Nah...it's just pure coincidence this all happened when he teamed up with Man-Ram.

Are you really stupid enough to claim a false positive is a positive?
Hey, lets do an experiment! Eat a poppy seed bagel, then take an opioid test like Olympic athletes take. Let me know how that goes for you. (It WILL test positive)

A claim of a leaked faulty test result that nobody has been able to provide details on in nearly 20 years is about as weak as it gets.

MLB never released details of what they tested for, or what was found and at what levels.
Neither did the Times.
Neither did Congress.
And supposedly they all had the data on the tests.

Any reliable testing program
A) Anonymizes the samples, after the person who collected the sample, it's just a number, no names. That limits any potential for lab corruption. Did MLB do that? Nobody knows.
B) Uses an A and B sample to mostly eliminate lab error. A positive A sample is then checked using the B sample.
c) Releases the information about what was found, and sometimes at what level. MLB did NOT do this with the 2003 testing. The info wasn't even given to the players who of all people would have a right to know. They didn't even give them that info when specifically asked for it by a player.
This is important, a couple examples.

Bicyclist tests positive for Testosterone, duh, he's a guy. Bicyclist tests positive for testosterone, nearly 3x the limit? Yeah, that's a problem. (Actually the testosterone/epitestosterone ratio, 4:1 is the limit, Landis was closer to 11:1.)

Snowboarder tests positive for Marijuana, loses gold medal. Appeals, says He doesn't smoke because he competes, but friends do and he's not giving up on his friends. Appeal shows that pot is not actually on the WADA list of banned substances despite being punishable by death in some countries. The ammount he had was close enough to the limit that it was possible that just being at a heavy enough party would put him there.
Guy doesn't end up losing his medal.
https://www.thespec.com/opinion/colu...e-hair.html?rf

MLBs 2003 testing program was just barely adequate to show more than 5% so they could start a real program in 2004 without the union getting in the way. It's not impossible that the lab found what they were paid to find. It was a joke of a program.

The hitting coach claim was not mine, it's from Ortiz book. And it wasn't a hitting coach, it was supposedly Francona. (Which yes, makes it shaky, because the timeline is a year off. )

The AB/HR stats are what they are. I didn't bother with going to thousandths or beyond.

An OPS difference somewhat early in a career is probably not at all unusual for a star player. I believe because OPS is affected by many things besides what the player can do naturally.
Ted Williams, Lou Gehrig, Reggie Jackson, Willie Mays, and to a lesser degree Mantle, All had 100-200 point jumps right about between their second and third full seasons. A couple others I checked didn't, Ott and Musial.

Manfred never said Ortiz was a false positive. He said at least 10 of the 104 positives MAY have been false positives and Ortiz POSSIBLY could have been in the 10, as could have any player. No one knows who the 10 were since the records were destroyed. Those 10 were not re-tested because they easily reached the 5% failure threshold which triggered future testing according to the agreement with the Union.

A positive is a positive. The result of the test was positive. Was it a valid positive? Dunno. But the result of the test was positive. That was confirmed by Ortiz and Rob Manfred.

No amount of your immature name-calling will change that.

Total coincidence, of course.

To be fair, he no doubt got a bump in performance just being in the same lineup as Ramirez.

And Manny will never get any serious consideration for the Hall. Basically just written off as a dirtbag.

One played the part of the lovable bumbling buffoon and the other was his genuine arsehole self. Ortiz gets a big A+ for using the media to his advantage.

A-Rod is also an analyst but he is universally disliked. I think in part because he is just weird, but also because he blatantly lied for years about his doping. People like Big Papi.

Bonds, Clemens, A-Rod - All cheated and have very disagreeable personalities which, right or wrong, is a factor in voters minds.

Sammy Sosa should definitely not get in, without the steroid use he was an average player at best.

His career OPS+ is surprisingly low.

Why should that matter? His SLG is 45th all time (also 31st in RBIs). That is better than Mel Ott, Mike Schmidt and a bunch of other power hitting HOFers. Sosa didn't walk a lot. I don't understand the obsession with middle of the lineup guys allowing themselves to get pitched around so players who aren't as good have to come up with big hits. Your middle of the lineup guys are the ones who should be driving in runs. Sosa shouldn't be in because he took steroids, not because he didn't allow himself to be pitched around.

Sosa shouldn't be in because he wasn't an especially good baseball player. Being the 19th best rightfielder is a very solid accomplishment, but it doesn't qualify one for the Hall.

100% agree with this.

I don’t think I follow the logic of the objection to me commenting on OPS+. Why would it not be relevant or matter? OPS is the combination of slugging and on base. Slugging is the more heavily weighted component of the two. If you are going to rely on slugging, mustn’t you then believe that OPS has some value? You do not believe getting on base is worth anything and thus OPS is junk?

OPS+ pits OPS in context of time and place. I would think the reason to do that is evident.