Sunday, May 26, 2024
Home > Opinion > Suggesting Front Office Traded Dee Gordon Because of Steroids is Misguided

Suggesting Front Office Traded Dee Gordon Because of Steroids is Misguided

Dee Gordon

The stunning news broke only minutes after the Dodger’s humiliating 5-3 defeat and sweep at the hands of the Miami Marlins was not only shocking but largely entertaining. Former Dodgers second baseman Dee Gordon has been suspended 80 games for testing positive for PEDs.

Think about that for a second. Little man Dee Gordon, doing steroids. It’s almost hilarious. Think about how stupid this week has been. The Dodgers play some of the worst baseball we have seen in years getting swept by Don Mattingly’s lowly Marlins. Then after the final game Dee Gordon is busted for roids. You can’t script this stuff.

Embed from Getty Images

What’s even more stupid is how all of the moneyball kids are now claiming that Andrew Friedman must have known about Gordon’s positive PED test. That must be why he was traded they claim. They’re shouting with glee. “That Gordon trade is looking pretty good now isn’t it”? No, it still sucks. It will continue to suck, long after the juice drains from Dee Gordon’s python twig arms. I would rather have a juiced up Gordon than the flotsam the Dodgers got in that trade.

To suggest that Friedman knew all along suggests that there was some kind of collusion. If the Dodgers knew of his roiding and didn’t tell the Marlins, wouldn’t they be in some trouble with the commissioner’s office? Wouldn’t old man Joe Torre cry Evita or something? Just imagine if the news came forward that the Dodgers had inside knowledge of Gordon’s roids and didn’t report it, or disclose it. Or even worse that the Marlins also knew and didn’t do anything. Rob Manfred’s head would probably explode.

Embed from Getty Images

To think that is totally misguided. We don’t know why Friedman traded Gordon in the winter of 2014. I think I can guess though. If I had to guess it would probably have something to do with the moneyball guys not valuing base running. The stat nerds hate stolen bases. They want their clubs to be as station to station as possible. No need for base running or speed on our teams no thank you.

We don’t know when Gordon was roiding. We did notice him bulk up around 2014, but we don’t know if that was via steroids or not. Maybe he was juicing in 2014, or maybe he didn’t start juicing at all until 2015. Whatever the case, to think that Friedman dumped him to the Fish because he knew of Gordon’s substance problem is delusional. That’s all I have to say about that.

We now return you to the Dodgers regularly scheduled train wreck.

Scott Andes

Scott Andes: Longtime writer and Dodger fanatic

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:

Scott Andes
Scott Andes: Longtime writer and Dodger fanatic

54 thoughts on “Suggesting Front Office Traded Dee Gordon Because of Steroids is Misguided

  1. Anything the money ball paraders can do to try and prop up their lead nerd Friedan they’ll do. It ceases to amaze how the money ball folk refuse to acknowledge some of the gawd awful moves they’ve made yet they were first in line to kick Ned Colletti in the nuts. It was embarrassing seeing these guys take to twitter last night after the Dodgers got punched in the face by the friggin Miami Marlins and Don Mattingly for four games. The Dee deal will not make or break the Dodgers in any fashion, they got a solid utility player, a minor league catcher and a shitty gas can relief pitcher. They also dealt the best prospect in the trade for a second baseman with shot legs on the downside of his career. Hardly a great deal. Joy.

    1. Well put.

      The trade helped Miami be a better team. Maybe not long term, we’ll see what Gordon can do when he gets back. The Heaney/Kendrick trade seemed anti-sabermetrical when it was done, but now Heaney out with forearm flexor problems so the nerds that polished that trade can breathe a sigh of relief. Still, I’d rather have Heaney and the $30 million we are paying Howie back. Plays better into my ’18 plans.

  2. I wondered the same thing after we found out about LoDuca. I think they traded Dee because they thought he was as good in 2014 as he would get, and Kendrick had put up two more WAR in 2014, so why not? But who knows…there’s a code of silence among baseball execs.

  3. “What’s even more stupid is how all of the moneyball kids are now claiming that Andrew Friedman must have known about Gordon’s positive PED test.”

    I just checked the comments in the previous Dee article. I just checked over at trueblue. I just checked Dodger Digest. I’ve not seen a single comment by any supposed “moneyball kid”, whatever the hell that means, that supports that statement.

