Home > Opinion > Baseball’s Steroid Era Was No Surprise, So Hall of Fame Voters Should Accept It

Baseball’s Steroid Era Was No Surprise, So Hall of Fame Voters Should Accept It

Reader Comments
Back to article

Mr. Ezra's artcile is well written, yet tend to beleive that baseball players using steroids to enhance their performance were concealing their use because they knew it was illegal and that it de-valued what they accomplished. That others previous were addicted to alcohol or using coaine etc. does not change the nature and rational for steroid use.
The reason for the drop in baseball offense in 1931, from 1930 was openly accepted due to the National League changing the resilance of the ball they used; this to the frustration of players like Hack Wilson who set the(then) NL record for HR in a season (56) and the still standing MLB season RBI record (191). The NL climb and drop on each side of 1930 were as follows:
National Lge: BA OBA SLG OPS
1929 .295 .357 .426 .783
1930 .304 .361 .448 .809
1931 .277 .335 .387 .722
Frankly, when owners relized the long ball increased the gate dollars they made rules to increase the offense such as banning the spitball for other than those relatively few "grand-fathered." So yes some might view the big numbers of the 1920-35 era as inflated; but nothing illegal being blatantly pursued and concurrenlty denied.
Given this, just can't see how the Big-Offense era jusitfies ignoring the use of steroids. Yes Bary Bonds would ahve been Hall of fame caliber had he maitained his first ten year prodiction, even given the likliehood of aging decline; but then so too aren' Joe Jackson and Pete Rose Hall of Fame caliber? Among the three I have greater compassion for Jackson; yet I must admitt had I played in MLB in the stroid era I too would ahve been tempted ot catch up wit the users by using. Yet none of that makes a justifiable excuse; and the usage of steroids was not so much an acute fall to a single sitiation, but a "way of life."

Lam of MA 3:04PM December 30, 2009

The writer will have you believe that "we knew, and we had no problem with it", but this is simply false. We did have a problem with it. If we had no problem with it we wouldn't have rules set for Olympic events which forbid athletes to take a litany of drugs which are deemed performance enhancing. Babe Ruth's drinking and hitting or a pitcher wiping grease on a ball is the stuff of legends, because they add color and describe eras and personalities. Allowing the rampant use of a drug which adds 10 better years to an elite's player's already noteworthy career when he should be in his decline skews records and discredits the game significantly. It is simply a false representation of a player's natural, "God-given" abilities and merely a testament to how.
The writer and his supporters will have you believe that this is comparable to one season in the majors when the ball was given more bounce and less curve. The league has always been tinkering with the equipment to provide spectators with an evolving game as the players evolve. Changes to the game by the league have always been in favor of going against trends being displayed by offense or the defense. Too many hits, expand the strike zone. Too few? Change the ball, shrink the zone. But to suggest that these changes are equivalent to 20% of your entire league changing his entire genetic makeup to produce better numbers, and shatter records? It is a fallacy of logic.
The last major contention of this writer is to have you believe that the steroids did not modify performance on the mere contention that some athletes' statistics were not enhanced at all by their taking of HGH's. Two of his examples are brothers of all-stars, who received chances in the majors merely because of the name of the sibling. Who is to say that they had any talent for the majors whatsoever without using steroids to begin with? His example of Randy Velarde taking "the clear" in 2002 is ridiculous, given that Randy was 39 years old and playing in his final season. That being said, Velarde still managed to increase his statistics across the board from his previous miserable season when all he could muster was 15 games played. There are a number of factors which can be parlayed from the use of enhancers, such as concentration, muscle stamina, injury recovery, power and speed.
The suggestion that steroids, or HGH does not increase an athletes ability to produce bigger numbers than they are otherwise capable of is not only deceiving, but laughable. The concept that these players are equivalent to old-school mentality players whose worst crime is behaving badly a night before game-time and playing drunk, which is not exactly a performance enhancing drug, is ridiculous Further still, the notion that those who are arguing against the inclusion of these players in baseball's eternal shrine are doing so from the platitude of being judgmental or overly moral are missing the point. The game must be measured equally.

Sam Farthing of OR 2:47PM September 13, 2009

A. Lee,
If the Hall of Fame is reserved for players who can match Babe Ruth, it'd be virtually empty. And if you don't think Bonds was an extraordinary, hall-of-fame-worthy player for a good 10 years BEFORE touching performance enhancing drugs, you don't know baseball.
The author has it right. In the 1990s we fans were willfully ignorant and happy. Now we're embarrassed by our earlier enthusiasm, and so we're ready to crucify any player involved.
Excellent article, David. (I'll have to read your book.)

PS of VA 5:23PM August 11, 2009

when it gets right down to it , who gives a #$%@ . Most pro athletes are spoilt talented overpaid brats who never "worked " a day in their lives for anything . There is enough money spent on pro sports in one weekend (plus beer) to solve some of the real issues on the planet , but all we want to do is play or watch the play, while kids work in the sneaker shops 16 hrs and 7 days a week or get bombed tortured starved to death . Who really cares about the pro athletes and their fans? The other half isn't listening

john of LA 9:30AM August 07, 2009

David Ezra has a way with words.. he makes me think not only about cheating as a proffessional baseball player..but of the possibility that maybe.. just maybe.. a player could be very gifted in more than one area, and some people are so jealous they can only rush to judgment.

PC of Ca of CA 8:09PM July 27, 2009

Babe Ruth often hit HR’s while impaired - after a night of drinking & womanizing. Unless Bonds, A-Rod, McGuire, & the like can post his stats while drug free – keep them out! Pitchers such as Cy Young, Nolan Ryan or Tom Seaver are welcome! Pitchers who took performance enhancing drugs prior to pitching should enter the sandlot Hall of Shame! Hall of Fame should remain reserved for EXTRAORDINARY players – not those who must rely on performance enhancing drugs to play. Grant these buffoons admission – why bother taking a trip to Cooperstown?!

A. Lee of CO 4:45PM July 27, 2009

Very well written article. This guy should be a professional sports writer !!!!
His view and his ability to put it down on paper makes for a seemingly intelligent analysis of America's favorite past time and the ridiculous expectations of the people.
Excellent!!! Very enjoyable , yet intelligent writing...

Onebig Fan of CA 12:15PM July 23, 2009