Search THT:

Or you can search by:

February 27, 2012

Did Ryan Braun get off on a technicality?

No.

Unfortunately, I have to explain that. A point that is under-reported can be summed up this way: Braun’s defense team provided the exact information about what happened to the sample from the time it was given to when it was tested. As defense teams do, they repeated the process. Yes, they took urine from Braun, repeated the conditions and guess what? They got the same result.

When people talk about the “loophole,” they seem to be describing the chain of ownership of the sample. But the sample was never lost, misplaced, or visiting with Jimmy Hoffa for any period of time. The location of the sample is accounted for at all times.

The problem is that, for some reason, the sample was contaminated by the condition it was stored. This is not a legal loophole, but a serious and repeatable problem specific to this case. If you take Braun’s urine and repeat the steps, you get the same result.

This, is of course, why the procedure needs to be followed preciously. If you have a recipe and decide to not follow it, you’ll get something that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike what the recipe is supposed to make.

The questions I have are:

{exp:list_maker}Why was a sample where the proper procedures were NOT followed even tested? Procedures are in place for a reason, specifically to avoid a questionable result.

Why was this information leaked, and by whom? Baseball has had two major leaks related to drug testing in 2003 and in this case. {/exp:list_maker}
I think the first question is the most important. Braun didn’t get off on a technicality. This is also the reason why MLB, although vocal, probably will not appeal the results. They are not going to put their testing procedures, and their ability to follow them, up to close scrutiny.

Once again, reporters, faced with a PEDs related story, dropped the ball completely. Few are reporting why Braun really was absolved of this charge. Instead, the tone is more like Jeff Passan's:

Make no mistake: This was a technicality. It was a loophole. Most of all, it was brilliant lawyering by Braun’s attorneys. Hundreds of tests had been handled in exactly the same manner in baseball and never before had the players’ union protested their accuracy. Sources from MLB and the union told Yahoo! Sports the chain-of-custody section of the joint-drug agreement is likely to be rewritten to ensure that a defense similar to Braun’s would have no legs. Because even some inside baseball who should be on Braun’s side – players, agents and other officials – see his prevailing as a Pyrrhic victory.

Which is completely wrong. But the MSM being wrong about PEDs is the default standard, designed to enrage and sell papers instead of report what actually happened.

The problem isn't that chain-of-custody. The problem is that while in the chain of custody, a procedure was not followed (and hence, this wasn't like the hundreds of other tests). It was shown that deviation from the procedure caused the results that triggered this.
Posted by: Mat Kovach

January 16, 2012

PED injustice and the Hall

Hall of Fame vote is frustrating. Something is wrong with either the procedure or the people involved in the voting. This became clear when Barry Larkin’s deserving, and late, induction became a second tier story to who did not make it and the ongoing assault about the role of steroids or PEDs*.

* For the remainder, I’ll refer to PEDs to include steroids, HGH, etc.—anything that has been considered Performance Enhancing Drugs. It will also refer only to those performance enhancing drugs that are banned and/or tested for.


The leaking of Ryan Braun’s positive drug test, currently in appeal means at some point we’ll be forced to hear the opinion of members of the Baseball Writesr Association of America (who do the Hall voting) on the validity of numbers, the historical content of PEDs, and the presentation of evidence about PED usage by players. Even if Braun’s appeal is successful, we’ll hear writers' opinion about what should have been done if Braun was actually suspended.

There has to be more reason for this constant discussion than what is presented on the surface.

There are writers who say using drugs is illegal and people using PEDs* are therefore breaking the law which lacks integrity as well as specific rules of baseball. Despite that writers will vote for players, and support active players, even when they break the rules of baseball or demonstrate a lack of integrity.

* When I use the term "‘using PEDs" or "PED user" i am talking about people who have admitted to using PEDs and those who are simply suspected of using PEDs. It is impossible to tell if the writers are concerned if there is a difference. Given that I’ll group the convicted and suspected together for my discussion about writers.


The Hall of Fame includes admitted spitballer Gaylord Perry. Whitey Ford's plaque stands in the Hall despite his admission to throwing doctored baseballs, including in the 1962 All-Star game to strike out Willie Mays. Writers use the cheaters excuse inconsistently, so when they do trot it out, safely dismiss it.

A standard is set. Writers often use the statistical standard of the players in the Hall in arguments for or against players. They will use bad behavior only as a reason to not vote for somebody, ignoring substantial information that cheaters and other bad people are already in.

So writers will set various levels of badness to rules, allowing some to be broken without incurring penalty. Given the example of Perry and Ford, I have never heard of a writer who voted them into the Hall advocating allow the spitball to be part of the game. If one argument is that cheaters should not be in the Hall, how can the next argument be that people who didn’t cheat that badly can still be considered. Logically this does not sense.