    I’ll be blunt. That was a stupid comment and a stupid article. I’ll even settle for one – as in single – rather than “all”.

    I can see how data driven decisions can become excessive and myopic and lead to an over-reliance on such things, but I generally find a more analytical approach to baseball that goes beyond batting average and ERA to be interesting and here to stay. Does that make me one of those “moneyball kids?” What is with this separating Dodger fans into antagonistic groups?

    If you’re going to spend the rest of the season writing angry screeds against made up strawmen, then you’re going to be in for pretty miserable time because I can’t really see how writing this vitriolic …..stuff….. is pleasurable. It certainly isn’t thought provoking. Emotion provoking -yes …of the bad kind.

  4. So Dee Gordon not playing for 80 games is still better than a 1 for 4 trade for the players we got. Keep trying Andes. You and the rest of the neg club of the internet. Sheesh. Get that look of glee off your face. Best thing you’ve had happen yet this season is the Dodgers losing 4 and you doing the I told you they’re a bunch of idiots routine.

  5. The problem I have with Gordon thing is, if in fact, he was tested in ST, why did it take so long(3 to 6 weeks ) to get the results back. I would think it would be a top priority to find out ASAP. Note: Gordon drove in a run last night. If they had let everyone know a day earlier, Gordon wouldn’t even be in the lineup.
    I really like Gordon and I even got a 6 month suspension from another website for defending Dee so strongly in 2014.

    1. I read that they didn’t suspend him until he dropped his right to appeal. Guess he really wanted to play in the Dodgers series. That other website sounds like a real haven for honest opinions.

  6. Here’s the deal – baseball fans have increasingly become divided into 2 groups: SABERphobes and SABERphiles. Each has something valid to say, but each has become blinkered as to the merits of the other’s arguments.

    SABERphiles trumpet their ability to observe things via analysis of data that previously went hidden. And to a degree, they are right. There is no doubt that analyzing the data can lead to a better way of evaluating talent or strategizing.

    SABERphobes note that baseball has been played professionally since the 1860s and that while the game has changed markedly, each era has something to learn from the others. The game can be watched by experienced pros (or fans) and their eyeballs can provide data points that can lead to valid evaluating of talent as well as strategizing.

    Dodger fans are concerned because we have a front office that keeps signing more and more supposed geniuses, many of whom have no background in baseball, but there seems to be little apparent emphasis on baseball experience. Andrew Friedman was a stock broker; Farhan Zaidi has a PhD in econ from UC Berkeley but has stated that his baseball playing experience was limited to little league in Egypt! Alex Anthopoulos got his start in the mailroom with the Jays, and he became a scout, but as far as I know has no baseball background. Josh Byrnes played HS and college baseball but I believe that his tenure running the Padres was a disaster.

    So – the team has a bunch of management types who are good with computers and can analyze the data – but where are the baseball guys? It turns out that the baseball guys aren’t considered that important to the SABER guys. Here’s what Baseball has to say about J.P.Ricciardi, former GM in Toronto:

    “Ricciardi’s tenure at the helm of the Blue Jays was quite stormy. He was originally considered one of the Moneyball, generation of executives, so-called after the best-selling book explaining the methods used by his mentor Billy Beane in Oakland, and some of his early moves were in that vein. These included firing most of the team’s scouting staff, hiring a young internet-based writer, Keith Law, to serve as a sabermetrics advisor to the team, and installing an inexperienced manager, Buck Martinez, in the dugout (under the Moneyball philosophy, the manager is considered a disposable part, as the team’s philosophy is set by the General Manager).”

    There is a reason that many fans of a certain age distrust the Dodgers’ management; why they figure that the manager is a figurehead who is expected to keep peace in the clubhouse but not to run the team.

    In my view, all of the data is useful, but to exclude one and rely on the other is foolhardy.

    Another point – I am old enough to be skeptical of the current generation’s over-reliance on computers and inability to have real human relationships (they prefer virtual ones). I train new attorneys. It is hard to get them to pick up a telephone and call a client – to cement a relationship with human contact. They want to send a text or an e-mail instead. Similarly, experience in the law teaches you how to get things done or win your case in a way that reading it in a book (or online) can’t.

    In the Moneyball era, since the knowledge and experience of scouts is deemphasized in favor of computer analysis, people who actually have played the game or seen it played are shuttled off to one side when their knowledge can help win games.

    So, this is a long way to say that there is a lot of antipathy by those who dislike Moneyball baseball and so look to cast aspersions when they can. On the other hand, SABERphiles all disliked Dee Gordon because they didn’t like his skillset. SABERphiles don’t like the stolen base and generally don’t like “small ball”, preferring 3 true outcome-types and waiting for the 3 run HR. This is why PECOTA and similar statistical analyses consistently pick teams like the Royals to win 75 or 80 game but miss the playoffs. There is more than one way to win in baseball, and I am old enough to remember the Dodgers winning on the strength of great pitching, Maury Wills and not much else.

    1. I’m neither a phile nor a phobe, but I do get the division. I’m a science guy. I find baseball science interesting. The Physics of Baseball was a very interesting read. I recommend it. My problem is less with the philosophy and more with the FAZ result. After 300 moves made by these guys, are we any better? I don’t see it. We’ve got a deep minor league system. That’s important, but I hope that isn’t the goal. I keep hearing we are about winning now AND winning in the future. I get the future part. I’m just not sure the guys we have here that are good, most of whom were already here when the SABER guys arrived, buy into the philosophy. And I don’t believe there is any advanced statistical analysis data being used to predict injury. Changing training staffs hasn’t helped. The Dodgers appear to be a fragile bunch.

      This could be a long year. It could also be a team that finishes strong. When everybody gets back, and of course they will come back stronger than ever, the Dodgers may go undefeated in the second half. I just don’t know what to expect, so I find myself expecting more of the same. In the last 162 games, we are 89-73. That’s good. But it’s not trending up. At this point, if we finish could with 89 wins I think I would take it and be grateful.

    2. I don’t care what school of thought the FO comes from, bottom line, I am thoroughly unimpressed with FAZ over his first 18 months plus on the job. This is a big market team with a big payroll and very high expectations sitting on a close to a 30 year pennant drought. The talent these guys have brought in isn’t going to cut it. They keep on working on the periphery of the 25/40 man rosters. Utility guys and 3rd starter types aren’t going to put this team over the top, and frankly, they do a poor job bringing in guys . Look at some of THEIR failed acquisitions, just on the pitching front: Kazmir, Jim Johnson, Brett Anderson, McCarthy, Alex Wood, Chris Hatcher, Avilan, Mat Latos. Are you kidding me with that group.? The best was of the bunch is a league average year from Brett Anderson before being given a silly qualifying offer that he accepted and then blew out his back. Their best deals have been to bring in super utility Enrique Hernandez and Grandal and (so far at least) Maeda to a team friendly deal. I’ll give them credit for those deals, but they came at the expense of letting Greinke go, losing Matt Kemp and trading Dee Gordon. All the quality young prospects really have nothing to do with these guys as most of them came before FAZ got here.

      1. FAZ could have gotten Hamels, Price and others. Of course, we wouldn’t have Seager, Urias, De Leon, Bellinger and others. You can’t have your cake and eat it too!

        1. not true

          it wasn’t true the first dozen times you said it and it will remain not true no matter how many more times you do say it

          Seager and Urias were never going anywhere – a package of $$, Peraza, DeLeon and whoever would have got Hamels here

          FAZ did not want a big name. That would have been too easy. They want to outsmart, not outspend. Like someone here recently said, they be too clever by half.

          This is LA. These are the Dodgers. Stop it with the McCarthy and the Latos. Get the LA fans what LA fans deserve – MLB stars.

          1. They could have got Liriano Hammels, and Vazquez, instead of Anderson, and MCCarthy, for less money, or about the same money. And only Liriano has had some injury issues, but nothing like MCCarthy and Anderson. And Liriano is a better pitcher.

        2. Dodgers could have had Cueto and Price this offseason or brought back Greinke and it would have cost nothing but money, which they have plenty of. Not even a draft pick would have been lost. You don’t want to go north of 200 million for Price or Greinke, give Cueto his deal. A proven very good starter in the NL at the age of 30. No, instead he went to our rivals and we’re going to get Kazmir for 48 million for 3 after he opts in after a bad year and pretty much nothing from Brett Anderson and his 16 million dollar one year deal. It’s not like these guys aren’t spending, they’re just missing.

