Originally posted by: craig44 I would agree with Dallas when it comes to ryan. His career is remarkably consistent throughout. There is no statistical evidence, no failed drug test and no smoking gun with nolan. I think until there is a smoking gun or some sort of evidence against him it is safe to put him inthe clean camp. With Ortiz, however, we do have both hard evidence and statistical evidence. He has been on peds for a very long time and his statistics hold the prestige that comes with a cheater, none.
Stop drinking the kool aid. How can you believe Nolan Ryan was able to make a resurgence at the age of 43, but David Ortiz can't at the age of 40?
Nolan Ryan made his epic comeback on a Texas Rangers roster than included confirmed steroids users Rafael Palmeiro, Juan Gonzalez and a slew of suspected users. If you think it's a coincidence then I have some magic beans to sell you.
Originally posted by: JHS5120Nolan Ryan made his epic comeback ...
You first implied and have now stated directly that Ryan had an "epic" comeback on the Rangers. First, part of the period you cherry picked as part of that comeback Ryan was still on the Astros, and second, as the stats show, there wasn't anything "epic" about it. Ryan's career ERA+ was 112, and other than his early wild years on the Mets, his ERA+ was between 110 and 117 every five years, including the "epic" years at the end.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Originally posted by: JHS5120Nolan Ryan made his epic comeback ...
You first implied and have now stated directly that Ryan had an "epic" comeback on the Rangers. First, part of the period you cherry picked as part of that comeback Ryan was still on the Astros, and second, as the stats show, there wasn't anything "epic" about it. Ryan's career ERA+ was 112, and other than his early wild years on the Mets, his ERA+ was between 110 and 117 every five years, including the "epic" years at the end.
Do you know who was Nolan Ryan's pitching coach in Texas? Tom House.
"House, 58, estimated that six or seven pitchers per team were at least experimenting with steroids or human growth hormone. He said players talked about losing to opponents using more effective drugs.
"We didn't get beat, we got out-milligrammed," he said. "And when you found out what they were taking, you started taking them.""
A 42 year old pitcher who is pitching as well as he was in his prime on a roster riddled with steroid users, coached by a former steroid user...
Originally posted by: JHS5120A 42 year old pitcher who is pitching as well as he was in his prime on a roster riddled with steroid users, coached by a former steroid user...
Without the nonsense about an "epic comeback" you've got a more reasonable argument (you're welcome), but if you take out all of the gossip and innuendo, what you've got is a pitcher who was still as good (not better, which would be required for a "comeback", epic or otherwise) in his early 40's as he was in his late 20's.
No question that that's a rare thing, or that one possible explanation for it is steroid use. Perhaps we can agree that the evidence for this explanation is much weaker than the evidence against Ortiz - who has a higher OPS+ post-35 than he does during any other stretch of his career.
And note that Hoyt Wilhelm and Ted Lyons both had a higher ERA+ post-40 than they did pre-40; and Pete Alexander had a higher ERA+ post-40 than he did from 35-39. It's rare, but it's not unheard of among pitchers who, presumably, nobody is accusing of steroid use. There is no comparable list of HOF hitters; only cheaters.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
You speak of an epic comeback. That insinuates an epic decline. When exactly was this decline? He pitched very well for the Astros before he came over to the rangers. There is just no statistical data to prove your point of there being circumstantial evidence of ped use. You are trying hard, but it's just not there.
It is much more common historically for elite pitchers to perform well into their 40's than hitters. Look at cy young, Warren spahn, Gaylord Perry, Phil niekro to name a few. do you think cy young was on the juice back in 1908? I know pudding galvin tried to use a concoction of monkey hormones back in the 1890's but they ended up giving no perceived advantage so he discontinued use.
How many hitters have had a season like Ortiz at age 40? Bonds. Well, there you go.
Originally posted by: JHS5120A 42 year old pitcher who is pitching as well as he was in his prime on a roster riddled with steroid users, coached by a former steroid user...
And note that Hoyt Wilhelm and Ted Lyons both had a higher ERA+ post-40 than they did pre-40; and Pete Alexander had a higher ERA+ post-40 than he did from 35-39. It's rare, but it's not unheard of among pitchers who, presumably, nobody is accusing of steroid use. There is no comparable list of HOF hitters; only cheaters.
Compelling comparisons, but there are definitely holes in the players above.
Hoyt Wilhelm was reliever and knuckleball pitcher who didn't enter the league until the age of 29 - he only had a few seasons above 100 innings pitched and had the same sort of longevity many knuckleball players have. ALSO, something funny about Hoyt Wilhelm, in his final years with the Braves he was on the same team as the aforementioned Tom House.
Ted Lyons played only two seasons after turning 40 and played remarkably. But he also is considered one of the worst hall of fame pitchers - he has a career 2.3 k/9 and 3.67 ERA.
Pete Alexander played in the 1920's and his one good year after the age of 40 had a 1.6 k/9 (he was a career 3.8 k/9 pitcher) and his FIP after the age of 40 was 3.87 compared to a career 2.88 FIP.
Nolan Ryan was a fastball pitcher in the modern baseball era and arguably pitched better after the age of 40 than he did before. Coincidentally, this also coincided with the beginning of the steroid era while he was on a team with known steroid users and coached by a known steroid user. None of the pitchers above really compare to Nolan Ryan in any meaningful way.
Originally posted by: craig44 It is much more common historically for elite pitchers to perform well into their 40's than hitters. Look at cy young, Warren spahn, Gaylord Perry, Phil niekro to name a few. do you think cy young was on the juice back in 1908? I know pudding galvin tried to use a concoction of monkey hormones back in the 1890's but they ended up giving no perceived advantage so he discontinued use.
Nolan Ryan was a remarkably better player after the age of 40. Without nitpicking my use of the word "epic" but that's pretty astonishing!
Edit to add: are there any pitchers who played during the steroid era (or after) who pitched better after the age of 40 than before? The examples I've been given so far haven't included anyone from the steroid era. I included the only two I could think of...
You can substitute "remarkable" and "astonishing" for "epic" but I'm still not buying it. Nor do I buy that an ERA+ of 110 pre-40 and 116 post-40 is more relevant than an ERA+ of 112 pre-39 and 111 post-39; if you have to nit-pick 39 vs. 40 to make your point then your point isn't worth making.
You appear to have missed my points about the pitchers I listed. True, Wilhelm was a knuckleballer, but he was for his entire career. He got better after he turned 40, and your bizarre reference to Tom House notwithstanding, there is zero reason to believe that he was taking performance enhancing drugs. My point is that, unlike hitters, there are pitchers who find ways to improve as they age. That Lyons is "one of the worst hall of fame pitchers" surely is irrelevant; what's relevant is that he, too, found a way to be effective after 40. You compare Alexander's post-40 stats to his career stats, but my point was not that he found a way to again be, arguably, the greatest pitcher who ever lived after the age of 40, but rather that he found a way to be better than he was in his late 30's.
Ryan didn't find a way to be better than he had been before, he found a way to be as good. I can't rule out that the way he found was cheating, but neither do I see any reason to think that cheating is the most likely explanation.
But Clemens is certainly noteworthy; using the same age bands as I did for Ryan earlier his ERA+ looks like this:
clemens career was following the standard pattern; he built to a peak in his early 30's, and then declined. what happened after age 40 was, to coin a phrase, remarkable, astonishing and epic. it was also unprecedented, unlike what ryan did.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Originally posted by: dallasactuary You can substitute "remarkable" and "astonishing" for "epic" but I'm still not buying it. Nor do I buy that an ERA+ of 110 pre-40 and 116 post-40 is more relevant than an ERA+ of 112 pre-39 and 111 post-39; if you have to nit-pick 39 vs. 40 to make your point then your point isn't worth making.
We can agree that Nolan Ryan played much better during the steroid era than before the steroid era - everything we have both written agrees with this assessment.
So either the hitters became worse during the steroid era, or Nolan Ryan became better. Also, Nolan Ryan switched to the AL from the NL during this period, so he now had to face a DH.
So.........
You're either being ignorant or willfully obtuse.
What Nolan Ryan did is completely unheard of in the modern history of the sport. He is the only starting pitcher in modern history to have played better after turning 40 (other than Clemens and Pettitte).
Jhs, you are assuming that Ryan's later year quality is because of steroid use. Actually it is much simpler than that. He gained command of his pitches. Look at his walk totals in the 70's-late 80's. They were astronomical. That is what changed to allow him to continue his success. All those extra base runners made him appear to be as effective later on when he really wasn't. Had he had the same command in his 20's you would be looking at a Koufax quality pitcher. He had better seasons in the 70's and 80's than any Of his rangers years.
Originally posted by: craig44 No perkdog, baseball has been played by hundreds of player CLEANLY since the 80's. Your boy Ortiz just isn't one of them. I realize your hero worship has jaded your view of the situation. You must be delusional if you think Ortiz is performing naturally this year. Of course he's on peds.
I never once said Ortiz was clean bud, and I don't even idolize Tom Brady let alone Ortiz lol I'm not defending him at all I'm just pointing out why he is loved by Boston fans even though your absurdly out of your mind not being able to wrap your head around it lol
And furthermore I couldn't care less if he makes the HOF either, all I care about is World Series wins and we got 3 recently and guess what? I don't care if all the Sox players used PEDs or not, I'm happy with the 3 rings
You must be delusional if you think Ortiz is performing naturally this year. Of course he's on peds.
I guess they stopped testing David since 2003. I didn't realize that.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
So perkdog, you don't care if players cheat to win championships. Would you care if they gambled on games? Paid off umpires? Had Tonya Harding waiting in the visiting teams clubhouse with a pipe? That doesn't taint the championship for you? I am happy they won those rings, but hate that frauds like Ortiz and Manny were on those teams.
I also wasn't singling out Boston fans. It seems some national media has jumped on his bandwagon. They love bonds in sf, but he is roundly hated elsewhere. I guess if you have a bubbly personality it doesn't matter if your career is fraudulent.
I don't think he ever stopped. All mlb uses is a simple urine test. Blood tests were not part of the collective bargaining agreement. Are you naive enough to believe that Ortiz was caught in 2003 and was scared strait and never used again?
Again I ask, bonds and Clemens never failed any drug tests. Do you think they were clean? Look at the statistical evidence. Of course Ortiz is using . his body is so broken down that he can barely hobble the bases, yet he leads baseball in x base hits and ops? Come on, surely you are not that naive.
Looks like Mark deleted the post I was responding to here. Not surprised
Mark, you do realize mlb does not test for hgh right? Bonds passed all of his drug tests. Do you think he was clean?
So in 2009 he gets called on the carpet for a test in 2003. Positive for PED. So since 2009 he had the license to continue to cheat? Is that what you are saying? You know for certain that he is cheating? He know he is using HGH's? That's how I'm rwsing your words.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I don't think he ever stopped. All mlb uses is a simple urine test. Blood tests were not part of the collective bargaining agreement. Are you naive enough to believe that Ortiz was caught in 2003 and was scared strait and never used again?
Again I ask, bonds and Clemens never failed any drug tests. Do you think they were clean? Look at the statistical evidence. Of course Ortiz is using . his body is so broken down that he can barely hobble the bases, yet he leads baseball in x base hits and ops? Come on, surely you are not that naive.
Looks like Mark deleted the post I was responding to here. Not surprised
I deleted it to clean it up. Nothing changed.
I will answer your question.
Yes I believed Clemens and Bonds used steroids.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I don't know for certain. You asked my opinion. I gave it. You on the other hand know David Ortiz is on HGH' s now and has been cheating right along based on one test back in 2003. Right?
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
No one knows who is using (absent a failed drug test), or, more importantly, who is not.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Mark, I can tell you how you and everyone else know that bonds and Clemens were using peds. They were able to do unnatural things at unprecedented ages. Bonds had ruthian seasons in his late 30's-early 40's. He did things at that age he was unable to do in his prime. Clemens had a sub 2 era and won a cy young at 42. So you, along with most every other reasonable baseball fan concluded they cheated. Likewise, ortiz turned into a very different player when he joined the red sox. He is having his greatest season with a broken down body at age 40. He has already failed a drug test, so there is that precident. So the reasonable fan would conclude he is getting some chemical help. What he is doing is unprecedented except for the PED crew.
Originally posted by: craig44 So perkdog, you don't care if players cheat to win championships. Would you care if they gambled on games? Paid off umpires? Had Tonya Harding waiting in the visiting teams clubhouse with a pipe? That doesn't taint the championship for you? I am happy they won those rings, but hate that frauds like Ortiz and Manny were on those teams.
I also wasn't singling out Boston fans. It seems some national media has jumped on his bandwagon. They love bonds in sf, but he is roundly hated elsewhere. I guess if you have a bubbly personality it doesn't matter if your career is fraudulent.
No I don't care, reason being is a fraction of every team involved in playoff games that lead to titles had players on both sides that were dirty. Sorry but the world isn't all sunshine and rainbows, and we can't make it perfect ever. I look beyond the BS and live in reality. Talking MLB alone not one World Series game probably since the early 90's have had all clean players, including other eras that had payers on booze, Coke, emphetamines, greenies or something, it's reality. One game and player that sticks out is when Luis Gonzalez of the Diamndbacks had that game winning hit to win the World Series, he was dirty as anyone and nobody talks about that guy, he was single handily responsible for a win. Ortiz is one of many, I understand he gets love but again it's only because he helped turn the Red Sox into a contender year after year after 80 years of not winning a World Series, sorry but Boston Fans are going to love the guy dirty or not.
Yeah, not sure what I did there. I'll go back to my original stats - ERA+ 36-40 of 111, and 41+ also 111 - and repeat that if you have to nitpick one year to make your point your point isn't worth making.
Originally posted by: JHS5120We can agree that Nolan Ryan played much better during the steroid era than before the steroid era - everything we have both written agrees with this assessment.
Who's being willfully obtuse? No, he was not "much" better in the steroid era and nothing that either of us has posted supports that he was. Of course, you haven't defined when the "steroid era" begins, but I note that his career ERA+ was 112 and his ERA+ through 1974 was 112, through 1981 was 112, through 1983 was 112, through 1984 was 112, through 1987 was 112, and through 1991 was 112. You are picking some point in that stretch as the point that the steroid era began and trying to convince me that it's meaningful. I don't know how else to say it - I'm not buying it.
Originally posted by: JHS5120Also, Nolan Ryan switched to the AL from the NL during this period, so he now had to face a DH.
You are either being willfully obtuse or ignorant of what ERA+ is. ERA+ compares the pitcher within his league, not all of MLB, so when he switched leagues the standard ERA to which he was being compared also changed. Complete non sequitur.
Originally posted by: JHS5120So.........
You're either being ignorant or willfully obtuse.
I am certain that one of us is being either ignorant or willfully obtuse, and equally certain that it is not me.
Originally posted by: JHS5120What Nolan Ryan did is completely unheard of in the modern history of the sport. He is the only starting pitcher in modern history to have played better after turning 40 (other than Clemens and Pettitte).
OK, you added "modern" and "starting" since without those words you were proven wrong. The universe of pitchers who pitch past 40 is already very small, and you just made it much smaller with "modern", and smaller still with "starting". You've made it so small that I don't see how it proves much of anything. But you think it does, so how about Dennis Martinez? ERA+ pre-40 of 105, 40+ of 115. Now I'm sure you'll find some reason why Dennis Martinez doesn't "count", and add a word or two more to your dead and decaying argument so that Ryan is now being compared to only 2 or 3 other pitchers and he's the "only one!" among that handful to have done such and such. I said from my first post that what Ryan did is rare, but not unprecedented and that's where we still find ourselves. I also said from the beginning that it couldn't be ruled out that he cheated. We're still there. I also said that the evidence that he cheated is no stronger than the evidence against Pete Alexander, Ted Lyons or Hoyt Wilhelm (and now Dennis Martinez). We're still there, too.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Perkdog, you keep bringing up that there were players on all teams taking peds as if that means there was a level playing field and it really doesn't matter if Ortiz took them or not. The ONLY way to have a level playing field is if EVERY player either took peds or was clean. Even if one player didn't take peds, that means it wasn't a level league and all cheaters put up fraudulent statistics. Or as Dallas puts it, players like Ortiz were not playing baseball at all.
Do you really think Ortizs stats are legitimate? Do you think all of his clutch hits are legitimate? He is a fraudulent player who cheated to accumulate his statistics. They are meaningless.
People bring up cocaine, alcohol and amphetamines. These are all a completely different animal than steroids, hgh or other peds. Cocaine and alcohol are all performance decreasers. Amphetamines or greenies were used by players who had a tendency to stay out a "bit" late and use the bottle a bit . They were used to combat hangovers and all night parties. An attempt to bring a players performance back to baseline as opposed to peds which make a player perform above their natural physical level.
I look at greenies the same way I look at other medical procedures such as cortisone shots, Tommy john and bone spur surgeries. Those are procedures meant not to increase an athletes production, but to return them to their normal level of production
Who's being willfully obtuse? No, he was not "much" better in the steroid era and nothing that either of us has posted supports that he was. Of course, you haven't defined when the "steroid era" begins, but I note that his career ERA+ was 112 and his ERA+ through 1974 was 112, through 1981 was 112, through 1983 was 112, through 1984 was 112, through 1987 was 112, and through 1991 was 112. You are picking some point in that stretch as the point that the steroid era began and trying to convince me that it's meaningful. I don't know how else to say it - I'm not buying it.
Most Hall of Fame pitchers remain effective until their mid 30's and start to drop off as they reach their late 30's. There are very few (if any) starting pitchers who don't.
Nolan Ryan's late 30's also coincidentally coincided with the dawn of the steroid era. An aging pitcher who is clean would reasonably see a drop in production, but Nolan Ryan started pitching better than ever. Arguably his best five year stretch came at the age of 41 through 45. I think he is the only player in modern history to experience this sort of phenomena.
Originally posted by: dallasactuary You are either being willfully obtuse or ignorant of what ERA+ is. ERA+ compares the pitcher within his league, not all of MLB, so when he switched leagues the standard ERA to which he was being compared also changed. Complete non sequitur.
That's why I included k/9, WHIP and FIP.
Originally posted by: dallasactuary OK, you added "modern" and "starting" since without those words you were proven wrong. The universe of pitchers who pitch past 40 is already very small, and you just made it much smaller with "modern", and smaller still with "starting". You've made it so small that I don't see how it proves much of anything. But you think it does, so how about Dennis Martinez? ERA+ pre-40 of 105, 40+ of 115. Now I'm sure you'll find some reason why Dennis Martinez doesn't "count", and add a word or two more to your dead and decaying argument so that Ryan is now being compared to only 2 or 3 other pitchers and he's the "only one!" among that handful to have done such and such. I said from my first post that what Ryan did is rare, but not unprecedented and that's where we still find ourselves. I also said from the beginning that it couldn't be ruled out that he cheated. We're still there. I also said that the evidence that he cheated is no stronger than the evidence against Pete Alexander, Ted Lyons or Hoyt Wilhelm (and now Dennis Martinez). We're still there, too.
Starting pitcher because that is his position and "modern" because the two other players to play better at the age of 40 than prior played almost 100 years ago.
Also, I firmly believe Dennis Martinez also took steroids.
What Nolan Ryan did has only been done by suspected and confirmed steroid users (or players born in the 19th century).
Hoyt Wilhelm didn't play during the steroid era. Pete Alexander's pitching coach didn't admit that 80% of his pitchers were taking PED's. Ted Lyons didn't see the sort of production increase Nolan Ryan did.
Evidence against Nolan Ryan: 1. One of the only starting pitchers in history to increase production after the age of 40. 2. Played for a pitching coach who admitted that "7 or 8" pitchers on his team were using that he knew of 3. Played on a team with other confirmed and suspected users 4. Saw an uptick in production perfectly coinciding with the advent of steroid use in MLB 5. Despite his age and more difficult competition, saw an increase in production into his 40's
This is all circumstantial evidence, but this it is enough for any objective observer to raise suspicion. Long story short, there is just as much evidence that Nolan Ryan took steroids at the age of 40 than there is that David Ortiz at the same age.
