Power Pros Forum

He will, players like Pettitte, Tejada that were in the Mitchell Report were all in the 08 version.

they'lll be a great anyway, and you can always edit.

Calm down guys.

The way I see it, depending on how this story unravels, he will never make it to the hall of fame, home run king or not, IF he took steroids. This is going to forever change him, but like I said it's all going to depend on how this story unfolds.

It's kind of funny how cownip and I were arguing about him and steroids and now.....


It's also interesing how this shows up after the "Yankee Years" is out.

I guess his teammates rightfully did call him "A-Fraud".

One of the staff members said he was sure he was on performance-enhancing drugs. He said that the time in the weight room and his performance just didn't add up. Something like that.

yep.
the guy he told it to (VP of baseball operations or something) "doesn't recall the conversation".

After reading the SI story, and the 400+ commentaries at about 13:00 hrs on saturday, there are a few interesting points about this whole mess:

1. Rodriguez's name is the only one who is leaked from the tests. If there were 103 other players who tested positive, the fair thing to do is to make the list public. Let all get the blame, not just the biggest superstar.

2. Why now? Why a week from spring training?

3. I know that back then taking steroids wasn't illegal in the sport sense. But for me, it still feels like cheating. There's a stigma about them, but for me it isn't about being on the drugs or not. It's about taking that choice, a choice to win even if you have to cheat. If it wasn't illegal, why not go public about it? "I take performance enhancing drugs because I want to win no matter what". Even with that, there'd be a stigma, because then us fans would think that he'd be no good without the PEDs.

over most of major league baseball's history (going back to the 1800s), steroids was never a major issue until the first of two new substance policies were implemented in 2005, this first one starting in time for the season of that year. that's 2 years before this specific test indicates that a-rod was 'roiding up. the early 2005 rule only gave players a slap on the wrist so to speak for their first few offenses and this program replaced the previous steroid testing program under which, no player was even suspended in 2004. it seems ridiculous to treat a-rod as if he was some sort of super villain committing the most heinous crime when steroids were basically ok to use during that time and for a hundred years before this in the history of the game. we can find lists of players past and present on every team that have 'roided up or have taken substances which are now banned in baseball. if he is guilty of taking steroids after the now current penalties were introduced in november '05 then let the media have a field day but until then they should be focusing on the real criminals of the world.

he did not get penalized

That comes as no surprise.

A-Rod will still make the HOF anyway. 500 HR club are like "100%" HOF club, well if you don't take steroids. If Gary Sheffield makes it, A-Rod will amke it. Anyway, his post-steroid numbers are also very impressive.

I don't want to talk too much about this, because it still kind of hurts. But I just want to make one point. In the New York times on Saturday, there were two pictures of A-Rod, one with the Rangers, one with the Yankees. He looked a decent amount slimmer with the Yankees and his shoulders aren't nearly as broad as they used to be. Maybe I'm clinging to false hope, but because of this I think there's a pretty good chance he's not taking it anymore (plus he's been test several times since then). That photo was in 05, his MVP year.

You kind of gotta feel for A-Rod at this point. He's lost his family, his kids, and now this. True, he may have brought it aLL on himself, but still. I mean the New York media is pretty vicious with the New York Daily News and New York Post gossip (which I hate, with a passion). If he's no longer taking them, then I wish this never came out.
Edit:
Catcher, the test taking in 2003 were supposed to be anoynoumous. Players were promises that no one, not even the testers would see the individual results and nothing would be made public. About 130 players were tested, and a suprisingly high 5% were positive. Before this, steroids were not illegal in baseball. After that test, they created the penalties and random testing. A-Rod and other players who tested positive were notified, and all that would have been tested were promised the results and samples would be destroyed. Whoever told Sports Illustrated the results did so illegally, and if the players union found out, the person would no longer have access to such results and would possibly get sued. So from a legal standpoint, theses results should never have been released.

This also might explain why/if A-Rod stopped taking steroids since they started testing them. If that is true, then his best years with the exception of 03 were leginimite. I hope so, but I really don't know. If he stopped in 2003 and continues to do something remotely like he's done since then in the future, then I believe he will be a hall-of-famer. Right now is not a good time to evaluate it as we are all too biased, but in 2022, we may feel differently (his contract ends in 2017, 5 years before a player is elligible for the hall-of-fame). That would be 14 years of no steroids, a very good sample.

Keep in mind that just because someone hasn't tested positive that he is clean. There are masking agents, new steroids designed to stay in your system for a shorter time, and the possibility of being notified in advance of the tests. Did you know that the drug testers are contracted by MLB and notify team officials when they're doing the test in order to set up space for them in the locker rooms?

And then there's HGH, for which there is currently no reliable test for urine. There is for blood, but the union won't agree to that.

MLB and the union has made a messy situation even messier. I don't understand why the 2003 tests weren't destoyed. The initial punishments were a joke (10 games for a first offense) that prompted Congress to hold hearings.

I hope that they will eventually be pushed to fix the steroid policy: having an independent testing organization, really testing randomly, and having Olympic-style punishments (1 or 2 years for first offense, lifetime for second).

Beat me to it with that link. I personally believe him, but I understand those who don't. Now I think 1-2 years is too strong, but the punishments should be higher. I also believe that every two years (starting two years after the original sample), they should retest old samples with new testing technology and promising that old samples that are now positive will be grounds for punishment, as will samples for the next year and the year after that. After 6-10 years (the number would be decided by the MLB and Player's Union), the samples would no longer be tested, you wouldn't want to retest samples 30 years from now.

Edit:
Rockbard, in answer to one of your questions, Sports Illustrated is a news magazine (for sports), and like any form of news, their goal is to sell as many coppies as possible. They waited till the best possible time for their sales while making sure another source didn't get to the news first. People are starting to get excited about Baseball, there was no news for Sports Illustrated to really cover, and it didn't have to compete with headlines from the MLB, NFL or Tennis (Well, there's the NBA, but it's not nearly as popular, and the NHL, but no one watches that on TV, only in person).

Wow... I'm really surprised.

At least he was smart and just admitted it. It seems the players that are going this route are dealing with a lot less stress from the public.