For the record, I didn't particularly care myself. Not sure why ...

Thome falls just short. Albert the Phreak will get there down the road, barring big-time injury. Adam Dunn won't play long enough. Anybody else?

Miguel Cabrera has an outside shot just because of how early he started, but probably won't get there Mickey Mantle style

You might not care about McGwire's 600'th as it never happened - he ended up at 583.

It seems 600 was always reached in a group and with some drug use with only 2 players yet to be hit by it.

Aaron & Mays were contemporaries who both are said to have used 'greenies' which were the performance enhancing drug of the day. These are now banned and were not exactly legal at the time - much like steroids for the next group.

Bonds-Sosa-ARod all are either rumoured or confirmed as steroid users and were contemporaries. None were caught at a time when penalties were in place, with only A-Rod actually testing positive.

So the only guys yet to be hit by drug rumours are Griffey Jr (who played during the steroid era) and Babe Ruth (who spent tons of time with gamblers and drank tons of alcohol when it was illegal). Interesting eh?

I didn't really care. It is probably less to do with steroids and more to do with him being a vapid mimbo (bimbo)

Seriously, the guy has less charisma then a shell fish.

Aaron & Mays were contemporaries who both are said to have used 'greenies' which were the performance enhancing drug of the day.

You sure about that, John?   *Who*  said it exactly?   And were greenies any more "performance enhancing" than a can or two of Red Bull?  (Can players drink that?)  Did greenies add muscle, or improve durability?   I don't know the answers to these questions.  But I'm wary of saying something like this without clear evidence or knowledge of the substances alleged to be involved.

I'm disappointed that he hit it, because it was very fun to see it plastered over the front page of every sports site: "A-Rod Fails Again."

Because he's probably the most unlikable person in the game, and because he admitted to cheating, I anticipate this apathy with continue, even if/when he passes 700, 714, 755 and 762. One tainted "superstar" taking another's record. Ho hum.

It's a Hallmark cards thing.  Congratulations on your 600th.  I wish you a few hundred more. Cutesy drawing on the front. Give me a Pierre Belvedere blank, so that I can write a nice message to go with a pretty picture. 

When Rodriguez leaves the game, I will remember him as a typically flawed ballplayer (the steroids, the slap...) of exceptional talent and durability.  The same goes for Barry Bonds. 

1980's young childhood perspective - I don't care because 600 homeruns was never a milestone. Ruth and Aaron made it to the next "big round number", with Mays the next level down, way over 600. Bonds seemingly hit a new century mark each year, and again reached several more important ones. 500 was the only particular HR milestone, and that was because players didn't seem to make it far past, or just fell short like Gehrig and Musial. 500 was the milestone because it was the last one people reached, and enough people reached it for it to seem meaningful. 600? Well, 3 of the 7 guys who made it that far also have 700, which includes Rodriguez who probably will make a run at at least 700. So it's less a career celebration/achievement than a pitstop to further things for someone like Rodriguez.

I see it as a similar thing to 300 wins - the 300th win was a much bigger deal in my head for Glavine than it was for Clemens or Maddox. This is because it was a bit of an end point for Glavine, a sign of his career greatness. The milestone means more to me if it is a "last big accomplishment" situation, rather than a "latest accomplishment". Nothing against Rodriguez, his final days will likely be spent pushing for a final milestone (Bonds? 800? 700?), which will probably seem more important to me.

But I'm wary of saying something like this without clear evidence or knowledge of the substances alleged to be involved.

Unlike the in-depth knowledge we have on the effect of steroids on home run hitting?

According to what I've read it is listed in Aarons autobiography (haven't read it myself) and that Mike Schmidt, for example, admitted to using them. Amphetamines are performance enhancing as they help you recover faster (more energized). They are banned and have penalties just like steroids do (lower, but still suspended for anywhere from 15 days to 2+ years).

Basically, anyone who played baseball from the 1960's to the start of the drug program (2004 iirc) could use anything they wanted without any threat of a penalty or of being caught. To assume that the guys with the best stats during that stretch, from Aaron to Bonds, could've been 100% 'clean' of the currently banned substances is naive. I'd be willing to bet (if there was a way to confirm it) that most of the Jays in the 92/93 seasons were using amphetamines and that at least one or two had experimented with steroids or would shortly afterwards as they were in use by the time Canseco won his MVP in 1988 (I remember the 'steroid' chants that were directed at him back then).

