god, i love grums posts. you must have an assload of time on your hands to figure out/ find all those stats. good job on at least trying to keep the Bonds haters in check.
I make an obvious crack about some of these thought patterns being racially motivated (see above comment) and I get a stern talking to by admin about cracking a damn joke. There's no stern talking. I'm simply asking you not to go there. If you think a comment is ignorant, there are ways of saying it without comparing a member to the klan. Don't censor my post because you took the crack personally, or you felt like someone else may have taken it personally. I didn't take it personally. No one asked me to take it down. Then it seems as if admin is saying it's ok to discuss your beliefs that Whites were superior athletes in the past, but you can't joke about that being a racist viewpoint Though I disagree with the comment, you're misrepresenting what they said. They were saying that white players were better because they were paid more and baseball was their job, while the african american players were not paid well, so baseball was like a second job. You then compare them to the klan. This is emotionally involved, but you agree with this, so it stays. I'll make you a deal, put my comment back, take a vote to see if my comment is more "emotionally involved" than the previous one. If my comment gets more votes, I'll stop posting to your website. I don't agree with that comment. If you go back to my comments about bonds, you'd know that. Bishop, post here or not, that's your choice. I delete very little content. When I do, as I said before, it's because: It's not good for sportsfilter, it's not good for discussion, and it's not going to happen here. You can email me if you want to discuss it, but there's really nothing to discuss. That comment would have been deleted a year ago, today, and tomorrow. This is not a free speech subject. It's what works best for the website. That's my only concern. (I should have emailed you after deleting your comment instead of making a comment here, however. For some reason I thought you hadn't given an email address)
Still if it could be proved that he used a performance enhancing drug of any kind just to try to build up his stats, even though they weren't illegal when he played and even if he only did it for one season, I'd be the first person in line to have him thrown out of the Hall and baseball altogether. So you'd toss out about 50% of the players in the hall that played in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s? Greenies are now considered an illegal drug and they were used by a large number of players in those eras (like Mays). I guess you'd toss anyone that used a corked bat (whether it was illegal or not back then)? In that case, say sayonara to Babe Ruth. Doctored a baseball or used a spitball? That's going to be a lot of pitcher plaques being tossed into the trashbin of history. Mr. Perry, it was nice knowing ya. How about players that dabbled in cocaine, marijuana, or other illegal drugs? Good bye, Paul Molitor... Once you start, you can't stop! you must have an assload of time on your hands to figure out/ find all those stats Nah. It's pretty simple if you have a good knowledge of SQL, a copy of Microsoft Access, and download this database.
Yep, I guess I'd toss most of the ones you mentioned. Any player who cheats just to build up their stats deserves to be tossed from baseball. Works for me.
Look cheating is easy to define. My grandpapa used to say that "If you know in your heart that what you're doing is wrong at the time that you're doing it, then it's cheating and if you know in your heart that it's wrong and you do it anyway, then you were raised by shitty parents." It's easy to make excuses or rationalzations for what is or was allowed or what should or should not be called cheating, but 'roids are cheating and any player who used them during any part of their career should be banned from baseball. Period.
BTW grum, thanks for the link to the Baseball DL!! Looks like fun! Now I'll be able to make my friends crazy with BB stats!
Yep, I guess I'd toss most of the ones you mentioned. Any player who cheats just to build up their stats deserves to be tossed from baseball. Works for me. "Welcome to the Baseball Hall of Fame. The member plaques are to your right. No, you just walked past them. Come back. That's right. Al Kaline, Cool Papa Bell and Kenesaw Mountain Landis. When you are done reading them, we have lots of memorabilia from the former members of the Hall before The Great Purge of 2006 still available in our gift shop. Have a nice day!"
LOL! Works for me!
If you ain't cheaing, you ain't tryin'. Always liked that quote. Any player who cheats just to build up their stats deserves to be tossed from baseball. Works for me. What if it's not to build up their stats? What if it's to help their team win? Honestly CC, you remind me of a miss america contestant answering the question "If you had one wish..." with "world peace". It's a nice thought, but really naive. The history of baseball is a history of players looking for the edge. Stealing signs, letting the infield grass grow to help stop bunts, turning the AC off in the visiting locker room. You seem to have been a fan of baseball for a long time. Dirty play was even more prevalent in those golden times you seem to revere. When I was in little league we had a strict game time limit. Once in the playoffs we were late in the game and somehow beating a team that was far better than we were. But they were starting to come back, and our pitcher, the reason we were ahead, was about to pass his innings limit. We had no one else that could hold them. So our coach had us spend the last inning stalling. Calling time to tie our shoes, etc. And we won. And it felt great. If the other team could have artificially made the game move quicker, they would have. Don't get me wrong, you cheat and get caught, you should be punished. And sure, it's a long way from cutting the grass long to injecting crap into your body, but it's still looking to get an advantage over the opponent. Every team, every player, looks for an edge in someway. The only difference is the level to which they will stoop. Under your watch, the only players that would be left in the league would be those who got away with it. You'd have a league of best cheaters.
