Steroids, Veterans, and Rookies
And we're back to business as usual
Do you think that seeing some of the biggest stars in the game brought before Congress to face the threat of jail time will cause some of the next generation of stars to think twice before using illegal drugs?
Or do you think seeing how little power anyone (Congress, the commissioner, the Player's Union) has to punish offenders on the grounds of hearsay will only further embolden cheaters?
Or won't matter?
I've been thinking about the large number of veteran players who are still out of work. Some interesting pieces have been written lately about the possible collusion that is driving down the price on a large number of experienced baseball players.
I wonder where the steroid scandal fits into all of this.
I've always thought the clubs have to know who is doing something if not who is doing what.
So maybe we've just reached a tipping point.
We've always questioned the cost of a replacement player; maybe that minor leaguer can perform as well as the veteran, or close enough to be worth the drop in salary. Now the clubs have to worry about Radomski clones turning up in every major city. Maybe the money plus the road map of who knew how to get what is going to drive a lot of role players into an early retirement.
As Brian Cashman said of the market: "You either have the stars or the young guys. There are very few players in between."
The biggest names (like Pettitte) are worth the cost and the risk. Shawn Chacon, not so much.
0 recs |
11 comments
Comments
Better things to do?
Today, Andy Pettitte shows up to testify before Congress ...
Don't our elected officials have better things to do? Here's a start, why not work together to actually get something done on Capitol Hill--something that actually benefits the citizens of our nation--not special interests, not illegal aliens.
I pondered why Congress seems so compelled to suddenly stick their collective noses into baseball, football and the like, and could only come up with this ...
Does baseball and football use federal monies to build stadiums? I believe in some cases they do. Is this the silver bullet. Is why our leadership is sniffing around?
Perhaps baseball and football need to divorce themselves from any government cash?
I may be way, way off base here, but I was getting ready to post this same story and Jscape beat me again. But in my version I really wanted to get some opinion as to what others think about the government's intervention. As Ronald Reagan said, "The most terrifying thing a taxpayer can here is 'I'm with the government and I'm here to help.'"
Thoughts??
by Ronster22 on Feb 4, 2008 2:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Anti-trust
Great post...
The problem is a little thing called the "Anti-trust" law.
Both Baseball and all the other major league sports are covered by this law. Therefore, the Jerks in Washington have to regulate everything to its death. From the questions I have seen asked by the "Great Senators" they have no clue what the heck they are talking about. They should get out of the way and let the industry take care of itself. The market always adjusts itself one way or another. 27/08.
by Old Ranger on Feb 4, 2008 3:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
alleged steroid use
That being said, I don't know why we don't have other things to worry about. HGH, which Pettitte admitted to, is a PED but not a steroid.
by bxgrl1 on Feb 4, 2008 6:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Where Anti-Trust comes into play is
1.) get your name out there and have average joe sportsfan know who you are and
2.)Come down hard on an issue where almost 100% of the population will agree with your position.
This is like kissing babies for all these guys.
by seanp23 on Feb 5, 2008 10:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't let me stop you
Baseball is given special allowances and special regulation under the anti-trust laws.
I won't say what I think of the job the gov't has done recently or who's to blame. Just like Manny standing at the plate and watching a homerun, this is a part of the game that I'm not happy with but I have to live with.
by jscape2000 on Feb 4, 2008 4:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The big problem with
Getting into a he-said, he-said over details of the report does nothing to enhance the report's credibility. We've already come to our conclusions. I think there was a small minority who thought/think Clemens is innocent. Having his close friends trotted before Congress is overkill. Let the crusading IRS agent or other feds investigate if that is absolutely neccessary. But don't diminish Pettitte and Knoblauch through this congressional charade.
My two cents.
by LateInningRelief on Feb 5, 2008 8:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent information, but ...
I joke, but I'm sort of serious. Why not?
They want to bring accountability into baseball (I'm all for that) start by bringing in some accountability where it really matters--Congress.
by Ronster22 on Feb 5, 2008 9:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You're not going to
Still, I really have to lay this at the feet of Selig. He needed to use his bully pulpit to strenuously dissuade Congress from getting involved. In the absence of that, those guys can't help themselves: it's cheap, non-partisan grand-standing.
by LateInningRelief on Feb 5, 2008 12:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Selig is ...
While I'm not a fan of David Stern's micromanagement style, this is what we need in baseball--someone strong, with a backbone who truly does have the best interests of the game at the forefront.
by Ronster22 on Feb 5, 2008 2:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly,
by LateInningRelief on Feb 5, 2008 3:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He's one of them ...
by Ronster22 on Feb 5, 2008 4:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

















