on the juice

at this point, I could care less who's named. Because until they do blood and tissue tests, a lot of these players could've switched over to I've come to terms with that cheating is just part of the game, it's human nature to get by with what you can get by with. Not saying all do, there are some who resist the temptation.

My main problem w/ giving the gov the names and samples of the guys who popped is that the players tested under an agreement of strict confidentiality. With that breached, why would the MLBPA ever agree to do any sort of test-testing again (if/when they do the test run for HGH)?

What this ruling does is give up the greater good of future testing in order to hopefully strengthen the perjury rap against Barry Bonds. Will these ends justify the means in the long run? Hard to say, but I certainly doubt it. The gov may have just made things a lot more inconvenient for MLB and for themselves, in regards to future testings and union contracts are concerned .

The tests were supposed to be "confidential" and "anonymous"... and now, far after the fact, those names are to be used (and most likely released... er, "leaked"...) in the media? That is, in my opinion, a direct attack on the Constitution's Bill of Rights... a much more serious issue than which baseball players were using "performance-enhancing" substances.

Remember, the use of steroids, HGH, WD-40, or radioactive tablets was not against baseball's rules or CBA until recently! Any player who used steroids may have been breaking the law, (unless they were prescribed by a doctor,) but that player was not breaking any of baseball's rules!

In the case of Mark McGwire, the only "performance-enhancer" he is known to have used is "andro"... which, in 1998, was a legal "food supplement" available to anyone "over the counter" anywhere in the USA! Later, "andro" was declared a "steroid precursor", was taken off the market, and added to baseball's "banned" list.

Baseball's drug-testing in response to the Pittsburgh "cocaine" trials in the 1980s banned so-called "recreational" drugs... stuff that made one "high" was much more likely to impair on-field performance than "enhance" it.

The use of amphetamines in baseball is a much longer-term story than the use of steroids or HGH. "Greenies" were (apparently) used as far back as the 1970s as a "pick-me-up" to combat the stresses of cross-country travel, day games after night games, and the six-month-long daily grind. So should we cast a gimlet eye on every player from that era as well? If we do, we have to include current Hall of Famers such as Aaron, Mays, Clemente, Gibson, Brock, Bench, Fisk, Brett... and many more.

Gaylord Perry admitted, more than once, that he broke baseball's rules by "doctoring" the baseball. Perry threw the freakin' spitter for the great majority of his career! Whitey Ford and Don Sutton were also strongly suspected of being "scuffballers"... and are also Famers. (Burleigh Grimes was a legal "spitballer" who made the Hall, so I don't count him as a "cheater.")

How many of Big Mac's homers in 1998 came off pitchers who were "juicing"? While I certainly don't want to see high-school kids using steroids/HGH/speed trying to become bigger/stronger/more popular, I think the current climate of "juice-hunting" is both worthless and counter-productive.

Full disclosure... I have frequently used steroids, under doctor's prescription, to treat chronic allergic sinusitis. (I only discovered after my first Ear/Nose/Throat specialist retired that the "green anasthetic" he used to shrink my oft-swollen nasal passages was, in fact, cocaine! HELL-oh!) Amphetamines are the prescription drug of choice to treat such conditions as Attention Deficit Disorder. Meanwhile, tobacco (which will kill you when used according to directions) and alcohol (for those over 21) are perfectly legal to obtain and use. Maybe I'm crazy!

I agree with lboros' point that the (eventual) release of these 100 names may serve to shed light on baseball's so-called "Steroids Era"... but I'm of the opinion that the cost in Bill of Rights freedoms is too high.

Professional (and high profile college) sports are one part sport, one part entertainment, and all big business. Players, managers, and owners have always sought an extra edge (legal or not) and always will.  There really are no pure, clean sports. And don't start with the Olympics, unless you really believe that all those world records that still fall are done entirely legally.

As long as there's tons of money and fame involved in sports, people will continue seeking the extra edge. Honestly if you're looking for purity in your entertainment, professional sports will continue to disappoint you.

I'll be disappointed in any player who used an illegal substance in an attempt to gain an edge - but I also stand ready to forgive them if they're willing to be honest, tell the truth, and ask everyone associated with the game for their forgiveness.  That's the only way I see to deal with this in a healthy and constructive way.

I'd bet Weaver signs somewhere in the next 2 weeks now that Zito is gone (Boras can focus on Weaver one of the last real options on the market).

It's like fighting with your college girlfriend when you know the relationship is over.  You've been through the same issues so many times you no longer have the energy.  You just want it to end.

So, here's something positive to chew on.  BP has a new article up about Kennedy.  It's already been called the best signing of the year.  Here's a little more in depth insight...

http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5782&PHPSESSID=d1fa05c44b866f7680a1b40be97c0 2e1

including...

*Kennedy did underperform his BABIP by quite a bit, so he can be expected to bounce back in 2007. If you take the difference between his BABIP and eBABIP into account, Kennedy's 2006 line should have been somewhere around .298/.359/.409; combine that with his defense − he had 11 FRAA in only 127.2 AdjG − and you have yourself quite the productive second basemen. One other thing to note about his batted-ball data is that he is becoming less of a flyball hitter as time goes on. Kennedy was close to 40 percent in 2002-2003 as well, but has dropped very close to 30 percent now. This will cause his Isolated Power to drop, but his BABIP may be more consistent, since a higher flyball rate usually means a lower BABIP, which conflicted with Kennedy's high line drive rates. *

Non-Cardinal player- "I knew it! I knew he was juicing!"

Cardinal player- "No way! Someone tampered with his specimen! He would never do steroids!"

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/marcel_player_forecasts_2007/

I pulled out all the Cardinal players and put them in a table at CCH.  Can't do tables here or I would post it.

I think it is also important to note that there is a difference between a cheater and suspected cheater. We can't go back and test BigMac's urine and blood to see what exactly he was on. Although I remember an interview in which he stated he would take anything that was legal by baseball's standards. It is not cheating if it is allowed; it just makes him stupid for tearing up his knees for what? To be able to hit 460 foot HRs instead of 425 foot HRs? That is why I won't call Bonds a cheater. Yeah he is huge and has every sign of being on roids, but no one can prove it. And it is not cheating unless baseball says it is cheating. So what people did in the past before testing just doesn't matter. Players should be judged on the era they played the game. If they played before testing, then they shouldn't be held to testing standards. Cheating is changing the standard for how a player will be judged years after he retires.

When I think of players using roids I just tend to think about them as insecure people who aren't happy with who they are. Therefore they are trying to change/improve/enhance who they really are and what they are capable of doing.  You're in your 40's and have hard time being ready every fifth day so you use roids? Then maybe you should just accept you are old and retire. Your muscles can't handle the daily work load? Hmm then maybe you just weren't cut out to be an everyday player. As for the meatheads in the gym who use steroids; its call Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD). Ditch the needle and get into you counseling, the problem is bigger than your biceps not being big enough.

Enough of my soap box.

i love to talk baseball, love to read about it, but when it comes to this subject, it just hits too close to the bone, as far as i can remember, this is the first discussion involving someone wanting to beat numerous players on the field

i will say i agree on one issue, the same media who glorified mcgwire, sosa, bonds, clemens, caminiti, giambi, and at times canseco, have now started vilifying some of them, and if many prominent names come out here, that will happen even more so

by the way the same thing has happened in the case of drugs as well, the media loved strawberry when he came back as a yankee, but tore him down after the drug test failure

up until a few years ago, steriods were not banned by baseball, and they were legal in this country with a doctor's prescription. i'm sure there are plenty of doctor's willing to give prescriptions to atheletes for any/every reason. this may not necessarily be ethical behavior for the doctor, but if all 100 of those guys have doctor's notes, and if they aren't idiots they all will, then will everybody please just shut up about this?

sure, it may look fishy if a team doctor is handing out scripts for steriods, but if these guys need it to do their jobs, then i'm not sure why it would be wrong.

with a doctor's note, it isn't illegal, and it wasn't banned by baseball. therefore, it isn't cheating by any definition. there would officially be no pulpits to climb up on. issue dead.