Wait cody... you said that you would throw out any one from the HOF for using any performance enhancing drug... even if they weren't illegal at the time?????? That just seems assinine to me... What if next year they decide to get rid of caffeine because of its performance enhancing abilities? should we just raize the hall of fame and start again? How can you break a rule, if the rule is not in existence at the time you could have broken it?
I'll make you a deal, put my comment back, take a vote to see if my comment is more "emotionally involved" than the previous one. If my comment gets more votes, I'll stop posting to your website. We don't do deals. If you want to post here, knowing that comments are occasionally deleted, great. If you want to have public showdowns with admins about why a specific comment was deleted, no deal.
Well Gary in many ways I agree with you, esp the part about it being a long way from cutting the grass long to injecting crap. Most teams do look for some sort of edge or advantage, but you have to draw the line somewhere and I tend draw it at artifical substances in the body when they are used expressly to cheat, like Bonds (or other players) injecting steroids. I guess in some ways you could sort of understand it if they do it to help the team win, but people like Bonds are doing it only to satisfy their own egos and to prop themselves up to an undeserved place in the record books. The truth is that if I found out my boyhood hero (Kaline) used greenies when he played I'd throw away my pictures of him and, given the chance, would see him thrown out of the HOF. Just one man's opinion. As for the Miss America part well I guess in some ways I have to plead guilty to that too (just don't ask me to join in the evening gown or swimsuit parts). I can honestly say I've never done anything that could be called cheating in sports, at cards or even on my taxes. I'm pathtically honest to the point where it's cost me jobs and even a relationship or two. Can't help it. I'm the type of guy who'll point it out to the waiter if he forgets to charge me for something on my check. Maybe I should stick to Curling? LOL! How can you break a rule, if the rule is not in existence at the time you could have broken it? Everett, I refer you to my earlier post where I explained my grandpapa's definition of cheating. It doesn't matter if it's against a specific rule or not. If it feels wrong, it's cheating.
We don't do deals. If you want to post here, knowing that comments are occasionally deleted, great. If you want to have public showdowns with admins about why a specific comment was deleted, no deal. I agree. Gary's deleted a couple of my posts that were in (what I thought was) a grey area, but hey it's not my blog to administer. Though I still think he should have left the one up about Rev. Pat Robertson leg-pressing 2000lbs after drinking his energy drink! I mean talk about performance enhancing drugs!
Dude... your ends don't meet... I don't know what else to say.
Dude... your ends don't meet... I don't know what else to say. LOL! You may be right, but as one of the greatest singers ever once said "I gotta be me".
You may be right, but as one of the greatest singers ever once said "I gotta be me". Well, at least your honest about your position cc. Elsewhere: Bonds had a chance to change, but passed
Though I disagree with the comment, you're misrepresenting what they said. Kind of the same way you misrepresented me making a wisecrack as being to emotionally involved. Just for the record, I can't joke about an opinion being offered sounding like something a K**Nsman would say, however this remains. If she's lying, her food stamp card will not be able to compensate the damages done the players' reputation A comment made about the alleged victim in the Duke rape case on this thread, that at least 3 members thought to be a racist remark. How about you file that under the: It's not good for sportsfilter, it's not good for discussion, and it's not going to happen here If you're going to be consistent as your previous statement suggests, why not be consistent.
More on 715. Statisticians are wary of giving steroids credit for the offensive explosion not only because their effects are hard to pin down, but because of other changes in the game. In his "Historical Baseball Abstract," published in 2001, Bill James, perhaps the best-known sabermetrician, listed six trends contributing to 1990s offense, of which only one the rise of strength training could even remotely be connected to steroid use. The others included changes in bat design that enhanced bat speed, changes in pitching and hitting styles that increased opposite-field home runs and, especially, a wave of new, hitter-friendly ballparks.
