SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Recent Posts
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 7, 2013 15:14:34 GMT -5
Over/Under on anyone on this board knowing who the guy we are about to pick is? How about an over under on a 1 K deal... lol
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 7, 2013 13:28:07 GMT -5
They are not going to save shit on Trey Ball , he's getting at least slot. If this is true than I think they will need to save 250K somewhere else to sign Denney. Of course rumors earlier say he may sign for a little less than 3.25.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 7, 2013 13:02:36 GMT -5
KJ Woods/Cory Thompson for the Sox here. Is Woods the next Ortiz?
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 7, 2013 12:59:38 GMT -5
Here comes Brian Ragira Stanford (CF) or Matt Boyd Oregon State(Sr) LHP If its a college arm I would guess Skulina from Kent State. I kind of hope we can add another young bat and get them signed here or I like HS pitcher Eric Lauer HS LHP from Ohio. Well, there goes Skulina off your pick to Theo, I still think that LHP tall and good weight will go if they go with a pitcher and being a Sr less leverage so save some money also.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 7, 2013 12:45:13 GMT -5
Here comes Brian Ragira Stanford (CF, 1B) or Matt Boyd Oregon State(Sr) LHP
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 7, 2013 10:33:02 GMT -5
Complete speculation says Ball gets slot and Stank gets ~$1M. With the 5% overage, that would give the Sox about $500K to reallocate. If last year's draft is any indicator, don't be surprised if they go under slot with this pick and take a sign-ability guy in the fourth. Buttrey was the guy last year. He was the 38th ranked prospect and ended up signing for $1.3M. If ball signs for 3 Mil just under as a few are talking is about where he figures as just in top ten than your Stank at a Mil gives them 1.146800 plus overage of 5% on the first three picks comes in at 1.404140M about what Denney would want if he is there for the third pick. That looks pretty good if it pans out. Than maybe go with one more above slot at the 4th pick then just average Sr picks the rest of the way to pay for him.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 6, 2013 22:34:05 GMT -5
It is entirely possible that they agreed on a below-slot deal. We, of course, won't know until he signs. My guess is that he'll come in at approx. $1mm. Where can we find the slot $ for all the picks? I can only find 1st round. Maybe at $1 mill this is still a below slot deal that will save us a small chunk of change. Here is one spot I found: www.mymlbdraft.com/2013-mlb-assigned-draft-pick-values
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 5, 2013 13:20:26 GMT -5
Paroubeck in the 2nd round is too high.....don't let the physique and the Barry Bonds personal lessons impress you too much. He struck out in high school ball a little more than I like to see (24 in 137 PA) When/if he quits switch hitting and goes to just a lefty that will go down most likely. He appears to have far less coordination right handed and also his power in his hitting videos shows him exclusive powered left handed I believe. Watching him when batting right handed he just seems to lunge at the ball and awkward at that. The Barry Bonds lessons I also think are nothing more than good advise to the kid, but he is a strong athlete with a lot of arm strength from the field. Hope he does drop to the third too as I'd like to see the Sox take a flyer on him.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 4, 2013 14:07:22 GMT -5
Guys I'm interested in: 1st Round: Stewart, Frazier, all else fails Meadows, Dom. Smith, Bickford, or Shipley. 2nd Round: Rowdy Tellez (HS 1B), Jordan Paroubeck (HS OF), Kevin Ziomek (Vandy, LHP) , Chris Anderson (Jacksonvile, RHP), Cord Sandberg (HS OF) 3rd Round and on: Jan Hernandez (HS 3B), Dillon Overton (Okla, LHP if falls), Justin Williams (HS OF), Drew Ward (HS 3B/1B), Zack Collins (HS C/1B), Tucker Neuhaus (HS SS/3B), Tyler Danish (HS RHP), Austin Kubitza (Rice, RHP) These are some high school bats that I'm interested in as well. I think Hernandez might be a steal if we could get him at the 3rd round or beyond. Jordon is one I really like at this level if he is there. He has lots of baseball sense appears to have great power albeit from the left side looking at his youtube clips for this switch hitter, average runner but has a cannon arm already.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jun 4, 2013 13:56:00 GMT -5
