<< <i>Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? >>
I posed a question earlier about people's experience with steroids and physical activities but for some odd reason, it was completely ignored.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed?
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed? >>
Steroids increase muscle. Increased muscle increases bat speed. Increased bat speed increases the amount of time the batter has to size up the pitch. Increased bat speed also results in harder hit baseballs. It doesn't improve hand-eye coordination or other athletic skills. That's why steroids won't take Joe Couch Potato and turn him into a HOFer. It also won't take Duane Kuiper and turn him into Hank Aaron. However, it could turn Darrell Evans into Harmon Killebrew.
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed? >>
Steroids increase muscle. Increased muscle increases bat speed. Increased bat speed increases the amount of time the batter has to size up the pitch. Increased bat speed also results in harder hit baseballs. It doesn't improve hand-eye coordination or other athletic skills. That's why steroids won't take Joe Couch Potato and turn him into a HOFer. It also won't take Duane Kuiper and turn him into Hank Aaron. However, it could turn Darrell Evans into Harmon Killebrew. >>
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question.
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed? >>
Steroids increase muscle. Increased muscle increases bat speed. Increased bat speed increases the amount of time the batter has to size up the pitch. Increased bat speed also results in harder hit baseballs. It doesn't improve hand-eye coordination or other athletic skills. That's why steroids won't take Joe Couch Potato and turn him into a HOFer. It also won't take Duane Kuiper and turn him into Hank Aaron. However, it could turn Darrell Evans into Harmon Killebrew. >>
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
What kind of study do you need?
Why do you think you can hit a ball farther and harder at age 11, than you can at age 7? Because you are stronger.
You should go get a measure of your bat speed...then go sit on the couch for three months, eat a diet like an ethiopian, watch your muscular strength disappear, and then re-test your bat speed. If you can get your bat speed to the same pre-test level with 'less' muscle strength, then you have a strong point on your side of the debate that muscle strength has no effect on bat speed
Why do you think you can hit a ball farther and harder at age 11, than you can at age 7? Because you are stronger. >>
Yes, because you are still developing, hand eye coordination is getting better, any number of things that have no relevance whatsoever to steroid use.
<< <i>You should go get a measure of your bat speed...then go sit on the couch for three months, eat a diet like an ethiopian, watch your muscular strength disappear, and then re-test your bat speed. If you can get your bat speed to the same pre-test level with 'less' muscle strength, then you have a strong point on your side of the debate that muscle strength has no effect on bat speed >>
Why would you do that? You're suggesting that the difference in Arod's bat speed to steroids is the same as someone who loses all muscle mass?
<< <i> How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
How do you suggest we do these studies? Any player who takes part would automatically be suspended for 50 games. Maybe give steroids to high school players in states that don't have a big enough budget for drug testing
<< <i>How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
You have to be kidding!
Here are the simple facts; Testosterone is the naturally occurring male hormone that enables among other things, muscle growth. Steroids are synthetic testosterone, among other things they cause not only new muscle growth but slow down the rate that old muscle degrades. The results are well documented.
I am also not being confrontational............do a little google search and you will find some AMAZING facts on the benefits that professional athletes have had on performance. Also some bad side effects. Pick up a copy of "Juiced" by Jose Canseco. There you get the story right from the source. He studied steroids and carefully used them to improve all aspects of his game.
Joe
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
WHY did he want you in the gym? To exercise to build up strength as well as fast twitch muscle speed? Steroids most certainly will do that.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
I've noticed advocates for roid abusers usually play the "it doesn't improve the hand-eye coordination, therefore you're wrong" retort. It's a strawman since no one, at least to my knowledge, even makes this claim. If you're in MLB/MiLB system, you naturally have above average coordination. If it was just average or below, you would need to find a different career because no amount of steroids will improve it.
<< <i>...Charles Yesalis, a professor emeritus at Penn State and one of the country's foremost experts on steroid abuse.
...SI: What about his suggestion that steroids didn't improve his performance because they don't help hand-eye coordination.
Yesalis: Some players have made the argument that you can't make some guy a big behemoth and he's going to be in the majors. But if you have that rare, God-given skill of hitting 100 mph fastballs, and curveballs, and then you make that person bigger, the notion that being bigger after that skill doesn't help you, I can't even take seriously. You take Bambi and Godzilla with the same skill level, who's going to hit the ball better? >>
edited again: before any advocates call out Yesalis for being a fear monger, a lot of studies you cite stating health risks are greatly exaggerated most likely come from him.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i> How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
How do you suggest we do these studies? Any player who takes part would automatically be suspended for 50 games. Maybe give steroids to high school players in states that don't have a big enough budget for drug testing >>
Where in my post did I argue that such studies should be undertaken? I'm not advocating for them, I'm simply asking if any study on the effect that steroids have on bat speed have ever been conducted. If they have not, then I reserve the right not to make a WAG at the magnitude of the impact that steroids have on the ability to hit a baseball.
I'm also not advocating for steroid use, or defending steroid users- let's make that clear right now. I'm simply suspending judgment until I think the burden of proof has been satisfied. And so far (at least in this thread) it has not been.
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed? >>
Steroids increase muscle. Increased muscle increases bat speed. Increased bat speed increases the amount of time the batter has to size up the pitch. Increased bat speed also results in harder hit baseballs. It doesn't improve hand-eye coordination or other athletic skills. That's why steroids won't take Joe Couch Potato and turn him into a HOFer. It also won't take Duane Kuiper and turn him into Hank Aaron. However, it could turn Darrell Evans into Harmon Killebrew. >>
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
What kind of study do you need?
Why do you think you can hit a ball farther and harder at age 11, than you can at age 7? Because you are stronger.
You should go get a measure of your bat speed...then go sit on the couch for three months, eat a diet like an ethiopian, watch your muscular strength disappear, and then re-test your bat speed. If you can get your bat speed to the same pre-test level with 'less' muscle strength, then you have a strong point on your side of the debate that muscle strength has no effect on bat speed >>
So by your reasoning, if someone wants to become a better hitter they should add as much muscle mass as possible. Is this a fair summation?
Edit to add: Please don't start in with assumptions about 'my side of the debate'. To this point, 'my side of the debate' has nothing to do with the argument that bad speed is unrelated to strength.
FYI, just for clarification in case it was misinterpreted - Boo, I didn't intend to insinuate you were an advocate for steroid use. I included you in the edit for information purposes only.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Comparing bambi and godzilla is a flawed analogy. Period. It's the same nonsense the poster who advocated comparing the effects of sitting on the couch for months and not working out.
As was previously noted it pure muscle mass was such a benefit for hitting the ball then you'd have a league full of bulked up monsters. But the fact remains there's nothing to tie exorbitant muscle mass to elevating ball travel when hit.
<< <i>So by your reasoning, if someone wants to become a better hitter they should add as much muscle mass as possible. Is this a fair summation? >>
NO IT'S NOT! Generally speaking, more strength, and faster recovery from injury, will benefit you in nearly every sport. Only in bodybuilding are most users trying just for muscle mass.
Reading Canseco's book would really help you understand.
He developed a regimen not just to get bigger and stronger, but faster as well. He used different steroids and different combinations of steroids to along with a specific exercise program to "design" his athletic abilities.
If I remember correctly, he criticized Giambi for just bulking up without a proper plan.
Like him or not Canseco did not just start injecting stuff into his body willy-nilly, he found out how to do it "right". Even though he was WRONG!
By the way, steroids were developed legally by drug companies for various health benefits, some people have growth disorders for example, I am quite sure they did hundreds of studies that guided them in the development of what we have today. Not sure if these have been published.
Joe
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
<< <i>Comparing bambi and godzilla is a flawed analogy. Period. It's the same nonsense the poster who advocated comparing the effects of sitting on the couch for months and not working out.
As was previously noted it pure muscle mass was such a benefit for hitting the ball then you'd have a league full of bulked up monsters. But the fact remains there's nothing to tie exorbitant muscle mass to elevating ball travel when hit. >>
Actually the steroid era was full of bulked up monsters. I think it's no accident that before steroids were in vogue in baseball and after MLB cracked down on abusers, ERAs and HRs have returned to more historical norms. Muscle alone won't make a hitter great. That's clear. However, take a great hitter and bulk them up and they do become monsters that smash records on an annual basis. I wonder why nobody is hitting 60hr a year every year anymore? Did someone take the air out of the baseball again???