Baseball players have been cheating since the game began. Only reason people of Aaron's era didn't use steroids was because they didn't exist back then. Rodriguez is a no doubt hall of famer (first ballot). So is Bonds. The reason steroids are illegal lets remember is because they're harmful to the players involved, especially to kids and such still developing. At some point we're going to have performance enhancing drugs that are perfectly legal, and at that point we might as well put * on everything or just get rid of them altogether.

AWeb, that's a terrifically insightful post and not a position I'd really considered previously. Cuttlefish all around!

John Northey, of course you're right, but in an ironic way, my misremembering Mac's career final total makes my point even more profoundly ... not too long ago, I used to know not only the Top 10 home run hitters off the top of my head, but also the number they hit. Does anyone cre that Killebrew hit, um, I think 573? No, of course not. But the fact that McGwire's number is not entrenched in my brain suggests the lack of "power" the number and the growing list now has.

Let's see, can I even get the current top 10 (not in order)? ... Bonds*, Aaron, Ruth, Mays, Griffey, Sosa, Robinson, Killebrew?, Rodriguez, Thome?, McGwire ... did I miss anyone? That's 11 ... has Thome passed Killebrew and/or Robinson?

Yes, I know that players were said to have almost routinely taken greenies throughout this period; and I believe it.  But did they help them hit home runs?  I doubt it,  because their effects on the body are considerably different from those of steroids.  Players used greenies to forestall fatigue, to give them ‘energy’ to get through a long, gruelling season.  Or so they said.  I remember Aaron Hill saying something like that once when asked about this matter. 

As for Paul D's snark, we do know that steroids build muscle, hasten healing times, and increase strength. So if you've been hitting a lot of warning-track shots, they might begin to go out, right?  Brady Anderson?

As Henry Thoreau once said, “Some circumstantial evidence is powerful, as when you find a trout in the milk.”

Of course greenies help players hit home runs. If you're using them to keep your energy up, then having more energy going into games is very much going to lead to players hitting more home runs. If you're more alert and less tired you will perform better.

Isn't virtually any pharmaceutical product "performance enhancing"?  That's what they're made for.  I know for certain that ASA (aspirin) has improved my performance on many occasions. Nowadays I often take a slow-release arthritis pill before I play in my Strat-O-Matic league so my thumbs don't hurt.

 

 Kasi - Thursday, August 05 2010 @ 12:15 PM EDT (#219898) #
Of course greenies help players hit home runs.

Oh?

 TimberLee - Thursday, August 05 2010 @ 12:40 PM EDT (#219900) #
Isn't virtually any pharmaceutical product "performance enhancing"?  That's what they're made for.

Oh?

Well, O.K., guys.  If Johnny Mac took greenies, do you think he’d hit many more homers?  You first must have the hand-eye co-ordination and the strength to hit the ball out of the park relatively often: and a lot of players simply don’t.  Are hand-eye co-ordination and strength  enhanced by greenies?  (I don’t know.  Never tried them.)

“Performance enhancing” is different from “performance enabling”,  or don’t you agree?   Aspirin doesn’t enable one to play Strat-O-Matic any *better* than usual, does it?  But it does enable you to play it.  I suppose food and water could be considered to be performance enhancing, if you want.

(Last post from me in this thread.)

Another way to look at the HR levels...

After Mays & Aaron cracked 600 it was forgotten about as a milestone because it was unreachable. 500 was the target. Now, 600 seems very reachable (Bonds, Sosa, Griffey, A-Rod have made it recently, Thome & Ramirez could soon). However, if you look down the list you will see it will become a target again very soon.

400+ HR and active: Chipper Jones (retiring), Vladimir Guerrero (35 and unlikely to last anywhere near long enough to make it), Giambi (yeah right), Andruw Jones (not good enough to last).

With 300+ you almost have to be 30 or under to have a shot. Pujols is 30 this year and looks to have a real shot (393 HR so far, has 30+ ever season of his career). Dunn is a HR machine at 30 with 344 and hits 40 a year as a rule so is about 6-7 years away but that is a killer pace to have to keep.

