TRAVIS HAFNER
-
I don't find the suggestion to be at all silly. A power hitter with tissue issues leading to weight loss once steroid testing is in place? There's nothing silly about the suggestion that steroids had something to do with that. Still, Hafner always struck me as being country strong. The fact is none of us know what brought about the quick apex and nadir of his career path. Could be something as simple as strong guy loses his strength due to injury or it could be far more sinister.
Beanpot
It wasn't a tissue issue. It was ligiment, muscle, or cartilage issue. You don't have arthroscopic surgery on tissue. It is for torn floating cartilage, torn surface cartilage, ACL reconstruction, and trimming damaged cartilage.
And losing 10lbs is not a weight loss issue. Dudes on roids that go off don't only lose 10lbs.
If have pain in your shoulder, it will effect your power and swing.
Masters said:
It wasn't a tissue issue. It was ligiment, muscle, or cartilage issue. You don't have arthroscopic surgery on tissue. It is for torn floating cartilage, torn surface cartilage, ACL reconstruction, and trimming damaged cartilage.It most certainly was a tissue issue:
Dr. James Andrews performed the 45-minute procedure. In a statement, the Indians said Hafner underwent a debridement, or cleaning, of his right shoulder joint. Hafner's strained shoulder kept him on the disabled list from May 30 through Sept. 8.
Assuming you're in the medical profession, I suggest you read up on debridement:
Debridement is a medical term referring to the removal of dead, damaged, or infected tissue to improve the healing potential of the remaining healthy tissue. Removal may be surgical, mechanical, chemical, autolytic (self-digestion), and by maggot therapy, where certain species of live maggots selectively eat only necrotic tissue.
Beanpot
http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2...hafners_sh.html
-
Masters said:
Okay, first look at Pronks career stats. When you look at that, 2007 was not really that far out of line, other than his HR total being down.Respectfully, 2007 was FAR out of line with his prior seasons. His isolated power dipped from .350 to .185, his lowest number since his rookie year in Texas. Coupled with a drop in OPS from 1.097 to .837, I don't quite understand how one can look at his 2007 season and come to the conclusion that it was "not really that far out of line" with his recent performance.
Fewer base hits is not a link in any way to steriods.
Terrific. Allowing for the fact that you have no idea if fewer base hits are linked in any way to steroids, I referenced total bases. Which was just a quick look at his overall performance. Feel free to use ISO, RAA, RC or any stat to your liking.
Steriods don't make guys better hitters as far as total hits or average. If they did, then McGuire would have been a much better hitter than he really was. They make power numbers go up, not average or total hits.
To continue with the respectfully theme, you are either the leading authority on all things steroids or you're simply talking out of your ass. I'll go with latter after reading everything you wrote after "if they did". Look, you have no earthly idea if steroids make guys better hitters as far as total hits and average and numerous studies have been done that suggest that they do little to enhance power numbers. The entire topic bores me to tears, but I'll dig up some studies that disprove your suggestion if you honestly care to continue.
While admitting that it's not exactly a representative sample, the Mitchell Report suggests that "they" don't make power numbers go up in the slightest. As to your McGwire reference, do you honestly think he's a data point and not an outlier? I find it quite simple to say that if it didn't happen to A, it won't happen to the rest of the alphabet. Of course, it actually *did* happen to A, as McGwire was a much better hitter in terms of total bases and average during the window of suspected use.
I think it's just sad that any time a power hitter has an injury or a drop everyone assumes a guy had to have been juicing and that's what the drop. It is like now going back and thinking Ken Griffey Jr. was juicing and that's why he had injuries, off year, and a decline.
Sad? Christ-on-a-stick man, conjecture about an athlete gives you the blues? I find it sad (not in that way) that there are people who refuse to acknowledge the possibility that an athlete may have used PEDs. I also find those that do so to be incredibly naive.
Beanpot
Respectfully, 2007 was FAR out of line with his prior seasons. His isolated power dipped from .350 to .185, his lowest number since his rookie year in Texas. Coupled with a drop in OPS from 1.097 to .837, I don't quite understand how one can look at his 2007 season and come to the conclusion that it was "not really that far out of line" with his recent performance.
