Ryan Braun Suspended Remainder of Season for PEDs
-
robj55
Yep, this pretty much sums it all up. In these guys eyes' they have already won.Azubuike24;1477687 wrote:Melky Cabrera is the poster boy. First 5 years of MLB service time, 6M total. 2012-14, 22M total.
His reputation is in the toilet. He's one more suspension from being done. Guess what though? He's laughing all the way to 25M+ in career earnings after a career trajectory that had him destined to be a bench player.
I'd say at any given moment in MLB, 40-60% of the everyday hitters and pitchers could lose their permanent or starting roles in any given year. Why the hell would you NOT take PEDS?
I've taken a few cycles of different PEDS, injectable and oral, just to experiment and for recreational use. Are you telling me that if we had millions on the line and had THREE strikes before a lifetime ban, and a half-assed testing process that is easy to bypass that you wouldn't take them?
That paragraph above makes me believe that literally 90% or more of the sport (hitters, pitchers alike) were juicing in the late 80's, 90's and early 2000's. The only ones who weren't were those who genuinely had a moral belief not to. -
bases_loaded
Azubuike24;1477692 wrote:Then again, I'm also of the opinion that Phil Mickelson taking Humara for Rheumatoid Arthritis is just as much CHEATING as someone taking Dbol for mass building.
It's a joke because Phil is probably on a vegan diet and R.A. is something that is 100% reversible and the fault of the individual who has it. By taking that, Mickelson is bypassing "natural selection and ability" that is being enhanced (covered up) by a legalized drug.
It's a ****ing joke. And he just won the British Open...and how much more money tacked onto his hundreds of millions?
The fuck? -
Azubuike24
In short? Steroids are as harmless as many of the garbage pharmaceutical drugs prescribed to millions of people and many athletes. You just have to know what they do, how they work and what adjustments to make. All of it is covering up some sort of biological deficiency. Why are some illegal (and a societal no-no) and others are the status quo? It's messed up.bases_loaded;1477707 wrote:The ****?
Could Phil win without the Humara? No. He couldn't even swing a club... -
bases_loaded
So not being as strong and quick as someone is the same as an autoimmune disease?
-
Azubuike24
It's all part of natural selection and "God given" talent. That's all we hear about, right? Who is the best without ANY enhancements?
Part of it is railing on Mickelson's diet regimen, which is absolutely contributing to him needing that drug, as almost all auto-immune conditions are reversible. Still. What's the difference? If it was all meant to happen naturally, and you start throwing in enhancements, where do you draw the line?
Same with guys having Lasik surgery. Or pitchers having unneeded Tommy John surgery, to try to come back stronger. That's also becoming more common.
Then again, I believe EVERYTHING should be legal, the cream will rise to the top. The smartest and most intelligent will rise to the top. Until that happens, in no sport or even field of industry do you have 100% equality. -
bases_loaded
Phil is taking something so he can function like everyone else. Braun is taking something to have an advantage over everyone else.
-
Azubuike24
"Function like everyone else."
This is stupid. Who says he has the God given right to function in that capacity? Survival of the fittest. Any medication that helps your health and performance is consider a PED. I don't care if it's legal or not.
What if an athlete has low Test levels? Should he be able to use it? What is "normal?" What if there is an athlete with unusually high T levels? Can I take as much Test as I want, hoping to "function like that guy" I'm competing against? -
like_that
Gotta love the culture Bud Selig established with the MLB and steroids.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the MLB: Media won't stfu about it, people pretend the user is the worst human being in the world, he is suspended much longer than any other league, the petty baseball writers will never give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to voting in anything, and we so far have a 3 page thread dedicated to a suspension lol.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the NFL: Suspended for 4 games, nobody talks about it.
Way to go Selig. -
Rotinaj
Keep the lulz coming Azu. Good stuff! -
Classyposter58
Yeah but baseball is different. Some guy juices up and he might get a few more sacks, thing is everyone is so damn big it doesn't have as huge as an impact. Bonds and McGuire juice up and they set records with 70 HR's, no one has cleared more than 54 since thenlike_that;1477868 wrote:Gotta love the culture Bud Selig established with the MLB and steroids.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the MLB: Media won't stfu about it, people pretend the user is the worst human being in the world, he is suspended much longer than any other league, the petty baseball writers will never give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to voting in anything, and we so far have a 3 page thread dedicated to a suspension lol.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the NFL: Suspended for 4 games, nobody talks about it.
Way to go Selig. -
like_that
Except you are missing out on the fact that football is 10000x more physical than baseball, and taking PEs gives these players the ability to recover more quickly and feel 100% every game.Classyposter58;1477944 wrote:Yeah but baseball is different. Some guy juices up and he might get a few more sacks, thing is everyone is so damn big it doesn't have as huge as an impact. Bonds and McGuire juice up and they set records with 70 HR's, no one has cleared more than 54 since then -
robj55
Not to mention it's much more dangerous in football, these guys can seriously hurt each other, not so much in baseball.like_that;1477868 wrote:Gotta love the culture Bud Selig established with the MLB and steroids.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the MLB: Media won't stfu about it, people pretend the user is the worst human being in the world, he is suspended much longer than any other league, the petty baseball writers will never give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to voting in anything, and we so far have a 3 page thread dedicated to a suspension lol.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the NFL: Suspended for 4 games, nobody talks about it.
