Bloops: Schilling Says “There isn’t a team in the last 20 years that has won clean”
Posted by Steve Lombardi on July 7, 2011
Curt Schilling told a Philadelphia radio station on Wednesday that: “There’s a lot of good young pitchers in the game right now, but far fewer players are cheating. One of the bigger reasons they all did (steroids) was it allowed them to be April fresh in September and that helped you hit home runs. Anybody who ever says performance-enhancing drugs didn’t help players produce offensive numbers is full of crap.”
And with those numbers came championships that Schilling claims were tainted.
“There isn’t a team in the last 20 years that has won clean,” he said.
So, what do you think of this claim?
July 7th, 2011 at 11:37 pm
NoChance, just wait until you're *legally* on the ignore list. Then you're really done for.
July 7th, 2011 at 11:42 pm
@101 What is that twisto? Did I spell a word wrong one time? Is that the best you can do? I've said before the best thing about this forum is that BRef commenters do not get hung up on spelling and other BS arguments.
July 7th, 2011 at 11:50 pm
@100 I have not heard anyone say Thome is a marginal or questionable Hof'er. Have you heard this?
July 7th, 2011 at 11:55 pm
@102...
Hey Timmy, I know I am on the ignore list, but I need your help here... in a quick glance over Konerko's vs. Pitcher homerun totals... it looks like he hit about 25 homers against proven PED users; 119 against pitchers who probably used; 107 against pitchers who I think used; and 45 against those that I am confident without a doubt did not use; with the remainder somewhere in between...
So...anyway... I'm trying to calculate Konerko's true homerun total... I assume it can't go higher than 387 (what he has now) or lower than the aforementioned 45. I applied the coriolis force (to compensate for him not being a sweet swinging lefty) and came up with his homerun total as 67. I just want to make sure we sync up on our totals... you know... that we're speaking the same language.
July 8th, 2011 at 12:01 am
@102...
Timmy, sorry... need your help again.. I think my totals are off...
I noticed in a 2004 box score that Konerko actually benefited one night when, with two outs, a PED user walked another PED user to load the bases. The manager called in a PED user who promptly hit a non-PED user to force in a run. Konerko came to the plate and the opposing manager brought in a non-PED user (damn the age of specialist relievers) and Konerko hit a homerun.
I think I should eliminate that homerun because a non-PED user would not have hit another non-PED user and that non-PED user may have grounded out to second... Konerko therefore should have 66 homeruns, not the 67 I posted above. I'm sure you had that already figured though so don't get all mad at me for just figuring it out.
July 8th, 2011 at 12:33 am
Did I spell a word wrong one time? Is that the best you can do?
WTF are you talking about?
Believe, you provide plenty of material before one has to get to your spelling.
***
NoChance, kudos.
July 8th, 2011 at 1:22 am
Timmy P-
What evidence is there that Konerko is clean? What evidence is there that any player is clean? Again, not all PEDs result in hulking physiques for guys mashing HRs. PEDs do a lot more than that. Konerko has missed very few games in his career. Perhaps he owes his longevity and uncanny health to PEDs. We'd never know, would we?
My point is not to besmirch Konerko or his character. Rather, playing the guessing game of who did use PEDs and who didn't based on a very narrow understanding of what PEDs are and how they impact ballplayers is stupid. We can't conclude that anyone is clean so holding up clean guys vs dirty guys is stupid. Is it fair that some guys who were legitimately clean were harmed by the presence of PEDs in the sport? No. But that is on MLB's head.
July 8th, 2011 at 1:52 am
@107 My point is not to besmirch Konerko or his character Really? Perhaps he owes his longevity and uncanny health to PEDs. Your arguments are not well thought out.
