Jason Stark of ESPN makes the case that perhaps the best evidence that Ryan Braun was as innocent of using steroids as he claimed is the fact that this season Braun is basically hitting the exact same as last season. While the stats for this comparison certainly make for a nice column - the logic behind it is lacking. Two words came to mind when reading Stark's offering - David Ortiz.
David Ortiz is having perhaps the best season of his career - that does not mean that Ortiz never took banned performance enhancing drugs. He certainly did. Ortiz admitted that he tested positive in 2003. If I worked for ESPN I could probably put together a column comparing Ortiz' 2012 season to his 2003 season and what would my argument be - that Ortiz is back on the juice? That would be silly. But would it be as silly as Stark's argument that Braun's 2012 season somehow proves he didn't juice last year?