      2. The Moneyball mentality says that to maximize efficiency, you eschew big contracts and look for what they call “market inefficiencies” (good things that everyone else misses) and use them to your advantage. I think that the Braintrust has focused on the injured or injury-prone as assets that can be acquired cheaply and therefore be a bargain. You’re right – the Dodgers are a big market team whose management is running the major league roster as if they are small market, nibbling around the edges and acquiring marginal talent while waiting for the minors to produce the next batch of stars. This is all OK, but doesn’t bode well for the present. This has been Badger’s point from the beginning.

        1. I agree with you, and I don’t think this team will be back in the postseason until 2018 at the earliest. I consider this a quasi-rebuilding year, as much as you can do with a payroll north of 200 million. To expect any of those young pitching prospects to come up and produce right away is not realistic, and I think their major league roster is third best in the division. Just remember as this happens, Kershaw gets older and closer to free agency,

        2. FAZ has $65 million a year tied up in 3 players who will likely put up less combined WAR than Goldschmidt. I hear the moaning about what they have done but no one has ever suggested what else they should have done that is not moronic!

          1. The trade got us Adrian Gonzalez. As Eric Stephen wrote:

            “Since the start of the 2006 season, Gonzalez leads the majors with 1,612 games played, 36 more than anyone else (Robinson Cano and Ichiro Suzuki are next, with 1,576). Gonzalez also leads with 1,571 starts during that span. Gonzalez averaged 159 games played and 155 starts from 2006-2015, with no fewer than 156 games in any season during that span. Gonzalez since the start of 2006 is fourth in RBI (1,047), hits (1,774) and doubles (378).”

            Think about how inconsistent the Dodgers’ offense has been the past few years and where the team would be without Gonzalez. Think about how good he has been with RISP. How steady he has been in the clubhouse.

            You really wish they hadn’t made “the trade”?

          2. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it moronic mover.

            moronic mover – that’s funny

            What I find moronic is the continued shopping for market inefficiencies instead of shopping for stars. It’s becoming a boring team.

          3. I wouldn’t make a habit of constructing a team based on expensive stars, but this move has been a net positive. I think the Dodgers always really coveted Agon…I did. He’s a perfect fit in LA. They didn’t have Guggs money to sign him out of San Diego, but went after him when they were flush.

            He’s an expensive contract, but they got him when he was still in his prime. His contract ends when he is presumptively beginning his decline. I don’t know if it is necessarily a component of sabermetrics to not want to sign and expensive free agent to a long term contract when there is a high likelihood that the player will be less effective when he’s being payed the most. I don’t have to be a stat whiz to understand that Pujols contract is dumb….and it was dumb when it was signed.

            The history of signing expensive free agents past the age of 30 to long term contracts, especially pitchers, is that they rarely pay off. If you want to bring up McCarthy and recognizing injury risk and the perils of signing such a player, you also have to understand the risk of underperformance and lack of production due to age and just a history of ineffectiveness. There is a very high probability that Greinke will not be worth that contract and that a relatively small market team will be hindered in its ability to sign future players because of it. AZ is gambling that they can win something in the next 2-3 years. Samardija was a high risk signing based on his history of ineffectiveness. He’s doing ok so far, but we’ll see.

            The whole essence of sports is uncertainty. Who would have though Kershaw would lose to the Marlins the other night by giving up five runs in an inning after cruising for most of the game?

        3. I wouldn’t necessarily say this FO runs the team like a small market, simply “nibbling around the edges.” I think they’ve implemented strategies that have worked in their small market experience.

          Signing a star is a high risk proposition. That star has to start and has to produce up to the level of that contract to be worth it. I think the stock analogy is as good as any, and Friedman did this in a previous career. If you do research on a stock that is undervalued relative to it’s fundamentals, investing in these will give more sustained value than buying an expensive equity that might be at it’s zenith and likely decline. It minimizes the boom/bust cyclical nature of investment.

          Anthony Rizzo was kind of a lower end piece in a trade with the Red Sox. I don’t think Jake Arrieta was anyone of any particular note. They blossomed and the Cubs have mixed acquiring prospects and building a good minor league system with acquiring cheap high potential pieces with the occasional expensive free agent.

          The Yankees are terrible. Their strategy was just to outbid everyone else for talent the last 7 years of so. Texeira never live up to that contract, nor did CC.