The only real number out of line was his HR's, which have a drastic impact on the OPS (which this made up stat came into existance like 4 years ago), along with his OBS being down (which when average is down this will be). After all OPS is just OBP + Slugging. He had more hits, 6 less doubles, and his average dropped. So yes, I don't think he was that far out of line, at least from potentially being nothing more than an off year in HRs. It happens to all kinds of guys.
Terrific. Allowing for the fact that you have no idea if fewer base hits are linked in any way to steroids, I referenced total bases. Which was just a quick look at his overall performance. Feel free to use ISO, RAA, RC or any stat to your liking.
Of course I can't say with 100% certainty that hits aren't influenced by steroids. But steroids don't increase a persons hand eye coordination. That is why I personally don't draw the conclusion of hits/average and steroids. If you hit 15 less HR, of course your total bases are down. You get 4 total bases for HR.
To continue with the respectfully theme, you are either the leading authority on all things steroids or you're simply talking out of your ass. I'll go with latter after reading everything you wrote after "if they did". Look, you have no earthly idea if steroids make guys better hitters as far as total hits and average and numerous studies have been done that suggest that they do little to enhance power numbers. The entire topic bores me to tears, but I'll dig up some studies that disprove your suggestion if you honestly care to continue. .
Did I claim to be? Jesus dude.
While admitting that it's not exactly a representative sample, the Mitchell Report suggests that "they" don't make power numbers go up in the slightest. As to your McGwire reference, do you honestly think he's a data point and not an outlier? I find it quite simple to say that if it didn't happen to A, it won't happen to the rest of the alphabet. Of course, it actually *did* happen to A, as McGwire was a much better hitter in terms of total bases and average during the window of suspected use. .
I am starting to question if you know how total bases are calculated. Gee, if I get more dingers or doubles, my total bases won't go up?
Sad? Christ-on-a-stick man, conjecture about an athlete gives you the blues? I find it sad (not in that way) that there are people who refuse to acknowledge the possibility that an athlete may have used PEDs. I also find those that do so to be incredibly naive.
Jumping to a wild accusation about someone taking performance enhancing drugs based on one shoulder injury (which was called normal wear/tear issue from a baseball swing by James Andrews) is what I find sad. It's not that I don't think guys have or still do. I just don't believe in jumping to that conclusion and making that accusation with zero credible evidence to support it like you did. That is what I find sad.
-
Masters said:
It wasn't a tissue issue. It was ligiment, muscle, or cartilage issue. You don't have arthroscopic surgery on tissue. It is for torn floating cartilage, torn surface cartilage, ACL reconstruction, and trimming damaged cartilage.It most certainly was a tissue issue:
Dr. James Andrews performed the 45-minute procedure. In a statement, the Indians said Hafner underwent a debridement, or cleaning, of his right shoulder joint. Hafner's strained shoulder kept him on the disabled list from May 30 through Sept. 8.
Assuming you're in the medical profession, I suggest you read up on debridement:
Debridement is a medical term referring to the removal of dead, damaged, or infected tissue to improve the healing potential of the remaining healthy tissue. Removal may be surgical, mechanical, chemical, autolytic (self-digestion), and by maggot therapy, where certain species of live maggots selectively eat only necrotic tissue.
Beanpot
http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2...hafners_sh.html
It most certainly was a tissue issue:
Dr. James Andrews performed the 45-minute procedure. In a statement, the Indians said Hafner underwent a debridement, or cleaning, of his right shoulder joint. Hafner's strained shoulder kept him on the disabled list from May 30 through Sept. 8.
Assuming you're in the medical profession, I suggest you read up on debridement:
Debridement is a medical term referring to the removal of dead, damaged, or infected tissue to improve the healing potential of the remaining healthy tissue. Removal may be surgical, mechanical, chemical, autolytic (self-digestion), and by maggot therapy, where certain species of live maggots selectively eat only necrotic tissue.
Beanpot
http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2...hafners_sh.html
And when you read what the Cleveland Indians said:
"Hafner had what the Indians are calling successful arthroscopic surgery on the shoulder. The 45-minute procedure was performed by Dr. James Andrews at St. Vincent Hospital in Birmingham, Ala.
Essentially, the procedure cleaned out Hafner's shoulder joint, removing chronic changes brought about by the grind of baseball. Hafner will begin physical therapy at Progressive Field on Thursday and the Indians expect him to be at 100 percent strength by the start of the 2009 season"
http://cleveland.indians.mlb.com/news/arti...sp&c_id=cle
All I have to say about the end of your post is we all know what assuming does.
