"Appreciate The Game"

bigfan · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 7:53 am

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Four out of five aces recommend steroids for their fellow pitchers who use performance enhancing drugs.

If you HAD to bet $5,000 on each member of the 2005 White Sox being on steroids, who would you bet yes on?

Ill start you off

1. Cliff Politte

1) Rowand

Lets go to the Mountain of PED Hypocrisy for a GM in Kenny Williams and Manny Ramirez!!!!!!!!!!!

Kenny before Manny!

“Any time the purity of the game is put at risk, the competitiveness, the equal chance to compete on the field on a daily basis, [it hurts the game],” Williams said. “Absolutely it’s to the detriment of the game and we, as players, as people in management and coaches and everyone on the peripheral, have a responsibility.

“[The media] are part of that group. There is a responsibility to be caretakers of the game, and conduct ourselves that people before us did so. Yes, if anyone tells you it’s not a black mark each time any of these things happen, they’re kidding themselves.”

Kenny After Manny

“(Ramirez) explained exactly what he thought he was taking and the reason for it,” Williams said. “So absent of any sort of proof, who am I to make such judgments against a guy in that fashion?"

Brick · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 7:56 am

rogers park bryan wrote:

No, actually Im adding another type of career to the steroid list. The pitcher with good stuff who threw 94 for a couple years. Thats another type of career. It strengthens what I said.

Before, you said that a steroid career arc doesn't exist. In this thread, you described a steroid career arc. It's as simple as that.

It doesn't strengthen your case. You are admitting that we can look at certain career profiles and see what a steroid user typically looks like. There can be more than one. However, if someone, say Ken Griffey Jr., doesn't fit in with that profile, it can be used as evidence that they may not have taken steroids. It's not definitive proof but it is evidence.

That's the point. You believe that steroid career arcs exist. Admit it and we can move on.

Rod · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 7:56 am

rogers park bryan wrote:

Really? Thats it?

You dont think Politte was taking something?

I don't know. Probably. You asked if I were betting $5000. I feel real safe I'm going to be five grand in front with Rowand. If I throw in Frank, Jenks, Politte, Konerko, Contreras, Garcia, Hermanson, and Podsednik, I'm guessing I come out on the positive end. How's that?

Brick · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 7:58 am

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

If I throw in Frank, Jenks, Politte, Konerko, Contreras, Garcia, Hermanson, and Podsednik, I'm guessing I come out on the positive end. How's that?

I'd take Frank out but you'd probably make a lot of money with the rest of that group.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

No, actually Im adding another type of career to the steroid list. The pitcher with good stuff who threw 94 for a couple years. Thats another type of career. It strengthens what I said.

Before, you said that a steroid career arc doesn't exist. In this thread, you described a steroid career arc. It's as simple as that.

No.

You are wrong.

You presented it in that original thread like there was one steroid career arc and if you dont fit that career arc, you probably didnt do steroids. (You were trying to say that Frank Thomas career arc didnt indicate steroid use)

I disagreed and gave you a bunch of different examples of a path to and from steroid use.

There is not one singular career arc that indicates steroid use, as you claimed.

My statement was strengthened by adding, yet another type of career, that likely involved steroids.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

Really? Thats it?

You dont think Politte was taking something?

I don't know. Probably. You asked if I were betting $5000. I feel real safe I'm going to be five grand in front with Rowand. If I throw in Frank, Jenks, Politte, Konerko, Contreras, Garcia, Hermanson, and Podsednik, I'm guessing I come out on the positive end. How's that?

Well, I meant you had to make 25 (or 30-35 or whatever) bets

I thought you were saying, Rowand- Yes, Everyone else-No

Brick · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 8:19 am

rogers park bryan wrote:

You presented it in that original thread like there was one steroid career arc and if you dont fit that career arc, you probably didnt do steroids. (You were trying to say that Frank Thomas career arc didnt indicate steroid use)

I never said there was only one career steroid arc, though obviously there is one that happens more than any others. Obviously, and I believe it was referred to in that very thread, there is the "use steroids for a year to get a big contract" arc too.

It seems like now you are saying that there are multiple steroid arcs which is fine, but you may want to refrain from making statements like "There is no Steroid Career arc."

Here is where my confusing came from.

rogers park bryan wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Phil McCracken wrote:

THANK YOU! This whole there is no way that Frank Thomas took steroids thing is such BS. Every player from that era is suspect. How can you prove he didn't. The suspecion has to lie that the majority of great players from this time period used steriods. The holier than thou act of the Frank Thomas fans is ridiculous sometimes.

The odds are very low that Frank took steroids.

No they arent. Thats completely wrong.

And youre wrong about the career path

1) There is NO path. it affects people differently and you dont know when they took what.