<< <i>He developed a regimen not just to get bigger and stronger, but faster as well. >>
Just look at the 'exclusive' 40-40 club. Of the four in MLB history, only Soriano has a question mark.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
Well, I'm no expert on steroids as probably nobody else on here is either. However, I did play baseball up to the collegiate and semi-pro level. Increased muscle strength is one way to increase bat speed. Another way is to use a lighter bat which then results in less mass behind the baseball as you hit it. It's basic physics. So if you have more muscle mass to go along with your natural hand/eye coordination, you can improve your bat speed while maintaining the bat weight compared to if you weren't working out and building muscle.
Edited to add a question back to you. If increased muscle mass doesn't improve the bat speed and the hitter's ability to hit a baseball farther, why would baseball players work out and why would they continue to try to add more muscle as they body build? Why did McGwire go from a 1960s linebacker build to a modern day defensive end build and subsequently hit more HRs than he ever did in his career?
I never brought the point up of increased bat speed...because it is a given with increased muscle strength and explosiveness.
Axtell, why would I suggest taking away muscle strength? Umm, because if you take away your muscle strength you will see first hand how it will effect your bat speed.
Arod without steroids(and with the subsequent weaker muscles) equals Arod with slower bat speed. Sure, one can refute that because they are biased...but then just test it out yourself like I gave the example of and you will see the difference.
Axtell, just think, with your 38 MPH current bat speed(MPH of ball coming off bat), if you made your muscles weaker, you would probably drop down to 28 MPH. Check it out and see. No need to debate about it.
If you guys don't believe that increased muscle strength will increase stuff like bat speed...then why do you even bother making your muscles stronger? Stronger muscles helps you do everything easier. I guess I've been living life wrong. I should just let my body go and I could still do all the same stuff as easy as I could now!@ Boy, why didn't I meet you guys before I bothered spending all that time improving my muscle strength.
What the heck do you think is propelling the bat??
<< <i>I never brought the point up of increased bat speed...because it is a given with increased muscle strength and explosiveness. >>
It's a given? Says who? You? Proof or this point is invalid.
<< <i>Axtell, why would I suggest taking away muscle strength? Umm, because if you take away your muscle strength you will see first hand how it will effect your bat speed. >>
But your suggestion is a player's increases with steroids make an equal jump from no muscle to normal. Again proof or this is invalid. You can't just say 'because it is!' With no evidence.
<< <i>Arod without steroids(and with the subsequent weaker muscles) equals Arod with slower bat speed. Sure, one can refute that because they are biased...but then just test it out yourself like I gave the example of and you will see the difference.
Axtell, just think, with your 38 MPH current bat speed(MPH of ball coming off bat), if you made your muscles weaker, you would probably drop down to 28 MPH. Check it out and see. No need to debate about it. >>
30% increase in be speed ? Where do you get this stuff?
<< <i>If you guys don't believe that increased muscle strength will increase stuff like bat speed...then why do you even bother making your muscles stronger? Stronger muscles helps you do everything easier. I guess I've been living life wrong. I should just let my body go and I could still do all the same stuff as easy as I could now!@ Boy, why didn't I meet you guys before I bothered spending all that time improving my muscle strength.
What the heck do you think is propelling the bat?? >>
I am not disputing muscles power the ball. What can and is disputed is how much an effect steroid use has on an increase in how far the ball travels. You can sit there spinning hypotheticals all day but the facts remain that no one knows if there is a correlation. What is known is that steroids reduce recovery time.
<< <i>Comparing bambi and godzilla is a flawed analogy. Period. It's the same nonsense the poster who advocated comparing the effects of sitting on the couch for months and not working out.
As was previously noted it pure muscle mass was such a benefit for hitting the ball then you'd have a league full of bulked up monsters. But the fact remains there's nothing to tie exorbitant muscle mass to elevating ball travel when hit. >>
Actually the steroid era was full of bulked up monsters. I think it's no accident that before steroids were in vogue in baseball and after MLB cracked down on abusers, ERAs and HRs have returned to more historical norms. Muscle alone won't make a hitter great. That's clear. However, take a great hitter and bulk them up and they do become monsters that smash records on an annual basis. I wonder why nobody is hitting 60hr a year every year anymore? Did someone take the air out of the baseball again??? >>
Great post- If someone forced me to guess I think I'd take a position very close to this one. At this point the most likely explanation for the effect of steroids on performance (in my opinion) is that it can make an otherwise very good player into an exceptional player (or an average player into a very good player, etc.).
I am not disputing muscles power the ball. What can and is disputed is how much an effect steroid use has on an increase in how far the ball travels. You can sit there spinning hypotheticals all day but the facts remain that no one knows if there is a correlation. What is known is that steroids reduce recovery time. >>
Axtell, you are not the sharpest tool in the shed. THat 30% decrease was not said to be any number that increases/decrease...it was an estimate of what your pathetic bat speed would sink to if you were even weaker than you currently are.
Muscles power the body, which transfers power to the bat...I'm pretty sure that is indisputable.
The speed and weight of the bat determine how fast the ball will come off the bat....I'm pretty sure that is indisputable.
The speed and trajectory of the ball off the bat will determine how far the ball goes...I'm pretty sure that is indisputable.
If the first bat is swung at X amount of MPH the ball will travel X amount of distance. If the second bat, which is the same size bat, is swung at X+5 MPH(with X being the same speed as the first bat), the ball will travel farther than the first ball. This is a fact(given all other variables equal, spot on the bat hit, stationary or same speed ball coming in, wind, type of bat, etc...). That is a fact.
If stronger muscles means a person can lift more weights than they previously did, can throw a disc farther than they previously could, can run faster than they previously could, can punch harder then they previously could...are you saying they cannot swing a bat around faster than they previously could?
The line of thinking you are falling into is the old school baseball thought that stronger muscles are bad for baseball training. Yes, if a guy goes about building his muscles and does it in a way where he becomes one of those muscle bound guys that can't straighten out his arms or turn his neck without turning his entire body, then you would have point.
However, if a guy can increase his muscular strength and maintain his range of motion, then he will most certainly be able to propel the bat faster than he previously could...which physics says will indeed make the ball go farther than it previous did. That is a fact.
Bat speed equals the speed of the bat traveling. Exit speed equals the speed of the ball coming off the bat. Increased bat speed will equal increased exit speed. Increased exit speed equals increased distance.
Basically, for every extra 1 MPH of exit speed you can gain, the ball will go about 4 extra feet.
If a player can increase his muscle strength and be able to propel the bat faster than he could before, and he is able to gain 5 more MPH in exit speed, then he will be able to hit the ball appx 20 feet further than he could before.
Mechanics play a role...two players can have the same bat speed, but different exit speed. This could be caused by reaching their maximum bat speed at the wrong part of the swing. Ideally you want it maximized at the point of contact of course. However, in my above post, this would be one of the "all variables being equal."
<< <i> However, if a guy can increase his muscular strength and maintain his range of motion, then he will most certainly be able to propel the bat faster than he previously could...which physics says will indeed make the ball go farther than it previous did. That is a fact. >>
Skin, you can try to insult me, call me names, do whatever you want, but it doesn't do anything to prove your point that taking steroids = an increase in batted ball traveling. What steroids have been proven to do, again, is reduce recovery time between workouts, and reduce fatigue. This is vastly different from the idea that bulking up is going to make your outs turn into home runs.
So, keep on with the insults, keep on with the name-calling, all it does is only further diminish your points about steroids doing wonders and making guys hit more home runs.
<< <i> However, if a guy can increase his muscular strength and maintain his range of motion, then he will most certainly be able to propel the bat faster than he previously could...which physics says will indeed make the ball go farther than it previous did. That is a fact. >>
Skin, you can try to insult me, call me names, do whatever you want, but it doesn't do anything to prove your point that taking steroids = an increase in batted ball traveling. What steroids have been proven to do, again, is reduce recovery time between workouts, and reduce fatigue. This is vastly different from the idea that bulking up is going to make your outs turn into home runs.
So, keep on with the insults, keep on with the name-calling, all it does is only further diminish your points about steroids doing wonders and making guys hit more home runs.
Oh, and by the way? #653!!! >>
One way to get bigger is to work out more. Reducing time between workouts allows you to do that. You do actually get it!
Increasing testosterone levels (either naturally or artificially) in the male body plus lifting weights has already been PROVEN to dramatically increase muscle size. That you choose not to find this out for yourself is just another way to elongate these arguments.
You also cannot "prove" the surface of the sun is hot.................never been there have you?
