Players Overshadowed by Steroid Users

[Los Bravos]

Bottom line is, with masking agents, going after the usual suspects, etc. we really can't say for certain who did or who did not use. Even Derek Jeter, who I am actually a fan of. With only suspicion I cannot condemn a player for using, personally.

I agree with that, largely. What I can't go along with is the idea that's floated around here a lot that since a definitive list can't be compiled, it's all pointless and that even people who failed tests or have substantial proof against them on the record be allowed to skate away with no consequences.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

It was Joey, the real Captain Cold Nose. And it was 2002. He said "Harrr. Har rar rar har". I was told he was either talking about Lawton and other positive testers who did not look the part, or that a storm was coming.

Bottom line is, with masking agents, going after the usual suspects, etc. we really can't say for certain who did or who did not use. Even Derek Jeter, who I am actually a fan of. With only suspicion I cannot condemn a player for using, personally.

You don't have to condemn a player, thats fine.
But on your first point, that we really can't say for certain who did and did not use, I don't get that, at least a part of it.
We do know who some of the users were so why toss in those not proven to use with the users.

I hope were not going down the faulty false test results road now, anyone can use that line. Is it possible yes, but how many denied using only to be found out later. Why would anyone admit.

[CTaka]

Greg Maddux was generally over shadowed by Roger Clemens.

Not anymore though.

I'm not sure about that - Roger looks like he's packed on quite a few extra pounds since his playing days. If you put them side-by-side today, you may not even be able to see poor Greg!

But I get your point.

[Joe33]

It was Joey, the real Captain Cold Nose. And it was 2002. He said "Harrr. Har rar rar har". I was told he was either talking about Lawton and other positive testers who did not look the part, or that a storm was coming.

The thing is, Matt Lawton did look like a steroid user.

fQwQzvwI.jpg

Of course it's impossible to identify every user on the eye-test, but you can identify some based on some clear signs. If Lawton played today, he'd stand out a bit more than he did in the late 90s/early 2000s.

Many of those identified as users were either victims of stupidity (failing the test), or name recognition (Bonds, Clemens, et al). Plenty of others would have flown just under the radar because they never failed a test, nor did they find themselves wrapped up in a federal or similar investigation. Would we have ever known Jason Giambi used if he had secured a more discreet source than BALCO? Would we have discovered Albert Pujols used if his former trainer, Chris Mihlfeld, who was busted for supplying steroids, had given up names?

[Captain Cold Nose]

The thing is, Matt Lawton did look like a steroid user.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]108212[/ATTACH]

Of course it's impossible to identify every user on the eye-test, but you can identify some based on some clear signs. If Lawton played today, he'd stand out a bit more than he did in the late 90s/early 2000s.

Many of those identified as users were either victims of stupidity (failing the test), or name recognition (Bonds, Clemens, et al). Plenty of others would have flown just under the radar because they never failed a test, nor did they find themselves wrapped up in a federal or similar investigation. Would we have ever known Jason Giambi used if he had secured a more discreet source than BALCO? Would we have discovered Albert Pujols used if his former trainer, Chris Mihlfeld, who was busted for supplying steroids, had given up names?

I am a firm disbeliever in the eye test, myself. Is it enough to raise suspicions? Yes? We're a suspicious species. Is suspicion enough for condemnation? Not in my eyes.

Shoeless, I think you've misunderstood me. My point was not we can't be certain who used and who didn't. My point was we can't condemn a player without any evidence of usage. And the eye test is not evidence. I do put stock in positive tests, though.

[Joe33]

I am a firm disbeliever in the eye test, myself. Is it enough to raise suspicions? Yes? We're a suspicious species. Is suspicion enough for condemnation? Not in my eyes.

Shoeless, I think you've misunderstood me. My point was not we can't be certain who used and who didn't. My point was we can't condemn a player without any evidence of usage. And the eye test is not evidence. I do put stock in positive tests, though.

That's a fair position. It makes me ask why Sammy Sosa is always included in these lists. The "2003 list" has never been confirmed as legitimate.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I am a firm disbeliever in the eye test, myself. Is it enough to raise suspicions? Yes? We're a suspicious species. Is suspicion enough for condemnation? Not in my eyes.

Shoeless, I think you've misunderstood me. My point was not we can't be certain who used and who didn't. My point was we can't condemn a player without any evidence of usage. And the eye test is not evidence. I do put stock in positive tests, though.

Got it Cap, misunderstood your point.I also don't and never did go by the eye test. In the history of this game there were a good number of players who probably bulked up over the years and used nothing.
I also put stock in positive tests, although there could be some false reads.
Isn't that the usual line, there must be a mistake, I'm innocent. What would anyone expect to hear from one testing positive..............ya got me.

