Originally Posted by Brutus
Except that it isn't easily disproved. In fact, it strongly is correlated that in the mid 90's through 2005, offense was up among an all-time high in baseball.
Not by coincidence, since testing was implemented in 2006, the offense has gone away. Really not rocket science to figure out.
Although if you actually run the correlations you will see scoring was already dropping while steroid usage was still increasing. Then you will see that scoring continued to drop at the same pace
even after steroid testing began and usage rates plummeted. You should have seen a rapid drop in scoring if steroids had been strongly boosting scoring as you believe. The stats clearly show that steroid usage and scoring DO NOT correlate well at all.
There were plenty of other things that were going on in baseball over those years that more accurately describe the reasons for the increase then decrease in scoring rates. I listed them all in Redszone threads a few times in the past. There were a whole host of sweeping changes over those years that fully account for the ebbs and flows in scoring. Too many people missed these transformations due to the overwhelming publicity given to steroids.
I'll side with Baseball Prospectus who pointed out the fallacy of the whole "steroids ruined the game" angle rather than the wingnuts who cry "STEROIDS!, STEROIDS!" every time someone goes on a home run tear.
There have been plenty of times in the past when home runs suddenly spiked around the league. Guys like Ted Kluszweski and Davey Johnson and many others had sudden drastic increases in home run totals. But when it happens nowadays everyone has to fall into the steroids fallacy every time. The fact that these spikes are still occurring with current players should be an indication that steroids were not as influential as most still believe.