July 8th, 2011 at 2:39 am
Canseco was talking about Rickey Henderson who was obviously juiced up his final 6 or 7, maybe 10 seasons being in the Hall of Fame. He would know. And Curt Schilling is dissing every team that he won a ring with... so why would he lie? He wouldn't say anything a while back, because he was still playing, but you tend to be more honest when you're looking back on it. He definitely wasn't a steroid user, because he burned out in the second half at the age of 38. Steroids wouldn't help a pitcher have an absurd strikeout to walk ratio. He has said he's not a Hall of Famer though I think that's insane. His WHIP, postseason career, and the fact that he didn't become a great pitcher until he was 25 and it still didn't take automatically from there. He's one of those guys who learned how to pitch after just relying on a dominant fastball. Unlike Clemens, his best seasons weren't at the ages 41 to 43(2 Cy Youngs and would have won a third had he not been injured.) Most guys used who weren't juiced up used lame supplements like creatine and glutamine which really don't make you any better. And amphetamines can't really be counted since Mays and most players used those throughout the years. Schilling has nothing to gain from saying this except for telling the truth. Matt Williams, Ortiz, Man-Ram, and others used. He's not dumb. GNC supplements aren't illegal steroids... even that Andro crap. Anyone who used it knows better.
July 8th, 2011 at 4:36 am
@69: LMAO
Grain Belt!!!!!!!!!!!
July 8th, 2011 at 5:33 am
Canseco was obviously referring to Nolan Ryan
July 8th, 2011 at 7:36 am
Timmy may have overstated Konerko's case but I think much of the reaction to his post is based on the fact that so many here are predisposed to disagree with him. If he was clean Konerko's steroid era #s are obviously devalued by the monster #s put up by PED users. If the rest of the leagues power stats were lower for those seasons and Konerko's were the same he be looked upon as a more valuable player and his sabermetric stats would reflect that in OPS+ and WAR.
July 8th, 2011 at 7:52 am
Fred McGriff? He played clean and consistent, but his 493 HRs are dwarfed by his contemporaries (Sosa, et al).
Maybe he's a borderline HOFer either way, but his case was harmed by hitting 30 hrs/year while the juicers were hitting twice that. They got the headlines, he didn't; they got the eye-popping totals, he didn't; etc.
July 8th, 2011 at 8:24 am
@112 Thank you Howard, it's not easy for some people to see through their prejudices. I was serious in my idea that Sabrmetrics could be used to point out steroid users, and @113 McGriff should get in also.
July 8th, 2011 at 8:36 am
Is this the same Curt Schilling who rails against the government then takes a $75 mil tax free gov't loan to move his video game business from MA to RI?
July 8th, 2011 at 8:57 am
Timmy-even assuming Konerko is clean, I honestly don't see a HOF path for him unless he does something really exceptional in the last years of his career. I understand and agree with your argument that his modern stats, and even subjective valuations (like AS and MVP voting) would have been better without competition from the juicers. But put blinders on, put Konerko back thirty years, and what you have is a a slugger who's big ticket cumulative counting stats look a great deal like many players who never made it to the Hall of Fame. Put him up on the lifetime career leader-boards (where the impact of modern juiced sluggers is diluted), and he's more likely to be below 100 on the all time lists. The alternate route for players like Konerko are for those who had shorter careers but higher peaks (Kiner, Clemente). Konerko has had some fine seasons, but he's never cracked 100 runs, never hit more than 41 home runs, never had a slugging percentage above .584. He just doesn't distinguish himself sufficiently for a sustained period of time.
July 8th, 2011 at 9:16 am
Timmy-
What are the flaws in my argument? Certain PEDs (remember, not all PEDs are anabolic steroids) learn to better health, faster recovery, greater stamina, and extended longevity. Why is it impossible to believe that Konerko may have been using HGH? Does Pettitte fit the mold of PED user? Because he used HGH to bounce back. Or do we ignore that because it doesn't fit your argument?
July 8th, 2011 at 9:17 am
@116 I did say Konerko has to finish up strong, and by strong I men 2 years after this one with 35 homers and 100 RBI's. That would put him at 475 homers give or take and he might not choose to quit at age 37. I just don't think it's that hard to imagine that he could even get to 500 HR's. Paully is not Willie Mays, but I like the idea of a good player accomplishing great things and being rewarded.
