Lost in the Lester-lust, MadBum is SI Sportsman of the Year

Like Posey, almost uncomfortable talking about himself in the limelight. More times than not, both of them deflect the limelight to others in interviews.

When you read some of this stuff coming out, you almost think, "Is that story real? Do they still make heroes like this?" He's a real throw back to a bygone era. A John Wayne type.

From a questionable draft prospect with a name seemingly borrowed from a romance novel to World Series hero. That's our Madison.

from Bleacher Report:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2294745-sports-illustrated-story-reveals-absurd-details-about-madison-bumgarners-life?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming

MadBum is Sportsman of the Year

12/10/14 | 00:03:34

Madison Bumgarner receives SI's Sportsman of the Year Award, and MLB Commissioner-elect Rob Manfred speaks about MadBum's remarkable career

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/40172882/v37040839

Bumgarner on his splinter

12/08/14 | 00:29

Giants pitcher Madison Bumgarner jokes around about getting a splinter and throwing too much during the postseason

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/21753540/v37036667

MadBum on rare suit purchase

12/10/14 | 00:25

SI's 2014 Sportsman of the Year Madison Bumgarner speaks about his limited history with wearing suits and having to buy one for the event

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/21753540/v37040831

As shifts suppress offense, time has come to consider a rule change - MLB - SI.com

Really? Why don't we just ban the slider at the same time and call it a day? If you can't beat 'em, ban 'em I guess.


from SI.com
As shifts suppress offense, time has come to consider a rule change - MLB - SI.com:

I recently asked a veteran major league hitting coach what can be done to inject more offense back in the game. His first response was to address the new DEFENSIVE positioning. “The shifts,” he said. “Get rid of them. You need to come up with a definition of illegal DEFENSE. I know you’ll say, ‘Well, you’re a hitting coach. Of course you would [say that].’ But it’s something that has really changed the game.” 

Support of an “illegal DEFENSE” rule – or at least the consideration of it – is gaining some traction in baseball. Such a rule might stipulate, for instance, that you cannot have three infielders on one side of second base. A shortstop would be able to shift as far as directly behind second base on a lefthanded hitter, but no farther.

'via Blog this'


This MLB hitting coach ought to just resign. It is interesting to note that his name is not put next to the quote.

It's not as if we haven't had shifts throughout the history of baseball (see illustration above). The shift giveth and the shift taketh away.

I put this hitting coach in the same camp as the pitchers who complain about pitchers who carp about hitters bunting against the shift.

Both need a big dose of STFU!!!

Hooray for Sports....Sports is Money!!!

I should have known that owning a sports team is where it's at from an investment standpoint. Who needs stocks, bonds, gold and silver?


from Todd Harrison's Investment site, Minyanville:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Minyanvilles-2010-MidYear-minyanville-2811083429.html?x=0&.v=3


Minyanville's 2010 Mid-Year Review

Theme 7: Bracket Buster

According to Sports Illustrated, if you invested $25 in a US treasury EE bond on January 1, 2000, it would now be worth $36.10. If you plunked that money in the S&P, it would be worth $22.45. Had you invested in an index fund that tracked the value of professional sports franchises, it would have doubled or tripled.

As the Age of Austerity permeates, look for attendance at sporting events to decline as consumers curtail discretionary spending. This should manifest through regional blackouts and the contraction of major league franchises. While there will be relative winners -- soccer should benefit with the arrival of the 2010 FIFA World Cup -- we'll likely see "status backlash" against high profile professional athletes.

Update: Status backlash indeed; while Tiger Woods and Michael Vick set this trend in motion, Ben Roethlisberger, Lawrence Taylor and Jamarcus Russell, for this self-loathing Raider fan, proved yet again that money can buy many things but public opinion isn't for sale. (See: The Short Sale of American Icons)

Structurally, we've yet to see contraction on the professional level but the realignment of college conferences -- and the raid on the Big 12 -- is likely the first step towards major restructuring. Overall annual revenue for college athletics programs is estimated at about $10.6 billion, according to the NCAA. Look for institutions of higher learning -- and perhaps the student-athletes -- to jockey for a bigger slice of that pie.

THE ARGUMENT....AND MEMORIES OF REEFER MADNESS

I'm going to give credit to the blog Steroid_Nation for outlining the major arguments for Congressional involvement in the PED issue in sports.



