Good capture of the salient points of this mess, but the practical side of it is that no one is going to willingly fess up to using.

Just like no player will fess up to being gay until after they leave the game.

I, for one, would like the whole “let’s rip the scab off and deal with it all at once, once and for all” approach, but I also don’t think that’s happening anytime soon.

So that leaves us with a new ”(a) user identified; (b) hysteria over the identification; (c) coverage of the apology/statement; and (d) some backfill on the player, usually of the salacious variety (e.g. Mindy McCreedy; phantom cousins in the D.R.). Then things are forgotten for a while, only to have the cycle begin anew when someone else is identified” every February, coinciding with a pending book release.

“It’s not baseball, for one thing.”

No, it’s not, but the reason I follow this “story” is that it has had/will have a direct impact on the “game” that I enjoy watching.  PEDs in MLB were a major contributor (not the only one) to the “HR era” and the decrease in HRs the past few (handful?) of years is a result of the decreased usage of PEDs.

I agree with Carroll though, 2 positive tests is laughable.  It indicates that either MLB ain’t tryin that hard to catch cheaters or cheaters are just hopelessly ahead of testers.

The Presinal tales are the latest proof of the incompetence of baseball writers and MLB.  If he did (and I believe the allegations) spend the 07 season travelling with the Yanks and rooming with Sucart, how could the writers not notice he was around?  And not know his history?  How the hell did none of the writers or anybody in MLB not notice that he was part of the Dominican club in the WBC?

Presinal, McNamee, Radomski, Anderson….the baseball writers aren’t stupid, their observations and instincts would tell them what the role of these “nutritionists/trainers/personal assistants” was, they just didn’t want to get blackballed out of the club.

If there is a problem we should be concerned with it is the reports that steroid use amongst young athletes has increased dramatically.  And steroids aren’t going away, because they work, because athletes want to be and need to be bigger, faster, stronger.  And to hell with Congress and their grandstanding, they deregulated the “supplement” industry and made it easier for kids to get on the juice.

@Pete: Are you accusing them of incompetence, complicity or both?

If we’re going to go long, let’s do it for real and acknowledge that steroids have been part of MLB since the 1960s. Then start asking about some of the hallowed heroes of the game who are held up as paragons of the good old days. The current narrative of the 90s as the “steroid era” is a convenient myth.

@ Jason. Media - incompetent and cowardly.  Management - complicit.  (BTW, welcome back!)

@ Laurence - “how many - if any”  As for individual players….A Rod’s HR totals on the road from 01-03 weren’t impacted (IIRC), his home HRs were up substantially during that period because Texas is a better hitters park.  The flip side…Bonds HR production on the juice speaks for itself.  As for the “era”, HRs went WAY up (I’m not gonna look up the numbers) but one of the examples is the 50 homer club.  When Cecil hit 50 it was a big deal.  Once Brady Anderson and Luis Gonzalez started doing it, not so much so.

Pete - that’s exactly what I’m talking about: it’s all supposition. Are we meant to assume that A-Rod took steroids for no gain at all? Why would he bother? And just saying HRs were up is not sufficient - what about smaller ballparks, “juiced” balls…

I’m not arguing for a second that steroids don’t do anything. I don’t know. What I *am* saying is that I’ve never seen any proper examination of what they actually do to professional ballplayers that has any more detail than pretty much saying “there were more HRs in the 90s”.

@ Laurence.  HRs are down the past couple (handful?) of years.  If it isn’t because of testing and reduced usage of steroids, what is the cause?

ARod’s home run totals weren’t affected in 2001-2003 because he had been roiding since he was a teenager.  Since steroids were supposed to be so prevalent in high schools in the late 90s, why would anyone assume that only the mediocre players took them?  Since something was always available over the counter in the DR and other Latin countries (or so readily available that it might as well have been OTC), why would Latin players refuse it?

Bonds had been hot before, check out the last 45 games of 1994 after he was moved to 3rd in the lineup.  (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1994/Ibondb0010091994.htm).  Many guys were having incredible years that year.  Bonds and Williams would have broken Mantle/Maris.  Bonds obviously did not add 35 home runs a year, having just one huge home run year when several people had huge home run years.
In the early 2000s, he had a shorter swing with more lift than he had had say 1994, a harder bat, more fans in the park, a better family life, more experience, etc. - it’s impossible to separate the variables.  Because Luis Gonzales hit 57 home runs in 2001, you wonder how much pitching was down that year or if the umps were calling it very tight.