

Take your pick, I'd hardly call him a wimp.

[baseball junkie]

Let me know when we get to the funny part.

JDD, it wasn't meant to be funny. It was meant to deliberately mock the assertion that McGwire didn't juice. I think we can all agree Mark used steroids. A players doesn't go from batting .201, with an OBP of .330 and a SLG percentage of .383, in 585 PA in his peak age of 27 (1991) to hitting 135 home runs over the span of two seasons seven years later without something being very wrong.

I don't find steroids, HGH, PEDs, to be a laughing matter. I think they've forever blemished our once beautiful national past time.

Does that answer where the funny is to your statisfaction?

[four tool]

1) Perhaps he had to?

2) The out-of-control government tricked and lied to him. They told him before the hearings it would nbot be about him, yet one socialist Senator asked him anyway.

Take your pick, I'd hardly call him a wimp.

What did he think the hearings were about? Everyone I know knew they were about steroid use, and the others players were prepared to talk--apparently Mac had his head in the sand.

[Los Bravos]

No it isn't weak. To me I look at it as defying an intrusive, out of control federal government, and Ron Paul or any Libertarian would be proud.Maybe he can get into the Ayn Rand Hall of Fame.The out-of-control government tricked and lied to him. They told him before the hearings it would nbot be about him, yet one socialist Senator asked him anyway.Oh, good grief...:dismay:

If you're going to insist on dragging this political schtick into every steroid thread that comes up, at least try to get your facts straight. McGwire testified in front of the Government Reform committee of the House of Representatives.

[davewashere]

Looking back at those hearings, it's disturbing what a farce they really were. You've got McGwire claiming you can't trust the word of a convicted criminal (Canseco) while refusing to refute any claims, Schilling claiming baseball can police itself and that the 90% of players who are steroid-free want to expose the other 10% while at the same time warning the elected officials that they are only helping to promote a book that names names, and finally Palmeiro, the worse of them all, who comes out and says "I have never used steroids" and then volunteers for an advisory panel formed to combat steroid use. As we all know now, Palmeiro tested positive a few months later.

[BigandUgly]

JDD, it wasn't meant to be funny. It was meant to deliberately mock the assertion that McGwire didn't juice. I think we can all agree Mark used steroids. A players doesn't go from batting .201, with an OBP of .330 and a SLG percentage of .383, in 585 PA in his peak age of 27 (1991) to hitting 135 home runs over the span of two seasons seven years later without something being very wrong.

I don't find steroids, HGH, PEDs, to be a laughing matter. I think they've forever blemished our once beautiful national past time.

Does that answer where the funny is to your statisfaction?

McGwire didn't have a good year in 1991? So what? His years prior to that were more than solid. It's not like he started to be prodective in his later years. He was a productive hitter early, had a bad year, then some injuries, then rebounded back to his normal form. The guy led the league in slugging his rookie year.

Tony Gwynn had his highest power totals at the ages of 37 and 38 and his highest slugging at 34. He must have been on steroids. Nobody improves at that age.

Hank Aaron's highest SLG and HR totals came at the age of 37. Must be a roider. Pull him out of the Hall. He ruined the game.

With McGwire I think that he came into the league, hit a bunch of homeruns. Pitchers started to figure him out and get outs. After 8 or ten years playing pro ball he figured some things out, adjusted and became a better hitter. There are many players that are better hitters in their 30's than in their 20's.

There still is no proof McGwire did illegal steroids. Aren't we in a country where you're innocent until proven guilty?

[Captain Cold Nose]

Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, etc.: one can only hope that the Hall of Fame will never be disgraced by having them inducted.

:pray:

:crossfingers:

Witch! Witch!

[Darlingtonpride]

I am so on the fence on this. On the one hand, Major League Baseball knew there was a problem and glorified it. Remember the chicks dig the long ball commercials. Then suddenly it was a problem that had to be looked into by Congress, BY CONGRESS? On the other hand, atheletes have always searched for an edge, ALWAYS. I have read the stories of Amphetamine use in the past, and lets face it, there was a time when Heroin and Cocaine were touted as pain relievers that could not be rivaled. Are we expected to believe that no current HOFer ever dabbled in anything that they thought might give them an edge? I think I am going to wait a while before I pass judgement on players who, unfortunately for them, played at a time when the media was looking for a reason to burn them at the stake, rather than a time when they would have let it slide.

[White Knight]

What did he think the hearings were about? Everyone I know knew they were about steroid use, and the others players were prepared to talk--apparently Mac had his head in the sand.

He was brought in with the promise that there wouldn't be any questions asked about individual players. When the question was asked of him, the promise was broken.

[Brad Harris]

Witch! Witch!
Yes, but how do we know she's a witch? :laugh

[PVNICK]

Refresh my memory but did this Congressional have anything to do with Taylor Hooten? What was the cover story for these guys to grandstand? Not that that absolves anyone for how they behaved at the hearings but I'm just suffering a memory lapse on how the hearings first came to pass.

[Brad Harris]

Refresh my memory but did this Congressional have anything to do with Taylor Hooten? What was the cover story for these guys to grandstand? Not that that absolves anyone for how they behaved at the hearings but I'm just suffering a memory lapse on how the hearings first came to pass.
I believe it was a direct result of Canseco's "tell-all". I'm happy to be proven wrong if anyone has better information?

[Captain Cold Nose]

Yes, but how do we know she's a witch? :laugh

Further still, once we prove she's a witch, what makes us think being a witch is punishable by death?

[Brad Harris]

Further still, once we prove she's a witch, what makes us think being a witch is punishable by death?
Because.....she's made of wood?

[Captain Cold Nose]

Because.....she's made of wood?

That must be it.

It's bad, because, well, it's bad.

[four tool]

He was brought in with the promise that there wouldn't be any questions asked about individual players. When the question was asked of him, the promise was broken.

That's what he gets for checking with a senator about a house of representatives hearing--he still comes across as a wimp, not as a stand-up guy.

