Skip to content

George Brett: if steroid users get elected to the Hall of Fame, current inductees will boycott

Mar 16, 2012, 7:41 AM EDT

George Brett

George Brett was interviewed by Bob McManaman of the Arizona Republic and the topic of PED users and the Hall of Fame came up. Brett says that if he were a voter, he would not put guys like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens on his ballot.  Which, fine, there are a lot of people who think that way.  But Brett went further:

“I wasn’t a home-run hitter,” Brett said, “but I know from talking to guys in the 500-home run club, guys like Schmitty (Mike Schmidt) and some other guys like that, if those guys make it in then they’ll never go back.”

Meaning?

“Meaning those guys will never go back and attend (the Hall of Fame inductions) if the cheaters get elected.”

Really? Mike Schmidt would boytcott? The same Mike Schmidt who said that if A-Rod — who Brett specifically criticized by name — were to be elected, he’d “welcome him”?  The same Schmidt who is on record saying that if PEDs were prevalent during his time he probably would have used them too? He’d boycott?  Color me skeptical.

Also color me skeptical about this statement from Brett:

Brett doesn’t believe Alex Rodriguez, who was caught using steroids, should get into the Hall of Fame, either. Maybe if A-Rod would have come clean in the beginning, or tried to make amends like pitcher Andy Pettitte and slugger Jason Giambi did, Brett could see it.

Someone please explain to me how Pettitte or Giambi came clean in ways that Alex Rodriguez didn’t. Because my recollection of it all was that all three of them admitted to doing something only after they were caught. The biggest difference from what I can tell is that A-Rod was not very well-liked beforehand while Pettitte and Giambi were.

Anyway, the same old story here: subjective baloney about PEDs with some people being treated very differently for reasons that make little sense.

  1. largebill - Mar 16, 2012 at 7:54 AM

    Brett should go back to doing youtube videos about crapping his pants.

    • suicidalionsfan - Mar 17, 2012 at 9:54 AM

      Oh my God ! That video is freaking HILARIOUS ! Much like Brett, I too am good for at least two “sharts” a year. A curse I suppose

  2. JBerardi - Mar 16, 2012 at 7:56 AM

    Brett also said he’d “shit his pants” if they elected steroid users to the HOF… but that’s just coincidental:

    • peter2112 - Mar 16, 2012 at 2:24 PM

      Steroids this and Steroids that. Lets face it Ladies and Gentleman, its part of our mainstream society as its been going on for decades and beyond. The first real recognition of this particular kind of foul play happened during the Rome, 1960 Olympics when a cyclist fell down off of his bicycle when in fact he saturated his body with Strychnine to attain better stamina and endurance. Then came “blood doping” which the great Finnish Runner Lasse Viren practiced during the 72 and 76 Olympics. Blood Doping was a method in which a quart of an athletes blood was taken from them intraveniously, refrigerated and then put back into the athletes system to give them better oxygen. Viren won the 5000 and 10,000 meter run Gold in the 1972 Munich Games and then won the gold in the 5 & 10 again along with placing 5th in the marathon just a few days later in the 1976 Montreal Games. Blood Doping was then considered illegal by the IOC (International Olympic Committee) just a few years later. But I laugh it all off when I always read the story of Doc Ellis of the Pittsburgh Pirates (pitcher) who pitched a no-hitter while under the influence of LSD. The bats of the opposing players must of looked like slithering pythons and the backstop net behind the catcher must have looked like a spider-web from hell……..LOL

  3. katrinasafterbirth - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:00 AM

    Brett’s right, cheaters should not get in – too bad roiders.

    • JBerardi - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:09 AM

      And what’s your weak excuses for allowing amphetamine abusers like Hank Aaron into the HOF?

      • paperlions - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:25 AM

        There is a 0% chance Brett also didn’t use amphetamines during his career.

      • JBerardi - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:35 AM

        There’s a much greater than 0% chance that Brett used actual steroids during his career. It’s not like the shit was invented in 1994. And just look at that freakishly good age-37 season during his decline years… hey, at least Jeff Bagwell declined like we normally expect a player too. Forget boycotting the HOF, I say Brett is on HOF probation and not even ALLOWED to visit Cooperstown until he can PROVE that he never used any PEDs. It’s only fair to the clean players, whoever they are.

