58 replies to this topic

[SBTarheel]

Right, and clean.

So again, we have to hear whining every time someone signs a new deal...So if your solution is to kick everyone out of the league who uses PED's, that's fine. But those aren't the current guidelines. So we must deal with what happens after the rules that are in place are applied. 

[You Play to Win the Game]

I do agree that the rules are the rules, so the bickering is kind of silly and moot.

 

That said, there definitely appears to be a growing sentiment among clean players to tighten up the policies, so they should aim to do so in the next collective bargaining session.

[SBTarheel]

I do agree that the rules are the rules, so the bickering is kind of silly and moot.

 

That said, there definitely appears to be a growing sentiment among clean players to tighten up the policies, so they should aim to do so in the next collective bargaining session.

That's really my only point. 

 

And that's fine, if the rules change, the players will have to deal with any consequences. End of story. 

[Oriole85]

I do agree that the rules are the rules, so the bickering is kind of silly and moot.

 

That said, there definitely appears to be a growing sentiment among clean players to tighten up the policies, so they should aim to do so in the next collective bargaining session.

They've come a long way, even if it more has to be done, Raffy was only suspended 10 or 15 games.

[You Play to Win the Game]

That's really my only point. 

 

And that's fine, if the rules change, the players will have to deal with any consequences. End of story. 

 

I totally get where you're coming from, and it has to be beyond "old" at this point, and tiresome.

 

My biggest issue with this, is that it appears the people who actively dismiss PED's as no big deal, are not even considering the situation from the angle of the non-user baseball player. 

[SBTarheel]

I totally get where you're coming from, and it has to be beyond "old" at this point, and tiresome.

 

My biggest issue with this, is that it appears the people who actively dismiss PED's as no big deal, are not even considering the situation from the angle of the non-user baseball player. 

I get where you're coming from too, believe me, I personally just never saw it as the biggest deal in the world. Never justified it, mind you, but we'll never really know how many were using or exactly what the impact was for any of these guys. 

[Oriole85]

I totally get where you're coming from, and it has to be beyond "old" at this point, and tiresome.

 

My biggest issue with this, is that it appears the people who actively dismiss PED's as no big deal, are not even considering the situation from the angle of the non-user baseball player. 

If it's not a "big deal," I don't think players would go through the trouble of using it and then doing everything possible to avoid detection. The fact that many players are still doing it(and only the ones getting caught we know about), tells me that 50 games isn't a big enough deterrent. Cheating is cheating, whether it's speeding, on a test, with your spouse, etc; you see a benefit to doing it and then you try not to get caught.

[Oriole85]

I get where you're coming from too, believe me, I personally just never saw it as the biggest deal in the world. Never justified it, mind you, but we'll never really know how many were using or exactly what the impact was for any of these guys. 

You think someone like Melky Cabrera went from being a 4th OFer to be an All-Star without roids? Or what about Bartolo Colon suddenly becoming great at an older great? Just curious on your take on those two players.

[SBTarheel]

You think someone like Melky Cabrera went from being a 4th OFer to be an All-Star without roids? Or what about Bartolo Colon suddenly becoming great at an older great? Just curious on your take on those two players.

Of course there are guys like that, but I still think A Rod/Bonds and Clemens would have been first ballot HOF'ers regardless. 

 

Who knows. But honestly, I don't care, but I know I'm in the minority. 

[Oriole85]

Of course there are guys like that, but I still think A Rod/Bonds and Clemens would have been first ballot HOF'ers regardless. 

 

Who knows. But honestly, I don't care, but I know I'm in the minority. 

I'm not disputing those three, I'm talking about the players who go from minors to majors, bench players to starters, above average-players to All-Stars, All-Stars to HOFers -- think you get the idea.

 

If it's not a problem, why not just allow it in the game?

[SBTarheel]

I'm not disputing those three, I'm talking about the players who go from minors to majors, bench players to starters, above average-players to All-Stars, All-Stars to HOFers -- think you get the idea.

 

If it's not a problem, why not just allow it in the game?

If it's not allowed, it's not allowed, I'm not saying that players that don't follow the rules don't deserve to get punished..My issue today is once they are, and they serve their time, so to speak, it's over. 

 

You're bringing up a much broader issue, I'm not trying to be anyone's judge and jury, they're illegal in the game, let's leave it at that. I appears that MLB has done a much better job of late in policing it. 

 

If you're asking me if I WANT a game full of cheaters, then the answer is no. 

[JeremyStrain]

I do agree that the rules are the rules, so the bickering is kind of silly and moot.

