So the Cubs are playing the Rockies. As much as I have a hard time knowing who the Cubs are allowing to play these days, I have no fucking clue who the Rockies are running out there on a daily basis. I think Tyler Colvin? Is he still a thing for them? Does anyone care?
Mostly we needed a new thread.
The Cubs are already up 3-1 and Dave Sappelt is a triple and single short of the cycle. I missed the beginning because there was a new New Girl and I prefer looking at this:
… than what the Cubs and Rockies are capable of doing on a baseball diamond.
I could have started a new thread, I guess. I prefer not to.
i don’t HATE L&B, but not having them was kind of like being at the game.
So this Starlin Castro kid.
@ josh:
I see only about 3-4 games on TV each year, mostly listen on the radio. I’ve always liked having the radio on and the TV on mute, even in the days when Harry and Steve were on TV and Brenly was on his first go round on the radio.
@ josh:
josh the scrivener
Hey GW, since you’re here…have you ever happened upon a study suggesting that steroids and/or HGH could improve hand-eye coordination?
uverse has seven channels of cubs feeds which i have no desire to ever watch. the “no len and bob” channel? I would be all over that.
@ Rice Cube:
no, I haven’t. I suppose the place to look would be old medical studies, back when they were initially synthesizing (~60s) all these variants.
@ Rice Cube:
However, there have been studies that suggest HGH could help stave off mental decay and restore functionality to the pituitary gland in boxers and football players. But, don’t let the NFL know that.
This essay on academic publishing says a lot of things I agree with.
(Not to distract from talking Cubs…)
@ GW:
I figured it was more conjecture than anything concrete. It kind of makes sense that something that enhances muscle growth could potentially help the muscles that focus the eye, but I doubt it’s been tested and it still sounds a bit far-fetched.
@ GW:
Yeah, just the audience? It was kind of nice and peaceful.
rusin and dolis coming up big in the clutch there, knowing that this game will probably only go 5.
Remember when Dolis was the closer?
Of course, next year he’ll be the no. 3 starter.
Josh Vitters wRC+-o-meter: -11
@ Rizzo the Rat:
He’s not much worse than the rest if the shit they’ll be sending out there.
@ mb21:
Aaron Cook has already proven you don’t need strikeouts to hold a rotation spot. Hell, maybe they should trade Dolis to the Red Sox.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
That wasy the Red Sox could have the fewest strikeouts in MLB history.
@ mb21:
Pitching to contact is the new market inefficiency.
@ mb21:
maybe that fits in with their new gobbledygook strategy.
How reliable would medical studies on HGH or steroids back in the 60s be? The improvements made since then are significant so I wouldn’t really trust the results.
My thoughts on steroids in terms of performance enhancers is that they obviously allow the body to work harder and therefore a person can build more muscle mass. Strength alone isn’t going to produce power, but it’s a big help. I’m guessing hand eye coordination is improved, but it’s only a guess.
Mucker nailed in the last thread though. These guys are still busting ass and working harder to build their muscles than anyone else. You can take all the steroids you want, but if you don’t eat enough protein and work out you aren’t getting bigger.
It’s no wonder those who have been busted still claim what they did is what they were capable of doing. They spent the time working that hard to get to that point and feel they’ve earned it and they did. The only question is whether it’s a medical issue and that’s of no concern to me.
mb21 wrote:
improvements in what?
Dolis has 2 strikeouts in 1.0 IP. I think he’s finally turned a corner.
@ mb21:
THIS
@ Rizzo the Rat:
His FIP is kinda fucked though with that HR.
Went from winning to losing this one pretty quickly
@ GW:
The methods in which they’re used, for one thing. My understanding of steroid usage in the 60s was mostly in the gyms, but now it’s often done by profesionally athletes with the help of a medical professional. Secondly, the designer steroids are much more effective. Athletes often take cocktails of these PEDs too.
@ mb21:
unless you think we’ve gotten much better at measuring hand eye coordination, then I’m not sure how this is germane to the discussion.
mb21 wrote:
I hear this a lot, but it’s just not true, to my knowledge. you can only do so much to a steroid. most of the variants were originally synthesized and characterized a long time ago, and have been recently resurrected to avoid detection in modern tests.
I’m watching the Cubs game and my screen just went black. You guys thought watching a Cubs game without L&B was a treat? I think I just one-upped you.
@ 5 Run Home Run:
Shit. My picture just came back and the 2012 season still exists.
