2010 MLB - Playoffs and hot stove!

[calvino]

Ken Burns new Baseball Doc had a very interesting take on the Steroid abuse scandal of tne 90's and its context in the tradition of cheating in baseball.

 

I heard it put in that context before and I have to agree with it. I thought part one was pretty good. Watching the part on the strike brought up a bunch of bad feelings all over again - the White Sox were in first place that year before the strike.

[Lammycat]

Ken Burns new Baseball Doc had a very interesting take on the Steroid abuse scandal of tne 90's and its context in the tradition of cheating in baseball.

Can you synthesze the "take" on it for me? I watched most of the show last night but had to leave at one point to chase down a missing dog.

[calvino]

The sense that players always tried to get around the rules: spit balls, cutting the baseballs with rings, and amphetamines.

Also some implied that if a drug like steroids were around during the Ruth/Mantle days they would have used them.

 

Hope you found the dog.

[cryptique]

Also some implied that if a drug like steroids were around during the Ruth/Mantle days they would have used them.

I'm uncomfortable when people make such (il-)logical leaps. There's simply no way to know what Ruth or Mantle would have done, and speculating about it is pointless, unless they're trying to justify today's rule-breaking, which is hardly a noble pursuit.

[calvino]

I'm uncomfortable when people make such (il-)logical leaps. There's simply no way to know what Ruth or Mantle would have done, and speculating about it is pointless, unless they're trying to justify today's rule-breaking, which is hardly a noble pursuit.

 

Well when faced with the argument of "the players back in my day would never have used anything to enhance their ability", I tend to roll my eyes. Some athletes want to be the best and they go about it which ever way the choose. During the late 90's/early 00's it was not against the rules to take the crap some were taking. I am not justifying it, because really there isn't anything to justify. Now it is against the rules, so any player found taking the stuff should be punished and they are.

 

I don't think the frame of mind of athletes have change all that much since the Ancient Greek days - they want to win and excel. Some decide to do things differently up until the rules catches up with them and they go on and find something different and rules are added again.......

 

And for the record I much prefer a finish of 1 to 0 in 20 innings to a 12 to 11 game in 9 innings any day.

 

Another thing that Burns pointed out was known cheaters (Fingers/Ford) are in the Hall of Fame.

Edited September 29, 2010 by calvino

[calvino]

I'm uncomfortable when people make such (il-)logical leaps. There's simply no way to know what Ruth or Mantle would have done, and speculating about it is pointless, unless they're trying to justify today's rule-breaking, which is hardly a noble pursuit.

 

View Post

calvino, on 29 September 2010 - 01:31 PM, said:

Also some implied that if a drug like steroids were around during the Ruth/Mantle days they would have used them.

 

Also, I poorly worded the above response. I didn't mean Ruth and Mantle specifically would have taken the drugs, I meant that if the drugs were around during each of their eras, some players may have taken them.

[Moss]

Chris Rock had an interesting take. If you could take a shot and double your salary, wouldn't you do it? (or something along those lines).

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

I'm uncomfortable when people make such (il-)logical leaps. There's simply no way to know what Ruth or Mantle would have done, and speculating about it is pointless, unless they're trying to justify today's rule-breaking, which is hardly a noble pursuit.

 

Well, Ruth and Mantle had no compunctions about abusing alcohol for pleasure. Is it such a stretch to assume that they would abuse steroids for furthering of professional abilities?

Really?

[bobbob1313]

Steroids and baseball? Who put up the Bobbob signal?

 

Hank Aaron admitted that he used greenies to try and improve his performance, and the only reason he did not continue to use them was because they did not improve his performance.

[cryptique]

Well, Ruth and Mantle had no compunctions about abusing alcohol for pleasure. Is it such a stretch to assume that they would abuse steroids for furthering of professional abilities?

Really?

It may not be a stretch, but no one can definitively say that because they drank, they also would have done steroids (or HGH, or whatever). Alcoholics have principles too.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

Steroids and baseball? Who put up the Bobbob signal?

 

Hank Aaron admitted that he used greenies to try and improve his performance, and the only reason he did not continue to use them was because they did not improve his performance.

 

I find it interesting and almost amusing how some want to put the players of yesteryear on pedestals. They were human and had the same competitive streak and desire to excell that modern players do. That combined with the winking acceptance of cheating in baseball leads to situation we have today.

[cryptique]

I find it interesting and almost amusing how some want to put the players of yesteryear on pedestals. They were human and had the same competitive streak and desire to excell that modern players do. That combined with the winking acceptance of cheating in baseball leads to situation we have today.

No mention of the millions of dollars that players make now? Huh.

 

It wasn't all that long ago that MLB players had jobs during the winter to make ends meet.

