PDA

View Full Version : Rumored Steroid List



smith288
06-30-2009, 09:41 AM
Here is the rumored list. I bolded names of interest to a Reds fan.

http://rotoinfo.com/read_article.php?articleId=318

Rumored steroid list (UNCONFIRMED)

1.Nomar Garciaparra
2.Manny Ramirez
3.Johnny Damon
4.Trot Nixon
5.David Ortiz
6.Shea Hillenbrand
7.Derek Lowe
8.Pedro Martinez
9.Brian Roberts
10.Jay Gibbons
11.Melvin Mora
12.Jerry Hairston
13.Jason Giambi
14.Alfonso Soriano
15.Raul Mondesi
16. Aaron Boone
17.Andy Pettitte
18.Jose Contreras
19.Roger Clemens
20.Carlos Delgado
21.Vernon Wells
22.Frank Catalanotto
23.Kenny Rogers
24.Magglio Ordonez
25.Sandy Alomar
26.Bartolo Colon
27.Brent Abernathy
28.Jose Lima
29.Milton Bradley
30.Casey Blake
31.Danys Baez
32.Craig Monroe
33.Dmitri Young
34.Alex Sanchez
35.Eric Chavez
36.Miguel Tejada
37.Eric Byrnes
38.Jose Guillen
39.Keith Foulke
40.Ricardo Rincon
41.Bret Boone
42.Mike Cameron
43.Randy Winn
44.Ryan Franklin
45.Freddy Garcia
46.Rafael Soriano
47.Scott Spiezio
48.Troy Glaus
49.Francisco Rodriguez
50.Ben Weber
51.Alex Rodriguez
52.Juan Gonzalez
53.Rafael Palmeiro
54.Carl Everett
55.Javy Lopez
56.Gary Sheffield
57.Mike Hampton
58.Ivan Rodriguez
59.Derrek Lee
60.Bobby Abreu
61.Terry Adams
62.Fernando Tatis
63.Livan Hernandez
64.Hector Almonte
65.Tony Armas
66.Dan Smith
67.Roberto Alomar
68.Cliff Floyd
69.Roger Cedeno
70.Jeromy Burnitz
71.Moises Alou
72.Sammy Sosa
73.Corey Patterson
74.Carlos Zambrano
75.Mark Prior
76.Kerry Wood
77.Matt Clement
78.Antonio Alfonseca
79.Juan Cruz
80.Aramis Ramirez
81.Craig Wilson
82.Kris Benson
83.Richie Sexson
84.Geoff Jenkins
85.Valerio de los Santos
86.Benito Santiago
87.Rich Aurilia
88.Barry Bonds
89.Andres Galarraga
90.Jason Schmidt
91.Felix Rodriguez
92.Jason Christiansen
93.Matt Herges
94.Paul Lo Duca
95.Shawn Green
96.Oliver Perez
97.Adrian Beltre
98.Eric Gagne
99.Guillermo Mota
100.Luis Gonzalez
101.Todd Helton
102.Ryan Klesko
103.Gary Matthews

Degenerate39
06-30-2009, 09:43 AM
Corey Patterson?!? He couldn't hit WITH steroids

Hoosier Red
06-30-2009, 09:47 AM
I knew as soon as I saw a discussion on the ethics of posting the list that I'd be able to find it here. Good work Smith.

Homer Bailey
06-30-2009, 09:47 AM
Corey Patterson?!? He couldn't hit WITH steroids

Either way, he wasn't taking enough.

cumberlandreds
06-30-2009, 09:47 AM
Some of those guys need a refund. It didn't work. :)

smith288
06-30-2009, 09:51 AM
There was a discussion? :P

guttle11
06-30-2009, 09:57 AM
You know, looking at that list it's easy to see why the Reds didn't win...

The 2003 Cubs:

71.Moises Alou
72.Sammy Sosa
73.Corey Patterson
74.Carlos Zambrano
75.Mark Prior
76.Kerry Wood

LincolnparkRed
06-30-2009, 09:58 AM
this was from 2003 right, lots of Cubs, Red Sox, Dodgers, Yankees. Almost the final four teams that year, just missing many Marlins other than I-Rod and DLee

Big Klu
06-30-2009, 10:02 AM
I'm assuming you are bolding names of current or former Reds. Add #42 Mike Cameron.

HotCorner
06-30-2009, 10:02 AM
Interesting that the Cubs entire rotation of that season is on the list.

Didn't Todd Helton threaten to sue someone over allegations that he took an illegal substance?

A lot of big names on this list.

Chip R
06-30-2009, 10:03 AM
You know, looking at that list it's easy to see why the Reds didn't win...

The 2003 Cubs:

71.Moises Alou
72.Sammy Sosa
73.Corey Patterson
74.Carlos Zambrano
75.Mark Prior
76.Kerry Wood


I think it was more

Danny Graves
Paul Wilson
Ryan Dempster
Jimmy Haynes
Jimmy Anderson

OnBaseMachine
06-30-2009, 10:04 AM
If that list is true, then it appears as if half the Cubs players were on steroids. Carlos Zambrano, Kerry Wood, Mark Prior, Derrek Lee, Aramis Ramirez, Corey Patterson, Sammy Sosa, Juan Cruz, Matt Clement...

Perhaps the most shocking name is Todd Helton.

HotCorner
06-30-2009, 10:05 AM
Yeah maybe Dusty didn't kill Prior's and Wood's arms but rather the 'riods.

bucksfan2
06-30-2009, 10:07 AM
There were only two surprises for me. Felix Hernandez and Todd Helton. I never thought Helton would be on the list. Hernandez was awfully young at the time to be on the juice.