[chrispw1]

A few more examples of player spikes, Carlton Fisk had his career high in home runs at age 37 hitting 11 more than his career high, nearly 50 percent.
Kirby Puckett in his third year jumped from 0 to 4 to 31. Darrell evans hit 40 home runs in 1985 at age 38 after having only 1 20 home run season from 1976 to 1984. I'm not acusing any of these guys of using I'm just saying that everyone's career goes on different paths.

[four tool]

A few more examples of player spikes, Carlton Fisk had his career high in home runs at age 37 hitting 11 more than his career high, nearly 50 percent.
Kirby Puckett in his third year jumped from 0 to 4 to 31. Darrell evans hit 40 home runs in 1985 at age 38 after having only 1 20 home run season from 1976 to 1984. I'm not acusing any of these guys of using I'm just saying that everyone's career goes on different paths.

But none of those spikes continued a la Bonds for several years.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Improved at an advanced age? He still holds the record for homeruns by a rookie (49). Is 23 an advanced age? In his rookie year many people thought he'd have a chance to break the single season homerun record at some point in his career. He only had one complete season with less than 30 homeruns.

In 93 and 94 he was injured. in 92 he had 42 home runs.

In 1997, at the age of 37 Tony Gwynn has his career high in homeruns. His second highest total came in 1998 at the age of 38.

The only time Cal Ripken hit more than 30 was 1991 at the age of 30.

George Brett had his highest homerun total in 1985 at the age of 32.

Babe Ruth's highest HR season was when he was 32.

These players all showed increased performance "at an advanced age." Should we suspect them of steroid use? I think that a better explanation is that after a few years in the league they learned a thing or two and became better hitters. I think the same explanation can be given for McGwire.

Yes, Mcgwire's numbers came back in 1995 when he was 31 years old. But I don't think he had a "drastic improvement." He was always good.

As far as the Adam Dunn comparison, I think that you're only stated a better case for McGwire. Dunn is 29 years old and has had 5 consecutive 40 HR seasons, on pace for his 6th. Many players become better hitters in their early thirties. Even without improvement there is a very good chance that Dunn will have 500+ HR if he stays healthy. 600 is not really out of the question. If Dunn spent any time in a big market he'd be recognized as a superstar despite his .250ish career average.

None of those you mention were even on the same page as McGwire after the ago of 30. Your picking one or two seasons they had, none of them had as long a period of off the chart home run hitting numbers or home run frequency like Mac did, not ever close.
Here is Mac 1986-1995 and his AB/HR ratio----13.20
Mac 1996-2001---------------AB/HR ratio------8.26
What happened here, your looking at a hitter shaving almost 5 points off his already respectable 13.20, not just one season but 6 seasons.
Any wonder that eyebrows were raised.
The already great slugger Mark McGwire becomes Superman and not just for one season. That shaving of his AB/HR ratio after the 1995 season was far more than drastic.

Ruth in 1927 was right around some earlier seasons with respect to his AB/HR ratio in some earlier seasons.


You say Ripken hit 30+ (34) at age 30 in 1991. OK lets look further.
Ripken also hit 28-27-27-27 in earlier seasons, it's not like his 34 in 1991 was off the chart for him.

Brett's first season of 30 homers did come at age 32 in 1985, but it was not that much of a leap for him.
Brett 1985-------------30 HR---155 Games
------1980------------24 HR---117 Games--- 38 games less than 1985
------1983------------25-HR---123 Games---32 games less than in 1985

No shock on Brett, he was close to 30 earlier in his career with far less games and way lower at bats.
You can't just throw some one or two season numbers of others and compare them to the 6 year peak that Mac put up from age 32 and up, they are not even on the same page, lets not just talk total numbers either, also look at the peak numbers AB/HR ratio over some years.

The next time we were to see such staggering numbers, at an even later age, was from the other Superman, Barry Bonds and we know what he was all about.

Let me say, this post is not about what Mac may or may not have used. My point is to counter any that say what he did in home run numbers or AB/HR ratio was not much different than where he was at before 1996. What ever the reason, the leap was hugh, not to be compared with some one or two season spikes by others mentioned. I should add that some of the info I gave on Ruth, Brett and Ripken when looked at show they are no where near the 6 year spike by Mac 1996-2001.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

He showed up because he had to. At the time there was no way for him or any Major League player to discuss illegal PEDs without admitting to break the law. It is still against the law to witness a crime and not report it.

OK, bottom line, if he never used, why not just answer no.
Does it positivily mean he did use because he refused to answer either way, I'm giving Mac the benefit of doubt, no that does no mean he did use.
The problem is, it's got to do with perception of those who watched the hearing, what it's all about by refusing to answer or speak about it, he looked bad.
Is that fair, no it's not but we saw how it appeared to effect the voting of some for the HOF. Never used, just say no.

[Seattle1]

The obvious ones are guys like Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, etc. The ones who late in their careers looked like Incredible-Hulk-freak-versions of their former selves from early in their career. You'd have to have rocks in your head to vote for them in the Hall of Fame, especially when they are known to have tested positive.

:twocents:

[Ace Venom]

You'd have to have rocks in your head to vote for them in the Hall of Fame, especially when they are known to have tested positive.

:twocents:

Easy, slick. I think the 1990's runs a gross risk of being underrepresented for a number of reasons. If it weren't for Frank Thomas, you'd have a tough standard to set for first basemen (though he arguably should go in as a DH) in the 1990's since you eliminate Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro from the conversation by default. That leaves you with Jeff Bagwell? Good job. Oh wait. There's Fred McGriff, who will have an uphill climb as it is while Bagwell will probably sail in ahead of him.

Where you'll start having problems is with outfielders. The two biggest outfielders of that era were arguably Barry Bonds (#1 all-time in HR) and Sammy Sosa (#6 all-time in HR, #5 when he retired). So then you head for Ken Griffey Jr., but who else? I guess Jimmy Baseball looks pretty good with that 132 OPS+ and 8 GG as the second tier CF in comparison to Griffey with a possible Johnny Damon if he gets to 3,000 hits.