Then I'm going to outline why I think it's almost entirely wrong and in fact shockingly weak argument coming from a university professor.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/2008/03/congression-wei.html





So why should Congress pursue Clemens as well as

investigate anabolic steroids, HGH, and other PEDs?



* Because the truth is an important ethical

concept worth defending. Perjury remains a serious

issue.



CS - I can't argue against truth, justice or the American Way. But to put in context, Congress called Clemens in to "perjure" himself, and it is normally the domain of the law enforcement agencies to investigate crimes. Congress was basically a willing tool of the owners and Bud Selig to get the kind of movement on the issue from the Players Association that they never would have been able to achieve on their own. Should Congress be inserting themselves in labor/management issues?



* Because steroid and PED use (like HGH)

represents a hugely lucrative illegal industry for

organized crime



CS - Doubtful. Anecdotally you may be able to come up with a case or two here and there with links to organized crime, but "the mob" tends to focus on those goods (cocaine, heroin) and services (gambling, racketeering) that are not readily available to the masses. Unfortunately, steroids and PED's are available via our neighbors to the south (Mexico) as well as the Dominican, to say nothing about the Internet. That said, enforcement of the law, is for the local police, FBI, DEA, etc. to work out. Congress makes laws, it doesn't enforce them. Perhaps Congress should have held hearings into why the laws that were on the books were not enforced as they now, with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, believe they should have been. Why didn't the FBI follow up on Operation Equine in the 90's?



* Because PED distribution supports a

gazillion-dollar underground network that includes

money-laundering and income-tax fraud



CS - Gazillion is not a real number, but I've heard juveniles use it before to indicate a ridiculously large number. (Gazillion and other fictitious numbers from wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indefinite_and_fictitious_numbers )

Further, you are simply repeating your last point here in an attempt to pad (juice) the numbers and make your argument stronger. In reality, it's the same point.



* Because the PED (steroids and other drugs)

distribution networks also distribute other illegal

drugs including narcotics and stimulants



CS - Redundancy, redundancy, redundancy. Same argument as the prior two really, only weaker.



* Because these drugs are also obtained from AIDs

patients, thus diverting legally prescribed

pharmaceutics to illegal activities



CS - How prevalent is this really? Is this another attempt to play the emotional card? First it's "we're protecting the nation's youth" now we're protecting against those who would prey on unfortunate AIDS patients? Come on. Surely, you're aware of the old lawyers saw "When you have the facts on your side, pound the facts, when you have the law on your side pound the law, when you have neither, pound the table"? Seems like a lot of table pounding so far.



* Because the use of these drugs amounts to

practicing medicine without a license



CS - By the same logic would the aforementioned AIDS patients selling their prescriptions constitute practicing as a Pharmacist without a license? So anyone who takes a drug, without their own prescription, is practicing medicine without a license? That's a new legal theory on me, can you cite precedent for this? Or is this more table pounding?



* Because the use of illegal PEDs defrauds the

paying public who are deceived by the drug-cheats;

this constitutes fraud



CS - Again, I think I would stay away from the legal theory, it's doesn't seem to suit you. It seems like you're stretching the legal definition of fraud to suit your cause. I know of only one case (it's still pending, but we've cited it here http://slavieboy.blogspot.com/2008/01/i-smell-refund.html ), where a ticket holder sued a team for fraud as a result of this. I would think team ownership could more sue a player for fraud (as in Giambi) and get out of a bad contract, but even that hasn't been tested yet. I wonder why. I think the onus is on the owners (employers) to take action against the players (employees) for the fraud you're describing. The fan would seem to have action against the team owners for any fraud in the purchase of the ticket. And I'm not sure there is a winnable case there.



Speaking of fraud though, an example you might be more familiar with is described below. The disgraceful state of education in this country. Tuition costs rising significantly faster than the overall inflation rate, while university endowment funds grow faster than oil company profits.

----------------------------------------------------

FROM THE BLOG CARPE DIEM: DISTURBING VIDEO ON DECLINE OF MATH SKILLS

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/03/disturbing-video-on-decline-of-math.html



Q: What does a major state university do when test scores on a precalculus math exam for incoming freshmen continue to decline year after year, while at the same time high school GPAs of incoming freshmen are going up?



A: If your answer is "make the test easier," go to the head of the class!



