baseballgirl note: Southern California A's/Angels April 7th game - FINAL DEADLINE this Monday!
Let's imagine for a moment that every taxpayer in America received this letter in the mail from the IRS next week:
Attention hard-working Americans,
Due to staffing shortages, the Internal Revenue Service will not be auditing any of your personal tax returns in 2009. Please continue to fill these forms out honestly, fully reporting all of your sources of income. Do not inflate or invent any deductions for yourself, either.
Hmm...would we have a few cheaters on our hands?
While the national media once again turns its spotlight on steroids, I find myself listening to Alex Rodriguez's suspicious interviews and thinking once again about baseball's puzzling stance on Human Growth Hormone.
HGH is on the list of Major League Baseball's banned substances. However, unlike steroids and amphetemines, it is not tested for in MLB, in part because an accurate HGH test would require the testing of blood rather than urine and the CBA doesn't allow for such testing. Much like the silly IRS example above, baseball's HGH policy is a rule with no reinforcement - and thus, no chance of being universally abided.
Like steroids and amphetamines, HGH is also on the list of banned substances in the NCAA and in the Olympics, but its reputed benefits in healthy adults are controversial. Some athletes claim that HGH has improved their vision, helped them build muscle mass, and recover from injuries faster. Others believe that HGH's effects are greatly overstated by pharmaceutical companies, and that their effects are placeboic.
As I've listened skeptically to Rodriguez's half-truths, I've found myself thinking again about HGH use, and the likelihood that some former steroid users have simply made growth hormone their PED of choice since the 2003 season ended.
Even if you don't believe in HGH's reputed benefits, consider for a moment its potential power as a placebo alone. Baseball is a very psychological game, and confidence is essential to success. If a player took HGH and believed that he had an edge on his competition, he would undoubtedly feel more confident than he had before, and perhaps perform better with that added confidence.
These are five questions that I find myself thinking about as I reflect on current PED use in MLB. I'd be very curious for your opinions on them if you want to leave them in the comments (I also provided a poll below).
The fifth question is once again purely hypothetical, and I'm going to roll it into a poll:
Bobby Crosby is entering the most important year of his career. He desperately wants to earn his $5.25M contract, and simultaneously build a market for his services in free agency next year. He is booed at his job daily, and many loyal A's fans say and think hostile things about him, even though they've never met him. In the course of his offseason workouts, Crosby comes into contact with someone who can supply him with HGH, and that person testifies to its power. Crosby immediately thinks of the importance of the 2009 season to his future, and of how disappointed he's been in his own performance for several years.
0 recs | 96 comments
I just don't care anymore.
mikev - February 19, 2009
To clarify:
I think more players are using than clean Whether it’s HGH, testosterone, or some other designer anabolic that’s not tested for yet.
They still have to use a round bat to hit a round ball. Some guys are really, really good at it. Some guys aren’t. For every Bonds, A-Rod, and McGwire there is an FP Santangelo, Alex Sanchez, or Mike Morse.
Basically, if EVERY player who used PEDs was a supermegastar, I’d care. There are just as many guys who are fringe players, which is enough proof for me that they don’t turn regular guys into HOF caliber players.
mikev - February 19, 2009
+1
Masaryk - February 19, 2009
So you don't care if....
Young athletes develop serious health problems or die from using banned substances that are knowingly harmful to their body because it is encouraged at the professional level?
I concur that steroids don’t make people like Piatt a HOF but that is kind of the the point. It feeds on the desperation of lesser players and those developing to meet exaggerated expectations set by the successful players who are using. The biggest disgust I have is the way the league seems to escape accountability and the way management and trainers seem to all be unaware. If the union tested in 2003—-how long before that do you think concern was building—-Selig says he wanted the tests in 1995. The players union clearly didn’t originally want the testing—-because they are in the know—and the league didn’t want to push for it because they were trying to recover from the previous strike and couldn’t afford another one or even worse a steroid scandal on top of a strike.
Record and stats aside it is a source of corruption in the sport and the development of the future stars of the game.