RF? Oh yeah. Sheffield is connected with Balco. We've eliminated two right fielders already. What about LF? Without steroids, Bonds is the standard. Albert Belle? The guy couldn't stay on the ballot, which is a shame because he deserved better. 3B? Eliminate A-Rod and count your lucky stars that you have Chipper Jones. P? Well, Greg Maddux and Randy Johnson have you covered there. C? Ivan Rodriguez and Mike Piazza save you there, but only assuming that neither of them tested positive in 2003.

[Captain Cold Nose]

The obvious ones are guys like Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, etc. The ones who late in their careers looked like Incredible-Hulk-freak-versions of their former selves from early in their career. You'd have to have rocks in your head to vote for them in the Hall of Fame, especially when they are known to have tested positive.

:twocents:

Witch! Witch!

[BigandUgly]

The obvious ones are guys like Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, etc. The ones who late in their careers looked like Incredible-Hulk-freak-versions of their former selves from early in their career. You'd have to have rocks in your head to vote for them in the Hall of Fame, especially when they are known to have tested positive.

:twocents:

McGwire is not an obvious one. He looked like the incredible hulk as a rookie (when he hit 49 HR). Also, there is no evidence that he ever tested positive for any illegal substances.

[History Of Baseball Fan]

Easy, slick. I think the 1990's runs a gross risk of being underrepresented for a number of reasons. If it weren't for Frank Thomas, you'd have a tough standard to set for first basemen (though he arguably should go in as a DH) in the 1990's since you eliminate Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro from the conversation by default. That leaves you with Jeff Bagwell? Good job. Oh wait. There's Fred McGriff, who will have an uphill climb as it is while Bagwell will probably sail in ahead of him.

Where you'll start having problems is with outfielders. The two biggest outfielders of that era were arguably Barry Bonds (#1 all-time in HR) and Sammy Sosa (#6 all-time in HR, #5 when he retired). So then you head for Ken Griffey Jr., but who else? I guess Jimmy Baseball looks pretty good with that 132 OPS+ and 8 GG as the second tier CF in comparison to Griffey with a possible Johnny Damon if he gets to 3,000 hits.

RF? Oh yeah. Sheffield is connected with Balco. We've eliminated two right fielders already. What about LF? Without steroids, Bonds is the standard. Albert Belle? The guy couldn't stay on the ballot, which is a shame because he deserved better. 3B? Eliminate A-Rod and count your lucky stars that you have Chipper Jones. P? Well, Greg Maddux and Randy Johnson have you covered there. C? Ivan Rodriguez and Mike Piazza save you there, but only assuming that neither of them tested positive in 2003.

In roughly the same 4 or 5 year span when McGwire and Sosa were whacking out over 60 HRs a year, Griffey mysteriously had back to back 56 HR seasons with a 49 and HR seasons in there. To me, those back to back 56 HR seasons sound a little "fishy" to me. Other than McGwire and Sosa, how many players have had back to back 50+ HR seasons ? Its funny how we all of a sudden have 3 players doing it in the same couple year span.

I think Canseco claimed that Ivan Rodriquez was using the 'roids and it wouldn't surprise me if Piazza was at some time too. I'm not saying Canseco is 100% right, but he was right about a lot of players, so knows. Don't you find it "strange" at how many players have 500 and 600+ HRs in the steroids era ? For over 80 years, we only had 3 players hit over 600 HRs and yet in the steroid era we have Bonds, Sosa and Griffey all of a sudden hit over 600 ? How about the ones who have hit 500 and counting in the steroids era ?

Many teams were being tipped off about when their players and what players were going to be tested, so just because some players never actually failed a test, it does not mean that they are innocent. Until the test results are made public, I can't even include any players from the steroid era in a list of the best players ever... and that is sad.

[BigandUgly]

You can't just throw some one or two season numbers of others and compare them to the 6 year peak that Mac put up from age 32 and up, they are not even on the same page, lets not just talk total numbers either, also look at the peak numbers AB/HR ratio over some years.

My point was that many players become better hitters in their early thirties. The fact that he hit better after the age of thirty does absolutely nothing to prove use of illegal drugs.

[BigandUgly]

Many teams were being tipped off about when their players and what players were going to be tested, so just because some players never actually failed a test, it does not mean that they are innocent. Until the test results are made public, I can't even include any players from the steroid era in a list of the best players ever... and that is sad.

So you don't believe that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty? If it's possible you're guilty you should be punished?

[Ace Venom]

In roughly the same 4 or 5 year span when McGwire and Sosa were whacking out over 60 HRs a year, Griffey mysteriously had back to back 56 HR seasons with a 49 and HR seasons in there. To me, those back to back 56 HR seasons sound a little "fishy" to me. Other than McGwire and Sosa, how many players have had back to back 50+ HR seasons ? Its funny how we all of a sudden have 3 players doing it in the same couple year span.

Without steroids, there's no doubt that Griffey's accomplishments might look ten times better than they do.

I think Canseco claimed that Ivan Rodriquez was using the 'roids and it wouldn't surprise me if Piazza was at some time too. I'm not saying Canseco is 100% right, but he was right about a lot of players, so knows. Don't you find it "strange" at how many players have 500 and 600+ HRs in the steroids era ? For over 80 years, we only had 3 players hit over 600 HRs and yet in the steroid era we have Bonds, Sosa and Griffey all of a sudden hit over 600 ? How about the ones who have hit 500 and counting in the steroids era ?

One thing about Canseco is that I can say that he stirred up a lot of crap. He's said a lot of things that were true, but I also think he was talking out his butt for a lot of things and he just happened to be right (see Sosa). I'm also willing to bet he's said a lot of things that aren't necessarily accurate.

Many teams were being tipped off about when their players and what players were going to be tested, so just because some players never actually failed a test, it does not mean that they are innocent. Until the test results are made public, I can't even include any players from the steroid era in a list of the best players ever... and that is sad.

The burden of proof lies with the prosecution and not the defense. This isn't law, but it does ring true here. With a lot of no names using pharmaceutical means, the best still rose to the top. That's my take on the situation. You're either going to horribly underrepresent the era or you're not.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

My point was that many players become better hitters in their early thirties. The fact that he hit better after the age of thirty does absolutely nothing to prove use of illegal drugs.

