|
brandiniWeb Site: The Outsiders Look at the Insides of Baseball BallHype Member since June 14, 2007 |
Comments Posted
The A-Rod Roundtable
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini Really? Albert Pujols has played the same percentage of games at Coors Field as Matt Holliday has? Wait, Coors Field was up and running in the 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s?
There is a large amount of evidence to support the FACT that the ballparks have become more hitter friendly in recent years. Because of this, there is very little evidence to support the fact that steroids actually improve the performance of baseball players.
That being said, is there any surprise that 3 of Rodriguez's 5 most powerful seasons occurred in such a hitter friendly atmosphere in Texas? Not at all. But with the recent news of steroids, most are going to link those seasons to the juice instead of the obvious inflation of the ballpark.
But let's get this out there. Give me your, 100%, absolutely, without a doubt, accurate, to the one, prediction of the amount of ballplayers who used steroids. Please and thank you.
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini Jack,
I never ONCE said that it was okay for people to use steroids, NOT ONCE! What I said is that I can understand a ballplayer using-given that everyone else was doing so without a penalty.
Put this in a real-world perspective. If the penalty for speeding was death, do you think anyone would go one mile over the speed limit? Probably, but a lot fewer. Especially if it was enforced the way parking is in any major city.
But the fact is, the average citizen knows they can speed and get away with it. They know, if they are caught the penalty will be minimal. You yourself probably don't think twice about driving 5 over in the 'speeding' lane.
SO yes, I understand WHY a player used. I don't think that makes it alright, but it also doesn't make the person unethical. The same way going 1 mile over the speed limit doesn't make the vast majority of the population unethical.
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini Ha.
It's not a battle, just a discussion. I'm simply trying to get Marshall to look at things from an open minded perspective. Unfortunately he has already made most of his decisions without looking at the facts or explanations.
For example, Marshall cited the deviance rates in the NFL and NBA without suggesting there may be other factors involved (namely race and SES). Further, he claimed that America desires that their entertainment be 'clean' and 'moral', yet the NFL and NBA are far more popular yet admittedly less-'moral'.
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini Great point.
Let's not forget that pitchers were also pumping their veins full of this stuff. It isn't as if the hitters were stepping to the plate against clean pitchers and had an unfair advantage.
The problem is, people who have decided that the era is 'tainted' or that records should be erased fail to acknowledge that as many pitchers were shooting up as hitters.
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini "Is there another factor in the baseball stats like steroids, that only effected an undetermined percentage of players?"
Yes, ballparks.
Also, if steroids affected an 'undetermined percentage of players' is it not as likely that 100% of the players did steroids as it is to be 35%? A week ago most would have argued that ARod was clean, but after this finding, its tough to imagine any player not being a user.
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini "And,as baseball risks discovering in the near future, people tend to follow sports that have participants whose values they identify with and admire."
I'm sorry, what millenium are we in?
Baseball is at best third fiddle among sports viewers in North America with a legitimate argument that it doesn't even crack the top 5. You had mentioned in your article (and you mention again) that the viewers want to see similar values.
Possibly this is true. However, this would discredit your belief that America is a nation of incredible values given your self-proclaimed analysis that the other sports are certainly less ethical (after all, what baseball team would employ the Cincinnati Bengals?).
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini Jack, you're a lawyer, what's the penalty if busted for doing steroids? Would you suggest that it is greater, less, or equal to getting busted for cheating on an exam in college?
Saying that all forms of cheating are equal is like saying that breaking every law is equal.
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini "Your speeding example is mind-boggling. It doesn't make the presentation any better, or provide an advantage over other competitors."
Wait, steroids, absolutely, without a doubt, improve a players performance? While that is a nice theory, we are yet to see anything to back that up.
That aside, you are right, the act of speeding does not make the presentation itselt better. But are you telling me that if two equally qualified candidates are interviewing for a job, the person who shows up on time/early will not have the immediate leg up?
That is, a person's attire does not make a presentation or have them perform better at the interview, but it does go a long way to 'selling' the product. The same goes for a handshake.
