Just Sayin'

Say a player decided to do steroids. Say the player was 5'10" and only had little better than warning track power to start his pro career (say a HR once every 22 at bats during his first three plus seasons). Now say that player is with a new team where he suddenly has monster power (say 74 HR in 2 seasons at a clip of one HR in fewer than 15 AB). Doesn't this look a bit suspicious in hindsight?

Now say that this new found monster power makes the player attractive to another club and that club gives up two stud players (say a stud starter and a stud outfielder) - who is the real victim in this scenrio? Who is the culprit?

The fans of the team of the team who traded the stud prospects certainly lost out in the deal since hypothetically the guy with monster power hasn't delivered the team to the playoffs and now seems injury prone meanwhile the stud prospects look like franchise type players.

The player who may or may not have done steroids made out because he got a big fat contract but if it came out that he did use steroids his reputation would be permenantly scarred. Plus he may be facing unknown health issues down the line if he used steroids. For doing steroids, he'd obviously be a culprit in at least the fans' eyes.

Is the team who traded him a culprit in this? I mean all of a sudden the guy was a monster HR hitter when he wasn't before. Shouldn't they have known something was up? And if they knew or suspected he was a steroids user and still traded him - what does that make them?

Steroids is an awful, awful subject to cover. Not just the records are now in question but also the trades and the monster contracts.