2) His career arc seems awfully similiar to Jeff Bagwell

...and in this thread you said this:

rogers park bryan wrote:

At first, I was goiing to question the Clement thing, but then thinking about it, his career path and when he did what he did kinda follows the steroid trail

I hope you see my confusion.

Rod · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 8:20 am

rogers park bryan wrote:

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

Really? Thats it?

You dont think Politte was taking something?

I don't know. Probably. You asked if I were betting $5000. I feel real safe I'm going to be five grand in front with Rowand. If I throw in Frank, Jenks, Politte, Konerko, Contreras, Garcia, Hermanson, and Podsednik, I'm guessing I come out on the positive end. How's that?

Well, I meant you had to make 25 (or 30-35 or whatever) bets

I thought you were saying, Rowand- Yes, Everyone else-No

I'm sure there are others besides Rowand. I just really have no idea who. Some guys who seem like obvious juicers might be clean, but nobody would surprise me either. They're all suspect. That's their legacy. They can thank their union for that.

spanky · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 8:29 am

I'm gonna say no to Jenks and Garcia. Probably yes to Rowand and Crede.

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 8:33 am

The original post and thread premise are stupid. Obviously nobody at the Score came up with the slogan. The White Sox have a marketing team that comes up with these things. Does he think the Score came up with "All In" last year? How bout "Grinderball" from circa 2006? Stupid.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

The original post and thread premise are stupid. Obviously nobody at the Score came up with the slogan. The White Sox have a marketing team that comes up with these things. Does he think the Score came up with "All In" last year? How bout "Grinderball" from circa 2006? Stupid.

Id legitimately like to know how they got Red from That 70's Show to do the voiceover. I mean does Brooks Boyer have his number in the rolodex?

Surprised they didnt stick with grinder ball after it won a world series for the superstition of it.

spanky · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 8:58 am

Uribe for sure.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

1) There is NO path. it affects people differently and you dont know when they took what.

2) His career arc seems awfully similiar to Jeff Bagwell

...and in this thread you said this:

rogers park bryan wrote:

At first, I was goiing to question the Clement thing, but then thinking about it, his career path and when he did what he did kinda follows the steroid trail

I hope you see my confusion.[/quote]
I was saying there isn't one singular steroid career arc to hold up as a reference.

Its case by case

Brick · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 9:23 am

rogers park bryan wrote:

I was saying there isn't one singular steroid career arc to hold up as a reference.

Its case by case

This seems to be going in a circle, but if this is true then what does "his career path and when he did what he did kinda follows the steroid trail" mean?

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

I was saying there isn't one singular steroid career arc to hold up as a reference.

Its case by case

This seems to be going in a circle, but if this is true then what does "his career path and when he did what he did kinda follows the steroid trail" mean?

It means when you look at Clement's specific case, it seems a little steroid-ey

Brick · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 9:50 am

Fair enough. I think if you look at the specific cases of Griffey and Frank that it doesn't seem a little steroid-ey. Good to know you no longer have an issue with that because clearly you are now saying that players careers can be looked at for evidence of whether they took steroids or not.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Fair enough. I think if you look at the specific cases of Griffey and Frank that it doesn't seem a little steroid-ey. Good to know you no longer have an issue with that because clearly you are now saying that players careers can be looked at for evidence of whether they took steroids or not.

Of course, Ive never said you couldnt. My issue was with how you were viewing it.

And Im sorry that I was forced to look at the other side of the Frank Thomas issue but the way certain people here act, its as if its 100% certain Frank didnt take them "because he spoke out against steroids". That seems really ridiculous to me.

Frank Coztansa · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 12:16 pm

Neal Cotts (moreso than Politte)
Carl Everett
Rowand
Jon Garland

The Original Kid Cairo · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 12:43 pm

Frank Coztansa wrote:

Neal Cotts (moreso than Politte)
Carl Everett
Rowand
Jon Garland

Not Crede? I think his physical breakdown from 2007 onward told the tale.

badrogue17 · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 12:47 pm

The Original Kid Cairo wrote:

Frank Coztansa wrote:

Neal Cotts (moreso than Politte)
Carl Everett
Rowand
Jon Garland

Not Crede? I think his physical breakdown from 2007 onward told the tale.

I thought Crede was a modifier for any band that had a frontman who looked like Scott Stapp

Apologist · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 5:59 pm

Everett was getting his shipments from this guy ^

Curious Hair · **Posted:** Mon May 14, 2012 6:02 pm

rogers park bryan wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

At first, I was goiing to question the Clement thing, but then thinking about it, his career path and when he did what he did kinda follows the steroid trail

What is the steroid trail?

Just to move things along, please remember that you have claimed that there is no steroid career arc. http://score670.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=1217695#p1217695

He was at his best when steroid use was seemingly at its peak and quickly faded away after testing.

Clement quickly faded away when he took a comebacker off the head. Never was the same.

"Appreciate The Game"

Who is online