Watch a disturbing video on the decline in math skills for college students (click twice on the arrow above), with an explanation for why it has been happening ("reform math"), and some ways to solve the problem (abandon "reform math").



Thanks to Oak Norton for the pointer.



See a previous CD post on the huge shortage of IT professionals and the lack of technology talent in the U.S.. Thanks to "reform math," that huge shortage will likely continue.

-----------------------------------

MATH EDUCATION: A UNIVERSITY VIEW

---------------------------------------------------

* Because many MLB games are played in public

financed venues, that raises issues of misuse of

public funds when the games are not fairly played



CS - The publicly financed venues you cite are generally state and local funds so it would seem to be more their concern then that of Uncle Sammy. They have used the tax exemption hook to stick their nose under the tent so to speak, but even that is weak argument. And you know what happens once the camel sticks his nose under the tent don't you? Sure you do, it's not long before you have a camel in your tent. If I attend a rock concert at the same venue, where there is marijuana/alcohol abuse and perhaps other illicit drug use going on all around me (and let's face it, what other kind of rock concert is there?) then using the same legal theory, shouldn't I expect Congress to get involved in the name of reducing/stamping out recreational drug/alcohol use?



* Because that the trafficking of PEDs though

players that use, trainers that distribute, or

street-dealers that sell, represents illegal drug

activity, certainly answerable to the federal

government and the FBI



CS - We're back to the CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, LAW ENFORCEMENT argument again. Redundant.



* Because illegal PEDs likely made their way

through international checkpoints (like Canada) with

players breaking international regulations (see Juan

Gonzalez's story)



CS - We're back to the CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, LAW ENFORCEMENT argument again. Redundant.



* Because that it is clear youngsters under 18 use

PEDs (steroids and others) based somewhat on their

idol's use of PEDs



CS - Oh, Thank God. Protect the young people!!! Why is this so far down the list when it appears to most to be the number one reason for Congressional involvement. Let's get our priorities in order shall we, Professor? You say "somewhat" but if you look at the most recent issue of Sports Illustrated they cite their own polling that shows 99% of America's youth (99% PERCENT), would not, I repeat, WOULD NOT use steroids or PED's simply because their favorite athlete did.



http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/magazine/03/11/steroid.survey/index.html



Further, 97% said they would not use PED's even if they knew it would make them a better player. So it seems like kids are a lot smarter then we are giving them credit for. This restores my faith in the youth and makes me question more the faith in adults who would use condescending arguments from the "Reefer Madness" era to make their case in this issue. Makes me wonder if future generations are going to laugh just as much about our handling of this issue as our parents and grandparents handled the marijuana issue. Kids are not little idiots and should not be treated as such.



* Because these illegal drugs produce serious

medical side-effects, which in themselves are cause

for concern, but also represent a major public health

problem



* Because there is evidence the PEDs are addictive



CS - MEDICAL ISSUE - Two arguments for the price of one redundancy again. Now we're getting somewhere, let's let the AMA and Big Pharma decide this, they haven't screwed too many modern day issues up with their incompetence and corruption.



* Because illegal anabolic steroids have been

shown to be involved in felonious crimes beyond drug

trafficking -- crimes like murder, assault, and rape.



CS - We're back to the CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, LAW ENFORCEMENT argument again. Redundant. Nice touch by adding the murder, assault, rape emotional kicker. Did you forget about child molestation?



* Because the US Olympic team, which is obviously

a visible ambassador to the world, appears to be

violated by the drug-cheats and the PED dealers



CS - Then they would fit right in with the most corrupt organization involved in sports the International Olympic Committee. It wouldn't bother me at all if we didn't participate at all in that sham and for many reasons that have nothing to do with the PED issue. I didn't miss it at all when we boycotted the Olympics.



CS - Seriously Professor, if one of your students turned in a paper with these arguments and you didn't throw it right back into his face for a re-write than I wonder about our so-called institutions of higher-learning. Feel free to rebut.

------------------------------------------------------------

FROM THE REEFER MADNESS ERA: OR THE MORE THINGS CHANGE....THE MORE THEY REMAIN THE SAME



http://www.reefermadness.org/propaganda/trail_a.html







Another excerpt from On the Trail of Marihuana, the Weed of Madness:



"We now know that marihuana --



1. Destroys will power, making a jellyfish of the user. He cannot say no.

2. Eliminates the line between right and wrong, and substitues one's own warped desires

or the base suggestions of others as the standard of right.

3. Above all, causes crime; fills the victim with an irrepressible urge to violence.

4. Incites to revolting immoralities, including rape and murder.

5. Causes many accidents, but industrial and automobile.

6. Ruins careers forever.

7. Causes insanity as its specialty.

8. Either in self-defense or as a means of revenue, users make smokers of others, thus perpetuating the evil."



[italics were not added, they appeared in the original source]



Source: On the Trail of Marihuana the Weed of Madness by Earle Albert Rowell & Robert Rowell, Pacific Press Publishing, 1939, p. 33



---------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.reefermadness.org/propaganda/congress.html





Hearing Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Finance United States Senate, Seventy-Fifth Congress, First Session on H.R.6906 - July 12, 1937 Excerpt from statement of Federal Bureau of Narcotics chief Harry J. Anslinger



MR. ANSLINGER





I received this letter from an attorney at Houston, Texas, just the other day. This case involves a murder in which he alleges that his client, a boy 19 years old, had been addicted to the use of marihuana.

SENATOR BROWN





Shall we read this into the record?

MR. ANSLINGER





Yes, sir; I shall be very glad if you will.





(The letter is as follows:)



Houston, Tex., July 7, 1937



H. J. Anslinger United States Commissioner of Narcotics Washington, DC



Dear sir: Your article on Marihuana appearing in the July issue of the American is very useful as well as interesting. this subject strikes close to home because of a client II have who not so long ago murdered in a brutal way a man who had befriended him in giving him a ride. This client is a boy 20 years of age and he explained to me he has been smoking marihuana for several years. I would like to have about 1 copies of your article and will gladly pay any necessary charges. I would appreciate an early reply.



Yours Truly, Sidney Benbow

MR. ANSLINGER





I have another letter from the prosecutor at a place in New Jersey. It is as follows:





The Interstate Commission on Crime March 18, 1937



Charles Schwarz, Washington, DC



My Dear Mr. Schwarz: That I fully appreciate the need for action, you may judge from the fact that last January I tried a murder case for several days, of a particularly brutal character in which one colored young man killed another, literally smashing his face and head to a pulp, as the enclosed photograph demonstrates.



One of the defenses was that the defendant's intellect was so prostrated from his smoking marihuana cigarettes that he did not know what he was doing. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to a long term of years. I am convinced that marihuana had been indulged in, that the smoking had occurred, and the brutality of the murder was accounted for by the narcotic, though the defendant's intellect had not been totally prostrate, so the verdict was legally correct. It seems to me that this instance might be of value to you in your campaign.



Sincerely yours, Richard Hartshorne



(Mr. Hartshorne is a member of the Interstate Commission on Crime. We have many cases of this kind.)

SENATOR BROWN





It affects them that way?

MR. ANSLINGER





Yes.

SENATOR DAVIS





(viewing a photograph presented by Mr. Anslinger) Was there in this case a blood or skin disease caused by marihuana?

MR. ANSLINGER





No; this is a photograph of the murdered man, Senator. It shows the fury of the murderer.

SENATOR BROWN



That is terrible.



MORE REEFER MADNESS MADNESS: This is good reading, see if you can spot the parallels between current events and the events as described here.



http://www.reefermadness.org/propaganda/essay.html



http://www.reefermadness.org/propaganda/essay2.html



---------------------------------------------------------------

Some of the more positive suggestions I've seen from one of the few Congressmen that I thought acquitted himself well during the Clemens hearing.



FROM CONGRESSMAN ELIJAH CUMMINGS (D-MD) WEBSITE





http://www.house.gov/cummings/newsletter/050808.htm

http://www.house.gov/cummings/newsletter/050808.htm





Congressman Cummings Expresses Disappointment in

Baseball Star's Steroid Use



In continuing to take an active role in opposing the

tolerance of steroid use in professional sports,

Congressman Cummings expressed disappointment with

regard to the news that broke on August 1 that Orioles

baseball player Rafael Palmeiro was suspended for

steroid use.



He continued by noting that when sports leagues ignore

this type of cheating, they send a message to the

public that steroid abuse is acceptable.



