I'm not a big fan of the legal advice Rusty Hardin gave Roger Clemens, but I have to agree with Rusty on this:

If the federal prosecutors move to indict Clemens and seek to use the substances found on the drug paraphernalia as evidence, Clemens's lawyers are expected to question their authenticity and the chain of custody. Clemens's lead lawyer, Rusty Hardin, said Monday night that he was not surprised to learn that performance-enhancing substances had been found.

"Duh," he said with exaggeration. "Do you really think McNamee was going to fabricate this stuff and not make sure there were substances on there?"

Of course, Hardin has to add, "The fact is Roger never used steroids or H.G.H." He had me at "Duh."

I don't know if McNamee created the evidence or not. I just have a difficult time trusting the evidence.

The Hooton Foundation was taken in by a group that sells steroids.

Rob Neyer responds to Murray Chass who responded to Joel Sherman on Mike Piazza's back acne indicating the catcher did steroids. Murray's article is the most interesting, since he explains the New York Times would not allow him to accuse Piazza of steroid based on back acne, and that Piazza's acne disapppeared once testing started.

Via The Hardball Times, the Philadelphia Daily News talks to a former pitcher about his steroid use. Be sure to read Craig's comments at THB, but this is the part that sticks with me:

Asked if he would do it again, he pauses before answering.

"I don't know how to answer that," he says. "I don't think I would have. Maybe I would have lost my job that year because I wasn't ready. But maybe I would have taken a year to come back and I wouldn't have pushed myself that hard and I might have maintained my health.

"If done in a structured, disciplined and educated manner, then the negative side effects can be minimized. I just think you also have to temper that with some restraint as far as pushing yourself too hard. If you could have a balance of the two, it's a really, really powerful combination for performance."

This player used steroids to bring his levels into a normal high, what you might find naturally in other athletes. I've always thought the best solution was to make steroids legal, but used under a doctor's care and and the use made public. This pitcher's admissions make me believe even more that it's the right thing to do.

Please donate to the Baseball Musings Pledge Drive.

Darryl Strawberry says he would have used steroids if they were available to him. Coming from Darryl, that's not much of a surprise. At least he's not high and mighty about it. The old timers who complain about this generation would have used them, too. There was nothing special about their attitude toward the game, they were just as competitive, just as likely to go to any lengths to win. Check out this history lesson.

Please donate to the Baseball Musings Pledge Drive.

It's official; Barry Bonds won't see a court room until at least July.

Please donate to the Baseball Musings Pledge Drive.

Amy K. Nelson talks to friends of Yuri Sucart to paint a portrait of A-Rod's cousin. He comes across as a gopher, not someone who would come up with a steroid scheme:

"If Alex had been loyal to [Sucart], he would've kept him out of this, kept it quiet," said Rijo, fired last week as special assistant to the Washington Nationals following a scandal involving a top prospect. "Yuri has a life, a family; it's embarrassing for him, too. ... Only Alex knew what he put in his body, only Alex knew, and Alex as a player would know what's going on around steroids.

"I'm pretty sure Yuri wouldn't read a book about steroids, [and] say, 'Alex this is good for you, this would be the best kind.' I'm pretty sure that's not the case."

Please donate to the Baseball Musings Pledge Drive.

Prosecutors in the Barry Bonds case are appealing the decision to not allow evidence in the case because Greg Anderson won't testify. It may be another year before the trial begins:

Unlike California state judges who must rule within 90 days on most matters before them or risk missing their paychecks, federal judges move at their own pace with no time limits placed on their deliberations.

That makes predicting how quickly -- or slowly -- the appeals court will act on the Bonds case a matter of conjecture. Legal analysts have said the appellate court could take as little as two months to more than a year to send the case back to U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston, who would then need several more weeks or months to schedule and start another trial.

According to the latest figures available from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, it took the 9th Circuit an average of 12.7 months in fiscal 2007 to decide criminal cases, slightly longer than the national average of 12.1 months. The 9th Circuit's performance in 2007 was an improvement over the average of 13.8 months in 2006 and 14 months in 2005.

Davey Johnson should invite Barry to play for team USA in the WBC, now that he'll be free for the rest of the month. After all, they have the strictest drug testing in the world.

Alex Rodriguez's drug of choice is disappearing from the Dominican Republic:

"Primobolan is not imported by Dominican pharmaceutical agencies, but you can get it without problem in the underworld of steroids," said Milton Pinedo, head of the anti-doping program for the Dominican Olympic Committee.

Local bodybuilder Manuel Feliz said the steroid has been getting harder to find since A-Rod's remarks.

"Primobolan is used very frequently in the country's gyms, but since it was linked with the name Alex Rodriguez, it started disappearing from the market," Feliz said.

I wonder why? Is the government cracking down on that particular drug, or did users not know there was a test for it?

Greg Anderson refuses to testify.

The media wants access to the jury questioners filled out in the Bonds perjury case. I've never heard of the press getting those before. Does someone know if that's a usual request in big cases? If I were a potential juror, I'd decline to fill it out for fear my name would be linked to the trial, and something I wrote was misconstrued.

Playboy's Jonathan Littman once again takes on Jeff Novitsky and his prosecution of Barry Bonds. Littman once again paints Novitsky as the evil person in this drama:

A hearing was scheduled. Novitzky's credibility was on the line. In October 2004 he filed a sworn declaration in Judge Illston's court stating that my Playboy article "falsely stated that agent White overheard me discussing getting a 'book deal' in connection with my involvement in this case. This is untrue. I have never had such a discussion with anyone and have never had any involvement with a 'book deal' in connection with this case or any other."

Rains deployed a detective to track down Iran White and learn the identity of the two San Mateo task-force agents who had also heard Novitzky talk about his hope to participate in a book deal. According to The New York Times, the lawmen talked to Rains and told him Novitzky had engaged in a host of improper, if not illegal, acts ranging from tipping off the media to the BALCO search to falsifying investigative reports and his plans to participate in a book or movie deal.

The government dragged its heels in turning over discovery to the defense, until finally Judge Illston ordered it to disclose the secret investigation of Novitzky to defense counsel by May 25, 2005. The government sent the full 150-page report by Federal Express on May 31. With a hearing set for June 7, Conte and his lawyers knew they had struck gold. If made public, the investigation of Novitzky could destroy his credibility and scuttle the government's chance to prosecute Bonds and the other key targets.

With the Bonds trial starting soon, the whole article is well worth the read. Remember, however, you are clicking through to Playboy, so be careful if you're at work.

Hat tip, Giants Win.

Brian Cashman speaks to the NY Times on A-Rod's PED smuggling cousin picking up Rodriguez yesterday:

"It's been handled," he said.

I get the feeling that if some club were to offer the Yankees a bag of balls and be willing to take over the contract, Cashman just might trade A-Rod to lose the headache.

Via The Big Lead, Time Magazine talks to Rick Helling, who warned the MLBPA about steroid use back in 1998:

That same winter, with the party raging at full throttle, one man rose up and basically announced the whole damn thing was a fraud. Rick Helling, a 27-year-old righthanded pitcher and the players' representative for the Texas Rangers, stood up at the winter meeting of the Executive Board of the Major League Baseball Players Association and made an announcement. He told his fellow union leaders that steroid use by ballplayers had grown rampant and was corrupting the game.

"There is this problem with steroids," Helling told them. "It's happening. It's real. And it's so prevalent that guys who aren't doing it are feeling pressure to do it because they're falling behind. It's not a level playing field. We've got to figure out a way to address it.

"It's a bigger deal than people think. It's noticeable enough that it's creating an uneven playing field. What really bothers me is that it's gotten so out of hand that guys are feeling pressure to do it. It's one thing to be a cheater, to be somebody who doesn't care whether it's right or wrong. But it's another thing when other guys feel like they have to do it just to keep up. And that's what's happening. And I don't feel like this is the right way to go."

At that point, the union could have cleaned this up on their own. They could have instituted testing, kept it quiet, pushed doping out of the sport. They chose to ignore the problem, as they were making too much money at the time.

Alex Rodriguez should donate his incentive money for breaking the home run record to charity.

At the risk of sounding like one of those awful wannabe populist columnists -- and with the full realization that this would never, ever happen -- how much fun would it be if A-Rod announced next week that he was donating his $30 million bonus to anti-drug charities? It would be delicious chaos, no? How does anyone root against him? Sure, you could call him a crazy, image-obsessed drug user, but think of the kids! He could even let Hank Aaron pick the charities! The columnists' heads would 'asplode.

It's a great idea, cold medicine or no.

The judge in the Barry Bonds case ordered Greg Anderson to court:

A federal judge has ordered Barry Bonds' personal trainer, Greg Anderson, to court to disclose whether he intends to testify at the slugger's trial next month.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston scheduled a hearing for Wednesday morning and ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to tell Anderson and provide him with transportation, if needed.

I assume Anderson will tell her, "No." At that point, she'll finish throwing out the counts of the perjury case that the prosecution needs Anderson to confirm. I suppose she also might hold Anderson in contempt and throw him back in jail.

ShysterBall praises Alex Rodriguez's choice of lawyer:

If you're not immediately familiar with Reisinger's name, it's because unlike the Rusty Hardins of the world, Reisinger looks to defend his clients' interests first rather than be the first one to a television camera. There's a reason why Andy Pettitte didn't get ensnared in a Clemens-like drama.

I remember talking to a lawyer friend during the start of the Clemens debacle, and he was amazed that they were allowing Clemens to talk. His advice would have been to shut up and let the lawyer do all the speaking on the subject. Wise counsel.

A study shows caffeine is a performance enhancer. We'll all be Mormons soon.

David Ortiz took questions about Angel Presinal this morning:

Ortiz stressed he's worked with Presinal, but the trainer never pushed him towards steroids.

"I've known him for a long time," said Ortiz. "All I know from him is how to keep our bodies ready; working out, teaching how to do the right exercises and things like that. He's not just teaching baseball players, he has a guy who runs marathon, a volleyball player, basketball player, everybody. He's been doing that for years. All i know is we all work out with him as a group a guys want to be ready in spring training. And that's about it."

So it strikes me there are a large group of players who work with this person in the off season. Are they all going to get suspended?

Update: Robinson Cano loves the guy, too.

Only Baseball Matters links to an expose of drugs in sports -- from 40 years ago.

The Daily News links Alex Rodriguez to Angel Presinal, a trainer banned by baseball for his involvement with the Juan Gonzalez Canadian steroid confiscation.

The Daily News has Persinal following Rodriguez around during the 2007, staying in the same hotels as A-Rod, but in a different room, with the famous cousin as a roommate. Of course, Alex has cited his 2007 season as a reason to believe he's not juicing. He failed to mention Angel's training as a possible reason, however.

Update: A suspension might come down over A-Rod consorting with Presinal. Hat tip, The Big Lead.

Since Presinal worked with players on the Dominican WBC team during the last tournament, will all those players be suspended as well?

ESPNdeportes.com investigates primobolan in the Dominican Republic, and finds that it could not be purchased over the counter during the time Alex Rodriguez says he injected himself.

Dr. Pia Veras, who oversees the regulatory agency, told ESPNdeportes.com that Primobolan is known as "boli" in the streets of Dominican Republic, and was not legal for purchase during the aforementioned years.

"What Alex Rodriguez stated at the press conference [in Tampa] doesn't make sense," Veras said. "It is important for us to clarify that such substance has not been registered and is not currently registered for legal sale in Dominican pharmacies -- not now and the same applies for the years 2001 to 2003."

Maybe this is why Alex used the street name; his cousin bought it on the streets. Testosterone, however, was available over the counter in the DR.

Since Greg Anderson won't testify, the judge in the Bonds perjury trial won't allow positive tests as evidence.

Fifth Outfielder, in a very funny column, uses Jeter's poor range as evidence that Derek is telling the truth when he claims he never used performance enhancing drugs.

The Big Lead takes a look at some of the Houston Astros of the 1990s and wonders if the Rangers get two much of the state's scrutiny when it comes to steroids.

A-Rod's cousin couldn't evade reporters for long:

As far back as anyone can remember, Yuri Sucart was always by Alex Rodriguez's side.

Sucart would tell anyone who would listen he was Rodriguez's cousin. But he was also Rodriguez's best friend, confidant and personal protector.

On Tuesday, when Rodriguez said in a nationally televised news conference from New York Yankees spring training in Tampa, Fla., that it was his cousin who provided and injected him with performance-enhancing drugs, it was Sucart to whom Rodriguez was referring, Sucart's wife, Carmen, confirmed to ESPN on Wednesday night.

When an ESPN Deportes producer knocked on the Sucarts' door in Miami, Fla., no one answered. The producer then called the Sucarts' house on the telephone and reached a woman who later identified herself as Yuri Sucart's wife. When the producer asked if Rodriguez had referred to her husband at Tuesday's news conference, she said yes.

Carmen Sucart said Rodriguez had given enough details about her husband at the news conference.

"I told you my husband has nothing to say," she said. "What A-Rod said at the press conference is what happened and that is all. And if you want to talk to my husband, why don't you talk to his lawyer?"

I'm sure they'll be not only talking to the lawyer, but to anyone else who knows the man.

Derek Jeter on the steroid era:

Jeter said the most frustrating thing about all of this is how people are labeling several years in baseball the "steroid era". Jeter said he was never tempted to use, was never approached about using it.

"Everybody wasn't doing it," Jeter said.

It was a lot better when it was the lively ball era.

All the rippings A-Rod received in the press didn't seem to hurt him with the fans at today's practice.

From MAD Magazine, a new A-Rod Collectible (click for a larger image):

I think I'd want the 1001st cup. :-)

Bugs and Cranks finds Tim McClelland understanding of steroid use. There also seems to be a hierarchy of use:

"I had a catcher tell me, 'Us peons have to get off steroids; we can't afford them,'" McClelland said. "He said the guys that make the big money, because they put up the big numbers, can get the synthetic steroids, and they can stay on them, and that's not fair".

How expensive are these drugs that someone making the major league minimum can't afford them? How can high school players afford them?

Brian Cashman is not A-Rod's best friend right now:

"We've invested in him as an asset. And because of that, this is an asset that is going through a crisis. So we'll do everything we can to protect that asset and support that asset and try to salvage that asset."

One of the points of signing A-Rod to that big contract was that he would be a Yankee when he reached all those great career milestones. If he doesn't win back the fans, however, they'll be millstones, instead.

Not that many people are paying attention to Miguel Tejada. He apologized to his Houston teammates Tuesday:

It's the first time Tejada faced his teammates since he pleaded guilty in federal court last week to lying to congressional investigators in 2005 when they asked if he had conversations with players about performance-enhancing drugs.

"It's part of this country. It's part of my life," said Tejada. "I apologized to my family, I apologized to everyone around me in baseball. Today I stood up and apologized to the entire team."

He'd be getting more attention if it wasn't for Alex.

Having some time to consider Alex Rodriguez's statements today, he appears to have offered a plausible explanation for what happened. It strikes me that Alex wasn't adverse to using something to get a boost, but he didn't want to use something that might hurt him later on. When his cousin offered him something safe, Alex said why not.

In other words, he probably didn't want to take something that made his head or feet big, caused him to go bald, or his back to break out in acne. Here was something over the counter in the Domincan Republic, so he went for it.

Now it's up to the press to try to tear the story apart. I'm sure they'll find Alex's cousin, see when and where he traveled in the DR, maybe even find the pharmacy where the drugs were purchased. We'll see if the story holds up.

More interesting is Alex's admission that he used something in Seattle that wasn't banned at the time but is banned now. There are supposed to be more drug allegations in Selena Robert's book, and I wonder if that was said to counter those future charges?

By the way, in my original post on the Gammons interview, I believe I nailed the one sure lie in the conversation.

I just watched A-Rod's opening statement again, because something happened at the end that I didn't quite get at first. At the end, he said that baseball is bigger than he is, then he looked toward his teammates and said, "To my teammates," followed by a very long pause in which he looked like he was trying to contain his emotions, followed by a, "Thank you," directed at his teammates. He looked like he came close to breaking down at that point.

Alex Rodriguez's press conference is starting about 20 minutes late. I hope it starts soon, because MLB TV is getting a bit repetitive.

Update: The new conference is getting started now.

Update: No follow up questions to keep things moving.

Update: Alex makes an opening statement. Thanks Yankees for their support. He knows he has to earn back trust. In 2001, 2002 and 2003 experimented with a banned substance that triggered a positive.

In 2001, a cousin, told him about a substance that would give him an energy boost. I'm not sure of the spelling, sounds like Bolly. He took it twice a month for six months during the 2001 and 2002 season. He said it only his cousin knew about it. (Update: The drug is spelled Boli.)

He says in 2003 he hurt his neck, and that combined with the start of testing caused him to stop.

So when he told Gammons he didn't talk about this with anyone, he actually talked about it with his cousin.

Update: First question is, if you haven't been caught, would you have come out with the admissions. He says he hasn't thought about that.

Update: He was asked if the substance helped. He says he felt more energy. He also says he injected the substance.

He's asked if it was cheating, and he sidesteps the questions saying that's for others to determine.

Update: A-Rod is asked about the kids and invokes God!

Update: Alex won't name his cousin. Says they never really researched how to use this properly. When asked how he couldn't know what he was putting in his body, Alex falls back on the excuse that he was young and stupid.

Update: Hannah Storm asked if he ever used anything else, and he said he used something with Seattle (I didn't get the name) that since was banned. He implied that he got it from GNC.

Update: Good question on why if he didn't think it was wrong, why was he so secretive. Alex even admits it's a good question. He says they knew they weren't taking tic tacs, but doesn't really come up with a good answer other than he was young and stupid.

Update: When faced with stats that show that a large number of fans don't believe his use was confined to 2001-2003, Alex said that when his career is over he hopes the numbers fall in his favor. If they don't he's prepared to live with that.

Update: The conference ends with Alex asking fans to judge him from this day forward.

I assume the media will be tracking down Alex's cousin to see if his story matches Alex's.

Alex Rodriguez faces the press today at 1:30 PM EST, and Buster Olney has some questions he would like to see asked.

I just received the latest cover of the New Yorker magazine, drawn by Barry Blit:

I'm in the "screw the children" camp when it comes to reasons to ban drugs. If a child is using a baseball player as a role model, they don't have a proper role model in their life. Secondly, a teenagers are not children. They're old enough to know the difference between right and wrong.

The drug use by Alex Rodriguez, however, does send the message that you can be very successful using performance enhancers. If you want to stop that message, then the government has to bust the player, send him to jail, and take away his money. A life-time ban by MLB just isn't going to cut it. Since I don't believe anyone is seriously considering that kind of penalty, Alex's type of doping could be very enticing.

Alex didn't turn into a monster with his drug use. There's no physical deformity as far as I can tell (and he did manage to father two children). He didn't turn into the incredible hulk, he didn't go bald. There aren't reports of 'roid rage. He's really rich and still attracts women. It's not easy to paint Alex as a monster, so a teenager might look at him and say, "with limited use and the right drug, I can get better and stay healthy." That's tough to counter with dire warnings.

Alex Rodriguez apologized to Selena Roberts for the comments he made during his ESPN interview.

I didn't think much the latest witness against Barry Bonds until I read this.

Though you likely don't know who Hoskins is, this is important because she claims that she watched Greg Anderson inject Barry Bonds. She apparently doesn't know what Anderson injected Bonds with, but it's looking kind of bleak for Bonds, especially given Bonds' prior testimony that no one except his doctors ever injected him with anything.

It would be sad if prosecutors got Bonds on lying about being injected, rather than lying about actually using steroids.

Via Instapundit, a drug that increase the ability to exercise by increasing the amount of oxygen transferred from haemoglobin to muscles. The article can't help but issue a warning:

As a result, Lehn hopes to begin clinical trials "as soon as possible". For athletes tempted to use the substance to enhance performance, he warns: "It could be very easily detected."

I could see a player using this instead of speed to get through rough patches of the season. I could also see where it would easy for doctors to prescribe this (like they do ADHD medicine) because an older player's oxygen uptake isn't what it's supposed to be. The targets just keep moving. Maybe we shouldn't worry about it that much.

A-Rod's obituary:

While there is no evidence to suggest foul play, some in the baseball community have speculated that A-Rod actually succumbed to self-inflicted injuries. Immediately after the tragedy was announced, former baseball player and fellow 40/40 club member Jose Canseco told reporters that he saw A-Rod's demise coming a mile away.

"There is no doubt in my mind that he did this to himself," Canseco said. "All the warning signs were there: the surprising power from a shortstop, the spike in home runs, the mood swings where he acted like a complete idiot. The guy has been knocking on death's door since 2003, and everyone wanted to pretend like it wasn't true. I'm not going to get into it too much here because the rest will be in my book coming out next month."

Added Canseco: "Trust me, Albert Pujols will be dead inside a year."

Let's hope not.

Most of Roger Clemens's defamation suit against Brian McNamee was thrown out today.

Ellison did not dismiss the portions of the lawsuit detailing McNamee's discussions with Andy Pettitte about Roger Clemens that occurred in Texas. But since Andy Pettitte has stated under oath that Clemens used HGH/steroids, then Clemens stands very little chance of winning that portion of the suit.

So not only did Roger lose his reputation, he wasted a lot of money chasing a lawsuit that he was bound to lose.

Brian Cashman says just the right things today:

But Cashman, addressing the media at the team's minor league complex, wasn't ready to say he was confident that Rodriguez was clean during his Yankee years. In talking about the game in general, he said, "I'm not confident about anything in the past anymore."

"From (2004) on, we've had testing procedures in place -- that's the best I can go off of," Cashman said. "I'm not here to represent I'm confident of anything of anybody. We've lived through a tough stretch that has shattered that confidence level. If you asked me that question five years ago, I'd be giving you a different answer."

Exactly. We're in a low confidence environment. It's going to be tough to defend anyone.

Sky Kalkman is running a poll measuring disappointment in various entities revolving around the steroid issue. Help him get a decent sample size by voting. If you want to be unbiased, vote first and then come back and read why I voted the way I did.

Alex Rodriguez hired a crisis management firm.

The company, interestingly enough, also employs Bonnie Bernstein. I wonder if she helped him prep for that ESPN interview? According to their web site, here is what they'll do for a client in a crisis:

Assemble a team and build a War Room to coordinate and manage the people, process, and media in real time. Host a strategy session with your team to define objectives, expectations, success metrics, and confirm the pertinent facts and timelines.

At least Alex is doing his part to keep the economy going. Maybe the government chasing steroid users is part of the stimulus. :-)

Joel Jacobsen sends along this article from Scientific American, an interview with a physiologist and former steroid user.

Here's another reason to like Joe Maddon, he makes sense on the steroids issue.

Maddon suggested Wednesday that MLB implement an amnesty program for the reported 103 other players who tested positive then take strong measures to make sure there are no future violations.

"I'm just looking forward to the day that we move beyond it," Maddon said upon arrival at the new spring training complex. "For me, it really needs to come to the point where I'd like to see like an amnesty, basically, and move forward, and then create a situation where the penalties are so severe, nobody would ever even consider doing it again.

I suggested something similar in a BP article a couple of years ago (subscription required). Let people come forward to confess. Find out why they did it, how they acquired the drugs, and in general get a better understanding of the whole steroid era. I doubt that will happen now.

Miguel Tejada pled guilty today:

Tejada's guilty plea grew out of statements he made to House investigators denying that he knew anyone in baseball who used performance-enhancing drugs.

His assertions in 2005 were contradicted by evidence that he had talked to an Oakland teammate about his steroids use and later purchased what he believed was human growth hormone from that player.

Is this really the best they can do, convict someone for lying about talking to other people? They couldn't even get him to admit to drug use. Pathetic.

The more I see of the way Congress acts the more I'm pushed over to the libertarian position that drugs should be legal.

The question of the day (now that the print edition of Sports Illustrated is out); was Alex Rodriguez taking steroids when he joined the Yankees? I don't quite follow the logic:

1. A-Rod fails drug test in 2003.
2. Gene Orza allegedly tips Alex to the date of his 2004 test.
3. Therefore, Alex was juicing in 2004.

This implies that Orza not only knew Alex failed a test, but that Orza knew Rodriguez continued to use in 2004. More likely, if indeed Orza tipped players, was that he simply tipped those who tested positive. If you take A-Rod at his word in his Gammons interview, he never confided in others that he had cheated. Orza's warning, in my mind, carries very little evidence.

Joel Sherman post three good questions for Alex Rodriguez:

You portrayed yourself as being naive about steroid use prior to your Texas years, saying to ESPN "before that (signing with the Rangers) I had never even heard of the idea of taking any substance." However, from the mid-1990s forward your now ex-wife was an avid bodybuilder, your inner circle as a couple was made up of many bodybuilders, and both of you were gym rats at a time when steroids were rampant in bodybuilding circles and gyms. So how is it possible that you "had never even heard of the idea of taking any substance?"

That was the first thing that came to mind when I read Alex's opening statement. He was not that young when he joined the Rangers, and he's a pretty intelligent individual.

The always thoughtful Doug Glanville makes a great point in his article on Alex Rodriguez:

We should step back and think about what we really want to gain from this situation. While I was playing professionally, it was disturbing to watch players cut corners through chemical means to get to that next contract. But I don't see the good in selling our souls while claiming we want to chase the devil from our midst.

I hope we learn how to keep our word. If the tested players had known up front that the results were going to be made public (or that there was even a chance that they might be), not a single one would have agreed to cooperate, and it has very little to do with hiding anything. It has everything to do with privacy. Being A-Rod should not change that fact.

I've written about this before, but it needs to be repeated. Drug testing in baseball represented a break through in owner-player relations, as it demonstrated how the two sides could cooperate to try to improve the game. In the future, some other scandal may emerge that requires the anonymous cooperation of players. That's never going to happen again.

The Clownvision Chronicles alerts me to this story on Miguel Tejada:

Houston Astros shortstop Miguel Tejada was charged with lying to Congress about performance- enhancing drug use in Major League Baseball.

Tejada "unlawfully, willingly and knowingly" failed to state his full knowledge of an unidentified player's use of steroids and human growth hormone in meetings with the investigators in August 2005, U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor said in a criminal information filed today in Washington.

The filing of a criminal information generally signals that a plea agreement is close. Tejada, a citizen of the Dominican Republic who has a U.S. work permit, is scheduled to appear in U.S. District Court at 11 a.m. Wednesday, a spokesman for the court said.

Miguel is not accused of taking a banned substance, just lying about what he knew about others taking them. I wonder who the others are and if they've been punished. I wonder how Miguel gets caught and Palmeiro gets away with lying to Congress?

A congressman is calling for Alex Rodriguez to testify before a committee. Why not just make lying to Peter Gammons a crime and go from there?

Bob Raissman felt Peter Gammons offered up too many softballs in the Alex Rodriguez interview. I would have loved to hear Peter tear into Alex about not knowing what drugs he was taking. Fortunately, we have the New York sports media, which has plenty of red meat left. I suspect their questioning will be much harsher in a few days.

The story on Gene Orza has gone from "Gene tipped off players about drug tests" to "Gene selectively told players they were on the government seized list."

Either way, according to two sources close to players, Orza's mission was obvious and widely known among the players.

"If Orza was looking for you, he was letting you know you failed a test," said one source. "The players found it odd because they thought it was supposed to be confidential. It was like he was on a crusade to warn people."

"Orza was going around in the Yankee locker room and letting players know," another source said. "At one point he was asking where he could find A-Rod."

If Orza only told players who tested positive about the list, then he was tipping without tipping. I don't have a real problem with that, however. The whole idea of testing, after all, was to drive the drugs out of the sport. If positive tests in 2003 did that, it's a good outcome.

Via The Hardball Times, whoever leaked the Alex Rodriguez test results likely broke the law:

Not only are the records from the 2003 raid under seal, but also Illston and two other federal judges have ordered that anyone who publicly disclosed those records would be found in contempt. In a statement Saturday, Major League Baseball's Player Association reiterated that point: "Anyone with knowledge of such documents who discloses their contents may be in violation of those court orders."

Though determining who was responsible for the leak could prove difficult, Illston has several options. "Federal judges have extraordinary power," said John Bartko, a former assistant U.S. attorney.

Leakers are difficult to find, because the reporters won't talk. I could imagine Selena Roberts being sent to jail for contempt would only generate more publicity for her Alex Rodriguez book.