      • jimmyp70 - Mar 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM

        Wait a minute, you mean that guys may actually have used steroids before 1994? No way. Just because players in every other sport were doesn’t mean baseball players would. The guys before 1994 were virtuous saints that would never sully the game like that.

    • mattraw - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:19 AM

      What about pine tar abusers?

    • largebill - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:25 AM

      How about “cheaters” like Brett who have pine tar too far up on their bat? That was an actual case of a player breaking a rule contained in the rule book. Or the pitchers who defaced balls (or applied a foreign substance) before pitching ‘em? Nah, instead of that, here is another idea: how about we evaluate players based on their performance on the field and if they break the rules during their career the league can suspend them for some duration and their HoF case will be impacted by the lost opportunity to accumulate stats while suspended?

      • georgebrett - Mar 16, 2012 at 11:33 AM

        Really, you’re kidding right? Do you know what happens when a pitcher deceives a runner? Yea, he breaks a rule and is penalized with a balk being called.

    • mox19380 - Mar 16, 2012 at 10:08 AM

      Brett and Schmidty are some of my favorite players all time but both were widely known (in Schmidt’s case) admitted users of amphetamines. Factor in the cocaine abuse of the late 70s early 80s and really no one is clean. Baseball/athletes have always tried and will always skirt the rules for exceptions and advantages. Brett doesn’t have a high horse to even sit on

      • sasquash20 - Mar 16, 2012 at 1:11 PM

        Steroids make you into a different person. They don’t just make you a little stronger, they make you way stronger. They help you recover quicker. There is no way anyone who knows what the hell there talking about would even compare steroids and amphetamines. There is no comparing the 2 they are completely different. And yes steroids are ten times worse then amphetamines. The numbers guys put up on roids aren’t real there fake.

      • JBerardi - Mar 16, 2012 at 1:27 PM

        Steroids make you into a different person. They don’t just make you a little stronger, they make you way stronger. They help you recover quicker. There is no way anyone who knows what the hell there talking about would even compare steroids and amphetamines. There is no comparing the 2 they are completely different. And yes steroids are ten times worse then amphetamines. The numbers guys put up on roids aren’t real there fake.

        Anyone who knows what they’re talking about? Hmm, where’d you get your medical degree?

        Your argument is bullshit; you offer nothing but a paper-thin appeal to authority. And you don’t even name the authority in question, other than “anyone who knows what they’re talking about”, which is basically saying “anyone who agrees with me is credible and anyone who disagrees with my is not credible” and offering no actual evidence as to why that’s true. The fact of the matter is that there’s no conclusive studies on the effect of “steroids” (which could mean many different substances) OR amphetamines on baseball performance. Hell, as far as I know, there aren’t even any inconclusive studies. We might have some knowledge of the effects they have on the body, but how that translates into baseball performance? It’s a total unknown. We don’t have the data, much less any conclusions drawn from that data.

        I’ll say this, there’s a hell of a lot of records set in the 70s and 80s that have to do with playing every day and running fast. Pete Rose? Rickey Henderson? There’s just as much of a case that the hit record and the stolen base record where amphetamine aided as there is that the home run record was steroid-adided.

      • spindervish - Mar 16, 2012 at 2:45 PM

        “Anyone who knows what the hell there [sic] talking about” clearly does not include you.

      • sasquash20 - Mar 16, 2012 at 3:11 PM

        I have worked in a gym for over 5 years training people. I have seen exactly what steroids does to people. It gives you power and strength that does without a doubt make you a better baseball player. You can question everything I’m saying I really could care less. But you can’t question what steriods have done to baseball. I also argue that steriods help you recover so fast that the even aid playing everyday. As far as amphetamines I have used them in my past and they do help you stay alert and focused. What they aren’t making you do is hit a baseball any better or run any faster. The difference between steroids and amphetamines is like night and day. If you need a study to understand that then good luck in life.

      • phillyphreak - Mar 16, 2012 at 4:24 PM

        I have worked in a gym for over 5 years training people. I have seen exactly what steroids does to people. It gives you power and strength that does without a doubt make you a better baseball player. You can question everything I’m saying I really could care less. But you can’t question what steriods have done to baseball.”

        I will question everything you are saying. Working in a gym doesn’t do anything to build your credibility. For one, it’s a weak attempt at appeal to authority. Two, there probably is at least some confirmation bias at work there. Three, the people taking steroids in the gym are suddenly playing baseball and hitting 50 HR a year? There were lots of people in the Mitchell report who were kinda sucky, despite supposed PED use. Is that steroid generated power and strength enhancing pitch recognition, bat speed, swing mechanics? Is it allowing pitchers to throw a better breaking ball, control their fastball better? I’m not sure anyone knows to what degree they do (if at all). I’m sure they can help, but like I and a lot of others have said, we just don’t know. Maybe they’ll help someone add a few HR a year, but I doubt it’s like 20 or 30HR a year.

        “I also argue that steriods help you recover so fast that the even aid playing everyday. ”

        There are also legal things that help players do this too- cortisone shots etc. So I don’t think that’s an issue.

        There is also the counterargument that people throw out: steroids shorten careers because they lead to injuries…..

      • sasquash20 - Mar 16, 2012 at 6:18 PM

        Phillyphreak my working at a gym gave me an up close look at the effects steroids have on people. If you don’t think that I know what I’m talking about that is fine. I’m not a doctor, so an authority I guess I’m not. Nowhere did I say people working out at my gym who use steroids are suddenly becoming baseball stars. But to act as though steroids taken by baseball players don’t help baseball players play better your wrong. Even less talented baseball players play better when they are on steroids. If you have warning track power steroids will make you a much better power hitter. And if you think that adding a few homers is all steroids did for some players then I ask you about Bonds,BigMac, and Sosa? Steroids added 25-40 homers to there steroid year totals. Look at Bonds career, best year not even 50 homers. He takes something and jacks 73, so that is at least a 24 homer jump. I agree steroids long term will shorten some careers. But short term it absolutely helps you recover fast, and thus you are not as sore or weak after playing or working out. Cortizone isn’t something you want to inject every other week either.

      • phillyphreak - Mar 16, 2012 at 6:35 PM

        “Even less talented baseball players play better when they are on steroids.”……”Steroids added 25-40 homers to there steroid year totals”

        Can you document your evidence for this please? Also, the assumption is that steroids are the ONLY reason for this jump. I would say that they may help but we have no idea how MUCH they do. Do they take warning shots out? I don’t know. Just because someone is strong doesn’t mean that they will start hitting HRs.

        Food for thought: http://joeposnanski.si.com/2010/08/06/what-if-we-are-wrong-again-about-steroids/

      • racksie - Mar 18, 2012 at 12:25 PM

        sasquash20″You can question everything I’m saying I really could care less.”

        How much less could you care? Grammar, son. Grammar.

    • pjthornton - Mar 20, 2012 at 2:14 PM

      I’m not sure a boycott would have any real impact. I mean, some of them won’t attend future induction ceremonies? Whoa, how will we ever survive THAT? Plenty of others WILL attend, and they’re ALL gonna be dead pretty soon, anyway. Eventually, the ‘roiders will be the ones ruling the roost, and deciding if they will boycott this or complain about that. Life goes on. So does baseball. This whole idea of a boycott is an exercise in meaninglessness, if you ask me.

  4. Gobias Industries - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:11 AM

    Craig: I’m not going to stand here and listen to this baloney.
    Gobias Industries: He won’t, you know. He doesn’t stand for baloney.

  5. navel gazing - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:19 AM

    Well, Mr. Brett, I look forward to seeing you crap your pants when an inductee admits steriod use.

    If George Brett refuses to go back to the HOF if users are inducted, does anyone really care? As great as he was, an entirely new generation has passed and raised kids loving the game. That generation wants to see its own favorites inducted, and won’t miss his attendance at all.

    First to print up powder blue #5 “get off my lawn” shirts wins.

  6. Charles Gates - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:26 AM

    All of these players have to wake up each day and face themselves in the mirror regarding what they’ve done. Some of them kiss it.