"Unfortunately, this perception has contributed to an

increase of the drug's abuse by teens from 1 in 45 ten

years ago to 1 in 16 (and in some surveys, 1 in 8)

today. Further, the players' unscrupulous actions send

a message to young children-many of whom try to

emulate their sports heroes-that steroids are safe."



Congressman Cummings said that he would continue to

urge Congressional Leaders to expedite consideration

by the full Congress of The Clean Sports Act of 2005

(H.R. 2565/S.1114) which he has co-sponsored with his

House colleagues Congressmen Davis, Waxman and Mark

Souder (R-Indiana). Senator John McCain (R-Arizona)

has introduced companion legislation in the Senate.



Specifically, the Clean Sports Act of 2005 would

require these professional leagues to:



1. Expel athletes for two years for their first

steroid-abuse violation and impose a lifetime ban for

a second violation;



2. Adopt a comprehensive list of prohibited

performance-enhancing drugs;



3. Test each player on an unannounced basis at least

three times during the regular season and twice during

the off-season; and



4. Finally, in an effort to ensure balance, the

legislation guarantees that players who test positive

receive their due process rights, including the right

to notice, a fair, timely, and expedited hearing, the

right to be represented by counsel, and the right to

appeal.



CS Note - This provision, albeit the American Way, would not satisfy the USADA, WADA Nazi's who use tactics to counteract that would not past serious legal muster in this country. So I would urge caution when listening to these purveyors of information on the topic, their agenda and methodology is wholly un-American.



"Passage of this legislation would send a strong

message to the public and especially to young people

that no one wins when athletes cheat," Congressman

Cummings said.

Peter KingofDoughnuts Replies

THIS IS A GOOD QUESTION, AND I THINK I HAVE A GOOD ANSWER. From Aaron of Toronto: "Will your boycott of an alleged steroid cheat extend to confirmed cheats such as Shawne Merriman?''

No. Merriman was tested, caught, and suspended. Barry Bonds was not tested, not caught, not suspended ... for years.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now this sounds like dumb logic until you consider the following:

This is the same Sports Illustrated that employed Jeff Pearlman (Author of Barry Bonds and the making of an AntiHero) when he was a cub reporter. Interesting stuff from an interview Pearlman did with Deadspin here:

http://deadspin.com/sports/baseball/authors-with-pure-hearts-jeff-pearlman-171871.php

Even though I assumed he wouldn't remember me, I'd actually interviewed Barry four or five times during my years at Sports Illustrated. During the 2000 season I even did a lengthy profile on him--the first time he talked to the magazine in seven years. We sat down for about an hour, and he was spectacular. Funny, charming, charismatic. In fact, when I handed in the piece my editor was very angry. His exact words, and I quote, were, "If you wanted to give Barry Bonds a blowjob, we could have flown him to New York." So I adjusted the story, which still was very positive.

That sounds like the producers of our favorite swimsuit edition have a bit of an agenda or axe to grind. But that doesn't happen, right? Journalistic integrity and all that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Or how about this from one of the two main stories excerpted from the book, the quotes from ex-teammate Jay Canizaro? You read about the original quotes, but not about stuff like this.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How much did you want to beat Jay Canizaro's ass after he pulled the switcharoo on you on live TV? We'd have really wanted to beat his ass.

Severely. I interviewed 524 people for this book, and he's the only one who did that. It infuriated me to no end, because you're talking about a writer's reputation. After I calmed down I called Jay and said, "Here's a way to settle this. You and I appear on the next day's Cold Pizza (the show where he denied all). I'll bring the audiotape of our interview and a printed transcript, and you show me exactly where and how you were misquoted." He apologized, and I actually felt sort of bad for him. Because it wasn't done out of malice, but fear. Jay was afraid that Bonds or someone could sue him, or he'd be blackballed from baseball, or ... whatever. But when you go 12 years without being accused of misquoting someone, and then someone accuses you of that, you become very, very defensive. Especially in a case like this.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's more about the second main excerpt, the Ken Griffey dinner conversation, that Griffey later said never occurred.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ESPN totally acted like your Griffey scoop was theirs in an attempt to make it look like they didn't get their asses handed to them by Sports Illustrated. Agree with that statement? Do you mind?

