Sources tell SI Alex Rodriguez tested positive for steroids in 2003

You can prove that more or less every great ballplayer is an outright fraud

If this guy can back this statement up he'll be set for life

xpost well yeah this is the problem--previously i could lol at arod for plenty of perfectly valid reasons but w/this i would technically have to lol at like 200 other guys as well.

lol the world brody http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:xqDSIkAyxTmQiM:http://microscopiq.com/images/mushroom-clown-ps3.jpg

like me for instance i dont even really like baseball

we could tell when you mentioned "salary cap"

and perhaps by the "magic make u perform better pills" thing

mets sux

call me blinky...

arod supposedly being interviewed by gammons later today

yah i'm with morbz on the 'doesn't really make u better' idea. like someone said above 'roids are designed to shorten recovery times and yeah build muscle mass but until i see some real evidence that shows an appreciable change in the ability to PLAY BETTER, i'm not going to care that much. (not that no one should care--for example i think it sets a shitty example for kids, considering how terrible roids are for yr body and the fact that most kids who take roids in HS arent going to amount to anything in pro ball.)

it's like, a pitcher putting vaseline on the ball will be able to manipulate the ball better and thus have a real, tangible, DIRECT advantage on a micro level; a batter (or pitcher obvs) taking roids might have more muscle and might be in better shape than he would have, but it's an indirect advantage and doesnt necessarily make him better at baseball. does any of that make sense?

That makes perfect sense.

i think that's a bit naive. i think PEDs make better players better... but it can't turn a nobody into a superstar... except for ken caminiti.

guys strength is super important to hitting fyi

But it's not of primary importance, which is why Gabe Kapler never hit 20 HR.

btw, Gene Orza denies tipoff angle.

“It’s not true,” Orza said in an e-mail message. “Simple as that.”

“It makes juicier stuff to suggest there were tip-offs,” Orza said about the SI.com report. “But there weren’t.”

He added: “I don’t care about the press coverage. It’s irrelevant.”

I was amused to see former NY Times hack Selena Roberts was apparently the lead SI reporter on this when Costas interviewed her on MLB. Wow, her AND Jon Heyman, SI really scoops up the best and brightest these days.

but it could be just a coincidence that bonds had the best seasons ever at an age when players are typically over the hill that mcguire et al were roided to the gills when they were breaking records etc etc

if yr good at baseball and want to hit the ball harder steroids can help

well what's he gonna say? "yeah i completely tipped those guys off." xp

ice cr?m... you're buying into a lot of mythology dude.

o plz enlighten me

If you can't hit the ball, bulking up after taking steroids will not help you.

If you can hit the ball, bulking up after taking steroids may or may not help you.

i-rod's career to thread

yah i'm with morbz on the 'doesn't really make u better' idea. like someone said above 'roids are designed to shorten recovery times and yeah build muscle mass but until i see some real evidence that shows an appreciable change in the ability to PLAY BETTER, i'm not going to care that much.

beyond statistics, is there any way to actually prove if it makes a player better or not? i mean tbh looking at the stats on bonds or sosa or mcgwire and then assuming that they started using steroids around a certain time, it makes perfect sense for people to believe that their subsequent "best of all time" kinda seasons were assisted just a little bit. i mean sammy sosa was, despite his HR power, a pretty mediocre player up until 1998.

like i said i can't get too pissed off about this stuff but there is some proof there, in a certain way. i'm not going to do anything other than ¯\(°_o)/¯ at this point though.

If you can't hit the ball, bulking up after taking steroids will not help you.

If you can hit the ball, bulking up after taking steroids may or may not help you.

― nosotros niggamos (HI DERE), Monday, February 9, 2009 2:26 PM (33 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

im not sure why people always bring up the 1st part of this formulation as its completely moot cause were talking abt guys getting an edge over other players who CAN hit the baseball

icey, we're not denying that numbers for certain players were very likely inflated, but it's a fog. There's no "control group" -- ie, no players can ever be proven "clean" -- so ppl who claim that Player X's use of Substance Y affected his output by Z-factor are just whistlin' Dixie.

i mean are people so far gone on this thing that they're now saying that strength only has an indirect relation to hitting? any one physical factor only has an indirect relation to hitting. no one is suggesting that big muscles create bat speed and hand/eye coordination but come the fuck on. how many weird spiky brady anderson in '96 seasons would you need to see to conclude that this has impacted games on the field?