You answered so I'm assuming you did read my post # 78.
You will notice that some of the hitters you mentioned, Brett and Ripken had earlier in their careers came close to the numbers you said they reached after the age of thirty and in less games and less at bats in that earlier time period, it was not surprising.
What Mac did was off the chart and even more important, it was not just one season, or two seasons it was 6 seasons 1996-2001.

Before 1996 his career AB/HR ratio was 13.20 and from 1996 to 2001 it was a mind boggling, hard to believe 8.26........over 6 seasons. Two completely different hitters before 1996 and fom 1996 to 2001.
Those that you mention were blips compared to what Mac took off on after the 1995 season, thats the difference.

You say that some others put up one or even two seasons with numbers in the 30's though true, they are not even on the same planet as Mac after age 30. Thats the point, there is no comparison as to what Brett and Ripken did compared to Mac.
We can find a number of others who hit their highest total after age 30, but did they erupt for off the chart numbers for 6 seasons, no.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

One thing about Canseco is that I can say that he stirred up a lot of crap. He's said a lot of things that were true, but I also think he was talking out his butt for a lot of things and he just happened to be right (see Sosa). I'm also willing to bet he's said a lot of things that aren't necessarily accurate.



I am certainly no fan of Conseco's, never even liked him before he opened up.
With that said, I doubt he "just happened to be right."

They can call him a rat, what ever they choose, it now looks like he was right on with much of what he said.
I do agree, I don't take all that he has said about some until there is some proof.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

In roughly the same 4 or 5 year span when McGwire and Sosa were whacking out over 60 HRs a year, Griffey mysteriously had back to back 56 HR seasons with a 49 and HR seasons in there. To me, those back to back 56 HR seasons sound a little "fishy" to me. Other than McGwire and Sosa, how many players have had back to back 50+ HR seasons ? Its funny how we all of a sudden have 3 players doing it in the same couple year span.

I think Canseco claimed that Ivan Rodriquez was using the 'roids and it wouldn't surprise me if Piazza was at some time too. I'm not saying Canseco is 100% right, but he was right about a lot of players, so knows. Don't you find it "strange" at how many players have 500 and 600+ HRs in the steroids era ? For over 80 years, we only had 3 players hit over 600 HRs and yet in the steroid era we have Bonds, Sosa and Griffey all of a sudden hit over 600 ? How about the ones who have hit 500 and counting in the steroids era ?

Many teams were being tipped off about when their players and what players were going to be tested, so just because some players never actually failed a test, it does not mean that they are innocent. Until the test results are made public, I can't even include any players from the steroid era in a list of the best players ever... and that is sad.

Totally agree with the "fishy" bit. Some how Ken Jr and what he did got over shadowed by some other events, I wondered about him at that time. Back to back 56 home run seasons, makes one wonder.
Here is that 4 year period, home runs

1996---49
1997---56
1998---56
1999---48
Just a bit away from 4 consectutive 50 homer seasons
As I have done with all others, looks fishy but at this time he has to be judged innocent.

[BigandUgly]

You answered so I'm assuming you did read my post # 78.
You will notice that some of the hitters you mentioned, Brett and Ripken had earlier in their careers came close to the numbers you said they reached after the age of thirty and in less games and less at bats in that earlier time period, it was not surprising.

Mac had 49 HR his rookie year. Hitting 60+ isn't surprising after he's in the league for a while and "learned" how to be a better hitter.


What Mac did was off the chart and even more important, it was not just one season, or two seasons it was 6 seasons 1996-2001.

The guy learned how to hit and got better. The fact that he was off the chart only adds to his HOF credentials.



Before 1996 his career AB/HR ratio was 13.20 and from 1996 to 2001 it was a mind boggling, hard to believe 8.26........over 6 seasons. Two completely different hitters before 1996 and fom 1996 to 2001.

Not really two completely different hitters. One real good, another even better. Also, much of his time prior to 1996 was spent injured. He missed most of 1993 and 1994 and a good chunk of 1995. From 1988 through 1992 he played with injury. The only way that you can say he was a completely different hitter after 1995 is to say that he was healthy.

You say that some others put up one or even two seasons with numbers in the 30's though true, they are not even on the same planet as Mac after age 30. Thats the point, there is no comparison as to what Brett and Ripken did compared to Mac.
We can find a number of others who hit their highest total after age 30, but did they erupt for off the chart numbers for 6 seasons, no.

My point wasn't to imply anything about these other players. My statement was in response to someone saying players can't improve at an advanced age. They can. We shouldn't penalize Mac for getting better. We should reward him.

Until their is proof that he did anything wrong I don't see why we should keep him out of the Hall.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Mac had 49 HR his rookie year. Hitting 60+ isn't surprising after he's in the league for a while and "learned" how to be a better hitter.



The guy learned how to hit and got better. The fact that he was off the chart only adds to his HOF credentials.



Not really two completely different hitters. One real good, another even better. Also, much of his time prior to 1996 was spent injured. He missed most of 1993 and 1994 and a good chunk of 1995. From 1988 through 1992 he played with injury. The only way that you can say he was a completely different hitter after 1995 is to say that he was healthy.



My point wasn't to imply anything about these other players. My statement was in response to someone saying players can't improve at an advanced age. They can. We shouldn't penalize Mac for getting better. We should reward him.

Until their is proof that he did anything wrong I don't see why we should keep him out of the Hall.

I could understand why we differ. Your take on how he performed after 1995, he just got better. Mine, no one gets that much better, for the next 6 seasons, he's hitting a home run almost every 8 at bats.
You call it getting better, I call it difficult to believe, the surge even for an already great slugger.

