Scott Gray (CT) Commentary - Brady Anderson the Steroids Poster Child

[The Wedge]

What you're forgetting is that he DID answer the question: No. But that's never enough for anybody, so when they push harder on the same exact question that he's already answered, he gives them a question to ask for them to logical answer themselves. He's not shifting focus at all, he's pointing out to the people who refuse to accept his "no" as an answer a line of logical reasoning that might help them since there's no way he can prove that negative.

[atomic]

You don't quite understand the straw man. In an argument, you put up a barely related point to a first point, tear that point down, and claim it proves the first point. Brady asking "why would I stop?" isn't a straw man, it's asking a pertinent question.

Too many people consider things like double talk, answering a question with a question, etc straw man. It's become this catch-all for diversionary argument techniques, but most of the time its used incorrectly. Kinda like irony.

It is a dumb answer as first all if he did stop why would we know why he stopped? Maybe he didn't like his balls shrinking up. Maybe he didn't stop.

[radar303]

What you're forgetting is that he DID answer the question: No. But that's never enough for anybody, so when they push harder on the same exact question that he's already answered, he gives them a question to ask for them to logical answer themselves. He's not shifting focus at all, he's pointing out to the people who refuse to accept his "no" as an answer a line of logical reasoning that might help them since there's no way he can prove that negative.

You are correct, but I guess that some(me included) just don't believe the "no". But logic, history(of this era's ball players) and what we saw just makes us cynical. Beating my head against the wall because I strongly believe he is lying and NO ONE can prove it., positively or negative.

Just hated the era. And to my belief it hurt the guys to some extent. They were too ripped, suffered from different kind of injuries and some didn't last as long. I like the old days when guys worked themselves into shape in Spring training. I think that the body needs to rest... year around training MIGHT NOT be the best thing. Seems crazy but I am sticking to that line of thinking. Seems like DL"s have lots more guys on them than in the olden days.

[The Wedge]

You are correct, but I guess that some(me included) just don't believe the "no". But logic, history(of this era's ball players) and what we saw just makes us cynical. Beating my head against the wall because I strongly believe he is lying and NO ONE can prove it., positively or negative.

Just hated the era. And to my belief it hurt the guys to some extent. They were too ripped, suffered from different kind of injuries and some didn't last as long. I like the old days when guys worked themselves into shape in Spring training. I think that the body needs to rest... year around training MIGHT NOT be the best thing. Seems crazy but I am sticking to that line of thinking. Seems like DL"s have lots more guys on them than in the olden days.

I perfectly understand the frustration. But can you imagine his frustration if he's not lying? There's only so many ways to say "no." I have no proof either way, but there's been no proof saying, for certain, that he did. I feel bad for any of the guys that were clean, but under suspicion anyway.

I mean, like I said much earlier in the thread, look at Roger Maris. Held the single season record for nearly 40 years, but he never even sniffed 50 in a season beyond 61 in 61. Had there been a PED backlash in the 60s, people would have been ALL over that. Nobody beyond suspicion, like its working today.

[Mondo Trasho]

I'm trying to look for another player who was suspected of using PEDs, and had a single career year, only to never again approach those kinds of numbers.

So far no luck...

[weams]

Straw man answer. Proving a negative is not a legitimate answer.

Nor is disputing it. He doesn't need to prove anything.

[Mark Carver]

What was juiced was the baseball itself in 1996. My theory is that MLB did it to increase home runs to put fans in the seats coming off the fiasco that was the strike. In the AL...

1993 - 77506 PA, 2074 HR = 1 HR per 37.37 PA

1994 - 62553 PA, 1774 HR = 1 HR per 35.26 PA

1995 - 78878 PA, 2164 HR = 1 HR per 36.95 PA

1996 - 79090 PA, 2764 HR = 1 HR per 28.61 PA

1997 - 88167 PA, 2477 HR = 1 HR per 35.59 PA

1998 - 88175 PA, 2499 HR = 1 HR per 35.28 PA

[radar303]

I perfectly understand the frustration. But can you imagine his frustration if he's not lying? There's only so many ways to say "no." I have no proof either way, but there's been no proof saying, for certain, that he did. I feel bad for any of the guys that were clean, but under suspicion anyway.

I mean, like I said much earlier in the thread, look at Roger Maris. Held the single season record for nearly 40 years, but he never even sniffed 50 in a season beyond 61 in 61. Had there been a PED backlash in the 60s, people would have been ALL over that. Nobody beyond suspicion, like its working today.

With Maris(who was a REALLY GOOD PLAYER but an under achiever for much of his career) the standard line was expansion. 20 or so new pitchers(who were in the minors the year before) watered down the quality. It was a perfect storm for a young(27), strong guy in a terrific line up(coming off an MVP season, he was no scrub) hitting in front of Mantle(the best player in the game at the time), short right field, good weather, hot summer and the added bonus of having Mantle pushing him for the home run title. He flaked out later but he sure played up to the pressure THAT year.

He went from 39 to 61(+22) and had years of 39,33,23,24,28,26 and 19(99games) all of which were bigger than ANY of Brady's years. Apex of a weird career. He was a POWER hitter who wasn't much of a doubles guy, which tells us about his swing.

Brady was not known as power guy(hit 1st in the order) he was a good player and very good often, but he was no Maris is regards to home run hitting. Brady's year is MORE UNUSUAL than Maris's.

[radar303]

Talking about PED's in the 50's and 60's there was a Doctor named Dr. Max Jacobson who "hung around" celebrities and was known as "Dr.Feelgood". Mantle was a client and Mantle and Maris were room mates????? I'm leaping!

Maris was not intentionally walked at all in 1961!! That is weird.

[weams]

Brady's year is MORE UNUSUAL than Maris's.

I disagree.

[The Wedge]

Talking about PED's in the 50's and 60's there was a Doctor named Dr. Max Jacobson who "hung around" celebrities and was known as "Dr.Feelgood". Mantle was a client and Mantle and Maris were room mates????? I'm leaping!

Maris was not intentionally walked at all in 1961!! That is weird.

Not really. He batted in front of Mantle.

[radar303]

I disagree.

Maris was a home run hitter and Brady was not.

[radar303]

Not really. He batted in front of Mantle.

I know, but for a guy to have that much success, it is odd. Mickey did miss 9 games.

[The Wedge]

Maris was a home run hitter and Brady was not.

He was a home run hitter, yes, but still had a HUGE jump in numbers for 61. I suck at math, but that's like an 80% increase over his next highest total. HR hitter or not, that's an incredibly unusual aberration.

[radar303]

He was a home run hitter, yes, but still had a HUGE jump in numbers for 61. I suck at math, but that's like an 80% increase over his next highest total. HR hitter or not, that's an incredibly unusual aberration.

The math is not close, if he 80% more than 39 he would have hit 71. It is about 56%, where as Brady went from(before 1996) a high of 21... a 140% increase! and a tad over 100% increase from his 24 homer year,. Brady's jump was way higher and only had 3 years of 20+. Maris had 7(and a 19 homer year in 99 games).

Mantle called Maris one of the greatest players he ever saw...... and truth be told I never liked Brady, even when he was good. Too cool for school type and he popped up a lot.