Sorry about that messed up on the quote: The criticism of Gray isn't that adderal is this hard core drug. It's the decision to take any banned substance when you are a shoo in to be a top 5 pick and possible number 1. Regardless of how innocent the substance is or how common it is, it is without a doubt a stupid decision. Is it anything more then one dumb decision by a young kid? Who knows - it wouldn't be fair to suggest it is, but I'm glad he did it. The Sox odds just went from .001% to about 1.0%. That's a 1,000 fold increase. Ill take it... Yes, those are scientifically tested figures. Of course the guy wanted to pass his finals in case baseball career looks as bad as like say Brien Taylor, Bullington, Clyde, Anderson, Paul Wilson, or even say a 6 like Andrew Miller!!! Kids want to succeed and when "Cross tops"" and "Black Beauties" were the in thing to study and focus with for their finals tons of kids across all venues used them to succeed or believed they helped them to study harder anyway. You can't blame him for that and neither do the scouts of yesteryear or today apparently. I know I don't ... he's still just a naive college kid for goodness sake!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on May 12, 2013 11:36:58 GMT -5
That might be the worst stretch of baseball I've ever seen, from the hitter dogging it to the just pitiful defense. The guy who scores is the only one that seems to have any idea how baseball is normally played. I got a question about that play that goes undetected doesn't it? When the ball is hit to the first baseman doesn't the umpire on first call him out on the catch (supposed to be in air) with the raised hand out call... than the guy at home should of had to retag third and the catcher tagged him at home even though the players seem to be wanting him to throw to first??? least wise that is the way it looks to me. Am I missing something or is the ump making a wrong call than during the play changing it!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Apr 7, 2013 18:51:06 GMT -5
Temple's boy Brian Johnson 4IP, 6 H, 1 ER, 1 BB, 2 SO, 4-3 GO-FO, 79-46 P-S Always comforting to see a polished college pitcher hold his own against Low-A talent. Especially after last August's fractured face episode.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Mar 29, 2013 13:07:57 GMT -5
Whether or not you believe he should start out in the majors is a completely different argument. I will never root for a member of the red sox to fail. I don't care if it's Beckett and Lackey at the height of beer and chicken gate, Crazy Carl at his worste or Mr embedded Yankee Ramiro Mendoza. To root for a member of the red sox to fail because possibly 6 or 7 years from now a billionaire owner might have to pay him a year earlier than he otherwise would is just silly. I don't even believe he should start out in the majors. I think it is shortsighted. However I will not root against this kid, and anyone who does should take a step back and take a look in the mirror. First of all, I'm not rooting for Bradley to fail - I'm rooting for him to struggle enough where they have to send him down for 20 days of seasoning. Secondly, it hasn't absolutely nothing to do with saving money for a billionaire owner. Think about it, if Bradley is as good as we hope he is, and the Sox were dumb enough to keep him up all year this year, then in the winter of 2018 the Sox would need to fork over a lot of money AND years to keep Bradley in town, especially with Boras as his agent. Do you think I really care if Henry saves money? I only care about the money from the point that the budget isn't infinite and if I have a choice of seeing Bradley getting $20 million/year as a free agent re-signee or seeing the Sox in need of say a pitcher, spending $10 million on arbitration for Bradley and having another $10 million available for a pitcher, I prefer the latter scenario. But more importantly, it's not even about the money. It's about the years. For the 2019 season, he'll be 29. If he's a free agent and a perennial all star caliber player at the end of 2018, he will command at least a six or seven year deal on the open market. Do you really want to see the Sox spend 6 years $120 million on him? Do you want that any more than you'd want to see the Sox spend that on Ellsbury or Jon Lester? Lester's 2014 season and Ellsbury's 2013 season are very valuable. They should be able to give performance commensurate with what they're being paid. It's the contract afterwards (think of $10 million/year Beckett from 2006 - 2009 versus $17 million/yar Beckett after 2009) that's the killer. Squeezing out the last year of a value contract from Bradley in the 2019 season matters. And as for the last point, I will certainly root against the Red Sox if it benefits the Red Sox in the long-run. I'm glad the Sox tanked in September last year. It meant the #7 pick instead of #12 and almost as importantly it means the end of the Bobby Valentine era. If you were a fan of the 2003 Red Sox and you liked the castoff from Minnesota who was wasting away on the bench, then you rooted for Jeremy Giambi to lose the DH job. Fortunately that happened and David Ortiz got his chance. As a teenager during the 1988 season, I remember hoping Spike Owen would be his mediocre self so that Jody Reed would take over the SS job. And of course there's only one other reason to ever root against the Red Sox and that's if it messes up the Yankees. Don't for a second think that Yankee fans weren't rooting against their own team that last day of