You obviously don't realize what a general/generic term tissue is, when refering to the human body.
-
Respectfully, 2007 was FAR out of line with his prior seasons. His isolated power dipped from .350 to .185, his lowest number since his rookie year in Texas. Coupled with a drop in OPS from 1.097 to .837, I don't quite understand how one can look at his 2007 season and come to the conclusion that it was "not really that far out of line" with his recent performance.
The only real number out of line was his HR's, which have a drastic impact on the OPS (which this made up stat came into existance like 4 years ago), along with his OBS being down (which when average is down this will be). After all OPS is just OBP + Slugging. He had more hits, 6 less doubles, and his average dropped. So yes, I don't think he was that far out of line, at least from potentially being nothing more than an off year in HRs. It happens to all kinds of guys.
Terrific. Allowing for the fact that you have no idea if fewer base hits are linked in any way to steroids, I referenced total bases. Which was just a quick look at his overall performance. Feel free to use ISO, RAA, RC or any stat to your liking.
Of course I can't say with 100% certainty that hits aren't influenced by steroids. But steroids don't increase a persons hand eye coordination. That is why I personally don't draw the conclusion of hits/average and steroids. If you hit 15 less HR, of course your total bases are down. You get 4 total bases for HR.
To continue with the respectfully theme, you are either the leading authority on all things steroids or you're simply talking out of your ass. I'll go with latter after reading everything you wrote after "if they did". Look, you have no earthly idea if steroids make guys better hitters as far as total hits and average and numerous studies have been done that suggest that they do little to enhance power numbers. The entire topic bores me to tears, but I'll dig up some studies that disprove your suggestion if you honestly care to continue. .
Did I claim to be? Jesus dude.
While admitting that it's not exactly a representative sample, the Mitchell Report suggests that "they" don't make power numbers go up in the slightest. As to your McGwire reference, do you honestly think he's a data point and not an outlier? I find it quite simple to say that if it didn't happen to A, it won't happen to the rest of the alphabet. Of course, it actually *did* happen to A, as McGwire was a much better hitter in terms of total bases and average during the window of suspected use. .
I am starting to question if you know how total bases are calculated. Gee, if I get more dingers or doubles, my total bases won't go up?
Sad? Christ-on-a-stick man, conjecture about an athlete gives you the blues? I find it sad (not in that way) that there are people who refuse to acknowledge the possibility that an athlete may have used PEDs. I also find those that do so to be incredibly naive.
Jumping to a wild accusation about someone taking performance enhancing drugs based on one shoulder injury (which was called normal wear/tear issue from a baseball swing by James Andrews) is what I find sad. It's not that I don't think guys have or still do. I just don't believe in jumping to that conclusion and making that accusation with zero credible evidence to support it like you did. That is what I find sad.
Masters said:
The only real number out of line was his HR's, which have a drastic impact on the OPS (which this made up stat came into existance like 4 years ago), along with his OBS being down (which when average is down this will be). After all OPS is just OBP + Slugging. He had more hits, 6 less doubles, and his average dropped. So yes, I don't think he was that far out of line, at least from potentially being nothing more than an off year in HRs. It happens to all kinds of guys.Wow. First, I have no idea what you mean by OBS. Must be one of those made up stats. Concerning OPS, it's been around for 25 years. Been in existence forever, though it has only found its way on the back of baseball cards in the last four years so that's what you must be talking about.
The "only real number" thing? You're that guy? Awesome. I've met the rest of your family all over the internet.
Hafner's walk rate dropped from 18.1 to 15.8, his OBP from .439 to .385, his SLG from .659 to .451, his OPS from 1.097 to .837, his ISO from .350 to .185 and his BABIP from .326 to .298. And to you, that's simply explained away by a drop in home runs. I must say, I admire your innocence. Not your inquisitiveness so much, but that sadness at the suggestion of steroid use is very cute.
Of course I can't say with 100% certainty that hits aren't influenced by steroids. But steroids don't increase a persons hand eye coordination. That is why I personally don't draw the conclusion of hits/average and steroids. If you hit 15 less HR, of course your total bases are down. You get 4 total bases for HR.
This is why I can't take you seriously. You say that "steroids don't increase a persons hand/eye coordination" while that very topic is the source of much debate.
For every Bobby Valentine comment about steroids not being injected in the eyes, there's a comment from Tony Gwynn about steroids improving muscle responses and hand/eye coordination. Or as Lee Jenkins wrote in the New York Times:
But their uncertain influence on a player's strength, bat speed, hand-eye coordination and confidence has become a source of debate
According to you, the debate is finished and there's little to discuss.
I am starting to question if you know how total bases are calculated. Gee, if I get more dingers or doubles, my total bases won't go up?
That's nothing. I'm starting to question if you're not my sister. She's a big baseball fan but she struggles with stats and logic. I'm just happy she's a fan. Ignoring the back and forth, I feel the same way about you.
Jumping to a wild accusation about someone taking performance enhancing drugs based on one shoulder injury (which was called normal wear/tear issue from a baseball swing by James Andrews) is what I find sad. It's not that I don't think guys have or still do. I just don't believe in jumping to that conclusion and making that accusation with zero credible evidence to support it like you did. That is what I find sad.
Ah, now I understand fully. You just struggle with words. Absolutely nothing to be ashamed of and I've had experience with others who suffer from your illness. We'll just go through it slowly together, ok? Now, you came to the conclusion that I "jump(ed) to that conclusion (that Hafner used steroids) and ma(de) that accusation with zero credible evidence to support it like (I) did." And that brought about sadness.
Now let's go through this thread together, ok? Here, take my hand and we're going to move up just a wee bit.
Now here's where I entered the thread. I posted a reply to (what I thought to be) a suggestion that it was silly to assume that Hafner had ever taken steroids. So I wrote:
I don't find the suggestion to be at all silly. A power hitter with tissue issues leading to weight loss once steroid testing is in place? There's nothing silly about the suggestion that steroids had something to do with that. Still, Hafner always struck me as being country strong. The fact is none of us know what brought about the quick apex and nadir of his career path. Could be something as simple as strong guy loses his strength due to injury or it could be far more sinister.
I followed that with a post that dealt with the drop in his productivity:
True. Sammy Sosa didn't come close to having the sort of decline Hafner did in his age 30 season. Then again, steroid testing wasn't in place that year.
I have no freaking clue if Pronk was a roid junkie. But pointing at his "down year" - when he had ~50 fewer total bases than the prior season - even with far more plate appearances, isn't exactly a point in the favor of those who suggest he was clean.
Next thing I read, you're claiming that allowing for the possibility is the same as an accusation:
Jumping to a wild accusation about someone taking performance enhancing drugs based on one shoulder injury (which was called normal wear/tear issue from a baseball swing by James Andrews) is what I find sad. It's not that I don't think guys have or still do. I just don't believe in jumping to that conclusion and making that accusation with zero credible evidence to support it like you did. That is what I find sad.
You know what I find sad? Ignorance.
Beampot
-
You obviously don't realize what a general/generic term tissue is, when refering to the human body.
And you obviously struggle with simple spelling. But let's forget that. Yes, I was very serious about my tissue comment (I thought like mad the maggot inclusion would have caused the 40 watt to go off above your head) but that wasn't the case. Any way, it seems like we hate one another. I pretty much reserve my Browns Board hatred for Rich, but I'll expand the umbrella if you want some go time.
God, the added audience here is a blessing and a curse.
Beanpot
-
Sorry I brought it up.
-
You obviously don't realize what a general/generic term tissue is, when refering to the human body.
And you obviously struggle with simple spelling. But let's forget that. Yes, I was very serious about my tissue comment (I thought like mad the maggot inclusion would have caused the 40 watt to go off above your head) but that wasn't the case. Any way, it seems like we hate one another. I pretty much reserve my Browns Board hatred for Rich, but I'll expand the umbrella if you want some go time.
God, the added audience here is a blessing and a curse.
Beanpot
And you obviously struggle with simple spelling. But let's forget that. Yes, I was very serious about my tissue comment (I thought like mad the maggot inclusion would have caused the 40 watt to go off above your head) but that wasn't the case. Any way, it seems like we hate one another. I pretty much reserve my Browns Board hatred for Rich, but I'll expand the umbrella if you want some go time.
God, the added audience here is a blessing and a curse.
Beanpot
Buddy, I don't hate you or even dislike you. Now being condesending....