Sub 300 makes it very hard to predict. Being over 30 makes it impossible (unless you do a Bonds). Miguel Cabrera (27) has 235 so far to lead the under-30 crew, then comes Prince Fielder (26) with 184. No real shot there unless one of those two has a major jump to 50 HR a couple of times.

I suspect in 10-20 years we'll be remembering the 600 club (Bonds-Aaron-Ruth-Mays-Griffey-Sosa-ARod is the order by the way) a lot better than we do today. Especially as steroids quiet down and other stuff takes over (genetic manipulation will arrive someday, surgery done to enhance performance, etc.).

As for Paul D's snark, we do know that steroids build muscle, hasten healing times, and increase strength. So if you've been hitting a lot of warning-track shots, they might begin to go out, right?  Brady Anderson?

I don't think that what John said is any less responsible than what you're saying right here about Anderson.  Also, it seems like there were at least as many pitchers on steroids as there were with hitters... all I'm saying is that we don't have any more evidence for steroids as performance enhancers than greenies.

all I'm saying is that we don't have any more evidence for steroids as performance enhancers than greenies.

I think we have more concrete evidence of their usage though.  Common sense says they both enhance performance or they wouldn't be used.  That's really the issue isn't it?  Intent?

The primary usage for both is to combat how the body breaks down through the length of the season. Steroids are more about the muscles themselves, while greenies are more about the mental fatigue. Both are important though.

then comes Prince Fielder (26) with 184. No real shot there unless one of those two has a major jump to 50 HR a couple of times.

I notice though that of the active leaders in AB/HR Price Fielder is the youngest in the top 100 - and #7 overall (15.09).   If he gets to 200 this year (quite possible) and maintains an average of 15 AB/HR over his average of 575 AB/Season then barring injuly he should have around 350 at the age of 30 (average of 38/season), putting him right around Dunn's numbers, and about a season behind Pujols.

For some reason I thought that the AB/HR number would drop from 26 to 30, but it seems not (Prince Fielder's most comparable by age is Juan Gonzalez, at age 26 he had 14.63 AB/HR, and at age 30 it was 14.91; Ryan Howard was running at an 11.36 clip at 26, and now sits at 12.62 per dinger).  This doesn't help my case at all, actually.  However, Fielder is having a bit of a slow year by his standards, which is significantly affecting his current AB/HR number due to the relatively low numbers.  Say he were to drop to 16 AB/HR and that his at bats dropped to 500 per season and he played 7 more years (maybe stretching things) that gives him 570 total (31/year from age 31-37).  He can smell 600 from there.

Just like John said, it will probably take a jumpt to 50 a couple of times to offset the lean years, but Fielder has already had two seasons in that ballpark, so I don't think that this is such a stretch.  I think that the biggest question mark is how well he can maintain his 5'11", 270lb frame.

 

There's no doubt that greenies (amphetamines) are more performance enhancing that Red Bull. As an example: American fighter pilots are commonly given amphetamines.

On steroids versus amphetamines, I'd say amphetamines are most definitely more performance enhancing within season and steroids across seasons. Baseball being a grind, being able to "get up" with amphetamines is a huge advantage. With steroids, the added muscle mass is obvious, but the few studies that I've seen cast doubt on how performance enhancing they actually are. Sure there's always the Brady Anderson and a ton of other anecdotes, but when they've been studied there's little evidence for performance enhancement w/steroids.

Steroids are great for recovering from injury. As an example anabolic steroids are often given to the aged who are experience muscle wasting. I wouldn't be surprised if once the steroid era has long past, we'll see a shortening of careers and narrowing of peak performance... for both pitchers and hitters. The trick/difficulty (which is the same difficulty in showing that steroids enhancing performance) is collecting good evidence.

I don't care at all about PED's

players have always looked for an edge - they always will. further, there's enough difference in the medical and training facilities available to the modern player, along with videotape and computer charting of stats and all the rest, to make any meanignful comparison between - for instance - Mantle and Griffey - ludicrus on the face of it .

Given that, all the astricks and hand-wringing and pontificating in the world doesn't impress me at all.

When all the steroids in the world are banned, there will be something else.

On top of all that, lets not assume that all pitchers were always clean except Clemens

On the subject of who will do what...