the 2011 regular season. They laughed like crazy when the Yankees blew a 7-0 lead to Tampa. After all, it helped cost the Red Sox their season. I'm not trying to say I disagree with you... What I was trying to say was the Sox may be keeping him up because of his well rounded stats in spring training and the board seems to be worried about 9 games with 5 against lefties... it just seemed odd that a few lefties would matter so much when at the moment he is hitting them ok from either side in the stats that we see albeit SSS. By the way I also think he should stay down and work hard in Pawtucket... But my believe also is he may be on the same type track Ells started his career on when he was hot... call up... sent down when they need the spot... call back up when they needed him again... Fan's seem to enjoy Ells that way back then too. Ells back then showed he deserved to be up but got sent down... Seems like it helped him with his learning curve some too. It takes a while to understand how to get your OBP up in the majors as Ells had to learn.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Mar 29, 2013 12:29:35 GMT -5
Yes, I wouldn't mind if he struggles a bit. The alternative is he plays too well to send down and the Red Sox lose one year of his services for the instant gratification of 9 games which - call me crazy - is monumentally stupid. The most valuable asset a team has is its control over a young player. It really shouldn't be too hard to understand. Yes, they can send him down for 20 games at some point, but the odds just increased that this won't happen because he might play too well or there might be other injuries that makes him very necessary. This all could have been avoided by sending him down for 9 stinking games. Whether or not you believe he should start out in the majors is a completely different argument. I will never root for a member of the red sox to fail. I don't care if it's Beckett and Lackey at the height of beer and chicken gate, Crazy Carl at his worste or Mr embedded Yankee Ramiro Mendoza. To root for a member of the red sox to fail because possibly 6 or 7 years from now a billionaire owner might have to pay him a year earlier than he otherwise would is just silly. I don't even believe he should start out in the majors. I think it is shortsighted. However I will not root against this kid, and anyone who does should take a step back and take a look in the mirror. Surely if Bradley makes it to Opening day we all agree it is because of his spring training success correct? Any way that is the assumption everyone seems to be attacking. So rightly or wrongly the Sox may be making that decision on these stats too dealing with his hitting LHP in those same spring training Abs. G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB IBB SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS vs Left - 24 4 11 3 1 1 5 3 0 5 0 0 .458 .500 .792 1.292 vs Right - 35 8 15 1 0 1 7 6 0 4 2 1 .429 .535 .543 1.078
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Feb 9, 2013 13:13:42 GMT -5
Should we read anything into Marrero? If they are aggressive with him would they let him leapfrog Vizcaino and start him in Salem or even AA? Also it's good to see Lackey show up in great shape. Hopefully he can put up a sub 4.00 era and 200 innings. Who is Vizcaino? At least we'll get a better assessment of what the Red Sox have in Marrero. I think he is talking about Jose Vinicio who was in Greenville last year.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 29, 2013 20:45:54 GMT -5
dont think they will be able to do that.... Right according to this espn article: According to two baseball sources -- one of whom is familiar with the wording of Rodriguez's contract -- even if it is proven that Rodriguez received steroids and HGH from Bosch, the Yankees would not be able to impose a punishment greater than the mandatory 50-game suspension stipulated for a first-time offender by baseball's collectively bargained Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. Section 7, paragraph M of the agreement states, "All authority to discipline Players for violations of the Program shall repose with the Commissioner's Office. No Club may take any disciplinary or adverse action against a Player (including, but not limited to, a fine, suspension, or any adverse action pursuant to a Uniform Player's Contract) because of a Player's violation of the Program." "Baseball's drug policy was specifically written so that teams can't do things like this," one of the sources said. "You can't use this to try to get out of the last years of a contract." espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/8894904/alex-rodriguez-contract-attempting-voided-new-york-yankees-according-sources
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 17, 2013 11:24:53 GMT -5
[That we didn't go out and sign the best 1B on the market (ie Casey Kotchman) Ahem. This is silly. Napoli's hip could liquify at any moment, which presumably rules him out from catching but could mean a completely healthy productive year - or the opposite. Youkilis may not be a perfect model of health but he's probably a better bet than Napoli, though signing as a third baseman might be tougher on him. I originally wanted Napoli at C and Youk at 1B, so I like both players, but it's at minimum debatable. Bill James projection on FanGraphs has Napoli wOBA .359, Youkilis .357, and Youk is a much better fielder. Seeing how Beltre didn't kill him in Texas or even try to plow through him and Beltre is long gone from the Sox and that make good one year deal he had ... well ah Naps has about a little better than 50 - 50 chance of upping his stock for a big signing next year.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 15, 2013 17:23:47 GMT -5
We are starting to get some excerpts from Francona's book which is expected to come out on January 22. We will finally get Tito's side of how things went down in 2011 and prior. It does not appear to be a flattering picture of the Red Sox ownership group. In some respects, it may also provide some redemption for Tito, Theo and others in baseball ops with ownership focused more on entertainment value vs. production of players. i would expect that RS ownership is already crafting their spin control in response to what will be harsh criticisim of ownership, particularly right before tickets are put up for sale to the general public on January 26. fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2013/01/15/terry-francona-on-red-sox-ownership-in-book-i-dont-think-love-baseball/look who is co-writing the book before we think this is all Tito's words Second he blames the ownership for owning the sox (like a hobby to make money) Last time I looked there are only 2 owners I can think of who own a team because they LOVE the game, Most people own a business to make Money, and when they don't make money they sell the team.. third. This book will be nothing but everyone pointing fingers at each other and blaming everyone else BUT themselves THIS!!!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 14, 2013 22:27:24 GMT -5
I think all the press and MLB attention to steroids as PEDs and apparently not so with greenies speaks volumes. Regardless, I don't recall players in the 60s and 70s putting up the kind of disparate numbers that Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire et al did late in career. But, disregarding the age factor, where were the 60 & 70 home run hitters back then? To me the evidence is very strong that steroids do make you better as defined by increasing stat lines unless one volunteers to be blinded. Sosa had three years of greater than 60 hrs. That's better period! McGwire & Bonds hit more than 70! One note Amphetamines hurt your body worse than steroids ever did. The reason is they draw off your natural fats in your muscle and cause the deterioration of muscle by taking out the fat which waste your body away and this causes you to not do as good later in your drug use cycle (just like those top athletes that wore down during the season and over the years couldn't get back to their elite level.) So at the end of their career their muscle mass had the effect of wasting away and the toning in their muscles couldn't sustain those end of career big HR numbers. Steroids added muscle to sustain long term use by training that muscle to keep it packed on for the longer time (during the season their bodies could keep healthier.) That is why they had more (HR) at the end of their career and that muscle addition is also why more pitchers were stronger at the end of their career then the earlier pitchers. Both are wrong, but their is no "Steroids" are worse because they work better in a character debate. Actually if you look at the game between batter and pitcher they may have evened the field for the pitcher for the greenie era ... but that is just an opinion and I'm not sure how correct it might be. But to the end of time I think they both are wrong but the owners didn't and they pushed it to the players don't think they didn't well at least until it was about to hurt those owners pocketbooks! I really see your point here and I agree that I too wish that they or those closest to them if they pass do admit that they did partake... And I hope that it starts with Mays, Stargell, and Aaron and then continues on down to all of the guilty parties. All of them have evidence against them that they took Performance enhancing drugs and need the same vote of equality one and all. But it will never happen as the hypocrisy of all of us known as human beings sadly gets in the way. Maybe until that time then we should bar anyone from visiting anything in the HOF... after all fair for one is fair for all. Right
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 13, 2013 16:22:26 GMT -5