Actually, I'm thankful ESPN the Magazine ran the excerpt from my book. And it's hard to blame them for trying to come back at SI. The one thing I'll say is the timing really backfired for me, because the excerpt was strictly steroids-related, so it gave the imprssion that my book was another Shadows. But I don't blame ESPN at all.


http://www.slate.com/id/2139038/

Seven years ago, while visiting Orlando, Fla., with his family, Barry Bonds stopped by Ken Griffey Jr.'s house and told him he was about to start using steroids.

This scene opens the 13th chapter of my upcoming Bonds biography, Love Me, Hate Me. Bonds was there. Griffey was there. I have verification.

And yet, even before I sat down to write the chapter, I knew the inevitable aftermath. Bonds would deny everything and call the writer a no-good sack of shit. Griffey would shrug his shoulders and yawn, "Never took place." Indeed, when ESPN the Magazine ran the excerpt two weeks ago, Bonds and Griffey responded predictably. They both insisted the conversation was fictitious.

"I don't remember it ever happening," Griffey said. "The only thing that Barry and I ever really talked about was me coming out to San Francisco and working out with him. And I told him, 'For six weeks, I can't leave my family.' … As far as the other thing, that conversation didn't happen."

Around the same time Griffey's words scrolled across the bottom of my TV screen, I received a phone call from an ESPN producer. He wanted a comment.

"A comment on what?" I asked.

"On Jay Canizaro," he said. "He's denying everything."

Canizaro, a one-time journeyman second baseman, had spoken to me at length about his early years with the Giants, when he watched Bonds balloon from Lara Flynn Boyle to Lee Haney. A former steroid user, Canizaro knew all the signs of a juicer. Zit-coated skin. Peanut-sized testicles. Moodiness. And Bonds was a juicer.

"Hell, he took off his shirt the first day and his back just looked like a mountain of acne," Canizaro told me. "Anybody who had any kind of intelligence or street smarts about them knew Barry was using some serious stuff."

Now, he was backtracking. Suddenly Canizaro admired Bonds as a great sportsman and was shocked—shocked!—that anyone would suspect the legend of cheating.

I called Canizaro that afternoon. In front of me were a printed transcript of our interview and a copy of the audiotape. My hands were shaking. My blood was boiling. I asked him how he could go on national TV and deny what he told me, especially considering I had it all on tape.

Canizaro hemmed and hawed. He stammered and stuttered. Finally, with a hint of humiliation in his voice, he admitted that he was, of all things, scared. How, he wondered, would his comments play to his major league brethren?

I was angry. I wasn't surprised. In Major League Baseball, there is a code. The Code. Simply put, ballplayers do not rat out other ballplayers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You have to wonder if the title "Game of Shadows" doesn't also describe how the media virtually manufactures the news nowadays, as opposed to simply reporting the news.
Everybody knows that you can make your name and gobs of money as a reporter quickly by breaking the next "Watergate". And it seems like the prevaling attitude is if you can't break the news, you have to make the news. It's how you adavnce and become a "name", a face, a talking-head, expert on the round-the-clock TV News shows.

Now I'm not personally a big fan of Curt Schilling, he's beaten the Giants too many times for that, but I have to agree with his comments after the Bloody Sock-Gate comments of Gary Thorne. There are some bad apples in the industry and there is really no accountability for some of these numb-skulls unless they say or write something totally politically incorrect and it gets through the filters.

Schilling's Quotes:
"So for one of the first times this blog serves one of the purposes I'd hoped it would if the need arose. The media hacked and spewed their way to a day or two of stories that had zero basis in truth. A story fabricated by the media, for the media. The best part was that instead of having to sit through a litany of interviews to 'defend' myself, or my teammates, I got to do that here."

So now, players have a defense mechanism or an outlet when they feel they have been unfairly portrayed by the local media. Fans can get a chance to hear their side of the story, in their own words if they so choose. That was supposed to be the job of the beat reporters, but the level of trust has dipped to such low levels and the technology is now in place that there is an avenue for players to fight back if they feel they've been wronged.

Interesting world in which we live in, that's for sure.

Hypocrisy, Hypocrisy, Hypocrisy...and Bonds at 740.

