Forums   |   Featured Articles   |   Advertising   |   Contact
//  Tuesday, September 7, 2010

An Era of Steroids Impact on Baseball

Friday, July 31, 2009
Posted by Jeff Galdys

On Thursday, the baseball world learned two more names from the infamous 2003 "survey" of 104 baseball players who tested positive for what is now deemed a performance-enhancing drug.  According to reports from the New York Times, both Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz (two integral parts to the 2004 and 2007 championship teams in Boston), were mentioned as the culprits of having traces of a now illegal substance in the game of baseball.

It almost comes as no shocker that Ramirez, the loveable leftfielder of the Los Angeles Dodgers would have his name announced on this list, as he served a 50-game suspension this season for PED's, but Ortiz was a different story.  The jolly designated hitter, whose smile erupted the crowds at Fenway, came across as a surprise to the public.

Sure, when you look at the statistical differences between his career as a Minnesota Twin (his best season came in 2002: 20 HR, 75 RBI), while in Boston he arose to one of the most feared batters in all of baseball (career high in HR's in 2006: 54), you can see an enormous improvement.  But, if you look at when those numbers appeared, Ortiz was still in the prime of his career during his prominent years in the heart of the Red Sox lineup.  Even though a jump of 34 homers over only four seasons can raise some red flags, it was also during a steady improvement (which was helped by the protection of one Manny Ramirez) for a skilled athlete.

Now that Ortiz has been without Man-Ram for exactly a year, you can tell that he's not the same hitter he once was.  But that was going to be expected as well.  There is no way that anyone could possibly think that another 50 homerun season at age 33, with all of the negatives that have begun to play a factor to an aging star, will happen.

And with the PED discussion taking full throttle on Ortiz after this announcement, that's just another burden on his plate.  But you cannot say that it was completely his fault.  In 2003, you have to remember that using such substances were not illegal for baseball (sure they were wrong, but not forbidden).  Also, there wasn't a strict drug policy set up, at the time, telling players that certain steroids were even a part of supplements they could have used after workouts and games.

What is yet to come, which will ultimately be one of baseball's biggest tests, is the opinions of the Baseball Writers of America when these stars become eligible for the recognition of Cooperstown.  It's been seen by many that it will not be easy for players from this era, who have a "tainted" resume, to earn the honor of Hall of Fame status.  Evidence of this is the case of Mark McGwire, who is 8th all-time in homeruns, as well as most famous for his 1998 season where he crushed 70 long balls in one year, but has failed to be elected in his three years eligible.

The argument for not allowing the "cheaters" of this era into the Hall of Fame is valid.  It has the credentials, as Pete Rose still suffers from a lifetime ban from baseball for betting on his Cincinnati Reds with regularity.  However, this should not be a one sided argument.

People always talk about the hitters becoming the beneficiaries of "juicing", but reading the Mitchell Report, there were also numerous pitchers mentioned as "tainted".  And then, Jose Canseco, who is most notably known for making this issue public, was quoted recently for saying that probably 95 percent of all ballplayers, at one time or another, used a performance enhancing substance.  95 percent...

So if there were only a limited number of players (and yes, there are true grinders: Derek Jeter, Curt Schilling, Chipper Jones), guys that have been ridiculed and persecuted (Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens) were only "using" these substances (allegedly remember) to even the playing field.  Alright, there were statistics that baseball has never seen before.  Records have been broken, and they cannot be just deleted.

You cannot imagine that a player who only wanted to be the best he could (while risking future damages to his personal health) was looking to be shunned and ex-communicated from the game they loved, by using a substance that at a time was not illegal.  I think it's safe to assume that these players would rather take an asterisk next to their names, and the chance to have their plaque hanging in central New York, rather than have nothing at all. 

Some of these guys, who have been accused of using PEDs, were the best of their generation.  Hell, they still could be considered among baseball's best ever.  But if we do find out that Canseco was as right as he says he is, and an entire generation of athletes enhanced their skills for the greater good of the sport, then a few of the premier stars were just plain better than their opposition during that era.

Only time will tell whether or not some of baseball's most recognized stars will be glorified in the Hall.  If I had a vote, baseballs best from the Steroid Era were still baseballs best and they deserve every right to hear their name called on a Sunday in Cooperstown.

Comments - Post a Comment


Post A Comment
Name: (*Required)
Email: (*Required)
- Not Displayed With Comment
Website:
Comment:
 

« Back to Articles

All Things Sports