The Biz of Baseball posts an MLBPA statement on why the 2003 test samples and results were not destroyed:

Those results were finalized on Thursday, November 13, and the players were advised by a memo dated Friday, November 14. Promptly thereafter, the first steps were taken to begin the process of destruction of the testing materials and records, as contemplated by the Basic Agreement. On November 19, however, we learned that the government had issued a subpoena. Upon learning this, we concluded, of course, that it would be improper to proceed with the destruction of the materials. The fact that such a subpoena issued in November 2003 has been part of the public record for more than two years. See, U.S. v. CDT, 473 F3d at 920 (2006), and 513 F3d at 1090 (2008) (both opinions have now been vacated). Other subpoenas followed, including one for all test results.

I guess it takes more than five days to destroy evidence.

The LoHud Yankees Blog posts the team's statement on A-Rod. The closing paragraph:

"We speak often about the members of this organization being part of a family, and that is never more true than in times of adversity. Alex took a big step by admitting his mistake, and while there is no condoning the use of performance enhancing drugs, we respect his decision to take accountability for his actions. We support Alex, and we will do everything we can to help him deal with this challenge and prepare for the upcoming season."

Police back Selena Robert's statement that she's never been cited:

Meanwhile, police spokesmen in New York, Miami, Miami Beach and Coral Gables have no record of Selena Roberts being arrested, stopped or cited. Reporters are asked to leave by rent-a-cops all the time. But that's not being cited, as Rodriguez claimed on ESPN.

Tom Hicks feels betrayed by the Alex Rodriguez confession:

Hicks said there were "absolutely no suspicions whatsoever" about Rodriguez using steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs during his three seasons with the Rangers after signing a then-record $252 million, 10-year contract in December 2000.

With the growing talk about steroids at the time, Hicks said he had general conversations with A-Rod and even asked the player if he had used them.

"Not in an accusatory way," Hicks said during a conference call. "But I certainly asked the question in a way where I came away with a clear answer that he had much too much respect for his own body that God had given him to ever do anything like that to hurt it with steroids."

Hicks also wonders why he should believe the A-Rod didn't use before he came to Texas.

I'm watching the interview, and it's good that Alex said if he were a fan of his, he'd be pissed. At least he doesn't expect fans to forgive him right away.

Update: A-Rod said he didn't know he failed the test until Selena Roberts told him.

Update: ESPN needs to lose the big banner at the bottom. They're cutting off a good portion of Alex's face.

Update: Alex just said that Selena Roberts says he did steroids in high school. He also just said Roberts tried to break into his house.

Update Selena Roberts denies the allegations in a note to ESPN.

Update: One of my favorite new shows is "Lie to Me," about a group that is good at reading facial expressions and body language to detect when people are less than truthful. I'd love to find out how real experts at that responded to the interview. At 6:20, Gammons starts asking Alex if he ever told anybody. He starts rubbing his nose at that point, which supposedly is a sign of lying.

Bugs and Cranks makes a good point about the steroid Alex Rodriguez took:

To be fair, some writers did google primobolan and have noted it's main characteristics. It's very expensive and helps the user add muscle without bulking up. Now, what that means is that primobolan doesn't force your body to retain water which causes noticeable bulking. Building muscle means you are getting bigger, but with primobolan you aren't going to walk around looking like you're carrying watermelons. Primobolan is also a fat-burner, sort of like taking Ripped Fuel but having it actually work. Primobolan is a favorite of competitive bodybuilders during their pre-contest routines because it allows them to become even more cut without sacrificing muscle. Basically, primobolan allows the user to gain muscle without changing their normal food consumption (it does this by telling your body to retain nitrogen which helps build muscle). However, the muscle gain is small which is why Primobolan is considered to be a weak steroid.

Basically, Alex Rodriguez took a steroid that made him as strong as he would have been if he were just going to the gym with the veracity that he reportedly does, with the difference being that instead of packing on pounds he was able to get bigger and remain cut. To put it bluntly, the advantage Rodriguez earned from primobolan was in sexiness, not in strength. I can't wait to hear someone claim that sexiness leads to additional home runs.

Alex, however, also tested positive for testosterone, which I believe does exactly what an anabolic steroid is supposed to do.

Hat tip, River Ave. Blues.

Gene Orza denies he tipped off Alex Rodriguez to a 2004 drug test:

"It's not true," Orza said in an e-mail message. "Simple as that."

ESPN will air a Peter Gammons interview at 6 PM tonight in which Alex Rodriguez admits steroid use:

"When I arrived in Texas in 2001, I felt an enormous amount of pressure, felt all the weight of the world on top of me to perform, and perform at a high level every day," Rodriguez told ESPN's Peter Gammons in an interview in Miami Beach, Fla. The complete interview will air on SportsCenter at 6 p.m. ET.

"Back then, [baseball] was a different culture," Rodriguez said. "It was very loose. I was young, I was stupid, I was naïve. I wanted to prove to everyone that I was worth being one of the greatest players of all time.

"I did take a banned substance. For that, I am very sorry and deeply regretful."

I'll take some exception to the young, stupid statement. Alex was seasonal age 25 in 2001 and finished the six years in the majors required for free agency. Twenty five is plenty old enough to know the difference between right and wrong.

Alex isn't stupid, either. When I was at ESPN, I used to hear praise for Rodriguez's intelligence, that if he wasn't playing baseball he might have majored in math in college.

Tune in and make up your own mind.

Update: I guess my main question now is, if he lied about this before, why should we believe he only used while in Texas? His tests since are clean, as he hasn't been suspended. Canseco, however, says he introduced Alex to steroid suppliers in the late 1990s. At this point, I'm more inclined to believe Jose.

The Daily News reports that those negative 2003 urine samples still exist and might be retested to see if anything undetectable then is found now. So just because someone came up negative in 2003 doesn't mean he's out of the woods.

As Kevin Kernan notes, both Reggie Jackson and Curt Schilling are calling for the other 103 names to be released:

Mr. October though, did make this telling comment to The Post yesterday: "They caught 104 guys," Reggie asked, pausing for effect, before adding, "Why would they only name one?"

Jackson did not want to comment further, but he had made his excellent conspiracy-theory point. Exactly who is protecting the other 103 and why?

The mystery is why has only Rodriguez's name been leaked? Even Schilling believes it's time to come clean with all the names.

On his blog, "Pitches", Schilling wrote yesterday: "I'd be all for the 104 positives being named, and the game moving on if that is at all possible. In my opinion, if you don't do that, then the other 600-700 players are going to be guilty by association, forever."

Someone is talking about this list, because Kernan goes on to say "there are supposed to be some big, big stars, none though as big and bright as Rodriguez." It makes you wonder if some of the unsigned free agents might pop up.

Kat O'Brien talks about how Alex Rodriguez changed since she first covered him in 2002. She also talked to a scout about Alex's alleged steroid use:

Even though Rodriguez has never been the best-liked player of his generation, for image problems both real and perceived, the taint of steroid use never hung over him. Now it does. One longtime American League scout who has known Rodriguez for years said he had never had cause to suspect Rodriguez of steroid use. That said, the scout said it would not surprise him if A-Rod did use steroids. No, the scout said, Rodriguez is just like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, all three of whom the scout believed would do absolutely anything to be at/remain at the top of their sport.

I talked about that competitive drive in this post on Saturday.

For those just coming to the scandal after a long weekend, ShysterBall rounds up the important elements, including Gene Orza's role in all this:

In any event, it is my view that long after the Alex Rodriguez-specific portion of this drama has played itself out with an apology, a press conference, and a .300/.400/.600 season, this episode will be remembered mostly for the first known instance of the MLBPA truly betraying the interests of its own players. That, my friends, will have longer legs than anything else that broke on Saturday.

We'll see how well Alex back tracks from his denial of using steroids on 60 Minutes. Recent history tells us the best thing to do is confess and apologize, Giambi and Pettitte did that and people were forgiving. Clemens and Bonds didn't and are being dragged through court, and McGwire is getting no support for the Hall of Fame.

Alex Rodriguez is still a great player:

I hope Alex Rodriguez didn't cheat. If we do find out that he cheated, I will wish that he hadn't. But whatever happens, I'm not going to change my opinion that he's a great baseball player. Like many of the greatest players, he'll do whatever it takes to be the best player he can be. For a stretch of five or 10 years -- and yes, perhaps even today still -- being the best player could have meant cheating. Maybe the cheaters were wrong; that's the direction in which I lean, probably because I've got a streak of the moralist in me. But I will not sit idly while great athletes looking for an edge -- not all that different from the many generations before them -- are demonized by the high priests of baseball opinion. I will not.

I understand Rob's point. To be highly successful in a sport, at the level of a Rodriguez or Bonds, you need to be so competitive that winning does become everything. We like to think our athletes are gentlemen and good losers, but it's the bad losers who tend to win championships. The truth is you wouldn't want to be friends with the highest level athletes. Their competitiveness will just drive you away. We should be that surprised that they went the extra yard to win.

This is why the steroid scandals don't bother me as much as gambling scandals. Steroids is cheating to win, gambling is cheating to lose.

Via River Ave. Blues, Sports Illustraded reports that Alex Rodriguez tested positive for steroids in 2003.

In 2003, when he won the American League home run title and the AL Most Valuable Player award as a shortstop for the Texas Rangers, Alex Rodriguez tested positive for two anabolic steroids, four sources have independently told Sports Illustrated.

Rodriguez's name appears on a list of 104 players who tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball's '03 survey testing, SI's sources say. As part of a joint agreement with the MLB Players Association, the testing was conducted to determine if it was necessary to impose mandatory random drug testing across the major leagues in 2004.

When approached by an SI reporter on Thursday at a gym in Miami, Rodriguez declined to discuss his 2003 test results. "You'll have to talk to the union," said Rodriguez, the Yankees' third baseman since his trade to New York in February 2004. When asked if there was an explanation for his positive test, he said, "I'm not saying anything."

There have been anonymous reports like this in the past, especially involving Albert Pujols, that turned out to be wrong. Assuming that A-Rod has been clean since 2003, I say he's a good case for arguing that steroids don't make that big an impact.

Update: Craig Calcaterra notes that Jose Canseco was right again.

Victor Conte emails the LA Times on the Bonds evidence:

Conte's major points surrounded the chain of custody questions about urine samples the government says belonged to Bonds, were processed through BALCO and sent to a private lab for testing. Three of those tests were returned positive for steroids, the government's unsealed documents claimed Wednesday.

Conte says, "A laboratory test is only as valid as the history and integrity of the sample analyzed. ... It is important to realize that the quality of control measures taken by [the private lab] are of no value if the specimens they tested were not authenticated and handled properly before they were received. It has been indicated that these urine samples were initially handled by [Bonds' trainer] Greg Anderson and ... [BALCO official] James Valente. Neither of them has a degree or license that would qualify them to process such laboratory samples . ... There was no legal chain of custody."

Conte also said there were "discrepancies" in the dates of BALCO ledgers and the private lab's samples.

In both this case and the Clemens case, it's going to be tough to convince jurors that these were pristine samples.

Update: The judge is leaning toward Bonds in regard to siezed BALCO samples:

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston said during an evidentiary hearing Thursday that she was leaning toward excluding the results seized by investigators during a BALCO raid unless there is direct testimony tying the urine samples to Bonds. She is not expected to issue her ruling Thursday.

Good news for Barry.

ShysterBall posts a link to the Bonds documents released by the government and notes:

the government is in deep doo-doo if it can't somehow compel Anderson to testify, because it needs Anderson to authenticate almost all of the documentary evidence that implicates Bonds. Without it, they are relying on considerable amounts of hearsay.

Does anyone know if the trial will be televised? It should be an education in perjury law.

Here's what was in the unsealed evidence. The worst is probably this:

In the court documents, prosecutors say Bonds tested positive in 2000 and 2001 for the steroids methenelone and nandrolone. Prosecutors want to use those test results to show Bonds lied when he told a grand jury in December 2003 that he never knowingly used steroids.

If true, I don't see how Bonds can spin those as legal at the time. Remember, even those those drugs weren't specifically banned at the time, controlled substances were.

The Feds unseal records in Barry Bonds's perjury case today. If any of you are legal experts and take time to sift through the evidence, I'd love to hear your opinion.

It looks like investigators found Roger Clemens's DNA in one of McNamee's syringes. I tend to agree with Rusty Hardin, here, however:

On Monday, Rusty Hardin, Clemens' Houston-based defense attorney, said the DNA tests "won't matter at all."

"It will still be evidence fabricated by McNamee," Hardin said. "I would be dumbfounded if any responsible person ever found this to be reliable or credible evidence in any way."

The chain of custody here is really poor.

A former teammate of Barry Bonds is going testify against the slugger:

It looks like Barry Bonds has more than just a failed urine test to worry about when his perjury trial gets underway on March 2nd. According to ESPN, Bobby Estalella, a former Giant who admitted using steroids provided by Bonds' trainer Greg Anderson, is prepared to provide "significant testimony" to back up the government's claim that Bonds knowingly took steroids.

Estalella admitted using the same substances, as well as human growth hormone, during the same BALCO investigation that led to the Bonds statements being questioned by federal prosecutors. He's reportedly able to provide first-hand knowledge of Bonds' steroid use, something that would be quite damning to Bonds' case.

The spoilers keep coming. They're taking all the drama out of the trial!

Update: Add the Giambis to the list of people called to testify.

Specifically, the prosecutors want to use the Giambis' testimony to establish that Anderson created doping calendars for both men. If the Giambis testify to that effect, the prosecutors will then be free to argue that Anderson created similar calendars to monitor Bonds's use of banned substances, according to a person briefed on the government's evidence. The person spoke on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to jeopardize his access to sensitive information.

The trial continues to leak like a sieve.

Was this really necessary?

Bob Sikes worked for the Mets when Dwight Gooden took his drug tests and doubts Kirk Radomski's story on the subject:

Gooden returned to the Mets in June after serving a suspension. As part of his return, he was required to take mandatory tests administered by the commissioner. Tests were adminsitered both on the road and at home. A witness for the ballclub was required along with the commissioner's adminsitrator. From the years 1987 through the end of the 1991 season that person was either me or my boss, Head Trainer Steve Garland. We signed a document after Gooden supplied the sample in our presence. No person would have been able to swith a sample afterwards as they were sealed in our presence and we signed the sealed packaging afterwards.

I was let go after the 1991 season and Gooden's time with the Mets ended after the 1994 season - Garland's last. Sam McCrary served as assistant - a man I know well. Although I was not there, I'm comfortable in saying that Garland - or Gooden for that matter would have allowed anyone besides Garland or McCrary to witness Gooden's drug test for the ballclub. That person would never have been a man who served as a clubhouse attendant as Kirk Radomski is quoted as saying in an interview with ESPN.

Kirk Radomski rebuts allegations that there is a glaring inconsistency in his story:

Sunday, The New York Times reported that Radomski may have damaged his value as a witness with a sentence on page 196 that the newspaper said contradicts McNamee's sworn testimony to congressional investigators last year. But for Radomski, the controversy is manufactured, and he suggests that the Times reread the page.

On page 196, Radomski and his co-author David Fisher wrote: "In fact he (McNamee) told me that in 1998 he'd begun injecting Roger Clemens with Winstrol that Clemens had gotten for himself."

As The Times reports, McNamee told congressional investigators in February that he never informed Radomski that he had injected Clemens with steroids or human growth hormone. Radomski says that's right. McNamee told him about the 1998 injections in 2008 - as he and Fisher were preparing the book, which the Daily News obtained Sunday from the publisher, Hudson Street Press.

"He only recently told me about the Winstrol," Radomski said.

I would think writers for the Times could better parse that sentence.

Jordan Schafer says he didn't cheat, but he was suspended anyway:

Schafer said he's guilty of hanging around the wrong people.

"I've never failed a test. I've taken 20 drug tests, and I've never failed one. I didn't take anything," Schafer said, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Schafer did not test positive for HGH. Rather, he was suspended after Major League Baseball probed anecdotal evidence of HGH use by Schafer, two sources familiar with Schafer's case told ESPN The Magazine's Buster Olney last year.

Human growth hormone is a banned substance under the current drug-testing agreement between the owners and players, but the sport, like other professional sports leagues in the U.S., does not test for HGH.

But Major League Baseball does have the authority within the agreement to pursue specific information about possible violations. Schafer was the first casualty of MLB's new Department of Investigations.

So MLB has someone who says Shafer did take HGH? It's not clear from this article.

Jay McGwire's ex-fiancee confirms Jay's story about supplying Mark McGwire with steroids. It looks like the story wasn't satire. Maybe it's finally time for Mark to come forward and talk about the past.

This is a joke, right?

Jay McGwire grew up idolizing his older brothers, became hooked on steroids, crashed, found God, now wants to share his story with the world. Oh, and he also claims he introduced Mark to 'roids.

The picture looks like they photoshopped a head that looks like McGwire on a body builder. How come we've never heard that Mark had a body builder brother? We know one played football.

There is a Jay McGwire fitness center. So maybe this is real. However, the story seems to contradict Jose Canseco injecting McGwire since Jose was out of Oakland in 1992 and Jay says he introduced steroids to McGwire in 1994.

Bob Tufts sends a link to this article by Jonathan Littman on the unsealed court documents surrounding the Barry Bonds perjury case. The gist of the article is that the clear (THG) was not classified as a steroid at the time:

Neither Conte nor Anderson was charged with distributing THG. In fact, nobody in the seven-year BALCO investigation has been charged with possession or trafficking of the drug. Less than $2,000 of drugs was found in the highly publicized raid of the Burlingame, Calif., laboratory in 2003.

Besides the staggering amount of taxpayers' money the investigation has cost, BALCO spawned Congressional hearings, countless television news accounts and the best-selling book "Game of Shadows." Yet the lack of a federal criminal punch made it difficult for the government to bring traditional charges against athletes for taking drugs.

The paucity of illegal profits and drugs raises the question whether prosecutors realized that the only potential for criminalizing the behavior of athletes who took banned substances was to set perjury traps or bait athletes into lying to the grand jury or to a federal agent.

"It sounds like a misuse of the grand jury," said John Bartko, a former assistant U.S. Attorney in San Francisco who has tried perjury cases. "They go and try to trip the guy into lying."

The government believes it has tripped Bonds, but whether he falls will be determined in court. The fact that the key drug he is accused of taking was legal and not recognized as a steroid under federal law could complicate the case, experts say.

"I don't understand why the government would seek an indictment after obtaining Catlin's expert testimony that the Clear was not a steroid," Cannon said. "Why come up with an indictment based on an ambiguous definition?"

I'd like to hear from the lawyers on this article. It seems to me that the clear was not a steroid because someone hadn't tested it properly yet. Was Bonds told it was a steroid? Was Bonds told it would act like a steroid?

The article talks about the cream being a masking agent, but it certainly contained steroids. We'll see how this case goes. I agree to a great extent that it was a waste of money. However, if Bonds wins, he'll at least be able to try to recover some of his lost prestige. To him that will be worth all the money spent by prosecutors.

Maury Brown interviews Ed Wyszumiala of NSF International, a company that certifies nutritional supplements for MLB.

The makers of the supplement that caused J.C. Romero to test positive for PEDs says the product can cause false positives. That should boost sales!

There seems to be an epidemic of ADHD is major league baseball:

"This is incredible. This is quite spectacular. There seems to be an epidemic of ADD in major league baseball," said Dr. Gary Wadler, chairman of the committee that determines the banned-substances list for the World Anti-Doping Agency.

He recommended an independent panel be established - WADA recommends at least three doctors - to review TUE requests in what he termed "a sport that grew up on greenies."

"I've been in private practice for a lot of years. I can count on one hand the number of individuals that have ADD," he said. "To say that (7.86 percent) of major league baseball players have attention deficit disorder is crying out of an explanation. It is to me as an internist so off the map of my own experience."

Rob Manfred, baseball's executive vice president of labor relations, said it would be a mistake to compare ADHD in baseball with statistics for the general population.'

"We are all male. We are far younger than the general population, and we have far better access to medical care than the general population," Manfred said.

I'm not a Gary Wadler fan, as he's a first class scold, but it looks like he's right here. Manfred's statement doesn't pass the smell test, unless, for some reason, there is some link between ADHD and playing baseball.

It Is About the Money, Stupid presents a very detailed timeline and summary of the Sergio Mitre/J.C. Romero drug suspensions. What's most interesting is the conflict between Romero and the MLBPA:

Friends, that is the general counsel of the world's most powerful union effectively calling "bullsh*t" on one of its members. Do not take this lightly. Weiner is essentially calling Romero (and his claims) a liar. I cannot believe, for a second, that the senior attorney for the union would publish a comment like this without it being a bulletproof statement.

Hat tip, The Hardball Times.

The J.C. Romero case shows why I liked the original system of punishing players for using PEDs. The first time caught was a private reprimand.

My feeling is that, if Romero did in fact break the rules, he deserves to be punished. Phillies GM Ruben Amaro Jr. feels the same way, as his recent statement seemingly backed major league baseball as opposed to his own supposedly wronged player. Ouch. This case, however, features some extenuating circumstances, as Romero did buy the product prior to its banning.

And, on top of that, while newer bottles display a warning that the supplement may cause positive drug tests, the bottle presented by J.C. in his hearing did not. It really feels like he is getting jobbed here, or made an example of. Perhaps he should never have bought the supplement, but if it was legal at the time of the purchase, and the purchase date can be proven, 50-games seems very excessive. Then again, the MLBPA did issue a revised list that apparently did show OXO-6 as banned.

I'm a bit torn here. This seems like an excessive punishment given the case presented by Romero, but it really seems like he could have exercised a bit more caution. Then again, he did speak to several different sources that cleared the supplement as safe. Either the Phillies training staff needs to be re-evaluated or Romero is receiving unfair treatment. After all, he spoke with just about everyone on his team whose job is to ensure this does not happen, and yet it did happen.

Under the original set of penalties, we wouldn't even know about it, and the issue would be properly taken care of. Romero would know if he used something like this again, he would be suspended, and he would be a lot more careful about the supplements he purchased. The original system gave the players a chance to make a mistake and not have their names dragged through the mud. It was fair. Too many people wanted heads to roll, however, and now the Phillies are without a good reliever for 50 games.

Sergio Mitre and J.C. Romero each were handed 50-day suspensions for a positive drug test. Mitre is upset:

Romero earned two wins in Philadelphia's World Series victory over Tampa Bay last season. He has called the penalty unfair, ESPN.com reported Monday night. He contends the supplement he took during the season was legal because he bought it over the counter at a nutrition store in the United States. An arbitrator decided against Romero in November.

Mitre is with the New York Yankees' Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Triple A team.
The arbitrator ruled Romero was guilty of negligence. The penalty will cost the left-hander $1.25 million in salary, ESPN.com said.

"I still cannot see where I did something wrong,'' Romero told the Web site. "There is nothing that should take away from the rings of my teammates. I didn't cheat. I tried to follow the rules.''

I wonder if other players took this supplement? If so, why is he the only one testing positive. It was my understanding that players knew OTC supplements are risky.

Brian McNamee sues Roger Clemens for defamation. I would think it would be pretty tough to defame someone who wrote an article for the New York Times that was a big lie. I think we've moved from tragedy to farce at this point.

Mindy McCready tried to commit suicide.

Genetic Future links to a commentary in Nature that comes down in favor of "cognitive enhancement using drugs." I like the guidelines they lay down for use, and I think something similar should have been done with performance enhancing drugs in sports.

Baseball will reveal the number of players who tested positive for amphetamines for the first time in 2008. I suspect the number will be low. Players who tested positive in 2007 won't be included, and are likely not to be using with the threat of suspension hanging over them. It would be nice if they included the number already at the suspension testing level entering 2008.

Update: MLB reversed itself on this.

J.C. Bradbury comments on the latest HGH inannity. His conclusion:

I guess I can't blame MLB. It's the cheapest way to fight a public relations problem--that's all this is. And the sad part is that HGH's prohibition signals to potential users that it works, and the drug has many bad side effects. If anything, the war on growth hormone will do more harm than good. As I have suggested before, the best solution is to legalize it.

I agree.

The MLB Players Association is set to file a grievance on behalf of Barry Bonds, but reached a deal with MLB to delay that:

The baseball players' union says it has found evidence teams acted in concert against signing Barry Bonds but it reached an agreement with the commissioner's office to delay the filing of any grievance.

The union expressed concern in May about the lack of offers to the home run king. Filing a grievance would trigger proceedings before arbitrator Shyam Das.

It doesn't say why they agreed to delay the filing. Is baseball going to try to reach a settlement privately? Is MLB willing to investigate and punish clubs? I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Looks like Jose Canseco can't stay away from performance enhancers:

Canceco was detained at San Diego's San Ysidro border crossing Thursday after agents searched his vehicle and said they found human chorionic gonadotropin, which is illegal without a prescription, said his attorney, Gregory Emerson.

Emerson declined to say if Canseco - who admitted to using steroids in a 2005 book that also alleged steroid use by other baseball players - had the drug, which is banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency for use in males. The drug helps restore production of testosterone lost in steroid users.

Maybe he's trying to make a comeback.

Bob Tufts sends this article from earlier in the week I missed.

Before Barry Bonds goes on trial next March for perjury, the conduct of the prosecutor and principal witness against him will come under public scrutiny in a long-running dispute over seized major league baseball drug testing records.

The players' union won a ruling before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday, setting aside a previous decision that the government can keep steroid tests and records of more than 100 players seized in January 2004. Now, an 11-member appeals panel will hear oral arguments about the conduct and credibility of the prosecutor and investigator carrying out the search.

What makes this issue critical to the Bonds case is that the search was conducted by BALCO lead investigator Jeff Novitzky and was reviewed by none other than Susan Illston, the Bonds trial judge.

Good. Someone is finally reeling in Novitzky.

The jugde threw out the Signature Pharmacy case.

But Judge Stephen W. Herrick, of Albany County Court, found that mistakes by the prosecution had prejudiced the case against five people associated with Florida-based Signature Pharmacy, which prosecutors had alleged was the supplier of at least $10 million worth of controlled substances sold to customers in New York. They are Naomi Loomis and Robert Loomis, the husband and wife who own the pharmacy; Mr. Loomis's brother, Kenneth Michael Loomis, a pharmacist at the company; and two former employees, Kirk Calvert and Tony Palladino.

George E. LaMarche III, a lawyer for Kenneth Michael Loomis and Mr. Calvert, praised the judge's decision, calling it "gratifying and a tremendous relief for everyone involved."

If upheld, Judge Herrick's decision could unravel other elements of Mr. Soares's criminal investigation. Lawyers for people who had previously negotiated guilty pleas with the district attorney said they would be closely examining Judge Herrick's decision to see if it contained grounds to reverse their clients' guilty pleas.

Nice work by the D.A!

Scott Carroll of the Reds ran afoul of the minor league drug program, taking a hormone that stimulates testosterone production. What's interesting is that Carroll appears to be pretty good. His walks and home runs allowed are very low.

Via The Big Lead, Buzz Bissinger and I agree on something.

Maury Brown takes a closer look at the rash of minor league suspensions for performance enhancing drug use.

Maury Brown notes that there have been a large number of minor league suspensions due to substance abuse in the last nine days. I wonder if it was just because the review process finished at about the same time?

They'll ban this soon.

Via Big League Stew, it looks like you can add Viagra to the list of performance enhancers. The New York Daily News learned Roger Clemens took Viagra, and players are using it to increase blood flow to muscles:

Clemens wasn't alone. The pitcher, who is believed to have scored the drug from a teammate, joined the burgeoning number of athletes who have turned Vitamin V and its over-the-counter substitutes into one of the hottest drugs in locker rooms.

The drug is so widely used for off-label purposes that it has drawn the attention of anti-doping officials and law-enforcement agencies in the United States and beyond.

"All my athletes took it," BALCO founder Victor Conte, whose acolytes included Jason Giambi, Barry Bonds and Marion Jones, said of an over-the-counter supplement he claimed mimicked the effects of Viagra.

"It's bigger than creatine. It's the biggest product in nutritional supplements."

Plus, it has nice side benefits. Soon, somebody will put together the all erectile dysfunction team. Right now, Viagra isn't covered under MLB's drug policy, and I wonder how much more effective it is than ibuprofen in promoting muscle healing.

Update: J.C. Bradbury talked to exercise physiologist colleagues who don't think Viagra does much to improve athletic peformance.

Steroids, the Musical. I can't resist a show that includes "Xanadu."

I saw Xanadu recently on HDNet Movies, and it's a much better movie than I remember. I was really disappointed in it when I was 19. Yes, the acting is bad and Gene Kelly is underused, but the music and dancing is top notch.