Thats what had some thinking the numbers and I might add it wasn't only Mac, Sosa and his numbers were raising eyebrows. We saw what took place with Barry Bonds when he exploded, fans wondering, even more suspect Because Barry was in his mid 30's. And now it appears there is some proof they both used.
When hitters started hitting 50 and 60 home runs like never before and two 70 homer seasons, it raises suspicion.
Mac is innocent at this time, may always be, no ban at that time if he did use.
But to the voters, they are going by what they perceive, balls flying out of parks like never before, never before ( mid-late 1990s) so they wonder.
No problem with me should he get in the HOF, thats up to the voters, but his refusal to speak about the past after already being suspect did not sit well with some voters.

[Los Bravos]

He looked like the incredible hulk as a rookie (when he hit 49 HR).He looked a lot more like Dr. Banner in '87.

[stuarthouse]

McGwire is not an obvious one. He looked like the incredible hulk as a rookie (when he hit 49 HR). Also, there is no evidence that he ever tested positive for any illegal substances.

I disagree. He was an Adonis as a young player, not some freak!!!!! He began his fraudulent career in 1995, after which he looked like Hulk Hogan.
He never came even close to the holy grail of a 500' home run until he was on the juice! Fortunately for him, when he was examined by Congress about his steroid use he refused to answer, thus avoiding the fate that awaits Bonds. He had better legal advice than Bonds, or at the very least the personality to heed the advice. Bon apetit, Barry!

[BigandUgly]

I disagree. He was an Adonis as a young player, not some freak!!!!! He began his fraudulent career in 1995, after which he looked like Hulk Hogan.
He never came even close to the holy grail of a 500' home run until he was on the juice!

There is still no proof of illegal steroid use.

And besides, Mac isn't really that big.

http://baseball-fever.com/picture.php?albumid=58&pictureid=528

And the fact that he got a bit bigger and stronger doesn't mean he did it an unnatural way. I'm 36 now and I'm bigger and stronger than I was when I was 26. I don't use 'roids. My diet is different and I work out in a different way. I think that is also the story with Mac.

[Blackhat]

If Mac isn't getting votes because they don't think that he was a good enough player to get in the Hall of Fame that's fine.

Unfortunately, Mac isn't getting votes because of the PED controversy and that is just plain wrong. Until there is proof against him he should not be punished.

[JDD]

I cannot believe there is even room for debate in his case.

[PVNICK]

I cannot believe there is even room for debate in his case.
On which point the using or the HOF worthiness (or both)?

[White Knight]

I'm a huge Mac fan. I really hope he didn't use.

[Blackhat]

I'm a huge Mac fan. I really hope he didn't use.

The only thing that he's been shown to have use is Andro. When he was using Andro it was not against the rules and was not illegal. The fact that it was illegalized and reclassified as a steroid after he used it should not be held against him.

If Advil is illegalized next year should we keep all pitchers out for using illegal Anti-inflammatories?

I also think that players are helped far more by cortizone shots than they could be helped with steroids, but that's another issue.

[KHenry14]

I believe that a lot of guys would tell the truth now except that they are afraid of getting caught up in some type of law enforcement problem. I can imagine a scenario where cops in certain jurisdictions might want to talk to McGwire about where he got the drugs from, and those are questions he probably doesn't want to answer.

However, telling the truth does work. Andy Pettite admitted it, and nobody says anything to him about it now. This country would forgive almost any transgression (except for maybe OJ) if some one would just tell the truth. A lesson that Pete Rose should have learned.

[Blackhat]

Players that didn't use are in a no-win situation. They can either admit to something they didn't do or deny it and be called a liar. If you were a clean player accused of using what would you do?

[JDD]

Lordy... it's like a ball on a tee.

Take a drug test and make the results public.

[Blackhat]

Lordy... it's like a ball on a tee.

Take a drug test and make the results public.

It's too late. Drugs are out of the system. If a player volunteers for a drug test the skeptics will say it's because he's been off the juice for 30 days and knows it will just make him look good.

[White Knight]

The only thing that he's been shown to have use is Andro. When he was using Andro it was not against the rules and was not illegal. The fact that it was illegalized and reclassified as a steroid after he used it should not be held against him.

If Advil is illegalized next year should we keep all pitchers out for using illegal Anti-inflammatories?

I also think that players are helped far more by cortizone shots than they could be helped with steroids, but that's another issue.

I agree. Andro isn't really much of a steroid and doesn't do much at all anyway, being that it is ingested. Someone competing for Mr. Universe would laugh if it were offered.

[MyDogSparty]

So you don't believe that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty? If it's possible you're guilty you should be punished?

You keep harping on this "innocent until proven guilty" line and quite frankly that's not a requirement in this situation. This isn't a court of law. It's a court of public opinion. McGwire has no entitlement to be enshrined in the HOF. No rules have been broken to keep him out of the HOF. It's all based on people's opinions and hopefully common sense. In this case whether or not we agree with it, "the tribe has spoken". McGwire is NOT a MLB HOFer. I can understand arguments on both sides.

[STLCards2]

Totally agree with the "fishy" bit. Some how Ken Jr and what he did got over shadowed by some other events, I wondered about him at that time. Back to back 56 home run seasons, makes one wonder.
Here is that 4 year period, home runs

1996---49
1997---56
1998---56
1999---48
Just a bit away from 4 consectutive 50 homer seasons
As I have done with all others, looks fishy but at this time he has to be judged innocent.


But with the small parks, tiny strikezones, chicken pitchers who refused to throw inside, and better natural training and weightlifting, many people were going to hit 50+ homeruns this era - juts probably not in the mid 60's-low 70's. Gus like Mays hit that many a few times without any of the environmental conditions in their favor. I don't see why the Griffey hitting that many with the environmental conditions in his favor as being "fishy."

[west coast orange and black]

bigandugly: So you don't believe that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty? If it's possible you're guilty you should be punished?

mydogsparty: This isn't a court of law. It's a court of public opinion .... It's all based on people's opinions and hopefully common sense.

opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty; a personal view, attitude, or appraisal
(my underlining)

[four tool]

bigandugly: So you don't believe that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty? If it's possible you're guilty you should be punished?

mydogsparty: This isn't a court of law. It's a court of public opinion .... It's all based on people's opinions and hopefully common sense.

opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty; a personal view, attitude, or appraisal
(my underlining)

"A personal view attittude or appraisal"--apparenty many voters have an an appraisal of McG that he is not hall of fame worthy--so what's the point of quoting the definition?