This list sure makes Larkin's HOF chances almost a lock and Jr may be remembered as the best of an era.

flyer85
06-30-2009, 10:07 AM
pretty much any latin american player worth anything is on the list ... which is not surprising

now we know how the sox won ... they had a team loaded with cheaters

Homer Bailey
06-30-2009, 10:09 AM
Lee and Soriano weren't on that Cubs team yet, but Mousis Alou was. I'm surprised we didn't see Bartman on that list.

OnBaseMachine
06-30-2009, 10:09 AM
There were only two surprises for me. Felix Hernandez and Todd Helton. I never thought Helton would be on the list. Hernandez was awfully young at the time to be on the juice.

This list sure makes Larkin's HOF chances almost a lock and Jr may be remembered as the best of an era.

Felix Rodriguez, not Felix Hernandez.

Big Klu
06-30-2009, 10:11 AM
This smells like the Pittsburgh drug trials all over again.

guttle11
06-30-2009, 10:11 AM
now we know how the sox won ... they had a team loaded with cheaters

They cowboy'd up, that's for sure.

HeatherC1212
06-30-2009, 10:11 AM
If that list is true, then it appears as if half the Cubs players were on steroids. Carlos Zambrano, Kerry Wood, Mark Prior, Derrek Lee, Aramis Ramirez, Corey Patterson, Sammy Sosa, Juan Cruz, Matt Clement...

Perhaps the most shocking name is Todd Helton.

That's the one that jumped out at me too. :eek:

BTW-A few of these guys have all ready either been caught, admitted to past use (I think JHJ admitted to HGH use a while back but I could be wrong), or were rumored to have been on something for a while now (i.e. Clemens, Bonds). I know most of the Orioles on this list have either been caught or talked about their past all ready (Brian Roberts and Jay Gibbons come to mind who have all ready talked about their pasts) but some of these other names are somewhat surprising. I'm very surprised to see Helton, Trot Nixon, Casey Blake, Scott Spezio, and Eric Byrnes on this list only because I'd never heard anything about any of them being suspected of drug use in the past. Interesting names although for some reason, Carlos Zambrano being on the list doesn't shock me at all, LOL :laugh:

Big Klu
06-30-2009, 10:12 AM
Yeah maybe Dusty didn't kill Prior's and Wood's arms but rather the 'riods.

Exactly what I was thinking.

smith288
06-30-2009, 10:14 AM
That's the one that jumped out at me too. :eek:

BTW-A few of these guys have all ready either been caught, admitted to past use (I think JHJ admitted to HGH use a while back but I could be wrong), or were rumored to have been on something for a while now (i.e. Clemens, Bonds). I know most of the Orioles on this list have either been caught or talked about their past all ready (Brian Roberts and Jay Gibbons come to mind who have all ready talked about their pasts) but some of these other names are somewhat surprising. I'm very surprised to see Helton, Trot Nixon, Casey Blake, Scott Spezio, and Eric Byrnes on this list only because I'd never heard anything about any of them being suspected of drug use in the past. Interesting names although for some reason, Carlos Zambrano being on the list doesn't shock me at all, LOL :laugh:
Seriously? You are shocked to see Spezio? Maybe you missed a comma because that guy was a druggy through and through.

OnBaseMachine
06-30-2009, 10:14 AM
It sucks seeing some of my favorite players on there like David Ortiz, Pedro Martinez, Gary Sheffield and then lesser names like Aaron and Bret Boone and Dmitri Young.

I'm just glad that Griffey's not on there.

Same with Vladimir Guerrero and Mike Piazza. I know some have suspected those two of doing sterioids but I never thought they did.

HeatherC1212
06-30-2009, 10:16 AM
Seriously? You are shocked to see Spezio? Maybe you missed a comma because that guy was a druggy through and through.

I guess I did miss something! I didn't follow him as much after he wasn't with the Angels anymore though so that could be why I missed it.

I have a few friends who are big Red Sox fans and I'm sure they're going to be upset to see this list with some of their fave RS guys on it. My one friend who is a Cubs fan is out of town but I'm sure she'll hear about this list when she gets home. She'll probably be pretty bummed out too. She loves Derrick Lee. :eek:

westofyou
06-30-2009, 10:17 AM
This smells like the Pittsburgh drug trials all over again.

I was thinking more of the early 50's and not the 80's myself.

JaxRed
06-30-2009, 10:23 AM
No Griffey and no Pujols

cumberlandreds
06-30-2009, 10:32 AM
There were only two surprises for me. Felix Hernandez and Todd Helton. I never thought Helton would be on the list. Hernandez was awfully young at the time to be on the juice.

This list sure makes Larkin's HOF chances almost a lock and Jr may be remembered as the best of an era.

Helton's not for me. I've seen his name speculated on before.

Was every player tested? Or just a random number of players? If it was just a random number then, most likely, many more were doing it.

flyer85
06-30-2009, 10:35 AM
No Griffey and no Pujols
hardly any reds at all. I guess Aaron Boone and Guillen are the only ones who would have been a Red in 2003(both were traded mid-season)

Big Klu
06-30-2009, 10:36 AM
I was thinking more of the early 50's and not the 80's myself.

I was thinking about how some prominent names were caught in a scandal, and how IMO it has affected the Hall Of Fame chances for some of them, such as Tim Raines, Dave Parker, and Keith Hernandez.

TRF
06-30-2009, 10:46 AM
I was thinking about how some prominent names were caught in a scandal, and how IMO it has affected the Hall Of Fame chances for some of them, such as Tim Raines, Dave Parker, and Keith Hernandez.

Parker and Hernandez have the stigma of cocaine, and that one isn't easily shaked. I don't remember Raines' scandal, but he should be a HOF.

_Sir_Charles_
06-30-2009, 10:49 AM
Yeah maybe Dusty didn't kill Prior's and Wood's arms but rather the 'riods.

