Coincidentally just days after that being basically the last question asked of the blogging panel at Saturday's event, Mark McGwire has apparently admitted to steroid use during the 1998 season. On the surface, this seems a necessary move since he's stepping back into baseball with the Cardinals this season. The questions and stories were going to dog him and the team all year.
I don't have much or anything to say about this at the moment, but it's obviously big news, even if massively unsurprising, so here's a thread to discuss it in.
0 recs | 150 comments
Does this make an Adrian Gonzalez trade more likely?
Bearskin Rugburn - January 11, 2010
WHA?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Oh wait…no.
SethGrandpa - January 11, 2010
Wonder how this ties into the Lee deal
OlSalty - January 11, 2010
Whelmed.
Scruffy Lefty - January 11, 2010
Does this make him a first-ballot HOFer?
I hope not.
skywaker9 - January 11, 2010
Considering he's already not been voted in multiple times, I'm gonna go "no."
SethGrandpa - January 11, 2010
He was not a HOFer without Roids
Unlike Bonds, who is.
skywaker9 - January 11, 2010
He was pretty good in his rookie year, assuming he didn't use steroids that year.
He wouldn’t be as good surely and may not have played as long but he wasn’t terrible.
Mariner John - January 11, 2010
He was a good, even very good player
But not a HOFer without roids given that his only claim to fame is HRs unlike Bonds who was one heck of a defensive player and base stealer in his younger days.
skywaker9 - January 11, 2010
We don't really know though.
He obviously wouldn’t have hit as many home runs but we can’t know how many less he wouldn’t have hit (that’s a doozy of a sentence) so it’s sort of a dumb argument to have.
Mariner John - January 11, 2010
Who cares whether he was a HoFer without roids?
He used roids, so we should evaluate his play with roids.
And he belongs in the hall.
Llewdor - January 11, 2010
Please let me know what Mark McGwire's entire career would have looked like without steroids
to make a statement like this is utterly unprovable. How do we know that steroids even significantly helped him? You could even argue that they actually hurt him, as he spent a lot of time in Oakland on the DL with various injuries, and anabolic steroids have been proved to be bad for athlete’s joints due to the quick building of muscle. How do we know that given his natural ability, that he doesn’t just hit 700 home runs by not using steroids and staying healthy his whole career?
seattlebruin - January 11, 2010
He used steroids primarily to recover form injuries,
The injuries had already happened. One of the main benefits of the steroids is to help you recover from injuries faster. I wouldnt expect it to cause them.
If he hadnt used them, he probably wouldve lost even more time to injuries.
ARock - January 11, 2010
The injury effect is debatable
Correct use of steroids can help you heal injuries short term, but abuse can lead to injuries. In fact, during the steroid era, DL visits spiked. This is probably largely due to the fact that many players did not regulate their use correctly.
Fuckmikereilly - January 11, 2010
Which is my point - how do we know that his use of steroids didn't have this effect on his body instead of helping him recover faster
seattlebruin - January 11, 2010
Does his eligibility reset if Tony pinch hits him this year?
vivaelpujols - January 11, 2010
Yes, I believe it does
Brian Floyd - January 11, 2010
Big deal...the Cards' closer does steroids and still plays.
SethGrandpa - January 11, 2010
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Dewey N - January 11, 2010
Well, buckets.
royalcurve - January 11, 2010
DINGERS!
Scruffy Lefty - January 11, 2010
I wish Bedard had taken steroids the past couple years.
kentroyals5 - January 11, 2010
Someone help me understand
I’ve been trying to grasp this for a while, and a great opportunity to ask has never come up, so this feels like as good a place as any to do so. When pitchers and hitters are on PEDs, doesn’t that (at least partially) balance things out?
I know I’m probably vastly outnumbered on this stance, but when the argument is always “player X from era Y never had benefit Z, so this guy is a baby eating cheater” shouldn’t we also consider that player X from era Y also never had to play against anyone who had benefit Z?
Like I said, just trying to better understand why players who took PEDs get such a lashing when they hit well, vs. the guys who were on them to improve other aspects of the game.
seattlecougar - January 11, 2010
doesn't seem to be the case
in theory I agree with you. I’m not sure why it wouldn’t balance. But if you look at the results, it clearly didn’t. While we saw home run distance increase, I don’t think we saw an increase in fastball velocity (I’m sure this could be confirmed).
