I hate David Ortiz

I'm sure most of you have seen this already, but it bears discussion: http://www.theplayerstribune.com/david-ortiz-on-the-record/

He's quickly approaching A-Rod as the player I loathe the most. As far as being a big whiney crybaby, no ones bigger than Ortiz. Passing a drug test means one thing: you can pass a drug test. So did Lance, so did A-Rod. Saying "I'm clean, I passed a drug test" doesn't fly anymore in this day in age, especially when the drugs they're using are always a step or two ahead of the tests designed to catch them.

He's had a great career but there's no one more irritating than Ortiz, IMO. I have long had a theory, there are two types of athletes: The ones that go into a slow, graceful decline at the end of their careers and those who hit a brick wall. The ones that hit a brick wall either lose their skills seemingly overnight or are crippled by injuries.

Ortiz has performed remarkably well into his late 30's showing no real decline in performance. While I don't think he's going to be slowed by injuries since he's a DH, I can't wait for the days ahead when he's suddenly struggling to hit .220, sapped power and the Red Sox "fans" turn on him. I don't think I'll ever root against a player harder than David Ortiz. No one likes a self righteous lying crybaby.

I'm sure most of you have seen this already, but it bears discussion: http://www.theplayerstribune.com/david-ortiz-on-the-record/

He's quickly approaching A-Rod as the player I loathe the most. As far as being a big whiney crybaby, no ones bigger than Ortiz. Passing a drug test means one thing: you can pass a drug test. So did Lance, so did A-Rod. Saying "I'm clean, I passed a drug test" doesn't fly anymore in this day in age, especially when the drugs they're using are always a step or two ahead of the tests designed to catch them.

He's had a great career but there's no one more irritating than Ortiz, IMO. I have long had a theory, there are two types of athletes: The ones that go into a slow, graceful decline at the end of their careers and those who hit a brick wall. The ones that hit a brick wall either lose their skills seemingly overnight or are crippled by injuries.

Ortiz has performed remarkably well into his late 30's showing no real decline in performance. While I don't think he's going to be slowed by injuries since he's a DH, I can't wait for the days ahead when he's suddenly struggling to hit .220, sapped power and the Red Sox "fans" turn on him. I don't think I'll ever root against a player harder than David Ortiz. No one likes a self righteous lying crybaby.

He is worse than ARod. Disgusting.

I don't actually mind Ortiz that much, but he's definitely not a HOFer.

I don't actually mind Ortiz that much, but he's definitely not a HOFer.

Last July David said it was 40 times. What happened that he had to be tested 40 times in a year? Lest than a year. I wonder. Is he a liar or is he on a more frequent test progression because of something we are unaware of?

Does anyone know if that's true, what he says about never having been told he failed the 2003 test, and still never being told what he tested positive for? I feel like I've heard before that's bull**** or at least it sounds like bull****, but if it's true then he really has a point with this article.

Last July David said it was 40 times. What happened that he had to be tested 40 times in a year? Lest than a year. I wonder. Is he a liar or is he on a more frequent test progression because of something we are unaware of?

It was fun to laugh at his temper outburst when he destroyed the dugout phone.

Ortiz has performed remarkably well into his late 30's showing no real decline in performance. While I don't think he's going to be slowed by injuries since he's a DH, I can't wait for the days ahead when he's suddenly struggling to hit .220, sapped power and the Red Sox "fans" turn on him. I don't think I'll ever root against a player harder than David Ortiz. No one likes a self righteous lying crybaby.

Let's just say for argument's sake that he is "clean" in the legal sense. He must have an extraordinary amount of natural testosterone coursing through his body. Just reading the article, he seems very... aggressive. He always seems aggressive.

I do agree with some of his points though. I think the anti-steroids campaign has been a witch hunt and was not well thought out. And players who grow up in rough neighborhoods deal with more serious issues than cheating at baseball -- which could be their meal ticket anyway.

It was fun to laugh at his temper outburst when he destroyed the dugout phone.

I wasn't amused at all.

Let's just say for argument's sake that he is "clean" in the legal sense. He must have an extraordinary amount of natural testosterone coursing through his body. Just reading the article, he seems very... aggressive. He always seems aggressive.

I do agree with some of his points though. I think the anti-steroids campaign has been a witch hunt and was not well thought out. And players who grow up in rough neighborhoods deal with more serious issues than cheating at baseball -- which could be their meal ticket anyway.

I wasn't amused at all.

ARod only ever tested positive in 2003 as well. ARod was tested more than Ortiz.

My big beef with Ortiz is the way he acts. I do think he belongs in the Hall of Fame. Doesn't mean I have to like the guy.

My big beef with Ortiz is the way he acts. I do think he belongs in the Hall of Fame. Doesn't mean I have to like the guy.

I'm curious why you think this? Do you think Johnny Damon, J.D. Drew, Mark Teixeira, and Carlos Delgado belong in the hall? That's about the tier of player Ortiz will retire as. You can make a thin case based on home run totals, but that's about it.

David Ortiz, ARod, and Ben Roethlisberger form my Axis of Evil for athletes. I hate Ortiz most of all.

BTW, when someone says "I never KNOWINGLY took steroids", it means "I knowingly took steroids", IMO. Why would anyone believe that he doesn't know what is being put into his body? It's just a cover up. He was a juicer.

He is a juicer.

But heck, he wrote a menacing article didn't he.

But heck, he wrote a menacing article didn't he.

He's not fooling anyone.

Last July David said it was 40 times. What happened that he had to be tested 40 times in a year? Lest than a year. I wonder. Is he a liar or is he on a more frequent test progression because of something we are unaware of?

The only reason he would be tested that often is if he has failed a test other than the test in 2003.