Author Topic: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?  (Read 2128 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #15 on: August 15, 2022, 02:12:39 PM »

Offline byennie

  • Webmaster
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2541
  • Tommy Points: 3029
I'm curious, why do people think that Tom Brady isn't using PEDs?  Despite a sketchy trainer, unprecedented performance at this age, and some body transformation, people rarely bring his name up.  Is it just because he isn't completely jacked?
As I've said in other discussions, I pretty much assume all athletes have used PED's or other "illegal" substances at some point in their career. I mean why wouldn't they with the shear amount of money at stake and the relatively minor penalty for doing it.

I think it's probably close to everyone in the NFL.  I don't know if a non-juiced athletes could play most positions today.

And, I get skeptical when a guy is better in his 30s than his 20s, and then gets better in his 40s than his late 30s.

I'd get it if Brady had lost an ounce of arm strength, but he's making every throw he ever has.

Theoretically all you need are PEDs that haven’t been banned yet. With millions upon millions of dollars to spend on whatever that might be. Lance Armstrong type situation— surely there are a ton of guys who are a step ahead and gave rationalized it one way or another in their own minds.

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #16 on: August 15, 2022, 02:26:12 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20362
  • Tommy Points: 2175
I think performance enhancement should be regulated emphasizing players' health and attention to the influence on aspiring athletes.  That said, I couldn't care less who does or doesn't get in the Hall of Fame.  It's a museum - an account of baseball (or whatever sport's) history.  Put Bonds and Clemens in and include their accomplishments as well as whatever is known about their suspected PED use.  Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire captured the attention of fans, and even non-fans. The story of these players is the story of baseball.  It's like deciding have the name "Trump" stricken from all historical records. No.  The story of Trump is American history.

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #17 on: August 15, 2022, 02:28:48 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52074
  • Tommy Points: -26007
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
I think performance enhancement should be regulated emphasizing players' health and attention to the influence on aspiring athletes.  That said, I couldn't care less who does or doesn't get in the Hall of Fame.  It's a museum - an account of baseball (or whatever sport's) history.  Put Bonds and Clemens in and include their accomplishments as well as whatever is known about their suspected PED use.  Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire captured the attention of fans, and even non-fans, The story of these players is the story of baseball.  It's like deciding have the name "Trump" stricken from all historical records. No.  The story of Trump is American history.

Very true.  1998 might have been the most entertaining season in the past 25 years.  The narrative was that it "saved" baseball.  And now MLB pretends that it didn't happen.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #18 on: August 15, 2022, 02:34:54 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52074
  • Tommy Points: -26007
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
Interesting link an infamous former member (miss you, dude) shared with me:

https://youtu.be/jmB6YCUzgMU


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #19 on: August 15, 2022, 02:40:41 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13876
  • Tommy Points: 1329
Clemens last few years in Boston the team sucked, especially the bullpen. I once saw an article showing the amount of runs allowed in by relief pitchers in those years and the wins lost and losses gained due to relief pitching being horrendous and if you took that stuff out of the equation, Clemens' numbers would have looked quite different. It was especially true for that last year here where he was 11-13. That could easily have been a 17-7 year simply by having a better bullpen behind him.

While that impacts his loses, and to an extend his era for inherited runners scoring, I don’t think it fully explains the jump. Also can anyone confirm or deny that he had the reputation of being out of shape at times at the end of his Boston tenure? That was my recollection.

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #20 on: August 15, 2022, 02:45:29 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52074
  • Tommy Points: -26007
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
Clemens last few years in Boston the team sucked, especially the bullpen. I once saw an article showing the amount of runs allowed in by relief pitchers in those years and the wins lost and losses gained due to relief pitching being horrendous and if you took that stuff out of the equation, Clemens' numbers would have looked quite different. It was especially true for that last year here where he was 11-13. That could easily have been a 17-7 year simply by having a better bullpen behind him.

While that impacts his loses, and to an extend his era for inherited runners scoring, I don’t think it fully explains the jump. Also can anyone confirm or deny that he had the reputation of being out of shape at times at the end of his Boston tenure? That was my recollection.