This is a perfect example of the hypocrisy we'll continue to see as Barry Bonds makes his march towards the home-run crown. Jeff Perlman, the author of Love Me, Hate Me, The Making of an Antihero has his own special man-crush on Josh Hamilton. Well, isn't that special? He clearly hates Barry Bonds and the example he provides, but gushes eloquently over Josh Hamilton. That's just so special.

from espn.com
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=pearlman/070420&sportCat=mlb

Of course, this nation is so full of forgiveness, but apparently on a selective basis only. It may be full of something, but it's clearly not forgiveness.

from espn.com:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=pearlman/07411&sportCat=mlb

Another comes courtesy of Sports Illustrated's Peter King, who is not going to mention Barry Bonds any more because he believes he cheated. Here's his take on Shawn Merriman after he tested positive for steroids:

MERRIMANMANIA. From Bruce White of Indianapolis: "Should Shawne Merriman be eliminated from the Pro Bowl due to his positive steroids test?''

No. If he's eligible for 12 games and plays at a very high level in those games, he should be able to play in the Pro Bowl. Now, if he were to miss three games down the stretch for any reason, let's say, I'd say he didn't deserve a bid because he missed too much time. But he paid his penalty according to the collectively bargained rules of the game.

All right, let me get this straight Mr. King:

You're going to protest Barry Bonds achievement with your silence, (sounds more like a reward than a penalty, hey whatever) but have no problem with Shawn Merriman being rewarded for his achievement by participating in the Pro-Bowl even though Merriman flunked a steroids test and to-date Bonds hasn't flunked one?

Sounds like your disdain for cheating is a bit selective, don't you think? Merriman served his time according to the CBA? Weak argument. Apply same logic to Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, than we can talk like intelligent, rational people.

Do you do any special contortionist exercises to reconcile your logic in these two instances?

I think I've about had it with the blatant stupidity of braying jack-asses like this.

Somebody on this planet needs to complete the Honesty and Integrity Trifecta (we'll call it the HIT for short) for me before I give them an ear on this issue.

That is, whenever I hear or read somebody blast Bonds, (and of course they know everything he's done or didn't do, because he's always been so open and accommodating with his time with the media) I ask, "what do you think about Clemens, might he be cheating to get the results he's getting at an advanced age?"
 "Oh no, no way".

How about Lance Armstrong, couldn't he have done something to help him defeat not only Cancer but his competitors, all of whom seem to be on something? Nobody except the French seems to think he does anything but win Tour de Frances.

There seems to be just as much of a mountain of real or circumstantial evidence to implicate Clemens or Armstrong from what I've seen, heard or read. But we gleefully leak information on the one hand and blissfully redact in the other? Not to mention some other guys we let slide because they're still popular, like Pujols, Prior and many others.

And I'm a little tired of hearing, "Well these guys aren't approaching "hallowed" records" as if cheating is somehow OK, up until a point. Try that the next time you rob a bank and don't steal all the money in the vault. You want to start erasing records from the record book, you better get yourself an awful big eraser, or gallons and gallons of white out.

Guys like Perry, Sutton and Whitey Ford are in the Hall of Fame and lionized in spite of careers built on bending rules. Time to put it away folks. Never mind whatever was accomplished as a result of the use of "greenies", which were made illegal in 1970.

There is a huge problem in this country among youth with use of crystal meth. Meth being shorthand for methamphetamine or "speed". Hey, Dad baseball players use it, why can't I?

There is a also a huge problem in this country with alcohol use among youth, but I don't see any major sport turning away sponsorship dollars on principle. I know it's legal and that makes a huge difference, but spit tobacco is legal also and they took a stand there. Tobacco by contrast does not generate sponsorship dollars. Seems like we're picking our spots to take a stand based on dollars to be lost or gained (wait, where have I heard that before?).

Palmeiro I can see venom being directed at. He knew the deal and still tried to get away with something. Anyone else caught under the drug testing program deserves whatever animosity they get.

McGwire, Sosa, Bonds all of them have the Lance Armstrong defense in my opinion, they've never failed a test. You want to blame them for baseball not having adequate testing, that's pretty ignorant and unfair. I don't see anyone at work unilaterally offering up urine or blood tests unless they have to and even then, under protest. You want to retroactively punish people for behavior, start by taking racists like Cobb, Anson, et al out of the Hall of Fame, then you'll have my attention. Or take out some of the cheaters you've glorified in the past. Then I'll be impressed by your position on the issue.

And by the way, Peter King and his ilk on the Football Hall of Fame have no problem whatsoever looking the other way on all sorts of reprehensible behavior when voting on membership in the Football Hall of Fame. Drug Use, Murder, Manslaughter, anything goes as long as you perform on the field. And your little piss-ant silent protest against Barry Bonds is supposed to mean something? Give it a rest you MF-ing hypocrite.