As for me, I've never bought that theory. Their mechanics killed Prior's & Wood's arms...not Dusty. He may have overworked them occasionally, but not drastically.

BCubb2003
06-30-2009, 10:50 AM
Parker and Hernandez have the stigma of cocaine, and that one isn't easily shaked. I don't remember Raines' scandal, but he should be a HOF.

That was a grim time. Didn't Tim "Rock" Raines carry it around in his back pocket on the field?

Sea Ray
06-30-2009, 10:52 AM
Are we sure every player on that list was tested? As I recall some players refused tests. Some claim they wanted testing to occur so in order to raise the number of positive tests they refused testing. I wonder if Helton was one of those

westofyou
06-30-2009, 10:52 AM
I was thinking about how some prominent names were caught in a scandal, and how IMO it has affected the Hall Of Fame chances for some of them, such as Tim Raines, Dave Parker, and Keith Hernandez.

True, I see a real division in the work force that leads to supposed lists, whispers, hearings, people being thrown in front of a bus by other players.

A real passion play, the essence of life.. and as we know baseball mirrors society better than any other sport.

Stephenk29
06-30-2009, 10:59 AM
The amount of big names on this list is just sad, but not in the least bit surprising.

smith288
06-30-2009, 11:06 AM
Are we sure every player on that list was tested? As I recall some players refused tests. Some claim they wanted testing to occur so in order to raise the number of positive tests they refused testing. I wonder if Helton was one of those
I wonder if those who refused were placed on this list?

Big Klu
06-30-2009, 11:06 AM
Parker and Hernandez have the stigma of cocaine, and that one isn't easily shaked. I don't remember Raines' scandal, but he should be a HOF.


That was a grim time. Didn't Tim "Rock" Raines carry it around in his back pocket on the field?

Yes, Raines said that the reason he always slid head first was so that he wouldn't break the vial of cocaine in his back pocket.

Roy Tucker
06-30-2009, 01:39 PM
I wonder where they got the list? Nothing referenced, just a list.

Orenda
06-30-2009, 01:46 PM
I wonder where they got the list? Nothing referenced, just a list.

I was thinking the same thing. What makes this list legitimate?

bucksfan2
06-30-2009, 01:58 PM
I was thinking the same thing. What makes this list legitimate?

I have a feeling what is going to happen in the next few days will make this list legitimate. If a player mentioned on this list says "I never took steroids" I have a feeling that his name will be released off the official list very quickly.

jojo
06-30-2009, 02:03 PM
There were only two surprises for me. Felix Hernandez and Todd Helton. I never thought Helton would be on the list. Hernandez was awfully young at the time to be on the juice.

This list sure makes Larkin's HOF chances almost a lock and Jr may be remembered as the best of an era.

Felix Hernandez is NOT on that list.

smith288
06-30-2009, 02:04 PM
I was thinking the same thing. What makes this list legitimate?
Nobody said it was, it says "rumored" which doesnt make it necessarily legitimate. Its for discussion.

The names on the list makes it seem pretty plausible.

flyer85
06-30-2009, 02:05 PM
Felix Hernandez is NOT on that list.
seeing as the list is from 2003 he was in the minors.

bucksfan2
06-30-2009, 02:07 PM
Felix Hernandez is NOT on that list.

I know it was Felix Rodriguez, sorry for the mistake.

KoryMac5
06-30-2009, 02:10 PM
This thing is going to continue to hang over MLB like a black cloud until its finally released.

Caveat Emperor
06-30-2009, 02:14 PM
Intuitively, it seems like there are too many "big" names on this list. If you'd asked me to make a list of players on the juice, I'd have guessed there would be a lot more fringe big-leaguers (25th men, relievers, etc.) on there who juiced to help make the jump from AAA to the majors as opposed to superstars.

We'll see if this is real or not.

BTW -- does it make me a bad person that I'm a little disappointed that Albert Pujols ISN'T on this list? ;)

reds44
06-30-2009, 02:37 PM
Ben Weber, now there's a name I never thought I would see again.

Brutus
06-30-2009, 02:47 PM
I actually can't say I would be surprised by Todd Helton. At the time, I never would have suspected it. However, I've been thinking the last year or two that he seems a lot more slender than he was several years ago. The way he seemed to tail off a few years ago and now he's sort of reinvented himself as a hitter makes me suspect he is a candidate.

Big Klu
06-30-2009, 02:51 PM
I actually can't say I would be surprised by Todd Helton. At the time, I never would have suspected it. However, I've been thinking the last year or two that he seems a lot more slender than he was several years ago. The way he seemed to tail off a few years ago and now he's sort of reinvented himself as a hitter makes me suspect he is a candidate.

Helton did play football at Tennessee. While I'm not saying that all (or even most) football players "shoot up", it's a fact that some of them have taken things to help add muscle mass.

Another ex-Red on the list: #86 Benito Santiago

Hoosier Red
06-30-2009, 02:57 PM
BTW -- does it make me a bad person that I'm a little disappointed that Albert Pujols ISN'T on this list? ;)

My friend who's a Cubs' fan said, "Well, out of 104 names what 10 have been revealed? I hope the other 94 are all Albert Pujols."

RED VAN HOT
06-30-2009, 03:08 PM
I noticed that the names in which WJ was known to show interest, Holliday, Dye, DeRosa, are not on the list. Did he know something? Or, is he is simply more likely to pursue players with good character?

Also, several guys that were variously touted on this board, Beltre, Ordonez, Bradley, are on the list.

I was most surprised by Shawn Green.

bucksfan2
06-30-2009, 03:32 PM
My friend who's a Cubs' fan said, "Well, out of 104 names what 10 have been revealed? I hope the other 94 are all Albert Pujols."