-
Wow. First, I have no idea what you mean by OBS. Must be one of those made up stats. Concerning OPS, it's been around for 25 years. Been in existence forever, though it has only found its way on the back of baseball cards in the last four years so that's what you must be talking about.
It was a typo. I meant OBP. As for OPS, it is baseball's version of a QB rating. You can put stock in it if you want. I don't. But according to you, if I don't put stock in every stat you do, I must not know anything. *yawn*
The "only real number" thing? You're that guy? Awesome. I've met the rest of your family all over the internet.
And your one of those guys. You know the type. Your OPINION is fact and no others can differ *sigh*
Hafner's walk rate dropped from 18.1 to 15.8, his OBP from .439 to .385, his SLG from .659 to .451, his OPS from 1.097 to .837, his ISO from .350 to .185 and his BABIP from .326 to .298. And to you, that's simply explained away by a drop in home runs. I must say, I admire your innocence. Not your inquisitiveness so much, but that sadness at the suggestion of steroid use is very cute.
So now steroids impact walks? Here I thought it came down to pitches. Yeah, his walks were down. And? SLG and OPS are both greatly impacted by a reduction in HR. I just showed how the OPS is calculated. What are the two things that make it up? Oh yes, it's OBP and SLG. Gee, if my slugging is down why oh why would my OPS drop significatantly? It's not lack of inquisitive, it's understanding math. Stats are pretty useless if you don't understand how they are achieved. Slugging is total bases (so Travis in 07 lost roughly 60 TB by having less HRs, or roughly .100 points off the SLG by getting that many less HR), while getting 100 more ABs, which is what TB is devided by to get you that SLG. See how easy less HRs can impact the slugging?
For the OPS, his AB went up 100 but walks and SO were pretty much the same between 2006 and 2007, as well as total hits. Why golly gee, perhaps he was just lining out more, especially with the shift teams started putting on him. That's gonna be a big hit on the OBP. You know the other half of the OPS. But I guess whe should assume all players will do more with an extra 100 ABs, rather than it possibly taking a toll on a player (or the players shoulder that he jerks practically out of place with every swing).
This is why I can't take you seriously. You say that "steroids don't increase a persons hand/eye coordination" while that very topic is the source of much debate.
For every Bobby Valentine comment about steroids not being injected in the eyes, there's a comment from Tony Gwynn about steroids improving muscle responses and hand/eye coordination. Or as Lee Jenkins wrote in the New York Times:
But their uncertain influence on a player's strength, bat speed, hand-eye coordination and confidence has become a source of debate
According to you, the debate is finished and there's little to discuss.
So what you go to show is how inclussive so many things are about the impact of steroids, yet the first assumption and accusation you make on a player is steriod use. See why I can't you seriously? I certainly don't think the debate is finished. But it's so damn inconslusive I won't latch on to everything and instantly jump to conclusions about any player who has their first injury or their first off year.
That's nothing. I'm starting to question if you're not my sister. She's a big baseball fan but she struggles with stats and logic. I'm just happy she's a fan. Ignoring the back and forth, I feel the same way about you.
I am starting to question if you're the cranky old guy sitting on his front porch yelling at kids to get off his lawn. Of course this proves my point that you like to jump to conclusions.
I have no freaking clue if Pronk was a roid junkie. But pointing at his "down year" - when he had ~50 fewer total bases than the prior season - even with far more plate appearances, isn't exactly a point in the favor of those who suggest he was clean.[/b]
One down year. It as easily can just be an off year for a guy going through contract negotations, still coming off the broken hand the year before, pitchers making more adjustments against him, spending more time in the 3 hole instead of the 4 hole in the line up (remember, Travis was hitting clean up in 2006 the majority of time, while batting 3rd 2007. But I'll guess you don't think where a guy hits in the order ever impacts his production, pitches seen, or the players comfort level at the plate), teams starting to do the shifting of the infield around on him, etc.
Do you think Miguel Cabrera, Jim Thome, David Ortiz, and may others were all on, off, and back on steriods? I can point to an off year for everyone of those guys and 100's more of MLB players. If you are such the expert you are now trying to portray yourself as and belittle me, you'd think you'd be aware of how oftern player in MLB, the NFL, NBA, or any other sport have an off year that doesn't match up with all their other production. As well as how easly other distractions can impact them.
