How do you think fans will react to the named players who did performance enhancing steroids as compared to those having done HGH? Will people make a distinction? It seems like HGH is starting to be viewed as "no big deal" since it doesn't directly affect performance and is not considered a health danger (at least not as much so).
As to the question of pitchers vs. hitters... my guess is that more than half are pitchers, but that most of those pitchers will be named as HGH users since recovery time is paramount to pitchers.
I think the bigger question is how many current players as compared to retired players will be named? It seems like a lot of the names being suggested are retired players. If there are 80 players named, but only 20 are current players, then I think the impact will be a lot less. If every team in baseball has 3-4 big names on the list, it could get ugly (at least initially).
"The government cannot give to anyone anything that it does not first take from someone else"
It would be good for baseball if there are hardly any current players on the list. I think the public would perceive that the problem has been fixed and that this report is the final chapter in a dark period in baseball history. I think that's a bunch of bologna, but that's how it would be viewed.
StarsNPinstripes wrote:From what I've been reading,and some names have been speculated on this thread, a lot of the names are going to be former Mets players who played while Kirk Radomski served as clubhouse attendant for the Mets;He supposedly gave Mitchell a lot of information.
If you think that he only gave drugs to Mets players, I believe that you are mistaken.
MVP's and All-Stars will be named. This is even bigger than I figured and I was expecting it to be pretty darn big.
P.S.- Why is one trainers testimony enough to drag 80 players name through the mud? They might not be charged with anything, but can the MLB strike their records without a fair trial?
StarsNPinstripes wrote:From what I've been reading,and some names have been speculated on this thread, a lot of the names are going to be former Mets players who played while Kirk Radomski served as clubhouse attendant for the Mets;He supposedly gave Mitchell a lot of information.
If you think that he only gave drugs to Mets players, I believe that you are mistaken.
I concur.
AussieDodger
Hall of Fame Hero
Posts: 11288
(Past Year: 418)
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Bases this season: 464
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: What do you mean, Flash Gordon approaching?
jfg wrote:MVP's and All-Stars will be named. This is even bigger than I figured and I was expecting it to be pretty darn big.
P.S.- Why is one trainers testimony enough to drag 80 players name through the mud? They might not be charged with anything, but can the MLB strike their records without a fair trial?
I think that he has a lot of proof like phone and bank records.
StarsNPinstripes wrote:From what I've been reading,and some names have been speculated on this thread, a lot of the names are going to be former Mets players who played while Kirk Radomski served as clubhouse attendant for the Mets;He supposedly gave Mitchell a lot of information.
If you think that he only gave drugs to Mets players, I believe that you are mistaken.
I concur.
Not impyling nor do I think anything;just passing along what I've read.
I really don't think Bonds will be on the list. Pleading not guilty a week before this comes out is pretty ballsy. I'm guessing he knows he won't be named.