We can debate all day long about being a fan of ARod or not, you like him, good for you.
Do some research for a change and take a break from speculation. The steroid information is well documented.
That would certainly change other people's opinion of you, and your posting style (no name calling here!).
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
<< <i> One way to get bigger is to work out more. Reducing time between workouts allows you to do that. You do actually get it! >>
So what? There's no proof that the correlation between getting bigger and more home runs exists. Until there's a definitive study, all there is is speculation by random folks on the internet.
<< <i>Increasing testosterone levels (either naturally or artificially) in the male body plus lifting weights has already been PROVEN to dramatically increase muscle size. That you choose not to find this out for yourself is just another way to elongate these arguments. >>
No, it's obvious there's a connect between working out and muscle size. What you all refuse to do is link evidence showing a correlation between this increased muscle size and an increase in home runs. Until that happens, again, it's all speculation.
<< <i>You also cannot "prove" the surface of the sun is hot.................never been there have you? >>
You. Can't. Be. Serious.
<< <i>We can debate all day long about being a fan of ARod or not, you like him, good for you. >>
Again, irrelevant to your side's repeated attempts to link steroid use to increased home run output.
<< <i>Do some research for a change and take a break from speculation. The steroid information is well documented. >>
Then prove it. Show me some of this 'well documented' results that prove steroid use results in increased home run output. If it's so easy to find, then you should have no shortage of studies you can back up your point that taking steroids results in more home runs.
Back up your accusations, or back up off your side of the debate. Your move.
<< <i>You also cannot "prove" the surface of the sun is hot... >>
A better example would probably be Einstein's Theory of Relativity. With the exception of a genius or two here, we cannot prove it but know it to be true.
The most basic formula that I can think of showing the effects of steroids and home runs would be D = W/F. If that's too complicated, sometimes pictures help:
If that doesn't work, it's called being deliberately obtuse and nothing can change that.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Good for you Stown you showed me photos of guys before and after they worked out. Congratulations. But you have yet to show any evidence steroid use to an increase in home runs.
The truth of the matter is there is no conclusive study that shows what effects steroids have on home run production. It's speculation. Just as I have none to say it doesn't. However since you guys are on the side of the coin making the accusation it's up to you to prove your case with evidence. Until then? You're doing nothing but wild speculating.
Everything I posted is scientific proof. You can dispute it all you like, but physics don't lie.
Stronger muscles equals faster bat speed, faster bat speed equals higher exit speed from the ball, higher exit speed equals further distance the ball will travel. Those are facts.
Based on your evidence(which is none), you are saying that every push up, pull up, and sit up done by hitters have been done in vein, because muscle strength has no effect on bat speed, or on any sports related event for that matter. You have just revolutionized the world as we know it!
You can write a new book titled, "Do nothing," because muscle strength is irrelevant.
You should not let bias get in your way. You are Arod's only fan left, and you are doing him an even worse injustice. He himself would cringe knowing you are the only guy left in his corner, and would prefer his corner be empty.
<< <i>I already know how this ends. You engage me, I make you look completely foolish, and then you play the Tinkerbell card.
No thanks. Go yap elsewhere, boy >>
Skin,
If an 'adult' cannot comprehend basic math, simple physics will go right over their head. It's comparable to explaining DNA to a child; they don't yet have the cognitive development and won't understand what you're explaining. Difference being, a child should eventually learn while you typically cannot teach an old dog new tricks.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
It's downright hilarious how much time and energy stown and skin have gone into attempting to link steroid use to a direct increase in home runs, with nothing other than anecdotal evidence suggesting they play a part in increased home runs.
I'd like to point you folks to a nice comprehensive report on the idea here suggesting there is no discernible link between steroid use an increased power/home runs.
"Now here's that critical matter: in doing this, we have to be very, very careful not to make the elementary mistake that some--from sportswriter to physicist--have made in trying to simplistically plug numbers into Professor Adair's equations. That mistake is to assume that all added muscle mass is being used to further power a struck baseball. It's wrong.
As Professor Adair himself put it:
"The considerable energy . . . transferred to the bat . . . is generated largely by the large muscles of the thighs and torso. The arms and hands serve mainly to transfer the energy of the body's rotational and transverse motions to the bat and add little extra energy to the bat. [Footnoted with:] In particular, the contribution of the hands and wrists to the energy of the bat is almost negligible. "
In short: Batting power is all about lower-body strength. Bulging biceps and triceps and deltoids and the rest of the upper-body muscle set may wow the baseball Annies--and perhaps scandal-sniffing reporters--but they mean essentially nothing to long-ball hitting. We don't need to rely on physicists for that fact: anyone in baseball knows it well."
So stown, your posting photos of known steroid users as 'facts' of steroids increasing home run totals is as misleading as it is naive. But keep on keeping on with the idea that steroids are the reasons records fell. Keep on believing the hype machine the media outlets spoon fed you for years. Those with a critical eye know the truth.
I can't wait until Arod bashes 661, next step on the all time ladder!
<< <i>Good for you Stown you showed me photos of guys before and after they worked out. Congratulations. But you have yet to show any evidence steroid use to an increase in home runs.
The truth of the matter is there is no conclusive study that shows what effects steroids have on home run production. It's speculation. Just as I have none to say it doesn't. However since you guys are on the side of the coin making the accusation it's up to you to prove your case with evidence. Until then? You're doing nothing but wild speculating. >>
<< <i> Ask Brady Anderson if it makes a difference...
>>
So the entire basis of your entry into this debate is Anderson took steroids for exactly one year? And if the results were so dramatic, and steroids alone were the reason he hit 50 home runs, why did he stop? Why would he take them for exactly one year? If steroids are responsible for his drastic power increase as you claim it was, why did he do it for just one year? Why wouldn't he have continued, especially as 1997 (the year after he hit 50) he would have been a free agent and been able to sign a much, MUCH richer contract?
The surface of the sun comment really was no different than the steroids issue.
Everyone (but you) is in agreement that steroid use helps players to hit more home runs. It happens to be a fact. I have already posted several links regarding this, I am not going to go back and do it again. If you can't realize that increased muscle = increased strength = hitting a ball farther, certainly no study is going to change your mind.
I applaud your incredible decision to swim upstream on this one. You do know the earth is not flat don't you?
If 1000 people tell you you have a tail, you might want to turn around and take a look to make sure.
You are the best!
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
"The considerable energy . . . transferred to the bat . . . is generated largely by the large muscles of the thighs and torso. >>
Hello, notice the words large muscles in that sentence??
Who has suggested that only the biceps swing the bat?
Those large muscles they are talking about, when increased in strength, will provide more powerful rotational forces, thus transferring more energy to the bat. As a proponent of rotational hitting myself, this is obvious to me. My apologies if you did not see the obvious.
BTW, it isn't just the lower body...as the abdominal region and back region are not lower body, and those are important forces in swinging. The back is another force. The chest plays a role too, as do biceps and tricpes(though those arent' as prominent as the core)
In short, it is taking muscles, mainly large powerful muscles to swing the bat. The stronger you make those powerful muscles, the faster you will swing the bat.
Everything you posted made zero sense and only proved what we are saying...which is that muscles swing the bat, and the stronger the muscles the faster the swing. THe faster the swing, the faster the ball comes off the bat. The faster the ball comes off the bat, the farther it will travel. The farther it travels, the more home runs one gets. All of those are indisputable facts.
Instead of talking about it, why don't you go to the local little league field, put a ball on a tee at home plate, take 50 swings and then record the one or two you might get over the fence. THen, spend one year working out all those large muscles that create the rotational forces, re-do your experiment at the little league field, and then record how many home runs you get over that 200 foot fence. Then you will learn first hand what everybody else already knows.
Anabolic steroids are a class of steroid hormones based on the androgen testosterone. Anabolic steroids are also known as anabolic-androgenic steroids or AAS or performance enhancing drugs.
What Do Anabolic Steroids Do?
Anabolic steroids increase the rate of protein synthesis within cells. The building of cellular tissue (anabolism) is especially noticeable in muscles. Anabolic steroids also have androgenic and virilizing effects. They influence masculine characteristics such as the growth of the vocal cords and body hair.
How Are Anabolic Steroids Used as Drugs?
Anabolic steroids have been attractive to athletes and bodybuilders because they increase the size and strength of muscles. They also increase aggressiveness and competitiveness, which can be desirable traits in sports. Anabolic steroids may be prescribed to promote appetite, stimulate bone growth, induce male puberty, to lessen the effects of muscle wasting from chronic diseases, such as cancer or AIDS, and may show promise as a male contraceptive. The drugs are available as oral pills, injectable steroids, and skin patches.
