HEY JOBDDT - Don't Diss Mike Sweeney
by Matty486 on Feb 7, 2009 6:29 PM EST
Email
PrintIn the AROD post about steroids this guy made a comment that "Mike Sweeney likely used also." Why would you just throw this around? Some people take the integrity of the game seriously so I can't think of many things more disrespectful than commenting like this when you have NOTHING to base this on.
In my opinion, if Sweeney would have been on roids his career wouldn't have crashed with injuries. We'd probably be talking about one of the best right handed hitter in the past 15 years. But because he refused his body broke down in different ways.
This is what I think. There's a minute chance I'm proven wrong but until that happens lets not make outrageous claims like this so non-chalantly.
85 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Anabolicminds.com isn’t a site I normally visit, but somebody posted Joe Posnanski’s 2006 article about Sweeney and steroids in the forums there, and I can’t find it anywhere else online, so here’s the link.
Who knows
But the injuries is no proof whatsoever. If he was roiding, increasing muscle mass and growth too quickly on a frame that couldn’t support it it could cause just as much injury problems as they solve. Its not clear cut.
The Allard Baird of incisive internet discourse.
His injury problems were a result of his body
But I believe his body was natural. I played ball with a kid who got huge. He lifted twice a day for two years. His junior year he tore his quad running. Redshirt. The next year he tore his biceps. Then he broke his ankle. And he tore a hamstring. I know for a fact that this guy never used. Some people just have that body type.
That's why we play the season on paper.
Likely because
When baseball began testing and regulating, his body broke down and his numbers dwindled to nothingness.
When we traded known steroids distributor Jason Grimsley (before he was outed), Sweeney uncharacteristically lashed out at the organization, saying Grimsley had “hidden treasures” and the organization would regret it.
Sweeney has also admitted that teammates offered him steroids early in his career.
There is a reason I said he likely was a steroid user. We have no positive tests (he isn’t famous enough to have an illegal leak like A-Rod is), but as Terrell Owens says, if it looks like a rat, smells like a rat, then by golly, it might just be a rat.
Banny being Banny.
In other words, you have nothing but a hunch.
When baseball began testing and regulating, his body broke down and his numbers dwindled to nothingness.
Sure, he declined faster than the norm, but you may want to check again on whether there were already hundreds and hundreds of other players who declined rapidly in their early 30s due to injuries, going all the way back to the establishment of professional leagues, before PEDs and testing.
Anyway he had two productive years and one league-average year after steroid penalties were established, in spite of the injuries. What’s up with that?
Alex Rodriguez had one of the most productive seasons in MLB history while clean in 2007. It is my theory that the best players of this most recent area would have been the best if everyone had been clean regardless. Whether Sweeney fits into that category is still cause for debate, though.
The big picture of today’s news is that yes, Alex Rodriguez could have been taking steroids since his rookie season with Seattle, as alleged by Jose Canseco. But still, we have seen pitchers getting busted for the same thing over and over again as well, and it could be argued that it helped them moreso than pitchers.
I used Mike Sweeney as a point to illustrate how no fan of any particular club can cast stones at these condemned steroid users BECAUSE of the steroids due to the fact that every single club in baseball has had steroid users since the 1960s. Boo the steroid users because they play for the other team, not because they did something the “good guys” could have very well done themselves.
Also, the variety of Sweeney’s injuries and the brittleness were not the main determining factors in my belief that he likely took steroids.
Banny being Banny.
And yes, it is late and I am at work.
In the first paragraph I meant “era” instead of “area.” In the second I meant “moreso than hitters.”
Banny being Banny.
no fan of any particular club can cast stones at these condemned steroid users BECAUSE of the steroids due to the fact that every single club in baseball has had steroid users since the 1960s
I agree with this point. But if you had named somebody who actually does appear in the Mitchell report instead of Sweeney, you’d make a stronger statement of it.
the variety of Sweeney’s injuries and the brittleness were not the main determining factors in my belief that he likely took steroids.