I don't buy the cheating angle. Baseball has a rich tradition of cheating. It's one of those sports that's just begging for it: Spitters, greenies, scuffs, corks, psych-outs, 'roids, stolen signs, home-friendly infields, backdrops, air-conditioning, and more. Barry is being completely singled out for the history of injustices in the sport. Frankly, it's clear that the media has had a lot to do with it, since people seem incapable of actually applying an iota of rational thought to the big picture. Of course, everytime we have one of these FPPs we have exactly the same arguements and I haven't seen one person change their mind, yet. Hey, we're just like ESPN!
From justgary's link about Bonds "changing": He could have become a sympathetic character, with a little more humility, a lot more grace, a smile that wasn't only reserved for "Bonds on Bonds." He had one last chance to show America a different side. But he didn't do it. Good. If he had "changed" he'd have been ripped by the media for "faking it", and lost a lot of respect from some of his fans for being a "character sellout". I'm quite fine with Bonds being himself, even if that means he doesn't pander to the media. In his "Historical Baseball Abstract," published in 2001, Bill James, perhaps the best-known sabermetrician, listed six trends contributing to 1990s offense, of which only one the rise of strength training could even remotely be connected to steroid use. I was reading that section the other night and was dumbfounded on how little mention there was about PEDs (if any). It's only been 5 years since it's been published, but it's amazing how much public (and expert) perception has been altered.
I hate cheating. I think Bonds has a crap attitude toward the game and the public. Having said that, Weedy's right. Cheating has been an integral part of baseball for as long as the game's been played. Players and managers have always tried to get an edge and the ones who are best at it tend to win. Even those that refuse to cheat know things that are done by others on the team, yet they say nothing. Could you really see even someone like Kaline or Mays saying "Excuse me blue, but I couldn't help noticing between innings that our pitcher has a little sandpaper in his glove. Just thought you should know."? Obviously, there are varying degrees, but if Bud and the powers that be learn that a particular form of cheating is catching on, and they feel that it's egregious and hurting the sport, they need to penalize it to the point that it's no longer worthwhile. Start banning people for life if they're caught corking a bat or doctoring a baseball and you'll virtually eliminate those activities, but do we really want to go to that extreme? For some offenses, maybe. The main hurdle there is getting an agreement with the players' union, but if the problem gets big enough, like steroids has, everyone eventually gets on board. Until then, we have to realize that teams are going to try to get an edge where they can, and as more people get involved, it will escalate until something is done to curb that particular form of cheating.
I have a couple questions that I don't believe has entered any discussions and I would like to understand why: What percentage of known steroid users are pitchers? And either way, shouldn't the possibility that pitchers are juiced have some kind of adverse effect on homerun hitting totals? I would really appreciate it if someone could answer back, because it seems to me the on going steroid discussions are very one sided...
From my very limited understanding of steroids (my only experience is a friend of friend who did the "program") he said pitchers would benefit more than hitters because of the accelerated recovery time associated with steroids.
What percentage of known steroid users are pitchers? From my understanding, between 33%-50% of the players testing positive for PEDs in the majors/minors have been pitchers. I think there is a website out there that is keeping track of that information. And either way, shouldn't the possibility that pitchers are juiced have some kind of adverse effect on homerun hitting totals? No, because that line of discussion doesn't involve Barry Bonds and he's the source of all evil in baseball, so therefore it is irrelevant to any discussion.
Ah! Got it. Thank you (for both).
No, because that line of discussion doesn't involve Barry Bonds and he's the source of all evil in baseball, so therefore it is irrelevant to any discussion. Nice to finally see you coming around.
Cheating has been an integral part of baseball for as long as the game's been played. Stealing signs, throwing the occasional spitball, or using a corked bat are a far cry from using performance enhancing drugs of any type. And if you want a true perspective of how most San Francisco Giants fans and writers feel about it, read this: www.mercurynews.com
Stealing signs, throwing the occasional spitball, or using a corked bat are a far cry from using performance enhancing drugs of any type. In what way? Many PEDs are legal and sold at GNC. What makes this brand of gaining an edge so different from a corked bat?
