I should have said Radomski and McNamee were New York guys. It is a proximity thing. Just like when they busted Balco there mostly Giants and A's implicated. If they bust a trainer in Gold's Gym in Boston, then there will be Red Sox (probably guys from 2004 and 2007) implicated. If the feds bust a drug lab in fort wayne guys from the astros and Rangers might get caught.
True, thats what makes this a great case to compare.... It was the Mets vs Yankees... Not the Yanks vs Mariners... Same time, same place.
This isn't about who took steriods and who didn't.. I don't blame them for doing it. If juicing up was the difference between me making the min wage bagging groceries or making the minimun wage in the MLB Id do it. If it was the difference between me 5Million a year and 12 million a year... I'd do it.
MLB practically begged these guys to take them, everyone made money, and now I think its a shame that players careers are being called in question BEFORE MLB had any language what-so-ever that it against policy to do so.
KCollins1304 wrote:If you think that the Yankees were the only team to ever have juicers, then you are very naive. If you think that the Mitchell Report named all or even half of the people to have used PEDs, then you are even more naive.
The Mitchell report failed to mention many players that are considered "common knowledge" for the sake of argument I ommitted any names that have come from sources other then the mitchell report.
It can't all be taken as fact of course, but implying that Ramoski and McNaee have no loyalty to any side, (Mets players LoDuca, Vaughn, and Huntley are all in the report) and their is no geographical distance between the teams other then a couple of subway transfers, The 2000 World Series would be one of the best examples to compare.
As a Met fan I personally don't really care, but as a history buff, I find it interesting that this a great case of where the history books are probably not correctly written.
All that proves is that more people from the Yankees used Radmonski and McNaee than the Mets. You can't conclude that more people from the Yankees used steroids than the Mets, or that it had a factor in the outcome of the series. On top of all of that, as has been said, steroids were widespread all throughout the 90's and this decade and you can keep playing the asterisk game throughout the history of the game.
It was one team full of steroid users agaisnt another team full of steroid users in a league that didn't have a drug policy. And yet you think there should be an asterisk on their World Series title? Incredible.
Old_Style wrote:Roger Maris broke Babe Ruth's single season home run record in a 162 game season, while Ruth only had a 150 games season to work with. Asterisk?
Actually originally there was an astrick next to this record. Then I remember the commish at the time said it was the biggest mistake of his tenure.
* don't solve problems, they only create new ones.
That is a baseball myth. There never has been and never will be an asterisk in the baseball record books. People might look at certain records as more legitimate than others but there will never be an asterisk in the books.
gws226 wrote:I think its hard to put Astericks on records, and championships but based purely on the mitchell report, I'd have to say if there ever was a case to put an asterick on a record/event... My vote would go to the 2000 Yankees World title.
There were 8 players on the roster that are directly mentioned in the Mitchell report. 1. Clemens 2. Pettite 3. David Justice 4. Jose Canseco 5. Chuck Knoublach 6. Denny Neagle 7. Mike Stanton 8. Jason Grimsley
For the sake of history, the players in the report contributed.... 3 Wins: Game 1,2,5 28.1 Innings, 7R, 5ER
Game 1: Difference Maker: Knoblauch scores tying run in bottom of the ninth Game 2: Difference Maker: David Justice scores on Jeter single in 5th (mets go on to score 5 in bottom of the ninth, but come up one run short) lose 6-5 Game 4: Difference Maker: With 2 on and 1 out in the 8th, Stanton comes on and strikes out both Trammel and Harris to end the threat.
Im a die hard mets fan but i still have aproblem with this. The guys who matter like Jeter, Bernie, O'neil, Mariano, Brossious, Posada, Tino and others werent on the report. And just because prominent Mets werent on the report doeant mean any of them didnt use PED's. and fwiw Pettite admitted to using HGH only in 2002. If you want to blame anyone for the Mets loss blame Benitez and Timo Perez who forgot how to run the bases. We had Game 1 in the bag
If I remember correctly, I read somewhere that steroids have been around baseball since the 1910-1920s. George Sisler, if I remember right, used to take shots of monkey testosterone, among others. I read that was a big thing back then. Oh gosh, more asterisks.
gws226 wrote: As a Met fan I personally don't really care, but as a history buff, I find it interesting that this a great case of where the history books are probably not correctly written.
Are you kidding me? This thread has got to be a joke.
The history books aren't correctly written? How in the hell do you know that the Mets were clean? How do you know Piazza wasn't on the juice? Or Ventura or Zeile or friggen' Timo Perez for that matter?
Pettitte was only mentioned as using HGH once in 2002, so that shows how much you actually read the report. And I'm glad you found it appropriate to cite guys like Canseco and Grimsley on your list, who had no impact on the team that year.