@ 5 Run Home Run:
(dying laughing)
I remember reading an article about Arnold Schwarzanegger several years ago. i think the article may have been in an old SI, but I’m not positive. Anyway, it was mentioned how there was no post cycle treatment at the time and IIRC, that wsa around the era in which these guys used to start using the drugs in cycles. Arnold was using in the 70s so the advancements since the 60s were probably pretty big. I don’t think the people using that shit in the 60s had a fucking clue what they were doing. Drugs and weights.
@ 5 Run Home Run:
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
@ GW:
Could it be that our knowledge of using the drugs has increased enough that we see greater effectiveness?
Josh Vitters wRC+-o-meter: -7. He’s on fire!
@ mb21:
I didn’t know the HBP was that important!
@ Rice Cube:
It was -8 before the game so he’s 0-2, HBP tonight.
He’s improved his wRC+ from -13 to -7 in 2 games. (dying laughing)
Yes, I wouldn’t be surprised if they have developed more effective cycles. And I don’t know whether they are safer or not. Not going to be much literature on that front, given the need for confidentiality among users.
RC was asking specifically about hand eye coordination, and there’s a chance of that showing up in the lit, back when the class of drugs was new and being tested for a variety of ailments.
@ GW:
Yeah, people are saying that steroids improve hand-eye coordination like it was common knowledge. The only link on Google was to an SI interview after McGwire’s confession by some steroid/doping expert and I don’t think they were very definitive about whether that’s actually true.
What the hell Lincecum. Grumble.
wow, 13 k’s through 5 for greinke. 110 pitches, though, so he’s probably done.
Dan MacNeil has it right: in 10 years, when every adult male over 35 is taking testosterone, we’re going to look back on the way we reacted to steroid use in baseball and feel really stupid.
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
I doubt that very much.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57519223-10391704/eunuchs-outlive-male-counterparts-study-of-korean-dynasty-finds/
SVB wrote:
Yes, this. Though on a tangential note I am currently dealing with a reviewer who is a fucking troll like you wouldn’t believe. Luckily it’s not my paper (I was asked to give a second opinion on this one).
@ Berselius:
As a former University Press worker, I think corporate academic publishing companies should be shut down and publicly humiliated.
@ Berselius:
Also it was companies like Elsevier who started the trend of no copy editors. So they charge more, put a stranglehold on academic information, and put out an inferior product. Those places are ridiculous.
I’m not exactly sure I understand the discussion about steroids in this thread and the last one. There is lots of evidence that PEDs improve performance. Look at EPO in cycling. Look at Olympic sports where the motivation is extremely high to dope, because without winning on the big stage or sustained winning, you have almost no income. Brady Anderson, Dan Serafini, etc. etc. I think the record is pretty clear that the E is PEDs is legit. Without the PEDs, you have longer recovery times, require more effort to build muscle, etc. etc.
So Enrico mentioned something about PEDs not really enhancing power. Is there good evidence for this? Because to me it seems clear that having more muscle (up to a point) should make it easier to throw 100 mph or drive a slightly mishit ball farther.
The argument I don’t understand is this one: The PEDs don’t really matter because the players still had to work out in the gym/field. I think that’s baloney. All players, if they want to succeed, work out. Doesn’t matter if they use PEDs or not. Some players use illegal drugs so that their work out is more effective. Other players don’t use illegal drugs and if they are borderline big leaguers, they don’t get their cup of coffee, while the PED-users do. I doubt that you can be a lazy PED user and make the majors, but I didn’t think that was the point of the controversy. I thought the point was that PEDs are illegal, and players that use illegal PEDs were gaining an advantage over players that were clean. The second part of the controversy becomes whether PEDs should be legalized, but that’s a different argument, and not really the main thrust of the discussion here.
Did she ask someone what rain is?
@ SVB:
I think we were mostly in agreement that PEDs confer a comoetitive advantage but my query involved how big that advantage is. I don’t think it’s as significant as people think but my issue is that I cannot really find empirical evidence or literature that supports my position outside of a few speculative sports articles. But then again I haven’t looked that hard.
@ SVB:
I’m guessing drugs like EPO aren’t used by baseball players because baseball is relatively anaerobic (with all the down-time in between pitches) and doesn’t require the oxygen delivery mechanisms that bike riders and cross-country athletes could benefit from. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone got caught using it though, but most of the drug fails are usually some form of testosterone or HGH.
Seems like the main idea is to increase strength. But if the drugs don’t significantly improve hand-eye coordination, then someone who isn’t good at making contact would just strike out more violently (dying laughing) The counter-argument is that increased strength equates to increased bat speed, which means that you can sit back on any pitch and then catch up to it and still hit it in the gap or out of the park. But that assumes you can recognize the pitch and make contact in the first place.
