Just watched the presser on Pudge's retirement as a Texas Ranger. Johnny Bench was my baseball idol growing up, but Pudge is the best catcher who ever played the game. He had it all. I know him personally, he's humble, and he's a class act. Glad he retired a Ranger.

Always liked Pudge

Nice to hear good things about someone. I am always amazed by catchers. The wear and tear on their bodies has to be extreme. I was always partial to Earl Battey. I remember one year in the early 60s when he picked seven runners off third. When was the last time that you saw a catcher pick anyone off of third (or even try)?

Pudge has come through his 21 year career behind the plate in remarkably good shape.

I will be watching tonight. Pudge was my favorite catcher. Loved to watch him throw to 1st behind a left handed batter for a pick off!

Better living through chemistry?

He's been a great ballplayer, and had an extraordinarily long career behind the plate. Most catcher's bats will die in their early thirties from bodily wear and tear.

I remember the Reds trying to keep Bench in the lineup by moving him to 3rd. He wasn't the same offensive threat that he was a few years before. He was done.

Biggio moved to 2nd, which keep him going worthy of 3000 hits.

No he didn't. That's why he used steroids and HGH. To give himself what nature did not. He's a lowlife POS in my book.

One of Pudge's biggest regrets is that he's only 150 or so hits away from 3000. Oh well, he's a first ballot HOF'er anyway.

Never played much, did you?

Explain. I'm absolutely dying to hear your explanation of how taking steroids and HGH didn't give 'Pudge' an unfair advantage. Kiss my ass.

Ghost, can you post for us evidence of when/where he was caught using the "stuff"?

Canseco said he put it in his ass, others have said the same.

PLUS, he dropped about 60 pounds of pure muscle towards the end of his career. I've seen it before. He looked like a high school kid at the end.

Kirby Puckett is in the hall. I'm a Twins fan since day one of my life, and there's no doubt in my mind he was using, and it's why he's a dead man today.

I spent the past few days with him in Dallas. He's pure muscle now, and I know he never weighed 230 lbs because he weighs 175 now. Now I don't know whether he did or not, but just admit you pulled your assumption out of your wazoo and that will be fine and dandy.

No wazoo pulling. It's generally accepted by the people in the know that Pudge used.

Sorry if it makes you feel bad. He was a cheating sumbitch.

BTW he used to weigh around 220#.

There is little doubt that Pudge was using. Those Ranger teams of the early 90's had a high percentage of players that ended up being tied to steroid use.

The 1992-1993 Rangers had Raphael Palmeiro, Jose Canseco, Juan Gonzalez and Kevin Brown who were all on the Mitchell report and Pudge Rodriguez who was claimed by Conseco to have used and Ruben Sierra who has been alleged to have used.

Canseco is a monumental jerk, but he has been proven correct on just about everyone he named in his book as being on steroids.

Pudge was officially listed at 165 lbs in 1992.

He was officially listed at 205, just 2 years later in 1994.

40 lbs is a lot of weight to put on between the age of 20 and 22 especially with a 5'9" frame.


One of the telltale signs of the Roid users during this time was the rapid weight gain at the height of their career as opposed to late in their career.

This is true.

Just to be clear, I think Ivan Rodriguez is one of the greatest catchers in history and should be a HOF 1st ballot inductee.

I do believe he probably juiced though.

So in your world, cheating is justified.

Alleged cheating......

Baseball is wrecked.

Actually I don't follow it as much as I used to. Whatever the facts are or turn out to be, Pudge is a darn good guy and treats avg people like me respectfully. He must have signed 100 autographs this weekend from people, both kids and adults, stopping him along the way, or even when we were eating. I asked him when he was going to quit signing every single time someone asked and he says "when they get tired of asking". Good answer.

Reality is, we'd have to hold out just about every hitter that played in the 90's and early 2000's from the HOF, not named Jim Thome.

This era tainted the entire sport. Do we deny the HOF to an entire generation of players because they are alleged to have used performance enhancing drugs? Unless they are proven in a court of law, are they not innocent until proven guilty?