Jeff Bagwell gets pulled into the steroid controversy by a second-hand anonymous source:

For years, Kelly Blair, the owner of 1-on-1 Elite Personal Fitness, bragged to friends and clients who worked out at his Texas gym that he supplied performance-enhancing drugs to professional athletes.

Blair, who was recently questioned by federal agents conducting the Roger Clemens perjury investigation, regaled visitors to his Pasadena gym with stories about providing drugs to Clemens, Andy Pettitte, Jeff Bagwell and other professional athletes, according to sources. Bagwell, Pettitte and Clemens were teammates on the Houston Astros in 2004 and 2005.

"Kelly wanted everybody to know he worked with the big guys," says one friend with close ties to Blair and the gym, who requested anonymity because that person feared retribution from Blair and his friends. "He wanted to be known as the guy behind the professional athletes."

As always, take this story with a huge grain of salt. The person relaying the story doesn't know if any of the athletes actually got the drugs, or if Blair was just making up stories to seem like a big shot.

Prosecutors rewrote their indictment of Barry Bonds and he's now charged with fourteen different lies. I guess they just need one of them to be real for a win.

Sports Law Blog notes that McNamee's legal team can't use much of Roger Clemens's alleged affairs as evidence. In that case, it seems these leaks are meant to embarrass Roger into dropping the suit.

Roger Clemens issued an unspecific apology:

In his first comments since a tabloid linked him to extramarital affairs last week, Roger Clemens on Sunday acknowledged making ''mistakes'' in his personal life. For those mistakes, he apologized to his family and the public, but the seven-time Cy Young Award winner remained steadfast in his denials that he has used steroids or human growth hormone.

''I know that many people want to know what I have to say about the recent articles in the media,'' Clemens, who has raised his four children with his wife, Debbie, in the Katy and Memorial areas, said in a statement to the Chronicle. ''Even though these articles contain many false accusations and mistakes, I need to say that I have made mistakes in my personal life for which I am sorry. I have apologized to my family and apologize to my fans. Like everyone, I have flaws. I have sometimes made choices which have not been right.''

Via the Projo SoxBlog, a comparison of Pete Rose and Roger Clemens:

"(Clemens) is Pete Rose to a T,'' Paul Janszen said Thursday. Janszen was Rose's close friend, workout partner and senior bobo, until Rose stiffed him on some money he owed Janszen . Janszen spilled his knowledge to John Dowd, who made his case with it.

"Certain athletes become larger than the game in the fans eyes, and in their own eyes,'' said Janszen . "(Rose) was always above it all. He thought no one would ever dare to question him. It's the same mentality Clemens is (showing) in the Congressional hearings and on 60 Minutes.''

In many ways, Janszen was to Rose who Brian McNamee was to Clemens. Each was an ordinary guy who befriended, enabled and bobo-ed a superstar player. Each was star-struck at first, then fiercely loyal. "I felt an obligation to protect Pete, and his image,'' Janszen said.

Eventually, each turned on his famous friend. Janszen wanted his money, then did what he felt was right; McNamee wanted to stay out of prison.

"It's not just athletes,'' Janszen said. "It's politicians, celebrities. People who think they're bigger than the institution. "When competition becomes obsessive, when nothing matters (but) winning, not even integrity or honesty, that gets you in the pickle those guys are in.''

It's good to see the breakup of BALCO hasn't stopped Giants players from finding drugs:

San Francisco Giants catcher Eliezer Alfonzo was suspended 50 games Wednesday for testing positive for a performance-enhancing substance, the first player penalized this year under Major League Baseball's drug program.

The 29-year-old Venezuelan was optioned to Triple-A Fresno just before opening day and is batting .306 with three homers and 14 RBI in 16 games. The suspension will start Thursday.

Just another example of a marginal players trying to get a boost.

Will Brinson thinks there is something strange about the Jordan Schafer suspension, because Schafer's side won't talk about it beyond, "No comment." I have two words for Will; Roger Clemens. If Rogers reaction to the Mitchell report was to have his lawyer say, "We have no comment on that," Roger saves himself a whole lot of trouble. Writers and pundits, unable to get the Rocket on record, would instead examining McNamee, trying to determine his truthfulness. Given that he lied in a NY Times article, and given that some of his allegations were true, it would have been a mixed bag. There wouldn't have been that much scrutiny of Roger.

So Shafer is playing this right. If he was wrongly accused, he can work this through proper channels without having the media poke into every part of his life. At least he's listening to his lawyers.

Mindy McCready confirms her affair with Roger Clemens.

Roger Clemens filed a defamation suit against Brian McNamee, and now the Rocket's reputation is under attack. Via The Big Lead, this article in New York Daily News:

Roger Clemens carried on a decade-long affair with country star Mindy McCready, a romance that began when McCready was a 15-year-old aspiring singer performing in a karaoke bar and Clemens was a 28-year-old Red Sox ace and married father of two, several sources have told the Daily News.

The revelations could torpedo claims of an unsullied character that are central to the defamation suit Clemens filed Jan. 6 against his former personal trainer Brian McNamee. Vivid details of the affair could surface in several media projects that McCready is involved with - including a documentary that begins filming today in Nashville, a new album and a reality show.

Canseco's claim that Roger was the only player who didn't cheat on his wife seemed far fetched to me. I had heard rumors about Clemens carrying on with women during my days at ESPN. This just goes to show that not talking about the charges would have been Rogers best defense.

Joe Hamrahi sums up the new drug deal between MLB and the MLBPA. I sure in a year we'll find that this isn't adequate, either.

The New York Times reports baseball will appoint an overseer to do something with drug testing.

The overseer will be appointed to a fixed term and will be given many protections from dismissal, said the lawyers, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

In the current system, Major League Baseball and the union each appoint two representatives to the health policy advisory committee, which oversees the testing program. A fifth person can be appointed to cast a decisive vote when matters are deadlocked. Antidoping experts have questioned its independence.

How do I get this job? The job description is undefined and there's little chance of being fired. I can sit around all day and blog and get paid for something else! How cool is that? Plus, I could revoke all HGH suspensions because it doesn't do anything.

Plus, how cool would it be to have the title Overseer? It sounds pretty godlike. Maybe the job comes with the power to produce lightning from your fingers. A cross between Charlton Heston and Darth Sidious.

Where do I apply?

According to an indictment, some agents were involved in steering players to doctors who were willing to write prescriptions for PEDs.

A federal indictment unsealed Wednesday charged that unidentified agents for baseball players steered clients to a California physician linked in media reports to supplying Troy Glaus and Scott Schoeneweis with illegal performance-enhancing drugs.

more stories like thisNo players or agents were mentioned by name in the 11-count indictment returned by a grand jury against Dr. Ramon Scruggs and two of his associates at the New Hope Health Center in Costa Mesa, Calif.

Schoeneweis is represented by Scott Boras, and Glaus by Mike Nicotera.

"I have no knowledge of this medical practitioner or any relationship that he has with any of our clients," Boras said. "We have never referred any of our clients to a wellness center."

I'd rather they release the names. Now, pretty much all agents are under a cloud.

J.C. Bradbury sums up my feelings on the Jordan Schafer suspension. I'm most interested in how he was caught, since a test doesn't exist yet for HGH. If someone ratted him out, was it a supplier? Was it a teammate?

Bob Watson informed the Padres that the umpires will keep an eye on Peavy's hands to make sure they stay clean.

Bob Tufts donated $50 or more to the Baseball Musings Pledge Drive and dedicates this post to the late Doug Pappas and all the excellent work he did with the business of baseball through SABR.

Bob also sends this story, about how the Albany steroid investigation may be in jeopardy because the district attorney was not registered to practice law!

But according to the records of the state's Unified Court System, Soares had no legal authority to act as a district attorney as he is not currently registered to practice law in New York State.

Or Florida either, for that matter.

All of the arrests and charges in the steroid scandal may be in jeopardy and may have to be dismissed because in New York State, persons who are not licensed members of the Bar of the State are prohibited from engaging in the practice of law.

That includes P. David Soares, Albany County district attorney.

This certainly hasn't been a good month for New York Democrats.

Update: Here's an update on the matter.

Suspensions are on hold:

Negotiators are close to an agreement that would call for more frequent drug testing and would strengthen the authority of the independent program administrator. If there is an agreement, the suspensions of Gibbons and Guillen most likely would be eliminated as part of an overall amnesty for players implicated in the Mitchell Report.

I wish they had done this before the Mitchell report so the players would feel free to talk to the investigator.

Pat Jordan tells you all you need to know (and somethings you don't) about Jose Canseco. I need to go disinfect myself now.

Hat tip to Alex Belth.

ABC New posted a long excerpt of Canseco's new book. I found this interesting as it somewhat contradicts the story that Bonds started juicing after the 1998 season:

As I drove off, I remembered an earlier meeting with Barry Bonds, and suddenly our little encounter made perfect sense. It was back in February 2000. We were in Las Vegas, for the Big League Challenge, a home-run hitting contest at Cashman Field. I was given $100,000 just to show up, and I was told that the winner would take home $600,000. I'd just had back surgery, though, so I figured I'd be lucky to hit anything at all.

When we were in the locker room, changing before going out into the field, I took off my shirt and found Bonds staring at me, his eyes bugging out of his head. "Man," he said, "you are ripped!"

I guess I was. I looked like Dolph Lundgren in Rocky IV. There wasn't an ounce of fat on me (if I may so myself). I was 255 pounds of chiseled, high-def power.

"You have to tell me what the hell you've being doing," he said.

"I'll tell you after the game," I said.

We went outside, and I knocked several moon shots out of the park, including twenty-eight bombs in the last round. I went home with the $600,000 enchilada.

Bonds hadn't even made the finals, and he was in a lousy mood, but he waited for me because he wanted us to have our little talk. I told him everything I knew. It was Jose Canseco's Guide to Steroids 101, and over the years I'd had that identical conversation with hundreds of other guys, players and non-players alike.

A few months later, when the regular season got underway, Bonds showed up with an extra thirty pounds on him, all of it muscle. And I'll be the first to tell you: you don't get that kind of muscle just from working out. It's literally impossible. Now, I'm not saying I saw him use the stuff, because I didn't, but I was pretty much an expert on the subject of steroids, and I can tell you that steroids had changed the man -- including the size of his goddamn head. That head was hard to miss!

And of course his performance spoke volumes. Here was a guy who'd never broken 50 home runs in a single season, and suddenly he hits 73, breaking the previous major league record, McGwire's 70.

There's also video of his Nightline interview here.

Brain McNamee passed out in his car and hit a bus head on. Luckily, no one was seriously hurt.

Bob Tufts sends along another piece of literature that indicates HGH doesn't do much for athletes:

Athletes, in particular body builders, reportedly use growth hormone to increase strength and improve muscle definition (5, 17, 76). We found that although growth hormone significantly increased lean body mass and was associated with a near-significant trend toward decreased fat mass, it did not result in gains in biceps and quadriceps strength. How can increases in lean body mass not translate into strength improvements? Because methods for evaluation of lean body mass do not reliably distinguish lean solid tissue from fluid mass (77) and because the included studies evaluated only short-term changes, we suspect that much of the increase in lean body mass from growth hormone is due to fluid retention rather than muscle hypertrophy (77-79). A nonrandomized study in experienced weight lifters supports this view. Yarasheski and colleagues (80) provided high-dose growth hormone to college football players and weight lifters and found that growth hormone did not increase muscle protein synthesis or decrease protein breakdown, suggesting that an increase in muscle mass from growth hormone use in such athletes is unlikely.

This is not new research, but a synthesis of other research brought together in one paper. As the authors note, there are limitations to this method:

Our study reflects the limitations of the included studies. First, our review highlights the lack of published evidence about the physiologic effects of growth hormone among athletic, young adults. Although we reviewed thousands of studies, only 8 studies assessed strength and exercise capacity for growth hormone treatment in a randomized fashion. Thus, our analysis may not have detected small but clinically relevant differences in outcomes and adverse events. Since no studies evaluated growth hormone for periods longer than 3 months, there is no evidence with which to evaluate the long-term use of growth hormone for athletic enhancement.

Still, it makes you wonder if the money being spent on developing an HGH test is just being flushed down the drain.

Mike Greenwell's wife is a nurse, and she wouldn't let him take steroids:

"The truth?" he said. "My wife's a nurse and basically told me she'd kill me if she caught me doing it. Really. Reality.

"She was a nurse. I looked into it [steroids]. I studied it. I know a lot about steroids, to be honest with you. Because I was very, very tempted as a player to do it and I think there's many, many players out there that were tempted to do it. Probably if I didn't have my wife I would have done it to try to perform at that level. Another little slight reason I retired when I retired. I just didn't feel like it was quite even anymore."

The Baseball Musings pledge drive continues through March. Please consider making a donation.

Bob Tufts sends along this article on performance enhancing drugs in academia:

But others insist that the ethics are not so clear, and that academic performance is different in important ways from baseball, or cycling.

"I think the analogy with sports doping is really misleading, because in sports it's all about competition, only about who's the best runner or home run hitter," said Martha Farah, director of the Center for Cognitive Neuroscience at the University of Pennsylvania. "In academics, whether you're a student or a researcher, there is an element of competition, but it's secondary. The main purpose is to try to learn things, to get experience, to write papers, to do experiments. So in that case if you can do it better because you've got some drug on board, that would on the face of things seem like a plus."

Baloney. Competition for entrance to colleges is fierce. When I applied to Harvard in 1978, one in ten applicants were accepted. Harvard added 300 places since then, but this year's applicant pool faces a 1 in 15 chance of admission. It's exactly the same problem baseball players face. The ones that remain clean might miss an opportunity to succeed because of someone who is doping. On top of that, I've never met a Principle Investigator who didn't face tough competition in applying for a grant, nor a pre-med student who didn't worry about the difference between an A and an A-. It's all about the competition.

The Baseball Musings pledge drive continues through March. Please consider making a donation.

The Baseball Economist tries to answer the question, "Why Do Players Take Human Growth Hormone If It Doesn't Work?" He examines new research on the placebo effect.

It turns out that the placebo effect of human growth hormone could be even stronger than previously expected. New research by economist Dan Ariely finds that the placebo effect is exacerbated by the price of the drug.

Since HGH is four times as expensive as Winstrol, there's a desire to see it work.

The Baseball Musings pledge drive continues through March. Please consider making a donation.

Via BBTF, Sports on my Mind offers one of the best posts on steroids I've seen. He starts by laying into the players and club officials who kept this quiet during the 1980s and 1990s:

Baseball players in the segment like Atlanta Braves pitcher Tom Glavine made excuses for steroid abuse:

"What goes on in the clubhouse stays in the clubhouse. That's the culture of the game. And it doesn't matter if the guy has a drinking problem or guys are doin' drugs, or whether guys are doin' things in their marriages they shouldn't be doin. You just don't discuss that.

If they're going out there and performing, then there's reason for everybody in the whole chain-of-command to not worry about what's goin' on or at least not explore so much what's goin' on."

In other words, Glavine, as do almost every other MLB player, engages in "the code of silence." It is a code that can only bring with it negative outcomes. It is the code that must be broken by policemen when they expose graft in their department. It is the code that must be broken by politicos to expose lies in the government. It is the code that must be broken by corporate employees when those they work for willfully entwine themselves in illegal acts that negatively impact the public.

However, he also has it in for reporters who don't report all the medical findings on steroids:

Here Quinn laughs sardonically before continuing:

"But that same winter you had the medical directors from both Major League Baseball and the Player's Association speak to clubs at the Winter Meetings and gave what people there said was a pro-testosterone speech. Said that there were definite benefits to it; that they should consider informing the player's about the benefits and dangers. There were people who left that meeting shocked that that was the opinion of the two top medical people in the game."

This is where there the unfathomable disconnect between writers like Quinn and other of his ilk with reality occurs. It is here where Quinn and the many like him stop - for whatever reason(s) - short in their investigative work and cease in aiding the conversation about performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) and sound more like propagandists. The result is that they fail to educate their peers, fail the public, and even fail lawmakers who, in part, rely on their countless hours spent close to the subject of PEDs for direction.

The author then cites studies that show for men over 25 years of age, steroids can help enhance well being. It's well worth the read to get the contrarian view on the subject, one for which I hold sympathy. While I don't think players should have used drugs illegally, I do think they they should be allowed to use them under a doctors care, and that use should be public knowledge. Then the fans can decide if they like those players or not.

The Baseball Musings pledge drive continues through March. Please consider making a donation.

ShysterBall analyzes the Bonds grand jury testimony and concludes the government is going to have a tough time convicting Barry:

There are about 70 more pages, but they're pretty much all variations on the above themes. Overall Barry seems evasive and defensive, but like I said, not so much that there's perjury on the face of his testimony. If he's going to get got, the government has to put someone on the stand to call him a liar.

And that's pretty much that. Given the indictment being temporarily thrown out on Friday, it's going to be a long time before Bonds gets to trial. Given the nature of the questioning and charging, he may never be convicted. Given the opinion most of the public has about Bonds, it may never matter one way or the other.

Hat tip, Baseball Think Factory.

The Baseball Musings pledge drive continues through March. Please consider making a donation.

The AP published snippets of Barry Bonds's grand jury testimony. The Smoking Gun has the PDF of the full testimony.

The Baseball Musings pledge drive continues through March. Please consider making a donation.

Your tax dollars at work:

A federal judge on Friday told the government to re-craft its perjury case against Barry Bonds, saying prosecutors had improperly lumped multiple alleged offenses into each of four counts of its indictment of the former Giants star.

At a hearing in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Judge Susan Illston said the case could not proceed because Bonds' indictment, handed up by a grand jury in November, was "duplicitous" - a legal term meaning it was improperly charged. By law, the government can only accuse a person of one crime per count of an indictment. But the judge said that in Bonds' perjury case, the slugger was being accused of telling as many as five different lies under oath in each count of the indictment.

She said the government could correct the flaws by rewriting the indictment or filing a new one.

Update: Bonds grand jury testimony is coming to a browser near you.

The Department of Justice is looking into perjury charges against Roger Clemens. Given the location of the alleged injections, Roger might want to turn to Cartman for advice:

Don Fehr proposed a good idea during Congressional steroid hearings today:

Fehr did suggest one way in which Congress could help sports leagues: require that commercially sold human growth hormone contain a chemical marker that would be detectable in a urine test.

This wouldn't be perfect, of course. Players might be able to buy it outside the country with no marker. At least Don is looking for a workable solution.

Also, to show the level of Congressional intelligence, they think pro wrestling is a sport:

The chairman also said he was "exceptionally and extremely disappointed" that World Wrestling Entertainment chairman Vince McMahon was the only witness to decline the subcommittee's invitation to testify Wednesday.

Tony La Russa doesn't believe Mark McGwire used steroids. Tom Fornelli reaction:

Seriously, if Tony LaRussa honestly believes that Mark McGwire was completely clean after everything we've learned in the years since he retired, the man needs to retire right the hell now. He's obviously insane, and shouldn't be managing a baseball team, even one as bad as the Cardinals are going to be.

The man had andro in his locker, in the Cardinals club house. Yes, it was legal at the time but as we know now it helps. McGwire's bulk wasn't all natural.

The Rocket's lawyer concedes that Clemens may have been at Jose Canseco's party. That's another shot at Roger's credibility.

The New York Daily News reports that a photo exists of Roger Clemens at Jose Canseco's party:

Their leads could include new photographic evidence that has emerged to potentially undermine Clemens' sworn testimony that he did not attend a 1998 party at the home of his then-teammate Jose Canseco - a party that figured both in the Mitchell Report and the Feb.13 public hearing in Washington.

The photo is owned by a young man who attended the party when he was 11 years old and took photos of his baseball heroes, including Clemens. Richard Emery, one of the lawyers for Clemens accuser Brian McNamee, was aware that such evidence had been circulating this week.

The party seems irrelevant to me. It's the kind of thing that fades with time, so it's quite possible McNamee or Clemens or both don't remember the details well, or are conflating multiple events into one. Clemens attending or not attending the party proves nothing.

Jonathan Mayo is a senior writer at MLB.com covering the minor leagues. His new book, Facing Clemens: Hitters on Confronting Baseball's Most Intimidating Pitcher, hits stores March 1st. Jon finished the book before the Mitchell report appeared, and wanted to weigh in on the subject.

Well, the dust has settled...for the moment. While everyone will wait for the next step ... an indictment, a guest spot on "The Moment of Truth," whatever it is, I can finally take a breath and try to figure out what all this Roger Clemens stuff means to me.

Why am I different than anyone else? I'm not really, other than the fact I recently completed my first book and boy, do I have interesting timing. It's called "Facing Clemens: Hitters on Confronting Baseball's Most Intimidating Pitcher." I kid you not. It was written, needless to say, before the Mitchell Report was released and there's nary a word about steroids, HGH, Vitamin B12 or eight-year old gauze.

It is, in pretty much every sense of the term, a pure baseball book. OK, so maybe pure isn't the best word to use, but you get the idea. I talked to some of the greats of the game over the last generation, from Cal Ripken Jr. to Ken Griffey Jr., from Gary Carter to Torii Hunter about the challenges of trying to hit Clemens over the course of his quarter-century career. Seemed like a nice, simple first foray into the book-writing world. Boy, was I unprepared for what was to come.

Since all the news has broken, I'm constantly peppered with questions from friends and family about whether it will help or hurt sales (I'm leaning toward helping), if I'm going to write an epilogue about all this stuff (sorry, no time for it) and, of course, who I believe (not really relevant right now). I've become a kind of pseudo-Clemens expert, though I never talked to the man for the book (I did do a chapter with his son, Koby, and he wrote the foreword).

In the end, I feel the book still stands on its own merits. Whether you think Clemens is guilty (Andy Pettitte's sworn testimony makes it hard not to, doesn't it?) or whether you think his vehement denials are sincere, the challenge of facing Clemens as a hitter hasn't changed. Maybe the respect the players I interviewed for the book had for Clemens has dissipated, but they still had to figure out how to hit him when he was a young fireballer and then figure out how to avoid seeing that splitter later on. Even if there had been public knowledge that Clemens was taking something he shouldn't have been, it's not like Torii Hunter would have refused to get in the box against him, seeking his first hit against the Rocket (he went 0-for-28).

Now maybe I'm being naïve and maybe I just want to sell a few more books. Both could be true. I still think that the insights the hitters gave into trying to make a living off arguably the elite right-hander of his era (Again, whether he cheated is beside the point. He was thought of in that echelon before all of this went down) makes for a pretty compelling book. I hope you agree with me.

As for where I stand on all of this, I'd love to stay impartial. But I also know that would be a weak stance to take. For the longest time, I really wanted to believe in Roger Clemens' innocence. I've been covering baseball long enough not to be shocked by anyone's indiscretions, but for once I wanted one person, especially an icon of this nature, to be wrongfully accused, for his denials to be 100 percent sincere. Alas, it has become increasingly difficult to do so and I've seen the faint hope of redemption pretty much extinguished by the testimony of Andy Pettitte. Who knows, maybe I'll be wrong and the Rocket will prevail. I'll still hope so because that would be good for the game of baseball. But I won't hold my breath.

Gelf Magazine takes an in-depth look at the phrase, "It is what it is." They include a excellent Venn diagram.

Here's why Andy Pettitte wouldn't talk about Roger Clemens at his Monday news conference:

McNamee attorney Richard Emery said Pettitte will be a central witness in the defamation suit Clemens filed last month against his former trainer. Pettitte may be required to sit for depositions and meet with his own attorneys - even as the Yankees prepare for spring training and the 2008 season.

"If I were Andy Pettitte, I would be furious at Roger for filing this case, because Clemens is now pursuing a frivolous defamation case against Brian, who will be forced to have his lawyers grill Pettitte much more thoroughly and painfully than Congress did," libel specialist Emery told the Daily News. "He will be dragged out of the middle of the season, out of the rotation, because of Roger Clemens."

WasWatching praises Hank Steinbrenner for deflecting attention away from Andy Pettitte:

It's a page right out of Big Stein's playbook. Say or do something that will direct the attention towards you and away from the team or a player. Andy Pettitte is getting his share of press today. But, thanks to Hank, it's not all on Andy.

On the surface, Steinbrenner railing at football for having a bigger problem just seems like sour grapes. WasWatching may be giving Hank too much credit here, although the outcome is likely a good one. It reminds me of my favorite Toby quote from The Office:

Toby: [talking to the camera while Ryan and Kelly make out in through the window] I don't think Michael intended to punish me by putting Ryan back here with Kelly, but if he did intend that? Wow...genius.

An excellent Young Frankenstein reference at The Soxaholix.

Maybe what really happened is Gagne sent his imbecile personal assistant, Igor, to go get him Human Growth Hormone but what Igor actually got Gagne was Human Loath Hormone.

Miguel Tejada's lawyers take the right approach:

Miguel Tejada said he's been advised by attorneys not to comment on the Mitchell Report or an FBI investigation looking into his alleged link to steroids.

"I can't really talk about that situation," Tejada said Tuesday morning upon arriving at Houston Astros training camp. "Right now, I just want to talk about baseball, because that's really my focus."

That's why you pay lawyers, so they can do the talking.

Why do players always do this?

Eric Gagne, identified as a user of human growth hormone in the Mitchell Report, apologized today to his new Milwaukee Brewers teammates for "a distraction that shouldn't be taking place."

Pettitte took his time apologizing for taking HGH, starting off with an apology for the embarrassment. Tell these people no one is embarrassed but them. No one is distracted but them. Apologize for what you did wrong.

Peter Abraham's take on the news conference is right on the money.

Andy Pettitte handled himself well in his press conference. He didn't duck any questions or hide behind his lawyers. He made a mistake and he admitted it. America loves giving second chances.

It's hard to buy his excuse, however. Using HGH to get back on the mound (as was his hope) is cheating. It's getting an edge on other players on the DL who are not using. It's getting an edge on the pitcher who took his place on the roster. Getting back in two weeks is getting an edge as opposed to three weeks.

This will blow over for Andy. The only thing that will keep him in the news on this issue is if the Clemens saga continues.

Update: Deadspin has a similar take to Abraham.

The Andy Pettitte news conference is just getting underway. Cashman and Girardi are sitting on either side of Pettitte. His attorneys are going to be available after the conference.

Update: Pettitte thanks the Yankees for giving him more time. He apologizes to the Yankees, Astros, their fans, baseball fans, and his own fans for the embarrassment. He's sorry for the mistakes he's made, but did it to get off the disabled list, not get an edge.

Update: He hates being between Clemens and McNamee, since both are friends. He's sorry he didn't tell the whole truth at the beginning, but was trying to protect his father.

Update: Jeter, Rivera and Posada are there in support. Andy says he hasn't talked to Roger Clemens.

Update: Pettitte is refusing to answer questions of the type, "Did you misremember what Clemens told you?"

Update: A reporter just asked Pettitte if he thought about not pitching. Andy said it crossed his mind. Pettitte said it wouldn't be honorable to do that.

Update: George Vescey asks about how Pettitte's religious beliefs weighed on the decision. Pettitte says in 2002 he felt it was the right thing to do. He says having this press conference will help him sleep at night.

Update: Pettitte is asked about breaking a ballplayer's code by talking. He says when you're put under oath you have no choice, and that sitting there in front of the committee was intimidating.

Update: Pettitte was just asked if he knew about the Mitchell report before he signed the contract. He had to be reminded of the dates of the contract and the report, then he says he did know, but he didn't feel he misled the Yankees.

Update: Andy is asked if he's a cheater. He doesn't think so because he didn't use it to get stronger. He understands, however, that people may think he's lying and they probably think he's a cheater.

Update: Peter Abraham asks if Andy ever used PEDs at any other time. Pettitte says no. Someone else asks if HGH helped him. Pettitte says no, he probably didn't use it long enough.

Update: They just asked Pettitte how he can concentrate on the season if Roger is indited and Andy is asked to testify. I'm always amazed at these questions. He's a professional athlete! He gets on the field and competes.

Andy says he hopes it doesn't come to that.

Update: I'd say so far the questions and answers haven't been too adversarial. Pettitte is keeping calm, and doing his best to answer the questions he can. If he doesn't understand a question, he asks the reporter to rephrase it.

He just asked why McNamee wouldn't be truthful. Andy says that as far as his use is concerned, McNamee was truthful.

Update: My Baseball Bias is also live blogging the conference.

Update: Andy is asked if the game is clean now, or what MLB should do to clean it up. He says after seeing what he's gone through, players are going to clean up quick.

Update: Pettitte says he hasn't heard from MLB, but he doesn't think he'll be suspended. Asked if he's ready for spring training, Pettitte says his arm is fine, but his legs aren't quite there yet.

