Machado wrote:thejuggernaut wrote:Machado wrote:now it's time for Ozzie Guillen & Robin Yount to comment on the mcgwire situation:
Ozzie Guillen said he feels betrayed by Mark McGwire's admission that he used performance-enhancing drugs, and the Chicago White Sox manager isn't buying the slugger's contention that they didn't help him hit home runs at a record pace.
"That bothered me," Guillen told ESPNChicago.com columnist Melissa Isaacson on Thursday. "First of all, we competed against [McGwire's Oakland teams] in the '90s, and when I saw that, I was like, wow, I could have been in more playoffs, maybe I'd have had the chance to be in the World Series because we had a pretty good ballclub.
"When people say, 'I don't know what happened,' we're lying to ourselves. I didn't see anyone doing it, but I know something happened. I saw these people growing bigger. The only time I felt betrayed is when Mark said, 'I did it, then Jose did it,' and we competed against them. Besides that, I don't even care. But I think Jerry Reinsdorf should have more division championship [banners] hanging around this ballpark than we have because we competed against them pretty good, and when you see the two best hitters they have that were on the juice, you feel betrayed."
Guillen credits McGwire for coming forward and admitting to using performance-enhancing drugs, but he's not sure the former St. Louis Cardinals slugger is being completely honest about the effects they had on his record-breaking power numbers.
"Personally, I hope he's right and I'm wrong, but I don't believe that didn't help him to hit the 60, 70 home runs," Guillen said. "I know God gave him a lot of talent because I saw the guy hit 50 his first year in the big leagues and that didn't come from [steroids]. But you can hit 50 home runs 390 feet and [that's different than hitting] 70 home runs 700 feet.
"But people can think whatever they want to think. Only he knows what's going on."
Guillen joined former White Sox catcher Carlton Fisk in criticizing McGwire, but Hall of Famer Robin Yount wonders if he could have said no to PEDs if he had played in the steroid era.
"I'll be very honest," Yount said in Friday's edition of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "In the fact that there was no testing and if there were benefits from it, it would have been very difficult.
"Without testing in place, you would've almost been forced to do it to keep up."
Yount, who played with the Milwaukee Brewers from 1974-93, said he won't criticize players who took steroids before testing was put in place by Major League Baseball.
"As competitive people and doing it for a living like we did, it's easy to [criticize] and not having to make those decisions," Yount said. "Those guys didn't get to that level of athletic expertise without being very competitive. I'm sure there's some out there who wouldn't do it, but it would've been very difficult if there were no rules against it to honestly say you wouldn't have done it."
1. Guillen probably didn't mind having Albert Belle and Frank Thomas as teammates.
2. Yount is the first sensible vet to speak up about it.
Are you certain about yount? I think I heard Mike Schmidt say something simliar, way before these yount comments.
I had no idea.
Just checked and you are correct.
Good for Schmidt.
MARK McGUIRE - HALL OF FAME?
The big question confronting Hall voters, this months, is McGuire? Might I offer some insight, as a Hall Member, once a home run hitter, and recently, an author of a best selling book addressing it.
Everyone knows that someone in my position will tend to walk the fence on the issue. I won’t argue that, I’m human, and I see the same things you do, but I was in that world for 20 years myself, and know a little about the pressure. I’d ask the voters to look past the basic question, did he or didn’t he, and consider the era, and what fueled it.
Look back at the era, that in my book, Clearing the Bases, I call Finding the Abyss. The theme I intended to convey was that, the Commissioner, baseball owners, executives, and administrators, the print and broadcast media, as well as the fans, all got caught up in the power explosion, which was led by McGuire. We loved him, and Sammy, and the fact that they were saving our game. No one wanted it to stop, it lasted almost 10 years. It was a feeding frenzy, and everyone fed off of it, especially television and baseball’s licensees. How about baseball gives all the money back that it made off of Mark McGuire? No, instead, baseball, and those that benefit from it, will keep that money, but punish McGuire, by associating him with steroid use, and questioning his Hall of Fame entrance.