The biggest Performance Enhancer Bonds has used in his favor IMO has always been Questec. Since being put in service in 2001, the year he hit 73 homers, his strikeout to HR ratio has turned from about 1:2 before to about 1:1.25 afterwards. Only Pujols seems to be as close in terms of HR to K ratio. That's a pretty significant change in one year.

Pitchers cannot pitch to him and get him out within the constraints of the strike zone as defined in the rule book, period. And it's possible they were never able to. However, prior to 2001, Major League pitchers had an extra 5-10 inches off the outside corner to work with. Anyone care to debate that fact? I didn't think so.

It's the same problem with Alex Rodriguez. He's so locked in and so good as a hitter and a slugger that he simply can't be pitched to. And even A-Rod strikes out about 4 time for every HR.

There is still a significant portion of the guys who study the game from statistical viewpoint who do not see the numbers of Bonds, McGwire and Sosa as being abnormal.

Here's another interesting outlook from Daniel Engber's article in Slate titled "The Growth Hormone Myth: What athletes, fans, and the sports media don't understand about HGH". The gist of the article is there is really not much data out there that indicates, from an exercise physiology standpoint, that using any of this stuff works to enhance performance on the baseball field. You have to make leaps of faith or assumptions that are not backed up by any scientific data.

The following paragraphs were I thought most interesting:

The most likely reason that athletes use HGH, though, is superstition. A ballplayer might shoot up with HGH for the same reason we take vitamin C when we have a cold: There's no good reason to think it does anything, but we're willing to give it a try. The fact that the major sports leagues have banned growth hormone only encourages the idea that the drug has tangible benefits. Why would they ban something unless it worked?

This mentality has put doping officials and athletes into a feedback loop of addled hysteria. The World Anti-Doping Agency will ban any drug that athletes use, whether or not it has an effect. The WADA code points out that the use of substances "based on the mistaken belief they enhance performance is clearly contradictory to the spirit of sport." In other words, it doesn't matter if HGH gives athletes an unfair advantage. If Jerry Hairston believes he's cheating, then he really is cheating.

That twisted logic has turned the latest round of busts into a giant PR campaign for growth hormone. Every star athlete who gets caught with a vial of HGH turns into a de facto spokesperson for the drug. In a certain sense, that might be a good thing: The media hype may soon make HGH so popular that it squeezes the more dangerous anabolic steroids out of the market. That's one way to clean up the game.

Seems like a silly way to go about it though, travelling from one bogeyman to another, but that seems to be the way things get done in this country.

And who cares if Hank Aaron doesn't show up for the record breaker? As far as I'm concerned, he couldn't hold Willie Mays' jock as a player. And if Mays had played in as hitter-friendly ballparks as Aaron enjoyed, we'd be taking about Bonds breaking Mays' record. And we might be waiting a bit longer for the record to fall. Mays might have hit 800.

I'm not going to go as far as calling Aaron a coward as Rob Parker did in this Detroit News article, but I do feel it shows a lack of class and respect for the game of baseball and Bonds accomplishments.

from detnews.com
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070420/SPORTS08/704200362/1129/rss15

And Bud Selig can stay home to for all I care. He was gutless at the beginning of this whole "steroids" mess and it wouldn't surprise me if he continued to be gutless now. If you really want to label anyone a coward in this whole mess, the guy for me would be Commissioner Bud Selig, representing all of the owners.

And for all the whiners, who won't be able to face baseball with Barry Bonds as it's Home Run King can always cheer on Alex Rodriguez as he makes a run at 800, 900 or, if he can get to Wrigley Field on a regular basis, who knows maybe 1000 HR's as the mark for future sluggers to shoot for.

Then tell me that the size of ballparks, the springiness of the baseballs, the dilution of pitching, etc. hasn't been a factor all these years. Me, I'll celebrate a great achievement, by a great major league hitter, possibly the best all-around hitter of this generation and most others.

The Keith Olbermanns of the world can stay home and make love to their inflatable Rebecca Lobo dolls or whatever young lady they're currently stalking (ahem, allegedly stalking) and try to pretend that they are the moral compass not only for baseball, but for the entire free world. Give me a M.F.-ing break. Where have you gone Harold Reynolds?