<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d6246235\x26blogName\x3dKevin\x27s+Royals+Blog\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://kevinagee.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://kevinagee.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-3074220402547471409', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Steroids, Steroids, Steroids

  • The day before Thanksgiving, I wrote a short couple of paragraphs about a steroids-related poll I found on ESPN.com. In the wake of Jason Giambi's court statements being leaked to the media, the topic is more relevant than ever. Here's what I wrote that day:

    The ESPN.com poll, which was on the MLB page, asked this question, with two possible answers:

    Baseball hasn't had a 50-homer guy since 2002. Which would you prefer?

    > Tougher drug testing, even if fewer HRs
    > Juice 'em up and let 'em rip

    I was surprised at the results after I voted for "Juice 'em up and let 'em rip," because only 16.1 percent of the 23,508 voters saw things the way I did.

    I know I might catch some flak for writing this, but I don't care if major leaguers take steroids, and I don't think baseball should care either. When an athlete takes a steroid or some kind of a significant supplement, he's essentially making a deal with devil: By shooting up, he risks losing years of his life as a tradeoff to perform at the highest possible level in the present. We all saw the unfortunate demise of Ken Caminiti, in which steroids played at least a small role.

    If an athlete of any sport wants to take that risk, I don't see the point of standing in his (or her) way. This isn't MLB's fight to pick, so I think they'd be better off to not ban steroids and let the Sammy Sosas and Jason Giambis of the world shoot up in the on-deck circle if they so choose. If what the fans want is legitimacy attached to their game, then let them have their legitimacy by giving players the option of using. Grown men play baseball, and if they want to die young to hit a lot of homers now, that's their sacrifice to make.
    Giambi's "confession" to using in 2003 hasn't swayed my opinion on this one bit. I still don't think Bud Selig should have any interest in saving idiots like Giambi from themselves, but I do see one acceptable way to put a stop to steroid use, not that it's going to happen. And that would be the players' union making a few rules about the use of illegal enhancements.

    Since the players are the ones juicing up and harming themselves, I think it would be in the best interest of the union (which supposedly cares about its members) to protect its members from potentially harming themselves down the road. I'd like to see a rule put in place that says if a player is found to be juicing, the consequence would be removal from the union. That's right: No more royalties from video games, merchandise, or other licensed memorabilia, and being labeled as a "scab" along with the replacement players from 1995.

    So my original opinion stands that MLB should have nothing to do with this, but the players' union, for the well-being of its members, has quite the responsibility here. I hope they take that responsibility, but I won't be surprised when they don't.

  • Lost in the sidebar of a December 1 Bob Nightengale column in USA TODAY was a sentence that read, simply, "The Royals are pushing hard for Phillies first baseman Ryan Howard." I'm not sure the Royals are "pusing hard" to get Howard to contribute for them, or if they're trying to get him with the intention of flipping him for a power-hitting corner outfielder. The latter seems like the more likely possibility, what with Howard being a first baseman and the Royals already having at least four guys who are limited to playing first or DH.

    Howard's generally viewed as being one of the better hitting prospects in baseball, which is an assertion I can only partially get with. There's no question that many of the skills are there, because Howard's done a fine job of drawing walks (206 in 1637 at-bats) and having a very good isolated power number of .282. However, his strikeouts really concern me the same way Dallas McPherson's do, and for that reason I'm not convinced that Howard controls the strike zone well enough to have Jim Thome's career. Right now, I view him more as a righty-mashing DH, which has value but not nearly as much as Thome II would.

  • By the way, I'm always looking for ways to improve the look and content of the blog, so if you have any suggestions, please e-mail me! Have a great weekend, everybody.
« Home | Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »