Clemens and Steroids

[ChrisP]

We can suspect all we want, but I refuse to accept a blanket scrutiny approach to an entire era until evidence surfaces otherwise.

Ahhhhh, I'm guilty until proven innocent on some issues with this being one. I could see people 20+ years from now saying things about Griffey, AROD, Ortiz, etc: "Yeah, but that was the steroids era". You know what? They'd be right. Just my 2 cents...

To save the neg points, I'm in no way saying those guys were a part of it (actually picked them because they haven't been mentioned that I know of), but I think in time the whole era will have a "*".

[Mackus]

Ahhhhh, I'm guilty until proven innocent on some issues with this being one. I could see people 20+ years from now saying things about Griffey, AROD, Ortiz, etc: "Yeah, but that was the steroids era". You know what? They'd be right. Just my 2 cents...

To save the neg points, I'm in no way saying those guys were a part of it (actually picked them because they haven't been mentioned that I know of), but I think in time the whole era will have a "*".

I don't really agree with this line of thinking. Theres no need for an asterisk. All these guys played against the same level of competition. You always have to account for eras when comparing players from different periods, and this will be no different.

The pitchers and hitters were on steroids, so its not like hitters had any advantage that pitchers didn't. I think that steroids help pitchers more than hitters anyways, especially relievers.

[ScottieBaseball]

Ahhhhh, I'm guilty until proven innocent on some issues with this being one. I could see people 20+ years from now saying things about Griffey, AROD, Ortiz, etc: "Yeah, but that was the steroids era". You know what? They'd be right. Just my 2 cents...

To save the neg points, I'm in no way saying those guys were a part of it (actually picked them because they haven't been mentioned that I know of), but I think in time the whole era will have a "*".

That's downright un-American, and so close to the 4th of July...you should be ashamed!

Seriously...I understand your point-of-view, but I neither agree with nor condone it. I think if there exists just one star from that era who we can reasonably deduce did not use ILLEGAL (unprescribed or illegitimately prescribed steroids and/or HGH) PED's, then an asterisk can't be applied. Instead, I think there should be repercussions (even if it's an asterisk next to each individuals' name in the official record books) as the offenders get outed. Canseco? Palmiero? The late Ken Caminiti? Guys that are proven to have used illegal PED's through either admission or failed tests? Absolutely put an asterisk next to their name.

The others like Giambi, McGwire, and the like? You can be suspicious, but to convict them without tangible evidence and on gut feelings is wrong and unfair.

[RayFink1e]

Bonds is also well known for his crazy workouts. Someone should def. look into Clemens.

[Migrant Redbird]

I think you have to question every player from the mid-90's to present.

Absolutely !!!!!!

Every player from maybe late 1980's to the present.

Put an "*" on the whole era.

Actually, anyone who played in the modern era may have used some kind of performance enhancing drugs. Given the number of athletes who have been documented to have used performance enhancing drugs in the last half century, it's unrealistic to assume that a few players wouldn't have at least tried them earlier than 1980 if they had been available -- and they were available in this country since at least the mid-fifties!

Testosterone was identified in the late twenties and synthesized in the thirties, but scientists were experimenting with using extracts from bull testes in the 19th century and one French scientist claimed to have used them to postpone the effects of aging in a report published around 1890. It's very possible that testosterone was a minor ingredient in a few patent medicines in the late 19th and early 20th century. The primary ingredient in patent medicines was usually alcohol, but many contained opium or cocaine and all claimed to contain "secret" ingredients. I doubt if testosterone would have had any efficacy if taken orally and injection of inadequately refined extracts from bull testes might have been pretty risky to one's health, but it's still impossible to rule out the possibility that sluggers like Babe Ruth or Jimmie Foxx might have had a friend with a chemical lab who was providing them with primitive PEDs.

The military of several different countries experimented with giving soldiers testosterone during WWII to improve strength and endurance, and it's documented that the Soviet Union was using synthetic steroids in the early fifties to enhance the performance of their weightlifters and other Olympic athletes. By the late fifties, body builders in Southern California were beginning to try out steroids to enhance their physiques, and it made its way into football by at least the late seventies, if not earlier.

I couldn't begin to name any names, but I think that it's almost certain that a few professional baseball players must have begun experimenting with steroids in the late fifties and in the sixties, when the body builders began using them. If we assume hypothetically that around 50 percent of major leaguers were using steroids at least occasionally during the nineties, then we could hypothetically project that to perhaps 30 percent in the eighties, 10 percent in the seventies, and less than 2 percent in the fifties and sixties.

I'm also pretty confident that ballplayers prior to 1950 used substances which they believed gave them an advantage, but I'm skeptical that they had access to anything that was actually effective -- any more effective than a placebo at least. However, it can't be ruled out when ballplayers were trying everything that they could find to gain an advantage and papers were being published before 1900 about the beneficial effects of extracts from bull testes. Well equipped laboratories and competent laboratory technicians existed in the 19th century; all that would have been necessary would have been the right kind of relationship between a ballplayer and a friend who was a technician.

Which is why it's silly to talk about making adjustments to statistics from the "steroids era" or putting an asterisk by those records. We can only prove that someone used PEDs -- and that only in very rare cases unless they admit to it -- we can never prove that anyone didn't use them. There is no practical point at which one could draw the line when it comes to adjusting statistics, much less determine how much they ought to be adjusted.

[Dr. FLK]

I've had this theory on Clemens since he started picking teams midseason.

Since he doesn't sign multi-year deals, he's not on a team each off season. So, is he still subjected to ML drug testing in the offseason? If not, wouldn't that give him all off season to be on the juice, get in shape for the next season, get it out of his system, and have enough muscle built up to be stronger for a shortened season? But, if he's still subjected to the same testing, then I guess this is all moot.

[Migrant Redbird]

Since he doesn't sign multi-year deals, he's not on a team each off season. So, is he still subjected to ML drug testing in the offseason?

I don't think that there is any drug testing during the off season for any of the players (except possibly for those having tested positive in the past). My understanding is that players get tested in spring training and randomly 2-3 additional times during the season.

If not, wouldn't that give him all off season to be on the juice, get in shape for the next season, get it out of his system, and have enough muscle built up to be stronger for a shortened season? But, if he's still subjected to the same testing, then I guess this is all moot.

If he's using HGH, which I suspect most affluent athletes have switched to, there's no test being administered for it at all. The only baseball player suspended for using HGH is Jason Grimsley, and he was caught by the DEA as a recipient of HGH from one of the dealers they were investigating. Clemens is a little smarter than Grimsley, and he probably has a lot more friends willing to help him acquire PEDs surreptitiously.

Bonds and Clemens are "freaks" in their ability to continue performing at a high level as they've aged past the point where virtually all their contemporaries see their abilities falling precipitously off the cliff. What is even more freakish about Bonds and Clemens is that they've actually increased their performance levels at an age where the performance of their peers is declining. Now is that freakishness the result of genetics or chemicals? I don't know, but I definitely have my suspicions.

[Chollie Eckman]

Bonds definitely is a user. Clemens? I think so. Before those 2, what players ever actually improved past the age of 35 and maintained it?