Gio linked to roids???

[Ray D]

Yes, I know.  Good points, all.

But what I was thinking was,  40 homeruns,  100 RBIs and .300 batting average are still the benchmark milestones.

In football, if a quarterback has a "Sonny Jurgensen Season" nowadays that's a mediocre season.

In basketball, I remember watching the day that Wilt Chamberlain scored career point 20,000.  Didn't LeBron just do that (after what, eight years)?

[Tyler Durden]

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8904906/daring-ask-ped-question

Grantland has an interesting article on PED use across the different sports recently. 

They put up this graphic (just go to the site to see it - the formatting is terrible when I paste the table here) -

MLB'S HOME RUN LEADERS BY SEASON
PLAYER AGE HOME RUNS YEAR
Barry Bonds 36 73 2001
Mark McGwire 34 70 1998
Sammy Sosa 29 66 1998
Mark McGwire 35 65 1999
Sammy Sosa 32 64 2001
Sammy Sosa 30 63 1999
Roger Maris 26 61 1961
Babe Ruth 32 60 1927
Babe Ruth  26 59 1921
Jimmie Foxx 24 58 1932

And then they note this - 'That list is dead. It means nothing. McGwire's generation made it fundamentally impossible to put power numbers into context for the rest of eternity, basically.'

61 homers used to mean something.  I'm not sure how many casual fans even know what the single season home run record is anymore when it used to be maybe the most well known single-season record in any sport, up there with 100 points in a game and maybe a handfull of other records.

[welch]

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8904906/daring-ask-ped-question

Grantland has an interesting article on PED use across the different sports recently. 

They put up this graphic (just go to the site to see it - the formatting is terrible when I paste the table here) -

MLB'S HOME RUN LEADERS BY SEASON
PLAYER AGE HOME RUNS YEAR
Barry Bonds 36 73 2001
Mark McGwire 34 70 1998
Sammy Sosa 29 66 1998
Mark McGwire 35 65 1999
Sammy Sosa 32 64 2001
Sammy Sosa 30 63 1999
Roger Maris 26 61 1961
Babe Ruth 32 60 1927
Babe Ruth  26 59 1921
Jimmie Foxx 24 58 1932

And then they note this - 'That list is dead. It means nothing. McGwire's generation made it fundamentally impossible to put power numbers into context for the rest of eternity, basically.'

61 homers used to mean something.  I'm not sure how many casual fans even know what the single season home run record is anymore when it used to be maybe the most well known single-season record in any sport, up there with 100 points in a game and maybe a handfull of other records.

I still consider 61 HR the record for the 162 game season; 60 the record for the 154 game season. Ruth's record impresses more, because the AL expanded in 1961, meaning that there were about 20 pitchers in the AL who would have been in the minors.

The steroids guys should just be erased from the records. 

[Lintyfresh85]

I prefer the * approach.

[Ray D]

I still consider 61 HR the record for the 162 game season; 60 the record for the 154 game season. Ruth's record impresses more, because the AL expanded in 1961, meaning that there were about 20 pitchers in the AL who would have been in the minors.

The steroids guys should just be erased from the records. 

Yes but the point, I think, is erasing the steroid guys doesn't accomplish what it might be intended to. For us older guys, 61 homeruns is the important record, and the steroid records don't matter.  But for the younger guys, and moving forward, if those cheaters had never existed, younger guys would know it's 61.  But because the steroid guys skewed it for everyone, the record doesn't have much meaning, 61, 71, or 73.  If you ask a 25 year old what the record is, he probably couldn't tell you.

[Ray D]

I prefer the * approach.

61 already has an *.

[blue911]

61 already has an *.

That was removed,and rightly so.

[Ray D]

That was removed,and rightly so.

Welch doesn't think so.

[welch]

I'm happy to have the asterisk removed. In fact, I cheered for Maris to break the record, and remember watching the 60th and 61st HR repeated. At the time, though, Early Wynn and other pitchers  insisted that the ball had been changed ("I know it's a rabbit ball because I can feel its heart beating"...approximately).

[Ray D]

I'm happy to have the asterisk removed.

The funny thing about that silly-ass asterisk, Maris didn't hit homerun #1 until about the tenth game of the season (don't recall exactly but I know it was past the eighth game which is the number of games they added in 1961).   So instead of arbitrarily saying he had to hit 61 in the first 154 games, Frick (or whoever was commissioner) could have said he had to hit it in the last 154 games, which he did.

And Frick had been a good friend of Ruth, which is what that was all about anyway.

[blue911]

The funny thing about that silly-ass asterisk, Maris didn't hit homerun #1 until about the tenth game of the season (don't recall exactly but I know it was past the eighth game which is the number of games they added in 1961).   So instead of arbitrarily saying he had to hit 61 in the first 154 games, Frick (or whoever was commissioner) could have said he had to hit it in the last 154 games, which he did.

And Frick had been a good friend of Ruth, which is what that was all about anyway.

An old man deifying his childhood hero

[nobleisthyname]

Personally I wouldn't mind seeing the hall split up into different eras. Steroids wasn't the only thing that changed the game dramatically. Babe Ruth did that almost by himself in 1920. All the other stuff blue mentioned on the last page significantly changed the game as well.