For baseball's sake Pujols names needs to stay clean. Baseball needs its heroes, especially amongst the younger fan base. Once someone's name gets brought up in the steroid talk it shines a negative light on their entire career. So far Jeter and Jr. are two current stars who have kept their name completely clean, I hope Pujols does the same.

Sea Ray
06-30-2009, 03:55 PM
How 'bout Juan Cruz? He has just a little more meat on his bones than Michael Jackson...

Edskin
06-30-2009, 04:02 PM
I'm honestly at the point where I more or less ignore it. I pretty much assume that the majority of the players from that era were dirty, and I move on...

Sea Ray
06-30-2009, 04:03 PM
Remember 500 or so tested clean

Tom Servo
06-30-2009, 04:17 PM
The Nature Boy Rich Aurilia NOOOOOOOOOOOO

Chip R
06-30-2009, 04:30 PM
The Nature Boy Rich Aurilia NOOOOOOOOOOOO

traderumor
06-30-2009, 04:55 PM
I'm honestly at the point where I more or less ignore it. I pretty much assume that the majority of the players from that era were dirty, and I move on...But it pretty much invalidates the feats performed during that period. Millions of dollars were earned, contracts signed, ticket prices driven up, all on a fraudulent product. That is the bitter pill I am still trying to swallow.

RedEye
06-30-2009, 05:04 PM
If true, this list should put to rest for good the sort of rumors that link perceived body type to drug use (e.g., "He just doesn't look like a guy who is using.") Alfonso Soriano? Oliver Perez? Alex Sanchez?

Strikes Out Looking
06-30-2009, 05:10 PM
I'd like to know more about this "list" before I accept it as the gospel truth.

And since they didn't (don't) test for HGH, I'm not surprised Pujols isn't on it, which also leads me to believe this may not be an accurate list since Pettite said he used HGH, not hormones, IIRC.

Edskin
06-30-2009, 05:58 PM
But it pretty much invalidates the feats performed during that period. Millions of dollars were earned, contracts signed, ticket prices driven up, all on a fraudulent product. That is the bitter pill I am still trying to swallow.

I totally agree... well to a certain extent I guess.

It absolutely tarnishes the history of the game, no doubt. But because we'll never truly be able to find out all the facts, all the names, all the dates, etc. I think we simply need to paint the era with a broad brush and accept it for what it is.

We should just acknowledge that it is a tainted era in baseball history and all records, championships, etc. should be noted as having taken place during that time period. To pick and choose who was dirty and who was clean seems silly to me-- we'll never know for sure.

Having said that, is cheating cheating? Or is setroids a more distasteful way to cheat?

What I mean is I do find it funny that we take things like the spitball, scuffing, stealing signs, and the like as all part of baseball lore-- but not really "cheating" per se.

It may have been Pete Rose who said a large number of players in the 70's dared not take the field "naked"-- meaning they couldn't play without first taking their "greenies"-- which are basically uppers or amphetameines. Those drugs may not have enhanced a player's strength, but if they indeed helped them play better or at least stay on the field consistently, they too, are in essence, PED'S.

And as has also been mentioned in this thread, a little bit before the steroid era, we had the "coke" era where players throughout MLB were sniffing before, during, and after games.

I'm not defending the setroid era by any means, but let's also not let nostalgia cloud our judgements on the players who came before these guys.

jojo
06-30-2009, 06:19 PM
Is this really an issue at this point?

traderumor
06-30-2009, 06:45 PM
I totally agree... well to a certain extent I guess.

It absolutely tarnishes the history of the game, no doubt. But because we'll never truly be able to find out all the facts, all the names, all the dates, etc. I think we simply need to paint the era with a broad brush and accept it for what it is.

We should just acknowledge that it is a tainted era in baseball history and all records, championships, etc. should be noted as having taken place during that time period. To pick and choose who was dirty and who was clean seems silly to me-- we'll never know for sure.

Having said that, is cheating cheating? Or is setroids a more distasteful way to cheat?

What I mean is I do find it funny that we take things like the spitball, scuffing, stealing signs, and the like as all part of baseball lore-- but not really "cheating" per se.

It may have been Pete Rose who said a large number of players in the 70's dared not take the field "naked"-- meaning they couldn't play without first taking their "greenies"-- which are basically uppers or amphetameines. Those drugs may not have enhanced a player's strength, but if they indeed helped them play better or at least stay on the field consistently, they too, are in essence, PED'S.

And as has also been mentioned in this thread, a little bit before the steroid era, we had the "coke" era where players throughout MLB were sniffing before, during, and after games.

I'm not defending the setroid era by any means, but let's also not let nostalgia cloud our judgements on the players who came before these guys.It is obvious that the use of steroids had a much greater impact on the game overall than someone using stimulants, some of which had dubious impact on performance. Players were doing things in baseball that had never been done before or may never be done again. I think it is hard to argue that greenies or coke had near the impact on the game, both from a gameplay and a financial standpoint. It has nothing to do with relative evils, but the clear exponential impact that steroids had over anything else that might technically fit the defintion of PED.

traderumor
06-30-2009, 06:47 PM
Is this really an issue at this point?Understanding leads to policy and prevention.

If you know all you want to know about the subject, it is certainly your perogative to "mark forum read" without ever opening this thread :cool:

klw
06-30-2009, 07:24 PM
If this list is legit I owe Steve Finley an apology.

BoydsOfSummer
06-30-2009, 09:51 PM
I think it was more

Danny Graves
Paul Wilson
Ryan Dempster
Jimmy Haynes
Jimmy Anderson

You mean these guys could have been replacement level and didn't partake? C'mon, take one for the team guys!

