Chuck and Mike played prominent roles for the Yankees during the championship years. Chuck was the table setter of the offense and set the tone with his patience and timely hitting. He turned things up a notch in the playoffs and would often make the SP throw 7 or 8 pitches before he concluded his at-bat. Whatever defensive deficiencies he had, we Yankee fans recognize that without him, our offense would probably never be able to give the SPs so many of those early leads that helped them settle down and pitch better with the lead. Without Mike, Mo doesn't get to save quite a number of all those games he saved during those years. Considering the amount of times we have been killed by our late inning relief sans Mo, Stanton's importance during those years stands out even more. We deemed it so important that we moved Joba to the 8th inning role late last year. They didn't put up spectacular numbers but they played prominent roles and were absolutely essential to our success. Think of them as Mad Max.
I dont get it .... but isn 't it WORTH DOING STERIOD and try to cover it up if possible. To take a shot at a BIG CONTRACT? I mean seriously if some of these guys gets a Multi-million dollars contract because the steriod producted GOOOD #'s !! ... and if you do get CAUGHT ... i mean so what u only get suspended for some games or so, but u have millions in the bank rite? if you dont do it some of these guys might not even last in the league or get the contract they are on now Jason Giambi (what $100+mils) and he sucks now. there's more to gain than lose ... i guess is how I'm seeing it. so I would too shooot. __________________
did you get to hear their response?? they asked to have a peek at the report before it was made public so that they too could answer questions from the media. they were denied that opportunity. i just think this whole thing is stupid. on one hand selig says, "our new drug policy is working." great. so why publish a comprehensive report naming names for activities that happened 4 years ago??? what's the point of that? it's incredibly damaging to those individuals, but tells us nothing we didn't already know about the state of baseball during that period. i don't get it.
I can't believe how thin the evidence is for naming some of these guys -- "such and such saw a syringe in the trash...etc."
The alternative is to sweep it under the rug and pretend like nothing happened. Of course it is damaging to the individuals - that's the point. If they cheated and screwed with the integrity of the game, their reputations SHOULD be damaged, at least in the view of MLB. I don't particularly care that much about steroids personally, but if MLB thinks that full disclosure is the best way to go to exorcise its demons then I find that decision respectable.
thats how I feel. if naming names is the way the MLB wants to set an example, so be it. one could say, well the names they listed might have not used roids, its all speculation, so be it. you had your chance to talk to mitchell, if i were an MLB player and I was innocent, I would have been lining up at the door to talk to mitchell. state my case right off the bat. instead no one wanted to talk, thus were subject to have their name thrown out there, whether it be true or not.
The players who paid for their drugs by check are idiots. $3,000 is like loose change in their couches. Why create a paper trail. They probably pay by check to street pros and write "hand job" in the note section of the check so their wives can see the canceled check later on.
Totally agreed. If they cheated they should be damaged. But some of these guys have no more evidence supporting the fact they did steroids than allegations made by trainers. Because Mitchell decided to include them in the report, the assumption is they must be guilty. That's certainly how the report is being received. Full disclosure is fine. But in terms of the Mitchell Report, full disclosure means, for some guys, you do nothing more than parrot the allegations reported by others. Which prove nothing, Sam. I think that's unfair. I think it's unfair to put a black mark on a man's career and character by simply having a team of lawyers take down someone's allegations and insert them into a document under a former senator's name. And I don't see how it accomplishes anything positive for baseball.
yeah, right. and if you had enough money to consult with an attorney, he'd tell you to shut up unless you're subpoenaed.
I for one, am glad Lenny Dykstra is on the list, even though it's been in the news before the report. I loathe him above all others. "Nails" indeed.
hey madmax, its a great day! maybe cause mario williams is playing well or the rocket won. its such a good sports day, maybe the best! i'm so happy!
That's fine - but then said attorney shouldn't complain they never had a chance to present their side of the story. He should say "we had a chance, we chose not to, and now we wish we had." If Clemens has nothing to hide and wasn't involved with steroids, why NOT talk to the Mitchell report? It's not like they can force him to answer questions he didn't want to. So if they asked about other players, he could just say no comment.
Yeah, I think this sucks for the players' union, but I understand it. The more people they give it to, the more chances of a leak - and that's the worst thing that could have happened. Notice the feeding frenzy we had a few hours before the report came out when all we had for names (and wrong names, at that). Imagine that for a few days. MLB did a great job keeping the report under wraps until at least a few hours before it was made public. But lots of people said baseball was protecting its stars and that its drug policy wasn't good enough, etc. Others said it wasn't nearly as widespread as the rumors. This kind of thing answers some of that. It makes clear that HGH is a major problem, that all types of players - pitchers, hitters, stars, backups - were using. It shows the depth of the problem, how it spread through baseball, etc. It forces MLB and the MLBPA to address the HGH issue. It's just a step, but its the first non-biased thing we've gotten that doesn't come with the spin of either Selig and the owners or the players' union.