It's a tough call for the voters. I think the only answer is to hold the players in this era to a higher production standard. If someone is alleged to have juiced and would normally have just made it in, no.

If it's obvious that they would have made it in, even had they not used, as in the case of Ivan Rodgriguez, gARod, Barry Bonds (though it pains me to do so), Roger Clemens and a few others, then they should probably be voted in. Well, after Pete Rose and Joe Jackson are allowed in.

Yep.

Amen to Pete Rose.

I would agree in that pro sports is controlled by organized crime. It's no longer a game, but big business and big money with billions being bet. I watch it to see great plays, but only get really interested in college ball.

Just an observation. The pitchers were juiced. The hitters were juiced. How does that play into the equation?

I'm a fan of baseball. I'm not a fan of steroids. Does blame fall on the agents, owners and MLB front office too? Everyone profited on this. There has been tons of finger-pointing over the past few years and nobody ever asks the question to the others involved.

Congratulations to Pudge on retirement. Juice or no, he was a tremendous Catcher.

Heck, Mickey Mantle didn't draw a sober breath for 40 years, but he remains a baseball icon.

I don't buy into the whole juicing is cheating thing. It definitely won't be stopped now, the ball has been rolling for too many years.

20% decline in MLB home runs in 2009 compared to 2000 at the height of the steroid era.

In 2011 MLB had 4.28 team runs per game.

In 2000 MLB had 5.14 team runs per game.

There has been a marked decrease in home runs and scoring since 2006 when the new testing and suspensions program started.


Steroids do effect performance. One need only ask themselves why a player would risk a 50 game suspension for first offense if it doesn't give them an advantage, a 100 game suspension for 2nd offense and a lifetime suspension for 3rd offense.

Only a nutjob would buy and inject something into their system that risked their career, reputation and health, if it didn't provide them with a competitive advantage.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but when I was talking about rolling the ball, I guess I was thinking wider than just baseball.

I do not endorse the use of steroids, and I can say with complete honesty that I have never taken them (Other than a dose of prednisone)but there will always be an element who feels like they need to go that route.

As long as that element is there, the market for masking agents will be strong.

No they just need to get off their asses and really do something to them when they catch them. Drugs you're out now for life all your stats come out of the record books.

It does seem like a bit of the old "Gag on a gnat and swallow a camel" where Pete Rose is banned for life and Barry Bonds is good to go.

Yep.

Regardless of any juicing, it's nice to know Pudge is a decent guy around other people. I met a HOF baseball player (multiple batting titles, World Series ring, etc.) about 5 years ago through a mutual friend at a party, and he was one of the Top 10 biggest jerks I've ever met in my life. In fact I had to go find my wife and bring her over to see the display. She still laughs about it.

Nice to know there are some nice guys in ML baseball.

That was the intent of my original post MD, that here's a very ordinary guy who happens to be a supremely talented pro sports star. I've known plenty who weren't that way at all myself and Pudge is a breath of fresh air.

Dude, take a chill pill would you? From the general tone of most of your posts, I'm certain there are many that would call you the same POS as you called Pudge.

1.) Talent doesn't come in syringe.

2.) How is it "unfair" when it was available to everyone that played in that period?

Due to baseballs Collective Bargaining agreement, the owners couldn't not test between '94-'04. This was one of the sticking points that led to the strike in '93. The Players Association wouldn't go for testing. It was Wild West time, and anything went. That era was what it was. The playing field was level for all if they chose it.

3.) I don't kiss Democrats!

Two different problems. I've met Pete Rose, and he is a jerk. I've met Barry Bonds, and he is a jerk. Arrogance oozes from each by the bucketful.

Baseball has been touchy about gambling since the Black Sox Scandal. Rose bet on his own team. Bad idea, and he knew the consequences. Personally, I think enough is enough. He could have committed any number of felonies and be out of prison in the 20 years since he was banned. Let it go.

Bonds? He is not good to go quite yet. I don't think the BBWA will treat him kindly when he first becomes HoF eligible.

This was not suppose to be about 'roids, but about a great player who is a good dude. The 'roid era is a fact, and a part of history. Since '04, testing has taken care of it. Fans have to live with it, and get over it.