Raisor
06-30-2009, 10:15 PM
If this list is legit I owe Steve Finley an apology.

I'm sure he and his young body will accept.


Wait, that was creepy wasn't it?

HokieRed
06-30-2009, 10:16 PM
If the bold type was for anybody ever in a Reds uniform, I think Felix Rodriguez should also be in bold. I think we had him at one time.

BCubb2003
06-30-2009, 10:21 PM
If this list is legit I owe Steve Finley an apology.

I'm not convinced it is.

Edskin
06-30-2009, 10:24 PM
It is obvious that the use of steroids had a much greater impact on the game overall than someone using stimulants, some of which had dubious impact on performance. Players were doing things in baseball that had never been done before or may never be done again. I think it is hard to argue that greenies or coke had near the impact on the game, both from a gameplay and a financial standpoint. It has nothing to do with relative evils, but the clear exponential impact that steroids had over anything else that might technically fit the defintion of PED.

Fair enough. Basically, all cheaters are not created equal.

jojo
06-30-2009, 11:38 PM
Understanding leads to policy and prevention.

If you know all you want to know about the subject, it is certainly your perogative to "mark forum read" without ever opening this thread :cool:

It begs the question that this list leads to any understanding that would lead to meaningful policy and prevention.

Neither the owners, the commish, nor the union care to really "understand" this issue and they have been overtly sticking their heads in the sand and playing shell games concerning their "efforts" to investigate. Lots of hand waving to appease but no real substance concerning the scope of substance abuse in mlb. Until they do actually get serious about defining the issue, all of the titillation lists like these provide don't amount to a hill of beans concerning policy and prevention.

So we're left with old news being spun as if it's revealing something....

backbencher
07-01-2009, 01:48 AM
So we're left with old news being spun as if it's revealing something....

It's only "old news" if the public knew it before. Did it?

I am skeptical as to whether this is "the" list, for the reasons that Caveat Emptor said - this list seems to have too many "big" names, and not enough small ones. Plus, there is only one Giambi.

I'm also generally opposed to the release of the list, as the owners and union agreed that it would be confidential, and I would prefer to honor that agreement for the sake of the players who believed their union, even if it gave bad advice on this point.

That said, if the correct list were released, I could see plenty of value. For example,

* Those of us who would like to thank the players who intentionally avoided the 2003 tests in order to trigger the permanent testing protocol are one step closer to finding out whom to thank.

* Those of us who want to get the juice out of baseball have one more avenue to apply pressure where the commissioner, owners and union have not.

* Players who might otherwise be inclined to juice will have own more reason to beware the consequences. There also would be one more reinforcement of the notion that cheaters never prosper.

* Players are less likely to make it into the Hall of Fames based in part on a fraud. Conversely, some greats of prior eras (Concepcion and Larkin, to name two) will have their memories viewed in more appropriate historical perspective.

* GMs who want to build teams in a less-juiced era will have a better idea of the appropriate precedents. The Twins, for example, seem to have few if any players on this list. The Moneyball A's? Perhaps it will be more difficult to find teams with the same combination of plate-discipline-and-power.

* Folks who like to use statistics to better understand that game will have a better understanding of their data sets. Some enterprising kid may, for example, come up with a "juice factor" like we have park factors.

* Ken Griffey, the greatest player of the 90s, will make it through the trash that ESPN through at him for more than a decade while it promoted frauds and charlatans of every stripe. The Worldwide Leader may even apologize. OK, that's not realistic.

* Some player who was outed may reciprocate by revealing the direct, hands-on complicity of a front office or the union.

* If the Q rating of guys on the list take a hit - and they will - future players will be less likely to use, as the financial risk will be quicker and more efficient.

* Guys who were unfairly under suspicion - Steve Finley was mentioned upthread - may obtain some peace. (Not complete peace, of course. But they probably appreciate every bit that they get.)

* No one trusts the owners as it is. But players may be less likely to support their "we'll cover your crimes, don't fret your health" union when they realize that the union dished out some pretty piss-poor advice on this one.

* As more casual fans realize who endemic juice is/was, the genie is less likely to go back in the bottle.

* An identified test population of juicers may give us a group to monitor for the long-term effects of steroids, both in terms of performance (there's a separate thread talking about the possible anti-aging effects) and health. It would be a crude sample, of course, but it's a start.

* If there is a list, it can debunk some potentially spurious statements, which might include those of Miguel "Vitamins" Tejada, Alex "Only with the Rangers" Rodriguez and Andy "Two Times" Pettite.

* Fans who want to r.oot for players, or push for trades, can do so with a bit better knowledge of the source of players' talents

* Those of us outside baseball can catch up a bit, knowledge-wise, with those in baseball who have known a lot more about juicing than us for years.

* We also can evaluate some of the things that we have been told publicly, whether by the media or by the Mitchell Report. The Mitchell Report missed a lot of names, for instance. And there seem to be a whole lot of Red Sox names on this particular list - if the list bears out, what would you think of Peter Gammons' sources?

Anyway, I'm sure that there are values. This is just what I thought of off the top of my head.

cincinnati chili
07-01-2009, 03:06 AM
Didn't Todd Helton threaten to sue someone over allegations that he took an illegal substance?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/123154-the-case-against-todd-helton-a-great-player-with-two-phenomenal-seasons

In March 2005, former Rockies broadcaster Wayne Hagin suggested that Helton had used some kind of banned substance. “I'm going to say something that is the absolute truth, and he will be mad at me for saying it if it gets out, but Todd Helton, a tremendously gifted baseball player, he tried it. I know he tried it because Don Baylor told me.”

Hagin continued, “He said to me, ‘I told him to get off the juice, that he was a player who didn't need that, get off it. It made him into a robot at first base defensively, and may have altered his swing.' He got off it, but he is not unlike so many athletes who have tried it because they wanted to get into that level playing field."

