PDA

View Full Version : Mike Downey doesn't think McGwire took steroids because there is no "proof"


chaerulez
12-14-2006, 06:47 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-061213downey,1,7519640.column?coll=cs-home-headlines

I find this interesting because I'm pretty sure Downey is anti-Bonds. While I hate Bonds as much as anyone here, I would say the proof on Bonds isn't that much better than McGwire, it's just an admission that he took some supposely by mistake to a grand jury. So if I do remember correctly and Downey is not a Bonds ass licker, this makes him somewhat of a hypocrite. With that said though, Downey is still a moron if he doesn't think McGwire took steroids. Although the one thing Downey is right about is that Andre Dawson should be in the HOF, he was stuck in baseball hell (Montreal) for a while and it wasn't until he came to the Cubs and played on a lot of bad Cubs teams did people realize who he was.

Jurr
12-14-2006, 10:35 PM
Again, pointless talk. Ask anyone who's ever played in the minors or higher. Just about everybody was doing something that wasn't "in the best interests of the game."

To deny that is to prove one's ignorance.

chaerulez
12-15-2006, 12:09 AM
I just realized I posted this on the wrong forum, sorry.

WhiteSox5187
12-15-2006, 12:40 AM
There WAS that bottle of Andro in McGwire's locker. Of course that was legal back then, but now it's not. It is worth mentioning though that Downey said he wouldn't vote Mac in because he had only about 1,100 hits and his average was something like, .230. The only thing Mac has going for him is the fact that he has 500 HRs and he got those HRs in the midst of the steroid era, in which it seemed like EVERYONE was going to hit 500 HRs.

NardiWasHere
12-15-2006, 12:55 AM
Nardiwashere doesn't think Downey has a brain becuase there is no "proof"

Parrothead
12-15-2006, 07:10 AM
There WAS that bottle of Andro in McGwire's locker. Of course that was legal back then, but now it's not. It is worth mentioning though that Downey said he wouldn't vote Mac in because he had only about 1,100 hits and his average was something like, .230. The only thing Mac has going for him is the fact that he has 500 HRs and he got those HRs in the midst of the steroid era, in which it seemed like EVERYONE was going to hit 500 HRs.

Avg. .263
AB 6187
Hits 1626
HR 583
Slg .588
11 all star games
3 Silver sluggers
1 gold glove
1 rookie of the year

Yeah the only thing he has is going for him is HRs.:rolleyes:

SoxxoS
12-15-2006, 08:37 AM
I remember when Downey started, I think Daver wrote a post welcoming him to Chicago, also saying he was a Sox fan.

I can't stand the guy and he is right up with Moronotti for worst sports writer in the town, IMO.

fquaye149
12-15-2006, 09:15 AM
Avg. .263
AB 6187
Hits 1626
HR 583
Slg .588
11 all star games
3 Silver sluggers
1 gold glove
1 rookie of the year

Yeah the only thing he has is going for him is HRs.:rolleyes:

Wow! Yeah! Those are some exciting stats you posted!!!!

Holy ****! 6187 AB!!!! 1626 Hits!!!!! A ROOKIE OF THE YEAR!!!! Three whole Silver Slugger Awards!!!

Basically it boils down to the guy is an 11-time AS with 583 HR. Period.

Oh yeah...and he's a jagbag who used steroids probably his entire career.:rolleyes:

miker
12-15-2006, 10:00 AM
I don't think Mr. Downey is a writer with a coherent thought because there is no "proof."

Jerko
12-15-2006, 10:15 AM
IIRC, "Andro" wasn't even a steroid when he took it. It was a "steroid precurser" or whatever the terminoligy was. :rolleyes: NOW, it's a steroid, no? So, technically, even though it was legal when McGwire ingested it, even though it was not a steroid when McLiar ingested it, it's one now. So, we know for a fact that McLiar played while taking what is now a steroid. That's enough proof for me. I don't care about the timing, or the naming, or what not. He played with that **** in his system.

maurice
12-15-2006, 11:57 AM
To state the obvious, there's the whole thing where he was asked by Congress whether he took steroids and repeatedly refused to answer the question, which completely destroyed his reputation. Why in the world would he do that if he truthfully could have answered "no"? The consequences of McGwire's approach were so obviously disasterous that Palmiero decided to risk perjury charges by lying his ass off.
:rolleyes:

Domeshot17
12-15-2006, 12:09 PM
I will tell you this much. You think Bud was clueless of Mac and Sosa juicing during their epic home run chase? You think he had no idea they were on it as the ratings for baseball came back from the dead and got the game more popular then the post strike era?

