The 2009 Major League Baseball Thread

#300 Reply
Posted by Drew_Kingsley on 30 Jul, 2009 12:38
Quote from: NickNels;237163
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4366335

Quote
Report: Manny, Ortiz tested positive in \'03

Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003, lawyers with knowledge of the results told The New York Times.

The two were key members of the Boston Red Sox World Series teams in 2004 and 2007.

Boston Redsox World Series Champs 2004* and 2007*

* Cheat to win
For anybody who is interested, we have probably already had the conversation that is about to ensue at least four or five times now. Just search the old baseball threads instead of bothering to reply.

#301 Reply
Posted by NickNels on 30 Jul, 2009 12:41
Quote from: Drew_Kingsley;237164
Quote from: NickNels;237163
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4366335

Quote
Report: Manny, Ortiz tested positive in \'03

Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003, lawyers with knowledge of the results told The New York Times.

The two were key members of the Boston Red Sox World Series teams in 2004 and 2007.

Boston Redsox World Series Champs 2004* and 2007*

* Cheat to win
For anybody who is interested, we have probably already had the conversation that is about to ensue at least four or five times now. Just search the old baseball threads instead of bothering to reply.

haha! Yes we did, but now its Manny and Poppi

It\'s kinda like when Tonya Harding clubbed Nancy Kerrigan in the back of the knee...actually, it\'s just like that

#302 Reply
Posted by zuke583 on 30 Jul, 2009 13:04
what was baseball\'s stance on PEDs in 2003?

#303 Reply
Posted by simpletwistupdon on 30 Jul, 2009 13:26
the stance was that the testing was a survey to see if rules needed to be put into place on a go forward basis. there was no penalties enforced until 2004. did he test positive in 2004 i would like to know? or anytime since then now that there was penalties associated with use. i wanna know when the rest of the 104 names is going to be relased instead of just the top players in the game too. seems like people just have axes to grind no matter what side your on. and leave it to the times to break the news about boston steriod use. just sounds like propoganda to me.

#304 Reply
Posted by Rujah on 30 Jul, 2009 13:47
Quote from: simpletwistupdon
and leave it to the times to break the news about boston steroid use. just sounds like propaganda to me.

Actually, I think the Times owns a portion of the Boston Red Sox organization. Although they are actively trying to selling their stake since, you know, the newspaper business isn\'t making much money nowadays.

Either way, I figured Ortiz was on the juice a long time ago so this comes as now surprise to me whatsoever. Does there need to be an asterisk on their 2004/2007 championships? I don\'t think so. Most teams had one or two stars using steroids, and I\'m sure the top pitchers were doing PEDs too.

That is, everyone except Tom Glavine, John Smoltz, Greg Maddux, not to mention Chipper Jones, Julio Franco, Fred McGriff, Eddie Perez, Walt Weiss, Mark Lemke, Jeff Blauser, among others.

I blame steroid cheaters for the Braves winning only one World Series despite 15 straight division titles.

Would like to see a list of players who did not take steroids?

#305 Reply
Posted by Drew_Kingsley on 30 Jul, 2009 14:02
Quote from: Rujah;237176
Quote from: simpletwistupdon
and leave it to the times to break the news about boston steroid use. just sounds like propaganda to me.

Actually, I think the Times owns a portion of the Boston Red Sox organization. Although they are actively trying to selling their stake since, you know, the newspaper business isn\'t making much money nowadays.
I\'m sure there is more to it than this, but The New York Times Company owns, among other things, 17% of New England Sports Ventures, which is owned by John Henry. So when Henry became principal owner of the Red Sox, the New York Times Company gained some de facto ownership of the Boston Red Sox.

#306 Reply
Posted by FrankZappa on 30 Jul, 2009 14:55
I\'m wondering why these are the only two names we\'re talking about if the list of almost 100 is out? :hscratch:

#307 Reply
Posted by Yoda on 30 Jul, 2009 15:01
A-Rod was already outed, so these are probably the next biggest names on the list...

I\'m really hoping that Griffey\'s name stays clean...

#308 Reply
Posted by Drew_Kingsley on 30 Jul, 2009 15:16
You would think that anybody who knew the results of the 2003 "anonymous" tests would have signed some sort of document that made them legally culpable if they couldn\'t keep their mouths shut.

But the MLBPA made a deal with the devil. The players\' union encouraged juicing by refusing to require testing, but offered this anonymous test to appease the owners (but really, to appease the media). The players got to juice and put up ridiculous numbers for a little while, then clean up (and maybe even retire and get into the Hall of Fame) before the results inevitably become public. In return, the media gets to drag the names out one by one. That way EVERY name is its own "news", instead of just the "top 10" out of the 100+ names on the list.

Sports and news are just like all other forms of "scripted" entertainment. Every so often we get a big reveal (first A-Rod, then Manny, then Ortiz), but we have to keep watching until the end to get the whole story.

#309 Reply
Posted by simpletwistupdon on 30 Jul, 2009 16:46
I cant say that im suprised by this news either... i didnt know about the henry/sox/times connection though which i find interesting. its just funny how this whole saga is playing out. names being leaked out very slowly and almost deliberately. if theyre gonna eventually release this list... just do it already and get it over with. we lived through the steroid era... big deal, every era has had some vice that eventually became illegal. its just whose smart enough to be ahead of the curve (i guess...). it would be nice if it was an equal playing field but its never going to be that. someones always going to find a way to get an edge. isnt that how life in general works? the minute one PED is made illegal some other topical cream or something comes out thats not screened for just yet. the list will continue to grow and companies like balco will continue to develop new products and fly under the radar for as long as possible. of all things its the lying that gets to me...

#310 Reply
Posted by bezerker on 30 Jul, 2009 19:12
Quote from: NickNels;237163
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4366335

Quote
Report: Manny, Ortiz tested positive in \'03

Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003, lawyers with knowledge of the results told The New York Times.

The two were key members of the Boston Red Sox World Series teams in 2004 and 2007.

Boston Redsox World Series Champs 2004* and 2007*

* Cheat to win

eat a d. every team was juiced sorry yours got shut out

#311 Reply
Posted by Wolfman on 30 Jul, 2009 22:04
I was more surprised when Clay Aiken revealed that he\'s gay.

Same stance I\'ve been posting for about 3 years now: All is fair. Every team had juice guys. Lots of them.

Jason Giambi hit 2 steroid homers in game 7 of the 2003 ALCS. David Oritz hit 1 steroid homer in game 7 of the 2004 ALCS. The Yankees almost certainly have had more games played by steroid users than Boston, but it\'s not really important and I don\'t hold it against them. It\'s all fair.

Whoever your team is, you had steroid guys too. Well, maybe unless you\'re a fan of the Pirates or the Royals. If that\'s the case, feel free to hand yourself every World Series title from 1995-2008, even though your team actually sucked.

It sure was a lot more fun winning with roid guys than it would have been sucking with clean guys. And in the end, this is all about fun. And fun was had by all who had the roid guys. I hope the Sox and Yankees can load up on HGH guys and do 2003 and 2004 all over again in 2009 and 2010.

#312 Reply
Posted by simpletwistupdon on 30 Jul, 2009 22:26
Quote from: Wolfman;237226
I was more surprised when Clay Aiken revealed that he\'s gay.

Same stance I\'ve been posting for about 3 years now: All is fair. Every team had juice guys. Lots of them.

Jason Giambi hit 2 steroid homers in game 7 of the 2003 ALCS. David Oritz hit 1 steroid homer in game 7 of the 2004 ALCS. The Yankees almost certainly have had more games played by steroid users than Boston, but it\'s not really important and I don\'t hold it against them. It\'s all fair.

Whoever your team is, you had steroid guys too. Well, maybe unless you\'re a fan of the Pirates or the Royals. If that\'s the case, feel free to hand yourself every World Series title from 1995-2008, even though your team actually sucked.

It sure was a lot more fun winning with roid guys than it would have been sucking with clean guys. And in the end, this is all about fun. And fun was had by all who had the roid guys. I hope the Sox and Yankees can load up on HGH guys and do 2003 and 2004 all over again in 2009 and 2010.

extremely well put...

#313 Reply
Posted by WellaShing on 31 Jul, 2009 01:01
Go Brew Crew ... mmmmmm ... Beer!

#314 Reply
Posted by Yoda on 05 Aug, 2009 09:26
I\'m going to drudge up an old discussion, but I feel that Don Mattingly should be inducted into the Hall of Fame...

Taking the average of 18 first baseman that played in the MLB, they have the following career stats:

Seasons - 18
Batting Avg. - 0.312
Hits - 2,396
HRs - 286
RBIs - 1,454

Mattingly\'s # are:

Seasons - 14 (4 season shy)
Batting Avg. - 0.307 (0.005 shy)
Hits - 2,153 (243 shy)
HRs - 222 (64 shy)
RBIs - 1099 (355 shy)

If you take his career season average and give him the additional 4 years that the avg. HOF has his numbers look like this:

Batting Avg. - 0.307
Hits - 2,933
HRs - 302
RBIs - 1499

Given that, compared to the players that have played roughly the same amount of seasons his numbers are pretty much in line... It just frustrates me that Mattingly only got 64 votes and steroid boy McGwire got 118...