MLB Season 2006 thread

[eva unit zero 271]

Is it hard to believe that Barry Bonds took steriods? You don't gain that much muscle that fast just working out. How much muscle did he put on? Probably 30 pounds worth?

I am not discounting the possibility. I am just trying to point out the fact that it has never been, and likely never will be, proven beyond hearsay.

Unless you know of a positive steroid test or an admission of guilt that nobody else is aware of?

[betterREDthandead 58]

There is not a steroid you can take which will improve your batting average. Also, that's a very skewed stat you posted; His average did not drop below .291 from 1990 to 1997...and in four of the six years immediately preceding the alleged juicing, his SLG was in the 600s and above his career average of .609.

Yes there is. Steroids will turn cans of corn into doubles off the wall, they will turn routine grounders into sharp singles through the hole or doubles down the line, they will turn that warning track fly ball into a home run, and so on. And again, just because he had good numbers prior to juicing doesn't mean anything. You say his average didn't drop below .291 from 1990-1997? I say it didn't drop below .303 since (except for seasons where he was hurt - 1999, 2005). You might say he hit .336 in 1993. I would say that post-juice, he beat that - three times. Never quite got to .370, or .341, or .362 - his numbers from 2002-04.

Or, since you want to take out '86-'89, when he was presumably still learning how to hit major league pitching, lets. His BA from '90-'97: .307. Again, from '98-'05: .323. Still inflated. Or his SLG: .691 pre-juice, .730 afterwards. From '01-'04, he slugged .863, .799, .749, .812 - levels he never reached before steroids.

Also: after hitting 30 HR only once from 86-91, Bonds would hit 40 HR three times from 92-97, hitting at least 30 every season. Aside from the 73 HR season, Bonds has never hit 50+ even in his 'juiced' years. Is it so hard to believe that one of the best players of our generation could have an unusually good season?

Or maybe every pretty good player that has had a ridiculously good season was just juiced? Selanne must have been hitting the needle hard in 92, huh? Or maybe Gordie Howe was on steroids when he posted 100 points in the 70s after never doing it before?

I'm not talking about an unusually good season. I'm talking about sustained superior performance far beyond the normal age range that an athlete can maintain it. Teemu Selanne was 22 in 1992. Roger Maris was 26 when he hit 61 homers. Career seasons don't happen at age 37. And Bonds isn't playing in AAA ball, which is an apt comparison to Gordie playing in the WHA.

[eva unit zero 271]

Yes there is. Steroids will turn cans of corn into doubles off the wall, they will turn routine grounders into sharp singles through the hole or doubles down the line, they will turn that warning track fly ball into a home run, and so on. And again, just because he had good numbers prior to juicing doesn't mean anything. You say his average didn't drop below .291 from 1990-1997? I say it didn't drop below .303 since (except for seasons where he was hurt - 1999, 2005). You might say he hit .336 in 1993. I would say that post-juice, he beat that - three times. Never quite got to .370, or .341, or .362 - his numbers from 2002-04.

Or, since you want to take out '86-'89, when he was presumably still learning how to hit major league pitching, lets. His BA from '90-'97: .307. Again, from '98-'05: .323. Still inflated. Or his SLG: .691 pre-juice, .730 afterwards. From '01-'04, he slugged .863, .799, .749, .812 - levels he never reached before steroids.

I'm not talking about an unusually good season. I'm talking about sustained superior performance far beyond the normal age range that an athlete can maintain it. Teemu Selanne was 22 in 1992. Roger Maris was 26 when he hit 61 homers. Career seasons don't happen at age 37. And Bonds isn't playing in AAA ball, which is an apt comparison to Gordie playing in the WHA.

Howe turned 40 the season he posted 44 goals and 103 points for the WINGS.

One could make the argument that Bonds is not uncomparable to Howe--both had their best years in their late 30s, both were among the great all-around players of their game, both were top players and MVP candidates often throughout their career.

Another thing to point out...

Many pitchers of Bonds' era are/were juiced. Bonds' rise in production may just have been due to hitting more juiced fastballs, and therefore having more 'warning track' shots get that extra couple feet to turn into home runs instead of doubles.

[betterREDthandead 58]

Howe turned 40 the season he posted 44 goals and 103 points for the WINGS.

One could make the argument that Bonds is not uncomparable to Howe--both had their best years in their late 30s, both were among the great all-around players of their game, both were top players and MVP candidates often throughout their career.

Another thing to point out...