To not care, to be complacent is to be complicit. It is the reason the MLB is where it is today and why all the talk of “moving forward” is more a PR spin than a reality.
WhiteElephant - February 19, 2009
No, I don't really care.
It’s not my decision, it’s theirs.
That doesn’t mean that I’m not going to explain cheating to my 6 year old when he gets older and starts to play sports at a competitive level, because that’s something I have a direct effect on.
Using steroids is cheating, just like using amphetamines, or corking a bat, or throwing a spitball, or stealing signs. If you get caught cheating, you pay the consequences that are set in the rules of baseball, and then you move on.
All the talk about removing records, adding asterisks, etc, is stupid.
mikev - February 19, 2009
The consequences are weak. The reprocutions are minimal. Bad press, damaged ego. Still made millions more than honest people.
Are you in favor of corporate CEOs robbing people blind and giving themselves bonuses before riding off into the sunset?
WhiteElephant - February 19, 2009
Young people die in huge numbers due to alcohol because its consumption is encouraged in adults even though it is harmful to your body.
Adam Piatt is currently working as a financial analyst. He seemed to go on to a reasonably productive life.
Steroids are not a boogey man or a special case. They are no more dangerous than 100 other things that teens may encounter. They certainly are bad for you, but hyperbole isn’t convincing anyone.
MrIncognito - February 19, 2009
Drinking alcohol, in most cases that I can think of, does in provide you the opportunity to earn millions of dollars.
WhiteElephant - February 19, 2009
*doesn't
WhiteElephant - February 19, 2009
Try posting that sober
Nico - February 19, 2009
Sorry I tend to drink when people allow morality to slide for the love of the game.
WhiteElephant - February 19, 2009
I tend to drink when
people say or do just about anything.
somebodyelse - February 20, 2009
"Bud Selig.....come on down!!!".
mrod - February 19, 2009
MLBN showed an "all-time game" last week
It was A’s vs. Mariners and Randy Johnson struck out 19 (A’s still won btw, and McGwire hit a HUGE shot into the second deck).
Anyhoo, there was a guy on the A’s I’ve never heard of before, I think his name was George Williams. I looked up his stats because I’ve never heard of him. Needless to say he wasn’t very awesome.
The point is, that he was absolutely ripped. He was super short and super burly. I don’t necessarily think that all strong people are juicing, but when you’re ridiculously strong and there are unnatural bulges everywhere (get your mind out of the gutter), then you probably are.
Look what all that ridiculous muscle did for his career.
Degolas - February 19, 2009
Ridiculous muscle?
Now we’re going to knock players for being in good shape? George Williams was a decent prospect at one time. He was a switch-hitting catcher with power and good strikezone judgement. His minor league numbers were excellent (though he was older than most of his competition which takes off much of the shine). Unfortunately, he suffered shoulder injuries from which he never fully recovered. Prior to the injuries, he looked like he might have a Mickey Tettleton-like career.
Monday Fan - February 20, 2009
Bonds
I really don’t know where I come down in the argument of what to do about PEDS. But one thing I do know is that I hate the argument that because some players on steroids were not good, PEDS must not help players.
First off, the talent difference from star to fringe in baseball is small. A few extra hits fall in and you’re hitting .300 instead of .275 and someone takes notice. A few of your flyballs go an extra 15 feet and you’ve got 20 HR instead of 10. If someone’s ability to hit a ball increased 1% or 2% or whatever the number is, that might mean someone that would otherwise be in AAA is now on a major league bench. No one is arguing that any amount of PEDS is going to turn Crosby or Barton into 40HR hitters.
Lastly, we’re got one BIG example to example to look at. And sample size or not, Barry Bonds went a great, great player to the best hitter of all time — in his late thirties. This simply does not happen. We pretty much know he was doing HGH and any number of other things. And on the list of “things that don’t happen,” the human body doesn’t just start growing again at age 40. Yet here we have Bonds, increasing his head and shoe size at age 40. To me, it’s clear that Bonds used, and it’s clear that it helped him. Can you really tell me that Bonds turns into a 350/500/750 hitter in his 15th season without a little extra help?
rageon - February 19, 2009
performance enhancers make a lot more sense for crosby than for a-rod
it’s the difference between being a starting SS with a decent contract and making almost no money as either a backup or minor leaguer, whereas a-rod supposedly started using right after signing a guaranteed $250m contract (yeah right).
look how much more money adrian beltre made based on one year.
xbhaskarx - February 19, 2009
Excellent point.
A-rod was always going to be good. He took them because he is a head case about his performance. A-Rod would still be a superstar, even without them.
Steroids are what make players like Jeremy Giambi even make it to the big leagues. And players like Crosby stop getting booed.
baseballgirl - February 19, 2009
How do you know?
What proof do you have that Jeremy Giambi wouldn’t have been a big leaguer without steroids?
mikev - February 19, 2009
Well he wasn't that good WITH steroids
Obviously there’s no proof about “what would have happened if he hadn’t…” because he did.
Nico - February 19, 2009
Right, but what I mean is there's no actual measure of "Steroids makes you X amount better"
mikev - February 19, 2009
What are you talking about?
How the hell can you watch what various players did—Bonds, McGwire, Boone, Giambi—and play some idiot game that begins with, “Well, we just can’t know…” Do you mean know exactly? Is that your point? Because, uh, we all get that. Nobody’s arguing that we can know exactly the effect. Nobody’s arguing that we can precisely say how many home runs were added. But who cares. We can certainly know enough. We can know what McGwire went from career declining rapidly to record setter. We can know that Boone went from low average, minimal power, defensive 2B to superstar with a super-thick neck. We can know that Bonds, as was said above, went from a great, great player to the greatest player ever by far in his late-thirties for god’s sake.
How is that not enough for you? It used to be that people making the argument you are would lean on the “we can’t know if they’re really using” illusion. But you don’t even have that anymore.
RLangford - February 19, 2009
Welcome back from obscurity, RLangford!
“Long time no hear from,” he ended a sentence with a preposition with.
Nico - February 19, 2009
I voted *yes* for the poll.
Oh wait, you said HGH, not ALCOHOL
oakinboston - February 19, 2009
Dangerous territory
Listen I am as guilty as anyone— speculating a while back as to who on the A’s might have been juicing in 2003 when the complete test was done.
I voted No for the simple reason that I cannot condone cheating. But I don’t think we ought to be having an open discussion about a current member of the A’s and whether he ought to cheat or not.
windyfelix - February 19, 2009
That's not the question, actually.
It’s, “If you were Crosby, would you use?” I voted “No,” figuring that if I were Crosby I’d probably keep missing with the needle.
Nico - February 19, 2009
Heck, I have to use
HGH and alcohol just to WATCH Crosby.
Nico - February 19, 2009
LOL!!
A'sFanInLondonUK - February 19, 2009
Off topic, but OMIGOD!!!!!!!
I am SO APPLYING!!!
Cindi
Nico - February 19, 2009
Here's something RIGHT with the game!
Or someone, at least! It’s nice to take a Holliday from all the mess once in a while!
http://oakland.athletics.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090219&content_id=3848420&vkey=news_oak&fext=.jsp&c_id=oak
A'sfansince1970 - February 19, 2009
I know this is about HGH and not steroids
but http://steroids-and-baseball.com/actual-effects.shtml.
I wish there wasn’t this kind of Bonds… time off… Palmeiro… time off… Clemens… time off… A-Rod. It’s dragging the steroid era out so much and it’s hurting baseball. I don’t think their achievements can be written off as purely the result of PEDs, but the fact is they are cheaters. They broke the rules. If Pete Rose can’t get in, these guys shouldn’t get in.
NateHST - February 19, 2009
agreed.
JJ - February 19, 2009
I would not take HGH because I don't like needles.
micdog2001 - February 19, 2009
I had a blood test this morning
They not only stuck a needle in me, they drank the blood. Stupid vampires. :-(
Nico - February 19, 2009
I missed breakfast. Sorry.
mikev - February 19, 2009
I passed out in the middle of my last blood test
super weird feeling. it was the kind where you have to fast for 12 hours prior and I did for like 15 hours because i was busy that morning.
micdog2001 - February 19, 2009
Yeah, I had to fast for 13 hours
So being light-headed already, plus being light-headed thinking about the needle…not a terrific combination. Although in fact the blood test is kind of like the White Sox catcher: Really just one prick.
Nico - February 19, 2009
Dr. Acula!?
NateHST - February 19, 2009
Tough Question
For any borderline player, a small edge could be worth millions of dollars, especially knowing that there will likely be no time in the future for the player to earn anything near that kind of money. So it’s a question of whether to cheat (and never get caught, and KNOW you’ll never get caught) or let your career sink into the slime. It’s a very difficult ethical dilemma…but is it any different, say, from that of a middle-of-the-road pundit who finds that in order to keep selling articles, one has to either move to the extreme left or extreme right, because there isn’t much room in the middle, and there’s no room to doubt one’s beliefs. In one case, it’s “cheating,” and in the other, it’s lying.
richwol1 - February 19, 2009
The pundit case...
…is a real one. I interviewed a former pundit who gave it up because she’d moved to the political center and couldn’t sell her work any more.
richwol1 - February 19, 2009
There are succesful moderate pundits
It’s just a much more difficult place to be.
MrIncognito - February 19, 2009
Yes....
..because there are fewer venues.
But that makes sense if you think about it. People like to read “experts” who are sure about what they are saying, and are righteous and moralistic in tone. A better example of why one would like to save a writing career might well be sportswriting, or sports punditry. The case of PEDs is really a complex one involving morality
-which is better, ensuring your family’s welfare, or not taking HGH? I think a lot of sportswriters, when faced with a similar issue, wouldn’t hesitate to choose their families’ welfare. But as sportswriters, they know the public wants blood, so they go for it. In that sense, they’re lying in order to maintain their careers.richwol1 - February 19, 2009
And that, is the reason for it:
For any borderline player, a small edge could be worth millions of dollars, especially knowing that there will likely be no time in the future for the player to earn anything near that kind of money.
baseballgirl - February 19, 2009
I wouldn't if I were Crosby
He’s set for life with the first contract he signed.
If I were a fringy player who was unlikely to be able to cash in without help andlooking for his first nice contract, I totally would.
Honestly, short term HGH use is unlikely to have any serious long term side effects. Once my name is on a contract, I’m off though – playing with hormones never leads to anything good in the long run.
MrIncognito - February 19, 2009
I don't know that Crosby is set for life with the first contract he signed
Who is likely to employ him for what after his 35th birthday?
Nico - February 19, 2009
If you can't be set for life with 12.75 million dollars, something is wrong with you.
mikev - February 19, 2009
Or you're not any better at managing money than you are at managing sliders
Nico - February 19, 2009
I'd hope that you could spend a little bit of that money to have somebody manage it for you.
Hard to pay somebody to manage hitting baseballs for you.
mikev - February 19, 2009
You really don't even have to manage it
If you put $6 million in a zero interest checking account and make do with $100,000 a year, you’ve got 60 years until you run out.
MrIncognito - February 19, 2009
If only...
So many players don’t do that. They either hire “financial managers” who steal from them or they spend to meet their means and go broke.
Nico - February 19, 2009
They get no sympathy from me.
mikev - February 19, 2009
I agree
Crosby is going to make $5 million this year no matter what happens. If you see the writing on the wall that your career is going down you better invest some of that. Buy a Mcdonalds or something.
micdog2001 - February 19, 2009
Wish I could make due
with 100 grand a year.
somebodyelse - February 20, 2009
I was once told by a physician...
that HGH is exactly what it is. Growth Hormone. Problem is, it makes everything in your body grow. Including tumors and other defects in the human body. Dangerous stuff, even when given for legitimate medical purposes.
alox - February 19, 2009
Wait, it makes EVERYTHING in your body grow?
{orders two}
Nico - February 19, 2009
Extenze is HGH?
Who knew?
Need to find my credit card….
alox - February 19, 2009
will it make my handsomeness grow?
Future Ed - February 19, 2009
That's not entirely accurate
The big problem is that your hormones are part of an impossibly complex signaling network communicating with all different parts of your body. Growth hormone levels feed back into just about every organ system you have, and it’s impossible to target the effect.
In patients whom we give exogenous growth hormone, we do see an increase in certain tumor types. However, it’s not clear that GH is the cause. More worrisome to me would be the reports of cardiomegaly (enlargement of the heart). You really don’t want heart disease, especially a weird one that has limited research on treatment.
MrIncognito - February 19, 2009
I've tried all the growth remedies--chemical, herbal, mechanical.... they never work
mikeA - February 19, 2009
That's because you haven't discovered the magic of Acai berries!!!!!!
Or so my spam claims.
Nico - February 19, 2009
Low blow to use Crosby
skalordes - February 19, 2009
Which means Crosby swings at the blow and misses
Nico - February 19, 2009
Hah..
It’s just a bad example. Could’ve used Holliday who wants to prove his Coors numbers are legit, and in a free agent year. Could be Duke who is coming off an injury and also in a free agent year. Or any player for that matter who is just trying to make the team.
Crosby is already down, no need to kick him.
skalordes - February 19, 2009
Agreed
Crosby has becomes AN’s whipping boy. I don’t like it. He might be struggling but he’s still on our team. I’d like to see him succeed.
Ran - February 19, 2009
(And he sucks)
Nico - February 19, 2009
when was the last time he was good. i mean even ellis had an ok last year
it could be said that the a’s have the worst middle infield in the league, and nothing in the pipeline
jhroac02 - February 19, 2009
giants
middle infield is much worse
skalordes - February 19, 2009
Well, we know what salb's answer to this question is
PaulThomas - February 19, 2009
Man, I am tired of reading this shit(PEDS, steroids, HGH)
It is all about speculation, pure and simple. And it’s. so. f’n. tired.
If one can prove to a player that HGH has considerable benefits a certain number of players will take it no matter the health risks. If one can prove that the health risks are minimal then I think the majority of players with access to the stuff are takiing it. It’s part of sports.
I don’t care and I don’t think it is a topic that should be addressed on the front of this blog over and over and over the way it is in the mainstream media. It is just so overdone.
Buck Turgidson - February 19, 2009
Thank you.
mikev - February 19, 2009
wouldnt you
i think your irs comparason is right on.
put yourself in there shoes, people are making tons of money, they are hitting for power and getting all the media attention.
you ask someone, most likely a trainer, what can i do, they would have said in thoses times to look into HGH
i blame baseball and the front offices, and believe selig should be gone.
i dont blame the players as much as i blame baseball and selig. i meanif you wanted to make it, you needed to do this bc everyone else was doing it.
jhroac02 - February 19, 2009
Why give Croz a choice?
Juice him up already and who cares how. It’s enhanced the numbers for a lot of players so it wouldn’t be unrealistic to see his inflate to say .255 12HR.
Ovale Fan - February 19, 2009
He should also take up smoking to relax him,
and drag race (without a seat belt) because it’s fun!
Nico - February 19, 2009
First!
There are some questions I haven’t seen answered, so I’ll do so in a concise format:
1- I’m a more on the optomist side – I say < 20% use HGH in baseball
2- I would be bothered if the other teams were cheating to get their success. A large payroll is not cheating. HGH is.
3 – This is probably the hardest question on the exam, truthfully. I think if there was evidence of HGH/steroids usage, I’d avoid that player. If it were suspicions based only on #‘s, that would be different. In any event, that would be one tough question when it came down to it.
4 – I don’t want players on my favorite teams using HGH or other steroids.
5 – I voted no. Integrity is a quality that you will carry with you the rest of your life (and beyond – for those of us who believe in that). $$ will only get you so far.
JJ - February 19, 2009
What if the admissions price into heaven is $3million?
Of course that would mean Crosby in heaven and me in “H-E-double hockey sticks.”
Nico - February 19, 2009
Consider its use as a placebo alone?