Also, some may disagree their opinion, when I saw Mac and Barry doing the just about impossible, hitting a home run every 8 at bats and not just for one season over a few years, been watching this game too long, something is up here and now we know.

Agreed, suspicion is never enough. Even when I believed Mac and Barry were using some years ago I always closed, saying at that time they are innocent

[SHOELESSJOE3]

That's a fair position. It makes me ask why Sammy Sosa is always included in these lists. The "2003 list" has never been confirmed as legitimate.

I thought he did test positive but no specific substance was described.
The problem is even if you believe the test and the names are not legit, the names will still be linked.

What makes you believe it was not confirmed. Not much was said after it came out because it was a mistake to make it public, thats probably why we never heard any details.

[Joe33]

I thought he did test positive but no specific substance was described.
The problem is even if you believe the test and the names are not legit, the names will still be linked.

What makes you believe it was not confirmed. Not much was said after it came out because it was a mistake to make it public, thats probably why we never heard any details.

He never tested positive and was never suspended for use. The 2003 list could have came from anywhere, from someone's imagination for all we know. Looking at the names on the list, it seems phony - don't recall any fringe players included, mostly names that would create a stir. There's never been a shred of solid evidence to support it.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

He never tested positive and was never suspended for use. The 2003 list could have came from anywhere, from someone's imagination for all we know. Looking at the names on the list, it seems phony - don't recall any fringe players included, mostly names that would create a stir. There's never been a shred of solid evidence to support it.

Sammy did test positive. The reason he was not suspended, the substance he used was not banned in 2003.

There was a total of 8 players who tested positive for a substance not banned in 2003, no action taken, no suspension.
Sixteen players on the list admitted to using.
Your mind is already made up, what leads you to believe the list was just made up, for what reason.

No fringe players, some are not even on the fringe, they did not target only big names.
Ricky Bones pitcher career record 63-82
Adam Piatt 2000-2003, career BA. 248
Nook Logan..... who is he, 2004-2007, .260 career.
Only a few also rans on the list, not big names.

You have to open your mind and be more objective...... Sammy did test positive........there were some on the list not even making the fringe......16 on the list later admitted to using.

What evidence are you looking for, again we heard no more about it simply because it was never supposed to be made public.
Could there be some mistakes on the list, probably so. But to say you believe it's someones imagination defies logic

[fenrir]

The thing is, Matt Lawton did look like a steroid user.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]108212[/ATTACH]

Of course it's impossible to identify every user on the eye-test, but you can identify some based on some clear signs. If Lawton played today, he'd stand out a bit more than he did in the late 90s/early 2000s.

Many of those identified as users were either victims of stupidity (failing the test), or name recognition (Bonds, Clemens, et al). Plenty of others would have flown just under the radar because they never failed a test, nor did they find themselves wrapped up in a federal or similar investigation. Would we have ever known Jason Giambi used if he had secured a more discreet source than BALCO? Would we have discovered Albert Pujols used if his former trainer, Chris Mihlfeld, who was busted for supplying steroids, had given up names?

Actually, Pujols former trainer was cleared of allegations that he supplied PED's to ballplayers: http://stlcardinals.scout.com/2/574564.html

The trainer that was named on the Grimsley affidavit was Brian Mcnamee, Clemens and Pettitte's former trainer.

This doesn't mean Pujols hasn't juiced, but he has never been linked to steroids in any way shape or form.

[NYYankeesFan92]

*Sigh* I think i'm probably the only person on the face of Earth who doesn't think Roger Clemens took steroids.

[fenrir]

Don't want to turn this into a Clemens steroids debate, but if you believe he was clean, you would have to believe Mcnamee told the truth about Pettitte and Knoblauch, but completely lied about Clemens, which would make no sense.. You would also have to believe that he injected Debbie Clemens with HGH (which has been confirmed) but not her husband the athlete, Roger Clemens.

[Joe33]

Actually, Pujols former trainer was cleared of allegations that he supplied PED's to ballplayers: http://stlcardinals.scout.com/2/574564.html

The trainer that was named on the Grimsley affidavit was Brian Mcnamee, Clemens and Pettitte's former trainer.

This doesn't mean Pujols hasn't juiced, but he has never been linked to steroids in any way shape or form.

I wasn't aware Mihlfeld's name was erroneously tied to that investigation. I could have said Angel Presinal, would have fit better with my point.

[Joe33]

Delete, double post.