His unhappiness that the organization sent Grimsley packing? His disclosure that he was offered steroids but refused them? I find these both to be extremely weak reasons. Although I’m sure we all remember his many failings, Grimsley was, overall, one of the more effective relievers on the staff while in KC. And why, if Sweeney was anxious to conceal steroid usage, would he offer any information on the subject at all?
So do you have other reasons? — because these easily pass my smell test. No rat detected.
Grimsley was having a putrid season when he was sent packing.
His “walk off wild pitches” in Atlanta remain one of the most scarring memories for me as a Royals fan. That is why it was so odd to see the normally upbeat Sweeney lash out in such an angry way about a seemingly over-the-hill pitcher getting traded.
And don’t get me started about the Mitchell report. I could find dozens of links about the flawedness of that study, including the fact that Mitchell is believed to have in many circles turned a blind eye to his favorite players and to players involved with the Boston Red Sox.
Banny being Banny.
No, he wasn’t having a putrid season. He had some memorably awful performances, yes. But compare him to Curt Leskanic, who set the standard for putrefaction in the Royals’ bullpen in early 2004. And compare him to the staff as a whole. He really did have a fair bit of positive value. Call it “hidden treasures”.
Of course the Mitchell Report was flawed. That’s not the point. The point is that your caution to fans who want to razz PEDs users is stronger when you name a Royal for whom some undisputed connection to steroids usage exists. That Royal is not Mike Sweeney.
Grimsley was absolutely awful.
His decent ERA hid a terrible WXRL and bad RA.
Stathead, Zack Greinke fan, and Rock Band 2 singer extraordinaire.
by NHZ on Feb 9, 2009 4:27 AM EST up reply actions
Stat battle!
I really don’t think Grimsley was performing poorly for the Royals in 2004 with KC:
FIP 3.75
tRA 4.12
tRA+ 110
So he was above average, even for a reliever, in both metrics. And I’ll take those metrics over WXRL for judging any pitcher.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 4:46 AM EST up reply actions
How dare you attack WXRL or any Baseball Prospectus stat!
The next thing you’re going to say is that MLVr and VORP are broken!
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 9, 2009 12:22 PM EST up reply actions
Everyone was saying that BP understood that their replacement level was off and that they were going to fix that
Any word on when/if this will actually happen? VORP has become sabermetrics crazy old aunt in the atic, with WARP her bastard child chained up in the basement.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 3:54 PM EST up reply actions
Seriously, it wouldn't be that hard
FanGraphs implemented WAR pretty quickly, and as far as I know, all those guys work for free.
Seriously, BP neesd a new general manager if they want to get “back on top” of the sabermetric world. I heard they were rethinking WARP, which is totally screwed. With VORP, while I don’t agree with how they adjust for positions, one can at least argue for it. But usingn MLVr as the basis, well, it’s been pointed out again and again why this is wrong… and they already have something that would fix the problem in-house: EqA/R. Just base it on that, and that would also take care of a lot of the historical issues with VORP.
Is Kahrl in charge over there? I’m not ripping on her, I just wonder if she just wants it to be a more “mainstream” site (whatever that means). Costas mentioning might have been the ’jumping the shark" moment. Is the problem that all their best numbers people have left other than Silver, who is too busy now, and Clay Davenport, who is more of a cruncher t han an analyst ? They charge money — they should have bought Simple Fielding Runs from Dan Fox before he left, then paid for the STATS or BIS PBP data….
I’m sorry to sound like an elitist about this, but it’s just frustrating because it seems like they should have the resources to be a totally kickass site, but basically now it’s mostly just slighlty-more-informed commentary (most of which is blown away by other stuff in the blogosphere, frankly, except for the “insider” stuff that Will Caroll can’t tell anybody about, etc.) and a kick ass fantasy projection system that’s only slighlty better than Shandler (but is cheaper).
Imagine if they’d hired Cameron, Kalkman, Justin Inaz, etc…
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 9, 2009 5:55 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, they aren’t innovating anymore. And they aren’t even keeping up with the innovations of others in the field. They used to define the state of the art and now they can’t even keep up. Nor do they appear willing to try given the personnel they have. And they have the money to buy proprietary metrics or, even better, hire good sabermetricians so they can be on the cutting edge again. For whatever reason, they just don’t appear to be interested.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions
I don't know as I see them as having dropped off
that far, but there’s no doubt in my mind they’ve fallen off. Unfortunately some people that they’ve lost aren’t easy to replace.
