Mitchell Report

[Royals]

You can swear andrew. We all know you're capable.

[Angels]

Bren, with respect, and to be fair, here are two quotes from previous posts of yours:

IMO, they're all dirty until they prove otherwise by adopting a stricter system of testing and punishment.

Until the players take a stand, a REAL stand, and each make an effort to clean up the sport, they're all guilty and I see no reason to presume any of them are clean.

[Astros]

Yeah but see, we weren't talking specifically about players from Bren's favorite team. So now we can throw those quotes out because it hurts his arguement

[Royals]

if you're a Barry Bonds or someone else who is under a lot of suspicion, then that's probably true. For most of the players though, they're not under heavy suspicion, they're playing in a shadow of all that and in their case, I think it would make all the difference.

That's pre-boston question.

They ARE all guilty of either making this mees or of not working to clean it up. And no, i don't fully trust any of their records or achievements, ANY of them. Ortiz, Jeter, A-rod, Schilling, pujols, Reyes, Santana... any of them.
Fix the program, close the loopholes, then I'll trust them.

[Giants]

I would say that Ortiz and Schilling, like every other player, live under the same shadow as every other player. We don't know that they didn't in the past or aren't currently on steroids because the 'testing program' is a complete joke.

Bren, you should go back to some of my old SotSG posts on Barry Bonds, even I was smoother than that. You said yourself that drug tests don't reach everything, therefore voluntarily taking a test does not conclusively prove your innocence. From Today's New York Times the undercurrent of the article is that while they are getting closer THERE IS NO RELIABLE TEST BLOOD OR URINE FOR HGH. David Ortiz or any other player you want to come out from the shadow of suspicion could have himself tested every day, come up clean every day, and take as much hGH as he wants. A player currently on steroids could volunteer to take a test while he was cycled off of them. Shit you could fix the test beforehand with someone else's urine/blood. There are dozens of ways to beat any voluntary test anyone could take, so volunteering to take a blood test wouldn't prove a thing, which is the biggest reason why players don't do it.

This reminds me of a series of articles Skip Bayless wrote in the San Jose Mercury as the steroid thing was just getting going. He challenged Barry Bonds over and over again to deny using steroids, then Bonds did an interview on Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel in which he was asked the question and he responded with a simple "No." Bayless wrote the next day that Bonds simple "No" wasn't strong enough, that if he really hadn't done steroids he should have essentially challenged Gumbel to a duel for besmirching his honor by even asking the question. My point? I have two of them. The first one is that anyone who wants to stay suspicious is going to continue to be suspicious no matter what and there is no easy solution to that. My second is that Bren you make about as much sense as Skip Bayless


[/url]

[Padres]

... If all this makes baseball sound like a cynical world where "the juice" is an everyday part of life as well as a factor in every trade or signing, then you're absolutely right. If you conclude that the whole sport, from the union, commissioner and owners through GMs and managers, has been deeply aware of its steroid epidemic for many years, but didn't have the guts to confront it, then you're correct again. Baseball has lived a lie since the late '80s, then stonewalled throughout the '90s, as a corrupting "code of silence," as the Mitchell report calls it, dragged the game to the bottom rung of the moral-authority ladder in American sports./b] What we've read is a 400-plus-page portrait of a sport that knew the depth of its problems at least 15 years ago. But, for the sake of union strength, crowd-pleasing home runs, record attendance and a "comeback" from its own self-inflicted strike, the entire sport turned its eyes away.

Away from what? That is the basest of all baseball's infractions. What the sport ignored, and still will not acknowledge adequately, is the true price of its moral weakness. Mitchell fingered it right up front, starting on page 5 with "Health Risks." Scientists debate the degree of danger posed by anabolic steroids and human growth hormones for mania, severe depression, heart attacks, liver damage, infertility, tendon tears, gigantism, cancer and arthritis. Yet science doesn't really know because no one would allow steroid or HGH tests on humans with the astronomical dosage levels used by pro athletes.

... There's shame to spare. But the union, which has done much good in other respects, deserves special disgrace. Instead of defending the workplace safety of its members, its leaders protected the interests of stars and their agents who were more concerned with blocking drug tests so that they could inflate their salaries rather than, as Don Fehr claimed, protect their privacy.

... Three years ago, every baseball player was a suspected cheat. In '05, new Nats GM Jim Bowden stared at a player who'd been an Expos standout. "He looks smaller this year," Bowden said. By the next year the player had been traded. [Hello Brad Wilkerson ...]

That deep cynicism, ingrained throughout baseball from owner's box to bleachers, will not change quickly. It took nearly 20 years for baseball to lose the benefit of the doubt about its basic integrity. The Mitchell report is almost certainly baseball's best chance to hit the absolute bottom of its dismal performance-enhancing pit. Finally, the game has stopped ducking its problems, covering up its cheaters, making its hole deeper. With its analysis of the past and its recommendations for the future, the Mitchell report gives baseball a choice: stop digging deeper into denial, throw away that damn shovel and grab this rope like it's your last hope.

The climb will be long and hard. But, at last, baseball can make a start.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... rss_sports

[Padres]

On the lighter side, some comments about Nook Logan's inclusion:

Nook Logan (along with Paul Lo Duca -- who wrote the HGH dealer on Dodger's stationary!) is named in the Mitchell Report.
If that doesn't convince you that HGH doesn't work, nothing will! (Capitol Punishment Blog)

How did Nook Logan wind up on the list? He looks like Tayshaun Prince in a baseball uniform. (Monroe [MI] News)

Nook Logan should be the face of an MLB advertising campaign against PEDs. If there is anyone who can convince people especially young kids that using HGH won't do them crap, it's da Nook. Whatever steroids he must have gotten must be the absolute worst ones on the planet.

In every drug experiment, someone gets the placebo. Looks like that someone was Nook. Either that, or "May turn you into Nook Logan" needs to be added to the list of side effects that will already take longer to recite than the rest of the HGH commercial when it airs during next year's MLB games on Fox.

I think I'd rather have the shrunken testicles than the Nook side effect!

Logan quote on the matter was "You'll have to talk to my agent, I just play baseball".
Er, that a somewhat generous term for what you do Nook ... Just proof that he was lying to them from the start!

I was scanning the list of players in the report on ESPN.com, thinking "none of our guys are really good enough to be on here." Then I saw "Nook Logan." I am glad I was not drinking anything at the time or my laptop would be covered in it. (Various comments from the Capitol Punishment Blog)

We can all sleep soundly, knowing Nook Logan has been named in the long-anticipated Mitchell Report. That was the big name you were waiting to read all about, right? (Charlotte Observer)

[Pirates]

Jim, remember that a lot of these players aren't outstanding or even good. But the HGH might have been enough between keeping them as a bench player for 15 years on a MLB roster or being a career AAA player.

[Padres]

... There's shame to spare. But the union, which has done much good in other respects, deserves special disgrace. Instead of defending the workplace safety of its members, its leaders protected the interests of stars and their agents who were more concerned with blocking drug tests so that they could inflate their salaries rather than, as Don Fehr claimed, protect their privacy. ...

Geez, when I read the following in the Mitchell Report (page SR-7) I wondered if the former Senator Mitchell (D-Maine) would have said this about a union when he was currying their favor while running for elected office:

The Players Association was largely uncooperative. (1) It rejected totally my requests for relevant documents. (2) It permitted one interview with its executive director, Donald Fehr; my request for an interview with its chief operating officer, Gene Orza, was refused. (3) It refused my request to interview the director of the Montreal laboratory that analyzes drug tests under baseball's drug program but permitted her to provide me with a letter addressing a limited number of issues. (4) I sent a memorandum to every active player in Major League Baseball encouraging each player to contact me or my staff if he had any relevant information. The Players Association sent out a companion memorandum that effectively discouraged players from cooperating. Not one player contacted me in response to my memorandum. (5) I received allegations of the illegal possession or use of performance enhancing substances by a number of current players. Through their representative, the Players Association, I asked each of them to meet with me so that I could provide them with information about the allegations and give them a chance to respond. Almost without exception they declined to meet or talk with me.

[Pirates]

Jim, read the part where it says when he interviewed I think it was formal montreal expo bullpen catcher. They found him bringing players baggage across the border with 'roids in them, and when Mitchell interviewed him he said that he named names but wouldn't let him put those names in the report. Stuff like that is a complete joke.

[Royals]

I would say that Ortiz and Schilling, like every other player, live under the same shadow as every other player. We don't know that they didn't in the past or aren't currently on steroids because the 'testing program' is a complete joke.

Bren, you should go back to some of my old SotSG posts on Barry Bonds, even I was smoother than that. You said yourself that drug tests don't reach everything, therefore voluntarily taking a test does not conclusively prove your innocence. From Today's New York Times the undercurrent of the article is that while they are getting closer THERE IS NO RELIABLE TEST BLOOD OR URINE FOR HGH. David Ortiz or any other player you want to come out from the shadow of suspicion could have himself tested every day, come up clean every day, and take as much hGH as he wants. A player currently on steroids could volunteer to take a test while he was cycled off of them. Shit you could fix the test beforehand with someone else's urine/blood. There are dozens of ways to beat any voluntary test anyone could take, so volunteering to take a blood test wouldn't prove a thing, which is the biggest reason why players don't do it.

This reminds me of a series of articles Skip Bayless wrote in the San Jose Mercury as the steroid thing was just getting going. He challenged Barry Bonds over and over again to deny using steroids, then Bonds did an interview on Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel in which he was asked the question and he responded with a simple "No." Bayless wrote the next day that Bonds simple "No" wasn't strong enough, that if he really hadn't done steroids he should have essentially challenged Gumbel to a duel for besmirching his honor by even asking the question. My point? I have two of them. The first one is that anyone who wants to stay suspicious is going to continue to be suspicious no matter what and there is no easy solution to that. My second is that Bren you make about as much sense as Skip Bayless


[/url]

Last point first. I won't bother arguing about Bonds with you. You've been a Bonds apologist for as long as I've known you and I don't expect that to ever change any more than I expect Gabe to change on Sosa.

First point, not every drug is currently detectable but just as new drugs are being developed, so are new testing methods. MLB is clearly NOT using the best methods possible to test. Any effective testing policy will include storage of samples for later testing when new drugs (such as Barry's cream and clear) are discovered and testing methods developed for them.

The current HGH test is not flawless, but it's pretty darn good. Good enough for the Olympics and every sporting body that's serious about catching cheaters to use it. The people complaining about it being bad are the ones getting busted.
There are also many other drugs only detectable through blood tests.

Jake (milwaukee), I'm still waiting to hear what exactly the players are afraid that MLB will find in those blood tests that will be so revealing and such an invasion of privacy. Aside from drugs of course.

Jim, jake (milwaukee) is dead on about Logan. Those articles reek of the type of attitude that wants to pretend that the steroid era didn't happen or that players weren't getting any benefit. Increased strength, shortened recovery times and improved eyesight are all known, proven effects of different PED's and all would be of great assistance to a pro baseball player.

[Yankees]

It's amazing how apologetic the people on this board are for the players and the union. Baseball is the ONE sport where truly everyone has a chance to play pro ball - high school kids, foreign born players, DI players, DII players, DIII players, JUCO players, semi-pro players, etc. etc. etc. Because of this the use of steroids runs rampant on EVERY level everywhere you turn. I knew of players taking steroids from my high school, college, and summer ball teams. The fact that the MLB spent $20 mill on this study - the MLB!!!!! - shows how far-reaching a problem this is.

I'm not saying every player is dirty, or that I suspect every player. What I am saying is that this report has put a irrevocable dark cloud over the last 20 years of the sport - and that cloud touches EVERY player who played. How can anyone say, with certainty, whether or not any player did or did not take steroids? You can't w/ the exclusion of everyone who has admitted it, and then Frank Thomas and Tony Gwynn. At this point, if you told me David Eckstein took steroids I wouldn't be shocked.

As Bren said, these players represent the apex of this sport - just like the Olympics, tennis, and cyclists - and they should be held to the same standard of those athletes. The last thing I think of now is - what if I took steroids? Could I at least have made a few minor league years out of it? Could I have received a free education for it? Those questions bug me - because the reason I always said no, was the health risks involved. But, even more then ever w/ this report - are kids actually asking themselves - "If steroids worked for those guys, why not me?" That sucks, and there is no group of people more responsible for this then the MLB players from this era - those who took them, and those who didn't take a stand against them.

[Dodgers]

I hear ya there Z.

An interesting question I have is how many of you are aware of Division I drug/testing policies? My girlfriend swims DIII but the whole college adheres to DI policies. You might be surprised at what you hear (I'll post them later).

[Pirates]

From what I was told when I briefly played college ball, was that we would be randomly drug tested, but then I was also told that athletes at hartford have never actually been drug tested in the past 2 years.

Also Z tell me if im wrong because im honestly not sure, but tennis and cycling are all sponsors? their is no union therefore the governing body has the right to implicate whatever drug testing method that they want.

[Padres]

That sucks, and there is no group of people more responsible for this then the MLB players from this era - those who took them, and those who didn't take a stand against them.

With very few exceptions, I couldn't agree more. That was really the point of Boswell's piece noted above:

Baseball has lived a lie since the late '80s, then stonewalled throughout the '90s, as a corrupting "code of silence," as the Mitchell report calls it, dragged the game to the bottom rung of the moral-authority ladder in American sports./b] What we've read is a 400-plus-page portrait of a sport that knew the depth of its problems at least 15 years ago. But, for the sake of union strength, crowd-pleasing home runs, record attendance and a "comeback" from its own self-inflicted strike, the entire sport turned its eyes away.

Away from what? That is the basest of all baseball's infractions. What the sport ignored, and still will not acknowledge adequately, is the true price of its moral weakness. Mitchell fingered it right up front, starting on page 5 with "Health Risks." Scientists debate the degree of danger posed by anabolic steroids and human growth hormones for mania, severe depression, heart attacks, liver damage, infertility, tendon tears, gigantism, cancer and arthritis. Yet science doesn't really know because no one would allow steroid or HGH tests on humans with the astronomical dosage levels used by pro athletes.

... There's shame to spare. But the union, which has done much good in other respects, deserves special disgrace. Instead of defending the workplace safety of its members, its leaders protected the interests of stars and their agents who were more concerned with blocking drug tests so that they could inflate their salaries rather than, as Don Fehr claimed, protect their privacy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... rss_sports

I do agree with Boswell that there is plenty of blame and should be plenty of shame to go around. The sad part is that even now I have no real hope of anyone in Union leadership or among the players stepping forward to deal with the problem in a positive manner.

Instead I expect that we will see lots of grandstanding and futile punitive efforts such as those being proposed by former Black Panther, Chicago 7 defendant and current Congressman Bobby Rush. Rush said he would hold a hearing Jan. 23 on the report's findings. "We're going to have to remain in the queue," he said.

Rush's announcement, at a church on Chicago's South Side, came as MLB Commissioner Bud Selig promises to deliver internal reforms and two other congressmen plan a separate hearing.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... &cset=true

At least Rush is saying, "It is important to send a message to young kids, upcoming athletes, that steroid use is not the way to succeed in sports." The truth is, though, this chronic abuse can not simply be legislated away. It will require leadership from within the ranks of the MLB players to turn the tide on this systematic problem.

[Royals]

Jake,
I can't speak for Tennis, but cycling does not have a union. Nor, I believe, does golf.

[Yankees]

Also Z tell me if im wrong because im honestly not sure, but tennis and cycling are all sponsors? their is no union therefore the governing body has the right to implicate whatever drug testing method that they want.

No - pretty sure you're right - but I certainly don't hold the union above ANY blame here. In fact, I have a few questions for Don Fehr if we ever meet...

[Pirates]

ive always been a huge fan of cycling ever since the days of mario cipolini if you remember him Bren, but it seems like the sports, Golf, Cycling, Olympics, Tennis which are more International sports are tougher on the drug policies. Baseball, Football, Basketball are all american based sports and it seems like in our lifestyle we don't "accept" it but we don't have it on top of our priorities as other countries might.

[Royals]

ive always been a huge fan of cycling ever since the days of mario cipolini if you remember him Bren, but it seems like the sports, Golf, Cycling, Olympics, Tennis which are more International sports are tougher on the drug policies. Baseball, Football, Basketball are all american based sports and it seems like in our lifestyle we don't "accept" it but we don't have it on top of our priorities as other countries might.

I didn't get into cycling until after I got into triathlon, which was only about a year ago.
That said, you're dead on. The International sports seem far more intent on putting forward an honest product than the American sports do.

[Dodgers]

Enough about cycling and tennis you pansies.