For those who don't want the writers to vote on the HOF, who would you have decide? From what I've seen, the HOF players, and fans don't want players who used PED's in. Why should those HOFer's, particularly the ones complaining and who are guilty of starting the downfall into the PED slippery slope get to decide who they want in? I personally want a statement from the league stating the PED era included back into the 50's and some of those in the hall are just as guilty and therefore PED use before testing can not be counted any different than back then when the Mays, Stargell and all those others including the owners got in! Than let the writers decide by STATS!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 13, 2013 13:26:00 GMT -5
Ok gweg you're coming around to the well-established fact that steroids are PEDs so that is progress. Once again tho, what the writers did was right not wrong because PEDs violate the integrity clause in baseball and their usage should offend all true baseball fans in any case. You are a baseball player and take illicit PEDs, you are cheating. Cheating sacrifices integrity..plain & simple. And, I hope that this voting result discourages ballplayers who aspire to the HOF in the future to refrain from compromising their chances for entry. That is also an unspoken message. I don't know what recreational drugs you so cavalierly state Mays, Stargell & Aaron were taking. Perhaps you have inside info and would like to share it?In any case, the fundamental issue is PEDs and not boozing, "recreational drugs" carousing with women or other personal behavioral matters. Go back to the Pittsburgh trials and you find quite a bit even ESPN acknowledged that at one point. sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=kreidler_mark&id=2225013sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=2289509Also this explains why amphetamines were and are better day to day and needed a pick up to be quicker to the ball in swinging, eye to hand coordination and that is why they help position players in those 10 day straight deals... you know like in the 60's and 70's when the common college folk need to stay up and study all night then pop one more just before the final exam to be alert and quick thinking to pass. Then that night crash hard and then get up half ready the next day to go on to the next. Well ball players do that too and it was prevalent back then. When they actually started testing for Greenies the game came back to the focus on good ballplay. I didn't really want to get into all this but I think some of you need or may want an explanation. If you want to address anabolic steroids as PED's fine, but realize what they really do is enable the best production of protein synthesis in your body which then converts to energy and creates red meat in your body which turns into useable muscle if and only if you train hard and exercise at an elite level and continue to do so. Thus this helps you keep that masculine body that stays healthier (bigger mass) over the LONG SEASON. It doesn't go to help you hit any better or have a better eye or anything along that line but it does keep your body mass up so that you can sustain power throughout the year. Heck alcohol actually will do close to the same job if you get rite down to it (albeit for a shorter time). WHY because alcohol is like protein converted into energy to produce mass. The key than is which one does it with less work IE energy used to convert... Alcohol does this part better because it is already broken down into ethyl alcohol and just needs to be converted into energy. The downfall those is if you take to big or a dose of ethyl alcohol and don't add enough sugars and fats it gives you that hangover and the extra energy is wasted off in your system. NOW don't do that training and high performance exercise and you get the Josh Beckett effect IE the beer belly!!! Greenies on the other hand don't create anything, they total best scenario use is to convert the fats and carbs in your body to a quick energy to use to waken your sense for eye contact wrist and hand quickness and such. The down fall to this is it takes the fats out of your muscle (the fats create the "marbling of the meat" or toning to keep your body as a oiled machine. Thus over a long period of time you become thinner in mass and weaker. Taken together you have the modern day ballplayer of the 1990's and 2000's. Baseball as you saw in the article above continually looked the other way on the real creation of the problem and the hallo of famers in it today are just as guilty has Clemens, Bonds, Big Mac and the others. One side note when Clemens was at trial and his side kept taking the b-12, b -complex shots THAT WAS TRUE... How I know this is if you take anabolic steroids or prednisone or solu delta cortef as a stimulent you need to immediately stimulate the electrolytes in your body and also stimulate the reproducing of natural enzymes in your body. Also make up for nitrogen loss , one of the best ways is to inject a combination of b-12, b-complex, and CaCo-Iron-Copper to re-stimulate your body to start naturally production of enzymes again as well as keep your vitamins up in your blood for a health red cell amount. I don't advocate this but as a trainer (not human but animal still the same) I do have some knowledge in this. I once again don't advocate steroids but the fact to me is that the baseball players and others in the hall are no different then the others today. Heck they caused today by their actions! So the only fix is to have a drug acknowledgement in the hall that admits all parties were involved in some way... Sorry for the rant!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 12, 2013 21:11:30 GMT -5
