White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
GO SOX! DSNB!

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-02-2005, 11:03 PM
SouthSideHitman SouthSideHitman is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Homewood, IL
Posts: 364
Default Sox and steroids

Frank Thomas came out yesterday as strongly supporting Bud Selig's proposed changes to the steroid policy which would be first violation, 50 day suspension, second violation, 100 suspension, third violation, lifetime ban. I just love how the Sox have been so anti-steriod for a while now, especially Thomas. I believe that in 2003 the Sox threatened to boycott the testing, which would have all counted as positive tests and forced the league to implement a bigger testing program until the union talked them out ot it.

This is especially interesting considering that our inspiring, hardworking, underdog division rivals just had one of their ace relievers, Juan Rincon suspended for violating the drug policy. Could you just imagine if LA or Boston or those-in-blue-who-shall-remain-nameless had done what the Sox did? They would be national icons, reminding the nation that even in corrupt times there is still a team playing for love of the game, etc, etc.

This is something that we as fans should really hang our hats on and be proud of for our team. If the national or even local media won't pat the Sox' back, then we should because this is something that's bad for baseball, bad for athletics, bad for honesty and something that the Sox have been fighting even when it wasn't popular and, in fact, likely to make you enemies.

I dunno, this was just a thought that I've been kicking around for a while and the Ricon thing made me wanna write about it. Thoughts?
__________________
"It was scary, it was quixotic -- what's that mean anyway, quixotic?"
Geoff Blum, on Game 3
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-02-2005, 11:10 PM
seanpmurphy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

I agree with you completely, but to think the media cares about what the Sox have done/are doing is approaching ridiculous. It really is sad though.

I'm not going to miss Rincon though. I think it'd be nice if one player on the team tests positive, then the entire team is immediately tested. That'd really make things interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-03-2005, 12:27 AM
elrod elrod is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Maryville, Tennessee
Posts: 2,009
Default

Tim Kirkjian basically said that steroids were the entire reason for Rincon's success last year and this year. And the big reason was strikeouts per nine innings. But hey, if him, why not Nathan too?

Rincon: 2001-2003, averages 6.5 K/9 innings
2004-2005, averages 11.4 K/9 innings.

That's obviously ridiculous, considering he pitched quite a bit, and was healthy in 2001-2003 (and pitched the same number of innings in 2003 as 2004).


Nathan:
1999-2000: averages 5.5 K/9 innings
Injured 2001-2002
2003: averages 9.46 K/9 innings
2004: averages 11.07 K/9 innings
2005: averages 10.32 K/9 innings

That doesn't necessarily mean Nathan is juicing, off course. Maybe he was actually injured before he got to the bigs, and his long recovery got him back to the man he was before he started in 1999. Possibly. But the very statistic that all the experts are saying is indicative of pitchers (especially relief pitchers) juicing - K/9 innings - that shows a bizarre jump for Rincon, also shows a big jump for Nathan.

By contrast, Jon Garland, who has obviously turned his career around in a hurry, has seen his K/9 innings go DOWN from the last few years. For the record, Johan Santana has ALWAYS had a K/9 innings rate around 10 . But if roids explains Rincon's big jump, might it also explain Nathan's?
__________________
"Talking loud and saying nothing."
-James Brown
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-03-2005, 12:30 AM
MUsoxfan MUsoxfan is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Romeoville, IL
Posts: 10,525
Default

LOVE the sig SouthSideHitman!
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-03-2005, 01:14 PM
hawkjt hawkjt is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,360
Default

This Rincon story should infuriate every sox fan when you think about the last two years and how our bullpen and starters faded down the stretch after we were in the lead into Sept and Aug the last two years. Contrast that with the stretch drives by the twins in those two years which won them the title. Relievers are the players who would benefit tremendously because of the recovery aid for guys that go out to the mound so much. The Twins bullpen has been the best in the division and probably in the AL the last few years. They fricking cheated the sox out of division titles. Bring on the harsher penalties.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-03-2005, 01:19 PM
mrfourni mrfourni is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Oak Lawn, Illinois
Posts: 1,221
Default