The point is, with no testing policy in place before 2005, and the expectations we put on those players, one must acknowledge that the approval they received daily, from media exposure, money, and fame, fueled their need for an “edge”. Thank God steroids weren’t available to us in the 70’s and 80’s. I, and many who will remain unnamed, would have been 40 lbs. heavier trying to keep up with the Jones, especially since the combination of leading the league in home runs and becoming a free agent meant millions. Think what it means today, choosing between Citation and Gulfstream.
As a player of his caliber, and fan expectation, in an era of electronic exposure beyond belief, where anything and everything is available, and a great many of your peers are getting bigger and more powerful, the temptation to join in was immense. What about integrity, honesty, clean living; maybe that’s what constitutes a Hall of Famer? Based on history, I don’t think so.
Ok, it sounds like I’m making excuses, and asking voters to condone the use of steroids just because “everybody was doing it”, well, to some degree I am, not so much on the player’s side, but the public. The public wanted to see his giant biceps and long bombs, and could care less what Mark McGuire was putting in his milk. He was baseball’s superman. Now you want to vilify him because he doesn’t want to own up, or admit, or even refute an involvement with steroids. Whoa! Now I’m not saying that if someone slips into the bathroom stall and sticks a needle in his butt, he should be given the benefit of the doubt. That borders on stupidity, and only Jose Canseco’s word is in evidence against Mark. Mark’s diet supplements were legal when he played.
What about his refusal to come clean before Congress? Yes, I agree, that could have been handled better, but we all know he was advised by his council to steer clear of any personal issues that might open an “abyss” of media scrutiny.
Until, and if ever, Mark chooses to admit to steroid use, you must give him the benefit of doubt. I guarantee you every Hall voting baseball writer got a months worth of articles from Mark’s career, and during the period from 1995 to 2003, they loved his every swing. In fact, I think most fans would agree, few players ever had as big an impact on baseball, including the two 1st ballot entries in 2007.
One last thing, this is only the beginning. Don’t forget over the next 10 years, dozens and dozens of players from that era will arrive on the ballot. So voters, you better treat that era for what it was, and what fueled it, and understand that what is more important than yes, or no, on McGuire, is how you interpret what constitutes Hall of Fame credentials in today’s version of baseball.
________________________________________________________________
Mike Schmidt says steroid users like McGwire have his HOF vote
The Philly Daily News caught up with Mike Schmidt. The former Philly HOF third baseman says players like Mark McGwire have his HOF vote.
PERHAPS MIKE SCHMIDT is on to something.
Yesterday, at Phillies spring training in Clearwater, Fla., Schmidt told reporters that if he had a vote, he would have selected Mark McGwire for this year's Baseball Hall of Fame class.
Schmidt sees no problem with the accused 'roid users. He doesn't understand why nothing much was written about McGwire or Sosa back in '98. Perhaps Schmidt is a better fielder than a reader. BALCO did not occur until 2002-2003, with 'Game of Shadows' published in 2006. Although reporters caught Big Mac with little Andro, the extend of the anabolic use was unknown (at least to most) in the late 90s.
While he is at it, Schmidt should endorse corked bats too.
Schmidt_mike011000But Schmidt isn't a writer and has no vote, despite being a Hall of Famer.
Maybe it's time for that to change. Maybe it's time for baseball to take the Hall of Fame vote away from the writers and instead give it to Hall of Fame members.
In the big picture, Schmidt and other Hall of Famers probably do have a better perspective on how McGwire, whose career is shadowed by a popular belief that he used performance-enhancing drugs, fits into the baseball pantheon.
"I think Mark McGwire, along with [former Chicago Cubs slugger Sammy Sosa], sort of saved the game back in the late '90s," Schmidt said...
"I don't see how we all could ride on the shoulders of Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa for 4 or 5 years and not write much or say much about the steroids element in the game."
Schmidt questioned why people watched those players and wrote about them, and then, when it came time for Hall of Fame considerations, they "all of a sudden bring up the issue of steroids and connect them to it."...
Some Hall of Fame members are like Schmidt and think the steroids issue is overblown with respect to Hall of Fame credentials.
Others think it is an unforgivable violation of the spirit of the game...
"I think it set a precedent," Schmidt said of McGwire's omission from the Hall. "Anyone who has been associated with steroids or substance abuse is probably not going to get in the Hall of Fame, certainly not in their first opportunity."
The actual members of the Hall of Fame should be the ones to decide that.
