Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock
No it isn't. It's about cheating, and why you excuse some cheaters but condemn others.
|
So I'll ask the question again. If a player who played shortstop and never hit a home run his entire career suddenly started injecting a substance that allowed him to hit a home run every time at bat would that make him a Hall of Famer?
If a player's numbers are arrived at artificially then I don't think he can be considered a Hall of Famer. As far as the uppers go, if I had enough evidence to believe that they skewed the playing field as much as steroids did I'd probably agree with you. But the evidence that we have doesn't suggest that is so. The steroid numbers stick out like sore thumb.
I'm not excusing some cheaters and condemning others. I making a distinction between the impact that steroids had on the game's numbers vs. the impact that amphetamines had on the game's numbers. You can't point to uppers and say, "look how much more inflated his statistics are because of uppers." But you can point to someone who has been juicing and say, "wow, the difference before he started juicing and after he started juicing is incredible."