    • JBerardi - Mar 16, 2012 at 1:30 PM

      Some? Most. It’s really hard to even get drafted into pro ball, much less fight your way thought to the majors. You have to be one arrogant son of a bitch to even attempt baseball as a career path.

  7. paperlions - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:33 AM

    Yet again, apparently every form of cheating, including non-steroid chemical enhancement, is okay…it is only steroids that are “real cheating”. Uh huh.

    In the 1960s Sports Illustrated ran multiple stories about drug use in sports, including at least one cover article and one focused on baseball. Contrary to popular belief, Jose Canseco did not introduce steroids to baseball, the 1980s was just the first time players started hitting the weight room in conjunction with steroid use.

    • thefalcon123 - Mar 16, 2012 at 10:01 AM

      Excellent point. Odds are, there already IS a player in the HOF who was on steroids through their career. Probably more than one.

      My vote is for Rogers Hornsby. I mean, come on, the guy has 36 career home runs in his first 5 seasons then suddenly becomes the best power hitter in the National League? Like he did that without chemical enhancement!

      • paperlions - Mar 16, 2012 at 10:59 AM

        There have been multiple reports from anonymous sources from MLB and the HOF that have said there are steroid users have already been inducted into the HOF. The sources were not willing to name anyone, the answer was in response to a “what would you do if a steroid user was elected” question…with an answer that boiled down to “nothing, there are already steroid users in the HOF”.

      • georgebrett - Mar 16, 2012 at 11:36 AM

        Sure, in 1922 Rogers Hornsby was taking steroids. Where do you people come up with this stuff.

      • thefalcon123 - Mar 16, 2012 at 12:13 PM

        @GeorgeBrett

        Sorry, did that go over your head?

      • braddavery - Mar 16, 2012 at 2:43 PM

        There is a HUGE difference between a PED abuser being unknowingly inducted and inducting a known PED abuser. I’m shocked so many don’t understand that difference.

      • Kevin S. - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:50 PM

        Sure. And I’m just as shocked that people do see a difference in knowing inducting a greenie-popper or a ball scuffer and a roid user. They’re all cheating, and a credible argument can be made that steroid usage is the least effective form.

  8. danrizzle - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:42 AM

    Wow, so, judging by the comments on this post, I guess George Brett craps his pants or something? The things I woke up this morning not knowing…

  9. normswifevera - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:42 AM

    “Someone please explain to me how Pettitte or Giambi came clean in ways that Alex Rodriguez didn’t.”

    That’s not what he said. He said maybe if ARod came clean in the beginning OR “tried to make amends” like Pettitte or Giambi. I don’t even remember what “amends” he’s referring to, but he didn’t say “maybe if he came clean like Pettite and Giambi did”.

    • paperlions - Mar 16, 2012 at 9:03 AM

      Of course, neither Pettite or Giambi made amends, and it isn’t even clear that Pettite was honest….he said he used HGH one time….seriously? We are supposed to believe that? It may be true, but it is also exactly what someone says when they have been caught and can’t say they never did it.

      • Alex K - Mar 16, 2012 at 9:13 AM

        He said he used it one time until they found evidence of him using it a second time. Then he only used it twice.

      • paperlions - Mar 16, 2012 at 9:38 AM

        I missed that part….I look forward to him using it a 3rd time.

      • Alex K - Mar 16, 2012 at 10:40 AM

        It wasn’t that long after he admitted using once, if my memory is correct. Andy did it the honorable way…only admit what they can prove. So different han how A-Rod did it, right?

      • Kevin S. - Mar 16, 2012 at 11:31 AM

        Two things to defend Pettitte:

        Tons of people were willing to take Brian McNamee at his word, and McNamee corroborated Pettitte’s story that he only used twice. Well, do we believe McNamee or don’t we?

        The third usage Pettitte admitted to wasn’t because new evidence was found, he offered it up once he was put under oath, and he had concealed it because his source was his ill father, whom he didn’t want to throw under the bus. I’m not going to kill him for omitting that before he was put under oath.

        That said, I don’t think Pettitte or Giambi really should have been treated any differently than A-Rod… all three fessed up when they were caught and/or put under oath. A-Rod actually admitted to far more than anybody actually had dirt on him for, unlike most “Yeah, it was only that one time” stories, but of course the bloodthirsty media still didn’t think that was enough.

      • Alex K - Mar 16, 2012 at 1:06 PM

        Kevin- I was actually mocking the way people rationalize Pettitte’s admission as somehow different that A-Rod’s. I wasn’t meaning to take a shot at Pettitte.

        I’m with you on A-Rod, too. He said way more than he needed to (even if it wasn’t the whole truth).

    • aceshigh11 - Mar 16, 2012 at 9:11 AM

      There really is no difference in the ways that they came clean though.

      Pettitte, A-Rod and Giambi all apologized and tried to explain why they used.

      The simple fact is people don’t like A-Rod, and that colors their perception of him.

      • jimmyp70 - Mar 16, 2012 at 11:08 AM

        Actually, Giambi never apologized for using steroids. He apologized for being a distraction and letting people down, but he never once said anything about PEDs. In fact, he specifically said he couldn’t be more candid about what he was apologizing about. That’s not admitting anything. At least when A-Rod was intimidated and cornered by the moral media, he owned up to it.

        When Pettitte apologized, he justified why he was doing it, said he knew it was wrong – yet still did it, showing he really didn’t care – and then tried to see how stupid everyone is by saying he only did it once or twice.

        Let’s not use Pettitte and Giambi as our moral standards.

  10. stex52 - Mar 16, 2012 at 8:49 AM

    I admit that I didn’t understand the issue very well before I got involved in the discussions on this website. Thanks, guys, I think.

    But it is clear that as long as winning and large amounts of money are at stake, then cheating will be a problem. At least as long as it is human beings who are playing the game.

    But I look at some of the people who have been accused or implicated and I see people who have been great competitors, credits to the game and to their communities, and would have been HOF’ers in any case. Some of the PED’s were not against the rules when they were taken, others were very temporary to heal from an injury, and others to help a player get over the top when faced with a physical problem. In the end they are taking a chance with their own health, but are they cheating any more than bat loaders or spitballers?

    Enforce a detection program. Use Largebill’s argument that the time (and money) lost from their career is their punishment. In the end, the HOF needs these guys more than they need it.

  11. sdelmonte - Mar 16, 2012 at 9:14 AM

    So…did anyone skip Gaylord Perry’s induction ceremony?

  12. thefalcon123 - Mar 16, 2012 at 9:52 AM

    It’s a very pussy move to attempt to speak for others on an issue like this. If Brett wants to say he’ll boycott, fine. But don’t hide behind that “Schmitty and some other guys” crap. That’s just giving yourself some imaginary backup. If they’re actually on the same page as you or care about it as much, they’ll come out and say it.

    Guess what George…you don’t get to choose the hall of fame. It’s an honor that was very deservedly bestowed upon you by sportswriters. It’s not up for you to decide who gets in or throw a hissy fit at the potential of the wrong kind of cheater getting in (bat corkers, spit baller and amphetamine users being the “right kind” of cheaters). I know I shouldn’t expect someone who counts Rush Limbaugh among his close friends to have any class, but even this is a bit shocking. If you don’t want to atttend A-Rod or Bonds’ induction, so be it, I’m sure you won’t be missed.

    • Kevin S. - Mar 16, 2012 at 11:33 AM

      Well, I question how much the BBWAA really does deserve it, but they probably have a better claim that George Brett.

  13. randygnyc - Mar 16, 2012 at 10:02 AM

    I’m pretty sure there are already guys in the HOF who have cheated, perhaps even with roids.

    • stex52 - Mar 16, 2012 at 10:18 AM

      I don’t even think there is any question there are PED users in the HOF.

    • Chipmaker - Mar 16, 2012 at 10:25 AM

      According to Tom Boswell, he knows of a modern-day HOFer whom he witnessed consume a “Canseco milkshake” during his playing career.

      Giambi still has not specified what his apology was about. People keep filling in the blanks for this guy. They shouldn’t; he should.