I can't remember if he was or he wasn't.  He was injured in '93 and '95, and pitched like an all-star in '94 and '96.  And, I think a lot of players got out of shape during the strike.

But, don't go by reputation.  Back then, even more so than today, the Sox owned the media, and repeatedly planted negative stories about their departing players.  Clemens got hit hard, then Mo Vaughn, then Nomar.

Here's an article about one spring training:

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1996-02-20-9602200009-story.html

Here's part of an article on Clemens' final four years:

Quote
But had Duquette looked closer -- or more objectively -- he would have found some explanations for Clemens' blue period with the Red Sox.

The evidence:

"I think Roger was in transition phase then,'' suggests a club source. "I didn't see the same velocity, to the extent that I remember, that I had seen from him in 1980s and early 1990s.''
Indeed, several former batterymates, including one-time Sox catcher John Marzano, say that Clemens began experimenting more and more with a split-finger fastball in the mid-90s.

"It took him a while to command that pitch,'' said Marzano, now a TV analyst in his native Philadelphia. "For a while, he was dominant he could beat you with two pitches -- his four-seam fastball and his slider. That's all he needed. But then his fastball started to be 92-93 (mph) instead of 98 and he had to make some adjustments.

Clemens had tried to introduce a forkball or split-finger fastball in the early 1990s, but then-manager Joe Morgan urged him to, as only Morgan could put it, "forget the forkaroni and go with Powder River (Morgan's delightfully antiquated term for the fastball).''

By 1993 and 1994, with Morgan gone and his velocity dipping, Clemens had no choice.

"At the beginning,'' recalls Marzano of the experimentation phase, "it would float up there. He didn't have that good late break to it and it looked like a straight fastball in the high 80s -- very hittable.''

Later, Marzano watched Clemens, a perfectionist, master the pitch that he would later label, in almost an homage to Morgan, "Mr. Splittee.''

"It got to the point where he could throw it in the low 90s -- with plenty action on it. My goodness. I guarantee he worked relentlessly to develop that pitch.''

Though Red Sox fans -- at times equal parts devout masochists and conspiracy theorists -- have convinced themselves that Clemens, buoyed by a long-term contract, mailed in his final four years.

Only when he was given a four-year, $31.5 million deal by the Toronto Blue Jays, they claim, did Clemens again dedicate himself to the cause.

"I suppose you could say that maybe there was a shred of complacency there (in the final few years in Boston),'' said the Sox official. "But I never saw his intensity reduce or his work ethic diminish.''

Marzano recounts long runs around the banks of Boston's Charles River as further support and adds there were many spring training runs which began as early as 6 a.m., punishing mini-marathons that few ever witnessed.

Poor support -- from his relievers and his hitters.
In 1994, when Clemens was just 9-7 despite a 2.85 ERA, the Sox managed just 15 runs in his seven defeats, scoring more than one run just once in those losses.

Despite failing to reach double figures in wins, Clemens had the lowest hit-per-inning ratio in the league and finished second in the AL in strikeouts and ERA.

In 1996, meanwhile, Clemens had seven leads blown by the bullpen. How different would Duquette's evaluation have been if Clemens had finished, say 16-11 instead of 10-13, especially when Clemens was 6-2 with a 2.08 ERA -- including another 20-strikeout, no-walk gem -- in his final 10 starts.

Hinting at the frustration he no doubt feels about his final four years in Boston and the rampant criticism he faced, Clemens has more than once said that had he had the incomparable Mariano Rivera -- or some other late-inning equivalent -- at his disposal, "I wouldn't be standing here, talking to you'' about approaching No. 300.

Translation: With someone other than Jeff Russell or Heathcliff Slocumb closing out games in his final Red Sox seasons, he would already have reached the magic number and begun enjoying his retirement.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2022, 02:59:16 PM by Roy H. »


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #21 on: August 15, 2022, 02:57:24 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Larry Bird
  • *****************************
  • Posts: 29826
  • Tommy Points: 1394
Clemens last few years in Boston the team sucked, especially the bullpen. I once saw an article showing the amount of runs allowed in by relief pitchers in those years and the wins lost and losses gained due to relief pitching being horrendous and if you took that stuff out of the equation, Clemens' numbers would have looked quite different. It was especially true for that last year here where he was 11-13. That could easily have been a 17-7 year simply by having a better bullpen behind him.

While that impacts his loses, and to an extend his era for inherited runners scoring, I don’t think it fully explains the jump. Also can anyone confirm or deny that he had the reputation of being out of shape at times at the end of his Boston tenure? That was my recollection.

I can't remember if he was or he wasn't.  He was injured in '94 and '95, and pitched like an all-star in '93 and '96.  And, I think a lot of players got out of shape during the strike.

But, don't go by reputation.  Back then, even more so than today, the Sox owned the media, and repeatedly planted negative stories about their departing players.  Clemens got hit hard, then Mo Vaughn, then Nomar.

Here's an article about one spring training:

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1996-02-20-9602200009-story.html
Clemens was a lot better in 94 than he was in 93. 
I was finally wrong. Boston not only didn't win in 5, but didn't win at all.

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #22 on: August 15, 2022, 02:58:49 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52074
  • Tommy Points: -26007
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
Clemens last few years in Boston the team sucked, especially the bullpen. I once saw an article showing the amount of runs allowed in by relief pitchers in those years and the wins lost and losses gained due to relief pitching being horrendous and if you took that stuff out of the equation, Clemens' numbers would have looked quite different. It was especially true for that last year here where he was 11-13. That could easily have been a 17-7 year simply by having a better bullpen behind him.

While that impacts his loses, and to an extend his era for inherited runners scoring, I don’t think it fully explains the jump. Also can anyone confirm or deny that he had the reputation of being out of shape at times at the end of his Boston tenure? That was my recollection.

I can't remember if he was or he wasn't.  He was injured in '94 and '95, and pitched like an all-star in '93 and '96.  And, I think a lot of players got out of shape during the strike.

But, don't go by reputation.  Back then, even more so than today, the Sox owned the media, and repeatedly planted negative stories about their departing players.  Clemens got hit hard, then Mo Vaughn, then Nomar.

Here's an article about one spring training:

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1996-02-20-9602200009-story.html
Clemens was a lot better in 94 than he was in 93.

Yeah, typo.  His all-star level seasons were '94 and '96 in that stretch.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #23 on: August 15, 2022, 03:08:54 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Larry Bird
  • *****************************
  • Posts: 29826
  • Tommy Points: 1394
Clemens last few years in Boston the team sucked, especially the bullpen. I once saw an article showing the amount of runs allowed in by relief pitchers in those years and the wins lost and losses gained due to relief pitching being horrendous and if you took that stuff out of the equation, Clemens' numbers would have looked quite different. It was especially true for that last year here where he was 11-13. That could easily have been a 17-7 year simply by having a better bullpen behind him.

While that impacts his loses, and to an extend his era for inherited runners scoring, I don’t think it fully explains the jump. Also can anyone confirm or deny that he had the reputation of being out of shape at times at the end of his Boston tenure? That was my recollection.

I can't remember if he was or he wasn't.  He was injured in '94 and '95, and pitched like an all-star in '93 and '96.  And, I think a lot of players got out of shape during the strike.

But, don't go by reputation.  Back then, even more so than today, the Sox owned the media, and repeatedly planted negative stories about their departing players.  Clemens got hit hard, then Mo Vaughn, then Nomar.

Here's an article about one spring training:

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1996-02-20-9602200009-story.html
Clemens was a lot better in 94 than he was in 93.

Yeah, typo.  His all-star level seasons were '94 and '96 in that stretch.
Figured.  Baseball is so dependent on other players it is really hard to gauge if a player is slipping or his team just isn't any good.  I mean look at Trout and Ohtani.  They are two of the best players in the sport, they play on the same team, yet the team just isn't any good.  I mean what other sport can arguably 2 of the most valuable players in the sport be on the same team, and yet the team blows.  That just doesn't happen in other sports where the greatness of an individual can elevate the mediocrity of the rest of the roster to greatness (this Brady or Peyton in the NFL, Lebron in Cleveland, etc.), but in baseball the mediocrity sinks the individual greatness and basically overshadows the greatness all together (like Trout and Ohtani). 
I was finally wrong. Boston not only didn't win in 5, but didn't win at all.

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #24 on: August 15, 2022, 03:20:35 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47379
  • Tommy Points: 8714
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Clemens last few years in Boston the team sucked, especially the bullpen. I once saw an article showing the amount of runs allowed in by relief pitchers in those years and the wins lost and losses gained due to relief pitching being horrendous and if you took that stuff out of the equation, Clemens' numbers would have looked quite different. It was especially true for that last year here where he was 11-13. That could easily have been a 17-7 year simply by having a better bullpen behind him.

While that impacts his loses, and to an extend his era for inherited runners scoring, I don’t think it fully explains the jump. Also can anyone confirm or deny that he had the reputation of being out of shape at times at the end of his Boston tenure? That was my recollection.

I can't remember if he was or he wasn't.  He was injured in '94 and '95, and pitched like an all-star in '93 and '96.  And, I think a lot of players got out of shape during the strike.

But, don't go by reputation.  Back then, even more so than today, the Sox owned the media, and repeatedly planted negative stories about their departing players.  Clemens got hit hard, then Mo Vaughn, then Nomar.

Here's an article about one spring training:

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1996-02-20-9602200009-story.html
Especially in that 1996 season, the Globe did hatchet job after hatchet job on Clemens and I wondered if the writers were watching the same games I was.

That year Clemens led the league in strikeouts, pitched 242 innings, had a 3.63 ERA, pitched 6 complete games and had 2 shutouts. His average game was like 7 IP,  3 earned runs allowed, 10 SOs, 3 BB. He had a WAR of 7.7, an ERA+ of 139 and struck out 20 players in one game for the 2nd time in his career. And, over half the baserunners he left to the bullpen that year scored.

He was pretty amazing that year but just ran into some bad luck. But, the Globe torched him to play it off as some horrendous year so management could make him look greedy by taking an out of town offer.

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #25 on: August 15, 2022, 04:16:02 PM »

Offline Birdman

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7810
  • Tommy Points: 211
LeBron James & Tiger Woods have to be using…
C/PF-Horford, Baynes, Noel, Theis, Morris,
SF/SG- Tatum, Brown, Hayward, Smart, Semi, Clark
PG- Irving, Rozier, Larkin

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #26 on: August 15, 2022, 04:52:06 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13876
  • Tommy Points: 1329
Clemens last few years in Boston the team sucked, especially the bullpen. I once saw an article showing the amount of runs allowed in by relief pitchers in those years and the wins lost and losses gained due to relief pitching being horrendous and if you took that stuff out of the equation, Clemens' numbers would have looked quite different. It was especially true for that last year here where he was 11-13. That could easily have been a 17-7 year simply by having a better bullpen behind him.

While that impacts his loses, and to an extend his era for inherited runners scoring, I don’t think it fully explains the jump. Also can anyone confirm or deny that he had the reputation of being out of shape at times at the end of his Boston tenure? That was my recollection.

I can't remember if he was or he wasn't.  He was injured in '93 and '95, and pitched like an all-star in '94 and '96.  And, I think a lot of players got out of shape during the strike.

But, don't go by reputation.  Back then, even more so than today, the Sox owned the media, and repeatedly planted negative stories about their departing players.  Clemens got hit hard, then Mo Vaughn, then Nomar.

Here's an article about one spring training:

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1996-02-20-9602200009-story.html

Here's part of an article on Clemens' final four years:

Quote
But had Duquette looked closer -- or more objectively -- he would have found some explanations for Clemens' blue period with the Red Sox.

The evidence:

"I think Roger was in transition phase then,'' suggests a club source. "I didn't see the same velocity, to the extent that I remember, that I had seen from him in 1980s and early 1990s.''
Indeed, several former batterymates, including one-time Sox catcher John Marzano, say that Clemens began experimenting more and more with a split-finger fastball in the mid-90s.

"It took him a while to command that pitch,'' said Marzano, now a TV analyst in his native Philadelphia. "For a while, he was dominant he could beat you with two pitches -- his four-seam fastball and his slider. That's all he needed. But then his fastball started to be 92-93 (mph) instead of 98 and he had to make some adjustments.

Clemens had tried to introduce a forkball or split-finger fastball in the early 1990s, but then-manager Joe Morgan urged him to, as only Morgan could put it, "forget the forkaroni and go with Powder River (Morgan's delightfully antiquated term for the fastball).''

By 1993 and 1994, with Morgan gone and his velocity dipping, Clemens had no choice.

"At the beginning,'' recalls Marzano of the experimentation phase, "it would float up there. He didn't have that good late break to it and it looked like a straight fastball in the high 80s -- very hittable.''

Later, Marzano watched Clemens, a perfectionist, master the pitch that he would later label, in almost an homage to Morgan, "Mr. Splittee.''

"It got to the point where he could throw it in the low 90s -- with plenty action on it. My goodness. I guarantee he worked relentlessly to develop that pitch.''

Though Red Sox fans -- at times equal parts devout masochists and conspiracy theorists -- have convinced themselves that Clemens, buoyed by a long-term contract, mailed in his final four years.

Only when he was given a four-year, $31.5 million deal by the Toronto Blue Jays, they claim, did Clemens again dedicate himself to the cause.

"I suppose you could say that maybe there was a shred of complacency there (in the final few years in Boston),'' said the Sox official. "But I never saw his intensity reduce or his work ethic diminish.''

Marzano recounts long runs around the banks of Boston's Charles River as further support and adds there were many spring training runs which began as early as 6 a.m., punishing mini-marathons that few ever witnessed.

Poor support -- from his relievers and his hitters.
In 1994, when Clemens was just 9-7 despite a 2.85 ERA, the Sox managed just 15 runs in his seven defeats, scoring more than one run just once in those losses.

Despite failing to reach double figures in wins, Clemens had the lowest hit-per-inning ratio in the league and finished second in the AL in strikeouts and ERA.

In 1996, meanwhile, Clemens had seven leads blown by the bullpen. How different would Duquette's evaluation have been if Clemens had finished, say 16-11 instead of 10-13, especially when Clemens was 6-2 with a 2.08 ERA -- including another 20-strikeout, no-walk gem -- in his final 10 starts.

Hinting at the frustration he no doubt feels about his final four years in Boston and the rampant criticism he faced, Clemens has more than once said that had he had the incomparable Mariano Rivera -- or some other late-inning equivalent -- at his disposal, "I wouldn't be standing here, talking to you'' about approaching No. 300.

Translation: With someone other than Jeff Russell or Heathcliff Slocumb closing out games in his final Red Sox seasons, he would already have reached the magic number and begun enjoying his retirement.

Good find roy. Honestly part of my memory was probably my dad hating on him and calling him curse words over certain years. He certainly did do some really bad stuff off the field in Boston that is rarely mentioned.

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #27 on: August 15, 2022, 09:09:25 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13876
  • Tommy Points: 1329

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #28 on: August 16, 2022, 06:05:14 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8525
  • Tommy Points: 263
Always been pro for healing and off-season performance helpers. Going into a season or a meet/event guys should be off the PEDs a month prior. If a guy is hurt it should be the same, use them but stop a month before returning to the game.

A huge plus is we get great players playing longer and returning faster and healthier from injury.

Most PEDs should not be active after month off. And the gains will level off.

Stims should be banned from sports. You either have it that day or you don't it's a part of sports/life.

Re: PEDs / Steroid in Sports: Where Do You Stand?
« Reply #29 on: August 16, 2022, 09:32:19 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Larry Bird
  • *****************************
  • Posts: 29826
  • Tommy Points: 1394
For those that asked me what I was referencing

https://www.sportscasting.com/roger-clemens-alleged-inappropriate-affair-with-country-star-mindy-mccready-who-tragically-later-died-by-suicide/
Is having an affair and then denying it really bad stuff?  Obviously it is terribly sad and awful that in the aftermath McCready killed her self, but I have a hard time attributing that to Clemens for denying an affair.  I mean people in walks of life do that every single day, I'm not sure that should be described as really bad stuff.
I was finally wrong. Boston not only didn't win in 5, but didn't win at all.