Way to go Selig. -
Ironman92
like_that;1477868 wrote:Gotta love the culture Bud Selig established with the MLB and steroids.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the MLB: Media won't stfu about it, people pretend the user is the worst human being in the world, he is suspended much longer than any other league, the petty baseball writers will never give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to voting in anything, and we so far have a 3 page thread dedicated to a suspension lol.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the NFL: Suspended for 4 games, nobody talks about it.
Way to go Selig.
And sadly...you aren't exaggerating at all. -
Azubuike24
By far the biggest advantage of PED's in baseball isn't necessarily an ehnancement of any physical skill. Sure, can it make you hit the ball further? Throw the ball harder? Possibly, for some guys. The biggest advantage is the ability to recover from playing 162 games in 180 days and maybe even do some other additional training work on the side. I know back when I played, we did very little non-sport specific related training during the season. I'd imagine the normal season is enough of the grind, and combining that with long travel, messed up circadian rhythms and sleep schedules makes it very taxing compared to the normal person.
-
Heretic
Depending on perspective, it's not really much longer than other leagues, although I do agree with the rest (particularly the attention -- the only NFL roider in recent times I remember getting a lot of attention was Merriman and that was mainly because he was so much worse after coming back). NFL is 4/16 games for a first-timer (25% of the season), while MLB is 50 games for a first-timer generally out of a 162 game season (app. 31% of the season).like_that;1477868 wrote:Gotta love the culture Bud Selig established with the MLB and steroids.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the MLB: Media won't stfu about it, people pretend the user is the worst human being in the world, he is suspended much longer than any other league, the petty baseball writers will never give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to voting in anything, and we so far have a 3 page thread dedicated to a suspension lol.
Player gets caught taking PEs in the NFL: Suspended for 4 games, nobody talks about it.
Way to go Selig.
But yeah, baseball is the only sport where "INTEGRITY OF THE GAME" gets thrown around like a sledgehammer. Which is funny when you consider how it's only used when it's the commish's office that's pissed off. I didn't hear Selig talking about "INTEGRITY OF THE GAME" when he decided to make the All-Star game determine home field advantage in the World Series or decided baseball needed a strict DRAFT salary cap in order to sabotage smaller-market teams' attempts to rebuild through development or any of the other moronic decision's HE has made. -
thavoice4 games in the NFL is 25% of the season. Just in case you were referencing Von Miller case...His wasn't PED. In the NFL if you test positive for weed and other rec drugs you go into a program, your second offense gets you a 4 game rip. PEDs do give you a 4 game on the first offense. People give Selig a very hard time. Did he turn a blind eye to it early on as an owner like every other owner did? Sure did. As a commissioner though he has brought about PED testing, HGH testing soon I think, harsher penalties so he must be doing something right. In June of 1991 Fay Vincent sent a memo to all teams regarding the use of ANY illegal or drugs no prescribed to players. Selig did the same in 1997. Thing thing is...there was no testing so a guy basically had to be busted with it. Baseball is more of a numbers game than football and I think that is part of the reason why people get more fed up with it.
-
thavoice
I am not sure that the draft salary cap is bad for smaller market teams. To my knowledge it was put into place to FIX that shit. Too many teams, mostly small market, would pass up on guys because they knew it would cost too much to sign them. I was lead to believe the changes capped some things so smaller teams could still draft the players and afford them moreso than in the past. Or teams would draft a guy high knowing he wouldn't sign, like the reds did to that one pitcher, who went to Vandy I think, then was drafted by the Indians....forget his name.Heretic;1477972 wrote:Depending on perspective, it's not really much longer than other leagues, although I do agree with the rest (particularly the attention -- the only NFL roider in recent times I remember getting a lot of attention was Merriman and that was mainly because he was so much worse after coming back). NFL is 4/16 games for a first-timer (25% of the season), while MLB is 50 games for a first-timer generally out of a 162 game season (app. 31% of the season).
But yeah, baseball is the only sport where "INTEGRITY OF THE GAME" gets thrown around like a sledgehammer. Which is funny when you consider how it's only used when it's the commish's office that's pissed off. I didn't hear Selig talking about "INTEGRITY OF THE GAME" when he decided to make the All-Star game determine home field advantage in the World Series or decided baseball needed a strict DRAFT salary cap in order to sabotage smaller-market teams' attempts to rebuild through development or any of the other moronic decision's HE has made. -
Heretic
No, what was happening in recent years was teams like Pittsburgh (Pedro, Cole, Taillon) and Washington (Strasburg, Harper) were signing their early round picks to HUGE contracts most every year. KC and Baltimore also were doing that, I think. Like, one example for the Pirates was a couple years ago. Josh Bell, a super-highly regarded high schooler from Texas was adamant that no one should waste a pick on him because he was going to school. Pirates drafted him in the second round and gave him high first-round money (like $5M). Bell changed his mind about college. And they were doing things like that on a lesser level all the time, drafting interesting looking guys in later rounds and giving them above-slot bonuses to "bribe" the ones they wanted to forego college.thavoice;1477991 wrote:I am not sure that the draft salary cap is bad for smaller market teams. To my knowledge it was put into place to FIX that shit. Too many teams, mostly small market, would pass up on guys because they knew it would cost too much to sign them. I was lead to believe the changes capped some things so smaller teams could still draft the players and afford them moreso than in the past. Or teams would draft a guy high knowing he wouldn't sign, like the reds did to that one pitcher, who went to Vandy I think, then was drafted by the Indians....forget his name.
It was the closest to an equalizer small market teams had. They couldn't outbid the Yankees or Dodgers for the top free agents, but they could pay tons of money for prospects and build a winner through their system. And so it was quashed. -
thavoice
So what changed about it? Only so much $$ to spend? I honestly don't know. All I do recall though is that the rule changes at the time talked about how it was supposed to change the fact that some small market teams were passing on top talent because of salary demands that the players were going to want, so instead of getting the best player at 1 they had to pick a lesser one. Maybe the rule change helped one thing but not the other? Could this new rule have helped a team like the Nats get Harper and Strasburg because there was a limit that any team could offer?Heretic;1477999 wrote:No, what was happening in recent years was teams like Pittsburgh (Pedro, Cole, Taillon) and Washington (Strasburg, Harper) were signing their early round picks to HUGE contracts most every year. KC and Baltimore also were doing that, I think. Like, one example for the Pirates was a couple years ago. Josh Bell, a super-highly regarded high schooler from Texas was adamant that no one should waste a pick on him because he was going to school. Pirates drafted him in the second round and gave him high first-round money (like $5M). Bell changed his mind about college. And they were doing things like that on a lesser level all the time, drafting interesting looking guys in later rounds and giving them above-slot bonuses to "bribe" the ones they wanted to forego college.
It was the closest to an equalizer small market teams had. They couldn't outbid the Yankees or Dodgers for the top free agents, but they could pay tons of money for prospects and build a winner through their system. And so it was quashed. -
Heretic
Yeah, it puts a cap on how much you can offer determined by the round you draft guys in. Which basically prevents teams from doing, as I said the Pirates had gotten fond of doing, drafting guys who seemed interested in college, and so weren't big draft targets, in lower rounds and then giving them high round money.thavoice;1478001 wrote:So what changed about it? Only so much $$ to spend? I honestly don't know. All I do recall though is that the rule changes at the time talked about how it was supposed to change the fact that some small market teams were passing on top talent because of salary demands that the players were going to want, so instead of getting the best player at 1 they had to pick a lesser one. Maybe the rule change helped one thing but not the other? Could this new rule have helped a team like the Nats get Harper and Strasburg because there was a limit that any team could offer?
Which shows the difference between the current front office and the old Dave Fuckface Littlefield way of doing things, because he did pass on top guys to sign lesser guys who'd be easy and cheap. Apparently, that wasn't a big problem, just like giving established players $200M contracts isn't. But being crazy-big draft spenders is a big problem and a stop had to be put to that.
EDIT: http://www.shaggybevo.com/board/showthread.php/101275-MLB-Draft-Changes
That link, especially the bolded parts in the early post(s) explains things pretty well. Since it's a college forum, they seemed to like it because it is good for college baseball. Me...I think it fucking sucks and wish death on that bitch Selig. -
thavoice
I see your point on that, but I think it did fix some things though, and I like some of the stuff Selig has brought in such as interleague play. The ASG thing is stupid, but ya know what....managers seem to take it a little bit more serouslyHeretic;1478005 wrote:Yeah, it puts a cap on how much you can offer determined by the round you draft guys in. Which basically prevents teams from doing, as I said the Pirates had gotten fond of doing, drafting guys who seemed interested in college, and so weren't big draft targets, in lower rounds and then giving them high round money.
Which shows the difference between the current front office and the old Dave ****face Littlefield way of doing things, because he did pass on top guys to sign lesser guys who'd be easy and cheap. Apparently, that wasn't a big problem, just like giving established players $200M contracts isn't. But being crazy-big draft spenders is a big problem and a stop had to be put to that.
EDIT: http://www.shaggybevo.com/board/showthread.php/101275-MLB-Draft-Changes
That link, especially the bolded parts in the early post(s) explains things pretty well. Since it's a college forum, they seemed to like it because it is good for college baseball. Me...I think it ****ing sucks and wish death on that bitch Selig.