eckstein is clean!

but morbs is otm

(xpost)

so because it's a fog we're just going to say it is what it is? i understand that to a certain point but i would like to see that list of 104 because it will increase my understanding of exactly what has been happening to the game.

this isnt a court of law or a peer reviewed journal - i just looked at the aging comically inflated bonds demolishing the record books and lold @ the farce - sometimes things are pretty easily seen and understood that dont offer the right circumstances for statistical or forensic or whatever analysis

i don't hate on the roiders because i guess the draw of taking the shit is the massive contracts, and i can sorta understand, but i feel for the really excellent players who don't take shit and get outclassed stats wise

will it? Waht about the guys who've been dodgy enough to pass tests but have still been using "something."

http://www.femmefan.com/site/images/lookerspics/lookers2/Brady-Anderson.jpg

well yeah it would be ridic of anyone to assume that we will fully understand the so-called steroid era but i would prefer to see this stuff start coming out, that's all.

btw I know that sports is 'the Toy Department' of life but the media vocab on this issue is so McCarthyite it's crazy.

icey:

the mythology is that power hitters/HRs = the steroid problem in baseball. 70%+ of the PED busts since the MLB began enforcing have been largely mediocre middle-relievers, speedy 4th-outfielder types... not exactly making the difference in the outcome of the game.

the other thing that the media perpetuates is that steroids = muscle/bulk. there are far more skinny, lanky PED abusers in MLB than bulky sluggers. steroids do not automatically inflate your biceps and neck. when used in conjunction with weight training, yes steroids help you gain muscle mass. but the media oversimplifies it so that bulky slugger = roids. while there's some correlation, it is not 1:1.

yah well there are a lot of mediocre middle-relievers in the world and most peds are not anabolic steroids - but steriods do build muscle mass thats what theyre for mr myth buster

a-rod admits in an interview w/ peter gammons tonight on ESPN. his reasoning is "when i got to texas i was young and naive and felt like i had the weight of the world of my shoulders and i wanted to prove everyone right"

His voice shaking at times, Alex Rodriguez met head-on allegations that he tested positive for steroids six years ago, telling ESPN on Monday that he did take performance-enhancing drugs while playing for the Texas Rangers during a three-year period beginning in 2001.

"When I arrived in Texas in 2001, I felt an enormous amount of pressure. I needed to perform, and perform at a high level every day," Rodriguez told ESPN's Peter Gammons in an interview in Miami Beach, Fla. "Back then, [baseball] was a different culture. It was very loose. I was young, I was stupid, I was naïve. I wanted to prove to everyone I was worth being one of the greatest players of all time.

"I did take a banned substance. For that, I'm very sorry and deeply regretful."

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3894847

all is forgiven alexander...

someone please ask madonna how this has affected a-rod's junk

but the media oversimplifies it so that bulky slugger = roids. while there's some correlation, it is not 1:1.

― (*ﾟーﾟ)θ L(。･＿･)　　　°~ヾ(･ε･ *) (Steve Shasta), Monday, February 9, 2009 2:44 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

this may be true but yr and morbs et al confusion at why people are focusing on the most successful players is def on some aspie shit

i'm just saying you bought into the mythology dawg. no need for a dude who posts 5000 msgs a day on her to start throwing out the "aspie" card... ;-)

im just saying that yr definition of mythology is based on some psychological disorder is all

so the Rangers' clubhouse at that time was Steroid Heaven. Anyone have anything to ask Mark Teixeira?

wow *jaw drops* at him admitting it, dont know what to say really

i mean i assumed he did it and all, it's just...i cant believe he's admitting it

what else can he do, stonewall after seeing what it got Sosa and McGwire?

yeah icey, we know WHY they're focusing on the biggest stars. It's a nation of morons, and sports fans are the biggest of them all.

yeah you're right

enlightening discussion on first & ten, as always

I was going to crack a joke about cjbaseball.com reactivating, but it looks like it has never not been active (including today).

http://www.cjbaseball.com/

Canseco was right all along... that's the greatest part.

Danny Bonaduce bout excepted

http://deadspin.com/5149914/alex-rodriguez-admits-to-using-a-banned-substance

Gammons/A-Rod video