…and then there’s today’s O RLY moment:
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/26/eric-gagne-says-80-percent-of-his-dodgers-teammates-used-steroids/
http://steroids-and-baseball.com/
White Sox attendance yesterday: 13,797
Cubs/Rockies: 26,660
It’s just baffling.
@ mb21:
That was a recent page I bookmarked because it’s too damned long for one sitting (dying laughing)
@ Aisle424:
Well, to be fair, yesterday was a Tuesday day game at the Cell on Yom Kippur. Though I don’t actually know how many Sox fans are Jewish. The Cubs-Rockies game may have sold that many tickets but there only looked to be 500 people in the stands.
aside: http://www.obstructedview.net/aside/road-to-100-losses.html
I don’t give a fuck about PEDs because I think so many guys were/are on them that the whole “unlevel playing field” argument goes out the window, and because there’s so much noise in the data that it’s hard to see what their impact is beyond decreased recovery time (which, BTW is also why I believe that when the story of steroids in baseball is finally told, we’ll find that FAR more pitchers than hitters were using, because they stand to receive the greatest benefits from decreasing recovery times). Of course anabolic steroids add muscle mass, but again, we’ve got almost no idea how increased muscle mass aids a baseball player, and some argue it could even be detrimental to most players.
If these guys weren’t breaking records, no one would care about PEDs, because you watch the same fucking mouthbreathers that get up in arms about steroids in baseball turn right around and scream their head off for a 6′-5″, 295 lb. defensive end who runs a 4.6 40 yd dash and has 5% body fat, as if that’s totally natural. The NFL is a league that exists because of 2 things: gambling and steroids. If people really cared about PEDs per se they would hate the NFL. But they don’t. They care about records and who holds them.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
This +1 LSA Rec’d NAMBLA
When I say “far more,” I think if we’re ever able to gather solid data on this, we’ll find that 90%-100% of pitchers were using steroids/HGH, but I bet for hitters that number is somewhere around 75%-80%, and probably closer to the lower end of that range. And no doubt 100% were/are using some form of amphetamine.
Wait for it…
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
THIS
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Other than seeing the players and knowing that it isn’t natural, have there been studies showing that use of steroids in the NFL is higher than MLB? I don’t really hear about people failing steroid tests in the NFL as much as I do the MLB. Does the NFL not publicly release the information like MLB does or do they have less stringent tests? Or are the players that much better at getting away with it?
@ WaLi:
Most doping experts consider the NFL’s policy to be seriously lacking.
1.) Players are routinely informed a day ahead of time when they will be tested, making manipulation much easier.
2.) The NFLPA only agreed to HGH testing in the last CBA, and it is as of yet unclear if the testing has actually been implemented.
3.) The initial penalties are not stiff (1-3 games) and many repeat offenders incurring longer penalties (4-8 games) often appeal and have their suspensions reduced or rescinded.
4.) When a player pops, the league does not normally reveal what sort of substance the player was caught taking, but there is widespread suspicion that the bulk of the violators of the drug policy are illict drug users and that very few PED users are actually caught. The last PED pops of note were the “Williams Brothers” in Minnesota. Their appeal has been going on for almost 4 years IIRC. When the new CBA was ratified, under its auspices, Pat Williams’ suspension was suspended, Kevin was given a two game suspension. And they weren’t even busted for the PEDs they were taking, but for having a masking agent present in their urine.
Bottom line: it’s not hard to get away with PED use in the NFL and no one cares.
@ WaLi:
yeah, I don’t know if the eye test helps here. We’re going from our own endpoints when we reckon things like that. And mine is nowhere near a pro football player. However, for a guy who has worked out and dedicated himself to athletics from a very young age, the endpoint may be much further down the line. Every story I’ve ever heard from a pro athlete has them working out and exercising from childhood. That has to have a long term effect on body composition.
@ WaLi:
If I was to learn there are more steroid users in baseball than football I’d likely die from shock. I’d be shocked to learn that there are fewer players at the college level (big time college programs). These programs regularly take 240 pound offensive linemen out of high school and within a year or two they’re weighing 310 pounds and they’re in better physical shape than ever.
Jason Parks @ProfessorParks
#Cubs 3B prospect Christian Villanueva was impressive w/ the bat yesterday for Obregon. Showing off his + bat speed; squaring solid velo
I embedded the forum in an iframe so it would look like it’s part of the site: http://www.obstructedview.net/obstructed-view-forums.html (link on the menu)
@ mb21:
I disagree. I think the level playing field has a lot of support but probably not from the most rabid sports fans. I agree that most of the pros in MLB and NFL (I don’t watch NFL fwiw) used PEDs. I think the level playing field actually shows up earlier. Minors for baseball and hockey. College for football. PED users don’t wash out as fast in the minors.
