And it's in, Ortiz has been elected to the Hall

[G1911]

Hell, many of the players being punished by the hall for steroids weren't even breaking any rule at all, test or no test. Andro wasn't banned when McGwire became known to be a user, and yet he, an obviously more deserving candidate than Ortiz, was ignored in the voting.

Ignoring Ortiz' test because it is known from a leak and the appeal and re-test processes wasn't in place (which seems to be what Manfred is actually referring to), while continuing to punish literally every other known user, including players who 1) didn't test positive at all and/or 2) were not even breaking the rules and/or 3) also tested positive in 2003 before the institution of the current procedures takes some truly incredible mental gymnastics to justify the obvious: Ortiz is held to a completely different standard from every other player. Reason should tell this is absurd.

[MINES_MINT]

The excuses being made on behalf of Ortiz and others such as Bonds and Clemens are just pathetic in my opinion. As fans and historians of baseball we should have integrity and respect for the game and expect the same from the players. Unfortunately, based on some of the responses I have read online, I am seriously beginning to question the character of the average baseball fan in modern culture.

When Ortiz first spoke publicly about his positive test, his response was "my results leaked because so many Yankees tested positive". Why wasn't his initial reaction to the article to deny that he had ever used PEDs in the first place? No defamation suit? No libel? In my opinion that initial reaction shows guilt, and no amount of walking it back will change that.

Manfred cosigning Ortiz for the Hall is just another blemish to his already questionable tenure as commissioner, and if you don't see the spin he put on this whole situation I'm guessing you've never hit a curve ball.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by MINES_MINT

The excuses being made on behalf of Ortiz and others such as Bonds and Clemens are just pathetic in my opinion. As fans and historians of baseball we should have integrity and respect for the game and expect the same from the players. Unfortunately, based on some of the responses I have read online, I am seriously beginning to question the character of the average baseball fan in modern culture.

When Ortiz first spoke publicly about his positive test, his response was "my results leaked because so many Yankees tested positive". Why wasn't his initial reaction to the article to deny that he had ever used PEDs in the first place? No defamation suit? No libel? In my opinion that initial reaction shows guilt, and no amount of walking it back will change that.

Manfred cosigning Ortiz for the Hall is just another blemish to his already questionable tenure as commissioner, and if you don't see the spin he put on this whole situation I'm guessing you've never hit a curve ball.

How does Manfred have a choice?

[GeoPoto]

Originally Posted by MINES_MINT

Manfred cosigning Ortiz for the Hall is just another blemish to his already questionable tenure as commissioner, and if you don't see the spin he put on this whole situation I'm guessing you've never hit a curve ball.

So, the world you wish to live in is one where a player, gullible enough to accept MLB's (Manfred's) word that a test would be confidential, have no consequences and, therefore, would skip over due-process, would end up "convicted" of a "failed test" and publicly shamed out of consideration for the Hall of Fame. Ortiz and the other players who were "tricked" into agreeing to be tested, participated in a key step toward getting the player's union to support driving steroids out of baseball (for the most part, at least). It seems to me you could replace "gullible" with "courageous" in my first sentence above.

[lowpopper]

Barry Bonds is king...HOF or not.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by GeoPoto

So, the world you wish to live in is one where a player, gullible enough to accept MLB's (Manfred's) word that a test would be confidential, have no consequences and, therefore, would skip over due-process, would end up "convicted" of a "failed test" and publicly shamed out of consideration for the Hall of Fame. Ortiz and the other players who were "tricked" into agreeing to be tested, participated in a key step toward getting the player's union to support driving steroids out of baseball (for the most part, at least). It seems to me you could replace "gullible" with "courageous" in my first sentence above.

Ortiz failed a test. Nothing in your statement changes that fact.

[G1911]

Where was the outrage for the other players who failed in 2003 and are still being kept out of the hall? Ortiz’s actions are now “courageous” while every other roider is still a cheater? When these are the arguments to try and justify the obvious, you know there’s no logical counterpoint.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Wasn't Pedro on the list?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Wasn't Pedro on the list?

I watched Pedro give an interview when he was trying to sell his book. He openly admitted he and the entire team was on PEDs. It was hilarious because the interviewer was doing everything he could to get Pedro to STFU. Pedro just kept running his mouth about a specific time when the whole team took PEDs together before a playoff game.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Ortiz failed a test. Nothing in your statement changes that fact.

Ok, since you must have inside info-

Failed in what way?
For what substance?
The testing was done by who?
And since we know it didn't follow internationally standard protocols, how was it done? Methodology? protection of chain of custody?