I expect A-Rod (whom i don't have any particular dislike for - by the way. I found bonds far more unlikeable) to reach 700 but given how he has slowed, and given that he doesn't strike me as the guy who's gonna play til he's 42 or something, i'm no longer convinced he'll make the top 3 - though he does have the ability if he lasts long enough.

Thome could do it within two season if he had an employer the next two years but I'm skeptical he'll get a contract past this year. Though he has the stats to warrant one.

Ramirez i think makes it just because I think he's the kind of guy who'd go five more years if he had too to reach a milestone.

Jones - no

Guerrero - will do good to make it to 500

Pujols - has a shot at 700 unless his health falls apart

Edmunds, Konerko - duh. I could see Konerko reaching 450 maybe.

Dunn - at a reasonable extrapolation of his career production he'd make it, assuming health. He does have the vibe (totally an emotional irrational view here) of one who'll go off a cliff one day and lose his mojo and fade away rather than lasting until he's 39 or 40. but you can't assume that.

The next guy even worth discussing is Cabrera and he's 365 away so it seems kind of silly to speculate. Beyond that, i don't see anyone else promising downlist.

the next potential candidate will be someone like Heyward or Snider who's too young and new to have a track record but made the majors young enough to have some mathmatical hope to go with their physical skills.

Dunn - at a reasonable extrapolation of his career production he'd make it, assuming health. He does have the vibe (totally an emotional irrational view here) of one who'll go off a cliff one day and lose his mojo and fade away rather than lasting until he's 39 or 40. but you can't assume that.

He's got the classic old guy skillset (low batting average, no speed, high K rate) and that doesn't bode well long term. Still, you've got to admire the man's consistency over the past decade and his ability to raise his batting average as he enters his thirties. Imagine how good he'd be if he actually enjoyed playing!

 

 

 

Given that, all the astricks and hand-wringing and pontificating in the world doesn't impress me at all.

My guess is that the asterisks aren't trying to impress you though. They're there to denote that they cheated.

Also, Mick, why does Bonds get an asterisk but Rodriguez doesn't? Yankee favouritism, or is A-Rod off the hook because he admitted his cheating?

Why doesn't George Brett get one? He cheated. The pitchers who used spitballs? The same. Like will said it is really hard to go between eras and compare people. So many things have changed in how athletes are developed. My guess is if you put someone with the skill and hitting approach of Pujols back in the 20s when Ruth played and he would hit something like .420/80/200 easily.

re Prince Fielder: I think that the biggest question mark is how well he can maintain his 5'11", 270lb frame.

Fat ballplayers certainly do not age well. Ages of last season:

Cecil Fielder: 34
Mo Vaughn: 35
Greg Luzinski: 33
John Kruk: 34
David Ortiz: ? (had been looking like 34 for awhile; he'll obviously make it to 35 now)

I'm sure there are many I'm not thinking of.

+1 on jmoney's comment. I don't care because i just don't care about A-Rod. someone hateful would be better than him he's just boring.

Fat ballplayers certainly do not age well.

Yeah - I just spent some time looking for ball players with comparable frames, and it was not pretty.  Maybe he'll need a couple of 60+ seasons, eh?

Don't really know where to put this, so I figured derailing the steroids topic was good enough. No one is going to be convinced anyway.

This vid here from Japan might be the greatest defensive play I've ever seen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYdpBNonxA4

The remarkable thing about Prince Fielder is that he's still 270 lbs despite converting to a vegetarian diet a couple of years ago.  He must be eating tonnes of junk food, which isn't going to help his longevity.

Oops the link didn't work. Well here it is without the url thing. Just copy paste I guess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYdpBNonxA4

The remarkable thing about Prince Fielder is that he's still 270 lbs despite converting to a vegetarian diet

Perhaps he only eats vegetarians?

I go back on my word, but simply to draw your attention to an article in today's NYT on Henry Aaron:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/sports/baseball/06aaron.html?_r=1&hp

My honest answer to your question: A-Rod is a Yankee, so I don't really care that he's reached 600. And he's a Yankee who used to take performance-enhancing drugs, so I double don't care that he's reached 600. Sorry about that, but the truth is the truth.