This matters though because we have evidence of detrimental effects of PEDs on health and those effects may be worse/compounded in younger people. If we accept that PEDs are ok in the pros, do we also accept them for high school athletes. Some are already taking PEDs. I’d be very upset if my kid did, but I’d be even more upset if she did because the sports program she was in encouraged it, even indirectly. But if you throw out the level playing field–or the legal playing field–argument for the pros, then you have to throw it out for amateur sports too because you start your career as an amatuer and if you can’t compete, you can’t go pro.
@ SVB:
Man I suck at typing on my phone.
I agree that more pitchers probably usaed PEds than hitters. But I think having the extra muscle and power helps hitters at least to a point by getting more distance or speed on a mishit ball. With right combination of bat speed, hitting the sweet spot, etc. Anyone can hit a home run. Ask Doug Dascenzo. But a slightly mishit ball probably goes farther thanks to PED muscle.
@ SVB:
There’s no such thing as a level playing field. Not in life and not in sports. Here’s what is a level playing field in baseball: all the teams are perfectly average. They’re all 81 win teams and the season is determined entirely by luck (who gets injured, who has more hits drop in, which average team overperforms, etc). I don’t think any sports fan wants a level playing field. I know I don’t. I would have no interest in watching baseball if the entire season was determined by luck.
I’m sure some will say that’s not what they mean, but no matter how you look at it, there is no level playing field. Families who have better than average income can spend more money on their children who can then focus more on a sport like baseball. They can hire the best coaches (former players). Others have to grow up in poverty here in the US or even worse, poverty in Latin America.
Most importantly, talent itself isn’t level. People are better at things than others. Some pitchers can throw 100 mph while others have trouble hitting 90. Some batters can turn on an inside fastball at 95 mph while others are lucky to even get their bat on the ball. Some people work harder at getting better than others.
As for the legal issue, I don’t really care what an adult does to his or her own body. With regards to amateur players, they have parents to watch out for them. It’s not the responsibility of someone else (a professional athlete) to ensure all other children are following the law. We have government for that.
By the way, there’s a much less level playing field in college sports than there is in professional sports. I don’t think the talent level in the minors is of much concern because the purpose of those teams isn’t to win championships, but to produce MLB caliber talent. In that sense, there also is no level playing field (Chicago Cubs minor league talent over the last 30 years compared to the Yankees).
I want to watch the sport. I just don’t care how it is what it is. I don’t care why or by how much Bonds was helped. I loved every minute I watched of his career. My thought is that if steroids can make you that awesome, I wish they all took them. Can you imagine? 700 players comparable to Barry Bonds and no more comparable to Koyie Hill or Joe Mather? That would be awesome. I could even get behind the level playing field then.
@ SVB:
right, and even if a majority were using, that doesn’t imply that the playing field was level given the uneven extent of the abuse.
@ SVB:
I disagree that you can’t distinguish. No PEDs in amateur sports. If you have the raw talent to reach the majors, and you’re 18/21 or whatever ad you want to spend money improving even more, then that’s fine.
Hey, wrestling has been augmented by PEDs for decades (and currently) and no one even pretends to care. Sure, it’s essentially an extremely athletic form of acting, but it still requires athleticism. And people find it entertaining.
@ mb21:
level playing field just refers to a uniform set of rules for the participants.
in all likelihood, there are tradeoffs between health risks and performance gains as a result of abuse. it’s up to the players to decide what level of usage they will deem as acceptable, and ultimately the fans will validate it by deciding whether or not to watch.
@ mb21:
Of course if everyone were using them, you’re back to raw talent, right? If we assume everyone was using to achieve their innate maximum point, whereas before everyone was not using (nudge nudge) and only achieved 90% of their full potential (with rare exceptions). But everyone has a different max point…
So you have basically the same sport but more extreme? Maybe you get 2 runs if you hit one more than 500 feet or something.
I think football played between robots (a la Cyberball) would be pretty entertaining.
The one thing maybe you lose is that sense of potential. If you know everyone is playing to the best of their ability, there’s less room for growth. That could potentially stagnate the sport. Or develop an arms-race sub-industry of the latest/greatest drugs.
I don’t know. Actually, that seems pretty lame-o.
josh wrote:
I don’t like thinking about PEDs or economic disparity in sports. It makes me not like sports.
I also never cared for Barry Bonds.
@ josh:
WTF? Is he like the Kim DeJesus of baseball to you?
Barry Bonds was awesome x 2 or 288. Whether or not he was on steroids.
