New Canseco Book & ARod

[Flip217]

Apparently in Canseco's new book he says he introduced ARod to a steroid dealer.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gJkNWo0vi8RESPAEnJ9kkekAb9JwD8VKLFSO9

Oh Canseco, who would have thought you'd be the guy cleaning up baseball...

...and I'm only half kidding.

[Moose Milligan]

Photos of Cansecos wife are necessary here, I think.

[Flip217]

<img src="http://baseballbookshelf.mlblogs.com/my_weblog/images/00juicy.jpg">

Here's one...boy, they seem like they must have been a classy couple.

[byrdz]

<img src="http://baseballbookshelf.mlblogs.com/my_weblog/images/00juicy.jpg">

Here's one...

OK, I believe Jose, she was a Playboy playmate afterall.

[Migrant Redbird]

Canseco, the dictionary example for lack of credibility.

I've suspected A-Rod for years, but there's nothing to support those suspicions aside from his performance, so those suspicions are essentially meaningless. It's just that all ballplayers who have played in the modern era are under suspicion to some extent because there's no way to prove that any of them weren't steroids or HGH users. Canseco's allegations add exactly zero to the discussion. They're in his book only because he was under pressure from his publisher to pad the manuscript with celebrities and sensationalism.

[CrimsonTribe]

Why wasn't this in the first book where he outed everyone else?

[Moose Milligan]

Canseco, the dictionary example for lack of credibility.

Just because you don't like him or think that he's a jackass doesn't mean he's not credible.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3314192

A-Rod needs to speak up and say something...denial won't work, saying that "it's over" won't work.

Either he did or he didn't and the press will keep pressing until they get what they want, be it an admission or a denial....and then, they'll keep pressing.

[Migrant Redbird]

Just because you don't like him or think that he's a jackass doesn't mean he's not credible.

Whether I like Canseco or not doesn't affect the fact that he's proven he's not credible. He's also proven multiple times that he's a jackass, but that's irrelevant.

I don't like A-Rod either, but Canseco's allegations and innuendo contribute nothing. Canseco didn't even allege that A-Rod used -- just that he was introduced to a "steroids supplier".

A-Rod needs to speak up and say something...denial won't work, saying that "it's over" won't work.

Canseco's allegations don't deserve to be dignified by a response.

I'm sure that A-Rod has already been asked by the press if he's used steroids and he's responded in the negative. Without any credible evidence to the contrary, A-Rod has no reason to be repeating the denials. Either you believe him or you don't -- repetition of the denials won't change your mind or anyone else's.

Either he did or he didn't and the press will keep pressing until they get what they want, be it an admission or a denial....and then, they'll keep pressing.

So what's the point. Stop throwing red meat to the wolves. When A-Rod does interviews, he will make it clear that he's going to answer questions for a certain period of time and if the reporters want to waste that time by asking questions that will continue to get a terse "no comment", it's their own story deadlines they're hurting. It won't take long for them to get the message.

Now if there's some credible evidence that A-Rod did use steroids or HGH, it will be different.

[Moose Milligan]

Whether I like Canseco or not doesn't affect the fact that he's proven he's not credible. He's also proven multiple times that he's a jackass, but that's irrelevant.

I don't like A-Rod either, but Canseco's allegations and innuendo contribute nothing. Canseco didn't even allege that A-Rod used -- just that he was introduced to a "steroids supplier".

Canseco's allegations don't deserve to be dignified by a response.

I'm sure that A-Rod has already been asked by the press if he's used steroids and he's responded in the negative. Without any credible evidence to the contrary, A-Rod has no reason to be repeating the denials. Either you believe him or you don't -- repetition of the denials won't change your mind or anyone else's.

So what's the point. Stop throwing red meat to the wolves. When A-Rod does interviews, he will make it clear that he's going to answer questions for a certain period of time and if the reporters want to waste that time by asking questions that will continue to get a terse "no comment", it's their own story deadlines they're hurting. It won't take long for them to get the message.

Now if there's some credible evidence that A-Rod did use steroids or HGH, it will be different.

How has he proven that he's not been credible? Look at the names in his first book, then look at the Mitchell report.

And Canseco doesn't have to say that A-Rod used...all he's saying is that he introduced him to a supplier. So what's your point? That's the story here. Whether A-Rod got PED's from that guy is an altogether different story...Maybe he realized that it wasn't the way to go after meeting him, who knows?

He can make denials and I'd believe him...simply because Canseco's story about introducing him to a steroid supplier doesn't provide much insight as to whether or not A-Rod saw it through to the end. That, and A-Rod hasn't given me a reason not to believe him.

On the flip side, what does Canseco have to gain from making up a story like that?

But you're a smart guy and you know that terse "no comments" don't look good to the general public. It's akin to being on the stand and "pleading the 5th"

[Migrant Redbird]

How has he proven that he's not been credible? Look at the names in his first book, then look at the Mitchell report.