How Do Anabolic Steroids Work?
Anabolic steroids change muscle mass and strength by two processes. First, the steroids lead to an increased production of proteins, which are the building blocks of muscle. The steroids also block the effect of the hormone cortisol on muscle tissue, so that existing muscle is broken down at a slower rate. Additionally, anabolic steroids lead to cells differentiating into muscle more readily than fat.
What Are the Risks of Using Anabolic Steroids?
In addition to increasing muscle strength and mass, the effects of taking anabolic steroids include harmful changes in cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, acne, liver damage, and changes to the structure of the left ventricle of the heart. Anabolic steroids have an androgenic or virilizing effect, meaning they affect male characteristics. Anabolic steroids affect the onset of puberty, growth of the clitoris in females and the penis in male children (does not affect the size of the penis in adults), increased size of the vocal chords and deepening of the voice, increased body hair, and premature baldness in people predisposed to it. Another side effect is decreased fertility and testicular atrophy.
Why Are Anabolic Steroids Dangerous for Teens?
Many of the side effects of taking performance enhancing drugs can be countered by combining them with other drugs and exercise and are somewhat reversible in adults. However, anabolic steroid use can have permanent negative consequences if used by adolescents. One side effect can be early onset of puberty. More significantly, the drugs can stunt growth by prematurely stopping the lengthening of the bones.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
You need to conduct a study violating Federal laws by purchasing mass quantities of illegal PEDs and then sacrifice some MLB players' careers taking said substances, which will result in a minimum suspension of 50 games (or 211 [corrected] games, and subsequent retirement, in Alex's case).
Until you do this many times over to get a conclusive, undeniable result... THE. SKY. IS. PURPLE!
edited to add since I forgot some posters are completely ignorant when it comes to formulas, be it in math or physics, and it requires to be spelled out for their 'special needs': D(istance) = W(ork) / F(orce)
edited again: My initial post stated Alex had a 150-game suspension when it's actually 211 and we regret the error
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>If you guys don't believe that increased muscle strength will increase stuff like bat speed...then why do you even bother making your muscles stronger? Stronger muscles helps you do everything easier. I guess I've been living life wrong. I should just let my body go and I could still do all the same stuff as easy as I could now!@ Boy, why didn't I meet you guys before I bothered spending all that time improving my muscle strength. >>
After you spent all that time improving muscle strength, how much did your home run rate change?
Don't be so confident, Joe. After the appeal, I firmly believe there are going to be major legal repercussions. The Yanks don't want him or any part of future milestone achievements*. They've already accused him of violating the CBA by getting a second medical opinion without their consent. Alex has threatened to sue the team's doctor for malpractice.
IF Alex did anything to breach his contract, IMO, the Yanks will either terminate or settle with a negotiated buyout. Going from there, he will follow in the same footsteps as Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, etc. A player without a team and has no other option but to retire.
I could be wrong but think it's more probable than possible.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>Don't be so confident, Joe. After the appeal, I firmly believe there are going to be major legal repercussions. >>
No, there won't. No matter how much YOU want it to happen, there is literally ZERO chance the yankees can weasel out of the contract.
<< <i>The Yanks don't want him or any part of future milestone achievements*. They've already accused him of violating the CBA by getting a second medical opinion without their consent. Alex has threatened to sue the team's doctor for malpractice. >>
So what? There's no recourse to void the contract. Arod is going to march right by 660 and collect $6 million bonus for doing so.
<< <i>IF Alex did anything to breach his contract, IMO, the Yanks will either terminate or settle with a negotiated buyout. Going from there, he will follow in the same footsteps as Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, etc. A player without a team and has no other option but to retire.
I could be wrong but think it's more probable than possible. >>
No, it's not more probable than possible. Hold your breath though!
<< <i>Don't be so confident, Joe. After the appeal, I firmly believe there are going to be major legal repercussions. The Yanks don't want him or any part of future milestone achievements*. They've already accused him of violating the CBA by getting a second medical opinion without their consent. Alex has threatened to sue the team's doctor for malpractice.
IF Alex did anything to breach his contract, IMO, the Yanks will either terminate or settle with a negotiated buyout. Going from there, he will follow in the same footsteps as Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, etc. A player without a team and has no other option but to retire.
I could be wrong but think it's more probable than possible. >>
I think I speak for the majority of MLB fans when I say that I hope your projections come to fruition. I certainly know that I, for one, am ready to see A-Rod recuse himself from the national discussion once and for all. And I will delight in the HOF's refusal to induct him.
The Yankees might want him to retire to save them the money.
MLB may want to ban him (HUGE lawsuit if they do) to rid them of his negative publicity.
People that don't like him want him to go away.
He will not retire with all that money on the table. I think the only thing Selig could get away with is to put him on the ineligible list once he does retire. Arod won't care much about that.
Arod will never voluntarily retire. As much as I hate to do it, I at least partially agree with ax85fan.
I am glad I don't care either way, his place in baseball history is destroyed as far as I am concerned. He'll be gone sooner or later with his money and his tainted records. Very few will see him as being anything but a TOOL.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
<< <i>Don't be so confident, Joe. After the appeal, I firmly believe there are going to be major legal repercussions. The Yanks don't want him or any part of future milestone achievements*. They've already accused him of violating the CBA by getting a second medical opinion without their consent. Alex has threatened to sue the team's doctor for malpractice.
IF Alex did anything to breach his contract, IMO, the Yanks will either terminate or settle with a negotiated buyout. Going from there, he will follow in the same footsteps as Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, etc. A player without a team and has no other option but to retire.
I could be wrong but think it's more probable than possible. >>
You might be right, but how would it look (and how much would it cost) if the Yankees were to lose the lawsuit?
If I remember right, every major league contract has some kind of "out" in it for behavior detrimental to the game or some such verbiage. I don't believe it's ever been tested and we have had some real a$$hats in sports, including Spreewell who tried to kill his coach!
You mention something about a second opinion from a doctor? No matter what his contract might say, most people (including myself) would view that as a chicken$hit way of getting out of the deal. Lawsuits coming out of that could last many years. I don't think the Yankees have the baseBALLS to try it.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
First off, I do need to make a correction. Stated Alex was appealing a 150-game suspension when it's actually 211-games and I apologize for the error.
<< <i>You might be right, but how would it look (and how much would it cost) if the Yankees were to lose the lawsuit?
If I remember right, every major league contract has some kind of "out" in it for behavior detrimental to the game or some such verbiage. I don't believe it's ever been tested and we have had some real a$$hats in sports, including Spreewell who tried to kill his coach!
You mention something about a second opinion from a doctor? No matter what his contract might say, most people (including myself) would view that as a chicken$hit way of getting out of the deal. Lawsuits coming out of that could last many years. I don't think the Yankees have the baseBALLS to try it. >>
The way I see it (from a non-lawyer perspective), the Yanks have nothing to lose, other than maybe having some egg on their face. Worst case scenario would be insurance covering the malpractice suit and obligated to honor the contract.
It's an unprecedented situation. MLB didn't only accuse Alex of failing a drug test, which would have resulted in a similar suspension to Braun or others, but rather numerous violations. According to reports, he was essentially the facilitator for the clinic, tried to interfere with MLB investigations, and bribe witnesses for evidence and silence. No one can definitively say the reports are accurate but putting a 211-game suspension in perspective, one can safely assume there's *a lot* more than a failed test.
I agree that Alex's selfish ego will not allow him to voluntarily retire; however, MLB and MLBPA must look after their best interests going forward. Again, this situation is unprecedented and the potential consequences will be far reaching in the future. Owners will demand additional out clauses for mega contracts, which puts the Union between a rock and a hard place. As I said earlier, IF Alex breached terms of his contract, I think they'll make Alex the so-called sacrificial lamb for the good of their overall membership. Sure, it will probably be perceived as a ticky-tacky way to get out but as Boo mentioned, an overwhelming majority of fans want to put the Roid Era behind us. While Alex's blind fanboys scream from the rafters, everyone else will just shrug and say good riddance.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
The precedent has already been set when it comes to interfering with a PED investigation. Melky Cabrera set up a fake website selling a product which he claimed led to his positive test. It actually sent MLB investigators all the way to the Dominican Republic trying to track it down.