There is a lot we will NEVER know about Steroids in Major League Baseball. But I fully believe Bud Selig is no better then Vince Mcmahon and the WWF Steroid Scandal.

My problem is, I always viewed Mac as a hall of famer. However, I don't think Sosa should be allowed in, and they have had virtually the same career. I know a lot of that comes from my bias of hating the cubs. Its just a shame the game of Baseball at the pro level has to be such a farce. Until they develop a test for HGH, no one will ever accomplish anything power wise and not be thought of as a juicer. Ryan Howard? Pujols? Andruw Jones? They all have big seasons, and get questioned on steroids and hgh.

Flight #24
12-15-2006, 01:13 PM
I will tell you this much. You think Bud was clueless of Mac and Sosa juicing during their epic home run chase? You think he had no idea they were on it as the ratings for baseball came back from the dead and got the game more popular then the post strike era?

There is a lot we will NEVER know about Steroids in Major League Baseball. But I fully believe Bud Selig is no better then Vince Mcmahon and the WWF Steroid Scandal.


Doesn't matter. Without testing, the best he could have had is strong suspicions or hearsay. And based on that, there's nothing he could have done. Try and suspend: MLBPA steps in and he loses. Try and change the drug policy: "it's invasion of privacy" cries Don Fehr.

I'm not saying the owners didn't prioritize $$$ over changing the policy. But I don't see what you want Bud to have done given that they had no testing at the time Mac was hitting HRs.

mantis1212
12-15-2006, 01:56 PM
Well, there IS an eyewitness that would testify that Mcquire took steriods- his name is Jose Conseco.

I know many question his credibilty, but if you look back at the whole picture now Conseco has more credibility than ANYONE. He was spot-on with Palmeiro if you remember, back when NO ONE thought Palmeiro was guilty.

People have been convicted of crimes with less evidence than that.

chaerulez
12-15-2006, 02:21 PM
Well, there IS an eyewitness that would testify that Mcquire took steriods- his name is Jose Conseco.

I know many question his credibilty, but if you look back at the whole picture now Conseco has more credibility than ANYONE. He was spot-on with Palmeiro if you remember, back when NO ONE thought Palmeiro was guilty.

People have been convicted of crimes with less evidence than that.

I don't think it's fair to say no one thought Palmerio was guilty, there certainy were people who suspected him. He went from a doubles hitter to a power hitter in only a few years into being with the Rangers. It's funny though, if he wasn't a roider he probably would've made it to the HOF despite never being top 5 in MVP voting and having made only four all star teams.

WhiteSox5187
12-15-2006, 04:12 PM
Well, there IS an eyewitness that would testify that Mcquire took steriods- his name is Jose Conseco.

I know many question his credibilty, but if you look back at the whole picture now Conseco has more credibility than ANYONE. He was spot-on with Palmeiro if you remember, back when NO ONE thought Palmeiro was guilty.

People have been convicted of crimes with less evidence than that.
I agree. I think there's enough evidence to convict McGwire, Sosa, Bonds etc. in a court of law of steroid use. We have to use common sense people. I've pointed this out before, in 1997 Sosa weighed 185 lbs, by 1998 he weighed 220 lbs of pure muscle. People don't just put on 35 lbs of muscle in the span of three months without the use of some steroid.

Oh, and Mac's numbers minus the HRs are not HOF numbers.

fquaye149
12-15-2006, 04:49 PM
I don't think it's fair to say no one thought Palmerio was guilty, there certainy were people who suspected him. He went from a doubles hitter to a power hitter in only a few years into being with the Rangers. It's funny though, if he wasn't a roider he probably would've made it to the HOF despite never being top 5 in MVP voting and having made only four all star teams.

umm....contradict yourself much?