As for Prince Fielder: my guess is that the Fielders, father and son, naturally tend to gain weight more than most people, due to metabolisms that are about as slow as Bengie Molina. This would have been good had the Fielders lived in an era in which food supplies were scarce - not so good now in the time of Super Colossal Double Bacon Mushroom Ranch Coronary Deluxe Cheeseburgers (with a side of fries).

I don't care too much about the drugs in the sense that so many people were taking them during that era.  To me, it means players like Bonds and A-Rod were the best of a drug filled era.

They're there to denote that they cheated.

The original asterisk was just to denote that the context was different (in Maris's case, that he played in a season with 8 more games). The problem is that asterisks are meaningless - the context is always different. One possibility is that there are going to be asterisks on almost everything because the context is ever-changing. What if there were no steroids, but one of the Blake St Bombers had 762? It's an advantage that 29 other teams didn't enjoy. The other is that asterisks are going to be arbitrarily, haphazardly or vindictively applied. A commissioner couldn't break with the past (or didn't want to deal with media fallout), so Maris's 61* lived in infamy. Bonds has a cleaner official record than others in the game, but gets saddled with asterisks talk because he was an ass and broke a cherished record. At this point, the toothpaste is out of the tube, and the records aren't going to be unbroke, no matter how much wishing-away everyone does. The asterisks only serve to distort the context in this case - it implies Bonds (or other asterisks candidates) as the only ones who cheated, ignoring the fact that they were competing amongst a semi-roided field.

No question cheatin' has been a part of the game since the get go.

But steroids are a different level of cheating. Steroids work - if you're gifted - they make you exceptional - Clemens, Bonds, ARod etc. However, they have serious BAD side effects - side effects that non-cheaters decide they are not willing to accept. They are not willing to go down Carney Langsford's road and die young of cancer - they are not prepared to risk their future just to make more money. They look at the "users" and they know they too could get those stats but steroids - can - kill.

Steroids - to me - are just a bridge too far. Let me see a pitcher caught with a file in his back pocket or a gob of goo under his hat - I can consider that a part of the game - be glad he got caught - and maybe (if he's a Jay) still love him - but not steroids - the smartest - the most sane - will just not go there. ARod - to me - like Clemns and others - is beyond my forgiveness.

Time for a scotch.

Isn't the original asterik a myth?  I didn't think that it really existed.

Also, Mick, why does Bonds get an asterisk but Rodriguez doesn't? Yankee favouritism, or is A-Rod off the hook because he admitted his cheating?

Ah, you give me too much credit. I am not that clever nor that loyal. I simply put it on Bonds' name because I wrote it first (which, btw, still feels icky to do) and by the time I got to A-Rod, forgot to do so. Same with Sosa.

Whoops! Though keeping two records still made the same statement of illegitimacy.

They are not willing to go down Carney Langsford's road and die young of cancer

Sorry, mylegacy, but I don't think this came out the way you intended.  Carney Lansford is alive and well, to the best of knowledge.  Unless the thought of double malt has me forgetting!

The remarkable thing about Prince Fielder is that he's still 270 lbs despite converting to a vegetarian diet

And in select company: apparently Tony LaRussa is a vegetarian, and some say that Hank Aaron was as well.   So even if Prince found a way to keep himself together long enough to hit 600 he'd still only be the second vegetarian to do so.

I think most of us would agree that Sosa was the king of cheating.

They are not willing to go down Carney Langsford's road and die young of cancer

You're thinking of Ken Caminiti.

You're thinking of Ken Caminiti.

I thought that was a heart attack, brought on by a particularly rough lifestyle, of which steroids was the cream in the drug-laden coffee.

I should really check wiki before I type anything... it was apparently originally believed to be a heart attack, but was actually "acute intoxication".

Long term steroid use is bad for sure. Especially irresponsible steroid use. But let's be real here. The errors of the early part of the steroid era have a lot to do with people using the substances stupidly. Now the dangers and pitfalls of it are much less for an informed user. (not that I am one, but just from the reading on the subject I've done) It was the cases of teens doing stupid things and getting themselves killed that brought this thing to the forefront. Remember steroids are prescribed by doctors for many things.

You won't see the deaths in baseball players that you will in football for example, and that is because of the nature of the sports. Even among non steroid users in football life spans are drastically shortened by the brutality of the sport and what it does to your body. Baseball is not of the same level.