July 8th, 2011 at 9:19 am
Howard-
That is true if we know exactly who the PED users are and who they aren't. We don't know. We do know for certain that some players used certain PEDs, but that is only the tip of the ice berg. Konerko might have used. Everyone might have used. We will just never know. It is possible that Konerko never gets out of the minor leagues without using. Or he could be the cleanest guy in the sport. How can we ever know?
Again, I'm not saying that we condemn everyone simply for playing during the era. Rather, I think playing the guessing game is stupid because we are guessing based on nothing.
July 8th, 2011 at 9:31 am
Three reasons Konerko is clean:
1) He has been getting tested the last 3 seasons like everyone else and there have been lot of other guys caught.
2) He is hitting the same now as he did 5 -7 years ago, when we were still in the high run era.
3) He is an all-American type, hard working, Polish superstud and those kind of guys don't cheat.
July 8th, 2011 at 9:57 am
1.) Many steroids are undetectable by MLB's drug test, including HGH and others that require a blood sample. Also, this does nothing to demonstrate his innocence prior to testing, which is when he was supposedly so harmed.
2.) Shouldn't that be more of a concern? Konerko is 35 years old. One of the supposed "marks" of a PED user is continued success into later years. It is a bit suspicious that he hits the same at 35 as he did at 28.
3.) I'm sure you are just trolling/baiting here, but this is more obviousness of the racial bias you take when evaluating players.
July 8th, 2011 at 10:15 am
1) Wrong! MLB and the other pro sports leagues use the latest in testing techniques.
2) It has been written about at this very site that we have gone back to pre-1993 scoring levels in the last 2 years. Despite that, Paully has put up his same consistent numbers.
3) There is no bias in pointing out that someone is an all-American, hard-working, Polish superstud. That is something to be proud of and something we should all strive for.
Now since I pointed out the obvious, that Konerko is a superstud, I predict that Twisto/mustache will again try to insinuate that I am a homosexual. Let me say again that I am not a homosexual, I do not frequent homosexual establishments, nor do I own any homosexual accessories.
July 8th, 2011 at 10:27 am
Timmy-
1.) You realize that simply saying something doesn't make it true, right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_drug_policy#Testing_for_banned_substances MLB uses a urine test only, which is not sufficient to test for every possible PED.
2.) Numbers across the board are down but Konerko's remain high. It's possible that is because he was and is clean. It's equally possible that he is still using. Fail.
3.) What makes someone All-American? Many thought McGwire and Giambi and Pettitte and Clemens were All-American before they were caught. Face it, you are a racist. You think certain "types" of players are above suspicion because of their background. That is racism, sir.
July 8th, 2011 at 10:36 am
I am not a racist! Steroids have nothing to do with race. Being all-American means telling the truth, taking your vitamins, and saying your prayers.
July 8th, 2011 at 10:39 am
You are the worst type of troll, as you are not even capable of being consistently dishonest with the BS you post. You are a jackass and a moron who doesn't deserve the time people waste responding to your posts here. This is the last such response I will offer.
July 8th, 2011 at 10:44 am
I am not a troll, I love baseball and my knowledge of the game is vast. I have tried to help you in the past straighten out your screwy way of thinking, but you refuse to listen, or even have an open mind.
July 8th, 2011 at 11:17 am
Why can't we all just get along....lol.
July 8th, 2011 at 11:26 am
Yeeesh. Does it always get like this? Maybe I'll just go back to reading the blog posts and Trade Rumors. Got to be safer.
July 8th, 2011 at 12:00 pm
Being all-American means taking your vitamins
I.E., taking PEDs.
and saying your prayers.
I knew it. Osama bin Laden was an All-American boy. I used to see him and Timmy Patrick tossing the ol' pigskin around the dusty fields of Wahoo, NE.
July 8th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
For those who mentioned about the 95 Braves, they had David Justice and Mike Stanton.