Stathead, Zack Greinke fan, and Rock Band 2 singer extraordinaire.
I guess I look at it that way
At this point, if money was no issue, and I had to choose between FanGraphs and BP, it would be a no-brainer.
Given BP’s reputation and the fact that Fangraphs is free and BP is not, that’s pretty bad. The only clear advantage BP has is it’s PECOTA-based fantasy stuff.
Frankly, in terms of informed commentary on moves, market, and player value, there’s no comparison, which is particularly sad given the relative age, experience, and “insider knowledge” of the two pools of writers.
What is more helpful to you, Will Carroll writing about how he saw some super-duper secret stuff that’s awesome that he can’t’ tell us about, or Dave Cameron doing a detailed, week-long series showing how WAR pretty closely approximates the real-world market, and where inefficiencies still remain? Would you rather read Christina Kahrl trying to analyze the Ellis contract without mentioning defense, or MGL writing about how we can determine what first baseman “scoops” are worth relative to their overall defense?
I’m not trying to pile on, I’m just making the point that, indeed, they have fallen a long way. FanGraphs isn’t the only example. Justin Inaz homebrewed an Uberstat by himself that blows anything on Prospectus away — using BaseRuns (are they ever going to get around to discussing that?) and combined STATS/BIS defensive stuff. The commentary on BtBS (and many other blogs) is of a higher quality than BP. ShysterBall (at THT)compares favorably to the equivalent sort of posts at BP. I like most of BP’s writers (Sheehan’s analysis of players are always good for a chuckle — remember when he said that the Jose Guillen deal was good? Funny how he didn’t mention that again when he mocked Guillen’s nomination for the All-Star game…), but even Rany’s best stuff is on his own blog…
My point is not to bash them, but simply wishing that they delivered more. The exodus for many of their best minds is no their fault, and it speaks to how good those people were. But looking at the talent out there, replacement level isn’t that far down…
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 10, 2009 1:05 AM EST up reply actions
Vaild points
Fangraphs and THT have displaced BP as my most-viewed baseball sites, and while BP’s annual, IMO, is well worth the price—PECOTA is still awesome—the commentary on the site is lacking. It feels as if Kahrl’s stagnated quite a bit, and I never agree with Sheehan anyway. I think pretty highly of Goldstein, but he’s “just” a prospect analyst, not a huge numbers guy….meaning not someone that BP was built around.
Stathead, Zack Greinke fan, and Rock Band 2 singer extraordinaire.
I agree on PECOTA
And I need to check their annual. But that’s not enough to make them the best, or even close. Especially when CHONE and ZiPS are free and almost as good (and some years, better)
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 10, 2009 11:22 AM EST up reply actions
He was traded in '04, right?
IIRC, his peripherals were decaying to worse rates than his mediocre 2003. WXRL had him ranked pretty darn low. Then for some incomprehensible reason, the O’s traded Denny Bautista for him. Luckily, the latter didn’t turn out to be anything, because the O’s sure didn’t need Grimsely to help them lose.
Stathead, Zack Greinke fan, and Rock Band 2 singer extraordinaire.
TO was lifting weights in his driveway. Lol.
Just made me think of that.
That's why we play the season on paper.
saying Grimsley had "hidden treasures" and the organization would regret it.
Sounds like a heroin addict.
but as Terrell Owens says, if it looks like a rat, smells like a rat, then by golly, it might just be a rat.
I believe you but using Terrell Owens as a part of your argument only weakens it.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Sorry JobDDT but it looks like you don't have much
You’re jumping to a conclusion based on very, very little circumstantial evidence.
The immoderate moderator
Of the 104 people who did test positive in baseball’s first round of steroid testing in 2004, only two have been leaked (Bonds and Rodriguez). If you want to go on the merit of the Mitchell report, you could name people in there for examples, but that also contained a large amount of speculation and hearsay.