Helton was furious, saying, “I would like to extend a hunting trip to him deep in the woods somewhere.” Hagin backed down quickly, retracted his statement and said he was referring to legal supplements.

[To clarify, when Hagin backed off, I believe he claimed to be referring to Andro - a substance that was both legal and permitted at the time. To my knowledge, Helton has never forgiven Hagin, who is now a Mets broadcaster.]

jojo
07-01-2009, 07:19 AM
It's only "old news" if the public knew it before. Did it?

I am skeptical as to whether this is "the" list, for the reasons that Caveat Emptor said - this list seems to have too many "big" names, and not enough small ones. Plus, there is only one Giambi.

I'm also generally opposed to the release of the list, as the owners and union agreed that it would be confidential, and I would prefer to honor that agreement for the sake of the players who believed their union, even if it gave bad advice on this point.

That said, if the correct list were released, I could see plenty of value. For example,

* Those of us who would like to thank the players who intentionally avoided the 2003 tests in order to trigger the permanent testing protocol are one step closer to finding out whom to thank.

* Those of us who want to get the juice out of baseball have one more avenue to apply pressure where the commissioner, owners and union have not.

* Players who might otherwise be inclined to juice will have own more reason to beware the consequences. There also would be one more reinforcement of the notion that cheaters never prosper.

* Players are less likely to make it into the Hall of Fames based in part on a fraud. Conversely, some greats of prior eras (Concepcion and Larkin, to name two) will have their memories viewed in more appropriate historical perspective.

* GMs who want to build teams in a less-juiced era will have a better idea of the appropriate precedents. The Twins, for example, seem to have few if any players on this list. The Moneyball A's? Perhaps it will be more difficult to find teams with the same combination of plate-discipline-and-power.

* Folks who like to use statistics to better understand that game will have a better understanding of their data sets. Some enterprising kid may, for example, come up with a "juice factor" like we have park factors.

* Ken Griffey, the greatest player of the 90s, will make it through the trash that ESPN through at him for more than a decade while it promoted frauds and charlatans of every stripe. The Worldwide Leader may even apologize. OK, that's not realistic.

* Some player who was outed may reciprocate by revealing the direct, hands-on complicity of a front office or the union.

* If the Q rating of guys on the list take a hit - and they will - future players will be less likely to use, as the financial risk will be quicker and more efficient.

* Guys who were unfairly under suspicion - Steve Finley was mentioned upthread - may obtain some peace. (Not complete peace, of course. But they probably appreciate every bit that they get.)

* No one trusts the owners as it is. But players may be less likely to support their "we'll cover your crimes, don't fret your health" union when they realize that the union dished out some pretty piss-poor advice on this one.

* As more casual fans realize who endemic juice is/was, the genie is less likely to go back in the bottle.

* An identified test population of juicers may give us a group to monitor for the long-term effects of steroids, both in terms of performance (there's a separate thread talking about the possible anti-aging effects) and health. It would be a crude sample, of course, but it's a start.

* If there is a list, it can debunk some potentially spurious statements, which might include those of Miguel "Vitamins" Tejada, Alex "Only with the Rangers" Rodriguez and Andy "Two Times" Pettite.

* Fans who want to r.oot for players, or push for trades, can do so with a bit better knowledge of the source of players' talents

* Those of us outside baseball can catch up a bit, knowledge-wise, with those in baseball who have known a lot more about juicing than us for years.

* We also can evaluate some of the things that we have been told publicly, whether by the media or by the Mitchell Report. The Mitchell Report missed a lot of names, for instance. And there seem to be a whole lot of Red Sox names on this particular list - if the list bears out, what would you think of Peter Gammons' sources?

Anyway, I'm sure that there are values. This is just what I thought of off the top of my head.

Every one of these points could be shattered to smithereens by an honest attempt by baseball on this issue. We're left knowing very little new info but constructing arguments about the progress we're now able to make nonetheless....

Maybe baseball is taking care of business in a supersecret "there will be hidden victories" kind of a sense. Who knows for sure. But we won't know it and we shouldn't act like we do. As it stands, baseball has very little credibility in it's attempts regarding this problem. They've been 90% cosmetic and marketing damage control and really to the extent that many names have been leaked, it's been ownership acting in their own financial interests (which have nothing to do with a concern for the health of the game).

alexad
07-01-2009, 04:24 PM
If any of them get in, how do you keep Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe out of the Hall of Fame? A cheater is a cheater, right???? At least Pete bet on his own team to win every night.

westofyou
07-01-2009, 04:30 PM
If any of them get in, how do you keep Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe out of the Hall of Fame? A cheater is a cheater, right???? At least Pete bet on his own team to win every night.

Took a day... but he shall not be mentioned was indeed mentioned.

First of all this list has nothing to do with HOF, so that's a red herring

Second of all Pete Rose walked into a baseball clubhouse over 25 tousand times and the same notification was on the wall in every clubhouse, looks to me like he just blew that rule off. As far as who he bet on, we'll never know and I would not assume that I knew and neither should you. The man has lied for years.

backbencher
07-01-2009, 04:59 PM
First of all this list has nothing to do with HOF, so that's a red herring



This boggles the mind. At a minimum, confirmed or strongly-suspected juicers will get fewer votes. Mark McGwire is my evidence. At a maximum, they will be kept out.

A side effect likely will be the election of non-juicers, either because of ballot numbers or because their pre-juice numbers regain some of their luster. Would Rice have been elected if McGwire had been able to "talk about the past"? I don't know, but it's close.

As Tejada's numbers are diminshed, those of the other SSs on the HOF ballot - I think that there is only one in 2010 - look better.

