Steroids

“Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive” - Sir Walter Scott

By now everyone is aware that Alex Rodriguez supposedly tested positive for steroids back in 2003. Here are a couple of thoughts on the subject.

1. I question the timing. Four sources confirmed the story for Sports Illustrated. Four sources! This isn't just one guy who has it out for A-Rod - there were four sources! Who benefits from this information being announced at this time? Barry Bonds certainly benefits as he is both taken out of the spotlight and he is no longer the only bad guy. Having A-Rod named opens a can of double standard worms. Why was Bonds singled out when baseball knew players like A-Rod were testing positive?

2. As much as the announcement may have benefited Barry Bonds - the announcement benefited the owners much more. They just took the highest paid player down a big notch and now any older slugger will be looking at a reduced contract because just the shadow of steroids will deflate the worth of any 30+ slugger. If you think Manny Ramirez' market worth is low now - can you imagine what will happen to his worth is he happens to be named among the 104 players who flunked the steroids test back in 2003?

3. The owners knew what players were on steroids. Remember Rangers owner Tom Hicks saying, "Juan Gonzalez, for $24 million, after he came off steroids probably... we just gave that money away." This is the same Tom Hicks who traded away A-Rod right after he tested positive for steroids in 2003.

4. It's not like the owners and the Commissioner haven't manipulated news about steroids before. Remember how the news about Rafael Palmeiro was delayed until after Ryne Sandberg was inducted into the Hall of Fame? If you think about it - the Commissioners Office was probably well placed to organize the leaking of A-Rod's name. They had both motive and opportunity.

5. Joe Posnanski made a great point (sorry I can't find the link) about how that 104 players who flunked the test in 2003 probably represents a much higher number than the 5-7% we were told it was. Poz notes "There were roughly 432 players who qualified for the batting title, the ERA title or pitched 50 innings of relief" and compares that to "If 104 people tested positive, and it was 5% — that means they tested 2,080 baseball players." Those numbers don't seem to add up - do they?

Oh what a tangled web baseball is weaving regarding steroids.

Fernando Vina, Tom Hicks and the Mitchell Report

With each passing day the Mitchell Report is looking more and more suspect in my eyes. It is getting praised for what was included but it should also get severe criticism for what it left out. Let's connect some easy dots here:

- Fernando Vina was named as both a steroids guy and HGH guy in the Mitchell Report. Vina currently works at ESPN and denies the steroids part of the allegation.

- Not six months ago on ESPN Vina blasted Texas Rangers owner Tom Hicks for saying Juan Gonzalez was probably a steroids guy.

- Hicks had very good reason to speculate that Gonzalez was a steroids guy since Gonzalez's trainer Angel Presinal has basically been banned from baseball clubhouses since 2001 after getting caught smuggling steroids (Presinal may have been a fall guy for Gonzalez).

Do the names Tom Hicks, Juan Gonzalez or Angel Presinal appear in the Mitchell Report? Did Mitchell attempt to interview either Tom Hicks or Angel Presinal? The more scrutiny the report gets the more it looks like white wash job with just enough sacrificial lambs to keep the public happy.

If you think that Presinal wasn't interviewed or included because he's "old news" - consider that he still works with numerous current players such as Ervin Santana, Robinson Cano, Luis Castillo, Francisco Cordero, and occasionally Pedro Martinez. Oh and he also works with Jose Guillen who was also named in the Mitchell Report. Makes you wonder what that $20 million spent on the report actually went for. An intern with a PC and Google probably could have done just as well.

Tom Hicks, Juan Gonzalez, Steroids and What People Already Knew

I have to laugh at reports about Ranger owner Tom Hicks comments about Juan Gonzalez "possibly" using steroids. The stories always mention Jose Canseco's allegations but none seem to bring up trainer Angel (Nao) Presinal who is more of a concrete connection to Juan-gone's steroid use. I guess "ESPN News Services" was too busy to even check their own files on Juan Gonzalez when they filed that first story I linked to because even minimal checking comes up with this nugget:

Presinal has been a persona non grata around the majors since an October 2001 incident in which he and former two-time American League MVP Juan Gonzalez, then Presinal's top client, were connected to an unmarked bag discovered by Canadian Border Service agents at the Toronto airport. The bag had come off a Cleveland Indians charter flight and, according to a New York Daily News story last summer, contained anabolic steroids and hypodermic needles.

Gonzalez, an outfielder with the Indians at the time, told Canadian Border Service agents that the bag belonged to Presinal. Presinal disputes that it contained steroids, but contends the gym bag and everything in it belonged to Gonzalez. Canadian authorities never filed charges against either the player or the trainer, but rumors about the incident have festered throughout baseball ever since.

Here's the rub - everyone in baseball knew about the run-in with the law in Toronto including, I assume, Tom Hicks and the Texas Rangers front office. Yet that very offseason is when they gave Gonzalez the 2-year $24 million contract. Reading Hicks comments in proper context it is more than possible that Hicks isn't mad that Gonzalez took steroids but instead mad that he stopped taking them after he got the big contract from the Rangers.

Tom Hicks Steroids Comment

I have to laugh at the reaction to Rangers owner Tom Hicks saying, "Juan Gonzalez, for $24 million, after he came off steroids probably... we just gave that money away." I learned about the comment from watching Baseball Tonight on ESPN last night. Both John Kruk and Fernando Vina ripped Hicks for talking about Juan Gonzalez without having absolute proof of what he was saying.

Is there anyone out there who doesn't think Juan Gonzalez was a steroids user?

Kruk and Vina are examples of the law of omerta the grips players and former players when it comes to steroids. If they can't even bring themselves to admit that maybe Hicks has a legit grievance when it comes to Juan-gone then why shouldn't the public just make the assumption that all the baseball players of that period were steroids taking cheaters? Kruk and Vina included. If anyone even owners can't talk about obvious cases of steroids use then what's the point?

It is so bad that Jose Canseco keeps looking more and more like a paragon of honesty and integrity when compared to former players and baseball scribes who covered the steroids era. Think about that.

EDIT: You can find Hick's comments here. Thanks to Kent Chapline for the link