“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
Right -- because asking people to back up their claims is tantamount to censorship. I guess we just have different ideas about what this forum should be about. Then again, the sarcasm is so thick in what you wrote that I am not sure whether there is an actual argument there or just a personal attack posing as cynicism. If you have something concrete to add to the conversation, please do so. So far, I am not seeing it.
“Every level he goes to, he is going to compete. They will know who he is at every level he goes to.” -- ED on EDLC
All arguments are not equal. Claiming someone is a cheater requires a compelling argument, perhaps even a more compelling argument, than any other typical claim given that the nature of the argument is also an attack on the player's character and the integrity of his performance.
That a professional athlete has gotten in better shape and improved his performance as he's aged from 25 to 31 years old is NOT compelling evidence that he is also a cheater. It certainly doesn't prove a point and isn't even a weak argument because it frankly is the embodiment of the normal developmental trajectory for major league ball players. It's the lowest common denominator of "proof" and that has never been ORG worthy at least given the culture of the ORG since I've been a member.
Do some on the ORG want to speculate about PEDs use? No doubt. But lets not pretend that just because there is some desire to suppose this player or that player is a cheat that doing so is somehow a noble discussion and is really anything but a tangent to the notion of discussing baseball in a reds-centric manner and a subject matter that tends to provoke poor quality discussion threads.
In other words, the quality of the ORG would be undeniably better without such lowest common denominator types of threads.
Last edited by jojo; 06-28-2013 at 01:13 PM.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
HokieRed (06-28-2013)
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
You continue to make this mistake. No one is arguing that just because a player has gotten better, there is reason to speculate about PED's. The argument is that if a player increases his power significantly at an age when most humans stop getting stronger naturally, there is reason to speculate about PED use. We have empirical evidence that doing PED's increases one power, so it is a logical, rarional argument to make, based on data.
As to the quality of discussion that this topic generates, I suggest you re-read the thread.
In the debate, posters brought forth other data to suggest that there were other factors in play. Brought forth was:
That Molina started his MLB career at a very young age.
That Molina started working out more.
That the Molina family has been known for late career improvement.
That Molina had always been a good line drive hitter.
That Molina's wOBA showed a steady improvement
That Molina's BABIP might explain his improvement.
WOY brought forth many other players from MLB history that had similar imporvements at the same age.
And that's off the top of my head. There was more great points made on both sides.
The thread itself is proof that such a topic doesn't represent the lowest common denominator of the ORG. In fact, except for the thread police who kept trying to derail it by claiming it wasn't ORG worthy, the thread has provided some of the most intelligent, logical, fact based discussion that this board has seen in awhile.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
Kind of sounds like some people are treating this as a jury trial, where others are merely looking for a search warrant or to face a grand jury.
Not everyone sees a message board as a place where a demand for hard evidence is required to convict in the court of public opinion.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
foxfire123 (06-28-2013),jimbo (06-28-2013)
When congress calls you in to testify, there is a link. I didn't see Derek Jeter called in. Or Ken Griffey Jr. Or Albert Belle. Or Frank Thomas. Why? Because there was no link. The others were called in because there was some sort of link and it wasn't "oh man, he hit a lot of home runs" or "oh man, he got bigger quickly".
The difference with your lamp analogy is that well, you saw me next to the broken lamp with the bat. You never saw a lot of those guys near steroids with a needle. In your scenario, you saw them with a bat somewhere and thought, man, a bat could certainly break my lamp. STEROID USERS!
To me, the lowest common denominator is constantly harping on appealing to the lowest common denominator.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
Bob Sheed (06-28-2013)
Actually, that's not even necessarily true. Fact is, many substances banned by Major League Baseball are legal to purchase by any ordinary American citizen at their local pharmacy or health/nutrition outlet. If I remember correctly, there are literally hundred(s) of such items banned by baseball that are not illegal.
Regardless, we're not talking about breaking the laws outside of the game of baseball. We're talking about something directly relevant to the sport and in an era where clearly the established bar of preponderance has been set very low empirically by the players themselves.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
"Lemonade requires a significant amount of sugar. Otherwise, you've just made lemon juice."
jimbo (06-28-2013)
While you are technically correct, we both know that they aren't talking about buying stuff at GNC. They are talking about HGH and Steroids.
As for the era we are in, we don't have a clue how many guys were using. But since they started testing less than 1% of guys have failed tests or even been linked in the media to some type of PED, so let's not just start throwing everyone under the train because of assumptions.
I thought HGH was legal?
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |