Jump to content

Gehringer_2

MotownSports Fan
  • Content Count

    55,620
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    156

Everything posted by Gehringer_2

  1. a lot of guys took PEDs, not many turned into Barry Bonds. Bond's had to be the perfect confluence of a biochemistry that the drugs suited well, his already substantial talent, and his level of drive to do anything to win the HR crown.
  2. I imagine Dodger stadium alone is probably enough to skew anyone's career in the NL west. ⚾🥎
  3. maybe because players had moved on to better chemistry but that banning came along well after their peak use. Also - as present as they apparently no doubt were, one of the contradictions in the narrative that large numbers of players had been been using large quantities of those amphetamines regularly is that it flies in the face of the their know addictive power. A lot of players should have become addicted and since amphetamine addition tends toward wasting it probably would have quickly destroyed their athleticism. Without a better resolution of that contradiction I then to think steroid use became much more widespread than any sustained use amphetamine had been - that amphetamine use was probably wide but mostly occasional whereas steroid use was part of committed program. And of course in the case of steroids we saw the excess muscle definition and early baldness pattern that signified their presence in many players in before the chemistry and usage schemes became more sophisticated.
  4. the bottom line with GME is that someone is going to be left holding the bag when GME's valuation falls back to well under $2 billion. The only question is who.
  5. If people simply want to gamble, they should go to Vegas. The reason the stock market exists is to increase the efficiency of the application of capital to economically productive use. When it gets to the point where that is strictly a minor part of its practical function, it need a major overhaul. We are probably already past that point. But then again, when it's the US Federal Reserve that has been the biggest gamer of the system out there, it's not so clear who needs to be regulated by whom.
  6. I think the other evidence to consider it that players have pretty much abandoned amphetamines of their own accord, which means that over time *their* judgment was they were not much value, as compared to steroids, where use was becoming more and more widespread right up until they were eventually banned and to this day players are probably finding ways to continue to use them despite the ban.
  7. I think the amphetamines probably benefit a batters concentration at the plate more than any physical or training effects.
  8. this is certainly true in terms of plays on batted balls, but the glove work of a 1b can still contribute a lot in ways are not captured by DRS etc. The 1b actually handles the ball a lot and obviously has to catch a lot more throws than batted balls. Throws by the pitcher to 1st, and especially if the left side of his IF are a couple of guys who don't throw very accurately. I've since forgotten the player and the team, but way back in the archives on this site is a discussion about a team that changed it's 1st baseman and saw a yty drop in errors by the left side of the IF which I think was in excess of 20 playing with the same 3b and SS. The defensive credit for that change probably accrued almost completely to the 3b and SS but there was pretty strong case most of it should have gone to the 1b.
  9. this is the same "you can do anything you would normally do except NO PARTYING!" that they issued last term.
  10. or the opposite - guys who felt they failed to do their duty.
  11. the fact that disqualification is expressly mentioned in the Constitution makes is perfectly clear logically that the sanctions applied to impeachment reach past removal from office and thus impeachment trials could clearly be inferred to continue after the defendant left office. While on the other hand it makes no logical sense at all that an office holder could remove himself from risk of impeachment by resigning and in so doing put himself beyond the reach of disqualification. There is really is nothing on the other side of this argument other than a lot of people trying to blow smoke up everyone else's you know what.
  12. IDK Lee, wearing titanium jewelry was the big rage for a while because all the players bought into some silly faux biochemistry marketing. i don't disagree amphetamines can be performance enhancing, particularly given the difficulty with getting regular sleep traveling athletes can have, but I would never put too much faith in something being true because a bunch of athletes thought it was!
  13. every judgment is a slippery slope to somewhere, that is no excuse for never exercising judgment. I am somewhat but not that uncomfortable with letting the larger sense of public opinion percolate into these decisions. To the extent that the BBWAA is reflecting a sense of a community standard I can live with things as they are.
  14. this is kind of a neat idea - I like it.
  15. IDK, I'm not so opposed to an assumed PED user being denied on the grounds that he only made it because he roided but I do prescribe to the general principle that some people put themselves outside the circle of decency because of their behavior and one way to do that is related to their PED use. Sure that can be a little unfair just because some guys were never challenged in public. Pudge being a good example. When testing came in he quit, you could see him lose the muscle mass and no one ever challenged him to tell the truth about the past so he was never faced with that decision. But guys who for instance went up to Congress and outright lied or like Clemens or Bonds who kept swearing black was white for so many years - I think those kinds of behaviors need to have consequences and I think denial of honoraria is an appropriate one. This is basically the 'you are not obligated to put creeps in the HOF' position and I know the sport competition purists take a different view, but a HOF is in the end a social institution and I have no problem with it being a reflection of social standards.
  16. this a fair point - one has to look over the horizon to all the possible unintended consequences/precedents. Still, if the GOP wants to keep protecting him, so be it. I don't see it ending well for them even if they succeed.
  17. Hinch stating that they plan to work out Paredes at 2B makes me wonder if they have increased their focus on signing a FA 1B.
  18. I think you can forget about him ever showing up to testify in the Senate, and there is this small problem of the 5th amendment that will protect him from ever having to testify in criminal proceeding against him. But the more I think about it, just disqualify him. Does anyone seriously think Trump is going to run around the country doing political rallies for other people's benefit? Never going to happen, he is no Stacey I'm-out-there-doing-it-for-the-principle-even-if-I'm-not-on-the-ballet Abrams. Take away the possibility of winning office for himself and Trump will exit the political stage faster than your Trump University Tuition turns into bad debt. This is a narcissistic socio-path remember - he's not going to be out there building the new populist GOP so the like of Cruz or Hawley can benefit. That would rate well down in his personal Maslow's hierarchy from another round of golf.
  19. it's a fair point that if they can disqualify him by majority vote they should do it and save everyone the rest of the effort. Impeachment is going nowhere in this Senate. The current GOP wouldn't convict the Sahara of having sand if they thought it could save them a primary fight. OTOH, disqualification is the only practical result of the impeachment anyway and for the Dems a DQ will accomplish exactly what they want, which is that Trump will get bored with politics if he can't run again to get his vengeance on everyone and so will almost certainly fade away politically, and with him the remaining energy in the GOP.
  20. As one of my all time favorite people once wrote: "A treacherous weapon is ever a danger to the hand" All these Repubs think they can ride the Trump tiger to someplace they want to go, but he will just toss them off and destroy them in turn as he has no interest in advancing any of their agendas.
  21. It was amusing to hear Carlos Monarrez throw shade on everyone's euphoria. He thinks they are already past the 'too many cooks in the kitchen' point.
  22. GE is now building wind turbines up to 13megaWatt each. They are going to have to sell a lot of them!
  23. Disagree. I think he made one objectively bad play while OTOH he made several great throws, and the last 1st down was a thing of beauty when most teams would have taken a knee and punted. If anything Ariens holstered his best weapon by taking Brady out of the ball control passing game he excels at by not throwing short often enough in the 2nd half.
×
×
  • Create New...