What does Palmeiro stake his HOF claim on but his power hitting?

Turn even 75 of his home runs into fly ball outs and even assuming his non HR hitting doesn't deteriorate, we're looking at a guy with <3000 hits <500 HR and, let's see---never started an all-star game, never top 5 in MVP voting.

Outside looking in.

And that's assuming that steroids only effects your HR hitting ability

chaerulez
12-15-2006, 05:03 PM
umm....contradict yourself much?

What does Palmeiro stake his HOF claim on but his power hitting?

Turn even 75 of his home runs into fly ball outs and even assuming his non HR hitting doesn't deteriorate, we're looking at a guy with <3000 hits <500 HR and, let's see---never started an all-star game, never top 5 in MVP voting.

Outside looking in.

And that's assuming that steroids only effects your HR hitting ability

How did I contradict myself?

fquaye149
12-15-2006, 05:08 PM
How did I contradict myself?

I don't think it's fair to say no one thought Palmerio was guilty, there certainy were people who suspected him. He went from a doubles hitter to a power hitter in only a few years into being with the Rangers. It's funny though, if he wasn't a roider he probably would've made it to the HOF despite never being top 5 in MVP voting and having made only four all star teams.

I thought I was pretty clear:

If Palmeiro wasn't a roider, he wouldn't have put up numbers that warranted hof consideration.

People act like all steroids do is make you a bad person. No, they make you a better power hitter...

chaerulez
12-15-2006, 07:35 PM
I thought I was pretty clear:

If Palmeiro wasn't a roider, he wouldn't have put up numbers that warranted hof consideration.

People act like all steroids do is make you a bad person. No, they make you a better power hitter...

Well I should've been more clear, I meant if he posted those stats without the aid of roids. And for the record, I don't think taking the steroids makes you a "bad guY", it's the lying afterwards about it. I can understand why a guy would have chose to take steroids in that era, and some players have come clean while people like Bonds Palmerio, Sosa, etc. continue to act like jackasses.

WhiteSox5187
12-15-2006, 07:38 PM
umm....contradict yourself much?

What does Palmeiro stake his HOF claim on but his power hitting?

Turn even 75 of his home runs into fly ball outs and even assuming his non HR hitting doesn't deteriorate, we're looking at a guy with <3000 hits <500 HR and, let's see---never started an all-star game, never top 5 in MVP voting.

Outside looking in.

And that's assuming that steroids only effects your HR hitting ability
Palmeiro's HOF claim is this: "I have five hundred homeruns and three thousand hits. Only four other guys (I think) have done that." The fact that he tested postive for steroids though kills any chance he has at the HOF. I think Palmerio would have gotten three thousand hits without steroids, but not five hundred hrs.

Parrothead
12-16-2006, 01:24 AM
Gotta say while I really don't care who gets in and who does not, McGwire shoud be in based upon stats. There are plenty of scumbags in the hall and Andro was legal in baseball while he did it(which does not make it right). What about the Perry, ect. et al.... He may have been on more but that is the only proof of any drug we have that he was on while he played.

The more important question for me is ....Why is there a Hall of fame in the first place and who really cares who is in it?

WhiteSox5187
12-16-2006, 01:47 AM
I've gone back and forth about "Well if Perry got in, so should McGwire et al." But I really do think that steroids give you a much more bigger advantage than a spitball or doctored pitch.

Also, Andro wasn't technically legal. In the 1980s, due to the rapant cocaine usage, MLB passed a rule that said no drug could be used WITHOUT a doctor's prescripition. Of course, they never bothered to test for it.

fquaye149
12-16-2006, 05:58 AM
Palmeiro's HOF claim is this: "I have five hundred homeruns and three thousand hits. Only four other guys (I think) have done that." The fact that he tested postive for steroids though kills any chance he has at the HOF. I think Palmerio would have gotten three thousand hits without steroids, but not five hundred hrs.

um well he has 3020 hits and 569 hr so if he had less than 500 hr he probably would have less than 3000 hits

Ol' No. 2
12-20-2006, 01:39 PM
Doesn't matter. Without testing, the best he could have had is strong suspicions or hearsay. And based on that, there's nothing he could have done. Try and suspend: MLBPA steps in and he loses. Try and change the drug policy: "it's invasion of privacy" cries Don Fehr.

