• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Jose Bautista

buckets said:
what? PEDs sole benefit is the gaining of muscle mass and enhancing the benefits of weight training, yet you say that gaining strength in a weight room doesn't make any difference. what exactly do you think people gain from PEDs? because if you say people go with their instincts and weight training is overrated... then it would seem that your logical conclusion would be that PEDs would not make a tangible difference.

and you are crazy if you don't think weight training/nutrition now is completely different than anything before the 80s. just look at athletes in ANY sport and the difference is almost night and day in their physical abilities. did baseball players even lift weights until the late 80s?
Click to expand...

no, no...I'm making the assumption that PEDs aren't involved. When they are, obviously it benefits one's strength greatly. I think there is an increased focus on weights and strength overall in all sports. Basketball is the most noticeable, mostly because the game has become much more physical. Players have adapted accordingly. And yes, the baseball players are bigger too...more guys trying to make up for marginal talent by jacking it out of the park. But I guess what I'm trying to think about here is absent the PEDs, what kind of numbers can a guy put up nowadays and not be under a cloud of suspicion? Baseball is acting like it has cracked down here (it has, but it's also largely symbolic) and has hit a reset button. Should I not raise an eyebrow to 50+ HRs anymore and simply chalk it up to players being bigger or better? Do I not raise an eyebrow because Bautista weighs under 200 lbs? Where am I supposed to say that this looks legit and where am I supposed to say this looks like PEDs?

And fuck MLB and Bud Selig for even making this an issue in the first place.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
no, no...I'm making the assumption that PEDs aren't involved. When they are, obviously it benefits one's strength greatly. I think there is an increased focus on weights and strength overall in all sports. Basketball is the most noticeable, mostly because the game has become much more physical. Players have adapted accordingly. And yes, the baseball players are bigger too...more guys trying to make up for marginal talent by jacking it out of the park. But I guess what I'm trying to think about here is absent the PEDs, what kind of numbers can a guy put up nowadays and not be under a cloud of suspicion? Baseball is acting like it has cracked down here (it has, but it's also largely symbolic) and has hit a reset button. Should I not raise an eyebrow to 50+ HRs anymore and simply chalk it up to players being bigger or better? Do I not raise an eyebrow because Bautista weighs under 200 lbs? Where am I supposed to say that this looks legit and where am I supposed to say this looks like PEDs?

And fuck MLB and Bud Selig for even making this an issue in the first place.
Click to expand...

let's just agree on this
 
Wrangor said:
He reminded me of Brady Anderson (who obviously took PED's) and his one career year of 50+ homers. Then Bautista comes back and takes the league by storm again. Can't really figure it out other than PED's. There really is no other explanation. He has to be taking them.
Click to expand...

Can someone explain to me why they think steroids help raise a guy's batting average? Obviously they get stronger... and might increase bat speed. And strength doesn't equal bat speed, and bat speed doesn't necessarily equate to any increase in batting average. Steroids certainly don't give a guy a better eye or help with their timing. I would expect to see a much smaller increase in average, maybe due to a few extra fly balls leaving the yard, the occasional grounder that turns into a hit because of the extra power behind it etc etc.

I think the changes he's made to his swing (per the article) seems like a much more reasonable explanation for the HUGE swing in average that Bautista had.
 
Watching Sosa a number of times during his 'prime' he simply hit the ball harder than anyone in the park. Grounders ripped thru the infield for singles. A pitcher has a hard time putting the ball somewhere the guy can't still rocket the ball on the ground.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
Expansion and smaller ballparks are a bigger reason than anything else.
Click to expand...

I've never really fully understood the "expansion=watered-down talent" argument. Expansion started really picking up when, the early 60's? Well MLB talent prior to the mid-50's was mostly geared toward east coast white guys. Over the past 60 years, along with expansion that added maybe 250 roster spots, we've seen the full integration of African-Americans, baseball spreading to the Dominican and throughout Central America, not to mention Asia. Baseball is an international game now, whereas it was not before expansion. I think the relative talent is multiple times greater today than it ever was in the past. I just don't think expansion has watered down pitching or any other facet of the game.

Now the smaller ballparks - absolutely true. Ballparks strategically designed to have the wind blow out more frequently - sure. Stronger players with a consistent off-season workout plan - definitely.
 
07, the players weeren't "east coast white guys". They were the best athletes the US had from all across the nation who were white. There was no competition to play football, basketball or anything else professionally.

It's bery logical to understand that the comeption of other sports for kids to play pro and even HS or college has dramatically diluted the "white guy pool".
 
Was California the baseball hotbed in the 30s and 40s it is today? I have no idea; I'd be surprised if it were just from a population standpoint, but you may be right.

Do you think the relative downturn of "top athletes" as they turn to football/basketball/soccer has been offset at all by the mass infusion of athletes from an international standpoint (Central America, African-American, etc.)?
 
Without even thinking here are three CA guys from the thirties or before-Lefty O'Doul, Joe Dimaggio, Ted Williams.

As African-Americans, we are at a historically low point in MLB since the 70s. Innercity kids aren't playing baseball at the same rate as then.
 
GoDeacs07GM said:
Was California the baseball hotbed in the 30s and 40s it is today? I have no idea; I'd be surprised if it were just from a population standpoint, but you may be right.

Do you think the relative downturn of "top athletes" as they turn to football/basketball/soccer has been offset at all by the mass infusion of athletes from an international standpoint (Central America, African-American, etc.)?
Click to expand...

Definitely. Whatever has been lost from the US pool in athletes to football/basketball, even ignoring the elimination of racial barriers, has more than been offset by the international boom and importation of Central and South America's talent, plus slowly Canada and East Asia. Law was actually addressing this very point on Twitter the other day: "ratio of jobs to talent pool (now also global) remains historically low even if we add two teams."
 
RJKarl said:
Without even thinking here are three CA guys from the thirties or before-Lefty O'Doul, Joe Dimaggio, Ted Williams.

As African-Americans, we are at a historically low point in MLB since the 70s. Innercity kids aren't playing baseball at the same rate as then.
Click to expand...

There are more sports to choose from for everybody now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top