The three biggest stars from this decade have all been linked to steroids. They didn’t even have the symptoms and side effects that steroids can bring along. Because of his close link with Grimsley, his frequent injuries and brittleness in multiple parts of his body, I believe it is likely he did steroids.
If everyone else thinks it is unlikely he did steroids, that is fine too. But the entire point is we can no longer throw bricks because we as baseball fans now all live in glass houses (or stadiums, for this example).
Banny being Banny.
That is exceptionally weak evidence
His injuries and the fact that he played with and might have been friends with one PED user? I’m sorry but that’s very weak.
If everyone else thinks it is unlikely he did steroids, that is fine too.
I think you are creating a false dichotomy where people either think it likely that he used PED’s or that it is unlikely that he used PED’s. I have no idea if he used PED’s. None. I’m not saying it is likely he did or that it is unlikely he did. I think every player deserves a presumption that they did not use PED’s unless and until there is enough evidence to show that they likely did. For people that tested positive and for people with a lot of other circumstantial and direct evidence, the presumption has been overcome. The scant “evidence” against Sweeney doesn’t even come close.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 8, 2009 5:20 PM EST up reply actions
Last time around on this for me: you’ve really got no reason to suspect Sweeney more or less than anyone else.
His only known link to Grimsley was that he was on the same team and felt that Grimsley’s positive contribution to the bullpen was an asset the team should have retained. Your suspicion that he had an underlying motive is unfounded.
We’ve talked about the injuries — all I can add is, read Posnanski’s blog today on “Mystery Player”, and then ask yourself whether his injuries are just as likely to be an indication of PEDs usage as Sweeney’s.
Finally, I no longer believe you when you say that your “entire point” is about circumspection on the part of fans regarding PEDs usage. If you really wanted to espouse circumspection, you would admit that you really have no idea about Sweeney.
+10
Finally, I no longer believe you when you say that your "entire point" is about circumspection on the part of fans regarding PEDs usage. If you really wanted to espouse circumspection, you would admit that you really have no idea about Sweeney.
Yeah, we’re all in glass houses in that we as fans may have been rooting for some players who used PED’s. “May” because we really don’t know. But, JobDDT, you didn’t say that Sweeney or any Royals player may have used PED’s. You said that the scant evidence shows that he likely used PED’s. There’s a big difference, and you just don’t have the goods on Sweeney.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 8, 2009 5:51 PM EST up reply actions
Glass houses
I’m not sure what “throwing bricks” is in this analogy. Are you talking about criticizing PED users? If so, I think throwing those bricks is just fine. It is fair to criticize any known PED users, as well as those who have such evidence that it makes it very likely that they used PED’s. And I’ll throw (figurative) bricks at any Royals player who falls into those categories.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 8, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions
The whole “throwing bricks” thing refers to the comment in the A-Rod fanshot inviting everybody to boo A-Rod at the K. I very much agree with JobDDT’s caution that piling on other team’s known PEDs users is neither wise nor warranted, given what we know now and anticipating what we’ll find out later.
I'm not too jazzed about the ARod thing
I don’t like PED’s and I don’t like that players have used them. But every report of a positive test doesn’t fill me with hatred for the player. I never loved ARod, but I never hated him either. Quite frankly as a Yankee, my dislike for him is so overshadowed by my dislike for Jeter that I can’t even muster many bad feelings for ARod. The simple minded sheep of Yankees fans that surround me love the massively overrated Jeter with all their hearts, which leads them to dislike ARod to varying degrees. That almost makes ARod look like a likable player by comparison.
In short, PED’s were very common in the 1990’s and early 2000’s. So I can’t really hate every player who used any PED’s at any time. Hell, Babe Ruth took some uppers and used a corked bat at times. Should we all hate him too? (this isn’t directed at you, 2X2L; just a general comment).
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 12:01 AM EST up reply actions
Tell me about it. I went to high school and college around some of those sheep, or maybe their forebaahs.