I tire of the casual fan and the armchair athletes stirred into a frenzy by ESPN and Sports Talk radio. The faux indignation that the Sports Media has incited over the topic closely resembles the MSM covering the political scene. They know the topic is controversial and the will go at length to get people stirred up about and keep them tuned in. Let's make this easy for all you baseball Democrats:

Bush Owned a % of the Texas Rangers.

Conseco played for the Rangers and says he stuck everybody in the ass with 'roids.

Therefore, it's Bush's fault!

Feel better?

Good to hear Pudge is down to earth. JG, thanks for sharing.

1. If you don't think steroids were performance enhancers, then you have not been paying attention and don't understand the game.

2. That's crazy logic. That's like saying everyone at the poker table had the opportunity to cheat, so cheating is alright.

That is honestly the craziest thing anyone has said in this thread. Not every player wanted to risk their reputation, health and career in order to inject themselves in an effort to enhance their performance. Not everyone is a scumbag that thinks cheating is alright if everyone has the opportunity to do so.

P.s. The strike was in 1994. Strike 3, grab some pine.

'94 is right. Phillies beat the Braves in the NLCS in '93, so I try to wipe that year out of my memory banks. Not my first swing and miss. The meat of the story is valid -owners wanted testing, the players association refused. The CBA ran for 10 years.

No drug will make Clark Kent hit a 96 mph fastball. That takes talent.

Performance enhancement drugs - nice Sports Talk radio lingo. Steroids are strength drugs, they won't help anyone dance the Swan Lake and the Met. Steroids along with resistence training can make one stronger, but how many homers did Arnold Schwartzenegger hit? Too many of you think that a little juice is all it takes to be a hero. Back to Sports Talk radio for you.

Amen brother. From what I've been told by some of the guys I played pro ball with, 'roids were at their best by helping you recover from being tired, run down, and recover from nagging aches and pains. They do not help you see the ball better, throw harder, or hit it more often. It takes supreme talent and hard work. Tony Gwynn is probably one of the best hitters to ever play the game. Everyone knows he was clean.

I never said it didn't take talent to hit a baseball.

But roids took Barry Bonds from a 40 homerun guy to one that hit 73.

A guy like Roger Clemens would have been a decent pitcher, but roids made him into a great pitcher. Yes, I believe Roger 'used' his entire career.

I believe that sports at all levels were better in the not-so-distant past when players took the field as their normal "as-created" state rather than in the "Bigger, Stronger, Faster" configuration. I have become very cynical of the weight-training craze; all that it has done is raise the bar and, especially in football, create a situation where the collisions are much more violent and farther along the continium of what the body can withstand - the balance between what a body can dish out and what it can absorb has been altered.

You're right, steroids won't help you hit the ball. They will however, increase your bat speed and/or allow you to use a heavier bat with equivalent bat speed, which will turn some warning track flyballs into HR's, some groundballs getting through the infield, that might have been fielded and some gap shots into doubles that might have been held to a single.

It may have put some AAA talent into the majors for a few years, but mainly it made 20HR guys into 30HR guys and 40 home run guys into 50HR guys.

It is really not debated that steroids effected offensive output during that era. It was also really not a level playing field since the vast majority of pitchers did not "juice". The percentage of pitchers on the Mitchell report is a small fraction of the players tied to usage. Most of the pitchers that did apparently use, were those trying to extend their careers or at least extend their effectiveness in the latter part of their careers. Most pitchers were apprehensive to use steroids because of fears of joint/tendon damage and injury which is far more likely with pitchers than position/DH players.

What really helped the HR totals were all the new ballparks being built with short porches, not just the juice.

Disagree. HR totals have been going down for years now.

Pipsqueek Brady Anderson jacked 50 one year, 1996 I believe. Roids, period.

Not really, those same parks are open today and HR's are down huge since 2006 when the newest testing standards came in.

In fact, most the new parks that came in in the 90's that were considered hitter friendly, were in the AL and yet the Sosa, Bonds, McGwire HR craziness was going on in the NL.