Update: Andy says he's not worried about what people will think of his career in historical terms. He's very humble about his pitching. He says he's not a great pitcher, but he battles and plays for a great team.

Update: At the end of the conference, Andy's lawyer says the contract was signed a week before the Mitchell report came out. So it's not clear if he knew about the Mitchell report before he signed the contract.

Update: I thought that went well for Andy. There was no confrontational questions, and Andy tried to be as cooperative as possible. He wouldn't answer the one question most people wanted answered, what does he remember of his conversations about HGH with Roger Clemens. He appears to be getting a lot of support from his teammates and the owners. I'm guessing he'll be okay.

Jerome Solomon goes after Andy Pettitte for lying:

He is a performance-enhancing-drug-using pitcher who appears to be in search of a truth that will set him free. Even if that truth is a lie.

When asked about his performance-enhancing drug use, he elected to say something other than the truth on more than one occasion.

Despite knowing this, a congressman described Andy Pettitte as "honest and forthcoming." Another Washington time-waster praised Pettitte for being a role model on and off the field because of his "consistent honesty." His likely-to-be former friend Roger Clemens even called him "a very honest fellow."

For the first time since he lied about the subject the last time they asked, Mr. Honesty is expected to talk to the media about performance-enhancing drugs today when he reports to Yankees spring training.

Few of us can truthfully say we have never told a lie, so struggling with the truth doesn't make Pettitte a horrible human being. But raise your hand if you've managed to be praised for lying.

Maybe it's that people like Andy Pettitte, so they're willing to cut him some slack. Or maybe it's that Andy told the little lie (I only did it once) instead of the big lie (I didn't do it at all). I agree that describing Pettitte as an honest person just doesn't work that well any more.

Andy Pettitte holds a news conference at 3 PM EST today. The media is already at the ballpark.

George King notes the change in testing procedures for PEDs this season:

In other years, MLB would test a handful of players during spring training. Yesterday at Legends Field, 28 YankeesNew York Yankees were required to give urine samples to testers. Every pitcher and catcher on the 40-man roster was tested.

When the remaining 12 position players arrive this week they will be subjected to tests.

Update: There are new rules on packages as well.

In the past, clubhouse attendants would either deliver packages to players or just unpack them. Now the packages must be signed for, logged in and hand delivered. After a player opens one, a team official must then see the contents and sign off on them. If a package lacks a return address, a club executive must be notified.

Prosecutors responded to Bonds's call to dismiss charges against him by making public a failed drug test:

U.S. baseball home run king Barry Bonds tested positive for steroids in November 2001, just a month after hitting his record 73rd home run of the season, U.S. prosecutors said Thursday.

The allegation came in a legal filing in his steroid perjury case that referred to Bonds' long-time trainer, Greg Anderson.

My question is, who tested him? Was this Major League Baseball on a probable cause test, or was this BALCO?

Update: As noted overnight in the comments, the prosecutors made a mistake:

U.S. attorney spokesman Josh Eaton now says that the reference in Thursday's government court filing regarding Bonds testing positive was actually referring to a November 2000 test that was previously disclosed in the indictment of Bonds and had already been reported.

That drug test was included in the indictment unsealed last year, when prosecutors said the test was for a player they called "Barry B."

I bet Bonds's lawyers will have a field day with this.

McNamee's lawyer makes a pre-emptive strike at denying Clemens a pardon:

One of Brian McNamee's lawyers predicted Roger Clemens will be pardoned by President Bush, saying some Republicans treated his client harshly because of the pitcher's friendship with the Bush family.

Lawyer Richard Emery made the claims Thursday, a day after a congressional hearing broke down along party lines. Many Democrats were skeptical of Clemens' denials he used performance-enhancing drugs and Republicans questioned the character of McNamee, the personal trainer who made the accusations against the seven-time Cy Young Award winner.

This won't happen. First of all, by the time anyone got around to indicting and trying Clemens, Bush will be out of office. I suppose he could pull a Ford and pardon Clemens before the fact, but somehow I don't think it will happen. The chances of convicting Clemens for perjury given the McNamee as a witness are slim and none.

A look back at the Black Sox scandal from the pages of the New York Times.

This is the second poll I've seen in which readers are asked a binary choice between Clemens and McNamee as to who is telling the truth. I'd like to look at it from a different perspective:

Do you believe Clemens?

What is the probability that Roger Clemens is telling the truth?

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

View Resulttherapesites.com

Free Web Polls

The LoHud Yankees Blog links to all the depositions related to the Clemens hearings today.

Update: J.C. Bradbury reads Pettitte's deposition and wishes Andy had appeared before the committee today to clarify things.

Cardinals Diaspora makes fun of Clemens for using "misremembered." Turns out, it's in the dictionary. I guess the writer there just doesn't like Texans.

Nationals Journal at the Washington Post is taking a poll on your reactions to the hearings. So far, Clemens isn't doing very well.

Not much changed since halftime. Roger Cossack on ESPN believes the federal government will investigate Clemens for perjury. However, Cossack doesn't believe there's not enough evidence to ever convict Roger.

So it's up to you to make up your own mind. I'm wondering how much Pettitte's testimony weighs in your thoughts. It clearly pushed Rep. Cummings over the edge.

Tom Davis wins the coin flip and starts the afternoon questioning.

Update: Davis is being much nicer to Clemens about the nanny. He's giving Clemens credit for finding her and a chance to explain what went on.

Update: The other Rep. Davis (the Democrat) asks Scheeler if Clemens meeting with the nanny was usual. Scheeler says no, it's done by a lawyer or a lawyer's investigator.

Update: Clemens says he never heard that Mitchell wanted to talk to him. (His agents didn't tell him.) Roger also gives plenty of examples of how easy he is to find.

Update: Waxman points out that Roger's investigators told him before the Mitchell report came out that Roger would be part of it.

Update: Rep. Braley is asking Clemens if he has any symptoms of needing B-12. Roger says no, and when asked if he's a vegan, says he doesn't know what that is.

Update: Braley asks Clemens why he would trust McNamee to do medical procedures like B-12 and lidocaine injections.

Update: I hate it when the reps give speeches rather than asking questions.

Update: Rep. Westmoreland thinks this is a show trial. They shouldn't be concerned with individuals, but the drug policy.

Update: Scheeler is asked about McNamee's questioning. Scheeler says the account of the interview in Roger's defamation suit is in correct. Scheeler says Mitchell asked the questions.

Update: Souder asked a New Yorker if "It is what it is" is a New York expression for telling the truth. The person told him it was.

Update: Clemens just read a statement by his wife. She said McNamee recommended HGH to her, and Roger didn't know she took it until afterward.

Update: Elijah Cummings is saying Pettitte's affidavit swings his opinion to believing McNamee.

Update: Bradford Files reports from the Red Sox clubhouse:

While it continues to rain outside, a group of players are hunkered down in the trainer's room watching the Roger Clemens hearing. Eveyone who walks out are just shaking their heads, relaying how it is not going well for Clemens.

It's over, thank goodness.

Update: Waxman is apologizing to McNamee for some of then comments directed at him. The chairman clearly believes McNamee and not Clemens.

I still don't know what to think about who is more truthful, Clemens or McNamee. Clearly, McNamee memory of specific dates is off, and he's admitted to lying in the past. Clemens has inconsistencies as well, especially in regards to saying he never talked about HGH with Brian, but did after Brian injected Debbie. Pettitte's deposition might be the deciding factor.

Waxman is clearly out to get Clemens. The whole nanny story he told was intended to make Clemens look like he was tampering with a witness. The butt MRI was pretty dramatic as well, getting a doctor to say B-12 wouldn't cause that. More when they resume.

I just got the power back on, it looks like I missed most of Waxman's opening statement. I did hear him read Pettitte's statement, and the statement of Pettitte's wife about the conversations with Clemens about HGH.

The yellow flower held by Mrs. Clemens is a nice touch. She appears to be playing the Maureen Dean role today.

Update: Pettitte used HGH one other time, stealing the dose from his father.

Update: Clemens is starting his statement with condolences over Rep. Lantos.

Update: Clemens says he's guilty of being too trusting of everyone. Clemens is pointing out no matter what he did, stay silent or strongly protest, people took that as a sign of guilt.

Update: Roger just stated categorically that he never took steroids or HGH.

Update: McNamee is up, and he opens with a statement that he injected Clemens with steroids and HGH, and inject Pettitte and Knoblauch with HGH. He's also expressing contrition.

Update: McNamee points out that his stories about Pettitte and Knoblauch were confirmed, and he's also telling the truth about Clemens.

Update: McNamee now says he injected Clemens more often than he reported to Mitchell.

Update: Alan Schwarz is in the committee room and filing report.

Update: It's about the children! No, it's about Roger Clemens!

Update: Rep. Cummings is questioning Clemens now.

Update: Cummings is telling Clemens how difficult it was for Pettitte to testify against Roger.

Update: Clemens said Pettitte misheard about Clemens using HGH. Clemens said he had a conversation with Pettitte about a TV show in which older men got back their quality of life by using HGH.

Update: Rep. Cummings is trying a trick. He keeps trying to get Clemens to say that he thinks Andy is telling the truth. Clemens won't fall for the direct answer and keeps saying that Pettitte misheard or misunderstood.

Update: Now they're getting to Debbie.

Update: Clemens doesn't remember the conversation with Pettitte about Debbie Clemens using HGH. Cummings wanted Clemens to be clear; did he not remember or did it never happen. Clemens says he does not remember.

Update: Cummings gets Clemens on the timeline. The original Pettitte-Clemens conversation was in 1999 or 2000. Clemens said his wife didn't use HGH until 2003, so when Clemens told Pettitte in 2005 that he was talking about Debbie in the first conversation, that doesn't jibe with what Clemens admitted.

Update: Rep. Davis is now questioning McNamee. He wants to know why the number of injections keep going up. He said he didn't keep records, but thinking about it the last two months, he remembered more and more.

Update: Davis asks McNamee why he never said, "I am telling the truth," during the taped phone conversation. McNamee claims when he said, "It is what it is," that's his jargon for I'm telling the truth.

Update: Davis is now asking Clemens about Mike Stanton noticing Roger Clemens bleeding through his pants. Roger says it didn't happen. McNamee says Roger told him it happened.

Update: Davis is getting to the Canseco barbecue. He's pointing out that McNamee's story does not match the evidence they've gathered.

Update: McNamee recalls seeing Clemens nanny at the party picking up one of Clemen's children as he headed for the pool, and Clemens showing up later.

Update: Clemens is asked how B-12 helps him.

Update: Roger said McNamee injected him five times with B-12, McNamee says he never injected Roger with B-12.

Update: Rep. Tierney notes in the past McNamee lied to investigators, both in Florida and to Federal investigators. He's now pointing out Clemens's credibility issues as well.

Update: Tierney is now reading Clemens's account of Debbie's injections. He wants to know why Clemens said he never had a conversation with McNamee about HGH when he did have a conversation about it over Clemens's wife.

Update: Dan Burton is asking Clemens why he thinks McNamee was coerced into lying about Clemens.

Update: Burton is pointing out all the lies that McNamee told over the years to newspapers.

Update: Burton just said he doesn't believe McNamee, and he doesn't like this trial by media.

Update: Rep. Lynch is talking about the abscess on Clemens's buttocks. The Blue Jays did have records of masses on the buttocks.

Update: They have an MRI of the mass, and the report says the mass was likely caused by an injection.

Update: A doctor says the MRI is more consistent with winstrol than B-12.

Update: The doctors and trainers for the Blue Jays at the time said they never said they had seen a reaction like that from B-12.

Update: Rep. Davis notes that Dr. Grossman, who examined Clemens at the time of the MRI, came to a different conclusion.

Update: Davis is pointing out that we know Clemens received a B-12 shot before the injury, but McNamee's recollection of when he gave Roger winstrol doesn't match the time period.

Update: For some reason, the Democrats on the committee seem to be going after Clemens, and the Republicans are going after McNamee. I have no idea why this would break down along party lines.

Update: Scheeler is being grilled about the Canseco party. Does he still believe the meeting occured? He won't give a definite answer.

Update: I would like someone to ask Scheeler why he thinks McNamee is truthful.

Update: Rep. Souder wanted the other witnesses here. He says the released depositions will be devastating.

Update: Souder is also discussing allegations that the owners didn't want testing and they should be investigated.

Update: Souder is noting that McNamee's slow release of information is usually what happens in drug cases. The criminal initially gives up just enough to stay out of jail, then something tics them off and more comes out.

Update: Waxman is now talking about the nanny. She said they her, Debbie and the children stayed over night at Canseco's house, and Clemens was there for some period of time.

Waxman now says that Clemens talked to her on Sunday, before the committee, after the committee had asked Clemens's lawyers not to contact her.

Update: Clemens's lawyers are objecting to Waxman's innuendo. Waxman says Clemens's actions in this regard are inappropriate.

Update: There's going to be a 15 minute break. I'll pick this up again in a new post.

Jay Jaffe is commenting on the Clemens hearing at FoxRadio.

Andy Pettitte's affidavit leaked to the press:

Pettitte said in the affidavit that he asked Clemens in 2005 what he would do if asked by the media about HGH, given his admission years earlier. According to the account told to the AP, the affidavit said Clemens responded by saying Pettitte misunderstood the previous exchange in 1999 or 2000 and that, in fact, Clemens had been talking about HGH use by his wife in the original conversation.

So maybe McNamee's story about Mrs. Clemens was correct. There's also more bad news for Roger:

Clemens will also be asked about corroborating information that committee staff members developed on their own that ties Clemens to such drugs, the lawyers said. That information, they said, stands separate and apart from the assertions made about Clemens by his former personal trainer, Brian McNamee, who contends that he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone from 1998 to 2001.

From Canseco's affidavit:

"I have never had a conversation with Clemens in which he expressed any interest in using steroids or human growth hormone," Canseco said in the affidavit. "Clemens has never asked me to give steroids or human growth hormone, and I have never seen Clemens "use, possess or ask for steroids or human growth hormone."

From Juiced:

"It was the pitchers who really kept that 'B12' joke going. For example, I've never seen Roger Clemens do steroids, and he never told me that he did. But we've talked about what steroids could do for you, in which combinations, and I've heard him use the phrase 'B12 shot' in respect to others."

So I guess that conversation was just informational.

It appears the original reason Pettitte won't appear before Congress was wrong:

Sources told Quinn that Pettitte was not a good witness when he appeared before congressional lawyers during a sworn deposition on Monday. Pettitte often contradicted himself, the sources said, so the committee agreed to his request not to appear Wednesday.

Lawyers familiar with the hearings would not say if Pettitte implicated Clemens as a steroids user in his testimony. However, they said that Pettitte's testimony didn't fully jibe with Clemens' versions of events.

So maybe there's less here than meets the eye.

Doctors tell Congress HGH doesn't help.

Joe Posnanski writes an entertaining and serious piece about tomorrow's congressional hearings:

I will admit, with a slightly red-face, that at first I was semi-looking forward to this Roger Clemens-Brian McNamee slimedown. I was looking forward to it in that same guilty-pleasure way that I always looked forward to those Monday Night Football sideline reports from Eric Dickerson*. I'm not proud of myself. But, hey, I couldn't help it. I mean here you have two guys -- one threw a bat at Mike Piazza and later started cutting billion dollar deals which allowed him to be a part-time baseball player from his living room, the other was a one-time cop who left the force so he could hang around ballplayers and, if applicable, shoot them up with steroids and HGH. It looked like it would be a very entertaining event, sort of a Wimbledon final between Ann Coulter and Geraldo.

I, for one, am not looking forward to this. It's just going to be a painful day.

Seth Mnookin tells us why he believes John Rocker:

I also believe him because if the whole steroids mess has shown us anything, it's that the least likely folks have ended up being the most honest. That's in large part because of the frat house/high school locker room mentality of the entire baseball world, where the omerta code is lots stronger than it is in today's mob...and guys like Jose and JR have already been kicked out of the club, so they have nothing to lose.

Dan Fox writes a thoughtful piece on using statistics to identify potential PED users. It's in response to this article by Alan Schwarz.

What I find interesting is that Dan's method would have flagged Carlton Fisk for increased scrutiny. Fisk's late career surge took place from 1988 to 1990, pretty much the height of Canseco's career. The drugs were available.

Mike Fish of ESPN.com interviews Kirk Radomski. Interestingly, he was turned in by a friend of ballplayers. The friend was in trouble with the law:

So who turned him in to the authorities?

A telling document is the affidavit in support of the search warrant executed the day before the December raid in 2005. In it, Novitzky writes that the FBI had provided a confidential informant -- described as an individual awaiting sentence on felony real estate fraud -- who learned through baseball acquaintances of an individual in New York who was supplying anabolic steroids to players.

The informant told Novitzky that one of the players supplied by Radomski had been publicly connected to the BALCO scandal. The identity of that player remains unknown publicly.

According to documents, the informant contacted a baseball source who eventually put him in contact with Radomski. The FBI tape-recorded the calls. Beginning in April 2005, the FBI informant placed at least five steroid orders on behalf of agents with Radomski, the last of which was shipped to a San Jose address provided by Novitzky.

"I know who it is. I know the real estate guy," Radomski says. "It took me a while, but I understood.

"They had a lot of information. I never talked to people about it, so it had to be ballplayers. And the so-called FBI informant, he didn't know as much as they thought he did. There had to be ballplayers that were talking."

The bigger the conspiracy, the easier it falls apart.

This doesn't sound good for Roger Clemens:

The chairman of the House Oversight Committee is supporting Andy Pettitte's request not to have to testify publicly against his former teammate Roger Clemens at a public hearing on Wednesday, a congressional staff person said Monday.

...

Pettitte asked out of public testimony because he did not want to say something to hurt his friend and former teammate while in the glare of national television coverage, according to a government official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

It appears there is something in Andy's deposition that casts a shadow on Clemens.

John Rocker is mouthing off again:

Former major league pitcher John Rocker said Monday that baseball commissioner Bud Selig knew he failed a drug test in 2000 and that doctors for the "league" and the "players association" advised him and several Texas Rangers teammates on how to effectively use steroids.

Rocker, no stranger to controversy, made those comments on Atlanta radio station Rock 100.5.

Later Monday, he told Atlanta sports talk radio station 680 The Fan that "between 40 to 50 percent of baseball players are on steroids" and "in 2000 Bud Selig knew John Rocker was taking the juice."

The league could test back then if there was probable cause. This also contradicts earlier statements by Rocker, detailed in the article.

Looks like Roger's lawyer shot off his mouth:

Rusty Hardin, a Houston-based lawyer representing Clemens, made his comments to The New York Times on Saturday, after he learned that Jeff Novitzky, a special agent for the Internal Revenue Service who has been leading a steroids investigation, planned to attend Wednesday's hearing.

In a letter to Hardin, the committee chairman, Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California, said his remarks could be interpreted as "an attempt to intimidate a federal law enforcement official in the performance of his official duties."

Hardin told The Times on Saturday that Novitzky's intention to attend the hearing was "unbelievable" and "brazen." Hardin also said, "I can tell you this: If he ever messes with Roger, Roger will eat his lunch."

On Sunday, Hardin, who had not yet received the letter from Waxman, said he wished he had not made the "injudicious" remark about Clemens's eating Novitzky's lunch.

When the Mitchell report first broke, I spoke to a friend who is a lawyer. I asked him what he would tell me to do if I was mentioned in such a report. His advice was to let my lawyer do all the talking, and if he were my lawyer, he wouldn't say anything. Hardin has Clemens talking way too much, and is talking way too much himself. As we've seen, Jeff Novitzky isn't someone you want working against you. After all, the IRS doesn't need a warrant to go through Mr. Hardin's and Mr. Clemens's tax returns to see if anything is amiss.

Clemens spent the last few days doing a tour of Congress. Too bad his lawyer undid all that hard work.

Kirk Radomski spoke to Mike Fish of ESPN. He trusts what McMamee says, although the trainer never told Kirk names of players usings steroids. I thought Radomski's comparison of Greg Anderson and McNamee was interesting:

Radomski said he wonders about the silence displayed by personal trainer Greg Anderson when he has been questioned about Bonds, and its relationship to the ongoing Clemens-McNamee dispute.

"I think it is money," Radomski said, speculating on why Anderson hasn't spoken about Bonds. "And you know what? If that is the case, that is fine with me. He made that decision. And Bonds did the right thing there. Then Bonds ain't that bad of a guy. And he's a smart guy, at least. And he looked out for his guy.

"Why didn't Roger do that to Brian, then? You want to protect people. You want to be their friend, but friendship also has to go both ways. I guess Bonds understood that."

So Barry did a better job paying off his trainer than Clemens!

Kirk Radomski avoid jail and Mrs. Clemens is accused of taking HGH. This Clemens story gets stranger all the time.

Update: Yankees Chick sums up the Clemens story very well.

The Smoking Gun has the pictures of McNamee's evidence. Somehow, I don't think this is going to convince anyone.

Brian McNamee turned over what he claims is physical evidence linking Roger Clemens to steroids:

McNamee kept syringes, gauze pads and vials from the 2000 and 2001 seasons because he feared Clemens would deny illicit drug use if the matter was ever investigated, according to the anonymous source cited by the newspaper.

I had a feeling Mitchell was going on something more than McNamee's word. We'll see how this plays out.

Here's an interesting study that shows significant improvement for ball players associated with Jose Canseco. I haven't had time to read the whole report, but it seems to make it likely that without Jose, the PED problem in baseball might be much smaller.

Hat tip, The Book.

The Buffalo News prints the deposition schedule leading up to the February 13, 2008 hearings on PED use.

McNamee told Pettitte about Clemens drug use:

Pettitte and McNamee talked in 2001 and 2002 about Roger Clemens's use of steroids and human growth hormone, McNamee's lawyers, Earl Ward and Richard Emery, said Tuesday.

They said that Pettitte, who has acknowledged receiving H.G.H. from McNamee in 2002, will provide the first account of contemporaneous conversations with McNamee about Clemens's use of performance-enhancing drugs in earlier years.

Clemens's lawyer in Washington responded Tuesday with another strong denial that Clemens had ever used performance-enhancing drugs.

I'd say that's pretty bad news for Roger, especially this part:

Emery and Ward said that not only did McNamee and Pettitte talk about Clemens's drug use on several occasions, but that Clemens might have influenced Pettitte the first time Pettitte asked to use a performance-enhancing drug.

"There was a conversation in the gym where Pettitte came over to Brian and told him, 'Why didn't you tell me about that stuff?' " Emery said in a telephone interview Tuesday. "It appeared to be after a conversation with Clemens, but he didn't know what was said in that conversation."

Ward, in a separate telephone interview, said, "Brian discouraged him at first, and then less than a year later he came back and that is when Brian injected him."

It's a good thing Roger dug a deep hole, because he's going to get buried.

My latest SportingNews.com column finds the report by Clemens's agent misleading. I think they had a chance to make a good case for Roger here, but by cherry picking data, they end up giving the opposite impression.

Dugout Central agrees with me that the report didn't prove its case. Sabernomics, however, takes the data and does a better job than the agents of showing positive evidence toward Clemens being clean..

Chuck Knoblauch agreed to a deposition. No word on how he did out from the federal supoena.

The Hendricks Brothers, agents for Roger Clemens, released a statistical report showing that Roger's longevity was due to adjustments, not steroids. Unfortunately, the AP does not link to the report. Has anyone seen it?

Update: The Boston Globe provides the link. You can find the report here.

Update: I just started reading, but there's some evidence the people writing the report know what they are talking about. Unfortunately, the report does not allow copying. At the bottom of page 3, however, the report discusses how ERA is a much better indicator of success than W-L record, noting that wins and losses are also dependent on run support, fielding support and bullpen support.

Update: Page 18 does a good job of refuting the idea that Clemens was washed up after the 1996 season. The writers note Clemens's won-lost record was due more to run support than poor pitching. They also note that Clemens's ERA margin that year was similar to Schilling's in 2004, a year Curt went 21-6 with great run support.

This is actually one of the things I find wrong with the reporting on Clemens. People are giving Dan Duquette more credit now for realizing Clemens was done in 1996. But according to McNamee, Clemens didn't start using steroids until 1998, after he won a Cy Young award in 1997. I don't think Duquette is off the hook for his statement, especially since the only thing wrong with Clemens's 1996 season was his W-L record.

Update: Starting on page 30, the report shows that while Clemens's quality of pitching didn't decline much with age (it jumped around a lot), his quantity of pitching did, both in terms of innings per game and pitches thrown per game.

Update: I finished a quick perusal of the report. It makes a number of good points, mentioned above. However, it does appear to cherry pick comparisons, showing similarities between Clemens, Ryan, Randy Johnson and Schilling to show that Clemens wasn't unusual. Of course, all four of those pitchers are unusual.

The most interesting graphs to me, however, were the ones showing the yearly fluctuations in Rogers ERA margin compared to Johnson and Schilling. Roger's bounces up and down throughout his career. Both Johnson and Schilling start off below their career averages, have a long steady period above their averages, then fall and don't recover. The fact that Clemens bounces around a lot means he suffers years of unexpected poor performance that Schilling and Johnson don't. Those might be the times Clemens is tempted to use steroids.

I'm interested to see what others think of the tables. For example, there is a table comparing the years Clemens, Johnson and Schilling finish in the top five in K per 9. It shows they all do it at about the same ages. If you extend that to top ten, does the table look different? There's a lot here for sabermetricians to chew on.

Jack Cust denies he ever talked about steroids with Larry Bigbie:

Cust told reporters that he never has used performance enhancing substances, saying, "No. No. Not even one game." And, he said, he does not remember having any conversations with Bigbie about steroids.

"He was a teammate of mine five years ago and we haven't talked since," Cust said. "I don't remember any conversations about (steroids). He might have misinterpreted something I said, but I don't remember anything.

"I read the report, and he said he had the locker next to me. I didn't have a locker next to him. I don't know how something like that gets misinterpreted, but I haven't talked to him in five years. ... A lot of people say the same thing, that it seems weird my name is in there when there were other cases where there was a lot more (evidence) accrued."

This was an example of where a player talking to Mitchell might have kept his name out of the report.

Chuck Knoblauch is still hiding out:

He can pull an Abbie Hoffman, eluding Big John Law for years, now and then granting interviews to selected media. He'll become Che' Knoblauch, a symbol of growth hormone rights, the man who refused to turn his butt in to the brownshirts of the totalitarian state. Noam Chomsky will cite him. Keith Olbermann will forgive him for beaning Keith's mom behind first base. He will be the Yankee That Got Away.

In this day and age, I would think it's pretty difficult to hide out. If he uses a credit card or ATM, someone is going to know about it. I would guess they can even ping his cell phone to get a fix on his location. I hope someone writes a book about how Chuck is eluding authorities.

Jose Canseco's new book suffers another setback in credibility. The first ghost writer quit due to lack of evidence, and now there are allegations Canseco tried to solicit money from Magglio Ordonez to keep the Tigers outfielder out of the book:

José Canseco, the former major league slugger and admitted steroid user who exposed other players in his 2005 best-selling book "Juiced," offered to keep a Detroit Tigers outfielder "clear" in his next book if the player invested money in a film project Canseco was promoting, according to a person in baseball with knowledge of the situation.

Four people in baseball confirmed that referrals were made from Major League Baseball to the F.B.I. regarding Canseco's actions relating to the six-time All-Star outfielder Magglio Ordóñez, who was not mentioned in Canseco's earlier book or in any other report on performance-enhancing drugs in baseball. All four insisted on anonymity because they said they didn't have authority to speak about the events.

Chuck Knoblauch learned the first rule of not being seen.

Ray Ratto suggests the Giants be punished for allowing Greg Anderson into the locker room by allowing the Athletics to move to San Jose if they wish.

Is baseball considering such a notion? Not that anyone can tell. But it is a solution that has several benefits to it, not the least of which is hitting the Giants where Magowan thinks they live. San Francisco's strategy for long-term health has been to drive the A's into the sea, and it galls the Giants that their annual contributions to the revenue sharing plan almost exactly match Oakland's take-home check.

My only problem with this is Oakland was ground zero for the explosion of steroids in baseball. Sure, the ownership and management that let Canseco run free isn't there any more, but there were plenty of Athletics under the control of Billy Beane who we know were users. If you are going to punish the Giants, you might think about punishing the A's as well. Maybe taking away that $13 million revenue check.

A mutual friend of Roger Clemens and Andy Pettitte says the two pitchers were never that close:

"They were never as close as they were made out to be," a friend of both said on the condition of anonymity. "They just sort of went along with it in the media, because it was a good story."