Jhs, why do you continually say ryan was a better pitcher with the rangers? The evidence just doesn't back it up. He was able to maintain performance but it didn't improve. His 1977 was far better than anything he did for the rangers. You ignore that the real reason he was able to maintain his performance into his 40's was because he was able to gain command of his pitches. His walk totals from rookie year to the mid 80's were almost unprecedented. Even with those huge walk totals he was dominant at times. He had better seasons in the 70's as well as in 81 and 87 than anything he did for the rangers. Had he had better command during the 70's we would be looking at a koufax or Gibson quality pitcher. The tremendous amount of extra base runners because of his wildness of course hurt his rate stats. He didn't improve in his 40's, he was able to reduce his walk totals.
Well, there we go. Ortiz is putting up a ted williams quality season at age 40. He is definitely doing that without the help of peds. Sort of proves my point. Ortiz is putting up the best slugging, ops and ops+ numbers of his career at age 40, while injured. Anyone who doesn't think he is juicing right now is either naive or delusional.
Well, there we go. Ortiz is putting up a ted williams quality season at age 40. He is definitely doing that without the help of peds. Sort of proves my point. Ortiz is putting up the best slugging, ops and ops+ numbers of his career at age 40, while injured. Anyone who doesn't think he is juicing right now is either naive or delusional.
You would have been an asset to the Salem court system in 1692.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Williams is a poor example. His 190 OPS+ was the 11th best of his career, and he did it in large part by limiting his playing time, and limiting it further against left handed pitching (against which he hit .219). Leaving out seasons where he was injured or out for stretches for military service, Williams worst season came at 40 and second worst season came at 41.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Mark, do you believe Ortiz is clean this season? Can we not use evidence to deduce conclusions? This is not spectral evidence friend, it is hard statistical evidence. Plus there is the previously failed drug test. You are either naive or delusional if you truly think Ortiz is clean.
Do you believe bonds was clean? There is no failed test with him. Only statistical evidence. Are those who believe him to have been a cheater also on a witch hunt?
Mark, do you believe Ortiz is clean this season? Can we not use evidence to deduce conclusions? This is not spectral evidence friend, it is hard statistical evidence. Plus there is the previously failed drug test. You are either naive or delusional if you truly think Ortiz is clean.
You asked a question on why so much love for David Ortiz. Several tried to answer your question only to be met with being called delusional or naive by you. Can't handle others opinions that differ from yours? Too bad.
Obviously the intention off this thread is to just preach. You are very zealous on the subject. Debating with a zealot is a bobsled ride to hell. You've already convicted him. So be it. Just don't expect others to hop on the bandwagon on the "evidence" you cite.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Nobody but Ortiz knows for sure when he was cheating and when, if ever, he wasn't. I think of it this way - if you had a gun to your head and were asked whether Ortiz was cheating this year, and you would be shot if you got the answer wrong, what would you respond?
I'd say "yes" and be relieved that I got such an easy question when my life depended on it.
Anyone here who'd answer "no"? Anyone here who'd think about it for more than two seconds before answering "yes"?
edit to add: My point being that I would never dream of convicting Ortiz of a crime based on this, but he's not charged with one and the Salem analogy fails for that reason. I would also never dream of honoring him by putting him in the HOF, and don't really understand why anyone else who thinks he's most likely a cheater would do so, either.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Mark, I can absolutely handle other people's opinions. Last I knew, this was a discussion forum where people with differing opinions can discuss and debate topics about sports. This particular thread has evolved as do many threads on this and other forums the delusional and naive statement was directed at those who still believe Ortiz is not juicing not at people's opinion as to why he is still so popular even after a failed test.
You still have yet to answer the simple question of whether or not you believe Ortiz is using peds. What say you?
Piazza is in the HOF now. Does anyone believe he didn't take PEDs? If I had a gun to my head and was ordered to answer that question, I'd also be relieved I got an easy one (and I'm a Piazza fan).
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Mark, I can absolutely handle other people's opinions. Last I knew, this was a discussion forum where people with differing opinions can discuss and debate topics about sports. This particular thread has evolved as do many threads on this and other forums the delusional and naive statement was directed at those who still believe Ortiz is not juicing not at people's opinion as to why he is still so popular even after a failed test.
You still have yet to answer the simple question of whether or not you believe Ortiz is using peds. What say you?
I would be surprised if he was but not completed shocked if he was using.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
using or used, there really shouldn't be any difference. in the real world we lose our job due to illegal drug use and the chances of working again for that employer are virtually nil. the question we are all debating shouldn't be whether or not these players are using banned drugs, but why there isn't enforced screening and complete bannings..................in all professional sports. think for a minute of Steve Howe and Darryl Strawberry and then draw the line to Johnny Manziel. this stuff is ridiculous anymore and the athletes are using the excuse that since others have done it and gotten away with doing it they have to in order to have a competitive edge.
most of them couldn't find ethics or integrity in the dictionary if you spelled it for them.
Keets has got it right. There should be much more severe penalties. I believe tennis has an automatic 2 year suspension. As far as the hall of fame. Should be an automatic no for known cheaters
didn't Tennis just ban one of the women?? I think she even came out and told the committee what she was using and why she was using it prior to being tested and she still got slammed. maybe my facts and timeline are wrong but that sets a good precedent. I was always amazed when the Steve Howe episode was unfolding, I think he had 6-7 bans and he still had a chance to comeback until he was eventually banned for life. unfortunately and very sadly that life wasn't very long and the tox screen post-mortem showed drugs.
if the focus was more towards a successful, drug-free LIFE and not a successful re-entry into MLB perhaps Steve Howe's future would have been different. certainly PED's aren't the same as alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, etc. in terms of physical effects, but I would put it to everyone that the mental aspect is the same. also, is it any coincidence that many of these athletes die early??
Originally posted by: keets didn't Tennis just ban one of the women?? I think she even came out and told the committee what she was using and why she was using it prior to being tested and she still got slammed. maybe my facts and timeline are wrong but that sets a good precedent. I
Maria Sharapova was just hit with a 2-year ban. She was using a medication that was formally banned on January 1 of this year. It has a legit medical purpose but also is a performance enhancer. It's also only supposed to be used for 6 months or less - and she's been using it for 10+ years in doses MANY times higher than recommended. She received numerous notifications that the substance was going to be banned, kept using it anyway, and got popped for it.
didn't Tennis just ban one of the women?? I think she even came out and told the committee what she was using and why she was using it prior to being tested and she still got slammed. maybe my facts and timeline are wrong but that sets a good precedent. I
Maria Sharapova was just hit with a 2-year ban. She was using a medication that was formally banned on January 1 of this year. It has a legit medical purpose but also is a performance enhancer. It's also only supposed to be used for 6 months or less - and she's been using it for 10+ years in doses MANY times higher than recommended. She received numerous notifications that the substance was going to be banned, kept using it anyway, and got popped for it.
She's hot. I forgive her.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
This is all very amusing. Like we all know who is using and who is not. LOL. All of the stats are very impressive but really circumstancial. Looks like someone is on a witch hunt and just can't stand Ortiz.
As far as the HOF........it doesn't mean SQUAT anyway until the "ALL TIME HIT LEADER" is in there! After all Rose got all of his hits the right way.......no PED's.
I know....."He bet on games". Like that affected his hitting or outcome of games....NOT!!!!
Dimeman, if you don't agree with using statistical evidence or circumstantial evidence to ferret out ped users, do you not think bonds or Clemens used? There is not one shred of hard evidence against either one. Ortiz has a failed test. That is hard evidence.
Originally posted by: craig44 So perkdog, you don't care if players cheat to win championships. Would you care if they gambled on games? Paid off umpires? Had Tonya Harding waiting in the visiting teams clubhouse with a pipe? That doesn't taint the championship for you? I am happy they won those rings, but hate that frauds like Ortiz and Manny were on those teams.
I also wasn't singling out Boston fans. It seems some national media has jumped on his bandwagon. They love bonds in sf, but he is roundly hated elsewhere. I guess if you have a bubbly personality it doesn't matter if your career is fraudulent.
I guess I don't care because it's impossible to weed out every player that used, the way I see it is every team has or had one or more "Dirty" players. Also who the heck knows what goes on behind closed doors, how many championship players did something that would get the banned or arrested had they been caught?
Originally posted by: craig44 So perkdog, you don't care if players cheat to win championships. Would you care if they gambled on games? Paid off umpires? Had Tonya Harding waiting in the visiting teams clubhouse with a pipe? That doesn't taint the championship for you? I am happy they won those rings, but hate that frauds like Ortiz and Manny were on those teams.
I also wasn't singling out Boston fans. It seems some national media has jumped on his bandwagon. They love bonds in sf, but he is roundly hated elsewhere. I guess if you have a bubbly personality it doesn't matter if your career is fraudulent.
I guess I don't care because it's impossible to weed out every player that used, the way I see it is every team has or had one or more "Dirty" players. Also who the heck knows what goes on behind closed doors, how many championship players did something that would get the banned or arrested had they been caught?
Comments
I would agree with Dallas when it comes to ryan. His career is remarkably consistent throughout. There is no statistical evidence, no failed drug test and no smoking gun with nolan. I think until there is a smoking gun or some sort of evidence against him it is safe to put him inthe clean camp. With Ortiz, however, we do have both hard evidence and statistical evidence. He has been on peds for a very long time and his statistics hold the prestige that comes with a cheater, none.
Stop drinking the kool aid. How can you believe Nolan Ryan was able to make a resurgence at the age of 43, but David Ortiz can't at the age of 40?
Nolan Ryan made his epic comeback on a Texas Rangers roster than included confirmed steroids users Rafael Palmeiro, Juan Gonzalez and a slew of suspected users. If you think it's a coincidence then I have some magic beans to sell you.
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
You first implied and have now stated directly that Ryan had an "epic" comeback on the Rangers. First, part of the period you cherry picked as part of that comeback Ryan was still on the Astros, and second, as the stats show, there wasn't anything "epic" about it. Ryan's career ERA+ was 112, and other than his early wild years on the Mets, his ERA+ was between 110 and 117 every five years, including the "epic" years at the end.
You first implied and have now stated directly that Ryan had an "epic" comeback on the Rangers. First, part of the period you cherry picked as part of that comeback Ryan was still on the Astros, and second, as the stats show, there wasn't anything "epic" about it. Ryan's career ERA+ was 112, and other than his early wild years on the Mets, his ERA+ was between 110 and 117 every five years, including the "epic" years at the end.
Mets: (Ages 21-24) ERA+ 98, k/9 8.7
Angels: (Ages 25-32) ERA+ 115, k/9 10.0
Astros: (Ages 33-41) ERA+ 110, k/9 9.1
Rangers: (Ages 42-46) ERA+ 116, k/9 10.1
Do you know who was Nolan Ryan's pitching coach in Texas? Tom House.
"House, 58, estimated that six or seven pitchers per team were at least experimenting with steroids or human growth hormone. He said players talked about losing to opponents using more effective drugs.
"We didn't get beat, we got out-milligrammed," he said. "And when you found out what they were taking, you started taking them.""
A 42 year old pitcher who is pitching as well as he was in his prime on a roster riddled with steroid users, coached by a former steroid user...
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
Without the nonsense about an "epic comeback" you've got a more reasonable argument (you're welcome), but if you take out all of the gossip and innuendo, what you've got is a pitcher who was still as good (not better, which would be required for a "comeback", epic or otherwise) in his early 40's as he was in his late 20's.
No question that that's a rare thing, or that one possible explanation for it is steroid use. Perhaps we can agree that the evidence for this explanation is much weaker than the evidence against Ortiz - who has a higher OPS+ post-35 than he does during any other stretch of his career.
And note that Hoyt Wilhelm and Ted Lyons both had a higher ERA+ post-40 than they did pre-40; and Pete Alexander had a higher ERA+ post-40 than he did from 35-39. It's rare, but it's not unheard of among pitchers who, presumably, nobody is accusing of steroid use. There is no comparable list of HOF hitters; only cheaters.
It is much more common historically for elite pitchers to perform well into their 40's than hitters. Look at cy young, Warren spahn, Gaylord Perry, Phil niekro to name a few. do you think cy young was on the juice back in 1908? I know pudding galvin tried to use a concoction of monkey hormones back in the 1890's but they ended up giving no perceived advantage so he discontinued use.
How many hitters have had a season like Ortiz at age 40? Bonds. Well, there you go.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
And note that Hoyt Wilhelm and Ted Lyons both had a higher ERA+ post-40 than they did pre-40; and Pete Alexander had a higher ERA+ post-40 than he did from 35-39. It's rare, but it's not unheard of among pitchers who, presumably, nobody is accusing of steroid use. There is no comparable list of HOF hitters; only cheaters.
Compelling comparisons, but there are definitely holes in the players above.
Hoyt Wilhelm was reliever and knuckleball pitcher who didn't enter the league until the age of 29 - he only had a few seasons above 100 innings pitched and had the same sort of longevity many knuckleball players have. ALSO, something funny about Hoyt Wilhelm, in his final years with the Braves he was on the same team as the aforementioned Tom House.
Ted Lyons played only two seasons after turning 40 and played remarkably. But he also is considered one of the worst hall of fame pitchers - he has a career 2.3 k/9 and 3.67 ERA.
Pete Alexander played in the 1920's and his one good year after the age of 40 had a 1.6 k/9 (he was a career 3.8 k/9 pitcher) and his FIP after the age of 40 was 3.87 compared to a career 2.88 FIP.
Nolan Ryan was a fastball pitcher in the modern baseball era and arguably pitched better after the age of 40 than he did before. Coincidentally, this also coincided with the beginning of the steroid era while he was on a team with known steroid users and coached by a known steroid user. None of the pitchers above really compare to Nolan Ryan in any meaningful way.
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
It is much more common historically for elite pitchers to perform well into their 40's than hitters. Look at cy young, Warren spahn, Gaylord Perry, Phil niekro to name a few. do you think cy young was on the juice back in 1908? I know pudding galvin tried to use a concoction of monkey hormones back in the 1890's but they ended up giving no perceived advantage so he discontinued use.
Warren Spahn (age 21-39) ERA+ 123, FIP 3.34, WHIP 1.188, k/9 4.6
Warren Spahn (age 40-44) ERA+ 104, FIP 3.79, WHIP 1.217, k/9 3.9
Gaylord Perry (age 23-39) ERA+ 123, FIP 2.93, WHIP 1.140, k/9 6.2
Gaylord Perry (age 40-44) ERA+ 100, FIP 3.62, WHIP 1.359, k/9 4.8
Phil Niekro (age 25-39) ERA+ 124, FIP 3.28, WHIP 1.200, k/9 5.8
Phil Niekro (age 40-48) ERA+ 103, FIP 4.20, WHIP 1.385, k/9 5.2
Nolan Ryan (age 19-39) ERA+ 110, FIP 3.01, WHIP 1.278, k/9 9.4
Nolan Ryan (age 40-46) ERA+ 116, FIP 2.86, WHIP 1.148, k/9 10.2
Roger Clemens (age 21-39) ERA+ 142, FIP 3.05, WHIP 1.180, k/9 8.7
Roger Clemens (age 40-44) ERA+ 146, FIP 3.28, WHIP 1.137, k/9 8.1
Andy Pettitte (age 23-39) ERA+ 117, FIP 3.75, WHIP 1.357, k/9 6.6
Andy Pettitte (age 40-41) ERA+ 117, FIP 3.64, WHIP 1.274, k/9 6.8
Nolan Ryan was a remarkably better player after the age of 40. Without nitpicking my use of the word "epic" but that's pretty astonishing!
Edit to add: are there any pitchers who played during the steroid era (or after) who pitched better after the age of 40 than before? The examples I've been given so far haven't included anyone from the steroid era. I included the only two I could think of...
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
You appear to have missed my points about the pitchers I listed. True, Wilhelm was a knuckleballer, but he was for his entire career. He got better after he turned 40, and your bizarre reference to Tom House notwithstanding, there is zero reason to believe that he was taking performance enhancing drugs. My point is that, unlike hitters, there are pitchers who find ways to improve as they age. That Lyons is "one of the worst hall of fame pitchers" surely is irrelevant; what's relevant is that he, too, found a way to be effective after 40. You compare Alexander's post-40 stats to his career stats, but my point was not that he found a way to again be, arguably, the greatest pitcher who ever lived after the age of 40, but rather that he found a way to be better than he was in his late 30's.
Ryan didn't find a way to be better than he had been before, he found a way to be as good. I can't rule out that the way he found was cheating, but neither do I see any reason to think that cheating is the most likely explanation.
But Clemens is certainly noteworthy; using the same age bands as I did for Ryan earlier his ERA+ looks like this:
pre-26: 141
26-30: 150
31-35: 162
36-40: 114
41+: 162
clemens career was following the standard pattern; he built to a peak in his early 30's, and then declined. what happened after age 40 was, to coin a phrase, remarkable, astonishing and epic. it was also unprecedented, unlike what ryan did.
You can substitute "remarkable" and "astonishing" for "epic" but I'm still not buying it. Nor do I buy that an ERA+ of 110 pre-40 and 116 post-40 is more relevant than an ERA+ of 112 pre-39 and 111 post-39; if you have to nit-pick 39 vs. 40 to make your point then your point isn't worth making.
Your stats appear to be wrong:
Nolan Ryan (age 19-38): ERA+ 110, FIP 3.00, WHIP 1.285, k/9 9.3
Nolan Ryan (age 39-46): ERA+ 115, FIP 2.88, WHIP 1.146, k/9 10.1
We can agree that Nolan Ryan played much better during the steroid era than before the steroid era - everything we have both written agrees with this assessment.
So either the hitters became worse during the steroid era, or Nolan Ryan became better. Also, Nolan Ryan switched to the AL from the NL during this period, so he now had to face a DH.
So.........
You're either being ignorant or willfully obtuse.
What Nolan Ryan did is completely unheard of in the modern history of the sport. He is the only starting pitcher in modern history to have played better after turning 40 (other than Clemens and Pettitte).
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
No perkdog, baseball has been played by hundreds of player CLEANLY since the 80's. Your boy Ortiz just isn't one of them. I realize your hero worship has jaded your view of the situation. You must be delusional if you think Ortiz is performing naturally this year. Of course he's on peds.
And furthermore I couldn't care less if he makes the HOF either, all I care about is World Series wins and we got 3 recently and guess what? I don't care if all the Sox players used PEDs or not, I'm happy with the 3 rings
You must be delusional if you think Ortiz is performing naturally this year. Of course he's on peds.
I guess they stopped testing David since 2003. I didn't realize that.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I also wasn't singling out Boston fans. It seems some national media has jumped on his bandwagon. They love bonds in sf, but he is roundly hated elsewhere. I guess if you have a bubbly personality it doesn't matter if your career is fraudulent.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Again I ask, bonds and Clemens never failed any drug tests. Do you think they were clean? Look at the statistical evidence. Of course Ortiz is using . his body is so broken down that he can barely hobble the bases, yet he leads baseball in x base hits and ops? Come on, surely you are not that naive.
Looks like Mark deleted the post I was responding to here. Not surprised
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Mark, you do realize mlb does not test for hgh right? Bonds passed all of his drug tests. Do you think he was clean?
So in 2009 he gets called on the carpet for a test in 2003. Positive for PED. So since 2009 he had the license to continue to cheat? Is that what you are saying? You know for certain that he is cheating? He know he is using HGH's? That's how I'm rwsing your words.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Again.... Bonds and Clemens never failed drug tests, do you think they were clean?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I don't think he ever stopped. All mlb uses is a simple urine test. Blood tests were not part of the collective bargaining agreement. Are you naive enough to believe that Ortiz was caught in 2003 and was scared strait and never used again?
Again I ask, bonds and Clemens never failed any drug tests. Do you think they were clean? Look at the statistical evidence. Of course Ortiz is using . his body is so broken down that he can barely hobble the bases, yet he leads baseball in x base hits and ops? Come on, surely you are not that naive.
Looks like Mark deleted the post I was responding to here. Not surprised
I deleted it to clean it up. Nothing changed.
I will answer your question.
Yes I believed Clemens and Bonds used steroids.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
But they never failed a test, so how do you know?
I don't know for certain. You asked my opinion. I gave it. You on the other hand know David Ortiz is on HGH' s now and has been cheating right along based on one test back in 2003. Right?
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
So perkdog, you don't care if players cheat to win championships. Would you care if they gambled on games? Paid off umpires? Had Tonya Harding waiting in the visiting teams clubhouse with a pipe? That doesn't taint the championship for you? I am happy they won those rings, but hate that frauds like Ortiz and Manny were on those teams.
I also wasn't singling out Boston fans. It seems some national media has jumped on his bandwagon. They love bonds in sf, but he is roundly hated elsewhere. I guess if you have a bubbly personality it doesn't matter if your career is fraudulent.
No I don't care, reason being is a fraction of every team involved in playoff games that lead to titles had players on both sides that were dirty. Sorry but the world isn't all sunshine and rainbows, and we can't make it perfect ever. I look beyond the BS and live in reality. Talking MLB alone not one World Series game probably since the early 90's have had all clean players, including other eras that had payers on booze, Coke, emphetamines, greenies or something, it's reality. One game and player that sticks out is when Luis Gonzalez of the Diamndbacks had that game winning hit to win the World Series, he was dirty as anyone and nobody talks about that guy, he was single handily responsible for a win. Ortiz is one of many, I understand he gets love but again it's only because he helped turn the Red Sox into a contender year after year after 80 years of not winning a World Series, sorry but Boston Fans are going to love the guy dirty or not.
Your stats appear to be wrong:
Nolan Ryan (age 19-38): ERA+ 110, FIP 3.00, WHIP 1.285, k/9 9.3
Nolan Ryan (age 39-46): ERA+ 115, FIP 2.88, WHIP 1.146, k/9 10.1
Yeah, not sure what I did there. I'll go back to my original stats - ERA+ 36-40 of 111, and 41+ also 111 - and repeat that if you have to nitpick one year to make your point your point isn't worth making.
Who's being willfully obtuse? No, he was not "much" better in the steroid era and nothing that either of us has posted supports that he was. Of course, you haven't defined when the "steroid era" begins, but I note that his career ERA+ was 112 and his ERA+ through 1974 was 112, through 1981 was 112, through 1983 was 112, through 1984 was 112, through 1987 was 112, and through 1991 was 112. You are picking some point in that stretch as the point that the steroid era began and trying to convince me that it's meaningful. I don't know how else to say it - I'm not buying it.
You are either being willfully obtuse or ignorant of what ERA+ is. ERA+ compares the pitcher within his league, not all of MLB, so when he switched leagues the standard ERA to which he was being compared also changed. Complete non sequitur.
You're either being ignorant or willfully obtuse.
I am certain that one of us is being either ignorant or willfully obtuse, and equally certain that it is not me.
OK, you added "modern" and "starting" since without those words you were proven wrong. The universe of pitchers who pitch past 40 is already very small, and you just made it much smaller with "modern", and smaller still with "starting". You've made it so small that I don't see how it proves much of anything. But you think it does, so how about Dennis Martinez? ERA+ pre-40 of 105, 40+ of 115. Now I'm sure you'll find some reason why Dennis Martinez doesn't "count", and add a word or two more to your dead and decaying argument so that Ryan is now being compared to only 2 or 3 other pitchers and he's the "only one!" among that handful to have done such and such. I said from my first post that what Ryan did is rare, but not unprecedented and that's where we still find ourselves. I also said from the beginning that it couldn't be ruled out that he cheated. We're still there. I also said that the evidence that he cheated is no stronger than the evidence against Pete Alexander, Ted Lyons or Hoyt Wilhelm (and now Dennis Martinez). We're still there, too.
Do you really think Ortizs stats are legitimate? Do you think all of his clutch hits are legitimate? He is a fraudulent player who cheated to accumulate his statistics. They are meaningless.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I look at greenies the same way I look at other medical procedures such as cortisone shots, Tommy john and bone spur surgeries. Those are procedures meant not to increase an athletes production, but to return them to their normal level of production
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Who's being willfully obtuse? No, he was not "much" better in the steroid era and nothing that either of us has posted supports that he was. Of course, you haven't defined when the "steroid era" begins, but I note that his career ERA+ was 112 and his ERA+ through 1974 was 112, through 1981 was 112, through 1983 was 112, through 1984 was 112, through 1987 was 112, and through 1991 was 112. You are picking some point in that stretch as the point that the steroid era began and trying to convince me that it's meaningful. I don't know how else to say it - I'm not buying it.
Most Hall of Fame pitchers remain effective until their mid 30's and start to drop off as they reach their late 30's. There are very few (if any) starting pitchers who don't.
Nolan Ryan's late 30's also coincidentally coincided with the dawn of the steroid era. An aging pitcher who is clean would reasonably see a drop in production, but Nolan Ryan started pitching better than ever. Arguably his best five year stretch came at the age of 41 through 45. I think he is the only player in modern history to experience this sort of phenomena.
You are either being willfully obtuse or ignorant of what ERA+ is. ERA+ compares the pitcher within his league, not all of MLB, so when he switched leagues the standard ERA to which he was being compared also changed. Complete non sequitur.
That's why I included k/9, WHIP and FIP.
OK, you added "modern" and "starting" since without those words you were proven wrong. The universe of pitchers who pitch past 40 is already very small, and you just made it much smaller with "modern", and smaller still with "starting". You've made it so small that I don't see how it proves much of anything. But you think it does, so how about Dennis Martinez? ERA+ pre-40 of 105, 40+ of 115. Now I'm sure you'll find some reason why Dennis Martinez doesn't "count", and add a word or two more to your dead and decaying argument so that Ryan is now being compared to only 2 or 3 other pitchers and he's the "only one!" among that handful to have done such and such. I said from my first post that what Ryan did is rare, but not unprecedented and that's where we still find ourselves. I also said from the beginning that it couldn't be ruled out that he cheated. We're still there. I also said that the evidence that he cheated is no stronger than the evidence against Pete Alexander, Ted Lyons or Hoyt Wilhelm (and now Dennis Martinez). We're still there, too.
Starting pitcher because that is his position and "modern" because the two other players to play better at the age of 40 than prior played almost 100 years ago.
Also, I firmly believe Dennis Martinez also took steroids.
What Nolan Ryan did has only been done by suspected and confirmed steroid users (or players born in the 19th century).