Yet even after all of this, he still received just a 50 game suspension. Anyone who suggests Arod's legal counsel is going to allow anything more than the same 50 game suspension is deluding themselves. This was his first positive test, and standard protocol for a first positive is 50 games. That's what he will serve.
As far as the Yankees go, if there was a way for them to legally wrangle them out of his contract, they would have done it by now. The fact remains that he is still a Yankee and is going to collect every penny (sans the 50 game suspension) of that contract.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Comments
<< <i>Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? >>
I posed a question earlier about people's experience with steroids and physical activities but for some odd reason, it was completely ignored.
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed?
<< <i>
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed? >>
Steroids increase muscle. Increased muscle increases bat speed. Increased bat speed increases the amount of time the batter has to size up the pitch. Increased bat speed also results in harder hit baseballs. It doesn't improve hand-eye coordination or other athletic skills. That's why steroids won't take Joe Couch Potato and turn him into a HOFer. It also won't take Duane Kuiper and turn him into Hank Aaron. However, it could turn Darrell Evans into Harmon Killebrew.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed? >>
Steroids increase muscle. Increased muscle increases bat speed. Increased bat speed increases the amount of time the batter has to size up the pitch. Increased bat speed also results in harder hit baseballs. It doesn't improve hand-eye coordination or other athletic skills. That's why steroids won't take Joe Couch Potato and turn him into a HOFer. It also won't take Duane Kuiper and turn him into Hank Aaron. However, it could turn Darrell Evans into Harmon Killebrew. >>
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed? >>
Steroids increase muscle. Increased muscle increases bat speed. Increased bat speed increases the amount of time the batter has to size up the pitch. Increased bat speed also results in harder hit baseballs. It doesn't improve hand-eye coordination or other athletic skills. That's why steroids won't take Joe Couch Potato and turn him into a HOFer. It also won't take Duane Kuiper and turn him into Hank Aaron. However, it could turn Darrell Evans into Harmon Killebrew. >>
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
What kind of study do you need?
Why do you think you can hit a ball farther and harder at age 11, than you can at age 7? Because you are stronger.
You should go get a measure of your bat speed...then go sit on the couch for three months, eat a diet like an ethiopian, watch your muscular strength disappear, and then re-test your bat speed. If you can get your bat speed to the same pre-test level with 'less' muscle strength, then you have a strong point on your side of the debate that muscle strength has no effect on bat speed
<< <i>
What kind of study do you need?
Why do you think you can hit a ball farther and harder at age 11, than you can at age 7? Because you are stronger. >>
Yes, because you are still developing, hand eye coordination is getting better, any number of things that have no relevance whatsoever to steroid use.
<< <i>You should go get a measure of your bat speed...then go sit on the couch for three months, eat a diet like an ethiopian, watch your muscular strength disappear, and then re-test your bat speed. If you can get your bat speed to the same pre-test level with 'less' muscle strength, then you have a strong point on your side of the debate that muscle strength has no effect on bat speed
Why would you do that? You're suggesting that the difference in Arod's bat speed to steroids is the same as someone who loses all muscle mass?
<< <i>
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
How do you suggest we do these studies? Any player who takes part would automatically be suspended for 50 games. Maybe give steroids to high school players in states that don't have a big enough budget for drug testing
<< <i>How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
You have to be kidding!
Here are the simple facts; Testosterone is the naturally occurring male hormone that enables among other things, muscle growth. Steroids are synthetic testosterone, among other things they cause not only new muscle growth but slow down the rate that old muscle degrades. The results are well documented.
I am also not being confrontational............do a little google search and you will find some AMAZING facts on the benefits that professional athletes have had on performance. Also some bad side effects. Pick up a copy of "Juiced" by Jose Canseco. There you get the story right from the source. He studied steroids and carefully used them to improve all aspects of his game.
Joe
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
WHY did he want you in the gym? To exercise to build up strength as well as fast twitch muscle speed? Steroids most certainly will do that.
edited to add for Boo: Link
<< <i>...Charles Yesalis, a professor emeritus at Penn State and one of the country's foremost experts on steroid abuse.
...SI: What about his suggestion that steroids didn't improve his performance because they don't help hand-eye coordination.
Yesalis: Some players have made the argument that you can't make some guy a big behemoth and he's going to be in the majors. But if you have that rare, God-given skill of hitting 100 mph fastballs, and curveballs, and then you make that person bigger, the notion that being bigger after that skill doesn't help you, I can't even take seriously. You take Bambi and Godzilla with the same skill level, who's going to hit the ball better? >>
Background on Yesalis -> link
edited again: before any advocates call out Yesalis for being a fear monger, a lot of studies you cite stating health risks are greatly exaggerated most likely come from him.
<< <i>
<< <i>
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
How do you suggest we do these studies? Any player who takes part would automatically be suspended for 50 games. Maybe give steroids to high school players in states that don't have a big enough budget for drug testing >>
Where in my post did I argue that such studies should be undertaken? I'm not advocating for them, I'm simply asking if any study on the effect that steroids have on bat speed have ever been conducted. If they have not, then I reserve the right not to make a WAG at the magnitude of the impact that steroids have on the ability to hit a baseball.
I'm also not advocating for steroid use, or defending steroid users- let's make that clear right now. I'm simply suspending judgment until I think the burden of proof has been satisfied. And so far (at least in this thread) it has not been.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I can't believe there are 5 pages of arguments on both sides about steroids and their effects on ballplayers and not a single mention of bat speed (unless I missed it). Hasn't anyone on here ever played baseball? Bat speed is everything for a hitter. It allows a split second of additional time to decide before committing to a pitch and also produces more force when the ball is struck. To say that steroids only accelerate recovery time is akin to claiming that the only benefit players gain from the use is reducing the number of games they miss. When I played a little college ball, my coach was on me to spend more time in the gym to increase my bat speed. When you go from hitting 80mph fastballs to 90mph fastballs, that extra split second becomes the difference between being a .220 hitter and a .300 hitter. >>
So you're saying that steroids increase bat speed? >>
Steroids increase muscle. Increased muscle increases bat speed. Increased bat speed increases the amount of time the batter has to size up the pitch. Increased bat speed also results in harder hit baseballs. It doesn't improve hand-eye coordination or other athletic skills. That's why steroids won't take Joe Couch Potato and turn him into a HOFer. It also won't take Duane Kuiper and turn him into Hank Aaron. However, it could turn Darrell Evans into Harmon Killebrew. >>
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
What kind of study do you need?
Why do you think you can hit a ball farther and harder at age 11, than you can at age 7? Because you are stronger.
You should go get a measure of your bat speed...then go sit on the couch for three months, eat a diet like an ethiopian, watch your muscular strength disappear, and then re-test your bat speed. If you can get your bat speed to the same pre-test level with 'less' muscle strength, then you have a strong point on your side of the debate that muscle strength has no effect on bat speed
So by your reasoning, if someone wants to become a better hitter they should add as much muscle mass as possible. Is this a fair summation?
Edit to add: Please don't start in with assumptions about 'my side of the debate'. To this point, 'my side of the debate' has nothing to do with the argument that bad speed is unrelated to strength.
As was previously noted it pure muscle mass was such a benefit for hitting the ball then you'd have a league full of bulked up monsters. But the fact remains there's nothing to tie exorbitant muscle mass to elevating ball travel when hit.
<< <i>So by your reasoning, if someone wants to become a better hitter they should add as much muscle mass as possible. Is this a fair summation? >>
NO IT'S NOT! Generally speaking, more strength, and faster recovery from injury, will benefit you in nearly every sport. Only in bodybuilding are most users trying just for muscle mass.
Reading Canseco's book would really help you understand.
He developed a regimen not just to get bigger and stronger, but faster as well. He used different steroids and different combinations of steroids to along with a specific exercise program to "design" his athletic abilities.
If I remember correctly, he criticized Giambi for just bulking up without a proper plan.
Like him or not Canseco did not just start injecting stuff into his body willy-nilly, he found out how to do it "right". Even though he was WRONG!
By the way, steroids were developed legally by drug companies for various health benefits, some people have growth disorders for example, I am quite sure they did hundreds of studies that guided them in the development of what we have today. Not sure if these have been published.
Joe
<< <i>Comparing bambi and godzilla is a flawed analogy. Period. It's the same nonsense the poster who advocated comparing the effects of sitting on the couch for months and not working out.