Can anyone answer this? When did steroids officially become banned from baseball? Wasn't that after 03. I don't think anyone answered your question. Steroid have been banned from MLB since 1991. I know it's ESPN, but the link below has some more information for anyone who isn't aware. There is so much misinformation about steroid in baseball that it is hard to keep to keep track. Though steroids have been banned in MLB since 1991, the league did not implement leaguewide PED testing until 2003espn.go.com/mlb/topics/_/page/the-steroids-eraSo the 'moral' dilemma can be argued over players who used steroids before 1991, but nobody currently up for the HOF. If they took steroids they cheated - pretty cut and dry. It should be noted that anyone who took Andro does not fall under this rule because it was not illegal until about 2000 (but it was obviously a steroid - so the moral argument is valid) One minor detail to this is that when Fay noted steroids were banned in 91 it wasn't that any or all steroids were banned... it was Unprescribed steroid usage has been illegal in the United States thus making them illegal in MLB. Just like recreational drugs that Mays, Stargell, and Aaron were taking. It is all a mute point now but whatever the writers did this year was wrong and their ethical lies to the people are just as wrong. That was and still is my point!
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 10, 2013 11:16:04 GMT -5
The counter to this argument is obviously that since steroid use is illegal, the majors should not need have specific rules regarding their use. Laws obviously supersede the rules of MLB. I am sure we could think of underhanded/illegal things everyone would consider cheating that is not specifically banned by an MLB rule, but would breaking the laws of the US. Not saying I believe that the steroid users should be banned, but that specific argument is very weak. Countering that: Then noting that illegal activities such as gambling kept Rose out BUT Alcohol use during prohibition didn't keep anyone out. Cocaine highly illegal didn't keep anyone out. Greenies distributed freely in the clubhouse highly illegal also didn't keep anyone out. Use of drugs such as amphetamines ("greenies" in baseball vernacular) and marijuana in the game. Both have a long history in baseball; John Milner in fact in testimony, spoke of Willie Mays and Willie Stargell, both iconic figures and Baseball Hall of Famers, giving him "greenies". Milner died at age 50 in Atlanta, Georgia on January 4, 2000. They made it and this is the exact same character issue It is well noted that amphetamines were used to enhance the performance of players who couldn't otherwise play at peak day after day. Performance was the issue with their use just like steroids today. Upon your logic of weakness of character and performance, than in my era Aaron, Ripken, Stargell, and Mays along with some others are wrongly elected than. The supposed quality BBWA writers once again are totally at fault by this logic and look at what they did with Mays: "Willie Mays' unquestionable career statistics and longevity in the pre-PED era, the more recent acknowledgement of Mays as perhaps the finest five-tool player ever, and the overwhelming consensus of many surveys and other expert analyses carefully examining Mays' relative performance, have led to a growing opinion that Mays was possibly the greatest all-around baseball player of all-time."
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 9, 2013 23:14:33 GMT -5
Have the Red Sox ever had three better pitching prospects (de la Rosa, Barnes, Webster) that project to be MLB starters in their system at one time? Maybe 05 seems to come to mind Jonathan Papelbon Jon Lester Anibal Sanchez Clay Buchholtz
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Jan 9, 2013 23:00:53 GMT -5
Can anyone answer this? When did steroids officially become banned from baseball? Wasn't that after 03.
Also why is Aaron and Ripken getting a free pass as they were suspect from the 70's and to the 90's (for Cal) when they began and continued the Greenies phase of drugs in the clubhouse... Which is also Verifiable by Canseco and Damon's admission of the greenies being freely available in a bowl right up front in all the clubhouses.
For all that why hasn't every writer demanded the owners return all the WS trophies were any player was suspected of greenies, cocaine, and steroid abuse. And why haven't they demanded the return of all post season revenue from those many teams?
The writers today need to be attacked for their lack of journalistic ability considering they apparently believed that they have the right to not vote for the superstars of one era but none of these other eras.
|
|
|