We'll see how this plays out in their congressional testimony.

Brian McNamee says he talked to one of Clemens agents about the steroid injections in 2004:

What may be the more significant reference to Murray comes moments later, when McNamee recalls that he met with Murray.

"I met with Jimmy in '04, and I told him. I said Jimmy, I just wanted to give you guys a heads-up because you better have some information. I'd rather you be prepared than unprepared," McNamee said.

McNamee's lawyers, in response to questions about the tape, said McNamee had met with Murray because he feared Clemens would fail a drug test.

This story keeps getting more interesting.

Congress set dates for players and trainers to be deposed and to testify.

I wanted to follow up on the post about false positives with this comment. The false positive problem is the reason I believe the first drug testing pushishment scheme was right to keep the first positive test confidential. It gave the player a chance to appeal the decision without being branded a cheater, and it gave MLB a chance to find more evidence against the player, such as shipments from out of state pharmacies. I don't think any test is perfect, but I have to believe raising an internal red flag is better than outing someone innocent.

Mike Lowell wants a perfect HGH test:

World Series MVP Mike Lowell is willing to give blood if that's what it takes to be tested for human growth hormone. But only if the test is 100 percent accurate. Not 99 percent.

"If it's 99 percent accurate, that's going to be seven false positives," the Red Sox third baseman said Thursday before the annual dinner of the Boston chapter of the Baseball Writers' Association of America. "Ninety-three percent is 70 guys. That's almost three whole rosters.

"You're destroying someone's reputation. What if one of the false positives is Cal Ripken? Doesn't it put a black mark on his career?"

Mike doesn't quite get the probabilities right. This is a perfect place to use Bayes Rule. What we want to know the probability of not using HGH given a positive test, p(~HGH|+). Let's say we know this (I'm making up the numbers):

• The probability of a player using HGH is 30%, p(HGH) = .3.
• The probability of a player not using HGH is 70%, p(HGH) = .7.
• The probability of a player testing positive given that he is using HGH is 99%, p(+|HGH) = .99.
• The probability of a player testing positive given that he is not using HGH is 1%, p(+|~HGH) = .01

Note that the test is 99% accurate in both direction. It detects 99% of players who use HGH, and it detects 99% of players who don't use HGH. By Bayes Rule, p(~HGH|+) = .01*.7/((.01*.7) + (.99*.3)) = .023, or 2.3% of the positives are going to implicate clean players. In fact, you should get five false positives if you test 700 players, not seven.

You can play with the number if you like. If only 10% of players are using HGH, then the chance of a false positive is 8.3%. In that case, you end up with about six false positives when you test 700 players. The smaller the number of players who actually use HGH, the more clean players end up testing positive!

Lowell's overall point is correct. We need to know the rates of false positives and true positives to really understand the results. There will be players caught who are clean.

It's nice to see MLB put the World Anti-Doping Agency in their place:

Selig fired right back at Fahey, who took over from Dick Pound on Jan. 1.

"WADA does not have a monopoly on independence in the world of drug testing," Selig said.

Rob Manfred, MLB's executive vice president for labor relations, was even harsher.

"These continuing, unprovoked, inaccurate publicity stunts by WADA have created an unwillingness to become more involved with WADA and its affiliates," Manfred said. "We were hopeful that false public statements by WADA would end with its recent change in leadership, and we are deeply disappointed that Mr. Fahey is showing the same counterproductive tendencies as his predecessor."

WADA set themselves up as judge, jury and executioner, with little oversight of their practices. I suspect that if some tried to set up the WAAD, World Agency for Anti-Doping, WADA would react like this (excuse the language):

BRIAN:

Are you the Judean People's Front?

REG:

Fuck off!

BRIAN:

What?

REG:

Judean People's Front. We're the People's Front of Judea! Judean People's Front. Cawk.

FRANCIS:

Wankers.

It is clear, however, that WADA really hates the dopers.

Via Baseball Think Factory, Doug Glanville opines about the steroid era:

The newest round of Congressional hearings danced around Miguel Tejada, the remorse of baseball leadership and a lot of could haves, should haves, and might haves. Moving forward, we must openly address not only the drug issues plaguing the sports we love, but the culture of fear that shakes our society.

We're scared of failure, aging, vulnerability, leaving too soon, being passed up -- and in the quest to conquer these fears, we are inspired by those who do whatever it takes to rise above and beat these odds. We call it "drive" or "ambition," but when doing "whatever it takes" leads us down the wrong road, it can erode our humanity. The game ends up playing us.

Elite athletes, I would argue, are a lot more driven than society as a whole. That's how they became elite athletes. To them winning is everything, which is why it's easy to go down the wrong path.

Ana Santi will spend the next three to six years behind bars. That's one less doctor available to write fake prescriptions.

There's a possibility Bud Selig might suspend Brian Sabean:

Rep. Henry Waxman, the chairman of the committee, asked Selig whether Sabean should have reported the allegations against Anderson to the commissioner's office.

"Of course," Selig responded.

Will Sabean be punished?

"That's all I want to say because this is under review," Selig said. "You've raised a very valid point. It's of great concern to me. Why anybody is in the clubhouse besides the official team trainer is beyond me."

Via Baseball Think Factory, someone who agrees with me that steroids should be legal and administered under a doctor's supervision.

Players are finding a way around the ban on amphetamines.

Rep. John F. Tierney brought up an interesting point that former Sen. George Mitchell did not address in his report - the spike in therapeutic exemptions for amphetamine-like substances to treat attention-deficit disorder.

According to Tierney, the number of these medical exemptions allowed by Major League baseball spiked from 28 in 2006 to more than 100 in 2007. The rate of players using drugs such as Ritalin and Adderall under the exemption last season was eight times the rate of adults using these drugs in the general population.

The players who want to use banned substances always seem to find a way around the rules. Getting a prescription seems to be the popular way right now.

Alan Schwarz at the NY Times Bats blog is live blogging the hearings. It appears Chris Shays isn't clear on the concept of milestones.

Frank Bowman, a former prosecutor, pens an excellent article at Slate on why the DOJ is doing a poor job in the steroid investigation. I agree with Mr. Bowman on this:

That said, the Justice Department has mishandled the baseball steroid investigation in two important ways. First, the DoJ is prosecuting, or at least focusing on, the wrong people. The primary targets should be players, not suppliers. At the same time, the U.S. Department of Justice had no business feeding Mitchell, and through him the public, damaging information about players it lacks the evidence or the will to prosecute.

According to reporting by the New York Daily News, the FBI had the goods on McGwire and Canseco in the 1990s, but prosecuted the dealers instead. If those two had gone to jail then, we might not be going through the misery of today.

Roger Clemens is not the only player in the congressional cross hairs.

A House committee plans to revisit statements made by former Orioles All-Star Miguel Tejada in 2005 to see whether the shortstop's story is consistent with information contained in the Mitchell Report, according to two sources with knowledge of the inquiry.

The Oversight and Government Reform Committee will look for discrepancies between what Tejada told committee staff in August 2005 and what investigators for former Sen. George Mitchell concluded about him in last month's report on steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs.

It's possible that Miguel faces jail time if the committee found he lied back in 2005.

George Mitchell, Bud Selig and Don Fehr face Congress today. It will be covered by C-Span 2 from 9:30 AM to noon. I won't be watching live, but I'll catch in on my DVR when I get home this afternoon.

I find the story on the double amputee not allowed to compete in the Olympics fascinating in light of all the talk about performance enhancing drugs going on now. It's another example of technology moving faster than the rules of sports. Prosthetics are advancing rapidly. There are now limbs that function much better because they respond to nerve impulses. It's just a matter of time before someone puts a strong motor in an artificial arm, giving someone strength beyond any shot of testosterone. How can we keep such people out of professional sports when in my lifetime we as a society worked to bring down barriers to people with handicaps? And if these people are allowed to play, at what point do ballplayers replace their limbs with artificial ones so they can make more money? In the next century, we may be watching the bionic baseball league.

Last night, Repoz linked to a T.J. Quinn interview with Rusty Hardin at ESPN. Repoz quotes part of the story in which Quinn claims McNamee, in the Mitchell report, indicated Roger Clemens used steroids before 1998. TangoTiger, at The Book, notices that part of the conversation is now gone. That original set of questions makes this passage seem to come out of the blue:

T.J. Quinn: But his career did change. I mean, he was...

Rusty Hardin: No.

T.J. Quinn: You talk to those scouts about when he was finishing up in Boston, and one after another, they say, "This guy's done."

Rusty Hardin: Back up a moment there. I tell you what. Why don't you wait till next week or so to, to so comfortably... Randy and them have been doing a study of his career and stuff -- and see. And, and if you talk about his career being stalled, which year was it stalled, in '96?

T.J. Quinn: It would've been end of '96, right, before he went to Toronto.

Rusty Hardin: He goes to Toronto in '97. Is the contention that -- when McNamee says he started before then. When are people saying he started using them? If McNamee is saying -- and I really didn't realize what you're saying, I have to go back and look at that now. Uh, if McNamee's saying -- when was he supposed to start it? Was he supposed to start it in '95, '94, '92? When did -- when is he supposed to have been using steroids, if McNamee says he had done it before? Uh, and if you look at his 1996 record, did anybody look at what was going on then? Has he started strong every year, or is he starting slow every year? And what standard are people using? I think what you're going to find is they're using the worst standard. They're using win-loss record. And, and, you know, 2005 will tell you why that doesn't make any sense. I mean, I watched him over here at this ballpark, and he pitched his heart out every time and he was losing. And, and he was pitching as well as anybody in the league, and he didn't have a win-loss record reflect that. Does that mean he's pitching worse? I don't think so.

I've reread the section on Roger Clemens in the Mitchell report and there is nothing about Roger using steroids before 1998. Quinn was wrong in part quoted by Repoz. The way the transcript looks now, Hardin comes off suggesting that the Mitchell report indicates Clemens used before 1998. ESPN should return the original section to the transcript with a note that Quinn was wrong about the Mitchell report.

Update: McNamee is willing to talk more about Roger Clemens.

According to a source close to the trainer who says he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone, McNamee answered questions from the government and former Sen. George Mitchell's office truthfully, but "he tried not to hurt Roger" in the process. Now that Clemens has sued him for defamation and has mounted a ferocious attack on McNamee, "stuff is pouring out of him." According to Ward, "Brian knows a lot about Roger's moral character and knows a lot about his extracurricular activities. ... There's a lot that he could say to damage Roger's reputation, but we plan on taking the high road. ... If some of this stuff were to come out, Roger Clemens would look very, very, very bad."

Pretty soon the two will be duking it out on the Jerry Springer show.

Brian McNamee claims Roger Clemens developed an abscess on his butt due to steroid injections. The New York Times can't find anyone to confirm that.

But did Clemens have an abscess in 1998? Three members of the Blue Jays' organization that season, including one of the team's two trainers, said in recent interviews that they did not recall any abscess associated with Clemens that year.

In addition, Clemens's lawyer, Rusty Hardin, said Friday that McNamee had made the same assertion about an abscess to Hardin's investigators Dec. 12. He said they followed up by contacting both Blue Jays trainers from that season, neither of whom backed McNamee's account.

This story can't go much lower.

Major League Baseball formed an investigative unit to combat drug use:

"The department of investigations will have critically important responsibilities in protecting the integrity of our sport," commissioner Bud Selig said.

Dan Mullin, a former New York City Police Officer who had been in baseball's senior director of security operations, was appointed vice president and head of the unit. George Hanna, a former FBI employee currently in baseball's security department, was appointed senior director of investigations.

MLB said the unit "will have broad authority to conduct investigations." The limits of the unit were not immediately clear. Will it place moles in clubhouses? Will it secretly tail players away from ballparks?

I'm actually a bit surprised a unit like this didn't already exist. I hope it doesn't turn out like this.

Knoblauch speaks to the New York Times in a poorly written article by Thayer Evans. Chuck said nothing interesting, and Evans fills the article with minutia like Chuck's wardrobe choice. And what does Knoblauch's failure to return phone messages from the House Committee have to do with the demise of Chuck's ability to throw a baseball?

It appears there was at least one Red Sox player on the 2004 championship team using PEDs.

The House of Representatives put the tarp on the witness table for the ballplayers as they postponed the hearing into steroid use until Feb. 13, 2008.

Congress wants to be prepared when Roger Clemens and his former trainer, Brian McNamee, head to Capitol Hill. The House hearing involving Clemens, McNamee and Andy Pettitte was postponed Wednesday from Jan. 16 until Feb. 13, giving lawmakers more time to gather evidence, to take depositions from the witnesses and to coordinate their investigation with the Justice Department.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform was to begin meeting with lawyers for the witnesses Thursday. Clemens' attorney, Rusty Hardin, said he hopes to meet with committee staffers next week. In addition, McNamee is to meet with federal prosecutors Thursday in New York.

"Roger hasn't done anything," Hardin said. "The federal government looking at Roger is fine with me."

Plans are still in place for the Jan. 15 hearing before the same committee about the Mitchell Report on baseball's Steroids Era. The witnesses that day will be commissioner Bud Selig, union leader Donald Fehr and former Senate majority leader George Mitchell, the report's author.

If you have tickets, they can be exchanged for any house hearing or put toward season tickets for the Senate. :-)

Via My Baseball Bias, Brian McNamee's attorney shot back at Roger Clemens yesterday:

"What does (Clemens) do, he calls him back with his lawyer in the room and a tape recorder going," McNamee attorney Richard Emery told the Daily News last night. "He wants to play that game, he's going to get buried. I have no compunction about putting him in jail.

"This is war."

Curt Schilling's company could turn this into a video game, World of Rogercraft. I wonder if a smoking syringe will show up?

Update: Sports Illustrated watched the 60-minutes interview with McNamee:

McNamee still holds Clemens in high regard, in part because he admires the pitcher's tireless work ethic, and also because he believes that Clemens was only one of many players using performance enhancers. "It's sad,'' McNamee says. "He was a mentor to me. Roger is an unbelievable family man. I learned how to treat my kids from Roger. And Roger was in no way an abuser of steroids. He never took them through our tough winter workouts. And he never took them in spring training, when the days are longest. He took them in late July, August, and never for more than four to six weeks max ... it wasn't that frequent.'

"Within the culture of what was going on, he was just a small part of it. A lot of guys did it. You can't take away the work Roger did. You can't take away the fact that he worked out as hard as anybody.'' When McNamee, also a former strength and conditioning coach with the Blue Jays from 1998 through 2000, is asked to estimate how many major leaguers were involved with steroids during that period, he answers without hesitation. "More than half,'' he says.

MLB issued a press release detailing new rules on club house personnel and access. The most important one is this:

The overnight notice to Clubs before the arrival of Comprehensive Drug Testing personnel has been eliminated. All Clubs will be required to have a single, designated area for collections in both the home and visiting clubhouses. Collectors will be provided with permanent, official credentials and their access will be facilitated.

It's going to be tougher for people working in the clubhouse, as they'll undergo background checks and random drug tests.

I missed most of the conference, but Peter Abraham said I didn't miss much. Roger is playing a recording of his conversation with McNamee.

Update: I missed most of the tape, but Clemens is just starting to take questions at 5:40 EST.

Update: ESPN bleeped out Roger Clemens. He really seems to be upset. He ended by saying he can't wait to get into the private sector where he doesn't have to answer these questions again. His anger really appears to be genuine. Unless he's a really good actor, I'm tempted to believe him.

Update: MGL heard the tape of the phone call between Clemens and McNamee and thinks Clemens is guilty.

Update: You can listen to the recording here.

AP Headline:

Pettitte to use Sosa's lawyer at hearing

I wonder if this means Andy will forget how to speak English?

Ken Rosenthal warns that the government might not react kindly to Roger Clemens accusing them of coersion:

The feds don't like to be smeared, and the lawsuit does just that.

"According to McNamee," Clemens' petition states, "he originally made his allegations to federal authorities after being threatened with criminal prosecution if he did not implicate Clemens (as a user of performance-enhancing drugs)."

That allegation of coercion -- if proven -- would be a significant blow to other federal investigations, including the government's long-running case against Barry Bonds.

Roger Clemens filed a law suit against Brian McNamee:

In a defamation lawsuit filed Sunday night, Roger Clemens claims Brian McNamee, his longtime trainer and chief accuser of steroid abuse, was threatened with jail if he didn't connect the pitcher to steroids.

The lawsuit was filed electronically with the Harris County civil courts Sunday evening just before CBS locally aired Clemens' interview on 60 Minutes.

So Clemens throws the first law suit. I wonder if McNamee will counter sue, and if this case will prevent the two from testifying before Congress?

This is all getting very Orwellian. According to McNamee, he was threatened with jail if he didn't tell the truth. According to Clemens McNamee was threatened with jail if he didn't lie. That second part doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I understand the federal investigators are pursuing these cases zealously. I don't understand why they benefit from framing Clemens. I'm guessing the feds have some other evidence or testimony they used to force McNamee to talk. With a lawsuit in place, maybe we'll find out.

The interview is starting now.

Update: Clemens is clearly upset at all this.

Update: You'd think CBS could bring for a HD camera. Maybe they're afraid Mike Wallace looks too scary in HD.

Update: Clemens's answer about why McNamee would tell the truth about Pettitte but lie about Roger didn't seem convincing.

Roger also says he wouldn't take steroids because they would shorten his career.

It's funny Mike Wallace is asking Clemens if he takes a lie detector test. I remember 60 Minutes doing a story many years ago showing how useless lie detectors were.

Update: The interview is over. For the most part, Roger was properly indignant about the accusations against him. Apart from the Pettitte question noted above, he made his case as forcefully as he could. Wallace did a good job. At one point, when Clemens was making the point that steroids destroy tendons and shorten careers, so why would he take them, Wallace pointed out that Roger was near the end of his career and wanted to the boost to keep going.

It was also interesting to hear how many other legal drugs Clemens used. He said at one point he was popping Vioxx like Skittles, and given the problems with Vioxx known now, that concerned him. If he wasn't using illegal PEDs, Roger was certainly extending his career through chemistry.

I doubt Roger changed any minds pro or con with this interview. We'll see how he does under oath vs. Congress.

Update: Some comments take exception to my describing Wallace as doing a good job. He did a better job than I thought he would do.

Pat Jordan guest post at The Baseball Analysts about Roger Clemens and Brian McNamee:

I would later learn that one of the many things Mr. Clemens hated about my profile of him was my description of his fawning relationship at the time with his friend Mr. McNamee, who lived in the pool house of Mr. Clemens' Houston estate. On the first day I interviewed Mr. Clemens in Houston I had dinner with him and Mr. McNamee at the most exclusive steak house in Houston. The bill was for over $400, which I paid. Mr. Clemens said, "I'll get you tomorrow." The next day he bought me a taco at a Mexican Restaurant. But the point of my profile of Mr. Clemens was less about his parsimoniousness than it was his strange relationship with Mr. McNamee. During the dinner at the steakhouse Mr. Clemens asked Mr. McNamee for his permission to have a steak (McNamee nodded) and a baked potato (McNamee nodded again, but added a caveat, "Only dry."). The same scenario played itself out at the Mexican Restaurant. Clemens pointed to an item on the menu and Mr. McNamee either nodded, or shook his head, no.

During the three days I followed Mr. Clemens around Houston, he seemed like a child beholden to the whims of the sour, suspicious, and taciturn McNamee. It seemed as if Mr. Clemens would not do anything to his body, or ingest anything into it that Mr. McNamee hadn't approved. I found it strange that, at 38, Mr. Clemens still had to have someone dictate his diet and workout regimen down to the minutest detail at this late stage of his illustrious career. In fact, Mr. Clemens' devotion to Mr. McNamee's diet and workout routine seemed almost like a spiritual quest that must not be impeded.

The whole article is well worth the read.

Hat tip, Baseball Think Factory.

Via Yanksfan vs. Soxfan, Roger Clemens and Brian McNamee spoke by phone on Friday night. I hope one of them had the good sense to record the call.

Peter Abraham offers his opinion on the next set of steroid hearings, now to include Clemens, Pettitte, McNamee and Radomski. I'm with Peter 100% here.

WasWatching too quickly jumps on Tracy Ringolsby's anti-Schilling bandwagon.

In the midst of Curt Schilling's holier-than-thou pronouncements about late-career booms, it would be interesting to have Schilling explain how he turned a lackluster career at the age of 30 into a dominating effort in the next decade.

At 30, having played with a Philadelphia Phillies team that included Lenny Dykstra and Pete Incaviglia, who were listed in the Mitchell Report, Schilling had a career record of 52-52.

Since he turned 30, Schilling is 164-94. What's more, he was 34 before he won 20 games for the first time and has done it three times in the past seven years.

Curt pretty much explained it on his blog in Novemember (originally linked here).

The trio in Delaware are pretty much solely responsible for saving my career in 1995. Dr Craig Morgan (Arguably the smartest man on the planet when it comes to throwing shoulders and 'sick shoulders'), Jeff Cooper (Over 3 decades as head trainer for the Philadelphia Phillies) and Phil Donnelly (NATA Hall of Fame and member of the 1980 US Olympic Training Staff). After being misdiagnosed with a rotator cuff tear, Coop led me to Dr Morgan. Doc took about 2 minutes of testing before telling me I did NOT have a rotator cuff tear, but instead I had a "SLAP Lesion". I believe it's Superior Laberal, Anterior, Posterior Tear. What it isn't, is a rotator cuff tear. I went from "Career ending" to "I can make you better than you've ever been if you follow the protocol for rehab" in a span of about 24 hours.

Doc fixed me, Phil rehabbed me, with Coop, and Coop kept me healthy over the next 5+ years. I came out of surgery throwing about 5-7 mph harder on a pretty consistent basis. Doc told me that he'd make my shoulder perfect, and he did, but also said that if I didn't follow the protocol religiously none of it would matter.

So, in fact, Curt does have an explanation. How much you want to believe it is up to you.

The New York Times asked a doctor about B-12 and lidocaine injections.

In a telephone interview Thursday, Dr. Jerome Groopman, a hematologist and professor at Harvard Medical School, described lidocaine as a common local anesthetic whose injectable form would probably require a prescription. Groopman said that vitamin B12, which does not require a prescription, is administered to patients with a serious deficiency of the vitamin, usually the elderly, and that its value as an energy enhancer was "an urban legend."

"For someone like Roger Clemens, who certainly looks robust, the likelihood that he would be deficient in vitamin B12 is a stretch," Groopman said, noting that he had not seen Clemens's medical records. "It would have no physiological effect. It would only have a placebo effect."

Baseball is clearly not doing enough to fight the abuse of placebos.

Update: J.C. Bradbury weighs in with more on B-12.

I majored in biochemistry in college, and a course I enjoyed was one called Cofactors. Cofactors are chemicals that help catalyze reactions. Like catalysts, cofactors are unchanged by the chemical reaction; they just help it move along faster. Most vitamins are cofactors or cofactor precursors. So vitamins, if you will, have a shelf life in the body. A molecule of glucose undergoes a reaction that destroys the glucose and creates energy. But a molecule of B-12 might help catalyze many reactions before it breaks down chemically and needs to be replaced. It's the main reason I've always been a bit skeptical about claims that large doses of vitamins are good for you. The amount you get from healthy diet should be enough. Increasing the amount of B-12 doesn't increase the amount of the primary catalyst, so the extra B-12 should just float around with not much to do.

Roger Clemens says he was injected with B-12 and lidocaine. I assume the lidocaine wasn't in the butt, otherwise Roger couldn't feel himself sit down. I wonder if Roger got the B-12 from Miguel Tejada? :-)

Murray Chass speaks with Roger Clemens's lawyer:

Question No. 1: How do you prove a negative?

"That's the problem; you don't," Hardin said. "It all comes down to the credibility of the people involved. The only thing you can do, I guess, is give people reasons to believe or disbelieve one of the two parties."

Question No. 2: Considering that you are trying to undermine Brian McNamee's credibility, hasn't Andy Pettitte established the trainer's credibility?

"Great question," Hardin said. "I don't have an answer for it."

Mr. Hardin has a very difficult task ahead of him.

Shane Monahan talks in detail about his steroid use in the late 1990s. Why?

"I'm not a superstar. Nobody remembers who I am. But you know what? I don't want kids from college or kids from high school going through what I had to go through. I certainly don't want my son, 20 years from now, having to be faced with that decision so he could play professional sports."

Shane doesn't name other players that used, but indicates use was widespread:

"I saw what kind of money it is going to get you," he says. "I had great minor league seasons, but I wanted to stay in the big leagues. I know my teammates and I know guys on other teams are doing it, and they're hitting home runs left and right. And I'm sitting there going, 'All right, well, what I'm going to do?'

"I read up on it. I learned how to use it. I started lifting weights and I went from like 190 pounds to 215. I mean, muscles on my body where I didn't know you had muscles. I already ran fast. I could hit. I had a good arm. But all of a sudden now, recovery time felt better. Everything was a lot better."

The players hitting home runs left and right for the Mariners at that time were Griffey and Rodriguez. Lou Piniella comes off badly in the report as well:

Asked if Piniella knew about that clubhouse culture, Monahan says, "Yeah, I think so. I think he knew everything that was going on in his locker room. I just think he turned a shoulder to it and really didn't care."

Through his agent, Alan Nero, Piniella, now the Chicago Cubs manager, declined comment on that characterization.

John McLaren says he didn't know about Monahan''s drug use:

McLaren was a coach under then-manager Lou Piniella during Monahan's brief stay on the Mariners roster.

McLaren acted as a sounding board for players who didn't want to approach Piniella directly.

"I had no idea whatsoever that Shane was doing that," McLaren said.

Monahan's confession should have been in the Mitchell report. Baseball should have encouraged this kind of confession, since we probably learn a lot more from people voluntarily coming forward.

Some have suggested Roger Clemens bring a law suit against Brian McNamee, but the trainer's legal team appears to be the ones going on the offensive:

In particular, Ward and Emery pointed Friday to a Mike Wallace interview with Clemens that is scheduled to appear on the Jan. 6 broadcast of "60 Minutes," on CBS.

"If Roger Clemens continues to play fast and loose with the truth on '60 Minutes' and he continues to call Brian McNamee a liar then we will proceed with a defamation suit," Emery said in a telephone interview. "It is one of the only avenues Brian has to defend himself against the claims that he lied."

It would be nice to see someone testify about steroid use in open court under oath.

Brian McNamee responded through his lawyer to Roger Clemens:

But McNamee, whose work Clemens credited for years as one of the reasons he was able to dominate into his 40s, would like to one day discuss the matter with Clemens, McNamee's lawyer, Earl Ward, said Sunday.

"Brian would be open to it, certainly," Ward said in a telephone interview. "I don't know if Roger would. But Brian would be open to it because he knows what he's been saying all along is honest and truthful and he'd want Roger to understand he was obligated to tell the truth.

"The bottom line is he did not want to implicate a friend and a baseball icon in a steroid scandal," Ward added. "He was asked to tell the truth and he has. That's always been his position since Day 1."

Maybe 60 Minutes can put them into the same room together!

Roger Clemens issued an unambiguous denial. Here's the YouTube video:

Thanks to Rich for the heads up.

Sabernomics points to an article in Saturday's New York Times in which two professor of statistics examine the data surrounding the players in the Mitchell report. On average, they find no gain from the alleged use of PEDs:

It is possible (but not addressable by these data) that one effect of drugs is to help players compensate for decline as they age, and thus to extend their careers. But there is no evidence in these data for performance enhancement above previous levels.

More study of this question would be valuable. But the results here are intriguing, and could send a simple message to America's youth who aspire to fame and fortune as professional baseball players: Don't use these drugs -- not only can they increase the risk of serious illness, they also don't enhance your performance on the diamond.

That might, in the end, be a more effective message than one based solely on ethical and moral injunctions.

If MLB had secured the cooperation of players from the start, these statisticians would have a better data set to work with. Most of the players in the Mitchell report were veterans trying to recover from injuries or hang on. There didn't seem to be many young players using steroids to get bigger and make the majors. That might make a huge impact on the results here. It's also not clear that they separated steroid use from HGH use, which I would think would make a huge difference.

Dan Naulty pens an article detailing his use of PEDs during his professional career, and the harm it caused him. I found this section on positive reinforcement most interesting:

I will say there was not a negative aspect of taking these drugs until later on. As I took them, literally from the second week forward, I don't think I ever got a negative remark from anybody. It was always, "Wow, you're throwing well, you look great." The positive reinforcements of it went well beyond the baseball field. And it was working. I was getting people out. It wasn't just that I was this big, muscular guy. I was also pitching well, which fueled the fire of my addiction. The more people patted me on the back, the more crap I loaded in the needle.