I have to think it’s all about the money, because bad feelings about A-Rod aren’t anything new. When I went back East to visit family in 2005 I couldn’t believe what people were waiting for hours on hold to say about him on the air on the sports stations. I remember thinking, “These are Yankee fans? What are they saying in Boston?” Sure, the Yankees melted down in the ALCS in 2004 after building up a 3-game lead, and A-Rod didn’t do a whole lot after Game 4, but why pick only on him? Jeter hit .200 in that series. It had to be resentment over The Contract.
I’m wary about saying it, but I can’t help but think that Sweeney has suffered from a Midwestern form of the same sort of resentment, at least in a limited way, when injuries prevented him from repeating his best years, and I hope that nothing along those lines happens to Zacque(h) when he reaches the big payoff years of his new contract, if he somehow fails to win the Cy Young award every year.
Anyway, no, you can’t hate all the PEDs users, and clearly nobody does, so don’t sweat it. Focus your acrimony on the ones who make the big money and/or set records, and you will be one with the flock.
It's all about the money
I agree. It must be. And it is such an odd thing to dislike a player for. If I could get $20M or $30M or $100B annually for my services, I’d do it in a heartbeat. I don’t blame him for getting as much money as he could get (and having the agent who is best able to help him do that). Sure I have a soft spot for players who take less money to stay with their original team of which they’ve grown particularly fond and loyal. But that doesn’t make me hate (or even dislike) players who are trying to get their piece of the owners’ huge revenue bonanza.
It seems particularly bizarre for Yankee fans to hate him for making so much money. But actually for Yankee fans, it might be something else. Their team is full of rich, very highly paid players, so I don’t think they care much about salaries and contracts. I think it’s about ARod not doing well in some big game, crucial situations (which they remember out of all proportion), and the fact that he’s had a somewhat adversarial relationship with Jeter. And Yankee fans love Jeter more than their own mothers and Jesus combined. So Jeter gets a pass for every strikeout and error, while ARod gets lambasted for hanging out in Central Park several hours before a game.
And I do think Sweeney gets grief from some fans because of 1) his big contract, and 2) the fact that he was injured a lot and thus failed to earn a lot of that money.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 1:42 AM EST up reply actions
naturally, they ignore the fact that Sweeney has permanent injuries because of actions he took in the coures of trying to earn that money.
Oh, and the fact that he (like all good young players) was grosslly underpaid realtive to the surplus value he generated before the contract.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 9, 2009 1:51 AM EST up reply actions
But what has he done for me lately?
Checkmate!
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 2:07 AM EST up reply actions
Sweeney gets grief from me because I never heard a word about his religion:
Until he signed a 55 million dollar contract. Then every other word out of his mouth is about the bountiful nature of god. It seemed like once the money was guaranteed, then the religion took over. It wasn’t the Royals paying him, but god above. That sounds a lot like our politicians in Washington, who relish religion because it means taking no responsibility.
by hunter s. royal on Feb 9, 2009 2:15 AM EST up reply actions
Sweeney is a lifelong, devout Catholic. Religion was a big part of his life even before he picked up a baseball bat. I remember him talking about God back when he was first with the Royals as a catcher. I’m not a religious person at all, but Sweeney’s religiosity is no reason to give him grief. He didn’t use his religion to take responsibility off of himself. It’s not like he blamed god for his injuries.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 2:32 AM EST up reply actions
Of course he didn't
Thats not what religionists do. When things are good, it is by the grace of God. When things are bad, it is because of the frailty of humanity, or sinful ways or some over justification.
God has the best PR man EVER, shit just does not stick,
The Allard Baird of incisive internet discourse.
I hate it when they paint with a broad brush
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 9, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
Their team is full of rich, very highly paid players, so I don’t think they care much about salaries and contracts. I think it’s about ARod not doing well in some big game, crucial situations
I think they care about A-Rod’s contract, because it’s The Contract, so rich and so large that it looms in the minds of Yankees fans as well. I remember the comments of callers on the radio typically including phrases along the lines of, “We’re paying him like a winner, so he should play like a winner.” Yes, they focused their ire on his failures in big situations — although in 2004 he actually had a pretty good postseason line overall — but they did not fail to mention that their wrath was justified by the money he was getting.
now mitchell is a diplomat to the middle east....
