Which player found guilty of taking steroids/ PEDs would shock you the most?

[Wassit3]

There's absolutely no shred of evidence to it. It's pure conjecture.

let's say for a second it did happen, would it make him any worse than the other cheats that got caught? It is arguable that he is having his best years the last couple of years which would have been drug free, so it seems to me that you could argue that he would have been awesome in the years that he did use drugs regardless, pujols that is not bob ucker.

[HoustonGM]

let's say for a second it did happen, would it make him any worse than the other cheats that got caught? It is arguable that he is having his best years the last couple of years which would have been drug free, so it seems to me that you could argue that he would have been awesome in the years that he did use drugs regardless, pujols that is not bob ucker.

Depends on when you're referring to him using. If he's been using something banned in the last 5 years or so since testing has been instituted, I would say that that is "worse" than the players like McGwire that did it in the 90's.

[Wassit3]

Depends on when you're referring to him using. If he's been using something banned in the last 5 years or so since testing has been instituted, I would say that that is "worse" than the players like McGwire that did it in the 90's.

Sorry I was not clear. I was strictly referring to him using pre 2005 and thus my argument that his performances since testing began have been sufficiently good enough to at the very least arguable that he would have been awesome anyway even without PED's 2005 and earlier and thus still worthy to be considered one of the best hitters of his generation.

[MichelleWie]

let's say for a second it did happen, would it make him any worse than the other cheats that got caught? It is arguable that he is having his best years the last couple of years which would have been drug free, so it seems to me that you could argue that he would have been awesome in the years that he did use drugs regardless, pujols that is not bob ucker.

UCKER? Blasphemy. How dare you misspell a legends name. Don't make me go all Jeffry on you with my man crush on Uecker...

[Coach Owens]

Edgar Martinez or Jay Buhner or Ichiro.

[actionjackson]

http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2010/01/19/iron-fisk

The point about home runs not actually being that much down from the "steroid era" jumped out at me. People point to the lower league leading home run totals as evidence that the testing is doing its job and that steroids did lead to the large individual home run figures, yet, leaguewide, it's really not that much different. As Posnanski says, the home runs are just more spread out.

But his larger point - the variety of factors that play into the run environment - is absolutely critical if you want to properly understand context in the game of baseball.

Thanks for this HGM. Terrific read. He sums up what I've been trying to say since this thread started much better than I've been able to, which isn't surprising when you consider he's the best baseball writer out there and I'm thrashing around about the subject on a gaming forum. You simply cannot throw out all the other factors involved in the '90's and '00's and go with steroids and steroids alone. I suppose it happens in police stations all across North America and around the world every day, where cops finger a suspect and try to build a case around him/her rather than gathering evidence and allowing it to lead them to the suspect. Unfortunately I guess we haven't evolved as much from the days when we burned witches at the stake or gathered in the town square to be spectators at a good old fashioned drawing and quartering as we'd like to think. It's so much easier to bring down the gavel on the entire era and scream: "guilty, guilty, guilty" than it is to thoughtfully weigh all the different factors that were at work in that era/are at work in any era. Nah, that's too much work. See ya at the hangin'.

[HoustonGM]

Sorry I was not clear. I was strictly referring to him using pre 2005 and thus my argument that his performances since testing began have been sufficiently good enough to at the very least arguable that he would have been awesome anyway even without PED's 2005 and earlier and thus still worthy to be considered one of the best hitters of his generation.

Of course.

[Jeffy25]

Thanks for this HGM. Terrific read. He sums up what I've been trying to say since this thread started much better than I've been able to, which isn't surprising when you consider he's the best baseball writer out there and I'm thrashing around about the subject on a gaming forum. You simply cannot throw out all the other factors involved in the '90's and '00's and go with steroids and steroids alone. I suppose it happens in police stations all across North America and around the world every day, where cops finger a suspect and try to build a case around him/her rather than gathering evidence and allowing it to lead them to the suspect. Unfortunately I guess we haven't evolved as much from the days when we burned witches at the stake or gathered in the town square to be spectators at a good old fashioned drawing and quartering as we'd like to think. It's so much easier to bring down the gavel on the entire era and scream: "guilty, guilty, guilty" than it is to thoughtfully weigh all the different factors that were at work in that era/are at work in any era. Nah, that's too much work. See ya at the hangin'.

well said, maybe you are on course to becoming a skilled writer as well.