Let's not forget that Bagwell's shoulder problem is genetic. IIRC, his father and grandfather had the same problem. It was not an issue due to steroids or anything under his control. Imagine how much shorter his career would have been had he stayed at 3rd base.
Sorry, but it's *not* obvious. Again, why are you ignoring all the other factors? But I get it. You've got pictures of his muscles and a ZIT, so now it's "obvious". We. Don't. Know.
uh okay. you guys crack me up. keep defending baggy...all good. I just happen to completely disagree and it makes me chuckle reading everyone's defense of him. Totally entitled to your opinions, but to me I doubt you are looking at him subjectively, which is understandable.
If you think Bags was juiced then I know u have to believe Finley and Luis Gonzales were juiced with the stats they put up after leaving here
Yes. I think they both juiced. I think tons of players juiced. And I don't really blame most of them. It sucks that it happened, but it was so widespread IMHO and I probably would have taken them as well if it meant the difference of making $500k and $5mm per year...as long as they didn't test So I don't think any of those guys are villians...just a generation of ballplayers that made bad decisions EDIT: and to the point of the OP, I think it's one thing to think Baggy juiced...but when a media member makes it public, that's bush league...especially when it's all conjecture with zero proof
We have the right to defend Bagwell. He was the face of the franchise a great player, and a great teammate on and off the field. Bagwell was basically to the Astros as what Hakeem was to the Rockets. You are basically spitting in the face of a possible hall of famer with accusations such as these when you have no facts or evidence what so ever. It's so easy to throw around rumors about players who took steroids. These rumors are completely invalid without any evidence to back them up. A guy hit a decent amount of homeruns and has hall of fame statistics. Automatically you assume he didn't get those fairly....? I could say I believed Hakeem took steroids and have just as much reason to believe it as you do that Bagwell took steroids. All players breakdown eventually thats what professional sports do to you. The human body isn't meant to endure that amount of physicall stress. Before you start throwing around random accusations make sure you have at least some legitimate information to back up your thoughts.
Huh!? If you really think the evidence is just zit and muscle pictures, then I guess there's nothing else to say. Because we all know that light-hitting 3rd basemen in the minors usually turn into super-HR hitters in the most pitcher-friendly park in the game.
Do you expect a player to come into the league and not improve at all ? Any player of Bags caliber was bound to improve upon mentally and physically the more he played. That alone would of helped him hit for more power and contact. Not to mention he was in the PRIME of his career. Berkman had years where he hit 42/45 homeruns. Obviously he took steroids during those years because those are abnormal compared to his other years of around 30.
Blah blah blah. I am a huge Astros fan and a huge Bagwell fan. I have been watching the Stros since I was 7 years old. I am not spitting in Bagwell's face and I stated that I don't blame players for what they did...just like I don't blame Bagwell (if he did, which obviously I believe). And comparing him to Hakeem? Look, once again I love Baggy but he was a playoff choker for the most part...while Hakeem put two teams on his back and brought home 2 championships. Once again, I stated multiple times that this was my opinion. That's it. An opinion. But I look at it subjectively...guy is small...gets HUGE...hr's blow up..ends up with injuries...now is TINY again. It's just my opinion. You guys can counter with "he just worked out hard" but I simply disagree. That's it. I have no more proof than you do.
The great players that roided up had incredible workout habits. Steroids won't create muscle. You still have to hit the gym. Steroids just let you go harder at everything because they help muscles repair and recover. My biggest problem with steroids isn't that players used, but rather how much they lie. Everyone denies it, or they admit to taking it only to help them overcome injuries.
Absolutely Gonzo was juicing. The guy had zero power when he was here then he had a year where he hit 57 HR's. That does not happen.
Do people wish Gonzo, Finley, & Caminiti were juicing while here if that was what made them all-star players elsewhere?
I wish that no MLB players ever took steroids. But since many did, especially in that era, yeah...I would take a 50 hr hitting Gonzo over a 15 hr hitting Gonzo
It's very common to assume that you're being objective and everyone *else* is not being objective--because there's no way they could possibly hold a different viewpoint from *yours* were they being objective. It's very common, and it's also very immature. You're ignoring several other factors, the most blatant of which is the shoulder condition. It's incredible (and idiotic) how many people keep marching the same old, tired argument out and never even mention this. I'll say it again: We. Don't. Know. If *I* really think? That's all most accusers talk about. I'm just feeding off the drivel I see. A few people mention HR numbers, out of context of course. They draw comparisons to people like Gonzo and Bonds and McGwire, and there is more dissimilarity than similarity. Nice try. Bagwell's power increase was far from sudden; check his power numbers from college. Guess who holds the all-time records from his (admittedly small!) alma mater? You mean ojectively again, I assume? So. Do. I. Sorry Blake, but it's not objective if one: -- overstates and exaggerates certain points -- entirely ignores others Here's what you're leaving out: - Bagwell got bigger, but nowhere near "HUGE" like McGwire or Bonds. - Bagwell has a degenerative arthritic shoulder which is hereditary (but that couldn't possibly have anything to do with it, right?) When you can't use certain muscles at all, there's this thing called atrophy. Ever seen an atrophied muscle? It's not smaller like "oh, dude quit working out". It's smaller like, "dude--are you sick or something?" In fact, Blake, by ignoring those things and only taking a skewed look at HR numbers and an exaggerated look at his size, you are being subjective while you accuse others of not being objective. But most of us aren't countering with that. I guess that's the argument you're attacking because it's the easiest to pick off. By the way, I am not arguing that Bagwell didn't juice. My point is simple (and I'll state it yet again): We. Don't. Know. Thank you. And I'll say this -- for those who are saying it's their opinion, I really don't have an issue. It's only those who either state it as fact or accuse others of "subjectivity" (which is the opposite of objectivity) that I'll quickly take issue with. It's immature to assume that if someone disagrees with you they must obviously be employing failed logic or looking through rose-colored (or homer-colored) glasses. I don't mean to attack or pile on; it's just immature. This is the way I see it: there are as many things that point to purely natural causes as there are that may point to PED's. Therefore: We don't know.
anyone remember that quote from hunsicker or a scout (when berkman was coming up and bagwell was still mashing) where he said berkman had the most natural power in the organization? i've remembered that and it always struck me as odd...until the steroid controversy broke out. after taking steroids 1 time i have no doubt in my mind that bags roided. i don't fault the guy, but look at how he blew up from his rookie year to his peak years and significantly back down.