@ Rice Cube:
I liked Sosa better than Bonds, but Bonds was obviously the better player. Helped that I grew up in CA and got to follow his career as a Giant.
@ Rice Cube:
It wasn’t a steroids statement. I just didn’t like him. Maybe b/c he was just a guy who came into town and beat up on my team, I don’t know. I still think he should be in the HOF. Whatever methods he used to be the second best baseball player of all time, you can’t deny that he was more the HOF worthy.
I also hate the shit out of Chipper Jones, if that makes you feel any better.
Where in the book does it say I can’t dislike players who beat up on my team? I’m still an ape, you know.
@ josh:
Oh no, then that’s cool. Bonds was an asshole. I just liked that he murdered baseballs for a team I followed.
@ josh:
I think I’m okay with people hating certain players as long as they’re still logical enough to recognize that those players are good at sports.
It’s kind of like how Green Bay has been sucking lately and all of a sudden it’s a bunch of “Aaron Rodgers sucks” comments on Facebook. Rodgers is still good at football, but it seems to me that the suck is because of his O-line and receivers, and not so much Rodgers himself.
/Cal
It’s been over 10 years since I watched, but I used to be a pro-wrestling fan back in the day. And if there was ever a saberist equivalent of a wrestling fan, I was that, too.
@ Rice Cube:
That’s just silly. I confine team loyalty to a season. I may not like Manny Ramirez or how he elevated the Dodgers team and allowed them to beat the Cubs in 2008, but that doesn’t mean I don’t recognize that Manny was damn good.
@ Mish:
Did you make up your own metrics like wSuplex and Turnbuckle Prowess (TBP)?
@ josh:
Ah, I wasn’t talking about you, just other people. My bad, no offense intended.
@ Rice Cube:
Too late. We have to settle this in the Thunderdome now.
@ josh:
Thank goodness I always keep my weapons close at hand.
(dying laughing) at the University of Minnesota at Crookston.
@ Rice Cube:
I don’t know what that weapon is called, but I imagine it’s called a splub.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/qa-albert-almora-cubs-first-round-pick/
@ josh:
I think it’s called a “lirpa”.
mb21 wrote:
Fine, I’ll say it. That’s not what “level playing field” means. It means that everyone plays by one set of rules and people don’t get ahead by breaking them. Is wanting that really such a bad thing? And I’m fine with outlawing PED’s since allowing them might encourage detrimental behavior (maybe one day when steroids are safe we can re-examine such policies). And as long as they’re outlawed, I’m going to root for the cheaters to get caught.
I guess as far as Roids go, I don’t necessarily have a problem with an adult putting whatever into his/her body, as MB likes to say (unless they’e my kid’s bus driver, or a trucker on the freeway I’m driving down, etc.). But there can be greater societal costs if those substances do have a lot of negative health effects. A pro athlete can pay their own healthcare costs, for the most part, but there is a problem if a guy goes bankrupt paying for healthcare after using a substance he was basically forced to use when he went pro. Look at the situation with football players and concussions. They are told to play through them and now there is rampant negative effects, some of them on people who don’t have the money to pay for care any longer.
I guess I fall in the camp of I don’t think any one should be barred from the HOF for steroids, unless they are borderline, MAYBE. But I don’t know if the other extreme of let them dope as much as they want is a good idea either. I’d say more quality research is needed on the positives and negatives, but of course that’s difficult b/c those substances are often illegal.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
I agree with you there. If we had more research on the effects and they could be used safely with medical supervision, then fine, but some peope using them while others try to play by the supposed rules leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
I would say I don’t really care about the HOF question. The only thing that bothers me is inconsistency. If you raise a stink about Barry Bonds, you’d better raise a stink about Gaylord Perry and Whitey Ford, as well.
Right on cue for this PEDs discussion is Eric Gagne’s “revelation” that 80% of his teammates were cheating. I guess he has a new book coming out.
http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/video/player/news/30699065#news/30693901
The only thing that is surprising about that is that Eric Gagne is apparently out of money.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
Agreed, but the problem with raising a stink over every player who breaks the rules is that you’ll be raising a lot of stink. I see breaking the rules as part of the game because it’s been a part of the game forever and will always be a part of it. If I cared about such things I wouldn’t even bother being a fan. Let them do what they want to do and if they get caught, they get caught. I don’t care one way or the other.
As far as I know, those who used PEDs are following the rules of the game. They’re playing 9 inning games, not batting out of turn, not skipping over bases or getting 4 strikes and only 3 balls. Why anybody cares what these guys do away from the game is just something I’ll never understand. But yes, if someone is breaking the rules in a baseball game then by all means they should be punished. Unless these PED users were shooting up in the dugout between innings I don’t see what they did as breaking the rules. Same thing can be said for gambling unless one person is intentionally throwing a game. As long as he is trying to win, I don’t care how much he gambles on the game. I don’t even care if he bets against his own team as long as he’s trying to win.
@ mb21:
Do you honestly think that the violation has to occur during the game in order to be cheating? What about bribing the other team to lose? Or breaking their legs? The rules do proscribe off-field behaviors, whether you care or not.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
Like I said, as long as they’re trying to win I don’t care. Breaking someone legs off the field (or on it) is a legal issue (like steroids). As for bribing the other team to lose, I don’t have a problem with the team bribing (might be a legal issue, but not a baseball issue), but I would have a problem with the team who accepted the bribe and tried to lose.
The entire point of professional sports is to win games. If you want honor, follow Little League. Even there you’ll find a shitload of cheating.
What about bribing or threatening umpires, then? You OK with that? And no, it’s not about honor; it’s about justice. Most fans(including me) want to see teams win honestly with their skills, effort, and luck. Winning via something else (sneakiness, intimidation, etc.) misses the point.
Rizzo the Rat wrote:
It’s a legal issue.
Rizzo the Rat wrote:
Most fans are still waiting for that team to win honestly with their skills, effort and luck.
Just because it’s never been perfectly realized doesn’t mean it’s irrational to want that ideal and to support efforts to move towards it.
I’d even like to see this just because it’s never been done. It would be like witnessing history.
@ mb21:
See my above post.
I mean, do I really have to post a list of things that it’s rational to want that will never by fully realized? It would be a long list.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
I’d say wanting something that’s not possible is irrational. I’m not trying to change your mind. You won’t change mine. I’ve had this discussion many times and I don’t care any more about what these guys do away from the field than I did after the first time I had it. It’s not my business. As long as these guys show up to work and do their best then I’m perfectly happy. How they do it is just something I couldn’t care less about. I don’t care about fairness in sports.
mb21 wrote:
How so? Wanting a world without violent crime does not entail believing that it will happen. It does mean being happy when it goes down, being unhappy with its continued existence, and supporting efforts to deter it. Which of these things is irrational? So it is with cheating. Less cheating = more happy.
“Wanting” is simply a preference, not an expectation. Wanting a world without rape means believing that a world without rape would be better than the one we live in now, all else being equal.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
violence is actually something that can be lessened. You aren’t going to lessen cheating in sports. All you’ll do is force players to cheat differently. If that’s the goal, sports has done a fantastic job at making the not so intelligent professional athlete come up with creative ways of cheating (and not getting caught).
Wanting sports without cheating is fine and dandy, but expecting any measure to create less cheating is similar to creating legislation to make it rain. Speaking of that, I’m kind of surprised our government hasn’t done that.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
There’s reasonable expectation that things can be done to decrease rape. Testing for steroids isn’t going to decrease cheating in baseball. It’s completely unreasonable to think there will be less cheating in baseball in 50 years. There’s really nothing that can be done to lessen cheating in sports. They’ll just find different ways.
@ mb21:
disagree completely. there’s no reason to think that all forms of cheating are equally efficacious.
By the way, I’ve never said to do away with the rules that they currently have in place. the MLBPA agreed to it so they get to suffer the consequences when they’re caught. I’m just saying it doesn’t matter to me who is taking steroids and who isn’t.
@ GW:
That’s true, but if methods are less effective they’ll just be more prevalent. Everyone took amphetamines. All the pitchers doctored the baseballs. Everyone didn’t take steroids.
Oh yeah, doctoring a baseball is far and away the most effective way to cheat. Done nowadays and the fans laugh. “look at the pitcher doctoring the ball. ha ha ha ha ha.”
It’s not so much who cheats that I’m talking about, but the existence of cheating and its undesirability for most fans. It used to be very common to bribe and threaten umpires, cut corners on the basepaths and grab opponents’ beltloops, and I would argue that the game is much better now that that’s no longer the case.
@ mb21:
again, disagree. there’s no “law of conservation of ill-gotten gains.”
Rizzo the Rat wrote:
Have you been watching the 2012 Cubs?
@ mb21:
Not lately. Are they still in the Wild Card hunt?
@ Rizzo the Rat:
I think so. The games wouldn’t be so exciting if they weren’t.
Sorry for killing the thread with my query on steroids, I was mostly interested in empirical evidence of their effects and not so much on the morality (dying laughing)
Re: cheating, I’d much rather everyone played fair, but I agree that’s never going to happen. You’ll always have guys going out of their way to take out the pivot man on the double-play, stealing signs, looking for tipped pitches, and trying to doctor the baseball wherever possible. And that’s just baseball. Like you’ve never glanced at your neighbor’s cards while playing Uno, right?
Seems like every time I turn on the cubs they’re behind and it’s the 1st inning.
@ Rice Cube:
I take UNO too seriously to do such a thing.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
THIS THIS THIS. Thanks. Unfortunately I can be a hit-and-run blog commenter because I rarely have time to check non-work stuff during the day except at lunch. But I agree with every one of your comments here.
I know mb21′s opinion on this because he’s stated it lots of times and I’ve given it some thought because I think he’s a thoughtful guy. I think he is in the small minority in his opinions on this subject, but possible not within the OV community, which is why I posted comment 68, because the assertion that the roids didn’t really matter because the players still had to go the gym didn’t ring true to me.
I think the logical outcome of MBs approach to cheating is essentially anarchy in sports. Even though MLBPA agreed to a contract with new drug testing rules, that doesn’t change the fact that the roiders were still cheating before because the contract prohibited illegal activity. The new contract better codifies consequences. Attempting to rein in cheating is an admirable goal if not completely attainable, just as it attempting to rid politics of corruption. If sports turned a blind eye to all off-field activities, I would expect that eventually some NFL team would be made up of 25 Rae Carruths. Would the fans root for that team? I hope not.
MB, in comment 70, you suggested that a sport where everyone was roided up would be awesome to watch. Josh laid it out. WWF or whatever it is now. Is that awesome? I haven’t liked it since I was 14, and I thought meh even then, when they claimed it was real.
Josh, you can’t distinguish. Will roids be legal only if you are a pro? At that point does the NCAA then call itself a pro league? Is semi-pro hockey pro or not? If roids make you this much more competitive at the amateur level so you can go pro, then how do you stop them? If they make you that much more competitive in HS to get noticed by a scout or into a BCS school, how do you stop them? I don’t think you can distinguish, and like it or not, the pros set the example that the rest emulate.
Who the hell is this Berken guy? It seems like every other day they put someone I never heard of on the mound.
I never likes wrestling. I’ve always liked baseball. The only thing that will make me like baseball is to not play baseball.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
He stinks.
Berken ain’t workin’ so far.
@ mb21:
Make NOT like baseball
Rice Cube wrote:
My 5 year old can’t hold 8 cards at once, so she lays them out on the table, face up, of course.
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
On the KC-Detroit Gameday, Alcides Escobar got credited with a “swinging pitchout”…I’ve never seen that before, although Escobar was just trying to protect the runner who got thrown out anyway.
@ Rice Cube:
You get the Instigator badge for the day.
@ SVB:
Should tell her to hold as many as she can and Kay the rest on the table. She’s got to learn to take UNO more seriously (dying laughing)
@ SVB:
My kid used to do that too. Made it very easy to win
@ SVB:
Well, I was just curious as to how much steroids actually contributed. I get tired of people saying so definitively that “steroids improve Skill X” or “you can attribute X% of performance to steroids” and my immediate reaction is “O RLY” because they’ve offered no evidence other than their opinion that they’ve stated as fact.
Fuckin phone can’t spell shit.
Rice Cube wrote:
Maybe THAT is the mysterious new market inefficiency we’ve been searching for.
@ mb21:
Seems to have spelled “shit” just fine that time. (dying laughing)
UNO (dying laughing) (dying laughing)
@ mb21:
Don’t you have an iPad with a keyboard?
/troll
@ SVB:
I don’t know, man. I don’t really like steroids. It violates my sense of propriety. I would be for more research, though.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
Waiver guy they got to replace Mardge.
@ mb21:
What if they had to institute new rules because everyone was juiced. Move the mound back. Make a special target worth bonus points. Change it so you have to hit a wicket on the fly to get a guy out at home because the monster roid ragers already killed three catchers (Koy Hill was the first victim)? I don’t know, seems like open doping could change the game.
This is one of those years I really wish I had a time machine so I could go back and bet that Samardzija would have a better year than Halladay and Lincecum.
@ josh:
BLERN
@ Rizzo the Rat:
He must have got his hands on some GREAT steroids.
@ Rice Cube:
The only word you said that meant anything in that sentence was BLERN.
The #2 pick is the Cubs’ to lose now.
Is Brett Jackson not playing anymore or something
@ SVB:
Autocorrected it to all caps. (dying laughing)
@ josh:
They had open doping and the fans lived every moment.
Lived loved same thing. (dying laughing)
@ mb21:
I gotta admit, I quit watching baseball in the prime steroid times. It was mostly coincidence, though.