No. That’s not how placebos work unless you want to ban voodoo, witchcraft, supernatural beliefs and albert pujols pointing up when he crosses home plate.
hazel - February 19, 2009
Yes, I would
Good post. In that situation I’m sure I could rationalize that others are doing it, that one year won’t really hurt me, that it will help me realize my “true” talent, that I’ll stop after this one year… that and more. Given the enormous potential payoff psychologically and monetarily—in the love of fan, sportswriters, and teammates and in the next contract—I’d have to say yes.
RLangford - February 19, 2009
You sound like me drinking just last week
Nico - February 19, 2009
If I was a borderline player...
I’d drink arsenic if it meant I’d make the show.
IM4Oakgal - February 19, 2009
You'd eat at Applebees?
That’s going a bit far.
Nico - February 19, 2009
Seriously?
I get a kick out of the Applebee’s jokes because WE live walking distance from one and we eat there at least once a week. We seem to be surviving the experience so far.
IM4Oakgal - February 19, 2009
You're playing with a ticking time bomb...
…So I hear, anyway. I’ve actually never eaten there.
Nico - February 20, 2009
I rather enjoy it.
67MARQUEZ - February 20, 2009
Not just once but often twice, I hear!
Nico - February 20, 2009
I have never gotten sick from Applebees
perhaps that person should stay away from spicey food :-)
micdog2001 - February 20, 2009
The thread that spawned the Applebees jokes
actually featured multiple former employees talking about their observations from having been in the kitchen. It was enough to convince me not to eat there, personally.
Nico - February 20, 2009
{faints}
67MARQUEZ - February 20, 2009
Sometimes I prefer ignorance to the truth
when it comes to the people handling my food.
somebodyelse - February 20, 2009
+ a billion
micdog2001 - February 24, 2009
I remember that thread too. One of the A's players got food poisoning from eating there.
It put me off AppleBee’s for a month or so but then I thought about it and I enjoy going there and it seems clean. The food isn’t all that wonderful but it’s a pleasant setting and nearby so it’s cool with me.
IM4Oakgal - February 24, 2009
I'd shoot HGH tomorrow if it meant I'd make 1.5 million that year...
hell, I’d probably do it for less. I’ve done things far more detrimental to my health, I’m sure, for minimum wage. All of you would juice for a couple mil… don’t even lie and pretend to take the high road. You’d all take the money.
FoolshGame22 - February 20, 2009
If I was Crosby...
and got heart all the time I’d already been using for a couple of years.
But that really contradicts my opinion on the whole drugs thing. I’d like the sport to be clean, I’d like all sports to be clean. But i realise we expect so much of the athletes that they could feel preasured to do drugs. Maybe the expectations have been set by record setting performances by former drugusing athlethes, I do not know. The expectations are there, how they got there does not really matter.
Next to my baseball addiction I’m also a big fan of cycling. Now here’s a sport with the most rigid drug policy, the most tests performed and still there are people caught using. So I cannot image baseball being clean at the moment… I’m afraid it is far from clean. How can you take your drug policy serious and not test HGH… How can you not test blood, I’m no expert but there is probably a lot more next to HGH you can see in the blood samples than you can in the urine samples.
I do not know how the whole union thing of baseball works but I think it is rediculous they could have kept drug testing out of baseball till 2004. And are they also now preventing the blood sampling/testing? Don’t they want to clean things up?
As a team I would set up my own drug policy, which every athlete in the organisation should be obligated to take part in. At least you would get your own team clean… But that’s probably not allowed either.
So I am afraid till MLB or the teams get more power we are stuck with a not so clean game of baseball. And even if the test became more rigid, you would still have some people trying… but at least you’re making it a lot harder on them not to get caught.
Harry2m - February 20, 2009
heart is hurt... and there are probably a few more errors in there...
Harry2m - February 20, 2009
My heart hurt reading it.
Oh I kid, Harry2m.
67MARQUEZ - February 20, 2009
Well my hurt heart, and I'm KID notting.
Nico - February 20, 2009
There seems something terribly
backward about that comment.
67MARQUEZ - February 20, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Athletics Nation to post a comment.