Anyone can be an anonymous source, but to me they are not credible if they don't have that sort of information.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

Ok, since you must have inside info-

Failed in what way?
For what substance?
The testing was done by who?
And since we know it didn't follow internationally standard protocols, how was it done? Methodology? protection of chain of custody?

Anyone can be an anonymous source, but to me they are not credible if they don't have that sort of information.

If you think Papi didn't use, what's your take on his transformation beginning in 03 from his Twins years?

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you think Papi didn't use, what's your take on his transformation beginning in 03 from his Twins years?

I heard a Papi supporter claim it was all Fenway Park effect. lol

[BCauley]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you think Papi didn't use, what's your take on his transformation beginning in 03 from his Twins years?

I'm not saying one way or the other if he used or not, but he had a few injuries to his wrist(s) and didn't get consistent playing time. Whenever the Twins sent him back down to the minors and he played regularly, he put up the numbers. When on the Twins, he didn't get that. Even when he got to the Red Sox in '03 he at first didn't play regularly due to Jeremy Giambi taking away from his playing time and he didn't do much. It was only when Ortiz started playing every day, about two months into the season, that he started producing.

I read some article the other day that mentioned something about the Twins stadium at the time and the park playing a factor as well with him. Something about him always trying to pull the ball to hit a home run instead of using the whole field or something and that the dimensions for Fenway made it easier for him to use the whole field/hit home runs. I don't remember the details on that though but that was the general idea.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you think Papi didn't use, what's your take on his transformation beginning in 03 from his Twins years?

What transformation? He hit 38 homers with the Twins in 715 ABs. The guy was a monster in the minor leagues. He beat out A-Rod and Griffey Jr in a home run contest when those guys were already in the majors..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUrg...ustoP%C3%A9rez

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you think Papi didn't use, what's your take on his transformation beginning in 03 from his Twins years?

What he said years ago was that Minnesota had a particular style of play they wanted, and that he was told to work on hitting to the opposite field and for average.

Nearly his first times with Boston when he got out trying for the opposite field he was told "that's not what you're here for, swing away"

Just a story to fill a book? Maybe? But taking an approach that's more suitable to your skills and way of thinking is generally good for most people.

Look at his AB/HR across that time and beyond.
2001 16.83
2002 20.6
2003 14.45
2004 14.19
2005 12.78
2006 10.33
2007 16.68
2008 18.08
The years after are roughly the same without doing the math. Around 30 in about 4-500AB

His last couple years in MN he was actually a better HR hitter than he was in 2003 and 4. And really only had one outlier year where he was really a lot better. I think you'll find a lot of players who had that one crazy year. Maris and George Foster come to mind immediately, and they were probably not doping.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by steve B

Ok, since you must have inside info-

Failed in what way?
For what substance?
The testing was done by who?
And since we know it didn't follow internationally standard protocols, how was it done? Methodology? protection of chain of custody?

Anyone can be an anonymous source, but to me they are not credible if they don't have that sort of information.

It was leaked in a NYT story that Papi failed a test in 2003. Papi has since admitted he failed the test. Manfred said Papi failed a test, but the testing resulted in some false postives and he never disclosed what banned substance it was and writers should use their judgement when voting for Ortiz.

Papi failed a drug test. No inside info.

[MINES_MINT]

Originally Posted by GeoPoto

So, the world you wish to live in is one where a player, gullible enough to accept MLB's (Manfred's) word that a test would be confidential, have no consequences and, therefore, would skip over due-process, would end up "convicted" of a "failed test" and publicly shamed out of consideration for the Hall of Fame. Ortiz and the other players who were "tricked" into agreeing to be tested, participated in a key step toward getting the player's union to support driving steroids out of baseball (for the most part, at least). It seems to me you could replace "gullible" with "courageous" in my first sentence above.

So in "the world you wish to live in" Ortiz is the victim, got it.

How about a world where people are held accountable for their choices and accept the consequences of their actions?

Ortiz cheated. Period.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by MINES_MINT

The excuses being made on behalf of Ortiz and others such as Bonds and Clemens are just pathetic in my opinion. As fans and historians of baseball we should have integrity and respect for the game and expect the same from the players. Unfortunately, based on some of the responses I have read online, I am seriously beginning to question the character of the average baseball fan in modern culture.

When Ortiz first spoke publicly about his positive test, his response was "my results leaked because so many Yankees tested positive". Why wasn't his initial reaction to the article to deny that he had ever used PEDs in the first place? No defamation suit? No libel? In my opinion that initial reaction shows guilt, and no amount of walking it back will change that.