Not sure what I think about that.
That's why we play the season on paper.
BTW
George Brett also was a likely steroid user.
You can’t prove he didn’t!
The immoderate moderator
George used pinetar.
3000 hits is what happens if you eat it for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
That's why we play the season on paper.
Whoops wrong thread.
Thats what Firefox tabs will do for ya.
Anyway, you guys are right. I was still trying to digest the Rodriguez stuff and used a bad analogy to make a point about booing people on other teams because they use steroids. It doesn’t change the fact that I still think there is a good possibility Sweeney juiced, but I shouldn’t have said it so matter-of-factly.
Banny being Banny.
There isn't any player beyond suspicion during this time.
They just don’t earn it. This isn’t McCarthyism, no one is getting tossed in jail they are just getting their rep hurt a tad. If they lie under oath then they deserve the 9 months or so they get. Chad Curtis and Tom Glavine told the union they should look into this back in ‘01 and they did nothing about it so they get what they get. It’s a joke that 104 players tested positive with as much warning that they got and with Orza tipping people off. I’m sure alot more than the 104 were doing it. Sweeney certainly fits the profile of a user, body type, spike in numbers, body breaking down. He probably did it and it worked well for him if he did 55M+.
Hopefully these discoveries will lead to blood testing to checkout if players are using HGH or doping their blood. I’m sure they’ve been doing this type of stuff forever. It’s a joke to think that other sports were doing but that baseball takes a different skillset and they wouldn’t do it.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
by kcscoliny on Feb 9, 2009 11:12 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
they are just getting their rep hurt a tad
I find your implication that this doesn’t matter very disturbing. Reputation matters, and this why you must avoid making specific accusations unless you have specific information. Sure, lots and lots of players very probably were using, as the sport was totally unregulated etc. etc. But you don’t name names unless you have the goods. That’s the way we do in in my country, anyway.
"let's not make outrageous claims like this so non-chalantly"
NO NO NO.
All witches must be burned!
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
You both are going a little far.
Who cares if these guys get tossed under a bus deserving or not. If people could trade their rep for Mike Sweeney or any other players lottery ticket they would in a heart beat. Nothing is happening to these guys. The majority of these players are guilty either by actually taking it or by not doing anything with the knowledge that it was happening. These accuse, rightly or wrongly aren’t victims and to play the role like they are is ludicrous.
As for the witches comment why don’t we take one of the most ridiculous things to occur societ and compare it to some guys filling their veins with roids and pocketing millions for it. Last time I remember reading about the witch trials those ladies and accused weren’t lining their pockets. Got any more ludicrous comparisons. Maybe these players should be compared to the Jews and we are all nazis for wanting to out them.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Dude, I was agreeing with you
It’s called sarcasm.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
Who cares if these guys get tossed under a bus deserving or not.
Helpful formula here, maybe you’ve heard of it: if you were the one getting tossed under the bus, would you care?
Exactly. Cased closed.
Exactly. Cased closed.
If I had already made millions of dollars? No
People act like Mark McGwire is leading some terrible life because he doesn’t talk about what happened and he hides behind the 5th ammendment. Do you think Mark McGwire or any of these guys wakes up everyday wanting to kill themselves over this? Please, they wake up in their California Kings, drink their expensive coffee and sit on their million dollar decks and watch their portfolio’s drop like the rest of us. They know what really happened and whether they did it or not and regardless of what they think is right or wrong they stand behind their union and shut their mouths and collect their pensions.
If these guys are gonna stand behind a cloak of union support then they should deal with the consequences that come with it. The ones that aren’t guilty should’ve stood up when they had the chance instead of letting the guilty few represent them. I’m not singling players out either, the owners and GM’s have just as much a responsibilty in this as any do. The game and these players all lived high on the hog for a good time and now if they have to trade their reputation for the money that many were enriched by then they should’ve known that those are the consequences of doing the drugs or keeping your mouth shut when you knew what was going on.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
If I had already made millions of dollars? No
I don’t believe you. I don’t actually have millions of dollars to give you to run the experiment, sorry. But if you had them, I’m quite sure you would care. Maybe not until you get over the novelty of being rich, but that wouldn’t take long.