[The High Heat]

Steroids and baseball? Who put up the Bobbob signal?

 

Hank Aaron admitted that he used greenies to try and improve his performance, and the only reason he did not continue to use them was because they did not improve his performance.

Jim Bouton wrote about players on greenies in his 1969 memoir. Players have been taking things for performance for decades. Also in 1969, SI did a story on the relationship of professional sports and steroids, predicting a heavy increase of usage in the future. Management, media, and fans played dumb for a long time - well, until a televised congressional hearing anyway.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

No mention of the millions of dollars that players make now? Huh.

 

It wasn't all that long ago that MLB players had jobs during the winter to make ends meet.

 

Point being?

[rareair]

Point being?

 

they used to play more for the love of the game than today's players?

[bobbob1313]

I do not think that is true. If you gave them the option of doing their offseason job full time and baseball for free they would likely have responded the same way current players would.

[Sir Stewart]

While it's impossible to know either way, it helps to take the average player of today and the average player of yesteryear (let's say, 1934) each as children, and look at that kid's perspective looking to the future, considering baseball as an adult, professional pursuit. Today's players, no matter how in love with the game they may be, were also well aware that the game would (at the very least) take care of them financially. More likely, no current MLBer was playing baseball as a kid thinking "I'm gonna hit .200 lifetime in the majors and live comfortably during that time." They were all thinking "I am Junior Griffey." A kid in 1905 playing had no such delusions.

[cryptique]

Point being?

Point being that there is now a huge financial incentive to maximize your statistics, or keep your body functioning at a high enough level that you can stay in the majors.

 

There's always been an incentive -- being an MLB player has always been a pretty cool job, after all, even when it didn't pay all that well -- but in today's majors, if you have one great year and get signed to an eight-figure multi-year contract with much of that money guaranteed, you've set yourself up for a lifetime of luxury (unless you manage your money poorly). Keep playing well and you might get to sign another one of those contracts, setting your great-grandchildren up for life. Fifty or sixty years ago you might have been able to sign a large (for the time) contract, but it wasn't likely to make you a rich man for life.

 

And just to be clear: I'm not saying that players in the past absolutely wouldn't have used PEDs. I'm just saying that there is a larger incentive to do so now. So let's not waste too much time speculating about what Babe Ruth or Mickey Mantle or any other past player might have done -- we weren't there, neither were these substances, and we'll never truly know the answer.

[u2roolz]

 

I figured I'd take us back to talking about this current closing weekend of the 2010 MLB regular season.

 

It will be quite an exciting weekend and we'll know where the pieces fit for the Post Season.

 

NL East Champion Phillies take on the Wild Card leading Braves in a weekend matchup that could send the Braves home a tad bit early, if they sweep them and the Padres win. (side note: I almost shit my pants when I clicked on the MLB site for the current standings and it was set to 2002. I thought I may have been in a coma to see the AL West belong to the A's.)

 

NL Wild Card:

Atlanta Braves -----

San Diego Padres 1.5 GB

 

NL West

San Francisco Giants ---

San Diego Padres 2 GB

NL West leading Giants take on the Padres (this weekend) who may wind up as the Wild Card or the NL West Champions, if they can sweep in San Francisco.

 

AL East

Tampa Bay Rays ---

New York Yankees .5 GB

 

The Rays finish off their season in Kansas City, while the Yankees go to Boston for 3. As I said on page 3 of this thread, I thought that the Red Sox would play spoilers for the AL East. Well, last weekend they almost swept the Yankees at their home. With the Yankees current pitching problems, I don't see them going very far. Once you get past Sabathia and Hughes, the rest of their pitching is so-so (Burnett, Vazquez, & Pettitte). Some analysts have said that they may sit out Burnett until the ALCS...if they get that far.

 

Current Playoff Picture:

ALDS: Rays Vs Rangers

ALDS: Yankees Vs Twins

 

NLDS: Phillies Vs. Giants

NLDS: Reds Vs. Braves

[Guest Jules]

"playing for the love of the game" = complete bullshit

[rareair]

"playing for the love of the game" = complete bullshit

 

maybe. but players in prior eras were not as focused on $, which is what I meant.

[Guest Jules]

maybe. but players in prior eras were not as focused on $, which is what I meant.

you have no way of knowing this.

[rareair]

you have no way of knowing this.

 

i have a way of believing this and articulating it. you have a way of disagreeing with it.

[cryptique]

you have no way of knowing this.

Um, yeah, actually we do. Ballplayers haven't always been highly paid. That's a relatively recent phenomenon, with a few notable exceptions.

 

It was a way to make a living, but not really a way to get rich.

[Guest Jules]

Doesn't mean they were any less "focused on $".