[MyDogSparty]

bigandugly: So you don't believe that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty? If it's possible you're guilty you should be punished?

mydogsparty: This isn't a court of law. It's a court of public opinion .... It's all based on people's opinions and hopefully common sense.

opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty; a personal view, attitude, or appraisal
(my underlining)

I'm not sure what your point is. Opinions are written everyday by judges in the court of law. I guess then by definition the court of law is "insufficient".

[CircleChange11]

And McGwire's career had hit the skids not from lack of monster power but from INJURY.

... and the #1 benefit of steroids is 'recovery'.

Bic Mac was finally healthy for 3 seasons in StL (following some injury-plagued seasons in OAK) and put together 3 HR seasons that have not been seen before, as did Sammy, as did Bonds.

The Mac retired with joint problems, which can be a side effect of continual steroid abuse ... steroids help muscles recover, not joints.

How this is even debatable is beyond me. It's like trying to convince someone that Tyson has personality issues.

For those convinced he did not use, no amount of evidence will be enough ... and there won't be a positive test, b/c he was gone by then.

Bic Macs brother says he injected Mark, as did Canseco. These guys aren;t just sayinjg they had some knowledge of Mark's use, they're saying they personally injected him with steroids. I would think that would be somethng to sue one for, if they were just making it up.

But, the whole package is what's damning .... the record numbers, the refusal to speak at congress, Canseco's allegations, the marred era, his 265 pound frame, the idea that the Andro in the locker was a plant to mask the obvious, etc.

[CircleChange11]

McGwire is not an obvious one. He looked like the incredible hulk as a rookie (when he hit 49 HR). Also, there is no evidence that he ever tested positive for any illegal substances.

Bullcrap.

1987 - Not the Incredible Hulk (6'5 215)
http://i1.iofferphoto.com/img/item/536/609/61/dcce_1.JPG

2001 - THE Incredible Hulk (6'5 265)
http://cdn.edu-search.com/uploads/MarkMcgwire.jpg


He started off as a scrawny pitcher at USC, then was converted to a 1B.

C'mon man. Steven Strasberg is more 'Hulkish' than an 87 McGwire.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

... Bic Macs brother says he injected Mark, as did Canseco. These guys aren;t just sayinjg they had some knowledge of Mark's use, they're saying they personally injected him with steroids. I would think that would be somethng to sue one for, if they were just making it up.

But, the whole package is what's damning .... the record numbers, the refusal to speak at congress, Canseco's allegations, the marred era, his 265 pound frame, the idea that the Andro in the locker was a plant to mask the obvious, etc.

How much proof do we need, for others who refuse to believe.
Would Canseco just make up this story, would he be so direct in his words, I believe him. Laughed at when Jose started talking, much of what he said turned out to be the truth.
Some can call Canseco a a jerk, in this case a rat but that does not matter, the issue is did Mac use steroids, OK no ban at that time..........bottom line he is a liar, he did use.

[EdTarbusz]

Players that didn't use are in a no-win situation. They can either admit to something they didn't do or deny it and be called a liar. If you were a clean player accused of using what would you do?

I find it hard to feel any sympathy for any player who might be clean. These clean players should have a lot of noise to the players Association while it was fighting any form of testing. Clean players should have loudly been demanding mandatory testing.

[CircleChange11]

I believe that a lot of guys would tell the truth now except that they are afraid of getting caught up in some type of law enforcement problem.

Really?

Do you also believe when David Ortiz says that anyone caught using steroids should be suspended for a year, that he means "including me"?

These guys do wahtever they can to protect their rep.

I'm waiting for an athlete to just sick of it all and just tell it like it really is, "Yeah, I used. A lot of people did. But, I'm not basing my use on theirs. People were passing me by on performance right and left. I needed a big contract. I have no other skills. All I've ever done is play baseball. I got nothing else. So, I usued, and I stayed healthy, and I perfoemd well, and I got a big contract, and now my family is taken care of.

Furthermore, I did research on steroids and as it turns out moderate use ain't gonna kill ya like mom and your 4th grade teacher said it would - It's also doesn't shrink your louisville slugger --- if yaknowwhatimean. I had someone knowledgable advise me and I took reasonable precautions. It worked exactly like it should have, with you guys cheering me on all along the way."

The sad part is this guy would only be a small part of the rampant problem.

But, Bud's cleaned it all up by now, as evident by the positive tests. Either that or athletes are understanding they need to use masking agents or other products (Remember why it was called 'The Clear'?). Which do you think it likely is?

[CircleChange11]

Would Canseco just make up this story, would he be so direct in his words, I believe him. Laughed at when Jose started talking, much of what he said turned out to be the truth.

We all did. There was a certain sector of the population (the bodybuilders, muscleheads, powerlifters, etc) that believed Jose right away, and knew he was just break the lid off of pandora's box because they've seen the use spread to rampancy in their own culture, their own gyms, etc. They know what athletes get like when rumors start swirling about something that drastically improves recovery or performance.

The surprising thing to me is that the big stars were using, and so many of them.

But, if athletes hear that cat food helps recovery, builds muscle, or improves performance, then there'll be a lot of guys walking out of the store with 'Meow Mix'.

Some can call Canseco a a jerk, in this case a rat but that does not matter, the issue is did Mac use steroids, OK no ban at that time..........bottom line he is a liar, he did use.

This is where people are wrong. Steroids WERE illegal in baseball back then, they're illegal to BUY or SELL without doctor's prescription for ANYONE in the USA. If memory serves it's a Class 3 drug.

What people mean when they say "steroids weren't illegal back then" or "they weren't banned" is they weren't tested for. Steroids have been banned/prohibited by every major sporting organization for decades.