Many pitchers of Bonds' era are/were juiced. Bonds' rise in production may just have been due to hitting more juiced fastballs, and therefore having more 'warning track' shots get that extra couple feet to turn into home runs instead of doubles.

You said '70s, so that's where I looked. But that's a nitpick. If you have to go to a guy so freakishly talented he was playing regular full seasons at the age of 52 to rationalize why Bonds could do what he's done, you're reaching. You're asking me to believe in the sheer coincidence that Bonds' stats inflated dramatically starting at the age of 34 and then hit the wall right now here at age 41. In other words, he got better and then right around the time steroids became an issue - to the point where it would definitely not do for him to get a positive test - he goes right back to exactly where he was before the juice. Remember how I said his AB/HR ratio was 16.2 before the juice? Guess what it is for 2006: 16.28. If Bonds is the Gordie Howe of baseball, why the sudden drop off and the return to exactly the pace he was at before?

And, pitchers don't juice up. They can't. Adding all that bulk would destroy their mechanics and take all the jump, jive, 'n' wail off of any breaking pitch they care to throw. A curve that used to be thrown at 82, all of a sudden getting thrown at 88, will not curve, and will land in the cheap seats. Not to mention the fact that one big problem with steroids is that they allow you to strengthen your muscles, but because it's artificially done, and too quickly, your ligaments and tendons don't follow suit. Pitchers put far too much stress on their arm. A pitcher on the juice would be having a race to see which blows first - his rotator cuff or Tommy John ligament. Pitchers have a bad enough time when even the tiniest flaw pops up in their delivery - something as drastic as steroids would ruin them.

[eva unit zero 271]

You said '70s, so that's where I looked. But that's a nitpick. If you have to go to a guy so freakishly talented he was playing regular full seasons at the age of 52 to rationalize why Bonds could do what he's done, you're reaching. You're asking me to believe in the sheer coincidence that Bonds' stats inflated dramatically starting at the age of 34 and then hit the wall right now here at age 41. In other words, he got better and then right around the time steroids became an issue - to the point where it would definitely not do for him to get a positive test - he goes right back to exactly where he was before the juice. Remember how I said his AB/HR ratio was 16.2 before the juice? Guess what it is for 2006: 16.28. If Bonds is the Gordie Howe of baseball, why the sudden drop off and the return to exactly the pace he was at before?

And, pitchers don't juice up. They can't. Adding all that bulk would destroy their mechanics and take all the jump, jive, 'n' wail off of any breaking pitch they care to throw. A curve that used to be thrown at 82, all of a sudden getting thrown at 88, will not curve, and will land in the cheap seats. Not to mention the fact that one big problem with steroids is that they allow you to strengthen your muscles, but because it's artificially done, and too quickly, your ligaments and tendons don't follow suit. Pitchers put far too much stress on their arm. A pitcher on the juice would be having a race to see which blows first - his rotator cuff or Tommy John ligament. Pitchers have a bad enough time when even the tiniest flaw pops up in their delivery - something as drastic as steroids would ruin them.

You are saying one of two things. Either A) Bonds is still on steroids, and that's why he's still got the numbers he had ten years ago, yet he for some reason doesn't test positive. Or B) He's so incredibly consistent that he would have had to cheat to alter his performance, up or down, which is proven by the fact that he is now not on steroids and putting up comparable numbers to ten years ago.

Both of those arguments seem awfully silly for one reason or another.

[betterREDthandead 58]

You are saying one of two things. Either A) Bonds is still on steroids, and that's why he's still got the numbers he had ten years ago, yet he for some reason doesn't test positive. Or B) He's so incredibly consistent that he would have had to cheat to alter his performance, up or down, which is proven by the fact that he is now not on steroids and putting up comparable numbers to ten years ago.

Both of those arguments seem awfully silly for one reason or another.

Well, I'm definitely not saying A. Bonds is not stupid enough to do anything which might test him positive any more. I don't know what you're saying in B.

Here's what I'm saying. From 1998 to sometime in 2005, Bonds took steroids. Had he not done so, his numbers likely would have remained as consistent as they were during the non-steroid portion of his career. He likely would have continued to hit 30-45 home runs per year, continued to bat .300-.310, and slug .650-.700. Probably would have continued to do so until age caught up with him. Take a look at the home run kings of ages past: Hank Aaron, Babe Ruth, Willie Mays, Frank Robinson, Harmon Killebrew, etc. They are consistent, generally through about age 34, where the numbers start to drop off. Even then they usually perform well above major-league level until some point, right around the late 30s or about 40, they hit a wall. They do not start outperforming themselves at such high levels after 34. Hank Aaron had arguably his best year in 1971 at age 37 - even then, his numbers (47 HR, .669 SLG) are consistent, not outlandishly better, than the rest of his career, where his HR numbers were 44, 40, 45, 44, 44, 39, 44, etc. Consistency. Bonds would have looked like that.