July 8th, 2011 at 12:11 pm
I think the biggest thing I never understood about the whole steroids controversy is the obsession of setting it to a fixed time period. Like why is the only the last 20 years? Yeah I'm sure the teams in the 1980s weren't using steroids. Or the 1970s etc etc
July 8th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Timmy, you're nuts if you think MLB can test for everything
July 8th, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Rich-
Because people are stupid. Every generation had people who took advantage of loop holes in the rules and/or violated the supposed ethics of the sport. Sign stealing, greenies, greased balls, pay offs, steroids, PEDs (not one in the same with steroids), cocaine, etc, etc, etc. My personal belief is that older members of the media were particularly bothered to see the heroes of their generation surpassed by "cheaters"... ignoring the cheating that their heroes did to become heroes. They rang the bell for sanctimony and much of the fan base fell into lockstep.
Is every player dirty? No. Is every form of "gaining an advantage" equally effective? No. Is every form of "gaining an advantage" equally problematic? No. But to pretend that baseball was a pure institution competitively until year 19XX is to be willfully ignorant. Most complicating the issue is MLB's complicity in the matter. If PEDs had always been banned but enforcement was limited by technology, that is one thing. But MLB tacitly endorsed PEDs when they helped bring popularity back to the sport and only took action when public perception turned against them.
July 8th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
The 2 choices everyone seems to put out there are:
1) The years 1993?-2005? (The "Steroid Era") effectivly doesnt exist. Nobody's numbers count. Almost everyone was using. Etc.
2) You may not like it, but that's WHAT HAPPENED. Barry Bonds hit 73 HR's, whether you like him or not.Etc.
The problem with BOTH arguments is this. Either way, the clean players, are punished. If you ignore a player who had a great MVP or All-star year during the steriod years, you are demeaning his accomplishments. If you count the cheaters stats, it lessens the clean guys accomplishments.
There is also a ripple effect noone seems to talk about. Lets say you have a few players who you "know" was clean. Let's call them Will C. and Fred M. No, too obvious, W. Clark and F. McGriff then. Sure, their BA, OBP, SLG will be pretty much the same and look normal....
but if their teammates (both played w/ Canseco) were using, then their R/RBI, etc are all inflated to a degree.
This is not something that is going to have a fast, simple answer. I think it's pretty obvious what the (most) fans want and what MLB and the MLBPA don't want:
A complete and total list of who was clean and dirty from 93-the present.
And that ain't EVER gonna happen.
July 8th, 2011 at 12:47 pm
Bubba-
You bring up a great point, something another poster alluded to earlier: clean players weren't playing in a "clean" vacuum. How many extra at bats did clean players get because their "dirty" teammates put runs on the board and extended innings? How many more times did they come to bad with runners on or get knocked in because of a "dirty" player? If we believe the "hulking 'roider" stereotype, how many hits fell in because oversized players couldn't get to them in the field? How many otherwise competent pitchers went on the DL with PED related injuries, ushering in minor leaguers who wouldn't have been in the league otherwise and gave up hits and homers in bunches?
We can never parse out the clean from the dirty. Personally, I don't know that we should. While I realize that baseball is a game and games have rules and rules need to be followed... let's step back and ask if the rules in place now ought to be in place? Perhaps we should just throw the doors open, let players do what they will with their bodies, and have at it. Realistically, what is the difference between cortisone and other steroids? Why are some supplements okay and others not? What does HGH do that stem cells don't? How "natural" is Tommy John surgery? This is obviously a different conversation; even if we agree that the rules are stupid or wrong, they are the rules and if you don't like them, you don't have to play. But I do think it is worthwhile to consider why we get so up in arms about certain types of rule breakers and whether we are allowing the tail to wag the dog.
July 8th, 2011 at 3:31 pm
No champion in the last 20 years...what about the 2010 Giants? Who was juicing? Panda? If he was then he forgot to lift LoL
July 8th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
Interesting that Schilling is limiting his roiding focus to hitters, not pitchers.