Baseball really didn't need testing 'pre-canseco' because they had a lot of out-dated assumptions that were considered fact like weight-training made you 'musclebound' and non-flexible, that steroids were only good for adding muscle, etc. Once that changed, the match turned into a full on forest fire.

It's like when people find out smoking a joint doesn't immediately lead to one becoming a vegetable or heroin junkie. People try it, see the benefit, and find out much of what they've been told is just mere 'scare tactic'. I have no idea how to go about eliminating steroids. It's like trying to eliminate alcohol during prohibition and eliminate drugs when people want to get high. It'll be a losing battle and the users will always be ahead of the testers, and the fans will never know for certain if what they're seeing is legit ... like the olympics.

I hate it and think because of the "nature of the beat", the only way to combat it is 'one strike and you're out'. T&F's '2 year ban' is a good start, because that basically ensurs that an athlete won't compete in the Olympics, so a '2-year ban' in essence is more like a 4-8 year ban in consequence.

Manny has just shown at what a joke it is. It's like he's a national hero, as if he survived cancer or something.

[Brad Harris]

This is where people are wrong. Steroids WERE illegal in baseball back then, they're illegal to BUY or SELL without doctor's prescription for ANYONE in the USA. If memory serves it's a Class 3 drug.

What people mean when they say "steroids weren't illegal back then" or "they weren't banned" is they weren't tested for. Steroids have been banned/prohibited by every major sporting organization for decades.
Not so. While they were illegal (in that they were prohibited by U.S. law), steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs were not prohibited specifically by MLB until such prohibition was agreed to by collective bargaining in the early 2000s. Before the union agreed to it, ballplayers could neither be tested nor punished for it, hence there was de facto no prohibition against it.

[CircleChange11]

Not so. While they were illegal (in that they were prohibited by U.S. law), steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs were not prohibited specifically by MLB until such prohibition was agreed to by collective bargaining in the early 2000s. Before the union agreed to it, ballplayers could neither be tested nor punished for it, hence there was de facto no prohibition against it.

When something is illegal, nationwide, there is no need for an organization within that nation to prohibit it. That's really where the arguement should end. It's not (or shouldn't be) necessary for MLb to list steroids as a "can't use this" compound, since you can't legally use it as a citizen.

But, FWIW, Vincent added steroids expressely to the prohibited list in 1991.

So that pretty much covers all of the players/fans we're talking about in regards to using the "non prohibited" claim as an excuse.

[jalbright]

But the punishment for that baseball could enforce was going "tsk, tsk, bad boy" while paying high salaries to players whose performance had improved. After the changes following the Congressional hearings, they actually could suspend guys without pay. The system before the changes in the collective bargaining agreement in reality provided incentives to juice in the form of continuing employment at a high paying job and/or increases in pay. You can argue about the efficacy of the system since then, but to claim there was any meaningful punishment for PEDs before it is pure sophistry.

[CircleChange11]

But the punishment for that baseball could enforce was going "tsk, tsk, bad boy" while paying high salaries to players whose performance had improved. After the changes following the Congressional hearings, they actually could suspend guys without pay. The system before the changes in the collective bargaining agreement in reality provided incentives to juice in the form of continuing employment at a high paying job and/or increases in pay. You can argue about the efficacy of the system since then, but to claim there was any meaningful punishment for PEDs before it is pure sophistry.

Oh, I agree with that. But, as an adult, I don't assume that the store's lack of cameras is permission to steal. Seriously. We're not talking 10 year old kids here.

The MLBPA, and threats of a strike/holdout, have been major impedences in the steroid policy. MLB has lots more "employer's rights" than they enforce, and they restrain themselves most likely to keep "amicable" with the union, because it's been shown that the union can be pretty damn powerful when it wants to ... not so much in the NFL and NBA.

Baseball has a history of being rather lenient with player's private lives (alcohol and drug use/abuse) ... it's only recently when fans have become disgrunteled, with DUI deaths and negligence have become legal issues, and that sacred records have fallen, that MLB raises an eyebrow. Baseball has generally been very 'laissez faire' when it comes to this stuff, and well the players did not act very honorably.

[jalbright]

I understand what you're saying about the store not having security cameras--but baseball turned a blind eye toward it, touting its home-run record race and paying guys for improving their performance and closing their eyes as to how it was done. The only way your analogy works is if the store paid you to steal the goods, but then submitted an inflated price for them in its insurance claim for the theft, so it too would profit from the wrongdoing.

[CircleChange11]

I understand what you're saying about the store not having security cameras--but baseball turned a blind eye toward it, touting its home-run record race and paying guys for improving their performance and closing their eyes as to how it was done. The only way your analogy works is if the store paid you to steal the goods, but then submitted an inflated price for them in its insurance claim for the theft, so it too would profit from the wrongdoing.

Perhaps, an even better analogy would be my "boss" (paying em to steal) and the store owner committing insurance fraud together as I became famous as the next "Jesse James".

I am no fan of the previous baseball commisioners. I think baseball commissioners have gotten weaker, as the NBA and NFL have gotten stronger, in large part tot he talent of their commissioners.

Certainly, MLB used the Summer of 98 to rebound from the strike. They rode Mark and Sammy all the way as we stood and cheered every time (and didn;t think twice about it). Then later when someone nobody liked started one-upping them, we got all passionate about it.

Personally, I feel like an idiot about it. 60 HRs had happend 2 times in 100 years, and then it happened 5 times in 7 years, with it happening to one guy (not Ruth) three times alone.

We all should have known better, but thought our sport was different from other sports.

I don't disagree with this, but I also do not think it makes a valid excuse for players to use something that is illegal in the US just because MLB doesn't test for it. It isn't one of those junior high arguements where one person being wrong, means the other is automatically right. Both parties are wrong, and it may never be 'right' again (seroiusly ... and unfortunately).

My biggest fear, more like acceptance of reality at this point, is that baseball will always be plagued by steroids, from this point on. I think it will cool off for perhaps this year and the next, but will start up again soon, perhaps when we become more acclimated to the cheating, the test-beaters get better, new products are not as easily detectable, or GH is available at a lesser price and everyone is just using that (likely the case in 15-20 years ... heck lots of us 55-60 year olds might be doing the 'hormone therapy' stuff by then).