I should really check wiki before I type anything... it was apparently originally believed to be a heart attack, but was actually "acute intoxication".

And the same goes for me. Now that this old memory has been jogged, his was a sudden unexpected death, not cancer at all.

The one I remember is Lyle Alzado who admitted to steroid use during his playing career before his death from cancer.

<i>When Rodriguez leaves the game, I will remember him as a typically flawed ballplayer (the steroids, the slap...) of exceptional talent and durability.</i>


The Slap! Yes! I'm still sad that the name Slappy Rodriguez never caught on.

OK - so except for the fact that I had the wrong guy, the wrong cause of death and most every other fact wrong - what's your beef?

PS: Still down on steroids and their users.

PS2: Time for a smooth double malt - yummy, yummy.

OK - so except for the fact that I had the wrong guy, the wrong cause of death and most every other fact wrong - what's your beef?

AAA Canada beef for me - you know, the kind loaded with growth hormone.

"So the only guys yet to be hit by drug rumours are Griffey Jr (who played during the steroid era) and Babe Ruth (who spent tons of time with gamblers and drank tons of alcohol when it was illegal). Interesting eh?"

I dunno if he used the alcohol in game, though. If he did, they should add some extra home runs to his total for the handicap :-)

In an article outlining Youkilis's season ending surgery on ESPN I read that

"With Youkilis gone, Epstein said the team try [sic.] and find a left-handed first baseman to help fill the void, but there doesn't appear to be anything imminent on that front."

So, will Overbay perhaps go the way of Rios in order to free up playing time for Lind, Snider and co.? 

This will be a very interesting and entertaining weekend of baseball.

Interesting Joe Pos article on steroids

I can't seem to get the link to work, here it is:

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2010/08/06/what-if-we-are-wrong-again-about-steroids/

I read the underlying article.  It is tiresomely unpersuasive.  A highlight: "almost all home run power is generated from lower body strength, steroids differentially assist development of lower vs. upper body strength, ergo, steroids don't significantly add to home run power". 

Fortunately, we do not need to have this debate again. 

Ack, brain cramp.  The highlighted argument indicates that steroid used differentially assists upper, as opposed to lower, body development.

Oooh, da man who says we don't need to have the debate hereby debates himself? Who will win? Who will lose?

Mick, do you really want to have a debate in 2010 about whether steroids help batters hit home runs (or help pitchers throw faster fastballs)?

I guess the "libertarian" memes about steroids or the census wear pretty thin in sober Canada. Facts may be lazy and facts may be late, but we like them.

I don't care because Rodriguez is really good. He has been so good that until #600 took him so long I hardly noticed it. As lots of people have said, it's a minor milestone for the one true centaur of the 21st century. It's more or less inevitable that he'll hit 661, which is a much bigger deal than 600 or 700. And, of course, there are at least three even bigger deals looming beyond that.

How many do you think Mays would have hit if he hadn't taken time off for the war?

Figure he might have hit another 20 in 1952 and 35 or so in 1953, add that to his career total of 660 and .... magic number! That'd be 715!

There is likely an active player who will make it to 600 homers (Pujols seems most likely to me). With the gaps between Ruth, Mays/Aaron and Sosa/Griffey/Rodriguez/Bonds, however, there is a precedent for there not being an active player who will make it. I'm never sure why it goes against someone's chances when they have "old man skills" like Dunn - obviously someone who hits 600 will have to be exceptional and not age poorly, and with someone like Thome creeping up the list (who has always been a K/BB/HR guy), why not someone like Dunn?
Cabrera seems like a possible 600 HR guy. He's been around for a while, but his performance this year, up a level from greatness already, could be his peak, since he's just in his age 27 season. A few huge years with ~45 HRs, and he gets close to the pace, which is a given if anyone is going to make that far anyway.

Also, with a chance at 500HR, Carlos Delgado is entering rumours for the White Sox and MEts...he could make a return maybe he'll be healthy enough to earn more playing time. If he doesn't expect a huge payday, I could see him playing next year for someone as a platoon 1B, DH type.

Carlos Delgado is entering rumours for the White Sox and MEts...

And apparently now with the post-Youk Red Sox as well.