Let me go further into the numbers. Rafael Palmeiro, a known user. He's the same age as Bonds, and his numbers pre-1998 look like this: 1 HR per 22.5 AB, .496 SLG. 1998 onwards: 1 HR per 14.7 AB, .540 SLG. Same as Bonds - about 7 at-bats gained per home run, and about an equal jump in slugging as well.

And for comparison's sake, Hank Aaron. Before he was 34 (the age at which Bonds, and I would guess Palmeiro, starting juicing), he hit a home run once every 17.2 at bats, and slugged .565. Age 34 and beyond, it was a home run every 14.9 at bats and a SLG of .533. The slight improvement in home runs is easily attributed to the move from a pitcher's park to a stadium so well-known as a hitter's park it was called the Launching Pad. Playing at Milwaukee County Stadium for the Braves, Aaron went 1 HR/17.8 AB, and at Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium, it was one every 13.8 AB.

Bonds' career path obviously is very similar to a known 'roider. Not at all similar to the Home Run King. Maybe you find all this number-crunching silly, but it's a far sight better than "He doesn't admit it and nobody saw him do it."

[Heaton 1]

If the Tigers hurry they can still hit the 100 loss mark!

Edited May 31, 2006 by Heaton

[dallas27 7]

I am not discounting the possibility. I am just trying to point out the fact that it has never been, and likely never will be, proven beyond hearsay.

Unless you know of a positive steroid test or an admission of guilt that nobody else is aware of?

I do, it's called the power of observation. Before he was juicing he was at maybe 170 and that is being generous. And within seconds he is 210 ALL muscle. Please. It takes years to obtain that much muscle. It doesn't happen overnight.

Tigers lose 4 straight and are still .5 games up overall and 1.5 on the chi-sox. Time to get back on track.

[timothy1997 0]

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/3918/c...02LAE8BAheFCLcF

Besides his overal appearance, just look at his stats. You don't at age 36 suddenly figure out how to hit home runs at ease. My guess is Barry Bonds didn't like that he was not involved in the Mac-Sosa home run summer and did something about it. Name other sports superstar that reaches his peak after 36.

[BlakChamber 8]

Nice win by the Tigs last night. A come from behind win over the Yanks playing small ball

Drapes, Stevie, and Lidstrom were at the game too. ESPN showed them a couple times, and Chris Berman would give updates on the Canes/Sabres game.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

I was extremely happy with this win, especially with it being on national TV. It annoyed me though that the ESPN feed was blacked out locally, i like getting different announcer perspectives on the Tigs.

Blak- How were the announcers reacting to Zumaya on ESPN? Was the radar gun just wowing them??? I know he hit 101 at least like 3 or 4 times.

[BlakChamber 8]

Blak- How were the announcers reacting to Zumaya on ESPN? Was the radar gun just wowing them??? I know he hit 101 at least like 3 or 4 times.

From what I saw, they weren't making that big a deal out of it, I was a little surprised. They talked about how he's a fireballer, but didn't talk about him throwing triple digets like I figured they would. Berman did seem pretty impressed with how the Tigers have turned the team around. He also mentioned a few times what a great baseball city Detroit is and how the fans have been waiting for a winning team. It was nice to see them get some love. They had nice things to say about Verlander too.

But, someone called during the 7th, so I was trying to watch the game and pay attention to the call at the same time. I'm not a good multi-tasker when the game is on

Right now, the Tigs are the front page story on ESPN.com's baseball section, and they get a mention on the cover of this week's SI

[lordstanleyofpreston 0]

Leyland was on the Big Idea with Donny Deutch on CNBC last night; the Tabbies are getting attention everwhere these days.

There'll be alot of Tiger fans with sore jaws this summer. Nate Robertson, look at the monster you have created.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

From what I saw, they weren't making that big a deal out of it, I was a little surprised. They talked about how he's a fireballer, but didn't talk about him throwing triple digets like I figured they would. Berman did seem pretty impressed with how the Tigers have turned the team around. He also mentioned a few times what a great baseball city Detroit is and how the fans have been waiting for a winning team. It was nice to see them get some love. They had nice things to say about Verlander too.