We’re just not going to reach agreement on this one.
Ya because it's ridiculous
You act like these guys are gonna have to walk around with a scarlet letter on their chest. Giambi and Pettite get practically no mistreatment now and the only reasons people bite on Clemens and Bonds so hard is becasue of how adamant they were with their denials and because they are pretty much known A-Holes. What reputation has been severly tarnished? McGwire, please McGwire wasn’t some media loving head in the first place, how do we know he wouldn’t have stayed away from the game that much anyway.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
We’re talking about players who are being accused of steroid usage with no basis other than that they played in the league when such usage was common, and somebody thinks “they fit the profile”, without any specific evidence. The players you mention here are obviously not in that group, so why you bring them up isn’t clear to me.
Why did you bring them up?
Because you act like these guys rep is so important.
If Sweeney gets accused of taking steroids well then big deal 95% of the public will still not know who the hell he is. Nobody is getting tarred and feathered in this dea.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
I am indeed acting as if reputation is important — not specifically that these guys’ reputations are important, but anyone’s. I said as much. Yours included.
5% of the public is a large number of people. Are you genuinely that insensitive to the effects of calumny?
These guys checked their reputation at the door
when they kept their mouths shut this whole time. Whether they did it or not they knew it was going on. They all had their hands in the cookie jar taking from the increased dollars from skyrocketing performance. It’s that simple and I have no problem saying that they are all guilty in some way or another. They are all guilty of greed so one added charge on a few isn’t gonna kill them.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
I'm sorry, but that's nuts
They all deserve to have their reputations besmirched whether they used or not? Every player deserves this, because he either used or didn’t rat out his teammates? They are guilty of greed by getting paid what the market would bear? Huh? This is bizarre.
People deserve being accused of what they are actually guilty of. It’s fair to say their are PED users because they are guilty of something else (greed?) is really out there and terribly unfair.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
There all suspect
Whether you want to admit it or not these guys profited from this. When they kept their mouths shut and increased their share of the pie they are guilty and gettin some mud tossed in their face is their punishment. Most would take that punishment for what they received.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Calumny is a double-edged sword. It does damage to its subject but also to its author. In your case, it makes me think that you’re sublimating resentment about their money in the form of disapproval of their behavior. It does not wear well.
Think what you want.
I think that you have to put a label on me is more of you thing than a me thing. I don’t care about these guys doing steroids I’ve openly said that elsewhere. Barry Bonds was a great player and one of my favorite players to watch since he was a Pirate, he is the greatest player I’ve ever seen and taking steroids didn’t change my opinion of him. Manny is the same thing and there is no link as far as I know with him and steroids but if it comes out tomorrow I won’t care. They didn’t rob me of any enjoyment in watching them whether they were on roids or not and the people that say these guys are robbing them live in a fictional world. You said earlier that accusing these people of things not proven yet is not the type of country you live in. I think you need to reexamine where you live because there were thousands of people rightly or wrongly livin over in Guantanamo that would tell you that you already live in that type of country.
That is an extreme example but it just illustrates where we live. I don’t know you from Adam but I know myself and I’m secure in my thoughts that anybody from any time period is not above cheating especially if money is involved. I don’t feel any sympathy for any of these guys if I or the public want to lump them all together.
This doesn’t make me love the game any less.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Yes, you’re right that such accusations are common. When I said what I said about my country, I meant that it’s not the sort of thing I’m willing to tolerate when I’m part of the discussion. I made too grand a statement, and I as soon as I posted it I regretted it. Sorry.
Anyway, back off on Sweeney, is the main point. If you “don’t care about these guys doing steroids”, don’t say anything. Otherwise other people who do care will hear you, and it can’t have any positive effect.
Everyone in here wants to label me
I’m a lawyer hater, resent ml players, etc etc. Maybe I just think they are as imperfect as everyone else out there. If you hung out with drug dealers I would assume you have something to do with drugs. Is that right, ya probably not but it’s the reality of the situation. If you think I’m a bad person for that then so be it.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
I think it’s fair to assume that because baseball players hang out with baseball players, they must something to do with baseball. I’ve got no problem with that.
Indeed
And if some players are using PED’s, then the clean ones are forced to play alongside PED users. Does this make the clean one’s PED users by association? That’s nuts. One chooses to hang out with drug dealers (or not). Players dont’ choose to play along side PED users.
In short, it is fair to accuse players of using PED’s when you’ve got good, meaningful evidence that they’ve used. Otherwise, it is just unfairly throwing baseless accusations at them.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
And by the way
You label me as having resentment to these guys that should just confirm to you that people are gonna label people. Wrongly or not, it’s not gonna stop it from being done and it doesn’t make it wrong or right it just makes it a label.
I never said that Sweeney was a user. I said he fits the profile of the guys that we know of so far. I also said that they all should be considered under suspicion. This isn’t a court of law this is life and people get labeled everyday.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Yeah, people get unfairly accused all the time
That doesn’t mean it’s a good thing.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 6:14 PM EST up reply actions
And this:
If people could trade their rep for Mike Sweeney or any other players lottery ticket they would in a heart beat.
is only going to confirm my suspicions that it’s really all about the Franklins, or whatever it is the kids say these days.
Anyway, no. It doesn’t work that way. You have the money, you still want — and deserve the chance — to preserve your reputation. His contract does not give you license to behave like a jerk. Well, except on talk radio, where they see it as good for their ratings.
Who's behaving like a jerk
Questioning the validity of all players during that time is legit. 104 or so tested positive out of what 800-900 guys. With tons of time to stop doing it and a union rep giving heads up when the test were being done. What would the true number be without that time?
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Maybe a lot of folks are behaving like jerks. However, one of them is you, if you think it’s OK to throw mud indiscriminately. Stop pointing fingers.
by 2X2L on Feb 9, 2009 12:57 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Sorry I didn't realize all these guys were just innocent bistandards who
were oblivious to what was going on. Especially someone like Sweeney who one of the few times he actually spoke out against the organization is when they let a steroid dealer Grimsley go. Oh poor Mike how will his rep recover.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Yeah, he was an innocent bystander
Others used and he stayed clean. He did his job. They broke the rules.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 4:25 PM EST up reply actions
You have no more proof that he was clean than I do that he wasn't
These guys words are hollow and that is their punishment.
I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.
Yes, anyone could have used
But does that mean we should then accuse all of them? I mean, I could be a muderer. You don’t know that I’m not. So should you accuse me of murder?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 9, 2009 5:32 PM EST up reply actions
Why do we never hear of the problems from before steriods?
The guys way back in the day were all alcoholics because they would take stuff to get them pumped. Then they’d have to come back down off of it and they’d use alcohol to mellow out so they could sleep.
It’s a LONG LONG LONG history of PE drugs… not just roids.
That's why we play the season on paper.
HEY DOUBLESTIX
Sorry, Matty, but I think it’s fair to say that any post that has its title ALL IN CAPS isn’t going to end well…
But while we’re at it, doublestix, I have a public suggestion for your site (or this one!) so that maybe others will jump on the bandwagon:
Have you ever thought of doing your own “Prospect Retrospective” sort of like Sickels does? I know it might be tough without video, but it would be cool if you could do stuff like that every once in a while. It’s probably a challenge to separate knowing how guys turned out from how you would have evaluated them “back then” without knowing the end of the story, but it’s worth a try. It would be interesting (to me, anyway) to see what you would have made of guys like Sweeney, DDJ, Aviles, Stodolka, Lubanski, etc. as young prospects.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 9, 2009 5:59 PM EST up reply actions
i have not thought of that
i could try, but yea it would be kind of difficult since I really didn’t start follow prospects (or really the Royals in general) until around 2005/2006. Lubanski, maybe Aviles, I could do, but the older ones would be difficult. Sickels has been doing what he does for a long time, so it’s a bit easier for him.
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
just a suggestion, no biggie
I just like your writeups and thought it would be a fun idea. Maybe down the road or something.
Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 9, 2009 6:16 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise’
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