That's what i hope happens. and then i hope no one ever talks about steriods in baseball again.

the article talks about "honing skills" in the Mexican leagues..then lists fine stats like these: RHP Gustavo Martinez -- The 18-year-old Martinez is 1-0 with an 8.56 ERA over 13 relief appearances with Leones del Escogido.

RHP Ricardo Rodriguez -- Rodriguez is 0-4 with an 11.57 ERA over eight appearances with Azucareros del Este. He has allowed 26 hits over 11 2/3 innings.

C Danilo Sanchez -- A 26-year-old catcher who played for the Detroit Tigers' Double-A affiliate this past season, Sanchez was signed by the Cardinals earlier this week. A member of Leones del Escogido, he is hitting .186 (11-for-59) with two home runs and five RBIs.

ok I picked the worst some guys doing well, but they listed these guys first..ironic..Honing skills and then they show the terrible stats..hmm maybe honing means somethign different in Mexico

LB referred to the whole thing as a "failure" which seems a little strong to me, as I'm still not sure what a single negative consequence was of the whole "era", various proclimations on the death of our non-existent national innocence re sports notwithstanding

PEOPLE PLEASE!

i have read all your thoughts, so now it's time for you to read mine. no matter how late to the party i am. was it ethicly wrong to use roids? yes. would i have done it? in a heart beat. like many of you all i ever wanted to do as a child was play for the Cardinals. and if i was one of the many AAAA players on the cusp of making it to the show i would have done anything, ANYTHING to play for the Cardinals. what sucks for me was i never had the talent or GOD given ability to even make it on a college team. i am a born again christian. and yes i would have taken roids to hit a ball over a fence if it would mean that i would get to play for the Cardinals. it would have gone aginst most everything i have been taught my entire life, but playing for the Cardinals was that big of a dream for me. i didn't care about the money, all i wanted to do was wear the birds on the bat. no matter what. i would have done it.

so i know why those players did it, and i do not contem or vilify anyone of them for taking roids. i've always been a big Bonds fan. i just love how he is the rebel. he always went against the norm, was flashy, flipped his bat, slapped his leg with is glove in the outfield, talked trash, and walked the walk to back up that talk. i dont care that be pissed off the media. heck, if i had seen what they did to my dad, like he watched them do to his, i would have done worse. maybe he is a bad guy, but everyone was aginst him. maybe it was because he was a bad teamate, friend and person. but i loved how he played the game. and i dont care if he started taking roids in 99. i think he did it for the wrong reasons. he never needed to. he was allready a first ballot hall of famer before he started hitting balls as far as Big Mac. he didn't need them. yet he got jealious and probably did them. i think that is his sin. he was jealious of all the attention he was not getting, so he made himself bigger, and got that attention.

and now he might bring down a lot of other guys, just because the govt in cali, the most liberal of this entire FREE country, has it in for him for whatever reason. i dont know what he did to tick off the feds in cali, but whatever it was, it was not worth it if it brings down so many other players. the feds should stay focused on Barry and leave the rest of MLB out of it.

i hate it that MBL is looked down on so much by ESPN for its roids problem, while the NFL gets a free pass. the world wide leader in sports is doing nothing but showing they are the leader of nothing but HYPE. they are all fluff,and no substance. nothing they say can be taken at face value. everything that comes out of bristol is a sham. from their selfish self promoting of crappy NFL monday night games, to the over blown coverage they give to TO. espn represents everything that is wrong in professional sports. they share a big part of the blame of roids for showing nothing on SportsCenter but balls flying over the fence. instead of a 6-4-3 double play in the 8th with the tying run on 3rd. simply because that was not as sexy as the first run scored in the game by that lone home run in the top of the first inning.  

is roids in MBL wrong? probably. was it banned by MLB when a lot of players were doing them? no. does that make it right? probably not. no good will come of telling the world who those player are that tested positive in 2003.

i would have taken the needle to play for the Cardinals. i would not have done it for the money or attention. but those would have been very nice. but not the main reason. i would have done it for the love of the game. because it's all i ever wanted to do. i love the game so much that sadly, i would have done roids if, IF it would have given me the ability to play for the Cardinals. to many of you i know that is an abomination. but i don't care. i love baseball. and all i ever wanted to to was play the game at the highest level. and for the best team ever, the St. Louis Cardinals.