Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

60 Minuties w/ Jose ConsecoFollow

#1 Feb 14 2005 at 4:49 PM Rating: Good
****
7,821 posts
Any of you watch it? what you all think about this guy...trying to do this for attention or do you belive him. I Believe him. The only thing i heard that maybe turning my head away from issue is a baseball anylist said that before the "Steroid Era" there were 7 500 HR hitters. in the "era" there has been only 5...no one is questioning the 7 before. anyway what do you all thinka bout this issue.
#2 Feb 14 2005 at 5:03 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts
Quote:
a baseball anylist said that before the "Steroid Era" there were 7 500 HR hitters. in the "era" there has been only 5...no one is questioning the 7 before.

Maybe because the pre-steroid era was 100 years, and the "Steroid Era" has only been around for 20 years.
Not that you can compare 19th century baseball to modern baseball anyway...


Here's what I think needs to be done:

1) Mandatory random testing of 1 player on each team per week.

2) Tougher penalties for positive tests. Currently, it takes FOUR positive tests to get just a 1-year ban. I say, first time - half a season. Second time - full season. Third time - career over. You have no excuses after already being caught twice. Three strikes and you're out.

3) Blood tests. Currently, only urine tests are used. Urine tests cannot detect HGH (Human Growth Hormone), which is supposedly the main steroid that's being used these days.


#3 Feb 14 2005 at 5:04 PM Rating: Good
The fact that he said that 'roids can turn an average athlete into an exceptional athlete really pisses me off.

We're going to have a new crop of thousands of kids who feel like they have to juice up to make it to the pros. These drugs cause so many reproductive and endocrine problems, it's unreal.

Plus, there will always be a new designer 'roid that will out-smart the testers.

#4 Feb 14 2005 at 5:15 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,700 posts
When I was about 8 Canseco was the man (15 years ago) now he is a fricking snail. He has blasted so many people and tainted careers of great players, pisses me off.

I dont for one second believe that 80% of baseball uses steroids, if you watch the game you can tell, 20% of the poeple have barrel chest and arms the size of tree-trunks, other 80% are pitchers or gangly fast *** running people.

As for the 500+ homerun hitters, most of the the old-timers that did it played shorter seasons and played longer careers, Hank Aaron was in the league for about 17 years or more, Babe Ruth was around a long time, Killabrew, etc etc etc (may of mispelled that). My point is that the people who are breaking 500 now a days are because of longer seasons and the pitching has improved. Well not over all pitching but at least the speed. If you can put the bat on a 90 MPH fast ball you pretty much put it over the fence. In the past pitching was all about finess and mind games, now its all about the 100+ mph fastball.

All in all the game has just evolved, your going to see different results. And the steroids help too of course.
#5 Feb 14 2005 at 5:23 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
It's like twinking or powerleveling in EQ. Everyone wants to be the biggest and the best with minimal effort. Or something.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#6 Feb 14 2005 at 5:37 PM Rating: Good
****
7,821 posts
the thing im mad about...why jsut question all teh great hitters? how about the pitchers who can consistantly throw 97, 98 back to back days and such. Maybe they are on it too
#7 Feb 14 2005 at 5:44 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Nashua wrote:
the thing im mad about...why jsut question all teh great hitters? how about the pitchers who can consistantly throw 97, 98 back to back days and such. Maybe they are on it too

In Roger Clemens' case, it's his coke habit, not steroids.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#8 Feb 14 2005 at 6:47 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,453 posts
Quote:
I dont for one second believe that 80% of baseball uses steroids, if you watch the game you can tell, 20% of the poeple have barrel chest and arms the size of tree-trunks, other 80% are pitchers or gangly fast *** running people.



Are you blind? Or is it that you just can't count?

Go back and look at some ESPN Classic ballgames from the 1970's. The players in those games look like little boys compared to the players of today. Jim Rice, who at the time, was considered the most fearsome, powerful, right handed hitter of his day, could barely fill the uniform of the average second baseman of today.

80%? Hell yeah, I wouldn't have any trouble believing that 80% of baseball has used steroids if not for the fact that roughly 40% of the players are pitchers. Call it 80% of the position players.
#9 Feb 14 2005 at 7:36 PM Rating: Decent
Let them pump that sh[b][/b]it. I like watching Barry pop one into next tuesday.

Ok, honestly, I agree with most of what Tricky said. The only thing I would tweek a bit is the one player per team, I just don't think they're going to catch anyone. Money = Manipulation of how random these tests are.
#10 Feb 14 2005 at 11:57 PM Rating: Decent
*
199 posts
Steroids may have helped a few good baseball players reach the next level.

And it may have helped a few great players become hall of famers.

However, I have a hard time believing that the influx of 500 home run hitters over the past twenty years can even be partially attributed to steriod use. Sure, a person can sure hit the ball a long way with pythons the width of a semi tire, but they don't help the most important aspect of all...hand-eye coordination.

There are so many issues at stake here. People are healthier today than they were twenty years ago, so careers are longer. Plus, steroids actually help contribute to an early decline, so it seems as if steroid use might actually lessen the amount of 500 home run hitters in the league.

Also, there are twice as many starters in the league as there were seventy years ago amidst baseball's last lively-ball era.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were more than 100 players in the bigs right now currently using 'roids. However, of those 100 players, I would estimate that 90 of them would be out of the game in five years because of the negative side effects of the drug.

And of the 500 home run hitters who have used steroids, I'd be willing to be that most of them would have been 500 home run hitters anyway.
#11 Feb 15 2005 at 12:05 AM Rating: Excellent
Code Monkey
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
GreatZidane the Mundane wrote:
We're going to have a new crop of thousands of kids who feel like they have to juice up to make it to the pros. These drugs cause so many reproductive and endocrine problems, it's unreal


Hey, as long as *they* can't have kids, we're weeding more stupid out of the gene pool!
____________________________
Do what now?
#12 Feb 15 2005 at 4:18 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
Sure, a person can sure hit the ball a long way with pythons the width of a semi tire, but they don't help the most important aspect of all...hand-eye coordination.


Assume were talking about Barry Bonds.

How many of his doubles become singles or ground outs without the extra power?

How many of his homers end up as outfield warning track homers without the power?

Now lets take a look at someone like Shawn Green who looks like a kid next to Barry.

How many homers would Shawn Green hit if he was on a roids program?

He set the Dodger record and this is one player who doesn't have the steroid look about him, that hits homers.

I admit, I could be wrong and maybe Shawn is hitting the roids and Barry is clean, but I wouldn't bet on it.
#13 Feb 15 2005 at 11:48 AM Rating: Decent
*
199 posts
Quote:
Assume were talking about Barry Bonds.

How many of his doubles become singles or ground outs without the extra power?

How many of his homers end up as outfield warning track homers without the power?

Now lets take a look at someone like Shawn Green who looks like a kid next to Barry.

How many homers would Shawn Green hit if he was on a roids program?

He set the Dodger record and this is one player who doesn't have the steroid look about him, that hits homers.

I admit, I could be wrong and maybe Shawn is hitting the roids and Barry is clean, but I wouldn't bet on it.


.


First of all, you are comparing two players..not trying to make a deduction based on the game in general.

What about guys like Jose Canseco, Mark McGwire, and even Jason Giambi who were washed up before their time was up?

Bonds is an anomoly in EVERY aspect of the game, there is no doubt about that. However, he was destined to be a 500 home run hitter, possibly even a 600 home run hitter, and maybe even a 700 home run hitter whether or not he was on the juice.

Like I said, there are likely players in the game who have stepped to the next level because of steroid use. However, if the drug acts in baseball like it does in all other practical uses, it has caused two players to regress for every one player it has helped.

edited because I quoted the wrong text

Edited, Tue Feb 15 11:58:50 2005 by bjohn
#14 Feb 15 2005 at 11:56 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,700 posts
Quote:
What about guys like Jose Canseco, Mark McGwire, and even Jason Giambi who were washed up before their time was up?

Bonds is an anomoly in EVERY aspect of the game, there is no doubt about that. However, he was destined to be a 500 home run hitter, possibly even a 600 home run hitter, and maybe even a 700 home run hitter whether or not he was on the juice


Canseco washed out for who knows why, giambi cause of roids, Mcgwire did cause of a bad back, usually roid problems are knee and tumors (not cancerous) like Giambi had. Frank Thomas was a mountain of a man like Mcgwire but washed up way early cause of a bad back too, nobody mentions him.

Bonds was nothing till about 5 years ago. He started out in like 88 and had maybe 300 homeruns till about 5 seaons ago, then he started hitting 45 to 75 homeruns per season. He was nothing without the steroids, maybe a 400 homerun hitter but he was never an exceptional power hitter, he was very consistant though, had a good swing. I have 0 respect for the man, he swelled up like a wet diaper and claims he is not on roids, please look at him his early career, 5 years later, 5 years later, and now today. He's a cheater and I hope he doesnt get into the hall of fame, disgracing the game.
#15 Feb 15 2005 at 11:58 AM Rating: Decent
*
199 posts
Kronig wrote:
Quote:
What about guys like Jose Canseco, Mark McGwire, and even Jason Giambi who were washed up before their time was up?

Bonds is an anomoly in EVERY aspect of the game, there is no doubt about that. However, he was destined to be a 500 home run hitter, possibly even a 600 home run hitter, and maybe even a 700 home run hitter whether or not he was on the juice


Canseco washed out for who knows why, giambi cause of roids, Mcgwire did cause of a bad back, usually roid problems are knee and tumors (not cancerous) like Giambi had. Frank Thomas was a mountain of a man like Mcgwire but washed up way early cause of a bad back too, nobody mentions him.

Bonds was nothing till about 5 years ago. He started out in like 88 and had maybe 300 homeruns till about 5 seaons ago, then he started hitting 45 to 75 homeruns per season. He was nothing without the steroids, maybe a 400 homerun hitter but he was never an exceptional power hitter, he was very consistant though, had a good swing. I have 0 respect for the man, he swelled up like a wet diaper and claims he is not on roids, please look at him his early career, 5 years later, 5 years later, and now today. He's a cheater and I hope he doesnt get into the hall of fame, disgracing the game.


You need to read up on the history of the game. Barry Bonds has been THE premiere hitter in the game of baseball since his back to back MVP awards in '90 and '91.
#16 Feb 15 2005 at 11:59 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,700 posts
A true Anomly is Ken Griffy Jr., if not for his bad knees he would of decimated the home run record. He had the fastest start out of anyone in the MLB. Till about 6 years ago when his knees went out, now every season he blows it out again but he still eclisped 500 homeruns in one of the shortest time spans. He wasnt massive either, just a pure swing artist, watching him swing was watching perfection.
#17 Feb 15 2005 at 12:18 PM Rating: Decent
*
199 posts
Kronig wrote:
Quote:
What about guys like Jose Canseco, Mark McGwire, and even Jason Giambi who were washed up before their time was up?

Bonds is an anomoly in EVERY aspect of the game, there is no doubt about that. However, he was destined to be a 500 home run hitter, possibly even a 600 home run hitter, and maybe even a 700 home run hitter whether or not he was on the juice


Canseco washed out for who knows why, giambi cause of roids, Mcgwire did cause of a bad back, usually roid problems are knee and tumors (not cancerous) like Giambi had. Frank Thomas was a mountain of a man like Mcgwire but washed up way early cause of a bad back too, nobody mentions him.


That is because McGwire was a known steroid user, be it a legal substance or not. His back may or may not have been the result of steroid use, but it is the same overgeneralization being placed on steroid use in the game of baseball just because Barry Bonds is shattering home run records.
#18 Feb 15 2005 at 12:26 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
It's all about home runs these days. No one cares about the artistry anymore - pure hitters, like Williams, Henderson, etc.
Anything that produces more long ball for the crowds to go wild over - steroids, high-tension baseballs, corked bats.

On a similar topic, my brother and I used to watch the old Home Run Derby show on ESPN Classic? Harmon Killebrew and those guys were gods to us.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#19 Feb 15 2005 at 12:52 PM Rating: Decent
**
268 posts
I, for one, was never a very big homerun guy. I always liked watching the true technique guys like Kirby Puckett (favorite play ever) and Tony Gwynn. Those guys were true plays.

They can hit all the homeruns they want, but all you have to do is look at their bodies. Most of baseball players take 'roids. Just look at them. Their heads look like balloons.

BTW, on 'roids testings. The steriods are getting better and better and soon will probably be harder to test for. Some don't show up in tests that are being taken now.
#20 Feb 15 2005 at 1:24 PM Rating: Decent
*
199 posts
Dragosan wrote:
I, for one, was never a very big homerun guy. I always liked watching the true technique guys like Kirby Puckett (favorite play ever) and Tony Gwynn. Those guys were true plays.


I couldn't agree more. A solo home run is about the most boring way to score in baseball. Personally, I prefer the run saving, inning ending double play....

Or a strikeout with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth.
#21 Feb 15 2005 at 1:26 PM Rating: Decent
*
199 posts
oh...and if I had to name a favorite player ever, I'd go straight to Sandy Koufax, Orel Hershiser, Fernando Valenzuela, and Don Dryesdale.

Notice, they are all pitchers.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 180 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (180)