As was previously noted it pure muscle mass was such a benefit for hitting the ball then you'd have a league full of bulked up monsters. But the fact remains there's nothing to tie exorbitant muscle mass to elevating ball travel when hit. >>
Actually the steroid era was full of bulked up monsters. I think it's no accident that before steroids were in vogue in baseball and after MLB cracked down on abusers, ERAs and HRs have returned to more historical norms. Muscle alone won't make a hitter great. That's clear. However, take a great hitter and bulk them up and they do become monsters that smash records on an annual basis. I wonder why nobody is hitting 60hr a year every year anymore? Did someone take the air out of the baseball again???
<< <i>He developed a regimen not just to get bigger and stronger, but faster as well. >>
Just look at the 'exclusive' 40-40 club. Of the four in MLB history, only Soriano has a question mark.
<< <i>
How do we know all this? Have their been studies done to confirm this, or are these just the musings of a guy on the Internet? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I think that's a fair question. >>
Well, I'm no expert on steroids as probably nobody else on here is either. However, I did play baseball up to the collegiate and semi-pro level. Increased muscle strength is one way to increase bat speed. Another way is to use a lighter bat which then results in less mass behind the baseball as you hit it. It's basic physics. So if you have more muscle mass to go along with your natural hand/eye coordination, you can improve your bat speed while maintaining the bat weight compared to if you weren't working out and building muscle.
Edited to add a question back to you. If increased muscle mass doesn't improve the bat speed and the hitter's ability to hit a baseball farther, why would baseball players work out and why would they continue to try to add more muscle as they body build? Why did McGwire go from a 1960s linebacker build to a modern day defensive end build and subsequently hit more HRs than he ever did in his career?
Axtell, why would I suggest taking away muscle strength? Umm, because if you take away your muscle strength you will see first hand how it will effect your bat speed.
Arod without steroids(and with the subsequent weaker muscles) equals Arod with slower bat speed. Sure, one can refute that because they are biased...but then just test it out yourself like I gave the example of and you will see the difference.
Axtell, just think, with your 38 MPH current bat speed(MPH of ball coming off bat), if you made your muscles weaker, you would probably drop down to 28 MPH. Check it out and see. No need to debate about it.
If you guys don't believe that increased muscle strength will increase stuff like bat speed...then why do you even bother making your muscles stronger? Stronger muscles helps you do everything easier. I guess I've been living life wrong. I should just let my body go and I could still do all the same stuff as easy as I could now!@ Boy, why didn't I meet you guys before I bothered spending all that time improving my muscle strength.
What the heck do you think is propelling the bat??
<< <i>I never brought the point up of increased bat speed...because it is a given with increased muscle strength and explosiveness. >>
It's a given? Says who? You? Proof or this point is invalid.
<< <i>Axtell, why would I suggest taking away muscle strength? Umm, because if you take away your muscle strength you will see first hand how it will effect your bat speed. >>
But your suggestion is a player's increases with steroids make an equal jump from no muscle to normal. Again proof or this is invalid. You can't just say 'because it is!' With no evidence.
<< <i>Arod without steroids(and with the subsequent weaker muscles) equals Arod with slower bat speed. Sure, one can refute that because they are biased...but then just test it out yourself like I gave the example of and you will see the difference.
Axtell, just think, with your 38 MPH current bat speed(MPH of ball coming off bat), if you made your muscles weaker, you would probably drop down to 28 MPH. Check it out and see. No need to debate about it. >>
30% increase in be speed ? Where do you get this stuff?
<< <i>If you guys don't believe that increased muscle strength will increase stuff like bat speed...then why do you even bother making your muscles stronger? Stronger muscles helps you do everything easier. I guess I've been living life wrong. I should just let my body go and I could still do all the same stuff as easy as I could now!@ Boy, why didn't I meet you guys before I bothered spending all that time improving my muscle strength.
What the heck do you think is propelling the bat?? >>
I am not disputing muscles power the ball. What can and is disputed is how much an effect steroid use has on an increase in how far the ball travels. You can sit there spinning hypotheticals all day but the facts remain that no one knows if there is a correlation. What is known is that steroids reduce recovery time.
<< <i>
<< <i>Comparing bambi and godzilla is a flawed analogy. Period. It's the same nonsense the poster who advocated comparing the effects of sitting on the couch for months and not working out.
As was previously noted it pure muscle mass was such a benefit for hitting the ball then you'd have a league full of bulked up monsters. But the fact remains there's nothing to tie exorbitant muscle mass to elevating ball travel when hit. >>
Actually the steroid era was full of bulked up monsters. I think it's no accident that before steroids were in vogue in baseball and after MLB cracked down on abusers, ERAs and HRs have returned to more historical norms. Muscle alone won't make a hitter great. That's clear. However, take a great hitter and bulk them up and they do become monsters that smash records on an annual basis. I wonder why nobody is hitting 60hr a year every year anymore? Did someone take the air out of the baseball again??? >>
Great post- If someone forced me to guess I think I'd take a position very close to this one. At this point the most likely explanation for the effect of steroids on performance (in my opinion) is that it can make an otherwise very good player into an exceptional player (or an average player into a very good player, etc.).
<< <i>
I am not disputing muscles power the ball. What can and is disputed is how much an effect steroid use has on an increase in how far the ball travels. You can sit there spinning hypotheticals all day but the facts remain that no one knows if there is a correlation. What is known is that steroids reduce recovery time. >>
Axtell, you are not the sharpest tool in the shed. THat 30% decrease was not said to be any number that increases/decrease...it was an estimate of what your pathetic bat speed would sink to if you were even weaker than you currently are.
Muscles power the body, which transfers power to the bat...I'm pretty sure that is indisputable.
The speed and weight of the bat determine how fast the ball will come off the bat....I'm pretty sure that is indisputable.
The speed and trajectory of the ball off the bat will determine how far the ball goes...I'm pretty sure that is indisputable.
If the first bat is swung at X amount of MPH the ball will travel X amount of distance. If the second bat, which is the same size bat, is swung at X+5 MPH(with X being the same speed as the first bat), the ball will travel farther than the first ball. This is a fact(given all other variables equal, spot on the bat hit, stationary or same speed ball coming in, wind, type of bat, etc...). That is a fact.
If stronger muscles means a person can lift more weights than they previously did, can throw a disc farther than they previously could, can run faster than they previously could, can punch harder then they previously could...are you saying they cannot swing a bat around faster than they previously could?
The line of thinking you are falling into is the old school baseball thought that stronger muscles are bad for baseball training. Yes, if a guy goes about building his muscles and does it in a way where he becomes one of those muscle bound guys that can't straighten out his arms or turn his neck without turning his entire body, then you would have point.
However, if a guy can increase his muscular strength and maintain his range of motion, then he will most certainly be able to propel the bat faster than he previously could...which physics says will indeed make the ball go farther than it previous did. That is a fact.
Bat speed equals the speed of the bat traveling. Exit speed equals the speed of the ball coming off the bat. Increased bat speed will equal increased exit speed. Increased exit speed equals increased distance.
Basically, for every extra 1 MPH of exit speed you can gain, the ball will go about 4 extra feet.
If a player can increase his muscle strength and be able to propel the bat faster than he could before, and he is able to gain 5 more MPH in exit speed, then he will be able to hit the ball appx 20 feet further than he could before.
Mechanics play a role...two players can have the same bat speed, but different exit speed. This could be caused by reaching their maximum bat speed at the wrong part of the swing. Ideally you want it maximized at the point of contact of course. However, in my above post, this would be one of the "all variables being equal."
<< <i>
However, if a guy can increase his muscular strength and maintain his range of motion, then he will most certainly be able to propel the bat faster than he previously could...which physics says will indeed make the ball go farther than it previous did. That is a fact. >>
Skin, you can try to insult me, call me names, do whatever you want, but it doesn't do anything to prove your point that taking steroids = an increase in batted ball traveling. What steroids have been proven to do, again, is reduce recovery time between workouts, and reduce fatigue. This is vastly different from the idea that bulking up is going to make your outs turn into home runs.
So, keep on with the insults, keep on with the name-calling, all it does is only further diminish your points about steroids doing wonders and making guys hit more home runs.
Oh, and by the way? #653!!!
<< <i>
<< <i>
However, if a guy can increase his muscular strength and maintain his range of motion, then he will most certainly be able to propel the bat faster than he previously could...which physics says will indeed make the ball go farther than it previous did. That is a fact. >>
Skin, you can try to insult me, call me names, do whatever you want, but it doesn't do anything to prove your point that taking steroids = an increase in batted ball traveling. What steroids have been proven to do, again, is reduce recovery time between workouts, and reduce fatigue. This is vastly different from the idea that bulking up is going to make your outs turn into home runs.