(I agree that Rose is a false equivalent.)

westofyou
07-01-2009, 05:04 PM
This boggles the mind. At a minimum, confirmed or strongly-suspected juicers will get fewer votes. Mark McGwire is my evidence. At a maximum, they will be kept out.

A side effect likely will be the election of non-juicers, either because of ballot numbers or because their pre-juice numbers regain some of their luster. Would Rice have been elected if McGwire had been able to "talk about the past"? I don't know, but it's close.

As Tejada's numbers are diminshed, those of the other SSs on the HOF ballot - I think that there is only one in 2010 - look better.

(I agree that Rose is a false equivalent.)

Guys who did steroids will get in, it's unavoidable.

Pete Rose however will not get in.

backbencher
07-01-2009, 05:17 PM
Every one of these points could be shattered to smithereens by an honest attempt by baseball on this issue. We're left knowing very little new info but constructing arguments about the progress we're now able to make nonetheless....

Maybe baseball is taking care of business in a supersecret "there will be hidden victories" kind of a sense. Who knows for sure. But we won't know it and we shouldn't act like we do. As it stands, baseball has very little credibility in it's attempts regarding this problem. They've been 90% cosmetic and marketing damage control and really to the extent that many names have been leaked, it's been ownership acting in their own financial interests (which have nothing to do with a concern for the health of the game).

Non-sequitur.

Baseball's functionaries did a poor job of policing themselves in the past. That is no reason to continue to live with correctable sins.

Again, I do not want to see a real list from the 2003 tests publicized, because I sympathize with the players who subjected themselves to testing based on representations that the results would be sealed. BUT if you were a GM, could you honestly say that you would be utterly indifferent to whether a player you were looking to acquire - a Jermaine Dye or a Nick Swisher, to use two examples from this board - were on the list? No way. When determining whether players' peak years run from 26-30 or 28-32 or in some other range, is it worth knowing which members of your data set may have deflated during the test period? You bet.

When we discuss the history of the game, is Barry Larkin's place in the pantheon of greats not-quite-as-overshadowed by the "era of the offensive shortstop" if it turns out that three of the "big four" (ARod, Nomar, Tejada) are implicated as having had artificial assistance? Well, I find it interesting.

backbencher
07-01-2009, 05:26 PM
Guys who did steroids will get in, it's unavoidable.

Pete Rose however will not get in.

Sure, I agree on both. Just as I'm sure that there are HOF members guilty of the same crimes as Charlie Hustle.

But it's not a red herring to say that the HOF is part of these discussions. I'm sure that Mark McGwire doesn't think it's a red herring. If there is any truth to the Rotoworld list, I'm guessing that Raffy Palmiero, Robby Alomar and others won't see it as a red herring, either.

Roy Tucker
07-01-2009, 05:40 PM
It will be interesting to see how steroid usage will affect HoF voting. I think we're getting an inkling seeing what's happening to Mark McGuire.

Guys like Manny Ramirez, Pedro Martinez, Sammy Sosa, and Robby Alomar were virtual locks (IMO). Now I'm no so sure. We'll just have to see how it gets played out.

VR
07-01-2009, 06:55 PM
Notable absence on the list by the StL Cards?

OnBaseMachine
07-01-2009, 06:59 PM
Jon Heyman on the list:

that alleged list circulating now is baloney. we know from court battles that bonds and palmeiro passed '03 roids test

http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman

westofyou
07-01-2009, 07:46 PM
Jon Heyman on the list:

that alleged list circulating now is baloney. we know from court battles that bonds and palmeiro passed '03 roids test

http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman

I'm waiting on the next Cecil B DeMille to name names myself.

marcshoe
07-01-2009, 09:13 PM
It took someone very cunning to make up a list and include Ben Weber.

Hoosier Red
07-01-2009, 09:30 PM
It will be interesting to see how steroid usage will affect HoF voting. I think we're getting an inkling seeing what's happening to Mark McGuire.

Guys like Manny Ramirez, Pedro Martinez, Sammy Sosa, and Robby Alomar were virtual locks (IMO). Now I'm no so sure. We'll just have to see how it gets played out.

My prediction is Manny is the first confirmed juicer to make the HOF.

Blitz Dorsey
07-01-2009, 10:16 PM
My prediction is Manny is the first confirmed juicer to make the HOF.

I'll go Bonds. (And don't even say he's not confirmed.)

jojo
07-02-2009, 07:11 AM
If Bonds doesn't make the HOF-on the first ballot- the HOF is dead as a useful institution and it will be Don Quixote on a high horse who put the lance through the heart of the hallowed halls....

hebroncougar
07-02-2009, 07:22 AM
It will be interesting to see how steroid usage will affect HoF voting. I think we're getting an inkling seeing what's happening to Mark McGuire.

Guys like Manny Ramirez, Pedro Martinez, Sammy Sosa, and Robby Alomar were virtual locks (IMO). Now I'm no so sure. We'll just have to see how it gets played out.

I concur. I don't think ANY of them make the HOF first ballot. Bonds included. It'll be interested to see if any of them make it in at all, if McGwire is the measuring stick, they're in trouble.

Chip R
07-02-2009, 09:08 AM
If Bonds doesn't make the HOF-on the first ballot- the HOF is dead as a useful institution and it will be Don Quixote on a high horse who put the lance through the heart of the hallowed halls....


DiMaggio didn't make it on the first ballot either.

BCubb2003
07-02-2009, 09:32 AM
Bonds' one chance is enough people say "He would have been a Hall of Famer anyway" and they vote for young skinny Bonds.

It's easier to keep a half-dozen misbehavers out than to wipe out a wide swath of several decades worth. It might just become an acknowledged era like the Dead Ball Era or the pitching-rich '60s or the Astroturf years.

jojo
07-02-2009, 09:40 AM
DiMaggio didn't make it on the first ballot either.