Hoyt Wilhelm didn't play during the steroid era. Pete Alexander's pitching coach didn't admit that 80% of his pitchers were taking PED's. Ted Lyons didn't see the sort of production increase Nolan Ryan did.
Evidence against Nolan Ryan:
1. One of the only starting pitchers in history to increase production after the age of 40.
2. Played for a pitching coach who admitted that "7 or 8" pitchers on his team were using that he knew of
3. Played on a team with other confirmed and suspected users
4. Saw an uptick in production perfectly coinciding with the advent of steroid use in MLB
5. Despite his age and more difficult competition, saw an increase in production into his 40's
This is all circumstantial evidence, but this it is enough for any objective observer to raise suspicion. Long story short, there is just as much evidence that Nolan Ryan took steroids at the age of 40 than there is that David Ortiz at the same age.
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
How many hitters have had a season like Ortiz at age 40? Bonds. Well, there you go.
Ted Williams hit 29 homers with a 190 OPS+ at 41.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Well, there we go. Ortiz is putting up a ted williams quality season at age 40. He is definitely doing that without the help of peds. Sort of proves my point. Ortiz is putting up the best slugging, ops and ops+ numbers of his career at age 40, while injured. Anyone who doesn't think he is juicing right now is either naive or delusional.
You would have been an asset to the Salem court system in 1692.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Do you believe bonds was clean? There is no failed test with him. Only statistical evidence. Are those who believe him to have been a cheater also on a witch hunt?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Mark, do you believe Ortiz is clean this season? Can we not use evidence to deduce conclusions? This is not spectral evidence friend, it is hard statistical evidence. Plus there is the previously failed drug test. You are either naive or delusional if you truly think Ortiz is clean.
You asked a question on why so much love for David Ortiz. Several tried to answer your question only to be met with being called delusional or naive by you. Can't handle others opinions that differ from yours? Too bad.
Obviously the intention off this thread is to just preach. You are very zealous on the subject. Debating with a zealot is a bobsled ride to hell. You've already convicted him. So be it. Just don't expect others to hop on the bandwagon on the "evidence" you cite.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I'd say "yes" and be relieved that I got such an easy question when my life depended on it.
Anyone here who'd answer "no"? Anyone here who'd think about it for more than two seconds before answering "yes"?
edit to add: My point being that I would never dream of convicting Ortiz of a crime based on this, but he's not charged with one and the Salem analogy fails for that reason. I would also never dream of honoring him by putting him in the HOF, and don't really understand why anyone else who thinks he's most likely a cheater would do so, either.
You still have yet to answer the simple question of whether or not you believe Ortiz is using peds. What say you?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Mark, I can absolutely handle other people's opinions. Last I knew, this was a discussion forum where people with differing opinions can discuss and debate topics about sports. This particular thread has evolved as do many threads on this and other forums the delusional and naive statement was directed at those who still believe Ortiz is not juicing not at people's opinion as to why he is still so popular even after a failed test.
You still have yet to answer the simple question of whether or not you believe Ortiz is using peds. What say you?
I would be surprised if he was but not completed shocked if he was using.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
using or used, there really shouldn't be any difference. in the real world we lose our job due to illegal drug use and the chances of working again for that employer are virtually nil. the question we are all debating shouldn't be whether or not these players are using banned drugs, but why there isn't enforced screening and complete bannings..................in all professional sports. think for a minute of Steve Howe and Darryl Strawberry and then draw the line to Johnny Manziel. this stuff is ridiculous anymore and the athletes are using the excuse that since others have done it and gotten away with doing it they have to in order to have a competitive edge.
most of them couldn't find ethics or integrity in the dictionary if you spelled it for them.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
if the focus was more towards a successful, drug-free LIFE and not a successful re-entry into MLB perhaps Steve Howe's future would have been different. certainly PED's aren't the same as alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, etc. in terms of physical effects, but I would put it to everyone that the mental aspect is the same. also, is it any coincidence that many of these athletes die early??
OK, I'm off the soapbox.
didn't Tennis just ban one of the women?? I think she even came out and told the committee what she was using and why she was using it prior to being tested and she still got slammed. maybe my facts and timeline are wrong but that sets a good precedent. I
Maria Sharapova was just hit with a 2-year ban. She was using a medication that was formally banned on January 1 of this year. It has a legit medical purpose but also is a performance enhancer. It's also only supposed to be used for 6 months or less - and she's been using it for 10+ years in doses MANY times higher than recommended. She received numerous notifications that the substance was going to be banned, kept using it anyway, and got popped for it.
didn't Tennis just ban one of the women?? I think she even came out and told the committee what she was using and why she was using it prior to being tested and she still got slammed. maybe my facts and timeline are wrong but that sets a good precedent. I
Maria Sharapova was just hit with a 2-year ban. She was using a medication that was formally banned on January 1 of this year. It has a legit medical purpose but also is a performance enhancer. It's also only supposed to be used for 6 months or less - and she's been using it for 10+ years in doses MANY times higher than recommended. She received numerous notifications that the substance was going to be banned, kept using it anyway, and got popped for it.
She's hot. I forgive her.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
As far as the HOF........it doesn't mean SQUAT anyway until the "ALL TIME HIT LEADER" is in there! After all Rose got all of his hits the right way.......no PED's.
I know....."He bet on games". Like that affected his hitting or outcome of games....NOT!!!!
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
So perkdog, you don't care if players cheat to win championships. Would you care if they gambled on games? Paid off umpires? Had Tonya Harding waiting in the visiting teams clubhouse with a pipe? That doesn't taint the championship for you? I am happy they won those rings, but hate that frauds like Ortiz and Manny were on those teams.
I also wasn't singling out Boston fans. It seems some national media has jumped on his bandwagon. They love bonds in sf, but he is roundly hated elsewhere. I guess if you have a bubbly personality it doesn't matter if your career is fraudulent.
I guess I don't care because it's impossible to weed out every player that used, the way I see it is every team has or had one or more "Dirty" players. Also who the heck knows what goes on behind closed doors, how many championship players did something that would get the banned or arrested had they been caught?
So perkdog, you don't care if players cheat to win championships. Would you care if they gambled on games? Paid off umpires? Had Tonya Harding waiting in the visiting teams clubhouse with a pipe? That doesn't taint the championship for you? I am happy they won those rings, but hate that frauds like Ortiz and Manny were on those teams.
I also wasn't singling out Boston fans. It seems some national media has jumped on his bandwagon. They love bonds in sf, but he is roundly hated elsewhere. I guess if you have a bubbly personality it doesn't matter if your career is fraudulent.
I guess I don't care because it's impossible to weed out every player that used, the way I see it is every team has or had one or more "Dirty" players. Also who the heck knows what goes on behind closed doors, how many championship players did something that would get the banned or arrested had they been caught?
Well put.