So, keep on with the insults, keep on with the name-calling, all it does is only further diminish your points about steroids doing wonders and making guys hit more home runs.
Oh, and by the way? #653!!! >>
One way to get bigger is to work out more. Reducing time between workouts allows you to do that. You do actually get it!
Increasing testosterone levels (either naturally or artificially) in the male body plus lifting weights has already been PROVEN to dramatically increase muscle size. That you choose not to find this out for yourself is just another way to elongate these arguments.
You also cannot "prove" the surface of the sun is hot.................never been there have you?
We can debate all day long about being a fan of ARod or not, you like him, good for you.
Do some research for a change and take a break from speculation. The steroid information is well documented.
That would certainly change other people's opinion of you, and your posting style (no name calling here!).
<< <i>
One way to get bigger is to work out more. Reducing time between workouts allows you to do that. You do actually get it! >>
So what? There's no proof that the correlation between getting bigger and more home runs exists. Until there's a definitive study, all there is is speculation by random folks on the internet.
<< <i>Increasing testosterone levels (either naturally or artificially) in the male body plus lifting weights has already been PROVEN to dramatically increase muscle size. That you choose not to find this out for yourself is just another way to elongate these arguments. >>
No, it's obvious there's a connect between working out and muscle size. What you all refuse to do is link evidence showing a correlation between this increased muscle size and an increase in home runs. Until that happens, again, it's all speculation.
<< <i>You also cannot "prove" the surface of the sun is hot.................never been there have you? >>
You. Can't. Be. Serious.
<< <i>We can debate all day long about being a fan of ARod or not, you like him, good for you. >>
Again, irrelevant to your side's repeated attempts to link steroid use to increased home run output.
<< <i>Do some research for a change and take a break from speculation. The steroid information is well documented. >>
Then prove it. Show me some of this 'well documented' results that prove steroid use results in increased home run output. If it's so easy to find, then you should have no shortage of studies you can back up your point that taking steroids results in more home runs.
Back up your accusations, or back up off your side of the debate. Your move.
<< <i>You also cannot "prove" the surface of the sun is hot... >>
A better example would probably be Einstein's Theory of Relativity. With the exception of a genius or two here, we cannot prove it but know it to be true.
The most basic formula that I can think of showing the effects of steroids and home runs would be D = W/F. If that's too complicated, sometimes pictures help:
If that doesn't work, it's called being deliberately obtuse and nothing can change that.
The truth of the matter is there is no conclusive study that shows what effects steroids have on home run production. It's speculation. Just as I have none to say it doesn't. However since you guys are on the side of the coin making the accusation it's up to you to prove your case with evidence. Until then? You're doing nothing but wild speculating.
Everything I posted is scientific proof. You can dispute it all you like, but physics don't lie.
Stronger muscles equals faster bat speed, faster bat speed equals higher exit speed from the ball, higher exit speed equals further distance the ball will travel. Those are facts.
Based on your evidence(which is none), you are saying that every push up, pull up, and sit up done by hitters have been done in vein, because muscle strength has no effect on bat speed, or on any sports related event for that matter. You have just revolutionized the world as we know it!
You can write a new book titled, "Do nothing," because muscle strength is irrelevant.
You should not let bias get in your way. You are Arod's only fan left, and you are doing him an even worse injustice. He himself would cringe knowing you are the only guy left in his corner, and would prefer his corner be empty.
<< <i>I already know how this ends. You engage me, I make you look completely foolish, and then you play the Tinkerbell card.
No thanks. Go yap elsewhere, boy >>
Skin,
If an 'adult' cannot comprehend basic math, simple physics will go right over their head. It's comparable to explaining DNA to a child; they don't yet have the cognitive development and won't understand what you're explaining. Difference being, a child should eventually learn while you typically cannot teach an old dog new tricks.
I'd like to point you folks to a nice comprehensive report on the idea here suggesting there is no discernible link between steroid use an increased power/home runs.
"Now here's that critical matter: in doing this, we have to be very, very careful not to make the elementary mistake that some--from sportswriter to physicist--have made in trying to simplistically plug numbers into Professor Adair's equations. That mistake is to assume that all added muscle mass is being used to further power a struck baseball. It's wrong.
As Professor Adair himself put it:
"The considerable energy . . . transferred to the bat . . . is generated largely by the large muscles of the thighs and torso. The arms and hands serve mainly to transfer the energy of the body's rotational and transverse motions to the bat and add little extra energy to the bat. [Footnoted with:] In particular, the contribution of the hands and wrists to the energy of the bat is almost negligible. "
In short: Batting power is all about lower-body strength. Bulging biceps and triceps and deltoids and the rest of the upper-body muscle set may wow the baseball Annies--and perhaps scandal-sniffing reporters--but they mean essentially nothing to long-ball hitting. We don't need to rely on physicists for that fact: anyone in baseball knows it well."
So stown, your posting photos of known steroid users as 'facts' of steroids increasing home run totals is as misleading as it is naive. But keep on keeping on with the idea that steroids are the reasons records fell. Keep on believing the hype machine the media outlets spoon fed you for years. Those with a critical eye know the truth.
I can't wait until Arod bashes 661, next step on the all time ladder!
<< <i>Good for you Stown you showed me photos of guys before and after they worked out. Congratulations. But you have yet to show any evidence steroid use to an increase in home runs.
The truth of the matter is there is no conclusive study that shows what effects steroids have on home run production. It's speculation. Just as I have none to say it doesn't. However since you guys are on the side of the coin making the accusation it's up to you to prove your case with evidence. Until then? You're doing nothing but wild speculating. >>
Ask Brady Anderson if it makes a difference...
<< <i>
Ask Brady Anderson if it makes a difference...
>>
So the entire basis of your entry into this debate is Anderson took steroids for exactly one year? And if the results were so dramatic, and steroids alone were the reason he hit 50 home runs, why did he stop? Why would he take them for exactly one year? If steroids are responsible for his drastic power increase as you claim it was, why did he do it for just one year? Why wouldn't he have continued, especially as 1997 (the year after he hit 50) he would have been a free agent and been able to sign a much, MUCH richer contract?
Everyone (but you) is in agreement that steroid use helps players to hit more home runs. It happens to be a fact. I have already posted several links regarding this, I am not going to go back and do it again. If you can't realize that increased muscle = increased strength = hitting a ball farther, certainly no study is going to change your mind.
I applaud your incredible decision to swim upstream on this one. You do know the earth is not flat don't you?
If 1000 people tell you you have a tail, you might want to turn around and take a look to make sure.
You are the best!
<< <i>
"The considerable energy . . . transferred to the bat . . . is generated largely by the large muscles of the thighs and torso. >>
Hello, notice the words large muscles in that sentence??
Who has suggested that only the biceps swing the bat?
Those large muscles they are talking about, when increased in strength, will provide more powerful rotational forces, thus transferring more energy to the bat. As a proponent of rotational hitting myself, this is obvious to me. My apologies if you did not see the obvious.
BTW, it isn't just the lower body...as the abdominal region and back region are not lower body, and those are important forces in swinging. The back is another force. The chest plays a role too, as do biceps and tricpes(though those arent' as prominent as the core)
In short, it is taking muscles, mainly large powerful muscles to swing the bat. The stronger you make those powerful muscles, the faster you will swing the bat.
Everything you posted made zero sense and only proved what we are saying...which is that muscles swing the bat, and the stronger the muscles the faster the swing. THe faster the swing, the faster the ball comes off the bat. The faster the ball comes off the bat, the farther it will travel. The farther it travels, the more home runs one gets. All of those are indisputable facts.
Instead of talking about it, why don't you go to the local little league field, put a ball on a tee at home plate, take 50 swings and then record the one or two you might get over the fence. THen, spend one year working out all those large muscles that create the rotational forces, re-do your experiment at the little league field, and then record how many home runs you get over that 200 foot fence. Then you will learn first hand what everybody else already knows.
Anabolic Steroids
Performance Enhancing Drugs
By Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph.D.
Anabolic steroids are a class of steroid hormones based on the androgen testosterone. Anabolic steroids are also known as anabolic-androgenic steroids or AAS or performance enhancing drugs.
What Do Anabolic Steroids Do?
