![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Aside from the trade deadline (will be seeing you, Nick!) the big news in baseball was the leaked report that David Ortiz (aka Big Papi) tested positive for Performance Enhancing Drugs in 2003. The testing was supposed to be anonymous - if 6% of the players tested positive, this would trigger a new set of testing rules. Shockingly, despite knowing the tests were coming and the real need to skate them, 103 players failed. As of yet, very few names have ever been released off this list: Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, and now Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz.
As luck would have it, I've seen a leaked copy of the list. I won't comment how, why or where. But I deem my source credible.
And one thing that's been impressed upon me is the stunning diversity of players on the list: Infielders and outfielders; journeymen and all stars; rookie, established, and aging vet; white, black, hispanic; domestic and international. And players from all but six teams (and covering all 30 once you notice player movement from the seasons prior to and after the test).
If your team has made the playoffs in the last ten years, you've had a player on this list and they probably played a significant role. If your team has consistently stunk - no excuses - , you've still had players on the list.
It makes you wonder how to handle records, when these juiced up hitters, were batting off juiced up pitchers, who were defended by juiced up fielders. Even the records of a clean pitcher is tainted if they benefit from a juiced lineup raising their run support.
And yes, in my darkest heart, I'm somewhat disappointed by the absence of some of the players I dislike the most. Actually, more disappointed by that than the presence of any players I rooted for.
The other interesting aspect was Bill James comment on the subject. Noting that, in particular, the effect of the drugs are to prolong playing time by allowing players to stay on the field and counter-act the affects of aging. Which is why they would be used, regardless of side-effects including what we already know but also soft tissue injuries.
As luck would have it, I've seen a leaked copy of the list. I won't comment how, why or where. But I deem my source credible.
And one thing that's been impressed upon me is the stunning diversity of players on the list: Infielders and outfielders; journeymen and all stars; rookie, established, and aging vet; white, black, hispanic; domestic and international. And players from all but six teams (and covering all 30 once you notice player movement from the seasons prior to and after the test).
If your team has made the playoffs in the last ten years, you've had a player on this list and they probably played a significant role. If your team has consistently stunk - no excuses - , you've still had players on the list.
It makes you wonder how to handle records, when these juiced up hitters, were batting off juiced up pitchers, who were defended by juiced up fielders. Even the records of a clean pitcher is tainted if they benefit from a juiced lineup raising their run support.
And yes, in my darkest heart, I'm somewhat disappointed by the absence of some of the players I dislike the most. Actually, more disappointed by that than the presence of any players I rooted for.
The other interesting aspect was Bill James comment on the subject. Noting that, in particular, the effect of the drugs are to prolong playing time by allowing players to stay on the field and counter-act the affects of aging. Which is why they would be used, regardless of side-effects including what we already know but also soft tissue injuries.
It seems to me that, with the passage of time, more people will come to understand that the commissioner's periodic spasms of self-righteousness do not constitute baseball law. It seems to me that the argument that it is cheating must ultimately collapse under the weight of carrying this great contradiction-that 80% of the players are cheating against the other 20% by violating some "rule" to which they never consented, which was never included in the rule books, and which for which there was no enforcement procedure. History is simply not going to see it that way.
Tags:
no subject
If it hasn't, there's not much that can be done legally. Even if it has or will be because of these reports, how will MLB deal with years of tainted records? Every team is affected, every team has players that have doped. Banning players isn't going to work. It's a big mess that should have been handled years ago when the news started popping about possible steroid use.
The 35 year long Royals fan in me (who has been waiting patiently for some return to the brilliance of the 1970s-1985) wants to know where we can get some of these juiced players but I'm slapping her down. *g*
no subject
Heh - your Royals team needs a whole lot, starting with a much better front office. Which is kind of ironic, since three of the SABR (Society for American Baseball Research) big names grew up Kansas City fans. (Bill James, Rany Jayazerli, Rob Neyer)
no subject
I thought they'd been banned, but, yeah, there's not much that can be done with earlier problems.
no subject
Sad news for you. This is an excuse that your ownership likes to use. Life is harder if you are Pittsburgh or KC, but small market teams can compete if they make very smart decisions with the money they do have. Teams like Minnesota and Oakland have managed several playoff runs even with lower payrolls. Oakland, in particular, had a notable stretch of making the playoffs and then trading off star players they couldn't play, and using the returned prospects for new playoff runs. On the other hand, Oakland's last few trades/free agent signings haven't worked, and they're back in the cellar.