[Brad Harris]

Baseball can't make anything "illegal" since baseball does not have the authority to make law. It's necessary for baseball to prohibit the use of something, however, if baseball wants it to be against baseball policy, which it clearly was not until 2004 testing went into place. Fay Vincent could have shouted from the mountaintops while he was Commissioner but it wouldn't have made his memo official MLB policy regardless. And that's the point.

Ballplayers are judged as ballplayers based on breaking the law; they're judged on breaking baseball policy. It's MLB policy, not federal law that puts players on the Ineligible List. It's Hall of Fame policy, not the laws of the land, that render suspended players ineligible for consideration for election.

And that's the point. None of these PED users - alleged or otherwise - did anything against the rules prior to the implementation of MLB's system of testing/punishment. Prior to those 2004 tests, it wasn't against the rules, whether it was illegal or not doesn't factor into it.

If the cops want to go after someone for using illegal steroids in the 1990's, that's their perogative, not Baseball's.

[four tool]

Baseball can't make anything "illegal" since baseball does not have the authority to make law. It's necessary for baseball to prohibit the use of something, however, if baseball wants it to be against baseball policy, which it clearly was not until 2004 testing went into place. Fay Vincent could have shouted from the mountaintops while he was Commissioner but it wouldn't have made his memo official MLB policy regardless. And that's the point.

Ballplayers are judged as ballplayers based on breaking the law; they're judged on breaking baseball policy. It's MLB policy, not federal law that puts players on the Ineligible List. It's Hall of Fame policy, not the laws of the land, that render suspended players ineligible for consideration for election.

And that's the point. None of these PED users - alleged or otherwise - did anything against the rules prior to the implementation of MLB's system of testing/punishment. Prior to those 2004 tests, it wasn't against the rules, whether it was illegal or not doesn't factor into it.

If the cops want to go after someone for using illegal steroids in the 1990's, that's their perogative, not Baseball's.

So you're saying baseball encouraged the players to break the law? We can't enforce, not our job, so so what?

[White Knight]

When something is illegal, nationwide, there is no need for an organization within that nation to prohibit it. That's really where the arguement should end. It's not (or shouldn't be) necessary for MLb to list steroids as a "can't use this" compound, since you can't legally use it as a citizen.

No. If something is illegal in law but not in baseball, you should be punished in court, but not by MLB. If someone likes do 75 in a 50, ticket him. But don't suspend him in baseball, since there is no law on the books in MLB for speeders.

[White Knight]

Personally, I feel like an idiot about it. 60 HRs had happend 2 times in 100 years, and then it happened 5 times in 7 years, with it happening to one guy (not Ruth) three times alone.

Sammy hit 60+ three times, Mac twice, and Bonds once. So six times in four years, not five times in seven years. Just saying. :)

[CircleChange11]

Baseball can't make anything "illegal" since baseball does not have the authority to make law. It's necessary for baseball to prohibit the use of something, however, if baseball wants it to be against baseball policy, which it clearly was not until 2004 testing went into place. Fay Vincent could have shouted from the mountaintops while he was Commissioner but it wouldn't have made his memo official MLB policy regardless. And that's the point.

Ballplayers are judged as ballplayers based on breaking the law; they're judged on breaking baseball policy. It's MLB policy, not federal law that puts players on the Ineligible List. It's Hall of Fame policy, not the laws of the land, that render suspended players ineligible for consideration for election.

And that's the point. None of these PED users - alleged or otherwise - did anything against the rules prior to the implementation of MLB's system of testing/punishment. Prior to those 2004 tests, it wasn't against the rules, whether it was illegal or not doesn't factor into it.

If the cops want to go after someone for using illegal steroids in the 1990's, that's their perogative, not Baseball's.

I get what you're saying. Baseball policy v. Fed/State Law.

The idea that even though Vincent added it to the prohibited "list" means little since there was not an agreed upon "policy/punishment" standard for which to operate. As a school administrator, I relate well to that explanation. *grin*

In regards to HoF, I don't think the question is "Can the HoF keep them out?", because they've shown they can. But "For how long?". I would imagine that if an athlete felt as though he was being wrongly 'prosecuted/punished' for something that was not clear policy, then they may have a legal case. You'd have to be a pretty big prick to file the suit, or really wanna stick it to MLB to do such a thing ... I can think of a guy, elgible in the near future who might be "such a prick" if HoF wanted to try and "punish him that way".

This may get really interesting. It would also establish what to do with "players from this era".

[four tool]

No. If something is illegal in law but not in baseball, you should be punished in court, but not by MLB. If someone likes do 75 in a 50, ticket him. But don't suspend him in baseball, since there is no law on the books in MLB for speeders.

So a player murders or molests a child, but can continue to play until the law catches up to him?

[Ace Venom]

So a player murders or molests a child, but can continue to play until the law catches up to him?

I'm gonna play devil's advocate here. If nobody knows what he did and he has not been arrested yet, what reason is there for him not to play if nothing is known about his criminal deeds? Now if he was arrested, the guy should get banned without hesitation.

[four tool]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate here. If nobody knows what he did and he has not been arrested yet, what reason is there for him not to play if nothing is known about his criminal deeds? Now if he was arrested, the guy should get banned without hesitation.
Arrested but not yet convicted? So much for innocent until proven guilty.

[White Knight]

So a player murders or molests a child, but can continue to play until the law catches up to him?

The law would catch up to him right away for those crimes if it was out in the open.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I sincerely would hope MLB and any related branch thereof would wait until justice if fully served before making a decision on a player's fate should they become involved in a case involving such heinous crimes.

Does anyone seriously think Urgueth Urbina will receive consideration for anything baseball-related now? If Urbina was actually tailoring a far more successful career, it likely won't matter. We're not talking a little marijuana or coke here, we're talking irreparably harmed victims. If having a bad attitude has hurt guys like Dick Allen and Albert Belle, actually following through on something will make a player persona non-grata.