And jumping to the weight loss and injury as a point to steroids is what makes it quite laughable. If you go off the juice, you don't lose only 10lbs. That is all Travis has reportedly lost. Wow, that's quite a reduction. Maybe my girlfriend was on steroids too. Here I thought she was just eating better, but I guess she was juicing and that's why she lost 10lbs over the winter.
The injury, as pointed out by the doctor is a normal injury for a hitter. It's also Travis first and only injury of that type. Every player that ever needed Tommy John surgery or any other arm, shoulder, or elbow injury must have been juicing.
You know what I find sad? That the person calling someone who is giving a player the benifit of the doubt ignorant. But I guess making people guilty until proven innocent is your idea of non-ignorance.
You'll have to forgive me for waiting and seeing if Travis now stays healthy and returns to form before I presume he was juicing.
-
Wow. First, I have no idea what you mean by OBS. Must be one of those made up stats. Concerning OPS, it's been around for 25 years. Been in existence forever, though it has only found its way on the back of baseball cards in the last four years so that's what you must be talking about.
It was a typo. I meant OBP. As for OPS, it is baseball's version of a QB rating. You can put stock in it if you want. I don't. But according to you, if I don't put stock in every stat you do, I must not know anything. *yawn*
The "only real number" thing? You're that guy? Awesome. I've met the rest of your family all over the internet.
And your one of those guys. You know the type. Your OPINION is fact and no others can differ *sigh*
Hafner's walk rate dropped from 18.1 to 15.8, his OBP from .439 to .385, his SLG from .659 to .451, his OPS from 1.097 to .837, his ISO from .350 to .185 and his BABIP from .326 to .298. And to you, that's simply explained away by a drop in home runs. I must say, I admire your innocence. Not your inquisitiveness so much, but that sadness at the suggestion of steroid use is very cute.
So now steroids impact walks? Here I thought it came down to pitches. Yeah, his walks were down. And? SLG and OPS are both greatly impacted by a reduction in HR. I just showed how the OPS is calculated. What are the two things that make it up? Oh yes, it's OBP and SLG. Gee, if my slugging is down why oh why would my OPS drop significatantly? It's not lack of inquisitive, it's understanding math. Stats are pretty useless if you don't understand how they are achieved. Slugging is total bases (so Travis in 07 lost roughly 60 TB by having less HRs, or roughly .100 points off the SLG by getting that many less HR), while getting 100 more ABs, which is what TB is devided by to get you that SLG. See how easy less HRs can impact the slugging?
For the OPS, his AB went up 100 but walks and SO were pretty much the same between 2006 and 2007, as well as total hits. Why golly gee, perhaps he was just lining out more, especially with the shift teams started putting on him. That's gonna be a big hit on the OBP. You know the other half of the OPS. But I guess whe should assume all players will do more with an extra 100 ABs, rather than it possibly taking a toll on a player (or the players shoulder that he jerks practically out of place with every swing).
This is why I can't take you seriously. You say that "steroids don't increase a persons hand/eye coordination" while that very topic is the source of much debate.
For every Bobby Valentine comment about steroids not being injected in the eyes, there's a comment from Tony Gwynn about steroids improving muscle responses and hand/eye coordination. Or as Lee Jenkins wrote in the New York Times:
But their uncertain influence on a player's strength, bat speed, hand-eye coordination and confidence has become a source of debate
According to you, the debate is finished and there's little to discuss.
So what you go to show is how inclussive so many things are about the impact of steroids, yet the first assumption and accusation you make on a player is steriod use. See why I can't you seriously? I certainly don't think the debate is finished. But it's so damn inconslusive I won't latch on to everything and instantly jump to conclusions about any player who has their first injury or their first off year.
That's nothing. I'm starting to question if you're not my sister. She's a big baseball fan but she struggles with stats and logic. I'm just happy she's a fan. Ignoring the back and forth, I feel the same way about you.
I am starting to question if you're the cranky old guy sitting on his front porch yelling at kids to get off his lawn. Of course this proves my point that you like to jump to conclusions.
I have no freaking clue if Pronk was a roid junkie. But pointing at his "down year" - when he had ~50 fewer total bases than the prior season - even with far more plate appearances, isn't exactly a point in the favor of those who suggest he was clean.[/b]
One down year. It as easily can just be an off year for a guy going through contract negotations, still coming off the broken hand the year before, pitchers making more adjustments against him, spending more time in the 3 hole instead of the 4 hole in the line up (remember, Travis was hitting clean up in 2006 the majority of time, while batting 3rd 2007. But I'll guess you don't think where a guy hits in the order ever impacts his production, pitches seen, or the players comfort level at the plate), teams starting to do the shifting of the infield around on him, etc.