I'm not saying the owners didn't prioritize $$$ over changing the policy. But I don't see what you want Bud to have done given that they had no testing at the time Mac was hitting HRs.When the andro story first broke, MLB did everything it could to sweep it under the rug. Steve Wiltshire, who broke the story, was almost banned from the Cards clubhouse, and Selig & Co. made it abundantly clear to the other writers that if they pursued the story they would suffer consequences. Selig protected the roiders with his silence.

The MLBPA caved on the testing issue mainly because of public pressure. Without Selig standing in the way, that public pressure would have come sooner.

Flight #24
12-20-2006, 01:41 PM
You know, it occurs to me that as significantly as Downey's kissing McGwire's ass, he might have noticed his shriveled testicles in the process....

PaleHoseGeorge
12-20-2006, 08:10 PM
Paul Sullivan thinks Sosa should be inducted into the hall because (paraphrasing here) last he checked nobody has outlawed Flinstones vitamins. Seriously... he wrote this.

McGwire puts a bottle of andro in his locker to cover his tracks; Sosa puts a bottle of Flinstones vitamins in his for the same purpose. And then Dan McGrath and the rest of the idiots who write and report sports in the mainstream media wonder why the rest of us have so little respect for their profession?
:?:

Steroids is the MEDIA'S mess, too. Blaming it all on MLB is just their convenient excuse that any other group of cowards would use, too.

(Still) Making jokes about steriod use? Sullivan and his ilk make me ill...

ewokpelts
12-21-2006, 02:15 AM
Palmeiro's HOF claim is this: "I have five hundred homeruns and three thousand hits. Only four other guys (I think) have done that." The fact that he tested postive for steroids though kills any chance he has at the HOF. I think Palmerio would have gotten three thousand hits without steroids, but not five hundred hrs.
3000 hits and 400 hrs would get him in...ask ripken(although he's REALLY getting in for something bigger)
as much as i hate to say it....palmiero will be in ...might not a first ballot, but that really is a meaningless thing anways

fquaye149
12-21-2006, 09:15 AM
3000 hits and 400 hrs would get him in...ask ripken(although he's REALLY getting in for something bigger)
as much as i hate to say it....palmiero will be in ...might not a first ballot, but that really is a meaningless thing anways
Ripken's getting in for doing that while

a.) being a superstar his whole career

b.) putting up those #'s at SS

the consecutive games thing didn't hurt either

AZChiSoxFan
12-21-2006, 04:17 PM
Avg. .263
AB 6187
Hits 1626
HR 583
Slg .588
11 all star games
3 Silver sluggers
1 gold glove
1 rookie of the year

Yeah the only thing he has is going for him is HRs.:rolleyes:

I'm sorry but the only numbers on that list that are impressive are the HR's and all-star games. We all know how objective the All-star game appearances are so that leaves just the HR's. We all know where those came from.

I'm so bitter over the fact that this clown made the all-century team. What a total joke.

I wish more than anything that when they announce the voting for the HOF they say "we were going to put MM in, but we're not here to talk about the past."

AZChiSoxFan
12-21-2006, 04:21 PM
The more important question for me is ....Why is there a Hall of fame in the first place and who really cares who is in it?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Parrothead
12-21-2006, 04:23 PM
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I stand by my statement. Who is in has no affect of my life in the least bit.

AZChiSoxFan
12-21-2006, 04:23 PM
Palmeiro's HOF claim is this:


Viagara

PennStater98r
12-21-2006, 05:11 PM
Avg. .263
AB 6187
Hits 1626
HR 583
Slg .588
11 all star games
3 Silver sluggers
1 gold glove
1 rookie of the year

If we take the steroids discussion out of the equation, I think we're missing two statistics here that add to McGwire's case FOR being inducted to the HoF.

