Lammycat Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 All previous discourse on the subject can now be even more aptly applied, you mean. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Well, in my opinion, before, when he hadn't failed a test, there wasn't a discussion. He was the best player of his generation, but now that there is evidence of a failed test there is should be a discussion over what effect the steroids had. To me, he's still a hall of famer because of what he did prior to the steroids. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 Come on now. Everyone (including yourself) knew he juiced. The book detailed this. The conversations prior to this blurb on him were certainly valid and I don't think it changes the viewpoint of most people who had already made up their minds on how history will treat Bonds. Maybe it will for you, and that's cool, but overall I don't think it does for most people. However, I'm always up for the discussion. Though to most folks around here it's like that kinks song, "Back Where We Started," I'd imagine. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 It doesn't change it, but it should. A failed drug test should be the only way someone should be denied for PEDs, in my opinion, and even then it's on a case by case basis. We aren't going to know how far drug use in baseball went and still goes because MLB wants to get a few scapegoats and make it seem like scattered cases. Bonds is your scapegoat, and he's taking the fall for all steroid use in baseball, and that's ok. Someone has to. But the fact of the matter is so many people used it that are never going to be found out. Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 MLB jobs: http://jobsearch.mlb.careers.monster.com/?...183226-70483990 Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 4, 2009 Author Share Posted February 4, 2009 MLB jobs: http://jobsearch.mlb.careers.monster.com/?...183226-70483990Is that legitimate? They have the same three jobs listed for each team.... Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 Yes. As you see, they only list those three positions on Monster. It lists them right on the first page. They are all pretty lousy jobs, from what I understand. But could be fun if you don't have a lot of responsibilities. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 The stat thing looks pretty cool. Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Bonds would have been a dead-lock for the Hall and most likely the greatest player of his day if he never took a fucking steroid in his life. The hubris. The hubris. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 And he's got only himself to blame for queering that deal. Link to post Share on other sites
rareair Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Here's the question: You are a BBWAA member. You have a vote. It is 2012. Does Barry Bonds get your vote? He's never been in trouble from the law or baseball from steroid use. Does the mere suspicion keep him out? i am relieved that this hypothetical is officially laid to rest. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 Ben Sheets may need elbow surgery. The TEX deal last week was nixed due to his injury:http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...rtnerId=rss_mlb Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Ben Sheets may need elbow surgery. The TEX deal last week was nixed due to his injury:http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...rtnerId=rss_mlbMax Kellerman yesterday was like, "What, did they find a suitcase nuke in his elbow? Did they find al-Qaida in his elbow?" Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 AMAZIN' AMBUSH! By ALIYAH SHAHID and DAVID K. L I February 5, 2009 -- Hell hath no fury like a baseball wife scorned! The enraged ex-wife of Miracle Met Art Shamsky tracked him to a Midtown luncheon yesterday and chased him down the street to air her allegations that he's a lying snake in the grass who carried on affairs with both men and women while they were married. Kim Shamsky confronted the New York sports hero at Gallagher's Steakhouse, where he and several other members of the legendary 1969 Mets squad were part of a benefit for the American Heart Association. As Shamsky hit the sidewalk to leave, Kim ambushed the Met and stalked him down 52nd Street, screaming at him and demanding a verbal throwdown. "Set yourself free . . . Why can't you look at me?" a rampaging Kim shouted, as Shamsky tried to speed away with his ear glued to a cellphone. He made it just a half-block east to Broadway, before deciding to reverse course and seek protection back inside Gallagher's from his angry ex. The bickering couple was married in 1994 and divorced 12 years later. Kim sued Shamsky last year, claiming she's owed compensation for the "physiological and emotional injuries" associated with his years of unfaithfulness. "He believes his own lies and he just hides, because everything he does is a lie and he can't admit it," said Kim, a wealthy entrepreneur who built an empire of temporary-employment agencies. "I have e-mails that he's done this to other people so justice will be served when this comes out in court," she said of the electronic paper trail she's basing her court case on. "He was leading a double, triple, quadruple life." Kim said she decided to take her case to the street to confront her former husband publicly and remind him that she's not through with him. "I just wanted to say, 'Bye, Artie, see you in court,' " Kim said. "I want justice to be served in the court." Inside the restaurant, Shamsky bristled when asked about his ex-wife. "Why would you even ask me that question?" the agitated jock yelled. He was surrounded by teammates Bud Harrelson, Ed Kranepool and Ron Swoboda at the event, where attendees paid $75 for lunch and a copy of Shamsky's book, "The Magnificent Seasons." The former big-leaguer hit .300 with 14 home runs for the World Series-winning Amazin's in 1969. And he batted a torrid .538 in the National League Championship Series against Atlanta. The Mets went on to beat the Baltimore Orioles in the World Series for the team's first title. Kim has said she'll likely continue to publicly confront Shamsky - although she hasn't decided how often. With this year marking the 40th anniversary of the Miracle Mets and the new Citi Field opening in two months, reunions of that 1969 squad figure to be plentiful. In her lawsuit, Kim claimed Shamsky's infidelity led her to catch a sexually transmitted disease. She has purchased the rights to www.ArtShamskySucks.com to launch a safe-sex campaign - complete with T-shirts and condoms. "I'm waiting for my case to be settled, so I can have this campaign and show everything on this Web site - including all of Art's personal e-mails to show he did what he said he did not do," Kim said. Shamsky has denied all his ex-wife's allegations. Link to post Share on other sites