Bren, can you please also denouce Rodney Harrison and all the benefits the Patriots have reaped from having him. Thank you.


http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/s ... d=tab5pos2

[Royals]

Harrison got caught and did his penalty. I have less of a problem with someone like Harrison or Palmeiro who gets busted and takes the penalty than with the Bondses, Clemenses and McGuires of the world who get away with it, denying it all the way. The NFL is a WHOLE other ball of yarn. I'm not familiar enough with the NFLs policies to really comment on it. From what little I've heard, their policies aren't any stronger than MLB's. To their credit though, the penalties do seem to be much stronger than MLB's. Harrison missed 4 games (and lost the associated salary) for his use of PED's. In the MLB, that would be like missing 40 games.

That said, I care much less about the NFL than I do about MLB.

[Pirates]

people will remember clemmens as being on the list forever, but if shawn merriman turns out to be one of the better linebackers of our generation no one will say anything about his failed drug test. Right after it happened have we heard anything? nope.

[Cardinals]

it's almost just perception. people in the NFL are GIGANTIC. They are superhumans. Ever see one stand in front of you? they're giants. It's almost just accepted if even untrue that they are juiced up, but nobody cares. Why? I don't really know, but I think people almost expect it out of NFL players.

Baseball is the sport where the skinny guy like Lincecum can be a top player. He's what, 5'10 160? Try being that in the NFL. Right or wrong, it's a different sport and different types of people playing them.

I really don't care either way to be honest. I don't really care who took steroids in either sports. Having never played football besides flag football, I can't really speak for the benefits of using HGH or whatever. Baseball I don't know if the impact is as profound as everybody turns it out to be. You still have to have an amazing skill set to play the game. Do you really blame any of these 4 A guys for shooting a steroid up their ass to get to the MLB and play baseball for a living? I don't. If given the opportunity I'm sure almost everybody here would make the same decision.

Michael Jordan was a strong guy was he not? Big strong dude? failed at baseball. It's not ALL about being strong. You have to have hand -eye coordination and a certain degree of mental ability to play baseball. I'm fairly skinny yet was always one of the better hitters/fielders/players in my town whenever I played baseball, better than kids that were bigger than me. Could some of them throw harder? sure. Could I throw harder than some of the bigger ones too? Sure. It's got nothing to do with size or whatever.

I'm also tired of hearing about Mark McGwire. Where was the witchhunt when he and Sosa revived the game in 1998? I think everybody was a McGwire or Sosa fan then. Now MLB and fans throw them under the bus. Congrats on being huge hypocrites.

I'm tired of the Mitchell Report and it really has done nothing for the game. There was nothing groundbreaking about it. People we suspected (Gagne, Teajda, Clemens) were "confirmed" and some others that we didn't (Petitte) were vilified for not doing too much. I also doubt that the Mitchell Report is going to turn fans away from the game or anything of the sort. Peoples asses are still going to be in the seats, people are still going to be watching baseball, still going to talk about baseball, still going to do exactly what they did last year.

[Padres]

Will Carroll, of BP, commenting on the Mitchell Report wrote:

... It seems that the entire report is based on the testimony of and network marketing of Kirk Radomski and his secondary distributor, Brian McNamee. So where did Radomski get his supplies?

One final note: While I agree with Sen. Mitchellís call for a blanket amnesty for all users, named and not named, prior to the testing agreement in 2004, I have a problem with several of the players in the report acting as salesmen and distributors for Radomski. Drug use is wrong, but drug trafficking is a far larger issue and one that I feel calls for not only suspensions, but the consideration of larger penalties.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/

[Royals]

JP, no one ever claimed that using Roids would make you a pro baseball player or a great baseball player. Steroids make you stronger. Being stronger helps you as a baseball player. Steroids help you recover faster. Faster recovery helps you as a baseball player (especially when injured). Steroids (specifically HGH) can improve your vision. What player wouldn't take better eyesight?
There are a lot of skills that go into being a baseball player. Enhancing some of those skills can mean the difference between a spot in AAA or a spot on Boston's bench, or possibly a spot on a bench to a spot in the OF.
To paraphrase Rocky IV (because I can't remember the exact quote) <in thick Russian accent>"We make a man, a better man"
HGH won't teach me how to swim or how to pace myself on a bike or while running, but it will allow me to recover faster after a workout so that I can work harder that workout, and the next workout and the next workout and get better, faster and be fresh every single day.