 

That said, there definitely appears to be a growing sentiment among clean players to tighten up the policies, so they should aim to do so in the next collective bargaining session.

 

Yeah I think I hinted at a bit of a "civil war" last year sometime. Ever since the Braun thing, there have been growing cliques of clean players that are getting louder and louder...but to really understand the situation you have to know how the insides of the clubhouses in baseball really look...it's a lot uglier than you think. (And technically it's not IN clubhouses, because there is too much traffic in there, the real stuff happens outside of the ballpark generally)

[mweb08]

I get where you're coming from too, believe me, I personally just never saw it as the biggest deal in the world. Never justified it, mind you, but we'll never really know how many were using or exactly what the impact was for any of these guys. 

You think someone like Melky Cabrera went from being a 4th OFer to be an All-Star without roids? Or what about Bartolo Colon suddenly becoming great at an older great? Just curious on your take on those two players.

Do we know the exact time frame when these players were using and were clean? Chances are that Melky was using at times while he was a 4th OF. I think the effects are largely overblown.

[Oriole85]

Do we know the exact time frame when these players were using and were clean? Chances are that Melky was using at times while he was a 4th OF. I think the effects are largely overblown.

No we don't know the exact time frame, we know the time frame he was caught.

 

What exactly are you arguing here? If it's overblown, why would you risk a 50 game suspension and your reputation?

[mweb08]

Do we know the exact time frame when these players were using and were clean? Chances are that Melky was using at times while he was a 4th OF. I think the effects are largely overblown.

No we don't know the exact time frame, we know the time frame he was caught.
 
What exactly are you arguing here? If it's overblown, why would you risk a 50 game suspension and your reputation?

Because it does help. But I don't think it takes mediocre players and turns them into all stars anywhere near consistently. I mean, it's pretty clear what I'm trying to argue so I'm confused by the response. I think the effects are overblown and I don't think your two examples are helping your case as much as you do since we'd need to know a lot more to really consider then.

Also, players have historically corked bats despite that not helping and players have taken amphetamines with risk of suspension, but most people seen to scoff anytime they're brought up in the same vein as steroids.

[Oriole85]

Because it does help. But I don't think it takes mediocre players and turns them into all stars anywhere near consistently. I mean, it's pretty clear what I'm trying to argue so I'm confused by the response. I think the effects are overblown and I don't think your two examples are helping your case as much as you do since we'd need to know a lot more to really consider then.

Also, players have historically corked bats despite that not helping and players have taken amphetamines with risk of suspension, but most people seen to scoff anytime they're brought up in the same vein as steroids.

But if it helps so minimally, it wouldn't be worth it in the first place considering the penalties. Do you think since the help is so minimal, you might as well just allow it?

 

What are you basing your opinion that the effects of it being overblown on?

 

If corked bats don't do anything, would you have no problem legalizing that?

[mweb08]

But if it helps so minimally, it wouldn't be worth it in the first place considering the penalties. Do you think since the help is so minimal, you might as well just allow it?

 

What are you basing your opinion that the effects of it being overblown on?

 

If corked bats don't do anything, would you have no problem legalizing that?

 

I'm basing it off what I've read on the subject, which is a fair amount. Also watching Bigger, Faster, Stronger awhile back. 

 

I'm not saying the effects are commonly minimal either. I just believe many people think they're a bigger deal than they typically are. They work more for some guys than others and of course how hard they work out and how gifted they already were plays a big role in that, see Barry Bonds.

 

I would strongly consider allowing HGH and possibly other drugs, but would have to look into more. I do think that the negative health effects for some of these PED's are overstated as well.

 

And no, I wouldn't have an issue with corked bats being used assuming the research I've read about is accurate.

[Oriole85]

I'm basing it off what I've read on the subject, which is a fair amount. Also watching Bigger, Faster, Stronger awhile back. 

 

I'm not saying the effects are commonly minimal either. I just believe many people think they're a bigger deal than they typically are. They work more for some guys than others and of course how hard they work out and how gifted they already were plays a big role in that, see Barry Bonds.

 

I would strongly consider allowing HGH and possibly other drugs, but would have to look into more. I do think that the negative health effects for some of these PED's are overstated as well.

 

And no, I wouldn't have an issue with corked bats being used assuming the research I've read about is accurate.

 

Propoganda?

[mweb08]

Somewhat. But kids generally shouldn't be taking at least most of these PED's.<br /><br />In general it depends on the specific drugs and how they're used.<br />