As others have pointed out, Sosa/Bonds/McGwire have ridiculous spikes in power production that are outside of the norm of their entire careers. Bagwell, not so much (and before you quote his limited minor league numbers, you may ought to check his stats from college). The classless remark was in reference to your condescending "magic jellybeans" and "Brooklyn Bridge" reference. Just because someone isn't willing to try, convict, and sentence Bagwell (or anyone else) based on his rookie card and a zit doesn't make him naive. McGwire is on the 2002 list--which, as you point out with Clemens, probably doesn't stand in a court of law. We always hear "where there's smoke, there's fire". Thing is, with Clemens and all the others there was smoke. With Bagwell, there's nothing but the occasional reporter popping his mouth off and the Internet BBS fan posting pics of his rookie card and proudly proclaiming, "SEEE!!!! I TOLD YOU!!!!!!!!11" To take it as fact that Bagwell never did would certainly be naive. But to take it as fact that he did is arrogant. We. Do. Not. Know. Do you understand yet?
"Massive"?? Dude was never "massive". you're making reckless assumptions and overplaying his size. "get over it."
I'd say 95% of the guys that use steriods have some way to beat the test. As the phrase goes "juicers are always ahead of the enforcers." You guys should read Game of Shadows (the one with Barry Bonds). It covers a lot of sports. At the end, I was pretty sad to learn about what sports has become.
Is it a coincidence that his body eventually broke down? Maybe. Bagwell was on a historic pace before Mcgwire, Sosa, or Bonds ever broke the home run records. Was is just the andro use? I said it a long time ago and got flamed but I'll still say that Bagwell did use PED's. Btw, Bagwell was my favorite player by far. I want to think fairly though and history suggests that he used steroids at some point. The huge neck gave it away imo.
So dumb, a stupid reporter says he thinks Bagwell took steroids and now most people are going to question it. This reporter has no evidence what so ever. I could say Albert Pujols and Griffey took steroids and my words would have the same amount of legitimacy as his. Don't make accusations when you have no proof what so ever.
a historic pace? He had the one year when he hit 39 in the strike shortened year. It projected out to 57 IF he managed to play every game that year. Of course, he broke his hand anyway, so the point is moot. Aside from that, I don't know how you make a claim like that to try and support your argument
Yup, this is the point that should be discussed. Gumble, who is widely respected in his industry, should not have lumped a guy like Bagwell with the others; the others are lumped together mainly for their Senate hearings. Bad move by Gumble. This has happened before in other publications: Example I
You're right about the pace. I thought it was much higher than 57. Maybe it was just the andro. It's just my opinion. You can't blame me for being cynical about MLB ball players.
You mean the same hereditary degenerative shoulder his dad has? But sure, let's gloss over that and talk about PEDs, because that's a more sexy conversation. Plus I've got a picture of him from his 97 season and he has a ZIT. LOL a "historic" pace? From 91 to 97, his average was 26 HR. A pace of 520, if he play *20 years* at that exact pace! Bagwell is one of the best 1B in history (not top five, mind you), but he is there on the basis of all five of his tools, not on dingers alone. There are others who simply had more power. So stop acting like he was channeling Babe Ruth out there. Sorry you got flamed. You may be right -- but you don't know. You can act like you know, but you don't know. And neither do I. We don't know. Fine. Then look at *all* of his history, especially that degenerative shoulder, instead of pictures from baseball cards. If you fancy yourself "fair", then gather *all* the information. What you're doing is extrapolating, with no real medical knowledge, from some pictures. Know what? *My* chest and neck are way bigger now than they were when I was 20. And I *promise* you, I'll never be accused of being an athlete. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. I know it's your opinion and I respect your opinion, but my opinion is that this is simply and utterly ridiculous. This I entirely understand and concur. I'll never, ever argue that Bagwell didn't roid up. I only argue with those who would pretend that they know for a fact that he did, based on pictures of "big necks", "big arms", or zits. But suspicion of everyone who played--that I understand. Look, it has been documented over and over that even some of the scrawniest, no-talent rats in ML and minor league clubhouses roided up trying to get an edge. While that would cast even more suspicion on *everybody*, it should also cast a little more light on how silly it is to look at big muscles and instantly assume PEDs. That's just dumb. Bottom line (again): We. Don't. Know.
You really expect us to believe that you had the same workout regimen as a pro ballplayer. Really? I am guessing that Bags spent more time in the gym in one day than you did in five. The guy made his living with his body and worked out fanatically. Was he using? Maybe. I don't know. I am pretty sure that you cannot compare your mass loss to his and imply that it is the same thing given his workout regimen and the fact that he cannot lift at all now due to the degenerative shoulder.
The defensive and snappy reaction here by some against those who think Bagwell used roids is similar to discussions of Rogerroid before he made a complete fool of himself. For years I've thought Bagwell used roids during his career but we may never know for sure.
That's a fair way to state it: you aren't claiming it as fact. I don't have an opinion either way other than this: we don't know. If Bagwell were ever to admit to using PEDs, I wouldn't have any regrets from these conversations. My response would simply be, "now we know."
All I can say is that when I was a little kid in the mid-to-late 90's, before steroids were even brought up as a possibility with ballplayers, I remember broadcasters consistently talking about Bagwell's incredible workout habits. I don't know if he used steroids or not, but I wouldn't simply make a conclusion based on his strength. He was a known gym rat.
Who cares what Gumble thinks, I want to know who else Conseco named. I know he listed McGwuire, Rodriquez (the goldenchild) and Palmiero, and all have come forward admitting steroid use. Funny thing is that Conseco was written off as a moron and a liar. Though I won't disagree with either one. Bags was a hero of min for many years, and thus I find it hard to believe he did steroids. However, as an adult I view the steroid issue as less of a problem or wrong doing.
There are also classic examples of the other side, with Chuckles (he'd never pass on a Butterfingers) Barkley as the posterizing extended size. But, to Bags and Roids. I am neither shocked nor, frankly particularly, offended, when guys are outed from the 'roids closet. And I choose to wait for some solid evidence before going back to my benign indifference. Because if they had had, and offered me, them magic pills when my shoulder died I believe I might well have accepted them because I wasn't ready to hang'm up. I mighta been a contender. So, 40 years on, I'm supposed to be upset if guys and gals take them now? For whatever reason? Now, when outed fellas like Bonds and Clemens act as they do then I do get an affront on.
Yeah, but aren't being a little too defensive for something that's as obvious as can be without actually stating it? I mean, if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. Granted, we don't know for sure. But then again, we couldn't be certain that OJ killed two people either. I mean, the gloves didn't fit, you know.
