Steroids --?

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by stl jason

I'd say freeze it at 1992. If you look at the total HRs by year, there's a big jump from 1992 (3038 total) to 1993 (4030 total) - 32.65% increase (and another large jump from 1995 (4081 total) to 1996 (4962 total).

From 1988 to 1992, it was pretty consistent (3180/3083/3317/3383/3038)

The big jumps in totals had more to do with the number of games played than the rate of homers increasing.

Just thought I'd point that out, if someone did not realize it......

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

Geez people can get really defensive over the most innocent stuff. The comment was meant to convey the idea that I wasn't attempting to tell you how you should play it, not that you needed permission from anyone for anything.

Sorry, that's just a phrase that gets under my skin. Always feels like someone is saying you're an idiot but....... Shouldn't have taken it out on you though.

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Sorry, that's just a phrase that gets under my skin. Always feels like someone is saying you're an idiot but....... Shouldn't have taken it out on you though.

When you want to kick your dog (or any type of canine you might own), you shouldn't kick your wife just 'cause she's closer.....

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Sorry, that's just a phrase that gets under my skin. Always feels like someone is saying you're an idiot but....... Shouldn't have taken it out on you though.

No worries. I tend to get defensive myself at times on this site due to how some of my posts have been treated. Happens to the best of us.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

That's fine. Like I said, it is your game so play how you want. I just hate the vitriol for steroids but no one seems bothered by stuff like "greenies" which helped guys like Mantle and Aaron perform at the levels they performed at.

Is there any sort of scientific basis for that conclusion? I'm not aware of any, so if there is anything along those lines to read, by all means please share it.

Another point to note about athletic performance in general is that it has been increasing since the dawn of the 20th century, thanks to such things as better training, better equipment, better selection of athletes, better medicine, and so forth. There was a TED talk on this point last year that's worth a watch: Are athletes really getting faster, better, stronger?

[Padreman]

http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v19n1/hill.pdf

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Is there any sort of scientific basis for that conclusion? I'm not aware of any, so if there is anything along those lines to read, by all means please share it.

Another point to note about athletic performance in general is that it has been increasing since the dawn of the 20th century, thanks to such things as better training, better equipment, better selection of athletes, better medicine, and so forth. There was a TED talk on this point last year that's worth a watch: Are athletes really getting faster, better, stronger?

Central nervous system stimulants and sport practice

Performance Enhancing Drugs (Amphetamines) Risks

Performance-enhancing drugs: Know the risks - Mayo Clinic

[jazzrack]

1888

In 1889, a Pittsburgh pitcher named Jim "Pud" Galvin became the first baseball player to be widely known for using a performance enhancer. (He was nicknamed "Pud" because his pitching supposedly turned opposing batters into "pudding" — much like Barry Bonds' brain.) Before pitching a game against Boston, Pud used something called the elixir of Brown-Sequard... essentially testosterone drained from the gonads of an animal. And, low and behold, the juiced-up Galvin won.

A Different Kind of Performance Enhancer : NPR

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Padreman

http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v19n1/hill.pdf

That's interesting. But it's worth noting its statement in the Analysis section:

"Although the Steroids Era is widely thought to have begun in or around 1993, which coincides with this increase in batting performance, several other notable events occurred in Major League Baseball that may have contributed to the increase in offensive performance ..." [It then lists the other reasons.]

"These charts have the capability to identify when a significant process change has occurred, but cannot identify the cause." [emphasis added]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

Central nervous system stimulants and sport practice

Performance Enhancing Drugs (Amphetamines) Risks

Performance-enhancing drugs: Know the risks - Mayo Clinic

Those only speak to the general effects such drugs can have. They do not speak to the specific claim made regarding those drugs: "'greenies' which helped guys like Mantle and Aaron perform at the levels they performed at."

I would like to see something regarding those two specific ballplayers since they were the ones mentioned.

[Ruthian23]

If you're dead set against having modifiers from any year steroids were a significant issue, I'd say to freeze it at some point in the mid '80s (maybe early to be safe) or so and never import them again. Sadly, I think anyone who thinks they're out of the game to any significant extent today is kidding themselves. As jazzrack indicated, though, performance enhancers of one kind or another have almost always been around, and likely always will.

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

That's interesting. But it's worth noting its statement in the Analysis section:

"Although the Steroids Era is widely thought to have begun in or around 1993, which coincides with this increase in batting performance, several other notable events occurred in Major League Baseball that may have contributed to the increase in offensive performance ..." [It then lists the other reasons.]

"These charts have the capability to identify when a significant process change has occurred, but cannot identify the cause." [emphasis added]


Those only speak to the general effects such drugs can have. They do not speak to the specific claim made regarding those drugs: "'greenies' which helped guys like Mantle and Aaron perform at the levels they performed at."

I would like to see something regarding those two specific ballplayers since they were the ones mentioned.

The argument for Mantle is easy since he was known to party late into the nights. I doubt he could have performed as well as he did the next day without stimulants. I only threw Aaron into it because he has admitted to using them throughout his career. And it isn't exactly a stretch to claim that a drug which increases your alertness and aggressiveness is a "PED".

[Questdog]

We've had this argument before and I don't want to enter into it again, but for those unfamiliar with my views on the subject, I will state them here:

1) Equating amphetamine use and anabolic steroid use is ridiculous.

2) Amphetamine usage in the 60's and especially the 70's and 80's was nearly universal, so that no one was gaining any competitive edge by their intake. Steroid use may have been rampant, but it was no where near universal.

[Painmantle]

Amphetamines work on the central nervous system, They are not a "Preforming enhancing drug" Steroids were specifically developed and designed by drug companies to make the body heal faster and better, when there is no healing necessary, they just make you bigger,stronger and/or faster.Saying Amphetamines compare to Steroids is about the same as NyQuil compares to heroin.

There is no comparison

What always amazes me is how a simple topic like when should I turn off historical stat modifiers to avoid the steroid era can turn into a cluster^%$# discussion like this

[Dyzalot]

Steroids are something you take for a while and coordinate with a workout program in order to enhance your performance in the future. Stimulants are something you take that day to help you perform better that day when you didn't get much sleep or are hungover. I agree, there is no comparison.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Painmantle

Amphetamines work on the central nervous system, They are not a "Preforming enhancing drug" Steroids were specifically developed and designed by drug companies to make the body heal faster and better, when there is no healing necessary, they just make you bigger,stronger and/or faster.Saying Amphetamines compare to Steroids is about the same as NyQuil compares to heroin.

There is no comparison

What always amazes me is how a simple topic like when should I turn off historical stat modifiers to avoid the steroid era can turn into a cluster^%$# discussion like this

Totally my fault. I should have titled the thread differently. Ugh

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

The argument for Mantle is easy since he was known to party late into the nights. I doubt he could have performed as well as he did the next day without stimulants.

That still isn't meaningful evidence to support your claim. I'm not saying your claim is wrong, but you haven't given anything to bolster it as it was stated.

The problem with PEDs, particularly as it relates to the early 1990s and beyond, is trying to determine just how much those contributed to the offensive boost versus expansion, strike zone changes, many new ballparks being opened, or other causes. Was PED use responsible for 5% of the increase or 50%? How can anyone determine that with any degree of certainty?

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

That still isn't meaningful evidence to support your claim. I'm not saying your claim is wrong, but you haven't given anything to bolster it as it was stated.

The problem with PEDs, particularly as it relates to the early 1990s and beyond, is trying to determine just how much those contributed to the offensive boost versus expansion, strike zone changes, many new ballparks being opened, or other causes. Was PED use responsible for 5% of the increase or 50%? How can anyone determine that with any degree of certainty?

The last couple of weeks of Mantle's 1961 season were ruined due to a botched amphetamine injection by Max "Dr. Feelgood" Jacobsen. Somehow I have a hard time believing that was the only time he used drugs to try to enhance his performance.

Time to delete Mickey Mantle from the Hall of Fame - SBNation.com

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Questdog

We've had this argument before and I don't want to enter into it again, but for those unfamiliar with my views on the subject, I will state them here:

1) Equating amphetamine use and anabolic steroid use is ridiculous.

2) Amphetamine usage in the 60's and especially the 70's and 80's was nearly universal, so that no one was gaining any competitive edge by their intake. Steroid use may have been rampant, but it was no where near universal.

Q-Dog Is correct.

Read this marvelous little gem I found on another baseball forum:

http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives...-and-greenies/

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Totally my fault. I should have titled the thread differently. Ugh

It's not your fault, David.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

The last couple of weeks of Mantle's 1961 season were ruined due to a botched amphetamine injection by Max "Dr. Feelgood" Jacobsen. Somehow I have a hard time believing that was the only time he used drugs to try to enhance his performance.

That still doesn't support your claim. Please recall your claim was fairly specific, so I don't think it wrong to expect something in the way of specific evidence, preferably something with a solid statistical analysis.

Furthermore, even if we grant the premise, we are still left with the same issue I gave previously: how does one go about ascribing the degree of responsibility for Mantle's or Aaron's performance to drug usage? How do you account for other influencing factors? How do you determine the degree of impact those other factors had as opposed to the use of any drugs?