Anabolic steroids increase the rate of protein synthesis within cells. The building of cellular tissue (anabolism) is especially noticeable in muscles. Anabolic steroids also have androgenic and virilizing effects. They influence masculine characteristics such as the growth of the vocal cords and body hair.
How Are Anabolic Steroids Used as Drugs?
Anabolic steroids have been attractive to athletes and bodybuilders because they increase the size and strength of muscles. They also increase aggressiveness and competitiveness, which can be desirable traits in sports. Anabolic steroids may be prescribed to promote appetite, stimulate bone growth, induce male puberty, to lessen the effects of muscle wasting from chronic diseases, such as cancer or AIDS, and may show promise as a male contraceptive. The drugs are available as oral pills, injectable steroids, and skin patches.
How Do Anabolic Steroids Work?
Anabolic steroids change muscle mass and strength by two processes. First, the steroids lead to an increased production of proteins, which are the building blocks of muscle. The steroids also block the effect of the hormone cortisol on muscle tissue, so that existing muscle is broken down at a slower rate. Additionally, anabolic steroids lead to cells differentiating into muscle more readily than fat.
What Are the Risks of Using Anabolic Steroids?
In addition to increasing muscle strength and mass, the effects of taking anabolic steroids include harmful changes in cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, acne, liver damage, and changes to the structure of the left ventricle of the heart. Anabolic steroids have an androgenic or virilizing effect, meaning they affect male characteristics. Anabolic steroids affect the onset of puberty, growth of the clitoris in females and the penis in male children (does not affect the size of the penis in adults), increased size of the vocal chords and deepening of the voice, increased body hair, and premature baldness in people predisposed to it. Another side effect is decreased fertility and testicular atrophy.
Why Are Anabolic Steroids Dangerous for Teens?
Many of the side effects of taking performance enhancing drugs can be countered by combining them with other drugs and exercise and are somewhat reversible in adults. However, anabolic steroid use can have permanent negative consequences if used by adolescents. One side effect can be early onset of puberty. More significantly, the drugs can stunt growth by prematurely stopping the lengthening of the bones.
Until you do this many times over to get a conclusive, undeniable result... THE. SKY. IS. PURPLE!
edited to add since I forgot some posters are completely ignorant when it comes to formulas, be it in math or physics, and it requires to be spelled out for their 'special needs': D(istance) = W(ork) / F(orce)
edited again: My initial post stated Alex had a 150-game suspension when it's actually 211 and we regret the error
<< <i>If you guys don't believe that increased muscle strength will increase stuff like bat speed...then why do you even bother making your muscles stronger? Stronger muscles helps you do everything easier. I guess I've been living life wrong. I should just let my body go and I could still do all the same stuff as easy as I could now!@ Boy, why didn't I meet you guys before I bothered spending all that time improving my muscle strength. >>
After you spent all that time improving muscle strength, how much did your home run rate change?
IF Alex did anything to breach his contract, IMO, the Yanks will either terminate or settle with a negotiated buyout. Going from there, he will follow in the same footsteps as Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, etc. A player without a team and has no other option but to retire.
I could be wrong but think it's more probable than possible.
<< <i>Don't be so confident, Joe. After the appeal, I firmly believe there are going to be major legal repercussions. >>
No, there won't. No matter how much YOU want it to happen, there is literally ZERO chance the yankees can weasel out of the contract.
<< <i>The Yanks don't want him or any part of future milestone achievements*. They've already accused him of violating the CBA by getting a second medical opinion without their consent. Alex has threatened to sue the team's doctor for malpractice. >>
So what? There's no recourse to void the contract. Arod is going to march right by 660 and collect $6 million bonus for doing so.
<< <i>IF Alex did anything to breach his contract, IMO, the Yanks will either terminate or settle with a negotiated buyout. Going from there, he will follow in the same footsteps as Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, etc. A player without a team and has no other option but to retire.
I could be wrong but think it's more probable than possible. >>
No, it's not more probable than possible. Hold your breath though!
<< <i>Don't be so confident, Joe. After the appeal, I firmly believe there are going to be major legal repercussions. The Yanks don't want him or any part of future milestone achievements*. They've already accused him of violating the CBA by getting a second medical opinion without their consent. Alex has threatened to sue the team's doctor for malpractice.
IF Alex did anything to breach his contract, IMO, the Yanks will either terminate or settle with a negotiated buyout. Going from there, he will follow in the same footsteps as Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, etc. A player without a team and has no other option but to retire.
I could be wrong but think it's more probable than possible. >>
I think I speak for the majority of MLB fans when I say that I hope your projections come to fruition. I certainly know that I, for one, am ready to see A-Rod recuse himself from the national discussion once and for all. And I will delight in the HOF's refusal to induct him.
MLB may want to ban him (HUGE lawsuit if they do) to rid them of his negative publicity.
People that don't like him want him to go away.
He will not retire with all that money on the table. I think the only thing Selig could get away with is to put him on the ineligible list once he does retire. Arod won't care much about that.
Arod will never voluntarily retire. As much as I hate to do it, I at least partially agree with ax85fan.
I am glad I don't care either way, his place in baseball history is destroyed as far as I am concerned. He'll be gone sooner or later with his money and his tainted records. Very few will see him as being anything but a TOOL.
<< <i>Don't be so confident, Joe. After the appeal, I firmly believe there are going to be major legal repercussions. The Yanks don't want him or any part of future milestone achievements*. They've already accused him of violating the CBA by getting a second medical opinion without their consent. Alex has threatened to sue the team's doctor for malpractice.
IF Alex did anything to breach his contract, IMO, the Yanks will either terminate or settle with a negotiated buyout. Going from there, he will follow in the same footsteps as Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, etc. A player without a team and has no other option but to retire.
I could be wrong but think it's more probable than possible. >>
You might be right, but how would it look (and how much would it cost) if the Yankees were to lose the lawsuit?
If I remember right, every major league contract has some kind of "out" in it for behavior detrimental to the game or some such verbiage. I don't believe it's ever been tested and we have had some real a$$hats in sports, including Spreewell who tried to kill his coach!
You mention something about a second opinion from a doctor? No matter what his contract might say, most people (including myself) would view that as a chicken$hit way of getting out of the deal. Lawsuits coming out of that could last many years. I don't think the Yankees have the baseBALLS to try it.
<< <i>You might be right, but how would it look (and how much would it cost) if the Yankees were to lose the lawsuit?
If I remember right, every major league contract has some kind of "out" in it for behavior detrimental to the game or some such verbiage. I don't believe it's ever been tested and we have had some real a$$hats in sports, including Spreewell who tried to kill his coach!
You mention something about a second opinion from a doctor? No matter what his contract might say, most people (including myself) would view that as a chicken$hit way of getting out of the deal. Lawsuits coming out of that could last many years. I don't think the Yankees have the baseBALLS to try it. >>
The way I see it (from a non-lawyer perspective), the Yanks have nothing to lose, other than maybe having some egg on their face. Worst case scenario would be insurance covering the malpractice suit and obligated to honor the contract.
It's an unprecedented situation. MLB didn't only accuse Alex of failing a drug test, which would have resulted in a similar suspension to Braun or others, but rather numerous violations. According to reports, he was essentially the facilitator for the clinic, tried to interfere with MLB investigations, and bribe witnesses for evidence and silence. No one can definitively say the reports are accurate but putting a 211-game suspension in perspective, one can safely assume there's *a lot* more than a failed test.
I agree that Alex's selfish ego will not allow him to voluntarily retire; however, MLB and MLBPA must look after their best interests going forward. Again, this situation is unprecedented and the potential consequences will be far reaching in the future. Owners will demand additional out clauses for mega contracts, which puts the Union between a rock and a hard place. As I said earlier, IF Alex breached terms of his contract, I think they'll make Alex the so-called sacrificial lamb for the good of their overall membership. Sure, it will probably be perceived as a ticky-tacky way to get out but as Boo mentioned, an overwhelming majority of fans want to put the Roid Era behind us. While Alex's blind fanboys scream from the rafters, everyone else will just shrug and say good riddance.
Text
Yet even after all of this, he still received just a 50 game suspension. Anyone who suggests Arod's legal counsel is going to allow anything more than the same 50 game suspension is deluding themselves. This was his first positive test, and standard protocol for a first positive is 50 games. That's what he will serve.
As far as the Yankees go, if there was a way for them to legally wrangle them out of his contract, they would have done it by now. The fact remains that he is still a Yankee and is going to collect every penny (sans the 50 game suspension) of that contract.