I agree with you southside. but the media will always point out that jose canseco was a member of the white sox in an effort to discredit any positive press sent the white sox way
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-03-2005, 01:25 PM
elrod elrod is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Maryville, Tennessee
Posts: 2,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrfourni
I agree with you southside. but the media will always point out that jose canseco was a member of the white sox in an effort to discredit any positive press sent the white sox way
Canseco was a meaningless part of a lost season.
Rincon was one of the essential components of the Twins' success last year. It would be like Marte juicing for us. How many other Twins relievers were juicing too? This is infuriating.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-03-2005, 01:37 PM
Flight #24 Flight #24 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,986
Default

Expanding on Rincon's history, here's his minor league k/9 stats

1997: 7.1
1998: 7.9
1999: 8
2000: 7.3
2001: 7.8
2002: 6.7
2003: 6.8
2004: 11.6
2005: 11.25

So after a fairly consistent K/9 in the 7s pretty much throughout his career, he suddenly doubles it? If it were HRs and a guy hitting 20 in the minors suddenly started hitting 35-40, what would we think? Why is it any different with pitchers? Yes, I'd expect some improvement as he's hitting his prime age-wise (26), but a 50-100% increase? Seems suspicious.
__________________
"You don't quit. You don't go home before it's time. You don't come out of a game, even if you are in pain and feel as if you can't go one more step"
"Never give up, Never, never, never give up."
- Luther Head after Elite 8 win v. Arizona
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-03-2005, 01:41 PM
elrod elrod is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Maryville, Tennessee
Posts: 2,009
Default

How exactly do steroids help you with strikeouts, though? The experts all agree that steroids helps your muscles rebound day in and day out (good for relievers) and they help boost strikeout totals. But why the latter? Steroids just make your muscles bigger, right? Well, in the case of a Rincon, is he really that much bigger? And aren't there tons of pitchers will smallish physiques who get tons of strikeouts - like Santana and Pedro? Also, wouldn't a sudden increase in muscle size make your whole motion different, potentially harming as much as helping? Just curious.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-03-2005, 01:41 PM
Ol' No. 2's Avatar
Ol' No. 2 Ol' No. 2 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bullpen Sports Bar
Posts: 11,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flight #24
Expanding on Rincon's history, here's his minor league k/9 stats

1997: 7.1
1998: 7.9
1999: 8
2000: 7.3
2001: 7.8
2002: 6.7
2003: 6.8
2004: 11.6
2005: 11.25

So after a fairly consistent K/9 in the 7s pretty much throughout his career, he suddenly doubles it? If it were HRs and a guy hitting 20 in the minors suddenly started hitting 35-40, what would we think? Why is it any different with pitchers? Yes, I'd expect some improvement as he's hitting his prime age-wise (26), but a 50-100% increase? Seems suspicious.


He shoulda read the label.
__________________

19 seasons, 9232 AB, 216 SO
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-03-2005, 01:54 PM
Nate_in_Kansas
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkjt
This Rincon story should infuriate every sox fan when you think about the last two years and how our bullpen and starters faded down the stretch after we were in the lead into Sept and Aug the last two years. Contrast that with the stretch drives by the twins in those two years which won them the title. Relievers are the players who would benefit tremendously because of the recovery aid for guys that go out to the mound so much. The Twins bullpen has been the best in the division and probably in the AL the last few years. They fricking cheated the sox out of division titles. Bring on the harsher penalties.
Just to play devil's advocate....At the most, the Sox were cheated one year, and that was last year. Rincon wasn't much until then. And even then it's possible this is all being overblown. Word is that Rincon's positive came from a test in Spring Training. You have to think he hasn't been taking since then. Sure, the effects of performance enhancers can linger, but we don't even know yet if this is roids or not. And the fact that his K's are still up, after having been tested and, presumably, off the stuff, may mean that he just has finally learned to pitch.