jenbobblehead Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Truck Day! Link to post Share on other sites
PigSooie Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 I love the picture with the dude hauling out the cases of deodorant. Link to post Share on other sites
IATTBYB Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 A-Roid? Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 7, 2009 Author Share Posted February 7, 2009 ^ It's o.k. because "everybody" did it. "You'll have to talk to the Union." Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Alex better rip shit up this season, especially in October, else it is going to be a long year for him. Like Phelps, he should just admit it - c'mon, FOUR independent sources? - show contrition and rip shit up. Link to post Share on other sites
dondoboy Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 I wonder what this news means to all those who wrote off Bonds breaking Hank's record by saying, "Well, A-Rod will pass him and everything will be ok again". Seems like that argument just flew out the window. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 7, 2009 Author Share Posted February 7, 2009 Seems like all arguments about these uber-players go out the window. I'm really tired of hearing that everybody was juicing when, in fact, not everybody was. It's an insult to players who didn't hit milestones or big contracts while playing within the rules of the game and the law. The sad part is that the majority of these guys would have been just as good had they maintained some integrity. Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Here is the thing about steroids and baseball. MLB itself has to put a lot of blame on itself with their lack of effort in dealing with the problem. From the article "Though MLB's drug policy has expressly prohibited the use of steroids without a valid prescription since 1991, there were no penalties for a positive test in 2003." Regardless if Bonds, A-Rod, whomever had a positive test in 2003 or prior MLB had no consequences for those actions. Heck, who is to say that with a positive test they did not have a valid prescription for it? MLB has to live with the mess they made. No player should be denied entry to the Hall of Fame for "suspicion" of steroid. And No player should be denied entry to the hall of fame even if a positive test was proven prior to 2003. However a plaque needs to be put up in the Hall of Fame saying "from 1991 - 2003 steroid use was thought to be common in baseball, and was not strictly prohibited by MLB. Many of the players from this era may or may have taken performance enhancing substances and as a result may have inflated numbers. There is no way to to definitively determine whether or not a player from this era has used these substances." Or even better, have a display, that talks in detail about this era in baseball. It is a valuable learning tool and important, albeit regrettable, time in America's past-time. Doing something like this I believe would help to put to rest this whole steroid thing. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 7, 2009 Author Share Posted February 7, 2009 Horseshit. There was a rule in place. Some people ignored it. Some people got caught ignoring it and now they need to face the penalty. MLB is certainly culpable to a degree. Yes, they were lax and looked away. However, it was/is still a personal decision to take HGH/PEDs. Nobody forced folks to break laws/MLB rules. Suck it up if you get nailed for it (is my take) and stop blaming the environment or whatever. If the BBWA doesn't look fondly on steroid users than so be it. MLB didn't create this. It's not a mess that "they" made. They are guilty of idly and passively allowing it to transpire but they did not introduce/create or facilitate illegal and anti MLB-policy drug use/cheating. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 I think the evidence is starting to mount that if everyone didn't do it, a large percentage of the best players in the game did. There are going to be plenty of guys out there who will simply get away with it. I really wouldn't be shocked if you gave me any name linked to steroid use. Bagwell? I could see it. Griffey? I've been thinking it for years. Pujols? He's either lying about his age or drinking steroid cocktails for breakfast. You'd have been an idiot to not take steroids before 2004. And Lammy, MLB didn't create this but: Because more than 5% of big leaguers had tested positive in 2003, baseball instituted a mandatory random-testing program, with penalties, in '04. According to the 2007 Mitchell Report on steroid use in baseball, in September 2004, Gene Orza, the chief operating officer of the players' union, violated an agreement with MLB by tipping off a player (not named in the report) about an upcoming, supposedly unannounced drug test. Three major league players who spoke to SI said that Rodriguez was also tipped by Orza in early September 2004 that he would be tested later that month. Rodriguez declined to respond on Thursday when asked about the warning Orza provided him. People all over baseball didn't want this to stop because there was too much money to be made by the players keeping up what they were doing. Link to post Share on other sites
dondoboy Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 [quote name='bobbob1313' date='Feb 7 2009, 02:09 PM' post='1277025' You'd have been an idiot to not take steroids before 2004.That just makes me sad as a fan. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts