215 replies to this topic

[Rocco Graziosa]

Thank you, Craig. Best post in the thread.

Cmon Skrub. Its the post of the thread if you believe the Mark McGwire/Sammy Sosa defense. No way your that stupid. I guess anything is possible and the list is bogus.........but man thats really hard to swallow.

[BucketOBalls]

This is just too brazen of a stand for someone to make if he were indeed guilty.

I wish I could believe that.

Let me start by telling you this: I have never used steroids, period. I don't know how to say it any more clearly than that. Never

Under oath. To congress.

Not that I am saying Ortiz did, but if you were going to willfully cheat to gain an advantage....I don't see why you would have trouble lying about it later.

Reading through this thread, you can make a pretty good case that Ortiz was as truthful as possible and that he was being evasive.

At this point, the words don't mean anything anymore. It's just whatever you want to believe.

[paulftodd]

Now it's in the Game Thread forum

This thread is an example of why we don't like having the discussion on the main board. Speculation, accusation, one word posts like "LIAR". What bullshit. I don't know what some of you people want from the guy, or why you'd expect him to do anything other than say plainly that he didn't use steroids. If he did, it will come out, and he'll deserve the lambasting, but as of now, some of the crap written here is beyond ridiculous. You're free to have your opinions, I'm not in a mod role here, but what I find comical is how sure of your opinions some of you seem to be. Just mind boggling, and a bit nauseating.

Obviously, anyone who expresses an opinion that what Papi said today is truth is just speculating or accepting it is a matter of faith. Skeptics "accuse" or post "bullshit"

In the absence of proof one must reason based on the facts that are out there, some call it speculation. The evidence conveniently is under seal by court order. The MLBPA conveniently enough will respect the court order as to what Big Papi tested positive for. Nobody will ever know 100% for sure what he tested positive for. Any anonymous reports will not be confirmed, unlike the report he tested positive (Makes you wonder if MLBPA released it themselves so their new guy would have a chance at the spotlight who could clarify (muddy the water) some points)

But here are the facts, which should be taken collectively .

In 2003, Papi had been given his outright release from the Twins and battled for a job with known steroid user Jeremy Giambi. Went from being a 20 HR a year often injured player to the best slugger in the game over the next 5 years, whose size increased in proportion to his OPS. I wish I had his hat size by year and we could talk HGH too. But Motive is clearly established.

Papi is linked to banned trainer Angel Presinal, who is also linked to A-Rod and Manny, one an admitted user, the other tested positive for steroids in 2009 and also 2003. Means and Opportunity.

Papi confirmed he tested positive in 2003 due to some unknown supplement. Now, in 2003, 2 samples 7 days apart were taken. After the 1st sample was taken, the player was advised to not take any supplements for 7 days as they might cause a positive test, and are cleared from the body quickly after stopping. If the first sample tested positive, the 2nd sample collected would be tested, and only if the 2nd sample also tested positive, would a player be deemed to have tested positive (otherwise the 1st sample would be deemed a false positive unless it came from a steroid not known to be available via supplements). Remember, it was important to the players for the % positives be under 5% to avoid punitive penalties in 2004. No clear mention of this in the conference when Papi claimed it was OTC supplements responsible for the positives.

In 2004 Papi was informed his 2003 tests were in the hands of the government and that he would be tested soon (there was a testing moratorium on players who had tested positive pending notification by the MLBPA). Papi says he was not told he had tested positive, but if only those players who tested positive were informed, well, you do not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out you tested positive. Yet he says he was surprised.

Papi mentioned in his book published in 2007 with Tony Mass he may have unwittingly taken something OTC that contained steroids. I thought this strange at the time but it is clear now.

Rather than promptly deny steroid use and suggest the positive result came from some kind of OTC supplement, which he had obviously thought about, Papi gets protection from MLBPA, assures himself the test results will never be disclosed by anyone other than an anonymous source, and has a meeting on the road 1 week later, in NY in the middle of a huge series, with the MLBPA soon to be chief (a lawyer and known Orza loyalist) at his side, only to deny using steroids (no mention of HGH which obviously was outside 2003 survey and even todays testing).

I don't blame Papi for using or denying, if thats what he did. Case is closed at this point, for now anyways, but Papi gets that asterisk in my mind just like every other player who played in this era, named or not. Yeah, even the small guys who never hit many HR's (like Manny Alexander) or those who broke records for playing everyday.

Edited by paulftodd, 09 August 2009 - 02:14 AM.

[Archer1979]

Couldn't you make the same statement for Clemens, Bonds or Sosa? What are your thoughts on those players?

Bottom line..........if you defend Ortiz here, your gonna have to do a real song and dance to distance yourself from McGwire and Sosa specifically, and Bonds exponentially.

I'm curious to hear peoples thoughts on McGwire and Sosa juxtaposed to Ortiz.

That's an excellent question. Each case is different but the similarities are that all three (Clemens, Bonds, and Sosa) are all on legal record as having said that they have not taken steroids. They really have everything to lose by publically coming clean.

McGwire's really a case unto himself. Most likely, there is no definitive proof that he took steroids other than Canseco's accounts. He didn't really deny anything in front of Congress.

Ortiz also has the benefit of learning from their mistakes on of having seen how their situations have played out.

In converse to the situation of those three mentioned, Ortiz really has everything to gain as most already believe that he's guilty. In fact, if he did come clean, there's an excellent chance that he could have been forgiven. The curtain call that he received at Fenway the day the news broke out suggests that the forgiveness phase had indeed already started. Lying only makes this a point of no return situation.

He's actually taking the harder road by fighting the accusation.

[Sille Skrub]

I've been lurking on this site for over six years without ever making a post. I respect many of the opinions that are posted on this board, even when I disagree. I know my opinion is worth just as much as the next guy, so you can take what I'm about to write with a grain of salt. But I felt compelled to offer my view for the first time. So it here it goes:

**snip**

Welcome aboard.

Also if anyone cares, my thoughts on PEDs are here.

[SeaDogsNation]

Yes, the circumstantial evidence is quite damning. As a fan of Ortiz, perhaps my judgment is impaired as I want to believe him.

Paulftodd, I agree with most of your post, except the part in bold below. You state that if Ortiz stopped taking a supplement it would be "cleared from the body quickly after stopping" (for the follow-up test a week later).

In actuality there were several supplements available at any GNC or health food store back in 2003 (marketed as "pro-hormones" or "muscle-builders') that contained steroids. Here are some examples:

• The products PheraPlex and Ergomax LMG contain the oral steroid DMT (aka Madol, the same drug from the BALCO scandal).
• The product Halodrol-50, which closely resembles the steroid Oral Turinabol.
• The product Superdrol, which contains a methylated form of the steroid Masteron.

All of the above products will give a user "steroid-like" gains and take at least 5 to 6 weeks to completely clear the system.

So, it is indeed possible that Papi was using a "muscle-building" product that he purchased from a GNC or health store. Some players might have preferred to use these types of products because they were legal to purchase, didn't require injection, and could be used for short 2 to 3 week cycles several times throughout the year to maintain mass and strength. Those players may not have realized they were taking oral steroids because those products were not marketed as anabolic steroids.

Papi confirmed he tested positive in 2003 due to some unknown supplement. Now, in 2003, 2 samples 7 days apart were taken. After the 1st sample was taken, the player was advised to not take any supplements for 7 days as they might cause a positive test, and are cleared from the body quickly after stopping. If the first sample tested positive, the 2nd sample collected would be tested, and only if the 2nd sample also tested positive, would a player be deemed to have tested positive (otherwise the 1st sample would be deemed a false positive unless it came from a steroid not known to be available via supplements). Remember, it was important to the players for the % positives be under 5% to avoid punitive penalties in 2004. No clear mention of this in the conference when Papi claimed it was OTC supplements responsible for the positives.

[Ed Hillel]

Couldn't you make the same statement for Clemens, Bonds or Sosa? What are your thoughts on those players?

Bottom line..........if you defend Ortiz here, your gonna have to do a real song and dance to distance yourself from McGwire and Sosa specifically, and Bonds exponentially.

I'm curious to hear peoples thoughts on McGwire and Sosa juxtaposed to Ortiz.

Clemens, Bonds, and Sosa are not in the same boat as Ortiz on the face of things. There is clear evidence (pun intended) that Clemens and Bonds knew what they were taking and knew that it was illegal and against the rules of MLB. In other words, they were knowingly cheating.

I'm not sure about Sosa's defense, but we must also remember that there is other evidence that the guy cheated in the past. Remember the marbles exploding out of his bat? A lot of people forget that, it seems. Thus, even if Sosa came up with a defense similar to Ortiz (I can't remember), there would at least be some past evidence of similar prior conduct.

I was with McGwire until the hearings and once Canseco started gaining credibility. If someone went in and took Andro it wouldn't bother me in the least. It's an OTC drug you can pick up at GNC, and MLB wasn't exactly proactive in letting people know what substances were ok and what were not.

Now, with Ortiz and other players I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt if they have a clean track record and they claim they tested positive because of OTC supplements. They might be lying, but I don't find it hard to believe at all if they're telling the truth. Unless and until other evidence comes out, there's really no way of knowing. And, again, if someone was on the list just because they went into GNC and took some creatine, I really could give a shit. Nobody cared at the time and MLB did absolutely nothing to make clear that stuff like this was banned.

The thing I really don't get in this whole process is that people are just clumping everyone together, regardless of the differences between the stories behind the positive tests. If we're talking about failing a test now then, yeah, there is little difference in culpability between knowingly taking steroids and not doing so, because everyone is on notice. But back then? It's completely different. The whole idea behind creating this list was not well thought-out. They should have known that this document would reach the light of day, given the nature of the media as it stands now.

[Myt1]

Couldn't you make the same statement for Clemens, Bonds or Sosa? What are your thoughts on those players?

Bottom line..........if you defend Ortiz here, your gonna have to do a real song and dance to distance yourself from McGwire and Sosa specifically, and Bonds exponentially.

I'm curious to hear peoples thoughts on McGwire and Sosa juxtaposed to Ortiz.

Bottom line, um, no, you don't. David Ortiz now knows that a list exists that has his name on it, and the substance which he tested positive for. His name has already been leaked despite a promise of confidentiality. It is entirely likely that more information will be released off of that list, that might contradict Ortiz's story and make him look even worse. Neither McGwire nor Sosa were in anything approaching the same circumstances. In fact, I don't know what the factual circumstances have in common except baseball, big guys, and steroids. But your posts on this subject have shown that once steroids are mentioned, that's all you need to hear. Every situation is immediately the same.

I wish I could believe that.

Under oath. To congress.

Not that I am saying Ortiz did, but if you were going to willfully cheat to gain an advantage....I don't see why you would have trouble lying about it later.

See above. Palmiero had no reason at the time to think that info about him would come back to bite him.

[Rocco Graziosa]

Bottom line, um, no, you don't. David Ortiz now knows that a list exists that has his name on it, and the substance which he tested positive for. His name has already been leaked despite a promise of confidentiality. It is entirely likely that more information will be released off of that list, that might contradict Ortiz's story and make him look even worse. Neither McGwire nor Sosa were in anything approaching the same circumstances. In fact, I don't know what the factual circumstances have in common except baseball, big guys, and steroids. But your posts on this subject have shown that once steroids are mentioned, that's all you need to hear. Every situation is immediately the same.

Really? I think I've made it crystal clear that I think taking the Pettitte/Arod route and being more transparent is a more effective strategy than the Sosa/Ortiz/McGwire route with regards to legacy.

As has been mentioned time and time again, fan are extremely forgiving for players that appear as transparent as possible. With the way these stories go away as quickly as they do these days (it won't even be a topic by Wednesday) Ortiz had, IMO, a one shot opportunity here. Now he may well have told the truth here, but I'm not so sure the truth really matters. For instance Mark McGwire hasn't tested positive or admitted to anything, and he's only a tiny notch below Barry Bonds as the poster boy for PED use in baseball. (while at the same time I don't think fans even think about PED's when the name Pettitte comes up) The stance Ortiz took Saturday will put him in this wing of this mess with a great deal of the MLB fan base outside of Boston.

I think he got bad advice.

Edited by Rocco Graziosa, 09 August 2009 - 05:56 PM.

[Jnai]

Rocco, but supposing what he said was the truth, what could he have said otherwise? Should he have admitted to using steroids he never took?

I think that's the problem, here. The public wants more even if more doesn't exist. We've already assigned guilt, now we just want the confession.

[jcd0805]

Rocco, but supposing what he said was the truth, what could he have said otherwise? Should he have admitted to using steroids he never took?

I think that's the problem, here. The public wants more even if more doesn't exist. We've already assigned guilt, now we just want the confession.

He should have at least been able to answer "yes" or "no" to the question asking if he had ever taken Andro, the fact that he couldn't or wouldn't just made everything else he said sound very evasive.

Edited by jcd0805, 09 August 2009 - 07:05 PM.

[Myt1]

Really? I think I've made it crystal clear that I think taking the Pettitte/Arod route and being more transparent is a more effective strategy than the Sosa/Ortiz/McGwire route with regards to legacy.

That's true. You have made that clear. When I said you believe that, "Every situation is immediately the same," I was referring to the situation the player faces when it comes time for him to make the decision of which strategy to take. The fact that you lump Pettitte/ARod/Sosa/Ortiz/McGwire all in together in this post illustrates that. The factual differences surrounding each of those situations are myriad, but you think that the very same response is appropriate in each of those cases, despite their differences. Further, despite the obvious differences, you think choosing a different strategy in any of those cases is de facto illustrative of guilt and or falsehood. That doesn't make any sense, and I think it's illustrative of the cast-in-stone viewpoint that you adopt once a player is associated with steroids.

Edited by Myt1, 09 August 2009 - 10:45 PM.

[Wingack]

Rocco, but supposing what he said was the truth, what could he have said otherwise?

But do you really believe it to be true? Honestly, I think there are many fans on this board that have come to terms with the fact that he is/was a user, but there still seem to be many that want to not believe it. But if David Ortiz was a member of the Orioles or the Twins for the past 7 years would you really need anything beyond his name appearing on The List to confirm suspicions.

[sfip]

In an extremely small sample of 1 of people who aren't Red Sox or Yankee fans, I asked my brother (Met fan, Yankee hater) how he felt the majority of the general public will now treat Ortiz after the Saturday press conference.

His answer, "Outside the Bronx, with respectful suspicion. In the Bronx, with asinine derision."

[Wade Boggs Hair]

But here are the facts, which should be taken collectively .

***

Papi is linked to banned trainer Angel Presinal, who is also linked to A-Rod and Manny, one an admitted user, the other tested positive for steroids in 2009 and also 2003. Means and Opportunity.

FWIW, we have no idea what Manny tested positive for in 2003. He tested positive for hCG, which is not a steroid, in 2009. I'm certainly not trying to cast doubt on whether Manny used PEDs, but it's not a "fact" to say that, as a matter of public knowledge, Manny tested positive for steroids at any point.

Papi confirmed he tested positive in 2003 due to some unknown supplement. Now, in 2003, 2 samples 7 days apart were taken. After the 1st sample was taken, the player was advised to not take any supplements for 7 days as they might cause a positive test, and are cleared from the body quickly after stopping. If the first sample tested positive, the 2nd sample collected would be tested, and only if the 2nd sample also tested positive, would a player be deemed to have tested positive (otherwise the 1st sample would be deemed a false positive unless it came from a steroid not known to be available via supplements). Remember, it was important to the players for the % positives be under 5% to avoid punitive penalties in 2004. No clear mention of this in the conference when Papi claimed it was OTC supplements responsible for the positives.

Similarly, we don't know whether Ortiz tested positive in both tests or in only one of the two. No one has reported that information, to my knowledge. If the government's list of 104 is allegedly overinclusive because only approximately 83 positive tests existed (not even 83 players who tested positive), then there is an unexplained discrepancy between the government list and an actual accounting of the players who tested positive. That Ortiz tested positive at first and then didn't in the supplement-less round, whether or not credible, is consistent with the facts available and his own story.

[paulftodd]

Forgot about this thread given it's obscure location.

FWIW, we have no idea what Manny tested positive for in 2003. He tested positive for hCG, which is not a steroid, in 2009. I'm certainly not trying to cast doubt on whether Manny used PEDs, but it's not a "fact" to say that, as a matter of public knowledge, Manny tested positive for steroids at any point.

Actually, yes it is. He was reported in USA Today and other papers of testing positive for synthetic testosterone (ratio of natural testosterone to synthetic was off at levels considered proof of synthetic testosterone-steroids being taken). I posted a link somewhere. MLB then investigated and found the prescription issued for HCG. Boras would have contested the testosterone positive, but there was no defense for HCG, and since the penalties are the same, MLB took the path of least resistance and suspended him for HCG which took effect immediately. Boras and Manny could do nothing.

Similarly, we don't know whether Ortiz tested positive in both tests or in only one of the two. No one has reported that information, to my knowledge. If the government's list of 104 is allegedly overinclusive because only approximately 83 positive tests existed (not even 83 players who tested positive), then there is an unexplained discrepancy between the government list and an actual accounting of the players who tested positive. That Ortiz tested positive at first and then didn't in the supplement-less round, whether or not credible, is consistent with the facts available and his own story.

The government simply has a list of players and results from 104 players they seized from the testing labs which included all positive reults (1st test or 2nd test). MLB and MLBPA should have the exact number of players they deemed to have tested positive, yet they never challenged the 104 number which has been floating around for years. This is a red herring.

That Ortiz tested positive at first and then didn't in the supplement-less round, whether or not credible, is consistent with the facts available and his own story.

It sure would have helped Papis case to say so, wouldn't it. But then, if it were not the truth, it's best not to say so, and let people assume it to be so. Surely he would have remembered being asked not to take supplements for 7 days and could have confirmed he did not. Sometimes what is not said is more important than what is said.

Any of the 83 or whatever number it is that are on the MLBPA/MLB list that are named in the future can use the same defense (83 players can become one of the X = 21 players that are only on the government "list" and not the MLB/MLBPA list). Thats convenient now isn't it.