McGwire had a .394 OBP to go with his .588 SLG (10th lifetime). The combo of those two numbers impress me more than the HR total. Add to the fact that McGwire had a lifetime .263 BA and that .394 looks even better. McGwire averaged 114 BB per 162 games. Ted Williams' was 143 and Ruth's was 133. Rickey Henderson's was 115 per 162 games...

Between his eye, his slugging percentage, the number of all-star games (make no mistake all-star games played is important - and 11 if a lot) he played in and his career .982 OPS (13th lifetime with six active players ahead of him who some should finish their careers with a lower OPS), he is a HoF.

Add the steroids - I don't know what to say. I don't think he deserves it - unless the press decided that others who took the juice deserve to go. All in all, I think that BBWA should pause for reflection on McGwire. If ever there was a good case for first ballot not deserving it, but maybe later he should go - this is it.

Ol' No. 2
12-21-2006, 06:04 PM
If we take the steroids discussion out of the equation, I think we're missing two statistics here that add to McGwire's case FOR being inducted to the HoF.

McGwire had a .394 OBP to go with his .588 SLG (10th lifetime). The combo of those two numbers impress me more than the HR total. Add to the fact that McGwire had a lifetime .263 BA and that .394 looks even better. McGwire averaged 114 BB per 162 games. Ted Williams' was 143 and Ruth's was 133. Rickey Henderson's was 115 per 162 games...

Between his eye, his slugging percentage, the number of all-star games (make no mistake all-star games played is important - and 11 if a lot) he played in and his career .982 OPS (13th lifetime with six active players ahead of him who some should finish their careers with a lower OPS), he is a HoF.

Add the steroids - I don't know what to say. I don't think he deserves it - unless the press decided that others who took the juice deserve to go. All in all, I think that BBWA should pause for reflection on McGwire. If ever there was a good case for first ballot not deserving it, but maybe later he should go - this is it.How many of those walks were because pitchers were pitching around him because they feared more steriod-induced home runs? Every one of his stats were inflated by steroid use. If McGwire had not taken steroids, he would have been just another journeyman 1B (think Ross Gload).

fquaye149
12-21-2006, 06:21 PM
How many of those walks were because pitchers were pitching around him because they feared more steriod-induced home runs? Every one of his stats were inflated by steroid use. If McGwire had not taken steroids, he would have been just another journeyman 1B (think Ross Gload).

Bonds has an even more ungodly OBP

Even Sosa, who is FAR from a patient hitter, had a very high obp.

Gee...what's the conexion-e

PaleHoseGeorge
12-21-2006, 07:51 PM
How many of those walks were because pitchers were pitching around him because they feared more steriod-induced home runs? Every one of his stats were inflated by steroid use. If McGwire had not taken steroids, he would have been just another journeyman 1B (think Ross Gload).

Let's also not forget that McGwire has been taking steroids going all the way back to his first days in MLB, shooting the **** into his ass with Jose Canseco inside the johns at the Oakland-Alameda County stadium clubhouse.

There is NOTHING about this guy that isn't tainted by steroid abuse. NOTHING. He isn't a national hero. He is a national disgrace. Voting him into the hall brings shame upon the institution. I wouldn't even consider voting for him until he came clean... starting with recanting his "I'm not here to talk about the past" stonewalling b.s. excuse.

Daver
12-21-2006, 08:12 PM
This question has to be asked.

How many of the homeruns hit by the suspected "juicers" were hit off of pitchers that were also using steroids?

Roughly half the players that have been caught by testing are pitchers.

SABRSox
12-21-2006, 08:43 PM
There is NOTHING about this guy that isn't tainted by steroid abuse. NOTHING. He isn't a national hero. He is a national disgrace. Voting him into the hall brings shame upon the institution. I wouldn't even consider voting for him until he came clean... starting with recanting his "I'm not here to talk about the past" stonewalling b.s. excuse.