We didn’t just see more home run players, but we saw individual players increase their ability to hit home runs regularly. So while it might seem like it should have balanced out, we have data showing us that it did not.
Also, such a theory would require every player to use PEDs and not just a handful.
Snuffleupagus - January 11, 2010
I'm convinced 90% of the players were roiding
Graham MacAree - January 11, 2010
Me too
OlSalty - January 11, 2010
90% might be high
But a quick glimpse at the pitchers McGwire hit HR off of reveals some familiar names (Clemens, Kevin Brown, Villone, etc).
I guess what I’m leaning toward is that it’s not just strength these guys were taking them for. They were taking amphetamines to serve as uppers, improving their overall alertness. They were taking various PEDs to increase their speed of recovery from injuries.
seattlecougar - January 11, 2010
I'd guess 80-90% tried it at least once over the course of their career
Whereas the number of players who used it on occasion was lower, and the number of players who used it regularly was even lower than that.
OlSalty - January 11, 2010
I wonder if bat manufactures saw an overall increase in the weight of bats ordered during the era.
Manzanillos Cup - January 11, 2010
And the 10% who weren't using steroid hormones
were using peptide hormones or synthetic analogs.
Bearskin Rugburn - January 11, 2010
eesh
vivaelpujols - January 11, 2010
As long as Edgar, Olerud, and Ichiro haven't used steroids, I don't care about the rest.
abender20 - January 11, 2010
Edgar seems like a prime candidate for using
as does Cal Ripken. But honestly I care not about those three but would love for Cal Ripken to be implicated.
Poochie - January 11, 2010
I don't know about Edgar
Ripken is almost certainly a user. You just can’t play that many innings at SS with his frame and not need help to recover. Either he was on steroids or he’s Wolverine.
Bearskin Rugburn - January 12, 2010
Ken Caminiti and Jose Canseco thought so
Poochie - January 11, 2010
Ken Caminiti was a cokehead and is dead from said cocaine.
I Lick Squirrels - January 11, 2010
Performance enhancing cocaine?
Dewey N - January 11, 2010
I don't see how that's relevant
Aaron Campeau - January 12, 2010
His thoughts might not have been all that reliable.
Due to cocaine.
I Lick Squirrels - January 12, 2010
Blow makes people more reliable
Bearskin Rugburn - January 12, 2010
Until you stop.
Faux - January 12, 2010
They.
They stop.
Faux - January 12, 2010
I kinda think that the physical motions of the game make the benefits unequal.
I think for pitchers the effects of steroid use are manifested in the form of better endurance and quicker recovery, and not so much additional MPH or break or control. Hitters get those same benefits, but the nature of batting also means that they benefit from more muscle mass, e.g. you weren’t seeing pitchers throwing 102 MPH, you were seeing offensive numbers explode.
Manzanillos Cup - January 11, 2010
Yeah, it's the offensive number explosion that does it for most people, I think.
lailaihei - January 11, 2010
I'm not confident we didn't see MLB fiddling with the ball during that period.
Llewdor - January 11, 2010
This has been my argument.
Seems to me it’s been a level playing field. And it’s not just a juiced hitter vs. a maybe maybe-not pitcher, it’s a juiced hitter vs. an infield/outfield who can maybe run down balls faster or throw out runners more effectively than they otherwise could have without asterisk inducing supplements. Baseball’s come to terms with eras of racism and exclusion. Uppers, amphetamines, and cocaine. Boozers and general douchebaggieness. They/we’re all going to have to get a grip and move on past the whole stupid steroid thing.
Hit By Pitch Brewing Company - January 11, 2010
Is he actually going to play again?
lailaihei - January 11, 2010
No. I think he's the Card's hitting coach.
ToddK - January 11, 2010
But if he did play again, would that restart his HoF eligibility?
Llewdor - January 11, 2010
From what I understand, no.
He would be taken off the ballot and would again wait until five years after his last game, then he’d be back on. But the number of years counted against him would be the same as it was the last time he was on the ballot. So he’d have 11 more chances to get in. Or something like that.
Teej - January 11, 2010
Where did you see this?
I’ve been looking for information on this since it came up and never came across this angle.
Faux - January 11, 2010
I think I read it on Keith Law's Twitter feed.
I’d try to hunt it down for you, but I gotta run out the door.
Teej - January 11, 2010
Thanks for the hint at least.
Faux - January 11, 2010
Here's a reader comment at BBTF
Take it for what it’s worth:
The more I look around, the more confused I get. I found a KLAW chat in which he said he didn’t know how the 15-year part would work. I could definitely be wrong, but I do remember seeing it from someone trustworthy enough for me to remember.
Teej - January 11, 2010
That would still be smart for him
By that time, there are bound to be more sabermetrically inclined writers in the BBWAA.
vivaelpujols - January 11, 2010
I think you missed this story:
Link.
Phil Hatzenbuehler - January 11, 2010
You're quite correct. Thanks for the link.
ToddK - January 11, 2010
This is a good thing, though not really shocking
Before today (in the eyes of the BBWAA, at least, and probably a good portion of the public) Mark McGwire was a steroid user and a liar. Today he’s just a steroid user. The sooner everyone admits to what they did the sooner we can make an honest assessment of what the steroid era really meant for baseball in general and stop blaming the few individuals that happened to be the best at the sport while juicing.
OlSalty - January 11, 2010
Even David Segui got a vote!
Dewey N - January 11, 2010
I think more Segui-caliber players should be on the ballot, if only as a test.
Where anyone who votes for a player on that level immediately gets their vote taken away forever. Some of those voters needed to be weeded the fuck out.
SethGrandpa - January 11, 2010
Jay Buhner got a vote a few years ago.
I feel like there’s no harm and no foul on that one.
Now the five who didn’t vote for anyone are ridiculous.
Two Rs and Two Ls - January 11, 2010
I'd rather see a vote for no one than voters picking Segui
njd.aitken - January 12, 2010
We had this discussion, and apparently Segui has some relative who has a HOF vote
still though
seattlebruin - January 13, 2010
shock!
the outrage/shock over player steroid use always seemed like a blatant cover from the rest of the baseball community. It was obvious to anyone with a brain in their heads that certain players were using steroids. Yet baseball refused to implement strong rules to prevent it. Everyone was complicit as a result. owners, managers, fans and especially writers.
Rather than own up to our collective participation in the steroid era we can all act shocked about these revelations and effectively blame the individual players. Baseball loved McGuire and his obvious steroid abuse at the time. To make him (and others) into a villain now is just a hypocritical attempt to pretend that we weren’t parties to the action from the beginning.
Snuffleupagus - January 11, 2010
McGwire hit .299/.470/.752 in '98 and received two first-place MVP votes.
Sosa hit .307/.377/.647 and got the other thirty first-place votes.
Wow.
JY - January 11, 2010
Cubs won 90 games and went to the playoffs...
Cards barely were .500.
That could be one reason for the discrepancy.
And holy shit the division winners in the NL that year were insane!
ATL with 106, Houston with 102 and Padres with 98 wins
seattlesundevil - January 11, 2010
That's about nine wins with the bat for McGwire.
Barry Bond’s bat in 2001 was worth 12 wins.
Manzanillos Cup - January 11, 2010
What a tool.
sirbrianwilson - January 11, 2010
I have never seen a player who loved the game more
nor do I know of a player who was a better teammate. McGwire left a $15m per contract on the table when he retired because he felt he could no longer perform like a star quality player. Criticize the steriod use if you must, but I feel baseball would be far better off if it had more people like him.
Poochie - January 11, 2010 via mobile
.
How so, exactly? What’s he got on Griffey/Sweeney?
Decatur - January 11, 2010
Steroids make for a better tickle fight
pdb - January 11, 2010
Not only was he held in the highest regard by his manager
But he retired in order so his salary could be used to bring in a star player.
Poochie - January 11, 2010 via mobile
He could still contribute to a baseball team
njd.aitken - January 12, 2010
Great teammates don't put their team in jeopardy by using steroids. Great teammates are role models.
sirbrianwilson - January 11, 2010
I kinda see the logic in this but...