Virtually anyone knowledgeable on the baseball steroids controversy could have filled in the names in Canseco's book and had just as good of a match with the Mitchell report. Canseco also swore that Clemens was clean; was he?

And Canseco doesn't have to say that A-Rod used...all he's saying is that he introduced him to a supplier. So what's your point? That's the story here.

That it's really a non-story.

Whether A-Rod got PED's from that guy is an altogether different story...Maybe he realized that it wasn't the way to go after meeting him, who knows?

Maybe A-Rod wasn't introduced to this "supplier". Maybe A-Rod didn't know the guy was a supplier. Who knows?

Where did Canseco introduce A-Rod to this "supplier"? Canseco says that it was in the "in the latter half of the 1990s", an extraordinarily ambiguous length of time. As far as I can determine, A-Rod and Canseco were never on the same team at the same time, so the meeting would likely need to have occurred when their teams were playing; at the 1999 All Star game when Canseco was the Devil Rays representative; or at some event outside of baseball, such as a charity benefit. The "supplier" likely wouldn't have been at the same event, which means that Canseco would have needed to set up some special appointment for the two to meet. It just doesn't pass the "sniff" test.

He can make denials and I'd believe him...simply because Canseco's story about introducing him to a steroid supplier doesn't provide much insight as to whether or not A-Rod saw it through to the end. That, and A-Rod hasn't given me a reason not to believe him.

Why should A-Rod be compelled to deny every flimsy allegation that surfaces? I'd be willing to bet that he's already denied using steroids -- probably multiple times. There's no reason that he should be required to repeat that denial ad infinitum when there's no credible new evidence.

On the flip side, what does Canseco have to gain from making up a story like that?

Duh! Have you not been paying attention? Canseco is selling a second book and he already used up most of the juiciest morsels that he could fabricate in his first one. He's also been alleged to have offered to exclude Magglio Ordonez from that book in exchange for an investment in the move he's promoting. There is every reason to believe that Canseco had to scrape the bottom of the barrel for sensational items to put in his second book and what could be more sensational than alleging that the best player currently active has used steroids.

But you're a smart guy and you know that terse "no comments" don't look good to the general public. It's akin to being on the stand and "pleading the 5th"

The "general public" isn't very smart either, plus they don't have a very long retention span. This is a non-issue now and it will be a forgotten non-issue within a few weeks unless something comes up to corroborate Canseco's allegations.

[Maverick2143]

On the topic of Canseco, there is a excellent article on Deadspin about Canseco. Regardless of his truth issues, the guy is a Grade A certified mess.

[Flip217]

Virtually anyone knowledgeable on the baseball steroids controversy could have filled in the names in Canseco's book and had just as good of a match with the Mitchell report.

So, that means Canseco's claims are likely to be true, right?

Canseco also swore that Clemens was clean; was he?

I doubt it. This just suggests that Canseco either has no knowledge of Clemens using or is lying, which doesn't disprove his other statements, but does contribute to his overall d-bag appearance.

That it's really a non-story.

Well, you think it's a non-story, but that's a subjective opinion.

It just doesn't pass the "sniff" test.

I think it does. I think it passes the stink test.

I'd be willing to bet that he's already denied using steroids -- probably multiple times.

I mean, come on -- so what?! "I am not a crook" doesn't mean you ain't a crook....

Duh! Have you not been paying attention? Canseco is selling a second book and he already used up most of the juiciest morsels that he could fabricate in his first one. He's also been alleged to have offered to exclude Magglio Ordonez from that book in exchange for an investment in the move he's promoting. There is every reason to believe that Canseco had to scrape the bottom of the barrel for sensational items to put in his second book and what could be more sensational than alleging that the best player currently active has used steroids.

And this is where my whole argument falls apart! Well, I won't admit to that much, but I do believe that Canseco's ultimate motivation for all this is to make some scratch and get some time in the spotlight. But I also think he was one of the guys most heavily involved in steroids as it was rapidly growing in popularity and so probably knows an awful lot about the subject -- even if he is a total jackass.

[BaltimoreTerp]

So, that means Canseco's claims are likely to be true, right?

I doubt it. This just suggests that Canseco either has no knowledge of Clemens using or is lying, which doesn't disprove his other statements, but does contribute to his overall d-bag appearance.

Well, you think it's a non-story, but that's a subjective opinion.

I think it does. I think it passes the stink test.

I mean, come on -- so what?! "I am not a crook" doesn't mean you ain't a crook....

And this is where my whole argument falls apart! Well, I won't admit to that much, but I do believe that Canseco's ultimate motivation for all this is to make some scratch and get some time in the spotlight. But I also think he was one of the guys most heavily involved in steroids as it was rapidly growing in popularity and so probably knows an awful lot about the subject -- even if he is a total jackass.

Or he's using his reputation as a user (an admitted user, which he is willing to wield as credibility) and the public witch-hunt for users to get as much money as possible.

Throughout history, during real witch-hunts, many of those named as witches were turned in by people with social or political reasons for doing so. Why should we assume this is any different?