I would like 73 and 762 to stay official and recognized. But note that they were achieved in an era that heavily abused steroids.

[codedandunited]

Looks like Jesus Montero has now been listed too

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/mariners/2013/02/06/report-mariners-catcher-jesus-montero-is-named-in-records-from-south-florida-anti-aging-clinic/

[tomterp]

MLB'S HOME RUN LEADERS BY SEASON
PLAYER AGE HOME RUNS YEAR
Barry Bonds 36 73 2001
Mark McGwire 34 70 1998
Sammy Sosa 29 66 1998
Mark McGwire 35 65 1999
Sammy Sosa 32 64 2001
Sammy Sosa 30 63 1999
Roger Maris 26 61 1961
Babe Ruth 32 60 1927
Babe Ruth  26 59 1921
Jimmie Foxx 24 58 1932

And then they note this - 'That list is dead. It means nothing. McGwire's generation made it fundamentally impossible to put power numbers into context for the rest of eternity, basically.'

    Context?  I got yer context right here:

1920 MLB Home Run Leaders

PHI    NL   64
NYY*    AL   61
Ruth   AL   54
SLB    AL   50
NYG    NL   46
PHA    AL   44
CHW    AL   37
WSH    AL   36
CLE    AL   35
CHC    NL   34
STL    NL   32
DET    AL   30
BRO    NL   28
BSN    NL   23
BOS    AL   22
CIN    NL   18
PIT    NL   16

*NYY sans the Babe

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Personally I wouldn't mind seeing the hall split up into different eras. Steroids wasn't the only thing that changed the game dramatically. Babe Ruth did that almost by himself in 1920. All the other stuff blue mentioned on the last page significantly changed the game as well.

I would like 73 and 762 to stay official and recognized. But note that they were achieved in an era that heavily abused steroids.

I'm with you on recognizing records from different eras.  Ruth could have an asterisk because he did not play against African Americans.  MLB was watered down at the time and did not have the best playing the best.  Mind you, I think he is one of the top 3 or so players of all time, but I don't see how you can say Maris faced a more watered down competition because there were an extra 16 - 20 pitchers in the league while Ruth faced the cream of the crop when we know it systematically excluded numerous stars.  If records from the segregation era count, then why isn't Josh Gibson recognized for a single season record?

So the segregation era deserves an asterisk like the steroid era, like the dead ball era, like each season after an expansion, like the 15 inch mound, like AL records in the DH era . . .

Recognize each era, appreciate the performance, judge it in context, and enjoy the debate over who was the best slugger, who was the best K pitcher, who had the best batting eye, etc... 

[spidernat]

The funny thing about that silly-ass asterisk, Maris didn't hit homerun #1 until about the tenth game of the season (don't recall exactly but I know it was past the eighth game which is the number of games they added in 1961).   

It was game 11 but so what? It's not like he sat for the first 10 games. He had 27 AB's in the first 10 games and failed to hit a bomb. Ruth didn't hit a HR for the first 3 games of 1927 so he hit 60 in 151 games. All said, Ruth hit 1 fewer HR in 10 fewer games.

[Ray D]

It was game 11 but so what? It's not like he sat for the first 10 games. He had 27 AB's in the first 10 games and failed to hit a bomb. Ruth didn't hit a HR for the first 3 games of 1927 so he hit 60 in 151 games. All said, Ruth hit 1 fewer HR in 10 fewer games.

The commissioner said that he had to do it in 154 games.   If he had said something like "there will be two separate records, one for the old 154 game format, and another for the 162 game format", well, I wouldn't have like that either, but it would have made more sense.  If Maris had hit 61 in game 154 it would have counted as the record.  Saying "have to do it in 154 games" is arbitrary and why can't it apply to the last 154 games rather than the first 154.

[spidernat]

I think it's obvious why.

[mitlen]

Yesterday was the Babe's birthday.

[RL04]

I still consider 61 HR the record for the 162 game season; 60 the record for the 154 game season.

The steroids guys should just be erased from the records. 

This.

[PowerBoater69]

So in a shocking twist of events, it's been revealed that Gio's dealer was a bit of a shady character.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/08/sports/baseball/baseball-inquiries-about-banned-substances-raise-some-doubts.html?ref=baseball&_r=1&

[daggerrrrrr]

The Washington Post reports that Gio Gonzalez will pitch for Team USA in the World Baseball Classic.
It's a bit of a surprising decision, as Gonzalez is still under investigation for his alleged connection to performance-enhancing drugs. As it currently stands, Gonzalez will join a pitching staff that includes R.A. Dickey, Derek Holland, and Ryan Vogelsong, with Justin Verlander reportedly still considering his offer to play in the tournament. Team USA players are tentatively scheduled to report to training camp on March 3.

Source: Washington Post

[Lintyfresh85]

Never a fan of pitchers playing in the WBC. Hope he stays healthy.

[Tyler Durden]

Never a fan of pitchers playing in the WBC. Hope he stays healthy.

Me neither.  Only positive might be that he gets away from the PED stuff for a while.

But not only is there the injury risk thing - there is also the possibility that he wears down earlier in the season because of this.

[spidernat]

Only positive might be that he gets away from the PED stuff for a while.

Probably what he's aiming for.