Q: What about some peripheral issues surrounding A-Rod – the union, for instance? One of the reports that stirred up the most anger among sportswriters and fans are charges that the union tipped off Rodriguez – and, presumably, other players are well – about upcoming drug tests. How can you justify that?
A: Let me reply by asking you a question: have you read the Basic Agreement between the Players Association and Major League baseball?
Q: Us, yes, sort of. What about it?
A: Did you see anything in it that indicated that MLB was supposed to alert the union before a drug test?
Q: Okay, no, I didn’t. What’s your point?
A: My point is, how could the union have “tipped” its members to an imminent test when they didn’t know when any test could be. I mean, the tests are random. No one knows when a player is going to be tested, so how could the union tip him off?
Q: Couldn’t they figure out some other way, like spies?
A: That’s so dumb, I hope you’re joking. Do you think they have bugs in the Commissioner’ s office? To my knowledge, not even Bud Selig has suggested that the players union was spying on them.
Besides, answer me this: Since all the PEDs in question take quite a bit of time to work their way out of your system, what good would it do to tip somebody off a few days ahead of time?
Q: Then what was the big tipping thing all about?
A: It was all about a non-issue that should have been put to rest a couple of years ago. All of the recent “tipping” accusations, including those in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, referred back to Selena Roberts’ Sports Illustrated story. If you check, you’ll see that she got her information on that from the Mitchell Report. Well, if you remember, when that accusation came up in 2007 when the report was issued, Gene Orza, the union’s chief legal counsel, squashed it at inception at the union’s press conference by explaining that, yes, he had contacted players about upcoming drug tests, reminding them that “It’s been seven months – or whatever – and you haven’t been tested yet, so it could still happen. Just remember that.” At the time that satisfied everyone. Now, less than a year and a half later, the non-issue rose up again because no one remembered it was old news.
This is an example of sloppy reporting and plain old union bashing, and there’s enough blame here to go around to just about everyone who picked up the “tipping” story and ran with it without checking the facts and finding the source.
*********
Q: So if everything you say is true, what about Bud Selig’s statement a couple of weeks ago to USA Today that he’s thinking of “punishing” Rodriguez? What can he do and what is he likely to do?
A: The answer to the last two questions is: nothing. Absolutely nothing, and it’s silly for the sports press to pretend that he can do anything. They should stop throwing around this “in the best interests of baseball” mantra.
What the commissioner can and can’t do regarding the player is spelled out quite clearly in the Basic Agreement; no commissioner has any authority to make any rulings regarding players that isn’t spelled in that agreement. Besides, Rodriguez’s positive tests were part of a plan to implement random drug testing. Let me repeat this: there were no penalties for the PEDs that Rodriguez used before 2004 when the BA went into effect.
For that matter, Selig’s power over Major League Baseball is limited. The commissioner of baseball works under a personal services contract from the team owners, and he isn’t going to do anything that upsets them. To imply that they would allow him the power to suspend one of their major stars for having used a drug six years ago, at which time there was no penalty, is ridiculous. He’d have to name all the other 103 players on the list and give out equal punishment to all those who tested positive and are still active. If he did this, his bosses would be outraged. They’d fire him immediately and hire a new commissioner who would change the ruling.
*********
Q: Do you think A-Rod was being candid at his press conference? Did he tell the truth? Do you believe this stuff about his cousin being his supplier?
A: As Michael Moore put it a few years ago when Clinton was being investigated by the Republicans, “You have no obligation to be truthful when answering questions no one has a right to ask you in the first place.” What’s the name of Alex Rodriguez’s cousin??? Who in hell cares? Has everyone writing and talking about this whole affair lost their moral compass?