          People lost their minds here when Greinke left. StL was in a similar position when the Pujols, who was the face of that franchise left in FA. StL hasn’t really even missed a beat since. The Royals don’t have any “stars.” The Yankees and Phillies highlight the boom/bust nature of building a team around expensive stars. It’s not sustainable.

          The Pods tried to buy wins through expensive trades and free agents, and that flopped miserably. AZ is staying afloat right now mostly because of the back of their rotation and because of lesser guys who are overperforming, not because of their bold moves.

          1. There is a different metric going on here and in New York and that is star power. The Yankees and and the Dodgers are numbers 1 and 2 on the Forbes list of most valuable franchises. Neither has won a championship in a while, but both teams compete every year. Teams like Miami, Oakland and you know the list, have to be extremely careful about buying wins. As much as I would like the Dodgers to do the same, they don’t need to do that to thrive. We look like crap out there and we still draw 49,686 fans who pay to watch the team stink it up against a very bad Padres team. And let’s not forget the $300 million a year tv contract to go with the b.i.s. revenue. This team, like the Yankees, is up to their penthouse in revenue. Other than Kershaw, what they don’t have are stars. People pay money to come see stars. Say what want about Pujols, but he has star power. And as old and slow as he is, he still put up a 3.1 WAR last year and a 3.9 the year before that. Believe it or don’t, he earned his money according to those who run the numbers.

            Maybe with the Dodgers it just doesn’t matter the product. We’re a .500 team and we again lead all of baseball in attendance. We can afford anybody we want, and apparently that means little to FAZ. I want Greinke, Hamels and Chapman. They want Latos, Wood and Blanton. Very strange to watch this happen. My hope is that when Urias, De Leon, Bellinger, Verdugo, Buehler, Montas and Holmes finally arrive, we have the star power this city so richly deserves.

          2. This presupposes that any baseball executive knows that the next Arrieta or Rizzo will be. If only it was that easy.

            The thing about a star player is that you already know that he has been successful. The best predictor of future results is past results. The reason that Dodger fans look forward to Clayton Kershaw’s starts is that he has done so well in the past. You expect that any big star will be successful.

            You’re right of course – Greinke will probably not be great for 6 years. But you are paying for 3 or 4 years of expected greatness and spreading the cost of it over 6 years if it works out. It is the cost of acquiring talent.

            Signing a star may be an high risk proposition, but signing mediocre players is a higher risk, because you are expecting that he will somehow be transformed into a good or great one. While it happens on occasions, it doesn’t happen often.

  7. FAZ did not trade Dee because of Roids. The word on the street is that Dee started the roids after the trade (maybe to show the Dodgers they made a mistake). I think this is not the end. Others my be implicated!

    1. I would be surprised if Dee is the only one that was caught and therefore suspended but how does baseball benefit by ‘naming a guy a week’ or something along those lines. If you have the list, announce it immediately and begin the suspensions.

      The irony is that Dee would probably be the last person suspected of Roids…..last I knew Roids doesn’t make you faster, in fact could have the opposite effect. Maybe he was looking at doubling his HR output from 1 to 2.

      Has there been any comments from Dee or his agent? Preferably from Dee.

        1. Recovering quicker and increasing speed are 2 different things but I’m sure you mean that by recovering quicker the body can perform at its highest level more often.

    2. I don’t know, but Dee came to the spring in 14 stronger and with more mass. He’s always been skinny as a rail. He tailed off that year during the second half. Did the long season hamper his ability to recover? Did it just wear an already frail guy down?

      I don’t know when it started, but it’s a reasonable assumption that last year’s batting title is somewhat of a mirage. I doubt the FO somehow knew anything about any PED use, but they did know what he playing history was and what he did in the second half of 14. They sold high based on the first half.

  8. Did everyone know that the Marlins, and Gordon, found out that Gordon had tested positive twenty games, before last night’s game. And Gordon was deciding on whether he was going to protest his positive test, or accept his punishment. And Gordon had told Mattingly before the game last night, that he was accepting his punishment. And the Marlins are the ones, that shared this right after the game was over last night. That is not right! And steroids do more then bulk players up. If you remember Gordon, only really had two good months, with the Dodgers. And that was the first two months, he played. And after the all star break, he was never the same! We all shouldn’t feel to bad, because the Phillies also just swept the Nationals. Things like this happen.