Naulty sits in stark contrast to Jose Canseco. You get the feeling reading his confession that PED use caused Dan to feel guilty from the start. I never got the feeling that Canseco feels any remorse for his abuse of drugs.

I'm glad George Vecsey isn't buying the "What about the children?" argument.

Peter Schmuck thinks the Jason Grimsley affidavit makes Clemens Mitchell report denial more credible:

When the Los Angeles Times last year quoted two unnamed sources claiming that Roger Clemens, Andy Pettitte, Miguel Tejada and Brian Roberts - among others - were among the blacked-out names on the affidavit, and then they turned out not to be, it opened a new avenue for suspected users of anabolic steroids and human growth hormone to maintain what the politicians like to call "plausible deniability."

That should be self-evident, but anyone who needs further proof need only look up to the supposed moral high ground and see the lawyer for Clemens talking down to the media, the government and George Mitchell about the dangers of rushing to judgment with the reputations of so many people hanging in the balance.

The only credibility changed here is the credibility of the Los Angeles Times, which took a huge hit. I assume Mitchell knew Clemens wasn't in the Grimsley affidavit. Clemens has a good case against the Los Angeles Times. Whether he used or not, the Times story was fiction. The Mitchell report has a more credible witness at the moment.

C.J. Nitkowski tells his story of training under Brian McNamee. Nitkowski was tempted to take steroids in 2001:

In the end, I decided against it. Not because of Major League Baseball and not because of health risks. I chose not to use steroids because I was concerned with the potential legal trouble I could get into possessing or buying them.

Had I taken them, most certainly my name would have been in the Mitchell Report and I would have had to have an uncomfortable conversation with my two children. Lucky for me, I didn't have a trainer who encouraged me to take them. That is not who Brian McNamee is, even when I, as his client, suggested it might be a good idea.

Is he a saint and innocent in all of this? No. But it would be wrong to assume that the man that trained two of the best pitchers of my generation is liar or a steroid pusher.

I'm sure I missed a story at some point, so could someone explain this to me?

Dr. Arthur Ting, the orthopedist who operated on the former Giants star for an elbow injury in 1999 and for a disabling knee injury in 2005, "is likely to be a witness for the government at trial," wrote Assistant U.S. Attorney J. Douglas Wilson.

The prosecutors revealed Ting's role as a witness in a motion filed to ask U.S. District Judge Susan Illston to assess Bonds' legal team for potential conflicts of interest.

...

Ting was among the witnesses subpoenaed by the government in its perjury investigation of Bonds, sources familiar with the case say. He also turned over Bonds' medical records to the government.

Doesn't doctor-patient privilege hold in this case? I thought Bonds would need to release his medical records, or is doctor-patient privacy just not that strong?

The Grimsley affidavit was unsealed:

Jose Canseco, Lenny Dykstra, Glenallen Hill and Geronimo Berroa were accused of using steroids by former major league pitcher Jason Grimsley in a federal agent's affidavit unsealed Thursday.

Grimsley also accused Chuck Knoblauch of using human growth hormone; David Segui and Allen Watson of using performance-enhancing drugs; and Rafael Palmeiro and Pete Incaviglia of taking amphetamines, according to IRS Special Agent Jeff Novitzky's sworn statement.

All but Incaviglia, Berroa and Watson were mentioned last week in the Mitchell Report on doping in baseball.

Allen Watson managed one good year in an eight season career. Imagine how bad he'd be without the juice!

Curt Schilling writes up his thoughts on the cheaters in baseball. Bonds, Clemens and Canseco come out poorly:

Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds. I know both of these men. Roger had a profound effect on my career from a very early point. His 'undressing' of me and lecture were a major turning point. I've always respected his career accomplishments and regarded him as the greatest pitcher to ever play the game. Now I, like every other Yankee, Clemens fan am faced with a dilemma. The two men that fingered multiple players, from my understanding, both testified with immunity, but only if they told the truth. So these guys had every reason in the world to NOT lie. That doesn't mean they didn't, but there is an immense amount of incentive for them to NOT lie when they gave their depositions because lying would have seen them open to legal actions beyond what they are already facing. So the question to me then becomes this. It's no mystery that Roger and Andy are as close as any two teammates I know of. Andy makes no bones about Rogers influence in his career. Their personal trainer, the trainer Roger took to Toronto, then to NY, has admitted to administering PED's to both men. Andy has admitted he did, and that it was a mistake and he never did it again. Roger has denied every allegation brought to the table. So as a fan my thought is that Roger will find a way in short order to organize a legal team to guarantee a retraction of the allegations made, a public apology is made, and his name is completely cleared. If he doesn't do that then there aren't many options as a fan for me other than to believe his career 192 wins and 3 Cy Youngs he won prior to 1997 were the end. From that point on the numbers were attained through using PED's. Just like I stated about Jose, if that is the case with Roger, the 4 Cy Youngs should go to the rightful winners and the numbers should go away if he cannot refute the accusations.

I don't know how you make numbers go away. As for revoking awards, there's nothing to stop the baseball writers from doing just that, and for keeping cheaters out of the Hall of Fame. Some people argued that the Mitchell report would help Barry Bonds, since it would show he wasn't the only PED user out there. But it also is hurting Mark McGwire, as it increases the animosity toward people who took PEDs.

The ghost writer of Jose Canseco's book writes the New York Times:

To take but one example, Roger Clemens has been added to the ranks of those linked to steroid use -- despite his most recent denial Tuesday. This is hardly a surprise to those of us who have worked the steroid beat over the years.

In fact, as the ghostwriter for Jose Canseco's tell-all memoir "Juiced," I can now reveal that serious thought was given to including Canseco's recollections of golf course conversations with Clemens about steroids. At the time, we decided to focus on players Canseco injected -- since those revelations would carry the maximum impact.

I assume we'll see those conversations in the next book.

Jose de Jesus Ortiz falls for the, "What about the children?" argument. He's looking for fan input on whether he should vote for players implicated in steroid use for the Hall of Fame.

It's a good thing I wasn't drinking hot coffee when I read this.

I thought the whole idea behind the Mitchell investigation was to keep Congress from holding more investigations. I guess our representatives can't resist a big media event.

Meanwhile, a Senate Democrat and a Republican senator yesterday announced legislation to limit access to performance-enhancing substances and stiffen criminal penalties for abuse and distribution.

Central to that effort is cracking down on the abuse of human growth hormone, a drug for which there is no reliable test, said its sponsor.

The bill by Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York would classify hGH as a "Schedule III" substance, equating it legally with anabolic steroids and bringing it under the watch of the Drug Enforcement Administration. That would mean that possession of hGH, a naturally occurring hormone approved by the FDA for treatment of some medical conditions, would be illegal without a current, valid prescription.

I don't quite see how this helps, since Federal authorities don't go after users. If the FBI arrested Mark McGwire in the early 1990s when they arrested his supplier, that might have sent a message. Why have a law that's not enforced?

MLB and the MLBPA agreed to sit down and start discussing the recommendations of the Mitchell report. I don't know if this means they'll reopen the CBA again. I could see the two sides agreeing now to changes that take effect in the next agreement.

Roger Clemens issued a denial of PED use:

"I want to state clearly and without qualification: I did not take steroids, human growth hormone or any other banned substances at any time in my baseball career or, in fact, my entire life," Clemens said Tuesday in a statement issued through his agent, Randy Hendricks. "Those substances represent a dangerous and destructive shortcut that no athlete should ever take.

"I am disappointed that my 25 years in public life have apparently not earned me the benefit of the doubt, but I understand that Senator Mitchell's report has raised many serious questions. I plan to publicly answer all of those questions at the appropriate time in the appropriate way. I only ask that in the meantime people not rush to judgment."

The first paragraph is fine. The second one sounds weaselly. Why isn't now the appropriate time?

Brian Roberts admits to steroid use.

In a statement he issued to The (Baltimore) Sun, Roberts said that after the single injection he immediately realized that it was not what he "stood for" or anything he wanted to continue doing. He said he's sorry he did it and said he regrets making what he says was a "terrible decision."

The Mitchell report is turning out to be like Canseco's book, Juiced: Wild Times, Rampant 'Roids, Smash Hits, and How Baseball Got Big. So far, everything we've learned from players was basically correct. Some deny the use of a specific substance, but the players who came forward basically confirm what Mitchell's investigators found. It's becoming more and more credible as time goes on.

The charges against Roberts were the weakest in the report. Now that they proved true, it makes the other links look a lot stronger.

Fernando Vina uses the injury defense in admitting to HGH usage:

Former major league infielder Fernando Vina on Monday admitted using human growth hormone in 2003 as he attempted to heal from injuries.

Vina, now an ESPN baseball analyst, was named last week in the Mitchell Report on performance-enhancing drugs. The report said he also purchased steroids from ex-New York Mets clubhouse attendant Kirk Radomski, but Vina denied those claims.

Vina also said the HGH didn't work. Vina came back from his injury in 2003 and went 20 for 87, a .230 batting average. The more I hear about HGH, the more it seems it's snake oil the steroid dealers sold players after testing started. It was banned, so it must work, and you can't test for it. Money for nothing.

Paul Byrd and MLB sat down Monday to discuss his HGH use. Byrd says he used it under a doctor's supervision for a medical problem:

HGH was banned by baseball in 2005. The Chronicle reported Byrd made his final purchase of HGH a week before the ban began.

I would like to know what drug replaced HGH to treat Byrd's problem.

Sports Illustrated reports there are more drug investigations that will likely yield more names of players:

Furthermore, there are also other large-scale, ongoing probes Sen. George Mitchell was clearly unable to access. For instance, there's an international DEA operation, code named "Raw Deal," that traces the movement of raw steroid and HGH powder from manufacturing labs in China to the basements and garages of American dealers. Raids have unearthed lengthy client lists and hard drive evidence that sources tell SI.com may well lead directly to the clubhouses and locker rooms of pro sports teams.

There are probably others that are still secret as well.

Hat tip, MLB FanHouse.

The Texas High School Baseball Coaches Association was supposed to have Roger Clemens as a speaker in January, but that invitation may be rescinded.

Clemens, who pitched with the Astros from 2004-06, was part of the Mitchell Report, where it was alleged that he used performance enhancing drugs. The topic of his speech to the THSBCA was "My vigorous workout, how I played so long (in professional baseball)."

Actually, I hope they let him speak and take questions. He might get a better grilling than from reporters. Clemens never came off as very articulate for me, so he might trip himself if he tries to answer steroid questions.

Lance Berkman wants Clemens to personally answer the charges against him:

Berkman says Pettitte's confession puts pressure on Clemens to speak publicly. Clemens vehemently denied using drugs in a statement through his lawyer Thursday.

"I'm not insinuating the allegations are true just because Pettitte came out and said the trainer was telling the truth about him," Berkman said. "I'm just saying it puts more pressure on the camp to specifically deny charges.

"I don't think it's good enough to make a blanket statement and say the guy's lying. Now that Andy's come out, that certainly puts a little more pressure to come out and make a more detailed statement."

The general consensus is that Pettitte's admission puts Clemens denial in doubt.

J.C. Brabury thinks out of the box and comes up with a good drug testing program.

Enforcement should be carried out by the baseball players' union instead of by the owners. Some will fear that the players would turn clubhouses into steroid dens if they were allowed to regulate the standards and the punishments for taking performance-enhancing drugs. But the incentives suggest otherwise. The party with the strongest incentives to enforce a testing program is the players. They are the ones who suffer from drug use by their peers, and they are in the best position to monitor each other and respond quickly to the countermeasures that cheaters employ.

Drug testing is in place because the clean players wanted it, and some cheating players wanted the need to cheat removed. Bradbury suggests high fines that get distributed to players who pass tests. It's an idea worth exploring.

Andy Pettitte admitted on Saturday that he used HGH:

"In 2002 I was injured. I had heard that human growth hormone could promote faster healing for my elbow," Pettitte said in the statement released to The Associated Press by agent Randy Hendricks.

"I felt an obligation to get back to my team as soon as possible. For this reason, and only this reason, for two days I tried human growth hormone. Though it was not against baseball rules, I was not comfortable with what I was doing, so I stopped.

"This is it -- two days out of my life; two days out of my entire career, when I was injured and on the disabled list," he said. "I wasn't looking for an edge. I was looking to heal."

That's pretty close to the story in the Mitchell report, pages 175-176. We'll see how fans react to this, but I'm guessing he'll get a pass.

However, by basically confirming McNamee's story, Pettitte makes the trainer look like a reliable source. That hurts Clemens case. Why would he tell the truth about Pettitte but lie about Clemens?

David Segui says Brian Roberts name should not be in the Mitchell report:

The most egregious inaccuracy in the testimony, Segui said, is Bigbie's recollection of a lunch in New York during the 2003 season. Bigbie told Mitchell that he, Segui, Radomski and Roberts dined together and then later Bigbie sat in Radomski's car and watched Segui buy "performance enhancing substances and paraphernalia." Bigbie said Roberts was not in the car at the time.

Segui said Roberts wasn't there at all -- that instead, Segui's son, Cory, then 11, was with them at lunch. Segui added that not only didn't he buy drugs from Radomski that day, but that he didn't purchase anything illegal from Radomski after 2002.

"Brian Roberts has never met Kirk Radomski, at least not in my presence," said Segui, who has admitted to taking steroids and to providing Radomski's contact information to several players who wanted to know more about performance-enhancers. "And I don't know wherever else he would have met him."

As you read through the Mitchell report, steroid abuse seems to follow Segui and Grimsley where ever they travel, much as it did Jose Cansceo. Segui, it stikes me, is as honest as he has to be when it suits him, so I'm not sure I trust any information coming from him. His original confession during the Grimsley raid that he took HGH because a doctor prescribed it was a crock. Please take anything he says with a grain of salt.

In reading the Clemens section of the Mitchell Report, McNamee gives a pretty clear time line as to when Roger started using steroids. It was after a series at Miami. Clemens pitched in that series on 6/8/1998. Here are his stats through that series: 6-6, 3.27 ERA, 9.2 K per 9, 4.3 BB per 9, 0.32 HR/9. From that date through the end of the season: 14-0, 2.29 ERA, 11.1 K per 9, 2.8 BB per 9, 0.48 HR per 9.

Update: McNamee also talks about injecting Clemens in the second half of 2000 and late in 2001. Clemens through 6/30/2000: 4-6, 4.76 ERA, 9.0 K per 9, 4.1 BB per 9, 1.44 HR per 9. July through the end of the season: 9-2, 3.00 ERA, 7.8 K per 9, 3.4 BB per 9, 0.95 HR per 9. Let me note, however, that Clemens suffered an injury that knocked him out for the last two games of June, and his two starts before he left the game with an injury were poor.

Clemens was pretty consistent through 2001. See pages 167-176 of the Mitchell report.

Donald Fehr takes the podium.

Update: Fehr admits that they could have taken action earlier on combating steroids, but that testing is working.

Update: Fehr sticking by players who might be disciplined.

Update: Fehr's remarks were short but surprisingly non-combative. A big reason for that is they haven't gotten a chance to study the report, since they did not get a copy until 1 PM, and that was a hard copy as opposed to an electronic format. During questioning, Don did seem upset about that.

He was willing to explore changes in the testing procedures, however. All in all, a very measured response to the situation. I didn't get the feeling that there would be a war between the players and the owners over this, but we'll see.

Karl Ravech just read a denial by Roger Clemens attorney.

Jacob Goldstein sends along two post from the Wall Street Journal. The first is a talk with Charles Yesalis.

So is there anything that would get drugs out of sports?

If the customers of elite sport withheld their purchasing - turned off the TV or didn't go to the stadium or ballpark because they were really irate about doping. Having said that, that is one of the stupidest things I've ever said. It ain't gonna happen, period.

The other thing would be a highly sustained police action against athletes. I doubt if we as a society have the stomach for that.

Second, a list of the types of drugs used for cheating.

Bud Selig just took the podium.

Update: Selig embraces all of MItchell's recommendations. The ones he can implement independently, he'll do so immediately.

Update: Selig says he will deal with active players identified in report. Sounds like Bud isn't on board with forgiveness.

Update: Mostly blah-blah after that. Selig is committed to eliminating cheating from the game.

On page S-33, Mitchell makes the following statement:

I urge the Commissioner to forego imposing discipline on players for past violations of baseball's rules on performance enhancing substances, including the players named in this report, except in those cases where he determines that the conduct is so serious that discipline is necessary to maintain the integrity of the game. I make this recommendation fully aware that there are valid arguments both for and against it; but I believe that those in favor are compelling.

If Mitchell had gone into the investigation with this in place and assurances from the government that players would not be prosecuted, he might have received more cooperation from players. I wrote about this during the summer for Baseball Prospectus (subscription required).

There exist many benefits to such a truth commission. Ending the constant speculation surrounding players would be a welcome relief. Instead, we can start looking at their records to debate what the drugs meant for their careers. Voters for the Hall of Fame could finally decide the worthiness of a candidate without guessing about steroid use. And we can finally gauge how fans really feel about the use of these substances. Do they boo and shun, or forgive and forget?

The other benefit is one to help police the sport in the future. Knowing when players started using drugs and the type of drugs used allows sabermetricians to study the change in performance associated with their use. It might be possible to build a probabilistic model to estimate the chance that a change in production was due to performance enhancing drugs. Knowing patterns of procurement and use might allow baseball to look for behaviors that indicate abuse.

Yes, players' reputations will suffer. Fans forgive, however, as they've done with Jason Giambi. But the players need to come clean and show contrition. George Mitchell needs to use his gravitas with both MLB and Congress to bring about the conditions required for honest testimony. Perhaps with that, the "steroid era" can finally pass into history. Without a truth commission, the investigation is destined to be stymied by a lack of player cooperation.

Instead we received a report full of hearsay. Clemens and Pettitte come out looking poorly, but players like Brian Roberts are tarred without a lot of evidence.

Probably the most important part of the report goes from page 302 to 306. They are Mitchell's recommendations for improvement of the Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. I like his ideas on transparency:

Drug testing programs must respect the privacy rights of the athletes who are tested. Yet to instill public trust and ensure accountability, they must be as transparent as possible consistent with protecting those rights. Transparency can be achieved by such actions as submitting to outside audits, and publishing periodic reports of de-identified aggregate testing results, retaining records of negative test results so that confirmation is available to correctly interpret subsequent tests, which may inure to the benefit of a player charged with a positive result in a later test. A transparent program should provide the public with aggregate data that demonstrates the work of the program and the results achieved by it (but that does not reveal or permit the determination of individual identities).

I'd love to know how testosterone levels of ballplayers compare to the population at large, for example, and how those levels might change from year to year.

Here's a quick list of every player named in the Mitchell report:

Marvin Bernard
Barry Bonds
Bobby Estalella
Jason Giambi
Jeremy Giambi
Benito Santiago
Gary Sheffield
Randy Verlarde
Lenny Dykstrka
David Segui
Larry Bigbie
Brian Roberts
Jack Cust
Tim Laker
Todd Hundley
Hal Morris
Mark Carreon
Matt Franco
Rondell White
Roger Clemens
Andy Pettitte
Chuck Knoblauch
Jason Grimsley
Greg Zaunn
David Justice
F.P. Santangelo
Glenallen Hill
Mo Vaughn
Denny Neagle
Ron Villone
Ryan Franklin
Chris Donnels
Todd Williams
Phil Hiatt
Todd Pratt
Kevin Young
Mike Lansing
Cody McKay
Kent Merker
Adam Piatt
Miguel Tejada
Jason Christansen
Mike Stanton
Stephen Randolph
Jerry Hariston Jr.
Paul Lo Duca
Adam Riggs
Bart Miadich
Fernando Vina
Kevin Brown
Eric Gagne
Mike Bell
Matt Herges
Gary Bennett Jr.
Jim Parque
Brendan Donnelly
Chad Allen
Jeff Williams
Howie Clark
Nook Logan
Rick Ankiel
Paul Byrd
Jay Gibbons
Troy Glaus
Jose Guillen
Gary Matthews, Jr.
Jose Canseco
Jason Grimsley
Darren Holmes
John Rocker
Scott Schoenweis
Ismael Valdez
Matt Williams
Steve Woodard
David Bell

Thanks to Baseball Digest Daily for the list.

From page 177 of the Mitchell report.

Knoblauch played for the Yankees during 2000 and 2001, the two years when McNamee served as the Yankees' assistant strength coach. McNamee provided personal training services to Knoblauch.

McNamee said that he acquired human growth hormone from Radomski for Knoblauch in 2001. Beginning during spring training and continuing through the early portion of the season, McNamee injected Knoblauch at least seven to nine times with human growth hormone.

That did Chuck a lot of good.

George Mitchell is starting to speak now.

Update: A link to the PDF is here.

Update: Mitchell said steroid use is down due to testing, but HGH use is up.

Update: Mitchell is concerned about the children. Screw them. Teenagers are going to use drugs no matter how good an example adults set.

Update: I just did a search for Albert Pujols, and he's not in the report. Neither are the names of Varitek and Kile. That list published earlier appears to be incorrect.

Update: Paul Lo Duca is on the list.

Update: Eric Gagne is on the list.

Update: Mitchell says testing should be given over to an independent organization. He also wants some transparency, with public access to aggregate data. I'm all for that.

Update: Mitchell is asking the commissioner not to discipline players named in the report. He wants closure on the issue. That's a good recommendation.

Update: Nook Logan's name is in the report. Clemens and Pettitte's names are indeed in the report.

Update: Mitchell's speech is essentially the first 37 pages of the report (through page S-37).

Update: Richard McLearn is now speaking. He's a Canadian law professor involved in sports drug testing.

Update: It appears that the report agrees that HGH doesn't do much, and probably does more harm than good (pages 9 and 10).

A number of studies have shown that use of human growth hormone does not increase muscle strength in healthy subjects or well-trained athletes.31 Athletes who have tried human growth hormone as a training aid have reached the same conclusion. The author of one book targeted at steroid abusers observed that "[t]he most curious aspect of the whole situation is that I've never encountered any athlete using HGH to benefit from it, and all the athletes who admit to having used it will usually agree: it didn't/doesn't work for them.

The primary attraction of human growth hormone for athletes seeking performance enhancing effects appears to be that it is not detectable in any currently available drug test.33 In addition, because human growth hormone stimulates growth in most body tissues, athletes use it to promote tissue repair and to recover from injury.

Update: Mitchell makes an important point on page 18:

There is a widespread misconception that the use of steroids and other performance enhancing substances, such as human growth hormone, was not prohibited in Major League Baseball before the inclusion of the joint drug program in the 2002 Basic Agreement. In fact, as early as 1991 baseball's drug policy expressly prohibited the use of "all illegal drugs and controlled substances, including steroids or prescription drugs for which the individual ... does not have a prescription." Even before then, however, the use of any prescription drug without a valid prescription was prohibited in baseball, and even earlier under federal law. In 1971, baseball's drug policy required compliance with federal, state, and local drug laws and directed baseball's athletic trainers that anabolic steroids should only be provided to players under a physician's guidance.

I often see someone write or say that steroids were not banned or illegal before the testing was put in place. That is just not true.

Update: The report addresses reasonable cause testing on page 47.

"Reasonable cause" testing for steroids was conducted on over 25 major league players between 2000 and 2006, but we were informed that no documents exist with respect to such testing. No player ever tested positive for steroids or for any other performance enhancing substance as a result of those tests.

Update: Mitchell finished at about 2:52.

Jon Heyman prints more names, including Chuck Knoblauch.

ESPN is running a special on the Mitchell report. One interesting thing that Steve Phillips and John Kruk talked about was that it's not unusual for a ball player to write a large check to a club house attendent. Kruk said he once wrote a $14,000 check as a tip. I assume that's a tip for the season.

Someone just sent me a list of names that are expected to appear in the Mitchell report. There are two names that stand out in my mind that are going to cause some gnashing of teeth, but until the report is official, I'll wait to publish.

Update: Baseball's Steroid Era provides a nice visual time line and a list of players already linked to PEDs. I should also mention there is one other player on the rumor list that will cause some angst among his fans for reasons that will be clear if and when his name appears in the report, but not for the same reason as the two mentioned above.

Update: Deadspin has the same list I do. The names that stick out to me are Varitek, Pujols and Kile. I take this list with a huge grain of salt, however, until Mitchell publishes.

(I had this update in the wrong post before.)

Update: This list turned out to be very poor.

ESPN is reporting that Clemens will be named in the Mitchell report, along with other Yankees:

The source said McNamee told investigators he supplied Clemens with steroids while Clemens was witih the Yankees, and prior to Clemens joining the team.

Also, The Bergen (N.J.) Record, citing a baseball industry official, says "several" prominent Yankees will be named in the Mitchell report. The paper said the source spoke to a third party who had seen the final report.

"It's going to be a rough day in the Bronx," the paper quoted the source as saying.

This will only add to calls that Mitchell, who is associated closely with the Red Sox, was biased.

Rays of Light is holding a Mitchell Report prediction contest.

I haven't seen any name leaked yet, but the Mitchell report will have some big names included:

MLB's "not going to love it, the union's not going to love it," he said.

The report comes at the end of a year when San Francisco Giants outfielder Barry Bonds broke the career home run record, only to be indicted on charges of lying to a federal grand jury about steroid use.

One source said that while the report will cite problems "top to bottom," it also will expose "deep problems, the number of players, high-level MVPs and All-Stars," as well as clubhouse personnel who allowed steroids and other banned substances in clubhouses or knew about it and didn't say anything.

Tomorrow's not going to be fun. The title of the post vaguely reminds me on an Aimee Mann lyric:

Cigarettes and red vines
Just close your eyes, cause,
Baby--
You never do know
And Ill be on the sidelines,
With my hands tied,
Watching the show
Watching the show

Howard Bryant writes a lengthy piece at ESPN.com on the Mitchell investigation. The Sports Network interviewed the people Mitchell interviewed to find out how the investigation was carried out. A quick summary:

• A number of people think Mitchell has a huge conflict of interest due to his relationship with the Red Sox.
• Various groups (GMs, trainers, strength coaches) feel they will be unjustly blamed in the report because their jobs have no protection (no union, no ownership).
• There was a sense that the investigators didn't know the right questions to ask. They also wanted speculation when facts were not available.

Here is one example of a complaint:

"The problem was, what did they want us to say?" said a team trainer who was interviewed by Mitchell's investigators in 2006. "They wanted us to speculate. And I wouldn't do that. They wanted me to say who I thought was using steroids. And when I said, 'I don't know,' they would say, 'Well, you work most closely with these guys. You work on their bodies every day. You weren't the least bit suspicious when you saw their bodies change?'

"This was the kind of stuff I was most afraid of, because they didn't ask me about specific people with specific information that they had. They asked me to guess. I said my guess was no guess at all, because what would happen to me if I said a guy was using steroids who wasn't? What if I guessed wrong? Then my name is out there, I get fired, and I'm easily replaceable."

There's good reason not to speculate. Bob Tufts, a player from 1981 to 1983 with San Francisco and Kansas City wrote me over the weekend to complain raise issue with the Mitchell investigation. He suffered from having his name associated with drugs:

The only issue with me was the cocaine stuff in SF and KC in my days there. As I told Murray Chass, I was told by a former club official and also a current federal judge that I was not able to get a job in 84 due to my name being associated with Blue, Aikens, Wilson and Martin. Due to this, it is best to tell the papers suing for names in the Radmomski files to shut up before you possibly damage another career.

Please read the whole article. It's lengthy but very well done.

David Segui once again gets ahead of the story, this time admitting steroid use. He used Kirk Radomski as his conduit for drugs:

Segui said he met Radomski after the Orioles traded him to the Mets in 1994; they became close friends and still talk by phone several times a week -- mainly about fishing and family.

A bodybuilder and personal trainer, Radomski initially assisted Segui with nutrition and weightlifting. Eventually, Segui said, he paid Radomski for various products, from legal supplements and workout gear to anabolic steroids and clenbuterol, an asthma drug that supposedly melts body fat and is on baseball's banned substances list. Segui also loaned Radomski money on occasion.

"It was stuff you do for a friend," he said. "I always had a feeling -- I knew when more and more guys were going through him -- that there is probably going to come the day when he is going to get caught."

But it wasn't as if Radomski was trying to operate a drug business, Segui said.

"If I needed to get something, anything, I'd go to him. He was someone you trusted," Segui said. "That's how he developed ... a clientele list."

Because Segui often paid Radomski with personal checks, he said he inadvertently created a paper trail. But Segui told his buddy not to cover for him.

Segui would not talk to Mitchell because he didn't it to appear that he gave up the names of other ballplayers. Segui's HGH confession is here, with my thoughts on David's arms.

Jose Guillen and the MLBPA will challenge Guillen's 15 day suspension.

His could be the first of several grievances that will go before Das and could become a precedent for players disciplined for performance-enhancing drugs absent a positive test or a conviction for possession.

A non-existent source supplies Baseball Musings with stunning information from the soon to be released Mitchell report:

Since the mid 1990s, 50% of ballplayers used a drug with the street slang "placebo" to enhance their performance. Although it's not clear where the abuse started, some point to a former Cleveland Indians player as the focal point. The player revealed to friends that a trainer told him, "A placebo every day and three weight sessions a week at the gym and I'd be in great shape. So far, it's made me a multi-millionaire! And the nice thing is, I don't have to stick myself with needles. I just take a pill out of this Pez dispenser!"

There is no test for placebo, although Major League Baseball will spend the $34 million allotted to the Marlins for revenue sharing trying to develop one.

I'm concerned about the children.

J.C. Bradbury points to two more papers showing that HGH does not improve player performance. Baseball should stop wasting time and money trying to develop a test for this drug.

Barry Bonds entered a not guilty plea today.

Rick Maese chronicles Jay Gibbons lies about PEDs over time, and concludes with this:

Perhaps the reaction would have been different if he were among the first busted offenders, but as it is - Gibbons is one of eight players connected to the Orioles to be tied to performance-enhancing drugs - what feels especially repulsive today is his parallel career of lying.

Gibbons walked around the clubhouse with a body that was supposed to be chiseled in the gym, not over the counter. The steroid witch hunt unfairly chased after the game's bulky gym rats, Gibbons said, and he promised us time and time again that his statuesque physique was solely the product of an incredible work ethic.

We wanted to believe him, mostly, I suppose, because Gibbons seems like a decent guy. He was the clubhouse union rep. He attended chapel before Sunday games. He rode an inspiring underdog story into the starting lineup, and both he and his wife constantly gave back to the community. He treated reporters, teammates and fans with respect and appreciation.

Which is exactly why the lying and the hypocrisy are so damaging.

Gibbons was one of the good guys, and if the good guys are cheating and able to look us in the eye and lie, what does that really say about the game? And its athletes?

Jay Gibbons and Jose Guillen draw 15-day suspensions for evidence linking them to performance enhancing drugs (PEDs).

Both players have never been linked to a positive test for a banned substance. Instead, both were linked to such substances through documentary evidence.

In its actions, Major League Baseball appears to be creating a framework for how it will deal with players that may be named in Mitchell's report. Mitchell has been provided with documentary evidence by Kirk Radomski, a former Mets clubhouse attendant who provided dozens with players with drugs from 1995 through 2005 and has since pleaded guilty to steroid distribution.

But the players in the Mitchell report, like those suspended today, may have a documentary link to performance-enhancing substances and not one involving positive tests. So they, too, could be facing the type of discipline levied against Gibbons and Guillen. In contrast, a player who now tests positive for steroid use is suspended 50 games for a first-time offense, with the penalty becoming more severe for a second or third offense.

Not everyone is getting suspended, however:

Four of those players, the commissioner's office also announced today, will not be suspended because the office "had determined that, with respect to each player, there was insufficient evidence of a violation of the Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program in effect at the time of the conduct in question."

Those four players are Scott Schoeneweis of the Mets, Gary Matthews Jr. of the Los Angeles Angels, Troy Glaus of the Toronto Blue Jays and Rick Ankiel of the St. Louis Cardinals.

The rumor is the Mitchell report comes out next Thursday. Stay tuned for more names.

If you believe the use of these drugs started with the shipments indicated in the article, it takes about a year for them to have an effect. Gibbons best power season was 2005, and Guillen's power exploded in 2003, both in the second season of receiving the drugs. The thing I'd like to see most in the Mitchell report is start dates for players so we can see just how much these drugs meant to their production.

Correction: Jay, not John Gibbons.

Arte Moreno on the Mitchell Report:

But Los Angeles Angels owner Arte Moreno raised the bar Wednesday when he said the report on the use of performance-enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball will include names of players.

"The names of players will come out that people will be mad about," Moreno, quoted by The Los Angeles Times in Thursday's editions, said. "Some of my information is secondhand, but I know there's going to be names."

Moreno apparently did not elaborate as to why he felt players, fans, management officials and others would be angered by the identity of any names that come from the report.

They're going to be upset because some name is going to be a fan favorite. Think about the icons on certain teams, someone whose name never came up before. Someone the fans think is an upstanding person who doesn't get into trouble, gives back to the community, etc. Fans will feel angry because they've been duped.

Rox Girl has an excellent take on Dan Serafini's suspension:

These are snippets that I've cut and pasted from the Jack Etkin article, so be sure to click on the link to get a more complete context, but in these statements you can see Serafini project a stereotypical PED user as a record breaking, non-Pop Warner coaching bad guy and then showing himself to be the contrast. Thus far, the reality has been that most of those testing positive have been just like Serafini or Jorge Piedra, guys on the fringe of the majors who need just an extra boost to get over that final hump or thsoe trying to accelerate their return from injury knowing that the clock is ticking on their productive years. Guys like Neifi Perez who are trying to stem the decline of age in their skill set. These are all decent human beings, too, trying to do right for their families and not miscreants.

The Biz of Baseball collects the thoughts of a number of writers and baseball insiders on Barry Bonds.

MLB FanHouse links to an interview with Larry Starr, long time trainer for the Reds and Marlins. He's out of baseball now and coopertating with the Mitchell investigation, although he refuses to name names. He was aware as early as 1984 that players were using steroids. His estimate of the percentage of players using is high, but not as high as Canseco's or Caminiti's.

While Starr won't name players' names, he did estimate to FLORIDA TODAY there were "some teams that had a high percentage" of players using steroids while he was still in the game.

"By high percentage, meaning 30 to 40 percent of the team might have been using," Starr said. "(But) some teams had maybe only one or two."

And he gives us a clue to the identity of one player:

Starr remembers one player who ended the season in 1989 weighing 171 pounds. In the spring, the same player reported to camp weighing 205, and his body fat had actually dropped from eight percent to 5.8. That was one of the moments that frightened him the most -- a player who was obviously loaded with performance enhancers to a dangerous point.

Looking at the Reds 1989-1990 rosters, there seems to be a likely candidate.

Keith Scherer at the Hardball Times answers some questions about the Bonds prosecution, defending the grand jury process.

I want to apologize to the Hardball Times, as an anonymous commenter posted the article in it's entirety twice. I've delete both those comments and included the link here. The anchor tag is allowed in comments. Please link to articles, don't violate other people's copyright.

Jonathan Littman updates his Playboy piece (referenced here) on IRS agent Jeff Novitzky. He's working on another article on the investigation and once again claims that the investigation from the beginning was centered on bringing down Barry Bonds:

The final chapter in BALCO will be less about drugs or Bonds' testimony about what he may have ingested, but about whether one of the greatest black athletes in history was set up. For the last few years, the media has painted Novitzky a hero, the "dogged" investigator in the style of Eliot Ness. In the wake of the indictment they are singing his praises anew. But the prosecution may turn on whether Novitzky's desire to topple Bonds led him to commit the classic rookie blunder--stepping on his fellow cops and the law. For no matter who was implicated in the case, Bonds was always the big fish.

I do disagree with one thing Littman brings up, which is the race card. Gary Sheffield got a pass for pretty much saying the same thing Bonds said, and last I looked Gary's wasn't white, and he's pretty close to being as surly as Bonds.

I'm especially interested in seeing how the defense handles the positive drug test. I guessing there was a chain of custody in that test didn't meet the standards of most crime labs.

Thanks to Eddie Ashe for the link.

The New York Times profiles Jeff Novitzky, the IRS agent responsible for the BALCO investigation. I wish the Times had gone into more detail as to why the investigation started, because there are conflicting stories here:

Assigned to the case after a tip, Mr. Novitzky started going through the Balco trash in September 2002. The reasons for the investigation are unclear. Collecting drug samples and financial records weekly, Mr. Novitzky identified more than a dozen famous clients.

...

In letters to Scott N. Schools, the interim United States attorney in San Francisco, Mr. Rains argued that the government should walk away from its investigation because of Mr. Novitzky's "vendetta" against Mr. Bonds.

But Dwight Sparlin, a retired I.R.S. manager who led the San Francisco office when the Balco case started, said the original focus was on Mr. Conte.

"He wasn't even looking at Barry Bonds," Mr. Sparlin said in an interview. "What appears to be a small money-laundering case, you never know where it will go."

But later in the same article:

In early 2003, Mr. Novitzky had a state narcotics agent go undercover in a gym to try to befriend Mr. Anderson. The agent, Iran White, later told Playboy magazine that Mr. Novitzky was obsessed with Mr. Bonds and talked about writing a book. One of the task force agents corroborated Mr. White's account, according to Mr. Rains's letters to Mr. Schools.

The Playboy article is no longer online, but my post on it is here. I'm starting to think that the truth is somewhere in the middle. The investigation may have started as focused on BALCO, but somewhere in there Novitzky started focusing on Bonds. We'll see if Bonds' lawyers can use that against the IRS agent.

From the AP via the Arizona Republic:

It was November 2000, and Bonds was preparing for the season in which he would shatter Mark McGwire's single-season home-run record.

According to Conte, a convicted steroids dealer, Bonds would visit the lab on Saturdays and after normal business hours with an entourage that included his trainer, Greg Anderson, and his personal physician, Dr. Arthur Ting.

Anderson had convinced Bonds to use BALCO to develop a dietary and supplement regimen, which Conte designed based on the results of the blood and urine samples.

Conte said Bonds was put through the same tests as other elite athlete clients, including tests to detect the use of 30 steroids.

I remember a similar story told by Giambi. It's a bit of a blackmail scam. "Let me test your blood to see how diet can help you. You're using steroids? Wouldn't want that to get out. Better use our steroids instead." While the article linked above notes how the defense will cast doubt on the result the way O.J. Simpons lawyers did, I believe the test is real. If BALCO is trying to con you with a false positive, why stay with them? They're either bad at their job, or trying to con you. More likely, you are taking steroids and just got caught, so rather than risk exposure, you go along with the new program. I wonder how a jury will see this.

Rick Maese the unusual length of time it took to indict Bonds:

Four years is a long time. Maybe you can justify chasing a mob boss, a corrupt politician or a dirty CEO for that kind of time. But an egomaniacal ballplayer who just wanted to hit a baseball farther than anyone else?

Question for my readers. Does anyone think this investigation or indictment deters others from cheating?

A very short story. I would guess that might keep teams from signing him as a free agent.

Update: Lots more at ESPN.com:

"I'm surprised," said John Burris, one of Bonds' attorneys, "but there's been an effort to get Barry for a long time. "I'm curious what evidence they have now they didn't have before."

Burris did not know of the indictment before being alerted by The Associated Press. He said he would immediately call Bonds to notify him.

The indictment charges Bonds with lying when he said that he didn't knowingly take steroids given to him by his personal trainer Greg Anderson. He also denied taking steroids at anytime in 2001 when he was pursuing the single season home-run record.

"During the criminal investigation, evidence was obtained including positive tests for the presence of anabolic steroids and other performance enhancing substances for Bonds and other athletes," the indictment reads.

I take this to mean that during the 2003 survey, Bonds tested positive. This is going to be a very interesting case.

Update: Fox has the indictment posted here.

Gary Matthews and Paul Byrd agree to talk to George Mitchell.

Jose Guillen, Matt Williams and Ismael Valdez are now linked to the Palm Beach Rejuvenation Center probe.

Williams was on pace to break Roger Maris' single-season home run record for the Giants in 1994, but a labor dispute ended the season in August and he finished with 43 home runs. During his next-to-last season in Arizona, records show, Williams placed two orders with the Palm Beach Rejuvenation Center. On March 9, 2002, he ordered $5,693 of testosterone cypionate, growth hormone, clomiphene, Novarel and syringes. On May 8, Williams ordered $6,000 of testosterone cypionate, nandrolone, clomiphene, Novarel and syringes, according to the records. The drugs were sent to a Scottsdale business office Williams long has used as a mailing address. Williams' prescriptions were written by the same dentist who prescribed growth hormone for Byrd and Guillen.

It's amazing how so many of these PED allegations point back to the Bay Area.

The New York Times notes the possibility exists for players to get advance notice of surprise drug tests:

The night before testers arrive at major league stadiums to take urine samples from players, officials for the home team receive a call from the testing company requesting stadium and parking passes for the drug testers. This procedure is not outlined in the league's 48-page testing policy, which baseball promotes as one of the toughest in sports. Teams are not told which players will be tested -- or how many -- but the number is said to be roughly five per visit.

According to Rob Manfred, baseball's executive vice president for labor relations and human resources and the official who oversees the sport's drug-testing programs, team officials are not supposed to tell players that tests will be conducted. He said a person with each club -- often the general manager or the assistant general manager -- is responsible for arranging for tester access and for space to be set aside in the locker rooms for tests.

Whether players are getting a heads up or not, I don't want to think about this device too much (emphasis added):

Advance notice of only a few hours could provide the opportunity for players to dilute their urine, use a masking agent or use a device that allows them to fill their bladders with drug-free urine.

That's gross on two levels. Where does the urine come from, and how do they get it in there?

No wonder Mike Cameron is able to run down those balls in the outfield:

Mike Cameron, the Padres' Gold Glove center fielder, was suspended for the first 25 games of next season on Wednesday after testing positive a second time for a banned stimulant.

Cameron, who plans to file for free agency, said he believes he took a tainted supplement.

That's always the story. Of course, the substance is gone, so there's no way of knowing for sure.

The timing of the Paul Byrd HGH leak leads Ken Rosenthal to look at George Mitchell's conflict of interest in the case:

I don't think Mitchell leaked the story. I doubt he would favor the Red Sox. I expect his report to be impartial, befitting a former Senate majority leader.

Because, you know, Senate majority leaders never do anything partisan.

But really, who cares what I think?

You don't have to be a professor of ethics to understand that the appearance of conflict is almost as damaging as the conflict itself. Concerns about Mitchell's objectivity, even if unfounded, diminish his long-awaited report.

Mitchell denied leaking the news, and we all know senators never leak anything. It's tough to like anyone involved in this whole thing. You have players like Byrd who act like they need HGH, and reporters who wait for the perfect moment to destroy players' reputation, rather than just coming out with the news when they have it. The Ankiel and Byrd leaks are showing that Fainaru-Wada and Williams are not Woodward and Bernstein, but a couple of self promoters out to gather as much fame as they can.

The San Francisco Chronicle exposes Human Growth Hormone use by Paul Byrd.

Many of the shipments reflected in the records were sent to Byrd's home in Alpharetta, Ga., north of Atlanta. But in March 2004, while he was pitching for Atlanta, a $1,050 order of syringes and somatropin, the generic name for synthetic growth hormone, was sent to Byrd in care of the Braves' spring training facility at Disney's Wide World of Sports Complex in Kissimmee, Fla., the records show.

On July 22, 2004, according to the records, $2,000 worth of somatropin and syringes was shipped to Byrd at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in New York City, where the Braves were playing a series against the Mets. The Braves were scheduled to stay at the Grand Hyatt during that trip, according to media information distributed by Major League Baseball.

Baseball formally banned the use of growth hormone on Jan. 13, 2005. One week earlier, Byrd made his final purchase of growth hormone from the Palm Beach Rejuvenation Center, spending $2,000 for six boxes of somatropin, company records show.

The Palm Beach Rejuvenation Center is part of a network of anti-aging clinics and online pharmacies targeted by the Albany, N.Y., district attorney for alleged illegal sales of drugs, including steroids and growth hormone. Many of the clinics and pharmacies are located in Florida and Alabama, but the New York prosecutor claimed jurisdiction, contending they had illegally sold more than $10 million worth of banned drugs in his state. Often doctors associated with the network wrote fraudulent prescriptions to make the sales seem legitimate, authorities said.

Two of Byrd's prescriptions for growth hormones were not written by a physician, according to a law enforcement source. Instead, the prescriptions were written by a Florida dentist, said the source, who asked not to be quoted by name because he was not authorized to comment. The dentist's license was suspended in 2003 for fraud and incompetence, state records show.

Byrd responded to FoxSports:

Byrd, a devout Christian, says he has had difficulty sleeping his entire life, and that his mother briefly put him on Ritalin when he was a young boy. In his book, he describes the effects of his sleeplessness and how it ultimately led him to a physician that prescribed HGH.

"Even though there were good things like my time with God that came out of my aloneness in the night, the sporadic periods of fatigue and lack of sleep have really bothered me on the baseball field," Byrd writes. "Chronic sore throats, an inability to recover and throw bullpens and times of tiredness have all affected while standing on the mound.

"At the insistence of a close friend, I went and had my hormones checked . . . To my surprise, the doctor told me that I was producing very little growth hormone and prescribed a dosage to help me out. I didn't like sticking a needle in my inner thigh each night but I sure did enjoy the sleep that occurred afterwards. My life changed during that time and I was able to work out more, experience less fatigue and recover quicker from pitching.

So does Selig suspend Byrd for this game? Reading both stories, the thing that doesn't smell right is the prescription from a dentist. If true, that hurts Byrd's credibility on the issue.

Marion Jones' confession to drug use may help Barry Bonds in his perjury defense, if he ever gets indicted.

The triple gold medalist in Sydney said she took "the clear" for two years, beginning in 1999, and that she got it from former coach Trevor Graham, who told her it was flaxseed oil, the newspaper reported.

"The clear" is a performance-enhancing drug linked to BALCO, the lab at the center of the steroids scandal in professional sports. Home run king Barry Bonds of the San Francisco Giants, New York Yankees slugger Jason Giambi and Detroit Tigers outfielder Gary Sheffield all have been linked to the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative and were among more than two dozen athletes who testified before a federal grand jury in 2003.

...

In her letter, Jones said she didn't realize she'd used performance-enhancing drugs until she stopped training with Graham at the end of 2002. She said she lied when federal agents questioned her in 2003, panicking when they presented her with a sample of "the clear," which she recognized as the substance Graham had given her.

That's basically the story and Bonds and Sheffield told. I think politicians call it plausible deniability.

ESPN linked Scott Schoeneweis to the signature drug scandal:

Scott Schoeneweis, the veteran New York Mets reliever and a survivor of testicular cancer, received six steroid shipments from Signature Pharmacy while playing for the Chicago White Sox in 2003 and 2004, ESPN has learned.

According to a source in Florida close to the ongoing investigation of Signature, Schoeneweis' name appears on packages that were sent to Comiskey Park while the White Sox were battling to win the AL Central title in 2003. Two more shipments arrived at the stadium in 2004, months before Schoeneweis underwent arthroscopic surgery on his left elbow.

Another bad reliever added to the list of suspected PED users. Given that he posted lousy numbers in the 2003-2004 time frame, it appears Scott wasted his money.

I just saw this story on a big drug bust involving coordinated raids across the country.

The Drug Enforcement Administration completed its largest strike against illegal steroids this morning by making the last of 56 raids that netted 120 arrests and took millions of doses of anabolic steroids and human growth hormone off the streets according to online reports.

DEA officials believe the network of suppliers of the illegal drugs originates in China, ABC News reported.

Raids in "Operation Raw Deal" took place in New York City, Houston, Kansas City, Providence and San Diego and confirmed the existence of a network of illegal laboratories and online marketing operations.

Stay tuned.

Update: More at ESPN.com. I found story particularly interesting:

The crackdown, dubbed "Raw Deal," grew out of a 2005 operation targeting eight Mexican labs that were responsible for 80 percent of America's underground steroid trade. Several large Chinese factories had been supplying the Mexican labs. When the Mexican labs were closed in what came to be known as "Operation Gear Grinder," those Chinese factories redirected their pipeline to the U.S.

"We came to find that 99.9 percent of the steroids in the U.S. were coming from China," Simmons said.

Drug agents in Mexico, Belgium, Germany, Denmark and Thailand cooperated in the Raw Deal probe, setting up shell companies to order the raw materials. They also focused on the makers of kits that help underground drugmakers turn raw materials into sellable drugs.

"This wasn't us going after one organization," said Rusty Payne, a DEA spokesman in Washington, D.C. "We went after lots of little cells. There's no one ringleader."

It's an Army of Davids approach to drug dealing. There's no reason to believe with this bust that the pipeline won't redirect the materials somewhere else, even within the United States.

Jay Gibbons is the latest player linked to the Signature drug scandal. I wonder why the names are leaking out so slowly. I'd think if someone has the list, why not just release the whole thing at once?

A source in Florida with knowledge of Signature Pharmacy's client list alleges that between October 2003 and July 2005, Gibbons received six separate shipments of Genotropin (a brand name for synthetic Human Growth Hormone), two shipments of testosterone and two shipments of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG), a hormone produced naturally during pregnancy, but taken by anabolic steroid users to stimulate the production of testosterone, which is suppressed as a result of steroid use. The information regarding Gibbons only pertains to receipt and not actual use of the drugs.

Gibbons had a lousy year in 2004 but set his career high for slugging percentage in 2005.

Troy Glaus won't comment on the steroid allegations leveled against him:

"I respect the fact that you guys have a job to do. I expect that you certainly have some questions. I am not going to comment on the story," Glaus told reporters before Saturday night's game at Tampa Bay. "I hope you respect that at this time."

Glaus appeared shaken by the situation when he talked briefly outside the Blue Jays' clubhouse prior to batting practice. He led the AL with 47 homers in 2000 and was MVP of the 2002 World Series for the Anaheim Angels, then missed large stretches in 2003 and 2004 because of shoulder problems.

Major League Baseball has already asked to meet with him.

"At this point I'm just trying to get ready for a game, and help us get into the playoff hunt," Glaus said.

There's an interesting point made about Glaus in this Star story. The allegations are that Glaus received drug up until May of 2004.

Dr. Christiane Ayotte, who heads an anti-doping lab in Montreal which has performed drug testing for the league, said she can't understand how Glaus could have avoided detection if he had been using nandrolone.

In 2005, MLB instituted random drug testing on its players.

"Everybody knows that nandrolone pharmaceutical preparations are long-lasting," Ayotte said

"It should have been detected ... unless he was not tested or never took it. Nandrolone is easy to detect and our anecdotal reports show it lasts up to 20 months in the system."

I suppose it's possible he wasn't test until the end of 2005, and that gave the drug enough time to get out of his system. But also, in 2005, MLB was forgiving the first offense, where the player wasn't suspended and the results were not made public. He might have failed, and we just don't know about it.

Rick Ankiel addressed HGH allegations tonight:

Rick Ankiel says any drugs he received in 2004 were prescribed by a licensed physician to help him recover from reconstructive elbow surgery.

Ankiel, whose comeback is one of the great stories of this season, initially acknowledged human growth hormone was among those medications during a brief session with reporters Friday, then refused to list his various prescriptions.

"I'm not going to go into the list of what my doctors have prescribed for me," the St. Louis Cardinals outfielder said when asked specifically whether he had taken HGH as part of his recovery. "I've been through a lot emotionally and physically. There are doctor and patient privileges, and I hope you guys respect those privileges."

MLB wants to speak with him, and he'll cooperate. I haven't seen a comment from Glaus yet.

Sports Illustrated links Troy Glaus to the Signature steroid scandal, providing me with a great headline. River Ave. Blues take is here.

A source in Florida with knowledge of the client list of Signature Pharmacy, an Orlando-based compound pharmacy, alleges that between September 2003 and May 2004, multiple shipments of nandrolone and testosterone were sent to Glaus at a Corona, Calif., address that traces to the player. Though the information only pertains to receipt and not actual use of steroids, both nandrolone and testosterone were on Major League Baseball's banned list at the time.

Glaus, then with the Angels, missed much of the 2003 season with a tear in his right rotator cuff and frayed labrum and underwent season-ending shoulder surgery after attempting a comeback in 2004.

The prescriptions, written in Glaus' name, were obtained through New Hope Health Center, a California-based anti-aging clinic that advertises the sale of anabolic steroids and human growth hormones on its Web site. The prescription was processed by Signature. The prescribing physician was Ramon Scruggs, M.D. According to the Medical Board of California, as of March 2007, Scruggs has been on probation and is prohibited from prescribing drugs over the internet. He also was reportedly involved in a lawsuit with Mobile-based Applied Pharmacy, which, ironically, was the subject of a previous multi-agency raid. (Contacted through New Hope and given the chance to comment on Friday, Scruggs responded with expletives and ended the conversation abruptly.)

I'm guessing that with the Daily News breaking the Ankiel story this morning, all the other rumors that reporters are sitting on will come out. My question is, how long has Selig had this information, and will he or the union take any action?

Update: Looking at Troy's pro career, you wonder where the juicing might have started. After being a first-team All-American in college, he tore up AA so thoroughly in 1998, that was the only time he spent in the minors apart from rehab assignments. He took until 2000 to adjust to the majors, and took off at age 24. Was he that good then, and tried the drugs to come back from an injury? Did he start in college? We'll see if he answers any questions today. I doubt it.

The New York Daily News connects Rick Ankiel to HGH.

According to records obtained by The News and sources close to the controversy surrounding anti-aging clinics that dispense illegal prescription drugs, Ankiel received eight shipments of HGH from Signature Pharmacy in Orlando from January to December 2004, including the brand-name injectable drugs Saizen and Genotropin. Signature is the pharmacy at the forefront of Albany District Attorney David Soares' two-year investigation into illegal Internet prescription drug sales, which has brought 22 indictments and nine convictions.

Ankiel's prescriptions were signed by Florida physician William Gogan, who provided them through a Palm Beach Gardens clinic called "The Health and Rejuvenation Center," or "THARC." The drugs were shipped to Ankiel at the clinic's address.

THARC also provided a shipment of steroids and growth hormone to former major league pitcher Steve Woodard, who pitched for Milwaukee, Cleveland, Texas and Boston during a seven-year career that ended in 2003, according to records. Woodard and Ankiel were teammates with the Triple-A Memphis Redbirds in 2004.

This is too bad. The article notes that "he (Ankiel) stopped receiving HGH just before Major League Baseball officially banned it in 2005." It should be noted that in 2005, there was an official policy put in place on testing and punishment. It was cheating to use PEDs before that, as any controlled substance was illegal. Players got around HGH by having doctors prescribe the drug, even though there's no real use for it once you're an adult.

And in fact, HGH does nothing for you. So this is going to turn out to be a scandal about cheating poorly. What's worrisome is that Ankiel was willing to use this type of drug, which may mean he was willing to do others as well.

I suppose the good news is that the drug testing agreement scared him off using these. So at least in this case, testing appeared to have the desired effect. We'll see how Rick responds later today.

Thanks to the Baseball Digest Daily newsletter for the tip.

Update: Sabernomics weighs in.

First, let me repeat what I have said a number of times. There is no evidence that HGH improves athletic performance--none, zero, zilch. This is the consensus of the exercise physiology profession. The people who study this stuff as their profession say that HGH is useless for building strength. Why isn't this being reported in the media?

HGH should be taken off the banned list. It does nothing for players and there's no way to detect it. Why waste money looking for it?

Kirk Radomski revealed the names of baseball players using steroids to Major League Baseball:

As part of the plea deal, Radomski agreed to testify before a grand jury, if needed, and to meet with investigators from baseball's own steroids investigation.

SI.com did not say when Radomski met with Mitchell. But it said the meeting may have occurred before July 13 when Yankees slugger Jason Giambi became the one current major leaguer to cooperate in the investigation.

It remains to be seen whether Mitchell would reveal names uncovered in his investigation, which may be presented sometime after this baseball season.

Radomski worked for the Mets for a decade, beginning in 1985, then used the contacts he made to go into business selling steroids and other drugs to ballplayers, according to his signed plea agreement.

I'm somewhat surprised we haven't seen leaks of the names yet.

Jason Giambi is off the hook.

Sean Kirst talks to two inner-city little league coaches about Barry Bonds. First, the technical details:

But when he watches Bonds, all Brooks sees is that perfect swing a technical masterpiece that he contends would not really benefit from chemicals.

"It's a compact swing, no wasted effort going back," Brooks said. "Everything is forward. He seems so tuned in how the pitcher's throwing. The other night, almost when the ball left the pitcher's hand, that left leg moved just a little bit to be in the right place to power that pitch. I don't think muscle builders really are going to help with that."