And I also think it's really sad and silly to pin the whole Twins relief corps with the "user" label based on one guy. This one guy even comes as a shock to most baseball fans, and I'd be willing to think that there are a few more "shockers" out there, on MOST teams (probably even the White Sox). I admire the Sox players who have come out vocally against Steroids. But the Twins have had some very vocal voices in the same department...Especially the Twin everyone loves to hate, Mr. Hunter (which makes me wonder...why don't we sox fans love him for that? because we're twins-haters in general....It's the same reason we'll so easily jump to conclusions about the Twins being dirty and we'll deny that anything like that could be goin on with our team). In the end, having strong voices of dissent does not mean any team is immune...
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-03-2005, 02:00 PM
Flight #24 Flight #24 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate_in_Kansas
Just to play devil's advocate....At the most, the Sox were cheated one year, and that was last year. Rincon wasn't much until then. And even then it's possible this is all being overblown. Word is that Rincon's positive came from a test in Spring Training. You have to think he hasn't been taking since then. Sure, the effects of performance enhancers can linger, but we don't even know yet if this is roids or not. And the fact that his K's are still up, after having been tested and, presumably, off the stuff, may mean that he just has finally learned to pitch.
Why eactly do we have to think he hasn't been taking since then? It's not like he's passed subsequent tests but failed the ST one. For all we know, he shot himself up just yesterday.

What we know is that he cheated. There's a chance that he did so unknowingly, but he did it all the same. Assuming it was a 1-time thing is like assuming Bonds only juiced that time his trainer gave him flaxseed oil, or that Sosa only corked that one time.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-03-2005, 02:07 PM
Nate_in_Kansas
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flight #24
Why eactly do we have to think he hasn't been taking since then? It's not like he's passed subsequent tests but failed the ST one. For all we know, he shot himself up just yesterday.

What we know is that he cheated. There's a chance that he did so unknowingly, but he did it all the same. Assuming it was a 1-time thing is like assuming Bonds only juiced that time his trainer gave him flaxseed oil, or that Sosa only corked that one time.
I'm not saying I know for sure, but if you got caught doing something, wouldn't you stop? Especially when you knew that you'd then be facing the scrutiny of everyone? Of course it's possible he did it again. But he'd REALLY be a complete idiot to do it again right after being caught for it and knowing he'd be facing the second, more sizeable penalty the next time around.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-03-2005, 02:17 PM
elrod elrod is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Maryville, Tennessee
Posts: 2,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate_in_Kansas
I'm not saying I know for sure, but if you got caught doing something, wouldn't you stop? Especially when you knew that you'd then be facing the scrutiny of everyone? Of course it's possible he did it again. But he'd REALLY be a complete idiot to do it again right after being caught for it and knowing he'd be facing the second, more sizeable penalty the next time around.
Are you saying that he was tested in the Spring, and they're only releasing it now? That doesn't make any sense. The excuse I heard was that he was using it over the winter, but hadn't been using since the Spring. And the juice lingered in his system until the recent test.

Of course the fact that he was using at all puts his entire career in doubt. And why shouldn't it? The reason we need a harsh testing regimen is to clear up any doubts like this. I find it interesting that some relative no-names have been caught so far. That leads me to believe steroid use is much more widespread than anybody thinks.

I don't think Rincon is stupid enough to ever use steroids again. But I also wouldn't be surprised if his performance on the hill suffers - especially over the course of the season. He shows up in almost every single Twins game. There aren't many relievers more vital for their team than Juan Rincon has been last year and this year.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-03-2005, 02:20 PM
AJPosguchi AJPosguchi is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
Posts: 209
Default

How about this added punishment:

Take away any team win where the positively tested player was involved/played in.

Who's to say that the inning of work Rincon put in against the only Sox loss to the Twinks this year wasn't due to steroids?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:00 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.