When Derek Jeter feigned being hit by a pitch, even to the point of allowing the trainer to inspect him for injuries, writers, fans, and even the manager on the opposing team thought it was a good baseball move. Willfully lying to the umpire, a lie that because of the nature of the play could not visually determine if the ball hit Jeter, is good? I wonder if this commercial played during that game. Jeter’s action did the exact opposite of what we teach about integrity. This was not attempting to deceive another player or team but the people you want to make the right call on the field. If this lack of integrity is a good baseball move, then how can you argue that integrity is needed for be eligible for an award or getting into the Hall of Fame. People will point to Jeter's fake injury as a reason that he deserves to be in the Hall.

Writers' claims of PED users as cheaters lacking integrity still have not given a reason why they won’t vote for a PED user. They have a different agenda when they ostracize PED users.

Let’s remember PED users took advantage of a tool that allowed them to train better. The increased training made them better athletes, allowing them to improve their baseball skills. They used something that baseball, their own union, and the players themselves did not feel strongly enough about to eliminate by testing the players.

PEDs are no magic pill; you have to work hard to get any advantage from them. A number of players who used PEDs achieved little of note in baseball. At the very least, players who used PEDs and are in consideration of seasonal or lifetime awards worked very hard to get there. The reason they are in consideration is because of the hard work. You may feel the PEDs increased their numbers* but ignoring those numbers is ludicrous.

* This is questioned by many sources. If the effects of PEDs were well known it would be easy to regress players' numbers. Without solid evidence on the effects of PEDs one can’t unauthenticate the statistics except arbitrarily. But arbitrary denouncements are what we are trying to avoid.

The underlying issue seems almost personal. That underlying issue is so important that writers, seemingly, want to rewrite history.

So where do we look for an underlying issue.

Easy.

The Twilight Zone.

Based on a 1950 short story by Damon Knight, Rod Serling’s teleplay of To Serve Man described how Michael Chambers happened to be on a spaceship. Told in flashback form, the cryptographer talks about Kanamits' visit to Earth. To Serve Man models a history of writers and PEDs.

The Kanamits, nine-foot aliens that communicate telepathically, visit the Earth uninvited. They use the United Nations to assure that they come with good intentions. To prove this the Kanamits help end world hunger, provide a cheap energy source, render nuclear weapons harmless, help cure diseases, and help to bring world peace.

The Kanamits* did leave a book at the U.N., but given the difference in languages, only the title had been determined, To Serve Man. Despite government and military insistence to decrypt the entire book to find out the true intention of the aliens, many people including Chambers assume that Kanamits have the best moral intentions and soon start signing up to visit the Kanamits' home planet, touted as a paradise. People assumed that To Serve Man was a message about how they wished to serve mankind.

* Fun note: Richard Kiel played the Kanamit. Also Jaws in several James Bond films.

Only, when Chambers is boarding the spaceship to travel to the Kanamits’ home planet is it revealed that To Serve Man is a cookbook. By then, it is too late for Chambers, and he is soon forced to accept his fate of becoming an alien dinner.

Many quality points to learn from the story. I am going to focus on Chambers as today’s baseball writers who were writing during the PEDs era of baseball. Kanamits are home runs and fans are the masses of people either traveling unknowingly to become a Kanamitian dinner or left to face the future on Earth.

Michael Chambers had a simple, yet important job; using his cryptology skill to decipher To Serve Man. However, failing to question the actions of the Kanamits, he assumed their motives were good. They must be moral and humane, they want to serve mankind. Those who did question their motives were trivialized. Chambers went along for the ride. In the end his lack of critical thinking and questioning the motives affected not only him but all of mankind.

This is the situation with PEDs. We expected the writers to turn their critical eye to the game of baseball. The home runs were the Kanamits. We, as fans, expected the writers to let us know if something was wrong. If the reporters, in the clubhouse, were not questioning things, why should we? Writers treated the offensive explosion just as Chambers viewed his encrypted cookbook, with complacency.

{exp:list_maker}It is easy, in retrospect, to see the questions Chambers should have asked himself to motive himself to crack the book.
How can we put human values on aliens, including ones that communicate in a completely different way then we do?
The Kanamits went to great lengths to make sure that mankind was fed, healthy, and not killing each other. Why did we just assume that they had our best interest when they clearly went out of their way to visit us?
Why in the heck were they so concerned about the weight of people when they were loading the spaceship? Given the advanced language and technology they surely did not need this information for a technical reason.
{/exp:list_maker}

Clearly Chambers fell down on his job. When we comeback from the flashback we see the Kanamits encouraging him to eat, so we doesn’t lose weight, and Chambers slowly is resigned to his fate and eats.

Baseball writers, as the offense numbers started to rise, stopped critical thinking and went along for the ride. They lost the ability or desire to look for the reason behind the increase in offensive numbers. They were, quite simply, acting like Michael Chambers looking forward to a pleasant trip with the Kanamits to the benefit of themselves. They were not thinking that they were being misled when their job is, specifically, is not to be misled. The fans were falling in love with the home run and they went along with the ride.

It didn't end until Jose Canseco starting running around saying, ‘To Serve Man’ is a cookbook.