Do you think Miguel Cabrera, Jim Thome, David Ortiz, and may others were all on, off, and back on steriods? I can point to an off year for everyone of those guys and 100's more of MLB players. If you are such the expert you are now trying to portray yourself as and belittle me, you'd think you'd be aware of how oftern player in MLB, the NFL, NBA, or any other sport have an off year that doesn't match up with all their other production. As well as how easly other distractions can impact them.
And jumping to the weight loss and injury as a point to steroids is what makes it quite laughable. If you go off the juice, you don't lose only 10lbs. That is all Travis has reportedly lost. Wow, that's quite a reduction. Maybe my girlfriend was on steroids too. Here I thought she was just eating better, but I guess she was juicing and that's why she lost 10lbs over the winter.
The injury, as pointed out by the doctor is a normal injury for a hitter. It's also Travis first and only injury of that type. Every player that ever needed Tommy John surgery or any other arm, shoulder, or elbow injury must have been juicing.
You know what I find sad? That the person calling someone who is giving a player the benifit of the doubt ignorant. But I guess making people guilty until proven innocent is your idea of non-ignorance.
You'll have to forgive me for waiting and seeing if Travis now stays healthy and returns to form before I presume he was juicing.
Masters said:
It was a typo. I meant OBP. As for OPS, it is baseball's version of a QB rating. You can put stock in it if you want. I don't. But according to you, if I don't put stock in every stat you do, I must not know anything. *yawn*First off, I don't put any stock in typos. Hell, I misspelled my own screen-name in an earlier reply. I just had no idea what you meant by OBS. I disagree with you about the value of OPS (and think it's not remotely similar to QB rating) but I do apologize for suggesting that you don't know anything. I've been trying to build this board for nearly a decade in various formats (btw, I'm in my 30's and you're still not allowed on my lawn) and a dissenting voice is welcome.
I will take exception with this comment of yours:
yet the first assumption and accusation you make on a player is steriod use.
That's simply not true and I'm curious as to how you came to that conclusion. It certainly didn't happen in this thread and I'd like for you to back that up, if at all possible.
BTW, the greatest evidence that Hafner didn't use roids is his 2006 season, when testing was first implemented. We disagree about the strength of it compared to his 2007 season, but it's evidence enough for me (with my fanboy hat placed firmly atop my head) that Pronk was clean.
Beanpot
-
Masters said:
It was a typo. I meant OBP. As for OPS, it is baseball's version of a QB rating. You can put stock in it if you want. I don't. But according to you, if I don't put stock in every stat you do, I must not know anything. *yawn*First off, I don't put any stock in typos. Hell, I misspelled my own screen-name in an earlier reply. I just had no idea what you meant by OBS. I disagree with you about the value of OPS (and think it's not remotely similar to QB rating) but I do apologize for suggesting that you don't know anything. I've been trying to build this board for nearly a decade in various formats (btw, I'm in my 30's and you're still not allowed on my lawn) and a dissenting voice is welcome.
I will take exception with this comment of yours:
yet the first assumption and accusation you make on a player is steriod use.
That's simply not true and I'm curious as to how you came to that conclusion. It certainly didn't happen in this thread and I'd like for you to back that up, if at all possible.
BTW, the greatest evidence that Hafner didn't use roids is his 2006 season, when testing was first implemented. We disagree about the strength of it compared to his 2007 season, but it's evidence enough for me (with my fanboy hat placed firmly atop my head) that Pronk was clean.
Beanpot
First off, I don't put any stock in typos. Hell, I misspelled my own screen-name in an earlier reply. I just had no idea what you meant by OBS. I disagree with you about the value of OPS (and think it's not remotely similar to QB rating) but I do apologize for suggesting that you don't know anything. I've been trying to build this board for nearly a decade in various formats (btw, I'm in my 30's and you're still not allowed on my lawn) and a dissenting voice is welcome.
I will take exception with this comment of yours:
That's simply not true and I'm curious as to how you came to that conclusion. It certainly didn't happen in this thread and I'd like for you to back that up, if at all possible.
BTW, the greatest evidence that Hafner didn't use roids is his 2006 season, when testing was first implemented. We disagree about the strength of it compared to his 2007 season, but it's evidence enough for me (with my fanboy hat placed firmly atop my head) that Pronk was clean.
Beanpot
I came to that conclusion by your first post in this thread. You said the following:
"Let's see?? Body breaking down and noticeably lighter....what does that spell????
Jason Giambi??? "
What other conclusion could one draw from that?
Hafner very well could have been using the juice, but to me, at this time, there is far to little evidence to even make the assumption or accusation, imo. I guess I am just in the boat of I wouldn't say one way or the other on it. I don't find it fair either way.
And appology accepted. I appologize for my jabs as well. It's a message board, so I don't take them to heart. As I am sure you don't either.
-
First off, I don't put any stock in typos. Hell, I misspelled my own screen-name in an earlier reply. I just had no idea what you meant by OBS. I disagree with you about the value of OPS (and think it's not remotely similar to QB rating) but I do apologize for suggesting that you don't know anything. I've been trying to build this board for nearly a decade in various formats (btw, I'm in my 30's and you're still not allowed on my lawn) and a dissenting voice is welcome.
I will take exception with this comment of yours:
That's simply not true and I'm curious as to how you came to that conclusion. It certainly didn't happen in this thread and I'd like for you to back that up, if at all possible.
BTW, the greatest evidence that Hafner didn't use roids is his 2006 season, when testing was first implemented. We disagree about the strength of it compared to his 2007 season, but it's evidence enough for me (with my fanboy hat placed firmly atop my head) that Pronk was clean.
Beanpot
I came to that conclusion by your first post in this thread. You said the following:
"Let's see?? Body breaking down and noticeably lighter....what does that spell????
Jason Giambi??? "
What other conclusion could one draw from that?
Hafner very well could have been using the juice, but to me, at this time, there is far to little evidence to even make the assumption or accusation, imo. I guess I am just in the boat of I wouldn't say one way or the other on it. I don't find it fair either way.
And appology accepted. I appologize for my jabs as well. It's a message board, so I don't take them to heart. As I am sure you don't either.
Masters said:
I came to that conclusion by your first post in this thread. You said the following:"Let's see?? Body breaking down and noticeably lighter....what does that spell????
Jason Giambi??? "
What other conclusion could one draw from that?
I said that.
-
First off, I don't put any stock in typos. Hell, I misspelled my own screen-name in an earlier reply. I just had no idea what you meant by OBS. I disagree with you about the value of OPS (and think it's not remotely similar to QB rating) but I do apologize for suggesting that you don't know anything. I've been trying to build this board for nearly a decade in various formats (btw, I'm in my 30's and you're still not allowed on my lawn) and a dissenting voice is welcome.
I will take exception with this comment of yours:
That's simply not true and I'm curious as to how you came to that conclusion. It certainly didn't happen in this thread and I'd like for you to back that up, if at all possible.
BTW, the greatest evidence that Hafner didn't use roids is his 2006 season, when testing was first implemented. We disagree about the strength of it compared to his 2007 season, but it's evidence enough for me (with my fanboy hat placed firmly atop my head) that Pronk was clean.
Beanpot
I came to that conclusion by your first post in this thread. You said the following:
"Let's see?? Body breaking down and noticeably lighter....what does that spell????
Jason Giambi??? "
What other conclusion could one draw from that?
Hafner very well could have been using the juice, but to me, at this time, there is far to little evidence to even make the assumption or accusation, imo. I guess I am just in the boat of I wouldn't say one way or the other on it. I don't find it fair either way.
And appology accepted. I appologize for my jabs as well. It's a message board, so I don't take them to heart. As I am sure you don't either.
Masters said:
I came to that conclusion by your first post in this thread. You said the following:"Let's see?? Body breaking down and noticeably lighter....what does that spell????
Jason Giambi??? "
What other conclusion could one draw from that?
You could have come to the conclusion that you confused me with another poster, as Peen explains above. In fact, that may be the source of much of this debate, at least on my end.
And appology accepted. I appologize for my jabs as well. It's a message board, so I don't take them to heart. As I am sure you don't either.
No need to apologize for jabs, I enjoy the back and forth.
Beanpot
-
Beanpot, Beenpot, Peenpot.....something like that.
This has been a fun thread to read!!
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login