Manfred cosigning Ortiz for the Hall is just another blemish to his already questionable tenure as commissioner, and if you don't see the spin he put on this whole situation I'm guessing you've never hit a curve ball.

If integrity and respect for the game is your standard, then that has to apply to all involved.

A leak from un-named attorneys, corroborated by nothing.

I'm not sure about the other players, but Ortiz was never informed about a positive test, something you'd think they'd want to do.

Along with not being told, they couldn't tell him what he'd tested positive for. Which is in many ways the single most important piece of information. I can see not making it public, but not informing the player?

If they had the info, why not also release what each player tested positive for? To this day that has never happened. Some things that could be tested for are present in some pretty mundane stuff. Many over the counter supplements, at least one cyclist got in trouble over a poppy seed bagel....
So release that information.

The government got the info, and at least for Bonds the actual sample. (Note, only one sample, when every serious testing program takes two.)
The 2003 program didn't find anything, but the government testing sure did.

So right off, either the testing was for the wrong things, or was poorly done.


Having integrity and respect for the game would not be anonymously "releasing" information that was supposed to be confidential, and that wasn't properly done, making it unreliable.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by steve B

I'm not sure about the other players, but Ortiz was never informed about a positive test, something you'd think they'd want to do.

That's false. Ortiz himself has confirmed that he failed a test.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Tabe

That's false. Ortiz himself has confirmed that he failed a test.

"Nobody came to me after, nobody came to me before, nobody came to me ever to tell me that I test positive for any kind of steroids," Ortiz said in the WEEI interview. "This was just something that leaked out of New York. They have still no explanation about it. It was just, 'You're name was there.' I was like, 'Oh, ok. See how that works.' It's not up to me anymore, about the Hall of Fame. I think I did what I was supposed to. I worked extremely hard to represent (Boston) the way I did."

From this 2017 article. I wanted to find the similar quote from 2009, but the rash of new articles makes it harder to find than it was a couple weeks ago.

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/b...icle-1.3180299

Also-
Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred said last year in Boston that when baseball and the union got the test results back from the 2003 survey testing, "we were well over the percentage necessary to trigger the (drug) testing."

But Manfred added that there were "double digits of names — so, more than 10 — on that list where we (the union and MLB) knew that there were legitimate scientific questions about whether or not those were truly positives."

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by steve B

"Nobody came to me after, nobody came to me before, nobody came to me ever to tell me that I test positive for any kind of steroids," Ortiz said in the WEEI interview. "This was just something that leaked out of New York. They have still no explanation about it. It was just, 'You're name was there.' I was like, 'Oh, ok. See how that works.' It's not up to me anymore, about the Hall of Fame. I think I did what I was supposed to. I worked extremely hard to represent (Boston) the way I did."

From this 2017 article. I wanted to find the similar quote from 2009, but the rash of new articles makes it harder to find than it was a couple weeks ago.

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/b...icle-1.3180299

Also-
Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred said last year in Boston that when baseball and the union got the test results back from the 2003 survey testing, "we were well over the percentage necessary to trigger the (drug) testing."

But Manfred added that there were "double digits of names — so, more than 10 — on that list where we (the union and MLB) knew that there were legitimate scientific questions about whether or not those were truly positives."

Ortiz says result got leaked because he was from Boston. He has never once said the result was NOT a positive.

Manfred admits it was a positive when he says it may have been a false positive.

[Mungo Hungo]

So what are the general thoughts on Maris? The up-and-down of his HR totals are striking: 16-39-61-33-23. Of course, there could be various explanations for that. But I remember reading that his hair was falling out in '61 and that some people were attributing that to something other than stress. Is there any reason to think he was using performance enhancers, or was the technology just not there at the time?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Ortiz says result got leaked because he was from Boston. He has never once said the result was NOT a positive.

Manfred admits it was a positive when he says it may have been a false positive.

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.

[FourStrikes]

Originally Posted by MINES_MINT

The excuses being made on behalf of Ortiz and others such as Bonds and Clemens are just pathetic in my opinion. As fans and historians of baseball we should have integrity and respect for the game and expect the same from the players. Unfortunately, based on some of the responses I have read online, I am seriously beginning to question the character of the average baseball fan in modern culture.

When Ortiz first spoke publicly about his positive test, his response was "my results leaked because so many Yankees tested positive". Why wasn't his initial reaction to the article to deny that he had ever used PEDs in the first place? No defamation suit? No libel? In my opinion that initial reaction shows guilt, and no amount of walking it back will change that.

Manfred cosigning Ortiz for the Hall is just another blemish to his already questionable tenure as commissioner, and if you don't see the spin he put on this whole situation I'm guessing you've never hit a curve ball.

yup.