But, someone called during the 7th, so I was trying to watch the game and pay attention to the call at the same time. I'm not a good multi-tasker when the game is on

Right now, the Tigs are the front page story on ESPN.com's baseball section, and they get a mention on the cover of this week's SI

I have strict rules about not answering the phone when the Tigers are batting or when Zumaya's pitching lol. Thats surprising that they didnt rave about the heat he was bringing,...oh well, they'll see whatsup sooner or later! Nice to see that Berman gave the boys props though

Leyland will be on the ESPNews Hotlist at 3 pm for those interested.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

nevermind on Leyland...i think this Duke Lacrosse crap got him bumped or something

[lordstanleyofpreston 0]

Tough loss to the BoSox last night. Looks like Rollercoaster Jones is back.

[Lou_Siffer 1]

That was like a punch to the gut seeing that ball go over the fence. F'in Jones...

[timothy1997 0]

WOW!!

Strange enough to see Zach Miner pitch....but PUDGE AT FIRST BASE!!

[Hockeytown0001 7,652]

did anyone see leyland today??? he was arguing calls with the home plate umpire and got tossed, and then he came out of the dugout and got up in the umpires face and really let him have it! he even went to home plate and pointed where the ball went!! props to leyland!!

[Lou_Siffer 1]

Article in Sundays paper about possibilities for adding a left handed bat by the deadline. The names mentioned were Cliff Floyd, Jeromy Burnitz, and Aubrey Huff. I think they do need to make some kinda move cause you cant count on DY at this point. Of those choices i'd go with Huff. He's had some injury problems and is only hitting .180, but that just makes him cheaper to get. Floyd would cost too much and i just dont think he's worth it, and Burnitz would just be another homerun or strikeout hitter...we already have too many of those!!!

Also Spurling was mouthing off a bit about his demotion. I cant say i really blame him, i never felt he shouldve been sent down the first time. Reading between the lines he pretty much said he wants out, and well, we dont need bad vibes around here. I smell a very small trade coming soon..

[timothy1997 0]

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Augp...=yhoo&type=lgns

Tigers make Andrew "Dr. Destroy" Miller their first pick in the MLB draft today. Great addition. I can already see him and Verlander being the aces of this pitching staff for years to come.

[Rice 42]

Tigers make Andrew "Dr. Destroy" Miller their first pick in the MLB draft today. Great addition. I can already see him and Verlander being the aces of this pitching staff for years to come.

That is until the Yankees sign them at least.

As for Barry Bonds -

Edited June 6, 2006 by ARice89

[Lou_Siffer 1]

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Augp...=yhoo&type=lgns

Tigers make Andrew "Dr. Destroy" Miller their first pick in the MLB draft today. Great addition. I can already see him and Verlander being the aces of this pitching staff for years to come.

Sweet, I know they liked Stubbs from Texas but with Miller falling to them cant pass him up. Better show him the money though, as im sure Illitch will.

[yzerman&thewings=CUP 0]

Sweet, I know they liked Stubbs from Texas but with Miller falling to them cant pass him up. Better show him the money though, as im sure Illitch will.

this is a great addition, and Mr. Illitch will pay him what he wants. I am really surprised he fell to number 6, so I will definitely take him. I have grown up a tigers fan but never followed them close until late 2003. Why is it that our draft prospects never turned out before Verlander? I know Eric Munson turned out to be a bust, but what other blunders did we have? I was just wondering. I am really excited to be a tigers fan these days! It is also a reason why I am excited to be a Wings fan, there is plenty of prospect talent waiting in the ranks. Does Evan McGrath ring a bell????

[betterREDthandead 58]

Sweet, I know they liked Stubbs from Texas but with Miller falling to them cant pass him up. Better show him the money though, as im sure Illitch will.

BIG TIME STEAL, in my opinion....Miller was considered the consensus #1, even more so than "Greedy Luke" Hochevar. Hopefully signability doesn't come into play - the Tigers have had a real tough time with their last two #1 picks - both Verlander and Maybin broke off talks at one point.

But for now, every Tigers fan should be salivating at the idea that Dr. Destroy is a future Tiger! Verlander hit the rotation as a regular in just a year and a half....I suspect Miller might be half a year to a year behind that, since he doesn't have Verlander's velocity or pinpoint control, so how does a September '08 callup sound?