July 8th, 2011 at 4:49 pm
I'm sorry, I know that this really isn't the forum for this kind of subject matter, but I just had to laugh, when I saw it in print.....@122: 'homosexual accessories'?
LOL
Ah, Timmy. Maybe you and Curt could run together for the presidency someday.
July 8th, 2011 at 5:06 pm
In all seriousness, although I don't agree with Timmy P's baseball viewpoints, much of the time, he does represent a slice of baseball fandom, the "Midwest Rust-Belt Joe Twelve-Pack" demographic, if you will, and, as such, should be accepted, as a part of this forum. (Even if what he does is shtick......I've actually become quite fond of the whole Juan Pierre storyline, lol.) But, the rest of it, witnessing someone being an asshole, for its own sake, gets tiring, very quickly.
Just a thought.
July 8th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
@58
"Neil, how many kilometres an hour, does that comes out to??"
Nash, you know 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers, so 7 mph = 11 kph. When will you Americans get with the (international) program? 🙂
July 8th, 2011 at 8:20 pm
@139 For your information Nash, although I hail from Wahoo Nebraska, and attended Boys Town in Nebraska in junior high and some high school, I have lived and worked in Asia and South America for extended periods. Except for the east coast I have also lived and worked all over the USA for extended periods of time. I am not a beer drinker, I have made it clear in the past my fondness for Johnny Walker black label, although I try not to post after I've had 3. Makes me sad that calling someone all-American would spark a negative reaction.
July 9th, 2011 at 5:24 am
@140: 🙂
@141: 'I have made it clear in the past my fondness for Johnny Walker black label, although I try not to post after I've had 3.'
I'm not a whiskey guy, but no worries there. However, regarding, your posting/not posting after three......try harder!!
lol 🙂
July 10th, 2011 at 2:59 am
There's another part to this argument that needs to be addressed. It's what I call the Rafael Palmeiro Effect. Everyone was ready to put him in the Hall of Fame because he played forever and put up numbers. Yet look at what his "important" numbers really were. In 19 full seasons he made only four (4!) All Star teams, and finished in the top ten in MVP voting only three times; in fact he received only four first place MVP votes in his entire career! Perhaps it was the steroids that gave him longevity and an injury free career (between 1988 and 2004 he failed to play 152 games only twice). In any event we all got lucky when he tested positive. That test kept a clear "good but not great" player out of the Hall of Fame.
Part of the problem is that not everyone was willing to risk their health and take PEDs. So a guy like Frank Thomas had a career with normal ups and downs (the back half of Willie Mays' career had similarities), while Bonds and McGwire lasted forever.
And then there is another side; some guys really do last seemingly forever. While I was the guy who started the Randy Johnson thread, look up Warren Spahn. From age 35-42 he failed to win 20 games only once, averaged 270 innings each year with 20 complete games, was in the top 3 Cy Young five times (only one award in all of baseball much of that time) and was 23-7 and 2.60 at age 43. So you just don't know.
We do know that the stats are forever impacted. Many people consider Clemens a better pitcher than Seaver, yet Clemens was obviously washed up (his own GM gave up on him in 1996--look at his awful stats, 40-39 from 1993-1996) before Toronto and steroids. And we also know that the "clean" guys did not get the numbers.
We are left scratching our heads. So I actually thank Schilling for keeping the conversation alive.
July 10th, 2011 at 9:14 am
@143: re: Warren Spahn: a BREF poster, has been bringing up Nolan Ryan, on occasion, lately........was he clean, or not??
Never considered it.......until he brought it up.
July 10th, 2011 at 3:12 pm
Nolan Ryan not clean? Of course not. In his early days he was an abuser of pickle brine, an obviously banned substance. It didn't help him, however, so the Mets traded him for Jim Fregosi to solve their third base problem.
July 11th, 2011 at 6:43 am
I think that, instead of trading for Fregosi, it would have been better, to trade for more pickle brine.......