  9. I just hope someone hasn’t found a way to sneak PEDS into bubble gum and sun flower seeds. The former could be really bad for a kid that chews about 5 pieces of gum at a time.

  10. Really enjoyed catching up with all the opinions today.

    From where I’m standing, this season is panning out very much as I expected.
    I said at the start that I thought this was a conduit year – from 15 – 17 when Deleon & Urias & possibly Bellinger, plus a more experienced Seagar, could take this team forward.
    There will be ebbs & flows along the way, but ultimately we will be a .500 team by the end of September.
    It is what I expected and therefore, am feeling very little emotion towards it this season. I am ambivalent really, just hoping to see some good games and hopefully a bit of Urias & Deleon before the season is out, to give us a taste of the future.

    I have taken heed of some of the more positive posters here, and am remaining optimistic as there are some positives, but in reality this team will not get the job done.

  11. Bum I do Agree with you, that Puig and Howie, shouldn’t be any where, at the top of the line up. Puig hasn’t been hitting very well, for a while now. Because he is trying to pull everything. And he doesn’t have good at bats, in clutch situations.

    He has been striking out a lot in these type of situations. In fact Puig has had twenty more at bats, then Joc, but he has only two more strike outs. And Howie has been hitting worse then Puig.

    I think that Roberts should pull Puig, before Joc , if Puig comes up at the right time for the switch. Just like you don’t want Joc to only get at bats against righties, it is not fair to only have Kike, get at bats, against lefties. Kike has done some clutch things for the Dodgers.

    And it isn’t only against leftie pitchers. And Roberts has been asked if he was planning on only hitting Joc, against Righties, and Roberts said no. He said that the reason that he having Joc sit against lefties, is more about just giving the players on the bench, a chance to play.

    And also baseball people don’t put much weight, to the stats after one month. And that is probably why, Roberts is still playing Howie, in the line up. Because Howie has a proven record, that he can hit. And the Dodgers need more righties in the line up, to balance the leftie bats.

    Right now Roberts is making some moves, on what players have done before, not just this month.

  12. I totally DISAGREE!

    Scott, your disdain for sabermetrics is SO ensconced that you’re taking the side of a proven cheater and liar? You’d, “…rather have a juiced Gordon thAn (it’s NOT “then” you supposedly professional writer) the flotsam the Dodgers got in that trade.” This is a stupid statement. I’d rather we got NOTHING than to have the Dodgers painted with the cheater/liar label Dee will now forever wear. Also, there’s knowing and there’s “knowing”. These guys didn’t just fall off a turnip truck. They’ve seen plenty of players they likely thought were on PED’s and were later proven correct or incorrect. It wouldn’t surprise me much to know Friedman suspected Dee was juicing and decided to sell high much more literally than we thought at the time.

    Dee has created yet more cynics – something the world needs a helluva lot fewer of – he’s been relegated to the trash pile of cheater/liar millionaires created because it is easier to do so than to make a rule that would eliminate the majority of this. Either once and out, or once and out 2 or 3 seasons and voided contracts. Yes, I understand all the reasons why everyone will say that’s not realistic. But it IS realistic if we truly care about trying to eliminate cheating from the game.

    1. Dan,

      I don’t hate sabermetrics, I hate the philosophies of the front office that makes them sign non-marginal and injury riddled players instead of impact players. I’m not taking anyone’s side. All I am saying is that Gordon juicing is funny as hell. And juicing or not, the trade was not that great. We got one decent player back for him. Guess what, an 80 game suspension is nothing, and hey Gordon will be back and the Marlins will still have a batting champion league leading base stealer on their roster. Brace yourself here Dan, but every franchise has had a cheater or roid label. What do you think Eric Gagne did during his days?

      Yes I get that I am cynic, but it’s fun to be a cynic. You need to lighten up a little and learn to read articles and have fun instead of getting all angry. No reason for that really. Oh and thanks for pointing out a typo in my article. When you are writing several articles per day and you end up writing over 1,000 articles per year you are going to have one or possibly two typos in them. Every major writer has one from time to time. I’ve seen typos worse than (I got it right this time!) that over at all of the other major Dodger blogs. Anyways, thanks for your opinion. Stick around and have some fun with us Dan, I need someone like you to keep me on my toes.

      1. Not really angry with you, Scott. Ok, yeah I’m a bit of a spelling Nazi – a career hazard, I work as a Quality Assurance Manager.