While I don't agree with McGwire going into the hall of fame, I don't think voting him in would bring shame upon the hall of fame. It's already a pretty worthless institution. Some of the guys in there have lesss business being in there than a roided-up cheater, and even he doesn't deserve to be in there.

The HOF is already a joke.

Tragg
12-21-2006, 08:45 PM
I Add to the fact that McGwire had a lifetime .263 BA and that .394 looks even better. McGwire averaged 114 BB per 162 games. .
Actually, it makes his numbers look worse. Guys who hit homers like he does routinely are pitched-around. He just took gift walks.

Now, put those walks on some slap hitting lead-off guy it WOULD be indicative of an exceptional eye.

But not in McGwire's case.

fquaye149
12-21-2006, 09:15 PM
This question has to be asked.

How many of the homeruns hit by the suspected "juicers" were hit off of pitchers that were also using steroids?

Roughly half the players that have been caught by testing are pitchers.

That's a good point.

Mohoney
12-22-2006, 05:42 AM
Paul Sullivan thinks Sosa should be inducted into the hall because (paraphrasing here) last he checked nobody has outlawed Flinstones vitamins. Seriously... he wrote this.

A while back, I just adopted the approach that ANYTHING the Cubune shills write about steroids is nothing more than a thinly veiled PR stunt to garner HOF support for Sosa.

Hopefully, voters will have a lot more sense than that, and look back on Sosa's ambiguous (at best) testimony before Congress.

If you think that the lobbying for Santo is creepy enough, just wait until Sosa gets on the ballot.

tstrike2000
12-22-2006, 10:48 AM
You know, it occurs to me that as significantly as Downey's kissing McGwire's ass, he might have noticed his shriveled testicles in the process....

:o:

Ol' No. 2
12-22-2006, 12:31 PM
That's a good point.It is a good point. But it's not a good excuse.

fquaye149
12-22-2006, 12:39 PM
It is a good point. But it's not a good excuse.

No excuses.

Just realization that in the 90's it will be hard to tell what accomplishments are artificial, and exactly how great steroids free players like Frank and Griffey were, since their numbers probably suffered b/c of playing against steroids-aided pitchers.

Ol' No. 2
12-22-2006, 12:49 PM
No excuses.

Just realization that in the 90's it will be hard to tell what accomplishments are artificial, and exactly how great steroids free players like Frank and Griffey were, since their numbers probably suffered b/c of playing against steroids-aided pitchers.Even without steroids, players change over the years and their accomplishments with them. That's why it's hard to compare players from different eras. The most valid comparisons are among players of the same time.

fquaye149
12-22-2006, 01:10 PM
Even without steroids, players change over the years and their accomplishments with them. That's why it's hard to compare players from different eras. The most valid comparisons are among players of the same time.

Absolutely---but this isn't like the 60's where you could look at a guy who hit, say .290 and say "damn that's a pretty solid average for a predominately pitcher's era."

You got a guy in the 1990's with 40 HR (Frank, for instance) you can't automatically say "well everybody was hitting HR"...it was everybody on juice, and some other guys hitting HR

Ol' No. 2
12-22-2006, 01:27 PM
Absolutely---but this isn't like the 60's where you could look at a guy who hit, say .290 and say "damn that's a pretty solid average for a predominately pitcher's era."

You got a guy in the 1990's with 40 HR (Frank, for instance) you can't automatically say "well everybody was hitting HR"...it was everybody on juice, and some other guys hitting HRAnd you also had pitchers on the juice (Daver's point), which means guys like Thomas would have had even more if everybody was playing straight.

Steroids have completely skewed the statistics for an entire era.

Craig Grebeck
12-22-2006, 02:39 PM
This is why OPS+ can be so useful. Comparing players from different eras is easier if you measure them against their contemporaries. FWIW, McGwire ranks 11th all time and ahead of Musial, Greenberg, Aaron, and Mays.