  14. uyf1950 - Mar 16, 2012 at 10:27 AM

    It’s always a mistake to speak for other people when you talk as Brett did here. Speak for your self only. He probably also should have said “KNOWN” steroid users. Since it’s probably a safe bet that there are at least 1 or 2 steroid uses in the hall already. And as for cheaters in general in the hall, I won’t even bother going there.

    Have a good day Brett living in your ivory tower.

  15. Bar None - Mar 16, 2012 at 10:53 AM

    If A-Rod, Palmiero, Clemens, etc. get in, they should let Pete Rose and Joe Jackson in.

    • Kevin S. - Mar 16, 2012 at 11:35 AM

      Cheating to make oneself better and help ones team win do not nearly compromise the integrity of the game as exposing oneself to the financial incentive to deliberately lose. There’s no comparison between what Rose and Jackson did.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Mar 16, 2012 at 11:35 AM

      Yeah no. Big difference between doing something that wasn’t against the rules of baseball at the time, and breaking the cardinal sin of baseball.

    • sasquash20 - Mar 16, 2012 at 1:22 PM

      I hope all the juice heads get kept out but if you let them in your telling our children its ok to cheat and break the law.

      • thefalcon123 - Mar 16, 2012 at 2:01 PM

        GAH!!!!

        You want to ensure law-breakers aren’t in the hall?

        First off, amphetamines are illegal, so there goes everybody from the 1950s-1970s at least…

        …Ty Cobb stabbed a man so he’s gone
        …here a link detailing Rogers Hornsby’s criminal problems, so he’s gone:
        http://baseballhistorian.blogspot.com/2011/11/troubled-life-of-rogers-hornsby-part-i.html
        …Babe Ruth was arrested for violating Child Labor Laws. He was aquitted, but if accusations are enough to keep Jeff Bagwell out, certainly Ruth must be removed too.
        …George Brett deceived consumers and is being sued for false advertising, so he’s a poor example and should probably be excluded too.

        In fact, everybody except for Jesus should probably excluded from the hall of fame. Though from what I hear, he can’t hit a curveball…

      • sasquash20 - Mar 16, 2012 at 3:16 PM

        HAHA I knew someone would take that post serious. Kids see a lot worse.

  16. Vindickative - Mar 16, 2012 at 12:03 PM

    Remember Mark McGwire’s interview with Bob Costas, back just before McGwire was hired as the Cardinals’ hitting coach? There’s a kernel of insight there as to why all of the steroid business gets people so riled up. Smack dab in the middle of all Big Mac’s “confession” and “coming clean” and “unburdening” there remained one emphatic, unqualified, unequivocable denial:

    “I did NOT sneak into a men’s room stall with another man, pull down my pants, and allow the other man stick something in my butt!”

    Since the start of the Steroids Mess, endless platitudes about “purity” of records and the “integrity of the game” and a “level playing field” have masked the real reason for all the hysteria — the oogie, rather fetishized, vaguely homoerotic steroid imagery of syringes, (male) buttocks, shrunken testicles, shaved chests, jockstraps, etc. We can now add Brett’s brand of dorky macho posturing to the smokescreen.

    • sasquash20 - Mar 16, 2012 at 1:19 PM

      your a douche bag

      • Vindickative - Mar 29, 2012 at 4:46 PM

        MY douche bag??

    • JBerardi - Mar 16, 2012 at 1:37 PM

      “Since the start of the Steroids Mess, endless platitudes about “purity” of records and the “integrity of the game” and a “level playing field” have masked the real reason for all the hysteria — the oogie, rather fetishized, vaguely homoerotic steroid imagery of syringes, (male) buttocks, shrunken testicles, shaved chests, jockstraps, etc. We can now add Brett’s brand of dorky macho posturing to the smokescreen.”

      Eh. I think boomers are just mad about the records of their childhood idols getting broken. To which I say, boo-f’n-red juice-hoo.

  17. sasquash20 - Mar 16, 2012 at 1:18 PM

    I can’t remember Pettite or Giambi presser when they came clean, but I do remember Arod lying during an interview and then later coming out with the admittance.