I also admit I like looking at Zooey.
That sister of hers, though. What’s up with that face?
To me Big Mac was the biggest offender of the Roid Era. Because fuck the Cards!
@ mb21:
Flu.
According to Carrie, he’s feeling better, but the last couple starters were lefties, so he’s still been benched.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
Must’ve gotten a cold from all the wind he whipped up with all those whiffs.
/rimshot
I think we’ve determined why Lendy Castillo almost never pitches.
@ Rice Cube:
No, no, no. He had the flu, so you have to do a flu joke. Like, he generated enough lift from all those swinging strikes that he flu off the ground.
That was truly terrible. I apologize for that last post.
@ Rizzo the Rat:
Everyone’s a critic.
It appears the Cubs TOOTBLANed their way out of a sac fly again. Waiting for the replay on Gameday, but that’s what it sounds like.
The rain delay theater guy on WGN is wondering whether you’d want Sammy Sosa back. He wouldn’t and doesn’t think the Cubs should bring him back.
I’m tempted to call in and yell at him.
1. steroids
2. corked bat
3. walking out
RC says:
http://worldseriesdreaming.com/2012/09/24/top-ten-list-ten-reactions-wsd-well-just-rice-really-has-for-people-who-dont-like-sammy-sosa/
Miraculous come-from-behind that starts an epic season-spanning 37 game win streak here we come!
According to Hoyer, the Cubs will be active on the free market!
I think it’s fascinating that nobody in the American League has clinched a playoff spot yet.
@ Rice Cube:
A’s and O’s are giving their respective divisions everything they can handle. Who would have thought that would be the case? It’d be cool if they both ended up on top.
@ Rice Cube:
At least order has been restored in the AL Central now that the Tigers are back on top.
josh wrote:
I too much prefer ZD over KDJ.
Buster Olney tweet:
Buster Olney @Buster_ESPN
Pretty cool news: The Marlins are going to give Adam Greenberg an at-bat next week. Nice gesture by Jeffrey Loria and David Samson…
Yay.
Referees are back tonight for football:
I need to quite my job and become a ref. Work less than half the year and make $200K? Where do I sign up?
@ WaLi:
How many touchceptions are you going to call, though?
@ WaLi:
I’ve always wondered what a bunch of amateurs refereeing NFL games would look like!
@ GBTS:
I’ll just take steroids and yell alot with very drawn out explanations of why I did what I did like Hocculi (sp). And when i review a play I’ll take 10 minutes to do it, so the NFL has enough time to throw several commercials up during the break (need to earn my salary).
@ Rice Cube:
Six and a half. Catching a player is harder than catching a ball, so they will be worth 8 points.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zaq5pWodP2k
You just got served.
By an arthropod.
There’s almost nothing to write about with regards to this team. It’s depressing.
@ mb21:
Jed Hoyer says the Cubs are gonna spend.
The Marlins are giving Adam Greenberg an AB.
Darwin Barney could tie Placido Polanco for the errorless 2B streak today.
This team sucks.
@ mb21:
I’ve noticed this as well.
If you only look at offense, then Joe Mather has garnered us one loss. Hopefully, Thoyer are going to bring in the kind of talent that can cost us multiple wins at league minimum. We’re trying to lose games here, people.
@ josh:
Rice Cube wrote:
For single season, right? He’ll still have to go into next season to pass him entirely, correct?
@ mb21:
Correct. Single-season consecutive streak is 141. I forgot how long the total streak was. There are six games after this one so Barney could conceivably get this all the way to 147 before next year.
It’s a bit of a hokey record because Barney was at SS for a game and made one or two errors there. Then there are days off and what not, but I don’t actually think Barney has had a day off in forever. Not to mention the couple of plays that could’ve been errors if not for a generous official scorer.
This of course doesn’t take away from the fact that Barney is an excellent defensive player.
@ Rice Cube:
Probably all the steroids.
new shit: http://www.obstructedview.net/news-and-rumors/hoyer-we-will-have-financial-flexibility.html
I bet what you say about Barney getting some breaks applies just as well to Polanco’s streak. Not a big deal.
@ Rice Cube:
I have no problem with the streak as it is. SS is a different position and shouldn’t be considered. You could look at any streak this long and there will be a handful of plays that could have gone either way (hit or error). You don’t get to this many games without a friendly call here or there.
I think the record for 2B is 157.
Watch Sports Live On Your PC And Never Miss Another Game Again. No Contacts,No Hassles Just A One Off Payment For 24/7 Access To Your Favorite Sports. http://bit.ly/watch-sports-live