So, Mr Ethical Standards, are you willing to approach your boss and tell him that there is a chance you cheated to get to where you are today? Keep in mind, this means that you have never gone over the speed limit (even 1mph) for anything that has subsequently led to you being in the position you are in now (conference, interview, exam, etc). Even if speeding did not 'enhance' your performance or was simply uneccesary, you still 'cheated' and should subsequently pay the price.
This is what I am infering to when I make my glass house reference. I know other people use it to proclaim others should not judge (which is a hypocritical statement in and of itself). What I am doing, instead, is suggesting that you put your very words into action.
It takes a bigger man to admit their own faults then to point out the faults of another.
But how is this, show up 5-10 minutes late for your next BIG presentation or court date. Do not call with warning or have a reason, simply show up late. Then get back to me and tell how things went
"It is not similar to some players using banned or illegal substances while others did not and assumed they were not."
Others were not? I wish we could go back a week and take a poll regarding Alex Rodriguez's steroid usage. The fact is, every player of that generation is now guilty. Canseco asserted that some 85-90% of players were taking, or had taken something. He claimed that Rodriguez had done juice and everyone scoffed.
The fact is, it is looking more and more likely that as many ballplayers were juiced, as the percentage of drivers who go 1 mile over the speed limit (something I am sure you have never done).
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini "As for the portion of Bonds' career that preceeded PEDs...well, an A student who's caught cheating on his final exam is still kicked out of school. Is that fair? Even if he almost certainly would have done just fine without cheating? Sure."
Different scenario. If the A student was caught cheating and so was everyone else in the world, there would be modifications/accomodations made to circumvent the issue (maybe a re-test, further investigation, etc). If he was alone on an island (as is the case in essentially all cheating scandals in academia) the student would undoubtedly be ripped from something he loves.
Stop linking steroid use to issues that aren't even close.
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini "Baseball just had to be baseball, have compelling stories, players and races, like it always has."
Is that why the years after the work stoppage (95, 96, and 97) were some of the worst years for MLB in recent memory? Is that why, despite being in one of the best American economies in recent history, baseball went from being the uncontested number one economic sport in North America to being number two, maybe number three?
Believe it or not, but 1998 saved baseball.
"No, the integrity of the stats are ruined, and nothing is going to fix them."
So the integrity of baseball in the 20s is ruined because of the racial barriers? Or how about until the 50s when pitchers were scuffing up the balls to get an advantage?
In otherwords, we have about 30 years of honest 'records' and statistics to follow. This from the morally clean America which wouldn't allow anything immoral into their living rooms.
"Calling cheating "keeping up" is a sickening and corrupt concept...I knew people were cheating in college...not enough to change the curve, but they had an edge. It wasn't hard. I still didn't cheat."
Let's look at a few issues here. First you admit that the cheating in college was not enough to change the curve, in other words, it's admittedly an entirely different scenario, and thus illogical to compare. Second, even if the cheating in college was as widespread as steroid use is in baseball (/society at large) we're talking to vastly different punishments. One, expulsion and essentialy the end of an academic career, the other, a small fine and whatever small incidental penalties follow.
Further, you are right, cheating in college is wrong. Doing steroids was wrong. It isn't, however, 'cheating'. From my perspective, it is like speeding to a job interview or rolling a stop sign on the way to a major presentation.
Speeding is wrong and causes far more casualties then steroids, yet all the fathers who are up in arms about their children having tainted role models, don't think twice when going 10 over in a school zone to get little Bobby to soccer practice.
I'm not, nor have I ever suggested that steroid use was fine, rather that it is understandable. Further, I never linked it to other, substantially harsher penalties, such as cheating on an exam, murder, or otherwise.
That said, what I am arguing is that if everyone was doing it (as seems obvious at this point-something you must agree), we were watching a level playing field. If a juiced pitcher is throwing to a juiced hitter who is hitting to juiced fielders, is that not the same as a non-juiced pitcher throwing to a non-juiced hitter who is hitting to non-juiced fielders?
"I never said that baseball executives uphold a higher standard."
You didn't? What about,
"[B]ut baseball is the one professional sport that carries with it a duty to the American culture. Character counts in America, and baseball is bound by history, tradition and its role in legend and myth to make certain that character counts on its playing fields as well. Baseball players, as Bill James quite accurately stated, are paid to be heroes. The sport does not have the raw physical display of football, or the speed of basketball, or the simple-minded appeal of soccer. What it does have that no other professional sport even values very much is integrity, or at least an appreciation that integrity is important."
All that being said, I don't see breaking laws, lying, and cheating as 'Sunday morals', rather, I see the individuals who are throwing stones today as practicing Sunday morals. This is like the individual who goes to Church on Sundays but does not live a God-centered life Monday thru Saturday.The fact is, I don't really care what a ballplayer does in his spare time. I follow baseball because I enjoy baseball, not because of the fascinating people who play the sport. Maybe there are some individuals that need the 'good guy' nostalgic, but that's not for me.
That is, I wouldn't call a player who smokes pot or drives drunk a 'cheater', you might simply because baseball apparently upholds an American-way that has been dead for decades.
The A-Rod Roundtable
-
brandini You really need to limit yourself from grouping 'laws' and 'the rules of baseball' in the same category.
Further, you need to look at yourself in the mirror. You and the rest of the Baseball Tonight fans of the game. This is not based on ethics, this is simply based on baseball doing what it had to to obtain the fans it had lost from the strike. Chicks didn't start diggin the long ball until baseball had dug itself a hole. Fans didn't start pouring through the turnstiles again until home run records were being shattered at an all time high.
Similarly, it is the Baseball Tonight fans who are throwing stones now that the game they built up, the facts they ignored, do not sit well with their Sunday morals.
Further, the fact that anyone would suggest a players records be voluntarily (or otherwise) stricken from history is shameful. As each day passes we are seeing that steroid use was far less 'cheating' then keeping up.
Was it wrong? Sure. Is speeding in a school zone on the way to a job interview wrong? Yes. Does that mean if an individual is running late for an interview they are going to swallow their pride and show up late? Doubtful.
That is, if everyone in baseball is doing it, as is gradually being implied, the 90's and the early part of this decade (even today) has been played on a level playing field. Subsequently, there hasn't been a cheater involved.
One quick question though. What happened to the happy-go-lucky, rose-colored glasses theory that baseball and it's deceitful executives uphold a higher ethical standard?
The baseball ethicist: why nobody signed Barry Bonds
-
brandini Answer:
Jack Marshall will not admit to being wrong ever. He will simply suggest that the point is not vital to his argument and blame you for making a bigger deal then it is.
The baseball ethicist: why nobody signed Barry Bonds
-
brandini "His pal and trainer rotted in jail..."
He was recently released as it was found to be un-ethical to keep a man in jail who was telling the truth. Interesting how baseball ought to uphold mde-up ethical standards but the courts do not.
The baseball ethicist: why nobody signed Barry Bonds
-
brandini RE: The Gold Glove
We all know the Gold Glove is not rewarded to the fielder who is the best, rather the one who makes the most flashy plays. Given that Pujols missed half a month of the season, it's not a huge surprise that he didn't win the award despite being largely more qualified. You did get the memo that Pujols won the MVP award, right?
RE: Pujols Allegations
That you don't even recall this is proof of the quality job the media did. Even Mr Marshall and his limited understanding of baseball recalls this issue.
RE: Hypothesis
The fact was that media hated Bonds and loves Pujols. I then posed a question based on that fact.
RE: 9 out of 10
I imagine I undershot this 'fact', although the figure was obviously more to make a point then a fact. The FACT was that a vast majority dislike Bonds. Whether it's 9 out of 10, 85 out of 100, or 93, 786, 546, 982, 320 out of 100, 000, 000, 000, 000 is meaningless. Certainly if I did a survey and posted it on a message board it would hold an ounce more credibility but does the fact differ? Can you honestly tell me that you believe most baseball writers like Bonds? Keep in mind these are the same baseball writers who essentially axed Bonds when was charged with perjury (something that is all but certain to be dropped) - boy, won't their faces be red!