He never really put his team in jeopardy by using steroids unless he was somehow addicted to it and was bashing other people in the face for a quick fix or in a fit of roid rage. He was a hell of a player whose career will be tainted with steroid use. Also you don’t have to be a role model to be a good teammate.
Slurvey - January 11, 2010
Had he been caught, he would have been suspended. That would have hurt the team.
sirbrianwilson - January 11, 2010
Now THAT makes more sense.
Slurvey - January 11, 2010
Except that andro wasn't against MLB rules in 1998
pdb - January 11, 2010
You get caught bad enough they probably toss you in the pokey.
Faux - January 11, 2010
Steroids didn't carry an auto-suspension when he played.
Matthew - January 11, 2010
Exactly.
Kirk - January 11, 2010
But he retired before the suspensions were instated.
ToddK - January 11, 2010
No, that's great role models you're thinking of
great teammates help their team win on the field and help keep order in the clubhouse. They’re easy guys to get along with and respected leaders.
seattlebruin - January 11, 2010
Do you think there is a chance McGwire retired because he knew steroid testing was beginning in 2002?
Not trying to patronize, but it is an interesting possibility. McGwire’s personality would fit into this thinking.
Wilder. - January 11, 2010
He may have retired because he hit .187 in 2001
Fuckmikereilly - January 11, 2010
That would be my guess too
ToddK - January 11, 2010
And his OBP was nearly double.
Wilder. - January 11, 2010
Well now I have to question the integrity of what was up to this day a completely honest and above-reproach game.
pdb - January 11, 2010
He said he's sorry
what more do you want, you vindictive, heartless puritan?
Bearskin Rugburn - January 11, 2010
I'm a sucker for a well placed asterisk!
Or we could just ban him from humanity, whichever.
pdb - January 11, 2010
Send him to District 10.
Decatur - January 11, 2010
Gotta get the rest of the prawns settled first
pdb - January 11, 2010
Like Canada Bill said, it's the only game in town.
Kermit. - January 11, 2010
I don't believe it.
I think he’s covering for someone.
CapSea - January 11, 2010
Canseco?
pdb - January 11, 2010
Jim Edmonds!
Big Jared - January 11, 2010
Watch out
Poochie bites
Dewey N - January 11, 2010
Yeah bit my bark is worse
Poochie - January 11, 2010
The hell you say!
Goose - January 11, 2010
Meh
Slurvey - January 11, 2010
'98 was still awesome; I don't care what happened
I’ll never forget watching this game.
stupidquestions - January 11, 2010
.
gregrabble - January 11, 2010
I'm amazed it took this long for this to show up.
JAH - January 11, 2010
So was I
gregrabble - January 11, 2010
Ahem
http://twitter.com/msea1/status/7641094613
Matthew - January 11, 2010
I thought it was a joke
Poochie - January 11, 2010
God dammit
gregrabble - January 11, 2010
Who cares
InSpokane - January 11, 2010
Water wet, sky blue, etc.
lemonverbena - January 11, 2010
Black is East, Up is White
yadda yadda.
CapSea - January 11, 2010
Round things roll and heated things are hot.
Sec 108 - January 11, 2010
It is what it is
Bearskin Rugburn - January 11, 2010
Se la vid.
levnclf - January 11, 2010
It's a good move for him, I imagine.
I’m not sure how many voters are willing to change their minds at this point, but it can’t hurt. And it might help him sleep better at night.
Teej - January 11, 2010
I knew he'd have to do it
when he took the job as Cardinals hitting coach. I’m sure the Cardinals discussed it with him in the hiring process.
Fuckmikereilly - January 11, 2010
Yeah, at some point
he was either going to have to make a non-apology apology or come clean, just so the first week of Spring Training wouldn’t be all steroids all the time.
pdb - January 11, 2010
I think they have moved on to HGH these days.
Kirk - January 11, 2010
He could have just lied and said he never used
Poochie - January 11, 2010
While he should have come clean long ago
there are few could who will come clean without being proven to have used
Poochie - January 11, 2010
I wish more players would use steroids
Corco - January 11, 2010
what
seattlebruin - January 11, 2010
They get paid a lot of money- if they have to kill themselves to maximize their performance, then that's an inherent risk to the job and I'm fine with that
Corco - January 11, 2010
Why not
Seems like a pretty arbitrary line to draw. Its not like everyone is back to drinking raw eggs and boxing frozen carcasses now that anabolics are being tested for.
Bearskin Rugburn - January 11, 2010
There would be more dingers
gregrabble - January 11, 2010
Eveybody loves dingers!
njd.aitken - January 12, 2010
I completely agree
Legalize them and let the players go nuts.
pdb - January 11, 2010
I'd prefer they be legalized and regulated because we know for a fact that they can be used safely
Aaron Campeau - January 12, 2010
We could finally get to see
this
Bearskin Rugburn - January 12, 2010
I still don't get why his admitting use of Andro back when he played is any different.
Same pathway, same result.
The demarcation between legal and illegal is ridiculous.
abender20 - January 11, 2010
Could you explain this thought using monosyllabic words?
CapSea - January 11, 2010
One of the big anabolic steroids is dihydrotestosterone, which is the active final product that triggers production of protein (for muscle mass).
Looking at the pretty pathway map, you’ll notice androstenedione is an intermediate that, with processing by two enzymes, becomes dihydrotestosterone (the very molecule which is illegal to ingest). What MLB did was decide that it was illegal to burn wood because it causes fire but Duralogs were still cool. Use a different product, get the same result.
abender20 - January 11, 2010
Wish more people would see it this way
In any case, going all apeshit over steroid hormones and turning a blind eye to all the other shit (look up myostatin inhibitors, that shit is amazing) makes it clear how much of this is a PR whitewash.
Bearskin Rugburn - January 11, 2010
I feel as though you may not know the definition of monosyllabic.
Here, I’ll do it for you:
“Two Roids. Both Lead to Same Bufff. One Good. One Bad. Why? Same Thing. No Point. Stupid Game. Make Sense! ARGH!”
CapSea - January 11, 2010
Monosyllabic is not monosyllabic and as such you outed yourself.
abender20 - January 11, 2010
I is a sesquipedalian.
Fo’ Sho’.
CapSea - January 11, 2010
It is worth noting that Andro, as a precursor, also leads to increased Estrogen production.
abender20 - January 11, 2010
So, quick question. I've read someplace that the rapid muscle growth from a serious program can lead to tendon or ligament damage.
The muscles gain mass and strength so quickly, they overpower the connective tissues which gain develop at a slower rate. It sounds pretty good, any truth to that?
Kermit. - January 11, 2010
"....which gain develop..." strike the word gain.
Kermit. - January 11, 2010
I've read the same and it makes sense developmentally.
Also, taking testosterone or intermediates that cause in increase in testosterone feed back negatively on the system that stimulates your body’s own production, leading to atrophy of those cells (see shrunken testicles etc.).
abender20 - January 11, 2010
Wasn't this on an episode of CSI last week?
ToddK - January 11, 2010
Apparently this came as a shock to Brian Williams
He opened tonight’s evening news with a nice dose of roid rage directed at Mcgwire.
Brian Floyd - January 11, 2010
Wow. At the beginning I thought it was some fake comedy intro to something they'd show on the Daily Show.
He’s a little ticked.
kentroyals5 - January 11, 2010
It was like someone told him Santa wasn't real
Unfortunately, he learned 5 years later than the other kids
Brian Floyd - January 11, 2010
Well that's too bad.
I usually like Brian Williams, but that was over the top. If you’re going to take a stand and rake one guy over the coals for lying to the nation, Mark McGwire is the one you pick? Silly, just silly. Maybe he lost a bet on it or something.
Bearskin Rugburn - January 11, 2010
Brian Williams is pretty smart guy and I am surprised at this
Poochie - January 11, 2010
Over/under on when McGwire's book comes out?
I Lick Squirrels - January 11, 2010
Seven.
Teej - January 12, 2010
I was going to say purple but seven's a pretty good guess
pdb - January 12, 2010
x
Negative ten
Poochie - January 12, 2010
I do not think you know what over/under is.
CapSea - January 12, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.