A non-juiced Jim Rice should now be a lock for the Hall.
Please, members of the press, Pedro Martinez was the greatest pitcher to ever pitch for the Boston Red Sox, not the Texas Con Man who went 41-39 in his last juice-free years as a Boston pitcher before finding religion later on.
"On their plaques, however, the word "steroids" should be prominent, and their heads should be twice the size of those on any other plaques." - Chad, this is not only funny as hell but Simmonsesque.
While we're on the topic of the Hall of Fame, why Ned Martin - the best radio game announcer this side of Vin Scully- and Luis Tiant - compare his lifetimes to first-time appointee, Jim Hunter - are not in Cooperstown is truly beyond me.
If Eric Mangini had been a baseball trainer, his would have been the third name in the Mitchell Report.
Keep up the good work, Chad.
Chad
Apologists maybe, but this would be a first class mugging of anyone listed who was not a taker. Looks like the Brian Roberts listing is the best possible example (only listed because Larry Digbie said so).
Congress got its perp walk and the prosecutor in SF got Bonds to lie. (I'm sure the street of SF will be much safer with law enforcement and prosecutorial resources being used up in going after Bonds). Now Bud gets his boogeymen list to wave in front of the press and congress and use it as leverage with Fehr. Yet very little of this is based on evidence that would hold up in court, but in a time of "rights be damned" in the USA, why not just name and shame and forget due process??
The press/media is culpable in both ways: It looked the other way on the issue for so long and now it drools over getting the names of people listed out to the public. I heard Varitek, Nomar and Trot listed before the report was published....there's defamation. The media is in the sorriest state that i've seen in my 42 years on this planet. Too damn lazy or too cozied up. All this report does for me is showcase how rotten your professoin has become.
Tim
Great point about Pedro.
All I know about Simmons is that he needs to stop making for of the WNBA since every player in that league has better shooting form than he does.
It was sad to hear Gammons sucking up to players and casting aspersions on the report. I thought he was better than that. And to be fair, I heard him the following day on ESPN Radio and he was much more fair-minded and dispassionate. Perhaps his immediate reaction was colored by his man-love for the Rocket.
I also think that a lot of baseball journalists feel a sense of embarrassment that this scandal occurred right under their damn noses, and they did very little about it. I mean, how many Popeye forearms, back zits and bloated heads have Gammons and Kurkjian seen in the last 20 years of prowling around clubhouses?
I wasn't surprised by the prevalence of the quad-A type of player on the Mitchell list. Those are the most desperate guys in baseball, and a small gain in performance can make the difference between minor-league lifer and major-league millions. To me, that's the insidiousness of the PED scandal: the fringe guys and the wanna-bes must have felt compelled to reach for that extra edge. That also goes for marginal college players wanting to be drafted, and high school players hoping for a scholarship. If they all feel like they have to use potentially dangerous drugs in order to compete, we have a major problem on our hands. And that's why we have to do everything we can to clean up baseball and fight PEDs.
The Mitchell report, flawed as it is (due to the nearly complete lack of cooperation, rather than any bias or lack of effort), is an important step toward a healthier game.
Good stuff Chad.
I too grew up idolizing Gammons. Ever since the Bond issue became public, I have continually been disappointed at Peter's take on steroids. Particularly how indignant he is about the whole issue. I cringe every time he yells 'show me a positive drug test!' It's bad enough that Bonds thinks we are idiots but then to have Peter reinforcing Bonds stance is just insulting.
Ever notice how much more acerbic he is since the surgery?
Can we get one of these reports for the NFL now.
I mean, have you ever SEEN a football player? Half of those people do NOT look normal. Do PED's cause your neck to disappear?
Regarding Bonds, Clemens, et. al. and the Hall, one thing I think the report underscores is that steroid use can only take a player so far. The fact that guys like Adam Piatt and Hal Morris were juicing alongside the Tejadas and Pettittes gives lie to the notion that simply sticking a needle in your butt makes you a great player. It made Bonds and Clemens better and - more importantly - gave them longevity, but they were great ball players to begin with. Which, of course, makes this even more frustrating to accept.
I feel more sympathy for the marginal players than the great ones.Yes, Clemens and Bonds were Hall of Famers even before they (allegedly) juiced up. In my mind, that makes their offenses even worse.
Adam Piatt needed an edge just to get on a major-league roster, and stick around for a few years as somebody's 25th player. Bonds needed an edge because just being a superstar, just being a filthy rich future Hall of Famer, wasn't enough for his king-sized ego.
I don't have a Hall of Fame vote. If I did, I wouldn't vote for anyone who juiced. Or who I thought had juiced. You think that's not fair? Tough. You say, what about the other guys who got away with it? I say, that's not my problem. I'd refuse to compound baseball's gross negligence by allowing cheaters into Cooperstown.
As much as I hate to say it, didn't Pedro bulk up after "strenuous workouts" while coming back from his shoulder woes?
And that's what's worst. Everyone's under suspicion, and we'll never know for sure.
What did they spend on that report? $5 million? To find out that Clemens took steroids. Anyone with two eyes could have told them that for free.
It kills me to say it, but I'm not sure Rice is an HOFer regardless. He was an amazing hitter, but I remember way too many late inning situations where he came up, fouled the first one back, took a vicious (missing) cut at the second pitch, and then flied out weakly or GIDP'd or something on a 1-2 count. And I say this as a huge Rice fan who adored the 78 MVP poster of him, left foot turned upward off his instep.
I've heard a lot of people say "We'll never know for sure." My reply is, why the hell not? The lid has been blown off drug scandals in other sports -- cycling and track, for two. Champions have been dethroned, entire eras tarnished. And, I say, we are better off for it. We are better off getting a handle on the problem and moving forward into the future if we know the truth about the past.
The only reason we might "never know" is that MLB, and the vast majority of the journalists who cover it, STILL DON'T WANT TO KNOW. And if they have knowledge of their own (the internal Sox memos about Eric Gagne show that ballclubs are far more aware of players' "medical situations" than they let on), they don't want it exposed.
We wouldn't have gotten this far, if not for that Congressional hearing a couple of years ago -- which, before it happened, was considered a waste of time and an example of political grandstanding. Sure didn't turn out that way. I'm hoping that Congress, or someone outside the game, keeps the heat on MLB. Otherwise, they will backslide and continue the cover-up.
"Hey, let's boo Mike Greenwell!"
"Why?"
"Because he's the best player on the team."
That's why Jim won't make it.
Thanks for articulating my exact thoughts about the media. It is obvious that these guys, who depend on access for their careers - and many of whom are obviously still star struck - are terrified of crossing that thin blue line and being shut out in the locker rooms. Being here in NY, I'm amazed that no one is questioning David Justice's "I didn't inhale" defense. Maybe someone should ask Halle Berry her opinion of Justice's credibility and integrity.
I'm hearing "due process" mentioned a lot, and it is a very valid argument, IF... IF the union compels the players to testify and you give Mitchell subpoena powers. Without that side of the justice scale, how did anyone ever expect anything but circumstantial evidence and "unfair" accusations from this investigation? Due process is absolutely required. So is subpoena power, sworn testimony, and the threat of perjury charges. New Era would start stamping the Fifth Amendment on cap bills for easy reference.
I enjoyed Diamond Notes in the Boston Globe. But that Peter Gammons no longer exists. Gammons has been a fraud for years.
Before the 2004 season began, we knew that Bonds trainer Greg Anderson was under indictment for distributing steroids and we knew that Barry Bonds testified to a grand jury in the BALCO case.
By April of 2004, a government memorandum was leaked which quoted Victor Conte saying he distributed anabolic steroids to numerous professional athletes including Barry Bonds.
Despite this knowledge, Peter Gammons gushed like a school girl about the season Barry Bonds was having because of all the the walks he had (a record 232 including 120 IBB). I remember at the time being so frustrated at Gammons because he was claiming that Bonds was probably the greatest hitter of all time and not a word would be mentioned about the mounting evidence of steroid use.
Regarding Pettitte, why is he a phony? And why would you compare him to the fat, lying, traitor hick? (Oops, sorry, I meant to say the fat, lying, cheating, traitor hick). If Andy Pettitte took HGH, which wasn't a banned substance, in order to recover from torn elbow ligaments, what's the big problem?
I think that there's a fundamental difference between the use of HGH (and even steroids) to accelerate the healing process and shorten the recovery time after an injury and using HGH and/or steroids while healthy to improve performance. If you don't believe Pettitte about the timing, duration, and reason for use, that's fine. Call him a liar. But if you accept that, then I really don't see an issue.
Commenting by HaloScan