It's awfully nice that you came to the defence of Mr Marshall, but you didn't offer anything to the conversation-much like Mr Marshall.
The baseball ethicist: why nobody signed Barry Bonds
-
brandini In regards to Roger Clemens,
Even with a pending trial, there is much less association between steroids and Rocket then there is with Bonds. Had Clemens not made himself look like an incompetent fool around the time of the Mitchell Report, I'm certain the majority of the media would still be clasping his reer.
The fact is, Bonds is an easy target for a media that already does not approve of him. Much like Bush and the American presidency.
The baseball ethicist: why nobody signed Barry Bonds
-
brandini "You have a warped idea of how one is supposed to use analogy and argument. I'm supposed to examine every college and college conference, with polls to prove which actually constitute a national following? Baloney. The argument that college athletics belong in a discussion of professional sports' ethical impact within the national culture is weak and misguided...and tangential."
Fine then! Don't use an argument that is 'weak and misguided...and tangential'. That is my point! Between the college issue and several of your arguments made in the article I'm trying to figure out what exactly your evidence. I mean, is that how you debate? When proven wrong you simply assert that the point is of lesser relevance?
Don't place this on me, not in the least bit. This is all about you sir. You are the one that grabs an issue and runs with it until one points out the fallacies within your statement.
In regards to you stating I am wrong with my opinions, could you give me some educated and rationale proof? Could you point out with FACTS that I am incorrect?
The problem is, I am more then happy to think about new ideas. I would have absolutely no problem with a reasonable explanation against Bonds and certainly would accept it, if factual. What I am not going to accept is a mis-mash of made up facts and analogies.
That's all I wanted and asked for. That was the point of my articles, to prove that what you were saying was ignorant and incorrect. That's why I pulled it apart on multiple levels with FACTS.
So Mr Marshall, can you do the same thing. Can you show me why baseball execs should follow a make-belief American cultural standard? Can you tell me how few people truly CARE about this standard? Can you tell me why one individual, who's legacy was not even remotely made due to steroids, should be the poster-child for steroids? Can you prove me wrong that statistically, Bonds would have been at least an average DH (playing for the league minimum)?
Just step up to the plate with FACTS and prove me wrong.
The baseball ethicist: why nobody signed Barry Bonds
-
brandini Actually, Pujols was linked with the big amphetamine bust at the beginning of this season. The link was eventually dropped, but it should have been a much larger story then it was.
The baseball ethicist: why nobody signed Barry Bonds
-
brandini But you are missing my point. Whether or not this is relavent to your argument, the fact remains, that you are hand picking your facts. When they are challenged you proclaim that is not the focus of your article.
Yes there are lots of Yankees fans all over, but how many Blue Jays fans are outside of Canada? No there isn't a lot of support for BC across the board in America, but there is a great deal of support for the bigger schools all over.
The baseball ethicist: why nobody signed Barry Bonds
-
brandini You pick and choose your examples carefully. Why Boston College? One of the smallest, least popular schools in division one. Why not Miami? Ohio St? USC? Michigan? Notre Dame? Texas? Penn St?
Check out the TV ratings of nationally televised games in either sport. Check out the TV ratings of the World Series v. NBA Finals. Check the dropping Little League enrollment rates.
You need to wake up from the 60s Mr Marshall. Baseballs influence on the 40 and under population is substantially less then Football, Basketball, NASCAR, Golf, even UFC.
Yea, MLB is way more popular then NBA which draws larger audiences and has a larger following.
Oh Jack, you aren't getting to me. You just don't know how to read. You are the one who suggested the NFL and NBA are less moral. You are the one who suggested that America leaches to morality. If these are both true (as you tried to illustrate with your poorly used 20 point scale) the NFL and NBA would be far less popular.
However, we both know that both sports are far more popular in America. This subsequently negates your theory that America wants morality-America simply wants to be entertained! For example, people could not get enough of baseball while a bunch of juiced up freaks were crushing the ball out of stadiums in 98.