The writers are now Chambers sitting on a spaceship left to think about their own inaction each time a vote comes around. Instead of accepting their fate, as Chambers does when he starts to eat, they are insisting on blaming others. They blame the home runs and the players who hit them.

The Kanamits didn’t do anything but benefit from Chambers, and others, basically assuming that the Kanamits wanted to server mankind. PED users got by only because the writers lacked common sense. The Kanamits provided things which we can compare to the statistics generated during the PED era. Eliminating them is an attempt to retroactively change history to an image we desire.

The reporters need to follow Chambers' lead and resign themselves to a history they enabled. Not taking into account the relative value of the players in relation to the era they played in continues to harm the history of the game. This point is curiously ironic. Reporters will argue that Jack Morris belongs in the Hall of Fame since we was the best pitcher in the '80s. His numbers are lacking compared to pitchers who have been elected but he is worthy despite, well, being worthy.

If Jack Morris can be worthy despite his lack of credentials, how can other players with credentials be seen as unworthy because somebody cheated when they played*.

* Which should not be referred to as "The Jeff Bagwell" voter effect.

Most importantly, the writers will continue to discredit players like Barry Larkin by relegating their stories behind the controversy. That is just another shame they need to learn to deal with and correct.
Posted by: Mat Kovach

March 04, 2011

Question of the every other day or so: Hall evaluations

With the passing Dodger great and Hall of Famer Duke Snider, some people are comparing his career to Jim Edmonds'. I can understand much of the comparison—the numbers seem to match up. The fact that Edmonds, like Snider, had to co-exist with other great players playing his position is a good comparison.

The argument for entry to Cooperstown will lead to comparisons of people already in the Hall. The argument goes; Player X did a, b, c and he is in the Hall. Player Y also did a, b, c. Hence Player Y should be in the Hall. Q.E.D.

But why does everybody stop there? What about gamesmanship? Many Hall voters will throw the following out there:

Choose players based on their “record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contributions to the team.”

Why are the players in the Hall not used for standards of "integrity, sportsmanship, character"?

Cheaters are in the Hall (Gaylord Perry)*. The level for sportsmanship, integrity and character of some very high profile players gets low marks (Ty Cobb).

* Spitballs are technically cheating, but an argument could be made that Perry was just promoting a safer alternative to split-finger fastballs. Okay. FINE. It’s cheating.


So, if voters are going to use current members of the Hall as the standard of "record, playing ability and contributions to the team," shouldn't those same voters also use current members of the Hall as standards for "integrity, sportsmanship and character"?

Indians note: Former bi-winning pitcher Rick Vaughn reportedly has not handled the death of former manager Lou Brown very well. Our thoughts and prayers go out to him.
Posted by: Mat Kovach

February 25, 2011

Question of the Every Other Day or So: Cheating

With pitchers slightly ahead of hitters in getting hurt this season, I have to admit that an ethical question has been in my head since the Hall of Fame voting. Let’s say (this is hypothetical and not an accusation against anybody) one of the pitchers put down for the count this season did the following:

{exp:list_maker}Checked around for some "enhancement" rehab therapy that would be outside the rules of the game.
Spent quite a bit of time researching this new therapy and figuring out a way to mix it in with his normal rehab.
Weighed the pros and cons, including the risk of serving a suspension while on the DL.
Decided to not use this special enhancement rehab therapy.
The week after he came back from rehab, the story broke and he admitted that he looked into it. Teary eyed, he explained that he just wanted to get back on the field to help his team as quickly as possible, so he explored every avenue available to him. In the end, he just couldn’t break the rules{/exp:list_maker}

The question of the day is: Did he cheat?
Posted by: Mat Kovach

August 25, 2010

Baseball’s secret star

What would you say about a fine-fielding, switch-hitting center fielder who put up the following stat line:

  AB     R     H    2B    3B    HR   RBI    BB    SO    SB    CS     BA    OBP    SLG  OPS+
 566   103   160    46    13    19    78    68   145    29     8   .283   .363   .511   127

If you'd be inclined to consider such a player a major star, I'd be inclined to agree.

Such a player exists, but his performance has come as such a late-blooming surprise that the mainstream media hasn't discovered him, and few fans outside of his home ballpark have even heard of him.

That stat line is what Andres Torres has produced in his almost-two seasons since joining the San Francisco Giants. It comprises 643 plate appearances through yesterday, or pretty close to what a regular player would garner in one full season.

Torres is no kid; he's 32 years old. And until 2009, he'd managed to scrape together just 89 major league games in parts of four years with the Tigers and Rangers, and truly struggled with the bat, to the tune of 210/258/276, for an OPS+ of 46. He'd never hit with much pop in the minors, either; it was only his blazing speed and defensive chops that were keeping his meager career alive.

But suddenly in 2007 Torres turned his entire game around, whacking 20 triples in a combined double-A-and-triple-A season. Last year he made the Giants' roster as a utility outfielder, and this year he's played his way into first-string center fielder status.

Click for more...

Posted by: Steve Treder


Click here for more THT Notes.