Poll - Greatest Living Player

[Peter_Spaeth]

Note the date.

Fed Proc
. 1981 Oct;40(12):2689-92.
The amphetamine margin in sports
V G Laties, B Weiss
PMID: 7286248
Cite
Abstract
The amphetamines can enhance athletic performance. That much seems clear from the literature, some of which is reviewed here. Increases in endurance have been demonstrated in both humans and rats. Smith and Beecher, 20 years ago, showed improvement of running, swimming, and weight throwing in highly trained athletes. Laboratory analogs of such performances have also been used and similar enhancement demonstrated. The amount of change induced by the amphetamines is usually small, of the order of a few percent. Nevertheless, since a fraction of a percent improvement can make the difference between fame and oblivion, the margin conferred by these drugs can be quite important.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Note the date.

Fed Proc
. 1981 Oct;40(12):2689-92.
The amphetamine margin in sports
V G Laties, B Weiss
PMID: 7286248
Cite
Abstract
The amphetamines can enhance athletic performance. That much seems clear from the literature, some of which is reviewed here. Increases in endurance have been demonstrated in both humans and rats. Smith and Beecher, 20 years ago, showed improvement of running, swimming, and weight throwing in highly trained athletes. Laboratory analogs of such performances have also been used and similar enhancement demonstrated. The amount of change induced by the amphetamines is usually small, of the order of a few percent. Nevertheless, since a fraction of a percent improvement can make the difference between fame and oblivion, the margin conferred by these drugs can be quite important.

The dispositive point for me is that amphetamines were not banned by the MLB until 2006. As such, suspected greenie users who ended their careers before 2006 were never cheaters.

Steroids, however, were banned in 1991. Prosecutors determined that Bonds tested positive in 2000. As a cheater, Bonds won 4 MVP awards and hit 317 home runs.

The argument that everyone did roids when Bonds did roids and therefore Bonds played on a level playing field rings hollow. If everyone playing the game is caught cheating at the game (which is patently untrue), then I'd argue that none of them are great.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by bk400

The dispositive point for me is that amphetamines were not banned by the MLB until 2006. As such, suspected greenie users who ended their careers before 2006 were never cheaters.

Steroids, however, were banned in 1991. Prosecutors determined that Bonds tested positive in 2000. As a cheater, Bonds won 4 MVP awards and hit 317 home runs.

The argument that everyone did roids when Bonds did roids and therefore Bonds played on a level playing field rings hollow. If everyone playing the game is caught cheating at the game (which is patently untrue), then I'd argue that none of them are great.

Agree with this. The more modern steroid users were violating known rules and skirting testing protocols. Some of them lied before Congress. And they changed their bodies at near comical rates. Ultimately a false comparison to what happened in the past. Presumably almost all players have used performance enhancing drugs at some level if they drink coffee. The more modern cheaters took things to an extreme that has rightfully earned the vile they have received.

[ClementeFanOh]

Carter and bk400- Thank you for the lucidity, it helps to combat the
deliberate obfuscation we've been seeing from the usual suspects. A few
closing points:

1) This debate is NOT about evil roiders versus real heroes. THAT is the
simplistic view and it's wrong.

2) The original post question asked for the greatest living MLB player. It is
obvious that such a person, whoever he is, should possess statistical
gravitas and some measure of respect by those involved. This
person doesn't need to be "perfect", a saint, or everyone's favorite. The
person certainly cannot be someone whose first impression nearly always
comes back to duplicity for personal gain. That person can be termed
sneaky, successful, or opportunistic- but "great" isn't the word.

3) For those who think it's cool or mature to choose Bonds, it may be worth
the time to ask yourself if you truly think he best represents this
sport you claim to adore. If you truly can't think of anyone else, you are
the problem. He's sludge at the bottom of the barrel in this conversation.

4) For what it's worth, I thought Bonds was an excellent player before his
head grew and his power numbers mysteriously skyrocketed. I'm sure
many of you thrilled to his latter career exploits. I did not. You got duped
or, at barest minimum, knew it was fake and played along by excusing it
somehow within yourself. This doesn't make Bonds great, it makes the
entire chapter/era rather sad. Bonds doesn't give a rip, he laughed all the
way to the bank (and people STILL defend it).

Trent King

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Mark17

I went with Bench because, in my opinion, he's the only guy alive who is probably the greatest player at his position.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Schmidt.

I also believe those two were the greatest ever at their positions.


IMO, As far as Bonds is concerned, BEFORE he started cheating, he was certainly one of the two best active players along with Ken Griffey, Jr.

He had as many advantages as anyone and didn't have to suffer to attain like those who came before...he stood on their shoulders and never seemed to be thankful...he just got greedy and took the easy way...same as Clemens.

Though it is not truly relevant to the 'Living GOAT' discussions, the fact that both Bonds and Clemens are absolute jerks (along with Rose) does enter into our choices.


I'll stick with Bench

honorable mentions go to Schmidt and Henderson.
.

[packs]

Players are able to file for exemptions and take approved prescriptions for substances like Adderall. It's use is accepted and there are exemptions for it.

Are there similar exemptions for substances like anabolic steroids or HGH?

If there is not, then I think MLB has made a clear distinction between the two substances and what their effect on the game is.

[Mozzie22]

How in the hell does Koufax get so much love? I understand he had an unreal short stretch, but Greg Maddux is clearly a better pitcher. Does Koufax's religion have anything to do with his popularity do you think?

[MR RAREBACK]

#1 Barry bonds
#2 Greg maddux
Both can be found in 1987 leaf boxes

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mozzie22

How in the hell does Koufax get so much love? I understand he had an unreal short stretch, but Greg Maddux is clearly a better pitcher. Does Koufax's religion have anything to do with his popularity do you think?

I don't think it's his religion. I think it's the strikeouts and no hitters, plus he had a certain mystique about him. Maddux is just a nerdy guy, and was an artist, not a blow you away pitcher. But there is no question in my mind from an overall perspective there is no comparison, Maddux was far greater.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Mozzie22

How in the hell does Koufax get so much love? I understand he had an unreal short stretch, but Greg Maddux is clearly a better pitcher. Does Koufax's religion have anything to do with his popularity do you think?

It's because I saw him PITCH!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bk400

The dispositive point for me is that amphetamines were not banned by the MLB until 2006. As such, suspected greenie users who ended their careers before 2006 were never cheaters.

Steroids, however, were banned in 1991. Prosecutors determined that Bonds tested positive in 2000. As a cheater, Bonds won 4 MVP awards and hit 317 home runs.

The argument that everyone did roids when Bonds did roids and therefore Bonds played on a level playing field rings hollow. If everyone playing the game is caught cheating at the game (which is patently untrue), then I'd argue that none of them are great.

So I ask again: is it the cheating people object to or the performance enhancement, or some of each? If (hypothetically) a player has a medical exemption to take HGH, are we OK with that?

[bk400]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So I ask again: is it the cheating people object to or the performance enhancement, or some of each? If (hypothetically) a player has a medical exemption to take HGH, are we OK with that?

I object to the cheating. Performance enhancement activities that are not prohibited by the overseers of the game, are in my view, fair play.

And yes, if a player has a medical exemption to take HGH (like Lionel Messi did as a youth player with a hormonal deficiency), I would be fine with it.