    Personally I don’t want any of the steroids guys in. There reward for their stats is the insane money they made. Money they wouldn’t have sniffed without steroids.

    • thefalcon123 - Mar 16, 2012 at 2:11 PM

      “Money they wouldn’t have sniffed without steroids.”

      Bull. Shit. Steroids don’t turn an Al Newman into Barry Bonds. In the most extreme example, they turned perennial MVP and best player in the game Barry Bonds into arguably the best player of all time Barry Bonds. And this is probably the most extreme case.

      Steroids don’t have the same effect on everybody. If they did, that means non-steroid using Gary Bennett would hit like me. To suggest that McGwire would have been a marginal player or Manny Ramirez wouldn’t have gotten huge contracts is silly. I’ll buy the argument that they probably would not been as great, but I’m not going to entertain the notion that they were marginal players and steroids turned them into superstars.

      • sasquash20 - Mar 16, 2012 at 3:22 PM

        But they extend playing careers and reward older players with contracts they would have never sniffed. Manny wouldn’t have gotten 50 million 2 year deal at that age if he wasn’t all juiced up.

      • sasquash20 - Mar 16, 2012 at 3:29 PM

        Bonds signed a contract the year after 73 homer season was a 5 year 90 million at the age of 38. Yeah steriods had nothing to do with that.

  18. ezthinking - Mar 16, 2012 at 3:44 PM

    Funny how Georgie is in trouble right now for selling magic necklaces to kids to turn them into all star players.

    http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7551115/lawsuit-alleges-george-brett-made-false-claims-necklaces-ads

    Trying to divert alittle attention there G-bag?

  19. schmedley69 - Mar 16, 2012 at 6:08 PM

    It is widely-known in baseball circles that Brett was a PREPARATION H abuser.

  20. Walk - Mar 17, 2012 at 2:04 AM

    I am always dumbfounded about the accusations of steroids adding a set number of home runs to a players total. The people mentioning that magical number are usually the same ones who totally discount the effects that the pitchers taking steroids had. Take sasquatch for example he goes on about working in a gym and seeing the effects of steroids. I am sure he did, i am equally sure he saw the effects of someone dedicated to working out. So how does one go from there to measuring this 25-40 homerun increase? Yep steroids had an effect not sure if it was more for pitchers or hitters and it an opinion of mine based on studies that had little to nothing to do with baseball, but i freely admit it is an opinion. I also know amphetamines had an effect. Right now players are struggling with the long season. The number of add drugs prescribed was about three times the national average for baseball players. Veteran players are getting more days off now for day games after night games than i can recall seeing from when i started watching baseball in the mid 80′s. I also remember watching scheduled double headers. I have not seen one of those in a long while. Seems like there used to be one scheduled one sunday a month. These things happened or started to disappear same time greenies fell out of favor. Steroids and hgh fell out of favor with doctors and have recently begun making a comeback in select procedures because of the effects they have on the formation of scar tissue having an effect on playing time if allowed to be used. So my opinion is that greenies have increased games played. My opinion is that steroids can decrease time spent recovering from injuries. Want to know how steroids and greenies can be compared? There you go, one mans opinion, well at least in part.

  21. gogigantos - Mar 17, 2012 at 10:48 AM

    How would Mr. Brett feel if there was already a PED “cheater” in The Hall? Is anyone sure there isn’t, and aren’t there a few that think there is at least one? Bill James questioned it, and Posnanski followed up, or was it,,,, and went so far as to speculate about who it might be. Honestly, it is hard to believe that there isn’t just a bit of the odor of ‘roids in The Hall already.

  22. racksie - Mar 18, 2012 at 12:23 PM

    sasquash20″You can question everything I’m saying I really could care less.”

    How much less could you care? Grammar, son. Grammar.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

This was 'the perfect baseball game'
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. S. Kazmir (5064)
  2. K. Uehara (4419)
  3. T. Wood (3744)
  4. G. Springer (3636)
  5. M. Machado (3480)
  1. J. Kubel (3390)
  2. H. Rondon (3123)
  3. T. Walker (3120)
  4. J. Reyes (3032)
  5. D. Pedroia (3026)