In DiMaggio's day there was a different voting standard...essentially, the BBWAA set the bar for the first ballot astronomically high.

That is not the case these days. Denying Bonds would be going glaringly against current precedent for reasons that could not be supported by his playing record.

Sea Ray
07-02-2009, 10:12 AM
My gut feeling is that Bonds will have a hard time getting in. The writers and the existing Hall members seem to be taking a very hard line on steroid users. He sure won't get in on the first ballot. I think it'll take a lot of lobbying to get him up to 75%. They'll bring up the character issue and if he loses his pending fed case it'll be another hammer to use against him

Chip R
07-02-2009, 10:25 AM
I think the writers will use the streroids as an excuse. They don't like him so that will be the real reason but the steroids justify it.

flyer85
07-02-2009, 10:43 AM
I think the writers will use the streroids as an excuse. They don't like him so that will be the real reason but the steroids justify it.payback time for being a jerk.

cincrazy
07-02-2009, 10:54 AM
I think the writers will use the streroids as an excuse. They don't like him so that will be the real reason but the steroids justify it.

Exactly. If Bonds were a class act and had been a media darling, AND if he would have come out after this whole steroids mess and said "I screwed up, my knee injury scared me and led me to juice," I think he would be in without a shadow of a doubt.

But, alas, that's not the case. and I can't see him getting in.

flyer85
07-02-2009, 11:02 AM
Exactly. If Bonds were a class act and had been a media darling, AND if he would have come out after this whole steroids mess and said "I screwed up, my knee injury scared me and led me to juice," I think he would be in without a shadow of a doubt.then how do you explain the treatment of McGwire by the writers?

Scrap Irony
07-02-2009, 11:27 AM
A lack of honesty by the players keeps them out of the Hall, IMO. Oddly enough, Pettitte may be the first PEDs user to get in. If he gets in. Perhaps ARod. (Though neither has been completely honest, at last they've given an account of their PEDs use and mea culpas.)

flyer85
07-02-2009, 11:30 AM
A lack of honesty by the players keeps them out of the Hall, IMO. Oddly enough, Pettitte may be the first PEDs user to get in. If he gets in. Perhaps ARod. (Though neither has been completely honest, at last they've given an account of their PEDs use and mea culpas.)IMO the honesty shouldn't make a bit of difference. Maybe it will, who knows but by the looks of the things the writers don't plan to forgive and forget.

Scrap Irony
07-02-2009, 11:44 AM
Have they ever?

wolfboy
07-02-2009, 11:55 AM
A lack of honesty by the players keeps them out of the Hall, IMO. Oddly enough, Pettitte may be the first PEDs user to get in. If he gets in. Perhaps ARod. (Though neither has been completely honest, at last they've given an account of their PEDs use and mea culpas.)

Pettitte may be the first known PED user to get in.

Chip R
07-02-2009, 12:10 PM
then how do you explain the treatment of McGwire by the writers?


He wasn't exactly Mr. Personality with the media before the home run chase and during. Sosa kind of drew him out but before that, he was kind of withdrawn.

wolfboy
07-02-2009, 01:39 PM
He wasn't exactly Mr. Personality with the media before the home run chase and during. Sosa kind of drew him out but before that, he was kind of withdrawn.

I don't think McGwire was ever on the level of a Barry Bonds or Albert Belle.

edit: Come to think of it, Belle was in his own universe as far as media disdain.

Chip R
07-02-2009, 01:46 PM
I don't think McGwire was ever on the level of a Barry Bonds or Albert Belle.


Oh, no. I'm not saying he was. But the media wants a guy who is friendly with them and going to give them good quotes/stories/information because it makes their jobs easier. During the first part of the season in the Great Home Run Chase, McGwire really didn't want to talk about it until he reached a certain level. It wasn't like he was being unfriendly for the most part but he was not necessarily giving the media what they wanted. Meanwhile Sosa was gregarious, cheerful, funny and a good quote/story. I think his attitude finally rubbed off on McGwire and as a result he embraced the media more.

redsmetz
07-03-2009, 07:19 AM
Interesting op-ed piece in the Washington Post. I'm just posting the link because it's a long column, it's titled "The Jerk Who Saved Baseball":

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/02/AR2009070201736_3.html

Hoosier Red
07-03-2009, 07:29 AM
I think what may become a factor is the Home Runs basically being invalidated by the writers. McGwire never was HOF worthy aside from the home runs.
I think Bonds will be kept out simply because the writers don't like him.

Highlifeman21
07-03-2009, 08:05 AM
If any of them get in, how do you keep Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe out of the Hall of Fame? A cheater is a cheater, right???? At least Pete bet on his own team to win every night.

Did Pete bet on his team to win each night?

Highlifeman21
07-03-2009, 08:48 AM
Pettitte may be the first known PED user to get in.

May is a strong word.

Pettitte is not a HOF.

jojo
07-03-2009, 08:52 AM
Did Pete bet on his team to win each night?

The odds are 50/50 that he did.....

cincrazy
07-03-2009, 03:47 PM
then how do you explain the treatment of McGwire by the writers?

It's a completely different situation with McGwire. Bonds was a different player when he first came up. He was CLEARLY more than home runs. Big Mac, that was his ticket to fame. Take away that, he's got nothing. And there's evidence that he was on the juice going all the way back to the beginning of his career. And has also been noted, he wasn't exactly a media favorite.

westofyou
07-03-2009, 04:31 PM
I think Bonds will be kept out simply because the writers don't like him.

They hated Cobb, they were not fond of Teddy Ballgame, they thought Carlton was a pithy fop... sometimes talent is bigger than the man.