Ol' No. 2
12-22-2006, 02:56 PM
This is why OPS+ can be so useful. Comparing players from different eras is easier if you measure them against their contemporaries. FWIW, McGwire ranks 11th all time and ahead of Musial, Greenberg, Aaron, and Mays.Even at that the game changes. Players are swinging for the fences a lot more than they used to, resulting in a lot more strikeouts. Since OPS is heavily biased toward SLG, even comparing OPS+ is bound to be biased. Comparing players from different eras is always fodder for arguments, but I don't think there is any really satisfying way to make those comparisons.

fquaye149
12-22-2006, 05:00 PM
And you also had pitchers on the juice (Daver's point), which means guys like Thomas would have had even more if everybody was playing straight.

Steroids have completely skewed the statistics for an entire era.

yup---it completely ruins things like OPS+...because it doesn't matter what the entire league was doing, or whether it was a "hitter's" era, or a "pitcher's" era.

The 90's were a "juicer's" era...and we don't know who the juicers ALL were

fquaye149
12-22-2006, 05:01 PM
Even at that the game changes. Players are swinging for the fences a lot more than they used to, resulting in a lot more strikeouts. Since OPS is heavily biased toward SLG, even comparing OPS+ is bound to be biased. Comparing players from different eras is always fodder for arguments, but I don't think there is any really satisfying way to make those comparisons.

And that's exactly what I'm saying. Even if you use EQA, a vastly superior scheme to OPS+...you still run into the problem that McGwire was a cheater...therefore if he was better than the rest of the league it had as much to do with his cheating as his own merits

Ol' No. 2
12-22-2006, 09:04 PM
And that's exactly what I'm saying. Even if you use EQA, a vastly superior scheme to OPS+...you still run into the problem that McGwire was a cheater...therefore if he was better than the rest of the league it had as much to do with his cheating as his own meritsMore.

PennStater98r
01-04-2007, 02:09 PM
I want to say - steroids aside - here's a blurb from one of Rob Neyer's articles on the ESPN In:


If by "one-dimensional" you mean "all he did was hit home runs," then no, that's not precisely true. McGwire drew more than 1,300 walks, and eight times he ranked among the top 10 in walks in his league. He didn't strike out particularly often. He never led his league in strikeouts, and finished in the top (i.e., bottom) 10 only twice. McGwire was not the all-or-nothing slugger we might see in our mind's eye. Yes, he batted .201 in 1991, his worst season, and .187 in 2001, his last season. He also batted .289 as a rookie in 1987, .312 in 1996 and .305 in 2000. McGwire's .263 career batting average was dead-on with his leagues' averages (one of which includes pitchers hitting, obviously, but still ...).

Here's the bottom line: The two most telling statistics in baseball are on-base percentage and slugging percentage. You probably won't be surprised to learn that McGwire led his league in slugging percentage four times. But you might be surprised to learn that he also led his league in on-base percentage twice.

This is something I was trying to say in an earlier post.

Nick Altrock
01-04-2007, 02:35 PM
Downey must also think OJ didn't do it.

Nick Altrock
01-04-2007, 04:35 PM
I'm not sure if any of you saw this, but Ken Rosenthal has a good answer to those like Downey who claim you cannot reject a player without concrete evidence of wrongdoing:


"With all due respect to my colleagues who say they can not reject a player's candidacy without concrete evidence that he used performance enhancers, I say, "baloney."
"This is not a court of law; there is no burden of proof requirement. Voters, in fact, are instructed to consider not just a player's record and ability, but also his integrity, sportsmanship and character."

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6212422

PaleHoseGeorge
01-04-2007, 07:27 PM
I want to say - steroids aside - here's a blurb from one of Rob Neyer's articles on the ESPN In:

Count on Neyer to be the 21st century equivalent to the 19th century idiot who asked, "So Mrs. Lincoln, other than that how did you like the play?"

:kukoo:

When McGwire decides he is going to start "talking about the past", I'll start giving serious consideration to his HOF credentials,too. Until then...

Baby Fisk
01-05-2007, 09:22 AM
Downey must also think OJ didn't do it.

Hey, welcome aboard! Very classy username. :cheers:

Nick Altrock
01-05-2007, 12:29 PM
Hey, welcome aboard! Very classy username. :cheers:

Glad to be aboard, Baby Pudge.:cheers: