8 Players on Contemporary Era HOF ballot announced.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by robert0629

I was looking at Ryne Sandberg's numbers the other day. I noticed something interesting. His OPS+ numbers fall off quite a bit after his MVP season, but then rebound later in his career:

Age 24 OPS+ 140 (156 games, MVP season)
Age 25 OPS+ 132 (153 games)
Age 26 OPS+ 98 (154 games)
Age 27 OPS+ 111(played only 132 games)
Age 28 OPS+ 108 (155 games)
Age 29 OPS+ 134 (157 games, hit a career high 30 home runs, normally a 25 homer guy)
Age 30 OPS+ 140 (155 games, hit a new career high of 40 home runs, never came close to this number again)
Age 31 OPS+ 138 (158 games)
Age 32 OPS+ 145 (158 games)

I believe Sandberg was a clean player. I'm pointing this out because I think it's ridiculous for fans to obsess of what players might have been taking. I feel we should let it go, and let the numbers stand. Nobody will ever be able to determine definitively all the players who were using PEDs and how it might have impacted their performances. You definitely can't do it just by looking at stats.

If I can do this with a player as respected as Sandberg was, I bet I can find many other players who's numbers look off in certain seasons who are also believed to be clean. Fans should realize that there are many factors that determine why a player performs a certain way in any given season. For example, a player who normally hits doubles could start hitting more homers just by intending to do so and making an adjustment at the plate.

He dealt with injuries in the 90s -- I also think he was clean. A hitter's prime in those days was late-20s to early-30s.

You can determine steroid use by looking at stats. For example, a player who averaged 10 home runs for many seasons in their 20s, then averaging 30 home runs and even brushing up against 60 home runs in their 30s -- ahem, a certain former D-Backs player.

[duwal]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

He dealt with injuries in the 90s -- I also think he was clean. A hitter's prime in those days was late-20s to early-30s.

You can determine steroid use by looking at stats. For example, a player who averaged 10 home runs for many seasons in their 20s, then averaging 30 home runs and even brushing up against 60 home runs in their 30s -- ahem, a certain former D-Backs player.

To an extent but don't forget there was also a good percentage of those that took steroids to JUST be good enough to make it into the major leaguers or stay in the majors. Look at someone like Manny Alexander who was caught with steroids and syringes in his car. He was a career .235 hitter with barely any power at that time. Or in 2005 when nearly 40 minor league guys were suspended for steroid usage, how many of them had their numbers jump up before they were caught? Would someone have seen Guillermo Mota in 2012 with his 5.23 ERA and think man this guy MUST be on steroids?

That's where its tricky, we understandably just see the overwhelming increase in numbers for a handful and brush off the players that are batting for league average with a little bit of power mostly from the help of steroids

[JustinVerlander07]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

You can determine steroid use by looking at stats.

Nook Logan was in the Mitchell Report.

He had 2 homers in almost 1000 MLB PA's hitting .268/.314/.346

How do you determine steroid use with those numbers. Please explain this thoughtfully.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by JustinVerlander07

Nook Logan was in the Mitchell Report.

He had 2 homers in almost 1000 MLB PA's hitting .268/.314/.346

How do you determine steroid use with those numbers. Please explain this thoughtfully.

With a before-and-after comparison. With PEDs, an average player turns into a good player. A good player turns into a great player. And a great player turns into god mode -- Barry Bonds.

I can give you examples like Ken Caminiti.

PEDs also counteract the negative effects of aging, which is why a lot of the best players during the steroid era were often older than the best players before or since.

A mediocre player doesn't have the talent or skill level to be a successful big leaguer, regardless of PEDs. The PEDS just enhance or make more consistent what's already there -- they don't create talent or skill wholecloth.

[JustinVerlander07]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

With a before-and-after comparison. With PEDs, an average player turns into a good player. A good player turns into a great player. And a great player turns into god mode -- Barry Bonds.

I can give you examples like Ken Caminiti.

PEDs also counteract the negative effects of aging, which is why a lot of the best players during the steroid era were often older than the best players before or since.

A mediocre player doesn't have the talent or skill level to be a successful big leaguer, regardless of PEDs. The PEDS just enhance or make more consistent what's already there -- they don't create talent or skill wholecloth.

No, I want you to explain exactly how steroids helped Nook Logan.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by duwal

To an extent but don't forget there was also a good percentage of those that took steroids to JUST be good enough to make it into the major leaguers or stay in the majors. Look at someone like Manny Alexander who was caught with steroids and syringes in his car. He was a career .235 hitter with barely any power at that time. Or in 2005 when nearly 40 minor league guys were suspended for steroid usage, how many of them had their numbers jump up before they were caught? Would someone have seen Guillermo Mota in 2012 with his 5.23 ERA and think man this guy MUST be on steroids?

That's where its tricky, we understandably just see the overwhelming increase in numbers for a handful and brush off the players that are batting for league average with a little bit of power mostly from the help of steroids

The primary benefit of PEDs to pitchers is recovery and durability. Though, a pitcher can bulk up a lot and increase their velocity, like with Eric Gagne.

PEDs only enhance what's already there -- they don't create talent or skill. A player who wasn't good enough to be in the majors isn't likely to be a successful big leaguer using them.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by JustinVerlander07

No, I want you to explain exactly how steroids helped Nook Logan.

I said you CAN determine PED use with the stats if you have a clear before-and-after picture -- like with Ken Caminiti. I didn't say you could always determine it no matter the player. A lot of it depends on talent and regime -- the gear used, as bodybuilders say -- and how the body responds. A journeyman using some PEDs doesn't necessarily make a significant impact on their performance.

I think we previously discussed the before-and-after of certain MLB players who got busted using testosterone. They all had higher BABIPs and career years at the plate, but they were still average or good players regardless.

[no10pin]

.....

[49ersSF]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

I said you CAN determine PED use with the stats if you have a clear before-and-after picture -- like with Ken Caminiti. I didn't say you could always determine it no matter the player. A lot of it depends on talent and regime -- the gear used, as bodybuilders say -- and how the body responds. A journeyman using some PEDs doesn't necessarily make a significant impact on their performance.

I think we previously discussed the before-and-after of certain MLB players who got busted using testosterone. They all had higher BABIPs and career years at the plate, but they were still average or good players regardless.

When you look at known PED users' stats you can generally make solid assumptions on others. It's almost always obvious.

[49ersSF]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

I said you CAN determine PED use with the stats if you have a clear before-and-after picture -- like with Ken Caminiti. I didn't say you could always determine it no matter the player. A lot of it depends on talent and regime -- the gear used, as bodybuilders say -- and how the body responds. A journeyman using some PEDs doesn't necessarily make a significant impact on their performance.

I think we previously discussed the before-and-after of certain MLB players who got busted using testosterone. They all had higher BABIPs and career years at the plate, but they were still average or good players regardless.

When you look at known PED users' stats you can generally make solid assumptions on others. It's almost always obvious.

Paul Molitor is one guy that has escaped any allegation yet statistically, he jumps out at you.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by 49ersSF

When you look at known PED users' stats you can generally make solid assumptions on others. It's almost always obvious.

Paul Molitor is one guy that has escaped any allegation yet statistically, he jumps out at you.

Molitor's age-35 to age-39 seasons stand out: .322/.388/.475, 128 OPS+ (vs career averages of .306/.369/.448 and 122 OPS+). Players don't outperform their career averages in their late-to-mid 30s.

Of course, he was a primary DH at that point in his career -- it certainly would have helped his hitting.

[hxcmilkshake]

Oh this thread.

Paul Molitor was injured for most of the 80s. So when he got to be full time DH he played more and put up great #s. Its not that big of a mystery.

Or will someone now say he used steroids to stay healthy.


Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

[ScooterD]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

Players don't outperform their career averages in their late-to-mid 30s.

Warren Spahn did - think he was on PED’s in the late-50s?

[carlo16]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

The primary benefit of PEDs to pitchers is recovery and durability. Though, a pitcher can bulk up a lot and increase their velocity, like with Eric Gagne.

PEDs only enhance what's already there -- they don't create talent or skill. A player who wasn't good enough to be in the majors isn't likely to be a successful big leaguer using them.

Bulking up increases velocity? Tell me more about pitching mechanics.

[Handsome Wes]

Originally Posted by ScooterD

Warren Spahn did - think he was on PED’s in the late-50s?

every era of baseball was the steroid era

the question becomes where you want to draw the line for this behavior (or if you do, i suppose)

[Scottish Punk]

I still get the impression that a lot of fans really think PEDs are like Super Soldier Serum for Captain America. Take a needle and poof muscles. No doubt they help you bulk up and recover quicker so you can train and push limits in shorter time frame. The extra bulk does take some warning shots to home runs. How many? How does juiced baseball factor in? Impossible to parse the data for that. Players like Bonds still needed to put in a ton of time in the weight room to get bulked up.

As far as, taking PEDs to help recover during the season or prolong a productive career for a few years? Meh. Dirty secret is that it is a net positive for the sport. Fans want to see stars in the lineup producing. I think the outrage is only when you see somebody like Bonds (who most didn't like), get real big and break records.

[JustinVerlander07]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

I said you CAN determine PED use with the stats if you have a clear before-and-after picture -- like with Ken Caminiti. I didn't say you could always determine it no matter the player. A lot of it depends on talent and regime -- the gear used, as bodybuilders say -- and how the body responds. A journeyman using some PEDs doesn't necessarily make a significant impact on their performance.

I think we previously discussed the before-and-after of certain MLB players who got busted using testosterone. They all had higher BABIPs and career years at the plate, but they were still average or good players regardless.

But according to you and some of the other folks here steroids = great performance! You mean taking steroids doesn't make you good or hitting a bazillion home runs?

We may have discussed Dee Gordon (I don't recall if it was you). I definitely did establish PEDs didn't make him a better player and it was more than likely just a fluky season for him that he repeated in another season as well!

[PumpnDumpling]

The Majority of Players use PEDs at some point in their careers, few are busted as they generally know how to conceal and are helped by staff

Hope this helps

[ScooterD]

Originally Posted by Handsome Wes

every era of baseball was the steroid era

the question becomes where you want to draw the line for this behavior (or if you do, i suppose)

Steroids post-date baseball, so the earliest era couldn’t have been a steroid era.

My comment was about the fact that Spahn exceeded his career averages in his late-30s (and actually into his 40s), and it was in response to a post that said that DOES NOT happen. It does happen. Not sure if Spahn was using anything - never heard that he was, but it’s possible since he played after a time that steroids existed (unlike the earliest period in baseball)

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by ScooterD

Warren Spahn did - think he was on PED’s in the late-50s?

Warren Spahn:

Ages 35 to 39 seasons: 117 ERA+; 4.5 bWAR per-season average

Career averages: 119 ERA+; 4.4 bWAR

Uncanny consistency, no doubt, but he didn't outperform his career averages in his late-to-mid 30a.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by carlo16

Bulking up increases velocity? Tell me more about pitching mechanics.

So you're saying Eric Gagne didn't increase his velocity by using HGH?

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by JustinVerlander07

We may have discussed Dee Gordon (I don't recall if it was you). I definitely did establish PEDs didn't make him a better player and it was more than likely just a fluky season for him that he repeated in another season as well!

Dee Gordon's 2015 season career-high stats: BA (.333), OBP (.359), SLG (.418), Hits (205), OPS+ (116), WAR (4.4 bWAR; 4.8 fWAR)

Referencing his high BABIP in 2015 to make the claim that his improved performance was purely luck-based ignores the fact that testosterone improves recovery, stamina, energy and consistency, which would translate to more production at the plate for hitters, including a higher BABIP. Gordon's Statcast expected stats that season were also the highest of his career.

[carlo16]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

So you're saying Eric Gagne didn't increase his velocity by using HGH?

The johnlock guy on here seems to actually know pitching. I’d love to hear him chime in on this but I know a bit.
I’ll ask you again. Where does increased velocity come from?
Go google.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by ScooterD

Steroids post-date baseball, so the earliest era couldn’t have been a steroid era.

But damn, players have been trying them for a long time:

“Scientists have attempted to use testosterone to build muscle going back more than 1,000 years, but the modern era of steroids starts in 1889 when prominent French scientist Charles Edouard Brown-Sequard tried to figure out how to increase the strength and mass of workers in the service of the industrial revolution. Brown-Sequard began to inject himself with a liquid extract derived from the testosterone of dogs and guinea pigs. He claimed that the injections “increased [his] physical strength and intellectual energy, relieved [his] constipation and even lengthened the arc of [his] urine.”

“…As the sporting industry exploded in the 1920s, athletic trainers and their charges immediately saw the possibilities of using his research. Even the Big Bambino himself, Babe Ruth, injected himself with extract from a sheep’s testicles, hoping for increased power at the plate (and in the bedroom). He attempted this only once, and it made him incredibly ill; the Yankees covered the story by telling the press that the Babe just had one of his famous bellyaches. Even though the Yankees tend to celebrate all things Babe Ruth, they have never, to my knowledge, had “Sheep Testicles Day” at the stadium.”

https://www.baltimoreorless.com/2011...eps-testicles/

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by carlo16

The johnlock guy on here seems to actually know pitching. I’d love to hear him chime in on this but I know a bit.
I’ll ask you again. Where does increased velocity come from?
Go google.

This is what Google AI says:

Yes, bulkier pitchers can throw harder, as greater body mass can increase the force and velocity of a pitch by providing more power to transfer into the ball. However, the relationship is complex; simply being "bulky" isn't the sole factor, and excessive mass without corresponding strength and proper mechanics can increase injury risk. Maintaining flexibility and proper, efficient mechanics is crucial for both speed and health.