Normally I reserve the “On Notice” (the idea which I’ve stolen from Stephen Colbert) board for crotchety old journalists like Bill Conlin who lash out at people who do his job better, but in this case, I’m expanding it to include people who make indicting statements about the “steroid era” on false grounds. Jay Urban of Bleacher Report wrote an article with a long title that reads “Gammons In Denial” before it hits the comma.
Most of the time, I will simply ignore articles like this and not even waste my time on it, but this one in particular is about a subject I feel strongly about, as it is a subject with loads of misinformation.
Mike Greenberg’s replacement that day, Erik Kuselias, reported that at the current rate Major League Baseball will produce 1,000 fewer home runs than two years ago. He then asked the baseball expert why this was ocurring.
I also asked this question not too long ago. The factor that seems to affect the offense the most is simply the weather. It’s typically cold and rainy in April and early May, so balls don’t carry as well.
Let’s take a look at last year’s New York Yankees who had the best offense in baseball. Their OPS by month…
That’s one example, but generally speaking, you will see a positive correlation between offense and higher temperatures. The current season hasn’t yet gotten into “high” temperatures.
In a laughable response, Gammons answered that the main differences were strategically motivated. Teams are thinking smarter and focusing on developing young pitching and that baseball nutrition was also undergoing a revision. Teams have been steering their players toward more versatile hitting bodies modeled after the winningest teams.
Come on. Was this a joke?
I don’t see what’s so egregious about Gammons’ response. In fact, it makes a lot of sense.
Are teams thinking smarter? It seems so, as Sabermetrics become more and more accepted in Major League circles. Teams still, unfortunately, utilize the sacrifice bunt in the wrong situations and offer a superfluous amount of intentional walks, but that has been a constant.
Are teams developing young pitching? It seems so. If you take a look at the best pitchers in baseball so far, a lot of them are under the age of 25: Edinson Volquez, Tim Lincecum, Zack Grienke, Fausto Carmona, Jair Jurrjens, Scott Olsen, Cole Hamels, John Danks, Felix Hernandez, John Lannan…
Are teams improving nutrition? How could they not? Nutrition is a science and science is always advancing. Additionally, Yankees manager Joe Girardi’s ban on candy and ice cream is an obvious focus on his team’s nutrition.
Have teams been focusing on “versatile hitting bodies”? That I cannot definitively say yes or no to, but if you think about it logically, I don’t know how it can be false. Teams don’t raise their draft picks to end up looking like Dmitri Young, do they?
The dramatic drop in home runs is a function of fewer steroid and growth hormone users, which in turn, is a function of more stringent testing procedures coupled with stiffer penalties.
This seems like a cogent correlation, but, unfortunately, it is not. Take a look at the numbers:
AL home runs per game, 2007: 0.99
AL home runs per game, 2008: 0.86 (-0.13)
NL home runs per game, 2007: 1.04
NL home runs per game, 2008: 0.95 (-0.09)
Unless Jay Urban thinks that they’ve only enforced strict drug testing on American Leaguers, he’s patently wrong here. The drop in home runs can be attributed to the cold weather and randomness.
However, even if both leagues had a significant drop in offensive production, Urban and others would still have to heed the “correlation does not imply causation” axiom.
Furthermore, Urban assumes that steroids and HGH are positively correlated with power hitting, but there has never been any direct evidence that shows this. In fact, HGH has been shown to not be performance-enhancing:
So far, no one has been able to connect the increase in lean body tissue caused by HGH with enhancement of athletic performance. Unlike steroids, growth hormone hasn’t been shown to increase weight-lifting ability; in the lab, it has a greater effect on muscle definition than muscle strength. And it doesn’t seem to help much with cardiovascular fitness, either.
As far as steroids enhancing performance, I make the argument that if they do, then so do Cortisone shots, over-the-counter and prescription drugs, protein shakes, and the like.
So, Urban is wrong on a host of fronts.
Among the penalties brought upon accused and convicted players thus far, the most potent has been fan reaction.
Right now Barry Bonds is unemployed, as is Sammy Sosa. Considering the difficulty that several American League teams are having putting runs on the board (this means you, Detroit Tigers), it would seem that these players still have a lot of value as designated hitters. Despite this, these players have been chosen as scapegoats to bear the sins of everyone else that broke the rules during this era.
Again, Urban makes a frivolous correlation: Bonds’ and Sosa’s assumed PED use is why they’re not on teams. Of course, Urban ignores that both are old and injury-prone, and that Sosa was merely league-average last season. Teams can get league-average offense in the DH spot from a number of places that don’t involve signing 40-year-olds that are essentially just taking at-bats away from younger, more deserving players.
The Bonds signing is almost definitely due to collusion, as the sage John Brattain explains. It’s not just the claim that he may have taken PED’s that is keeping teams from signing him, it’s that no one really likes him. He’s never been media-friendly (and oftentimes, rightfully so) and has always been independent.
Instead, the finger needs to be pointed in the direction of the news and sports media who have chosen to ignore the real issues that if covered, would have kept baseball accountable.
Generally, I agree with the sentiment that the media hasn’t done its job but this issue is not one such area.
PED’s were banned discreetly in 1991 via a memo, and hardly anyone knew about it. As Tom Farrey wrote for ESPN The Magazine:
In truth, steroids have been banned in baseball since 1991 — in a policy baseball officials made little effort to publicize. A source provided a copy of the seven-page document to ESPN The Magazine on the condition of anonymity.
ESPN spoke to five GMs from 1997, three of whom (from the Royals, Dodgers and Rockies) couldn’t recall that a steroids policy even existed — not that it would have mattered. “I hate to say this, but it didn’t do a whole lot of good to know the policy,” says Herk Robinson, the Royals’ GM during 1990-2000. “You weren’t going [to] solve anything. You couldn’t test. You couldn’t walk up to a guy and say, ‘What are you taking?'”
If you’re an anti-PED person, then you can only blame the guys at the top of Major League Baseball in 1991.
If you’re a more rational person who realizes that steroid and HGH use is only a controversy overinflated by the pharmaceutical industry that pays our politicians millions upon millions of dollars every year to pay attention to otherwise meaningless drug issues, then you blame… lobbyists and our easily-bribed politicians.
Instead of opening up the book and brokering a deal with major league baseball and the fans by explaining the full extent of the scandal, the media perpetuates the same fantasy that only a few were users.
Only a few were users! We haven’t even gone into the thousands (probably not even into the 500’s) with PED users, and there are close to 10,000 Major Leaguers every decade if my rough estimate is anywhere close. That would make 5% of the league over the last 10 years PED users. That’s not a big number at all. Perhaps Urban would like to present a more comprehensive list than those already compiled that include players suspended under the new anti-drug rules and those named in the Mitchell Report and whatever garbage is flowing out of Jose Canseco’s mouth.
These are periodically scapegoated in order to appease the fans who know that they were sold a lemon for over ten years.
Fans weren’t given a lemon because players were willing to put their future health at risk so they could put on a better show. The fans in the Steroid Era were given a magnificent show — the film Casablanca or Mozart’s Le nozze di Figaro if you will — and it’s a shame that so many people are willing to taint their own memories because of a manufactured controversy.
The real reason for lack of home run production is well-known and the answer points to an answer that few are willing to accept. (WARNING: the next sentence will seem outrageous to those who live in a fantasy world) A majority of players in MLB from the early 1990’s to the recent past were users on some level.
As shown above, the real reason for lack of offensive production is basically the cold weather and randomness. Go back to this article after the season and see if it still makes sense.
You know we’ve told you before
But you didn’t hear us then
So you still question why
No! You didn’t listen again
You didn’t listen again