        I don’t think Dee using PED’s is funny, I think it’s sad. I “get” why the image of him in Saenz’ (?) arms cradled as a baby and the same kid as a roided player strikes you as funny but these guys are fucking with the games credibility.

        And Dee was a beloved guy even after we traded him. So many of us thought Freidman had made a mistake and then when Dee “won” (cheated his way to) the batting title and stolen bases lead we thought we KNEW Friedman had made a terrible mistake. Now I think good riddance.

        Yeah, I know Gagne cheated and I hate it. I hate that I was one who was all hyped up (ironic terminology, huh?) when he’d come into the game. Chances are we have one or more guys using PED’s now too – and I hate it. These guys were always the best players everywhere they ever played for the most part. Some of them can’t stand the idea of there being players better than they are (Read, “Barry Bonds here). And that’s setting aside the windfall motivations like Dee’s $50MM contract. It’s become ho-hum, another guy cheated and lied….where should we go for lunch today? I like the game too much to let pass un-commented upon.

        Next time I won’t bust your balls about spelling, well unless it’s, “…they should OF” or “breaks” instead of “brakes” (I’m lying!)
        Have a good weekend, Dan

        1. A quality assurance manager. That would explain the keen eye. I agree Dan. Juicing of any kind is bad for the game. I don’t like it either. But it is funny and ironic how little man Dee was juicing it up all along. I don’t think Friedman knew though. otherwise if it wasn’t reported the Dodgers might have gotten into trouble with the commissioner’s office. Normally the players are tested in spring training. I think Gordon was obviously juicing this year, and maybe last year, but I don’t think he was juicing with the Dodgers. We still don’t know for sure if he was juicing before this year, and we might not ever know.

    2. One strike and you’re out? That ain’t baseball. I played in a slow pitch tournament that did that. I didn’t care much for it.

      But, point made Dan. 80 games and half year salary apparently isn’t enough of a deterrent.

      And I don’t think it’s sabermetrics. I think it’s the deals these guys are making.

      1. Badger,
        Like major contracting companies I deal with, unless you slap them hard in the pocketbook, you don’t get their attention. If it doesn’t hurt, if no one is howling it’ll likely have little or no impact.

        1. So – the death penalty for every infraction? One strike and you’re out?

          Or what – an 80 game suspension is a loss of 1/2 salary – that seems to be a pretty big incentive not to cheat.

          1. I thought so. But when a guy makes $50 million, damn near all of it later, what’s a million now? The Marlins aren’t going anywhere so wtf? Play some golf and go scuba diving. If it was steroids that won him a batting title, then using them sure paid off for him, didn’t it.

          2. Yes, if you truly care about the game, it’s records, it’s history. If you don’t “get” tht, well you don’t truly get baseball. Also, if you don’t do something like this players will never take the rules on PED’s seriously.

            Dee just signed a $50 million five year backloaded deal. 80 games and a million are not any kind of disincentive.

  13. Seems to me there must be some blind eye collusion from the clubs. It’s OK until the player gets caught, you win some, you lose some. How about baseball taking the player’s lost salary and contributing it to some good cause instead of letting the club owners gain from it?

    1. MLB has never taken PED’s seriously. Everyone can see that. They turned a blind eye to the “era” because the money was rolling in. Now they just go through the motions. The way to deal with it is simple – you are suspended for a full year and your contract is voided. You have to start over. Won’t happen. Why? Because MLB does not take the issue seriously. Players on performance enhancers are good for the gate. It’s ALWAYS about the money.

      1. You don’t think the players union has anything to do with that? You’d think they’d be ok with the commissioner voiding a nine figure multi-year contract? A big part of why MLB turned a blind eye to PEDs is because the players union objected to testing. The union is there to protect the players’ interests. That is their primary agenda.

        I’d like to see contracts voided. You can make an argument that a player who uses and then signs a big contract is actually defrauding his employer. I’m not a lawyer, but I would think a legal case can be made that the employer party to a contract negotiation detrimentally relied on the assumption of non PED use when estimating future value of contract. If you sell a company and deliberately cook the books to inflate that company’s value, that’s fraud. People go to jail for that all the time.

        There were some professional cyclists who went to jail for sports fraud. Lance Armstrong is being sued for fraud.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)