Stealing signs, throwing the occasional spitball, or using a corked bat are a far cry from using performance enhancing drugs of any type. In your mind, anyway. So we can be sure to rehash the same opinions we always do, how do you feel about gambling? Also, justgary linked to your article previously in this discussion.
grum: "Kenesaw Mountain Landis"??? You keep Judge Roy Bean and don't leave in Luis Aparicio? You're killing me.
grum: "Kenesaw Mountain Landis"??? You keep Judge Roy Bean and don't leave in Luis Aparicio? Well, I'm pretty sure I heard that someone saw Aparicio looking at a catcher's sign one time, so he's out. Kaline gets in because of the hero worship of CC. Bell gets in because his great nickname overrides any and all negative aspects he might have. Landis gets in because he'd be all for a great purge of the Hall.
In what way? Many PEDs are legal and sold at GNC. What makes this brand of gaining an edge so different from a corked bat? I don't have a problem with a legal diet supplement if you need that in place of real talent. A corked bat? It's just lower on the scale of cheating. It really does not help your batting, but there is always some idiot who will try. Gambling? I don't care as long as you aren't gambling on your own team while still in a position to change the outcome of the game.
Kaline gets in because of the hero worship of CC. Bell gets in because his great nickname overrides any and all negative aspects he might have. Landis gets in because he'd be all for a great purge of the Hall. LOL! I don't always agree with you on some threads grum, but I sure can't fault your logic or way with words.
Of course, everytime we have one of these FPPs we have exactly the same arguements and I haven't seen one person change their mind, yet. I don't know. Of course, you're right, but I've had to rethink my position. Grum does a good job pointing out all the inconsistencies when it comes to bonds. I still think he was into steroids pretty heavy. And I don't think he's that great a guy. But it may also be he's socially inept. Sure, the media ran with the story, but bonds gave them a lot of ammo also. But I also believe this was a large, prevalent problem for a period of time, and bonds was simply the best player in that period of time to use steroids. The whole asterisk thing is stupid. I think when it comes to bonds records it should just be noted the era he lived in, which includes steroids, just as ruth played in an era without great african american players. If a fan, on a personal level, doesn't give bonds his due, that's his choice. But I don't think baseball as a whole should do the same.
As an aside to those who wondered why there wasn't any fuss when Bonds passed Ruth. Where were you on June 10, 1972? That's the day Henry Aaron moved into second place for HRs lifetime. I don't think MLB executives did any more for Aaron that game than they did for Bonds when he moved into second.
Calm down. All this bull$hit keeps baseball in the headlines. Any publicity, good OR bad, is welcome... posted by joromu at 8:31 PM CDT on May 29 Yeah, all that talk baseball generated from August 11, 1994 to April 25, 1995 really paid off. Nah. It's pretty simple if you have a good knowledge of SQL, a copy of Microsoft Access, and download this database. I'm mulling over how responsible this post is. Stats don't kill people. People using stats kill people. Grum may have just entered into some kind of baseball arms dealing. (Coming up: playing off the expression "baseball arms dealing," a critique of John Hart, and more, right after this.) ruth played in an era without great african american players. This gets brought up a lot when comparing eras and measuring Ruth's accomplishments. There were also only 8 American League teams during Ruth's career. While baseball's integration started in 1947, it wasn't until 1959 that every team had a black player. By 1962, MLB had added four teams. It's impossible to know what baseball's expansion growth would have been if it had never been segregated -- Ruth might have faced more good pitchers, but he might have faced more not-so-good pitchers, too. Just adding more punctuation to the argument against comparing across eras.
Where were you on June 10, 1972? My parents hadn't even met yet. Thus, I can bitch. Hooray!
Where were you on June 10, 1972? My parents hadn't even met yet. Thus, I can bitch. Hooray! Oh great! I was already feeling old because of the upcoming big five-oh, but now I feel ancient! Thanks alot jerseygirl!
Oh, also a lot of negro players are overrated due to the fact that a lot of them were FARMERS AND HAD OTHER LOW INCOME JOBS! The professional players played it as their job! The negro players either didn't get paid or very, very little. So, obviously they had to get their source of income elsewhere. So my point is a lot of them weren't very good and their stats were blown up because they were facing weak competition. Sorry for the excessive rambling but damn somebody had to finally say it! Somebody had to finally say it? That the African American players in the past were not as good as the white players? I admit, that came out wrong. I in no way meant to say that white players are better than black players. What I meant to say is that a lot of black players stats aren't as good as they seem because they were facing low caliber type players. I mean the guys in the majors at the time played it as their JOB! Some black players played in the Negro leagues, but at one time or another worked as something else. I mean if you played in the majors and somebody else was a part time player and say they worked at a store or something, don't tell me that the major league player wouldn't easily kick the other player's ass. Yeah, you know you agree. But tha