A couple of weeks ago, Marvin Miller, the man who founded the Players Association, said that the media was on a “witch hunt.” Miller is wrong. This doesn’t even qualify as a witch hunt, it’s more like a hunt for the sorcerer’s apprentice. (Who, by the way, was played by Mickey Mouse in the movie.) Are we going to do this just for A-Rod or are we going to dig up all the other 103 names on “the list” and search out their list and maybe their cousin’s next-door neighbor’s?
Has everyone gone collectively nuts? Maybe it’s time to start random drug testing in the media.
Q: Then answer his question: Why is it just A-Rod?
A: A couple of reasons. First, his was the only name leaked. Now ask yourself why his was the only name leaked. Because he’s the best player in baseball? Now that’s an interesting assertion. Most baseball analysts regarded Rodriguez as one of the four or five best players in the game, and some thought he was the best – but there was by no means a consensus. All of a sudden there’s a drug scandal, and many writers who had been saying he was overrated are now saying he was the best so they can use that as a club to debunk his reputation with. As in “who knows how good he would have been if he hadn’t juiced.”
Q: So how good would he have been if he hadn’t juiced? Is there any way of calculating how much the steroids helped him?
A: Let’s get this straight: There isn’t any evidence that any of the drugs mentioned in this mess have enhanced anyone’s performance. Sportswriters who ignored this subject for years are now experts. They know everything there is to know about PEDS except the big one: Do they work?
As Baseball Prospectus’s Will Carroll – who does know something about PEDS, a great deal about them, in fact, put it to me: Steroids work. They make you bigger, faster, and stronger. What we don’t know is how that translates to baseball performance. Bigger muscles can help you run faster or lift more, but hit more or farther? That’s tougher to figure. From what we know from statistical studies, the effect doesn’t seem to be more than a couple percent, in the range of statistical noise.
In A-Rod’s case, there’s no evidence it even goes that far. The New York Times, ESPN, and loudmouths like WFAN’s Mike Francesa have been spending a lot of time and energy expounding about things they can’t prove. The Times ran a tale-of-the-tape chart on February 10 which showed that Rodriguez averaged 52 home runs per season with a .615 slugging percentage during the three years he admits to using PEDs, with “just” a 39.2 home run average and .574 slugging over this other eight seasons (that’s 1998-2000 with Seattle and five with the Yankees).
In this case The Times’ researchers should simply do their homework. In three seasons with the Mariners, A-Rod hit 125 home runs, 51 in his two home ball parks (the Kingdome and Safeco Field) and 74 on the road. In three seasons with Texas he hit 156 home runs: did about exactly the same on the road – 70 home runs (actually, a little less than he had hit with Seattle) – and much better at home, 86 home runs at the Ballpark in Arlington.
Guess what? Seattle’s parks are among the worst in baseball for power hitters, while the Ranger’s home park is one of the best. In other words, the only “boost” he seems to have gotten is the one that could easily have been anticipated: He hit a few more home runs at home while playing for Texas than he did on the road.
*********
Q: How do you know he wasn’t juicing while playing for the Mariners, or even the Yankees, for that matter?
A: I don’t. I don’t know that every hitter in the league wasn’t juiced and every pitcher as well. But there are no accusations for his years in Seattle or New York. You might ask why, if he was juiced in Seattle, he couldn’t hit more than 51 home runs in three seasons, which is a pretty low number for a slugger playing in front of his home crowd. You might ask why, if he was juicing in New York, he’s averaged just 19.6 home runs on the road for five seasons, compared to 24.7 when he was with Seattle. In short, there’s no statistical evidence that he was using anything in Seattle or New York – or that it helped him while he was playing in Texas.
Those interested in more information on this subject are advised to check out a study by baseball analyst J.C. Bradbury on Sabernomics.com, who concluded, “I’d probably have to say there was no observed effect.” (What Impact Did Steroids Have on Alex Rodriguez’s Home Run Performance?, Feb 10, 2009)
Next: Has Alex Rodriguez been overpaid? Does the New York media hate him? Is A-Rod a lousy clutch hitter? Are his civil rights being violated?