Only 4 new NL stadiums came in in the 90's. Joe Robbie, Coors, Bank One and Turner with 2 of those not coming in until the late 90's and only 2 of those 4 were considered hitters parks (Coors and Bank One).

Ironically both McGwire and Bonds played at historically pitcher friendly parks when they went on their HR tear (Candlestick and Busch).

Matt Williams who was also on track to break Maris in 1994 before the strike, did so in a horrible right handed hitters ball park (Candlestick).

Well in todays world it would have been a hate crime to force Barry out.

Nobody can really deny that juice wasn't a part of the HR explosion, but it is only a part. If it was, the aforementioned Brady Anderson would have hit 50 every year he juiced. There are a multitude of factors that all led to inflated offensive numbers.

1.) New Ball Parks - As JG said, Starting with Camden Yards, MLB left the 1960's vintage multi-use round enclosed stadiums, and built baseball only facilities.

2.) Expansion - Watered down pitching once Fla, Tampa, Colorado, and Arizona joined. Too many arms not ready to be starting pitchers and too many relievers that belonged at AAA.

3.) Questek and the Change in the Strike-zone - MLB mandated a tighter strike-zone, and went to a machine in some parks that would evaluate umpires. This was a result of
a.) The Atlanta Braves with Maddux and Glavine consistently getting the call off the plate
b.) Eric Greg's fiasco in the '97 NLCS where he had a strike-zone of enormous proportions that embarrassed MLB. Umpires would not risk calling a questionable strike in Questek parks, and that forced pitchers to throw belt high down the middle. Hitters can kill that in ANY era.

Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, Albert Belle, etc. hit plenty of homers before they became superhero sized. While juice may have made them stronger, you can't hit 60 or 70 homers without a pitch to hit. I watch baseball from April to October every year. I vividly recall the year that Bonds hit 73. McGuire and Sosa were all the rage, and had 20+ homers by the first part of June. Bonds had half of what they did. Bonds came to Atlanta and hit 4 solo shots in 4 games, and took off from there. Let's also remember that Bonds left Candlestick Park which was windy and dead for hitters for PacBell (or whatever they want to call it this week) that was very hitter friendly. Visiting there, my wife caught Bonds 687th!

His approach at the plate was to crowd the plate (wore a huge elbow pad as protection) to get a good look at the strike zone, choke up to get the sweet spot covering the plate, and to turn and hammer anything in the zone, and lay off the soft stuff on the outside corner because the pitcher never got the call.

Pitchers would get behind in the count, and come in with a fastball and boom! Conversely, he knew when to look for offspeed stuff away and would get all in it when he found a hanger. the most amazing part of that was his concentration - he almost never popped up or fouled off a meatball that I saw all season. Roids didn't give him that concentration, its not brain food.

So let's acknowledge that the Steroid Era produced some artificially strong strong players, but also agree that there were other factors that made the balls fly.

I don't know Pudge or much about the Rangers other than they beat up on the Twins nearly every time they play. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a baseball player that didn't use HGH or steroids from the late 90's through just a few years ago.

Which is really too bad. I love baseball and think it is the most fun to watch. I'm hoping it's cleaned up now, the "juicing" reguard.

Hatari, Pac Bell (AT&T) is considered one of the WORST hitters park in the majors, and not by any stretch a hitters park. Only Los Angeles is consistently worse for hitting home runs.

The year Bonds set the record, Pac Bell had the second fewest home runs in MLB and that's with a guy hitting 73 there by himself.

I agree with pitching being watered down in the mid 90's directly after expansion, but I don't think that was an issue by the end of the 90's.

On the strike zone, some of the most productive offensive years during the height of the roid era, were in the mid 90's. That was right in the middle of when the NL was calling strike zones that VW's could drive through. Take a look at the 1995 WS game 6. Glavine had a strike zone that you could drive a Mack truck through and 1997, as you referenced, was the zenith with the Marlins-Braves championship.

As to the new parks excuse, as I pointed out above, that was a red herring in the NL, where it just didn't exist.

Bottom line, parks and pitching dilution were contributors though I totally disagree on strike zone. However, steroids were the biggest factor.