Then on role models:

More important, Hayden questions why anyone would think of a baseball player as a paragon of virtue in the first place. "I'd never tell these kids that a ballplayer should be a role model," Hayden said. "I think, if you're looking for role models, it ought be a doctor or a teacher."

Will Carroll interviews Mark Silva, the man who makes Barry Bonds' arm brace. Although you need a subscription to read the article, the audio interview is available at the link.

The most important thing to get from the article is this:

It's the molds that bring forth the most interesting fact regarding Bonds since Game of Shadows was published. Silva states that because of the custom nature of the work, he's been asked to make casts of Bonds each year. In the first couple of years, he went through the entire process, but due to his workload, he started checking Bonds with precision calipers each subsequent year. "If I made the same brace every year for 12 or more years," Silva said, "it was because there was no size change in Barry's arms."

You read that correctly--the man who not only builds Bonds' brace, but who has taken precision measurements of his arm since 1992, has not seen any increase in the size of Bonds' arm. Point blank, Silva said "there's been no significant change in the size of his arms."

This is an on-record source saying Barry Bonds' arm hasn't changed in twelve years. It really goes against what was reported here. Another piece of the puzzle to sort.

Neifi Perez will sit out the rest of the season as he test positive for stimulants a third time.

Mickey Kaus offers a clever suggestion for Barry Bonds:

Retire now! Tonight. Before you break Aaron's record. That way you get good press for the rest of your life as the man who would have broken the record but chose not to. The way things are going, if you break the record you're going to get basically bad press for the rest of your life.

I don't think Barry will get bad press for the rest of his life. He'll make some kind of amends at some point, and as time passes this story will be less of a big deal. Maybe he can take the Michael Milken route to redemption.

Well, the anti-steroid message certainly seems to have gotten through to little kids. Or is it their parents just did a good job of getting them to hate Barry Bonds, who plays for the reviled Giants?

For Baseball Prospectus subscribers, my latest column looks at the possibility of an NBA like gambling scandal happening with Major League umpires.

Jose Canseco promised some information about Alex Rodriguez in his new book:

Canseco told WEEI-Radio in Boston on Friday that he has "other stuff" on the Yankees slugger, who he called a "hypocrite" who "was not all he appeared to be."

When asked if A-Rod had used steroids, Canseco told WEEI, "Wait and see."

Okay, I'll wait. It could just as easily be about A-Rod's sex life. It it does involve drugs, however, it will need to be taken seriously. Canseco's first book was pretty much on the money.

Update: This story reminds me not to get too caught up in believing any particular player is clean or not. You might get disappointed.

Kimberly Bell, former mistress of Barry Bonds, tells her story in the Novemember Playboy and poses nude as well.

Bell's appearance in the magazine can't help the government's case against her former lover.

Defense lawyers are widely expected to argue that Bell was a woman scorned because of Bonds' decision to marry another woman during their relationship. Her appearance on Playboy may only add fuel to the defense's case.

Really? Haven't we learned anything from the Gennifer Flowers case? Her story was dismissed because she sold it to a tabloid, but it turned out to be true. If Bell does have tapes to back up her story, my guess is her story will hold up in court just fine.

Jason Giambi met with George Mitchell today.

Details of the conversation, which was not recorded, were not released.

The meeting also was attended by Rob Manfred, Executive Vice President of Labor Relations and Human Resources for Major League Baseball; Mike Weiner, General Counsel for the Major League Baseball Players Association; and Giambi's agent, Arn Tellem, and his personal attorney, Brian O'Neill.

I wonder if not recorded means not taped? I would think a stenographer would be involved.

Neifi Perez won't be playing the next twenty five games for the Tigers or anyone:

Detroit Tigers shortshop Neifi Perez was suspended for 25 games today by Major League Baseball for testing postive for a banned stimulant.

The suspension is effective immediately. The Tigers open a three-game series tonight at home against the Boston Red Sox.

He's the first major league player suspended for uppers, which means he failed his second test. Given his horrid performance at the plate this season, this can only help the Tigers over the next month. Neifi's OPS is lower than Bonds' OBA!

Charlie Manuel tries to upset El Duque by having the umpires examine Hernandez's hat for a foreign substance. There's a spot of rosin on the hat, and the umps give it back. We'll see if the mind game works.

The AP joins the Hearst Corporation in trying to get details about a PED investigation. The AP is going after the Grimsley search warrant:

In an application filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Phoenix, the AP said a sworn statement signed in May 2006 to obtain a search warrant for Grimsley's home in Arizona should be released in its entirety based on legal precedent and public interest.

When the affidavit, signed by IRS Special Agent Jeff Novitzky, was made public in June 2006, names of the players Novitzky said Grimsley accused of using performance-enhancing drugs were blacked out.

"Any privacy interests of individuals named in the affidavit are insufficient to overcome the public's right to access," the AP said in its court filing.

The AP also said that if prosecutors provided the complete affidavit to baseball steroids investigator George Mitchell, "then they should not be allowed to invoke the privacy interests of third parties as a shield to prevent disclosure to others."

I agree with this. There's nothing special about Mitchell or major league baseball. If they can know, we all can know. On the other hand, we can all just wait for the leaks. :-)

Maury Brown at Biz of Baseball provides excellent analysis of the Jason Giambi situation from all sides. I agree 100% with this:

The notion that a high-profile player was willing to come forth and say that he was wrong for using steroids -- and by the way, MLB was wrong as well -- is what the game needs. Shoving the voice of reason into a corner will only perpetuate MLB's image as a league full of uncontrite Juicers.

Jason Giambi agreed today to speak with George Mitchell.

"I will address my own personal history regarding steroids. I will not discuss in any fashion any other individual," Giambi said.

Giambi was quoted in USA Today last month as seeming to admit to steroids use several years ago -- during a period when baseball did not penalize most first-time drug offenders. Selig threatened to discipline Giambi and said he would factor cooperation with Mitchell into his decision.

"A direct conversation the commissioner impressed upon me the idea that the game of baseball would be best served by such a meeting," Giambi said. "I will continue to do what I think is right and be candid about my past history regarding steroids. I have never blamed anyone nor intended to deflect blame for my conduct."

Selig may still punish Giambi, but I'm guessing it won't be too harsh, due to his cooperation. Without the type of leverage Selig had against Giambi, I'm not sure anyone else will testify.

It turns out Thursday is the deadline for Jason Giambi to set up a meeting with the commissioner, not actually talk to him. I would not be surprised if they agree to a date to talk about when they might actually talk about steroids. :-) As always, Annie Hall comes to mind:

1ST MAN Well, you take a meeting with him, I'll take a meeting with you if you'll take a meeting with Freddy.

2ND MAN
I took a meeting with Freddy. Freddy
took a meeting with Charlie. You take
a meeting with him.

1ST MAN
All the good meetings are taken.

There was an exchange last night between Brad Penny and Shawn Green. No one knew what it was at the time, but Penny accused Green of stealing signs at second base earlier in the game, relaying pitch location to the batter. Given that the Mets lost big, it didn't work very well.

The battle between Bud Selig and Jason Giambi heated up with a leak from the commissioner's office:

Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig is heading toward suspending Jason Giambi next week if the New York Yankees slugger does not cooperate with former senator George Mitchell's investigation on steroid use, according to a high-ranking MLB official.

The official, who talked with Selig but has not been granted permission to speak publicly because of ongoing talks, said Selig wants Giambi's decision by Tuesday.

I don't see the point of this. If anything, Selig should have taken Giambi's remarks as a starting point, and encouraged him and others to speak out more. Now it will just be another labor/management fight that might set back all the cooperation the sides achieved over the last few years. If you are a subscriber to Baseball Prospectus, see my latest column for how I would handle this.

Baseball needs to create an environment where the players can talk publicly and honestly about past steroid use so we can all discuss the subject with facts. Selig's leak does just the opposite.

For Baseball Prospectus subscribers, my latest column discusses a way the Mitchell investigation can get at the true history of steroids abuse in baseball.

There a fascinating post on the genetics of whippets at John Hawks Antropology Weblog. It turns out, we now know what makes whippets fast.

It worked. "Bully whippets," as the heavyset dogs are known, turn out to have a genetic mutation that enhances muscle development. And breeders may not want to eliminate the "bully" gene after all. The scientists found that the same mutation that pumps up some whippets makes others among the fastest dogs on the track.

If a whippet receives two copies of the mutation, the whippet is muscle bound and slow. If it receives no copies of the mutation, it is thin slow. But if the dog gets one of each, then whippet is a racer. If you keep a stock of slow think whippets and slow muscular whippets and breed them together, you'll always get a litter of fast whippets! And it turns out, humans have the same mutation.

Moreover, the prospect of races being won by dogs intentionally bred to have a genetic advantage may bring new attention to the way that genes contribute to canine -- and human -- achievement, even when the genetic deck is not stacked. Inborn abilities once attributed to something rather mystical seem to lose a certain standing when connected to specific genes.

A mutation similar to the one that makes some whippets faster also exists in humans: a sliver of genetic code that regulates muscle development, is missing.

"It would be extremely interesting to do tests on the track finalists at the Olympics," said Elaine Ostrander, the scientist at the National Institutes of Health who discovered that the fastest whippets had a single defective copy of the myostatin gene, while "bullies" had two.

"But we wouldn't know what to do with the information," Ms. Ostrander said. "Are we going to segregate the athletes who have the mutation to run separately?" For the moment, it is whippet owners who find themselves on the edge of that particular bioethical frontier.

This of course, opens up a whole new way to cheat at sports that will leave steroids in the dust. A little generic engineering, and out emerges a fast athlete. Parents can test for the allele and decide to train their child for sports at an early age. The possibilities are endless.

In this light, steroids actually balance the playing field. Why should some players be rewarded just because they produce more testosterone? Sports will ban the shots, but they'll have a lot more trouble detecting genetic manipulation to achieve the same result.

The Hearst Corporation wants to know what George Mitchell knows:

When the United States attorney's office announced that it had reached a plea agreement with Kirk Radomski, a former Mets clubhouse attendant who said he sold performance-enhancing drugs to major league baseball players, the government said it would provide information from its investigation to baseball for its own inquiry into drug use.

Now the Hearst Corporation, which owns 12 daily newspapers, including The San Francisco Chronicle, says it is entitled to that same information. The company is arguing that the former Senator George J. Mitchell, who is conducting the investigation, is acting as a private citizen and that the federal government cannot selectively give information to such people.

If Mitchell was given the names, the public should have access to them, too, Hearst is arguing in a lawsuit it filed in federal court last week.

Let's face it, the names are going to come out sooner or later. Someone in MLB is going to leak the names. I don't know the law here, but I think the newspapers have a point. What gives MLB the right to the names and not the rest of us? I'd love to hear the lawyers out there weigh in on this. Does Hearst have a case?

Thanks to Maury Brown for the heads up.

Jon Heyman at Sports Illustraded looks in depth at Kirk Radomski, and what he might know. There does appear to be a paper and electronic trail, which will give the former clubbie credibility when the names come out:

Documents indicate that dozens of players are connected to the case, although none have been made public yet. Verizon records of Radomski's mobile phone, according to the search warrant affidavit, contain "some numbers belonging to current and former MLB players have been already identified." The affidavit also said that investigators found 23 deposits of checks written by "MLB associated individuals" into Radomski's bank account between May 2003 and March 2005 for a total of $33,935.

There seems to be some question over the accuracy of the Giambi speed report:

But according to ESPN's Peter Gammons, multiple sources are questioning whether the report is true.

Giambi has not been asked to take follow-up tests, which is what would occur if he had a first positive test for amphetamines.

Also, Gammons reports that the subject of amphetamines was not raised at Wednesday's meeting.

This is why it's good to know the source of the story. It makes it a lot easier to judge the motives of the leaker.

The Daily News reports Jason Giambi failed a drug test last year for stimulants. However, they do not cite the source, so as in all things like this, take it with a grain of salt. They use this as evidence:

But Giambi himself hinted at the failed test - which was later confirmed by the Daily News - in his eye-opening interview with USA Today last week, when he said that he is "probably tested more than anyone else."

Under MLB policy, there are two reasons a player would be required to submit to additional testing: The first is a failed steroid test, but failed steroid tests are made public. The second is a failed amphetamines test, which would not be made public.

I thought that if there was suspicion of use, MLB could test more. Can someone familiar with the CBA clarify this? Once Giambi gave his apology a couple of years ago, I thought MLB would be justified in testing him all the time.

Anyway, so much for confidentiality. If you MLB wants to bring a player down, they just leak a failed amphetamine test. Nice of them to stick to their agreement. And they wonder why players won't talk to George Mitchell.

I agree with Mark Kriegel:

Commissioner Bud Selig should do everything in his considerable power to protect Jason Giambi and ensure that his story of steroid abuse is heard without fear of reprisal.

No player is going to talk to Mitchell because of past leaks, fear of reprisals from MLB and fear of prosecution by the government. If Selig does indeed want to get at the truth, he can remove the fear of reprisals and work on lessening the fear of prosecution. With the exception of Bonds, the government hasn't been keen to go after PED abusers. They've been hunting the suppliers. If Selig wants players to talk, he needs to let them know the risk of their careers and freedom is going to be minimal.

Jason Giambi comes down on the side of Barry Bonds, saying the steroid boost is overrated:

Giambi won't say whether he believes Bonds ever took steroids or human growth hormone, but he's convinced that no drug is responsible for Bonds' extraordinary career.

"Barry is one of the greatest players, if not the greatest, I'll ever see play," says Giambi, who has hit 355 career home runs. "I know people have a tough time accepting it, but what he's doing is unbelievable. And I don't care what people say -- nothing is going to give you that gift of hitting a baseball.

"It's the same thing for Barry. If it were that easy, how come you don't see anyone else doing what he has done?"

I find two things interesting about this type of argument. It separates the skill of hitting the ball from the strength to drive the ball. In other words, if the eye-hand coordination isn't there, if the body mechanics aren't there, it doesn't matter how strong you are.

So, if players believe this is true, why take steroids in the first place? Giambi didn't answer that.

"Unfortunately, (the rumors) are going to be a part of it. But that's OK. I'm probably tested more than anybody else. I'm not hiding anything," said Giambi, hitting .273 with five homers this season. "That stuff didn't help me hit home runs. I don't care what people say, nothing is going to give you that gift of hitting a baseball."

When asked, "So why did you take steroids?" Giambi said: "Maybe one day I'll talk about it, but not now."

In general, people use drugs because they work. Recreational drugs make you feel good. Steroids help build muscle. If Giambi is suddenly becoming talkative on the subject, let's hear the whole thing. And I hope it's better than, "Everyone else was doing it."

Bobby Bonds, Jr. talks about his big brother Barry:

"Everyone asks," Bobby Bonds Jr. said. "The only thing I tell them is the same thing I tell everyone, 'I don't know if he took (steroids). Even if he did, he wouldn't have told me.' They ask the dumbest questions when, most of the time, they could figure it out themselves."

But has he ever asked his brother?

"Of course," he said. "He said, 'No man, I don't need to do that (stuff).' Point blank. I'm not going to sit here and try to pump my brother up. If he did it, if he snuck it, he's not going to let me know. You know what I mean? And if he did, he kept it quiet from the whole world.

"When other people started getting busted, of course, this guy hit 73 home runs, he's big as hell, let's go after him. But they've tested him, he's come back negative. I don't understand why they keep bringing it up. They can't prove it."

It's interesting that despite a point blank denial from the elder Bonds, Bobby leaves open the possibility that Barry did juice. That says a lot all by itself.

Yesterday I linked to a post at MLB Fanhouse suggesting the ESPN poll on Barry Bonds was conducted poorly. I wrote Mark Blumenthal at Pollster.com, and he responded in a post today:

Pollsters sometimes "oversample" a survey sub-population in order to increase the reliability of the results for that group. More interviews means less potential random sampling error. Before tabulating the data for the full sample, however, they "weight" back the oversample its correct proportion with the larger sample.

I checked with Gary Langer, the director of polling at ABC News, and he provided a few additional details. The ABC Polling Unit started with a nationally representative sample of 1,803 randomly selected adults interviewed between March 29 and April 4. Of these, 660 described themselves as baseball fans (on the survey's first question). Of these, 64 were African-American.

The pollsters wanted a bigger and more reliable sampling of African-Americans. So they continued calling from April 5 to April 22 and interviewed another 476 randomly sampled African Americans, of whom 139 were self-described baseball fans.

Thus (adding everything up), the ESPN/ABC survey interviewed 799 baseball fans, including 203 among African Americans. Before tabulating the data, however, they weighted the combined sample of 2,279 (the original 1,803 plus the oversample of 476 blacks) in a way that reduced the proportion of African-Americans to its correct value as determined by the U.S. Census.**

This practice is not at all unusual. The intent is to generate more statistically reliable results by race, not -- as Brown puts it -- to "generate racially charged results."

It was indeed a good poll. Thanks, Mark!

John Perricone empties both barrels into Curt Schilling's criticism of Barry Bonds. What I found most interesting, however, was something that I wondered about since the March Congressional hearings two years ago:

.... some perspective is needed here. While Rep. Tom Davis (R., Va.) claims that currently "over a half a million youth are using steroids," the NY Times notes that, in addition to (the late) Efrain Marrero, only "two previous suicides had been attributed by parents to steroid use by young athletes."With steroid use in high schools dating back to the 1950s, the suicide rate -- even if Marrero's death were actually linked to steroids and not other factors -- seems negligible compared to a male suicide rate for 15-to-24 year-olds averaging more than 20 per 100,000 over the last 30 years.

Even more startling is how the young male suicide rate has fallen over the last decade while steroid use has grown. On Meet the Press, Rep. Henry Waxman (D., Calif.) claimed that, over the last decade, steroid use had risen from one out of every 45 kids to one out of 16, while the young male suicide rate has gone down from 26 to 20 per 100,000.

I had the feeling we were being manipulated with the suicide story, and now I'm glad that's been confirmed.

Lion in Oil notes that the Mets Jorge Reyes is the first minor leaguer to be suspended twice for steriod abuse. (Hat tip, Deadspin)

Off topic, but from the same Deadspin post, "People like Shakira more than soccer." Isn't this obvious?

Larry Brown at MLB Fanhouse notices poor polling practices in the recent survey about Barry Bonds.

David Ortiz comes out in defense of Barry Bonds:

Ortiz has an almost willful naivete about both Bonds and steroids. He still does not believe in his heart or his head that Bonds took steroids. And even if it were proven to him, Ortiz still would not link it to what Bonds does with a baseball bat. "To hit the frickin' ball, the guy makes it look easy, but it ain't. I don't know how you can have that swing, consistently. I don't know how steroids can do that," Ortiz said. "There are supposed to be guys using steroids in the game, and there's nobody close to Barry Bonds. What's that mean? He was using the best (expletive)? Know what I'm saying?"

He also believes Selig should be at the game if and when Bonds breaks the record. I personally don't care about Selig being there. He seems to sap the excitement out of the moment when he speaks at these milestones, so let the Giants handle it.

Juan Salas of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays fell to a positive drug test Monday:

Salas tested positive for a performance-enhancing substance, the commissioner's office said. His suspension will start Tuesday.

Once again, an older, marginal pitcher gets caught. The profile of the performance enhancer continues to the opposite of our image. It's not the successful slugger, but the player on the edge of the majors trying to hang on.

Update: So was cheating worth it for Salas? He managed two months of major league service, which grossed him about $120,000. If the Mariners bring him back after the suspension, he'll get another $120,000. You can see why players at his level are tempted to cheat. That's a lot more money than he'd make in the minors.

Via Getting Paid to Watch, the New York Daily News provides more on the Kirk Radomski story:

Over the course of the past year, several major league baseball players got phone calls from steroid dealer Kirk Radomski and noted to themselves or others that the calls seemed "strange."

After Radomski, a onetime Mets clubhouse attendant, pleaded guilty to distributing steroids Friday, they probably have a better idea of what he wanted.

According to sources familiar with Radomski's activities since federal agents searched his home in December 2005, as well as sources who spoke to the players in question, Radomski already was working for federal investigators when he made those calls, taping his conversations. Just last week, as The Associated Press reported, Radomski testified before the same grand jury investigating perjury charges against Barry Bonds.

The search warrant affidavit said Radomski had provided drugs to at least one player who "was publicly identified as being associated with BALCO laboratories." Those players include Bonds, Jason Giambi, Jeremy Giambi, Gary Sheffield, Benito Santiago, Bobby Estalella, Marvin Benard, Randy Velarde and Armando Rios.

And this:

Sources interviewed were not certain how many players' voices ended up on tape, but one lawyer close to the case said those players have reason to worry.

"They went to a lot of trouble to gather this evidence," the attorney said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "It wasn't like they were looking for a bigger fish than (Radomski) with those calls - they're collecting evidence on the players. They aren't looking at suppliers when they do this, they're looking at users."

The feds are finally going after the players. They can do what drug testing can't, take away livelihoods.

Two minor league pitchers find themselves out of action for a couple of months:

Roney, a 27-year-old right-hander, is 2-0 with an 0.90 ERA in five relief appearances at Triple-A Syracuse. He signed with Toronto last November and was sent outright to the minors on March 22. He was penalized under baseball's minor league drug-testing program, and his suspension began Saturday, the commissioner's office said Monday.

...

In addition, Detroit right-hander Sendy Vazquez was penalized for testing positive for a performance-enhancing substance under the minor league program and was suspended for 50 games, starting last Friday.

The Baseball Cube spells Sendy's last name Vasquez if you're trying to find his stats. Once again, pitchers get caught. Steroids, they're not just for sluggers.

MLB Fanhouse points to an article in which Giants outfield Dave Roberts is said to have helped Dodgers pitcher Bret Tomko with his delivery. Fanhouse notes:

The immediate question that must follow is whether or not Dave Roberts crossed a line in tipping his friend, who happens to pitch for a hated rival. Think about it -- do you see the players in the final showdown at the World Series of Poker tell each other their bluffs after they've finished? Of course not -- they know they'll meet at some point in the future and want to keep that privileged information to themselves. So what do you think, is it OK for Roberts to give a tidbit to his buddy, or does that cross the line of competition? I think Giants fans already know the answer.

But if you read the article, it's not at all clear when Roberts and Tomko talked:

Now, Tomko's mother is cancer-free. His wife is healthy. And he has used a new delivery inspired by a discussion over dinner with Giants outfielder Dave Roberts, a fellow San Diego-area resident, about how hitters were seeing the ball all too well against him.

So these two could have sat down for dinner when Roberts was a free agent. In that case, I don't see the problem giving advice to a friend.

MetsBlog.com posts two links worth checking out. In one, Brian McRae describes speed use by the Mets in the late 1990s, and it the other Bob Sikes tells us a little about Kirk J. Radomski. I agree with Matt that the amphetamine story could be told about any clubhouse in the majors for the last forty years.

A former Mets clubhouse employee (very former, by the way) ran into the Feds today:

Today, the IRS agents, FBI and U.S. Attorneys office in California that pursued the BALCO case made a significant announcement. Kirk J. Radomski, a New York Mets clubhouse employee between 1985 and 1995, has pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in San Francisco to distribution of a controlled substance -- a schedule three anabolic steroid -- to "dozens of Major Leaguers on teams throughout the league." He also pleaded guilty to one count of money laundering. (Combined, these charges are punishable by a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison and $500,000 in fines.)

Earlier this spring, the steroid-related news pertained to the break-up of a distribution chain linking the Internet sites to anti-aging clinics and compound pharmacies. Now, the BALCO investigative team is back in the picture.

No names yet, so stay tuned. Radomski is said to be cooperating.

Torii Hunter broke a baseball rule that almost resulted in him being banned from the game:

Hunter's gift of four bottles of Dom Perignon, which he had delivered to the Royals clubhouse this past weekend, was meant as a reward for the Royals sweeping the Detroit Tigers last September, allowing the Twins to come from behind to win the American League Central. The gift fulfilled a promise Hunter made last fall.

But baseball has rules about this sort of thing.

Namely, rule 21-b, which proclaims "Any player or person connected with a Club who shall offer or give any gift or reward to a player or person connected with another Club for services rendered ... in defeating or attempting to defeat a competing Club ... shall be declared ineligible for not less than three years."

The Royals returned the gift unopened, saving Hunter's career. It seems to me the rule is less about encouraging teams to win and more about preventing extortion. ("Wouldn't it be a shame if we didn't play well against the Tigers this weekend.") Since neither Hunter nor Terry Ryan were aware of the rule, the league might want to publicize this a little more.

The post from the Cheater's Guide to Baseball is here.

MLB won't investigate Francisco Rodriguez for illegal substances on his cap.

Rodriguez denied the allegations, saying the substance was built-up resin from his use of a rosin bag on the mound. Major League Baseball agreed.

Angels GM Bill Stoneman said baseball disciplinarian Bob Watson called the team and said "there's nothing to it, nothing to investigate."

K-Rod pulls the old bloggers aren't experts defense:

"It's easy for a guy sitting at his desk, watching television, to put pictures on the Internet," Rodriguez said, according to the Los Angeles Times. "But I hope he has something better to do than to mess with people. He has no clue what he's writing about. I don't even know who he is."

Zumsteg, reached by e-mail, told the Times "I understand where from his side it seems like he's been singled out and persecuted for what's a fairly common practice, and if baseball's going to crack down on him they should certainly look around the league at other pitchers with pine tar on their hats. I brought this up as something I found interesting in connection with my work on the book, and it's not at all personal."

On top of all that, The Cheater's Guide Blog is down.

Derek Zumsteng presented pictorial evidence a couple of days ago of Francisco Rodriguez using a substance on the brim of his cap to doctor the ball. Now, MLB is investigating.

Two years ago Donnelly was caught with pine tar on his glove. Is someone on the Angels staff encouraging this kind of thing? Scioscia comes from the Dodgers system, where legend has it this stuff was taught to everyone.

The players may not know it, but big brother is watching:

Major league teams are monitoring players during the period between when they are notified they must take a drug test and when they provide a urine sample, according to The New York Times.

The procedure was instituted in July 2005 and covers a period that can last up to several hours, the newspaper reported on its Web site Saturday night.

"Players may not be aware they're under observation, but we're watching," baseball executive vice president Rob Manfred was quoted as saying. "It doesn't mean we tell them we're watching."

Three general managers are monitors, 18 assistant GMs, four vice presidents, four directors of baseball operations. The title of the other monitor wasn't disclosed.

This was in response from criticism by Gary Wadler, who has yet to land the contract to test MLB samples.

Update: Dr. Wadler writes:

For the record, I would like to clarify that I am not employed by any entity that does drug testing, nor do I do personally do any drug testing. Therefore I am not sure what was meant by the following: "This was in response from criticism by Gary Wadler, who has yet to land the contract to test MLB samples." that appeared in Baseball Mussings.

So noted. It was meant as a snarky comment on Wadler's organization wanting to control all drug testing for all sports. I'm sorry if I conveyed the wrong impression.

Jamie Mottram donated $50 to the Baseball Musings pledge drive and gets to dedicate a post.

David Pinto is a blogfather to us all, and Baseball Musings is an inspiration for AOL's latest endeavor: MLB FanHouse. It's a group blog updated hourly with top-notch contributors from all over the web (The Dugout, We Are the Postmen, Surviving Grady, Foul Balls, Metstradamus, Where Have You Gone, Andy Van Slyke?, Larry Brown Sports and Detroit Bad Boys). Please stop by and check it out as the new season begins, and if you'd help spread the word we'll be forever grateful.

And Pinto rules! Throw mo' money in the hat! The man's been at it for five years, he's done enough!

The most recent post at MLB Fanhouse involves a thesis by Stanford graduate and Mariners prospect Chris Minaker on the use of steroids at the school. While the FanHouse post covers the steroid aspect, these student athletes are encouraged to take many supplements:

Teammates exerted the strongest external pressure by far, he said, followed by coaches. A coach, he writes, "can attempt to use his power to pressure his players into using supplements that he thinks will improve their performance, even if this is against the will of the player." Minaker found that the pressure athletes felt to use supplements, both from within and from external forces, was so great that they'd take products they had no proof even worked.

Protein and creatine were high on the list of popular supplements taken by the athletes Minaker surveyed.

"Overall, about 42 percent of the athletes surveyed had used a creatine supplement in hopes of enhancing their performance," he writes.

Some athletes consume massive amounts of protein shakes, he adds, even though research shows "a mixed diet" can provide the sufficient amount needed.

"In this study, it seems that every athlete is or has been on something," Minaker writes. "The supplement culture has become completely intertwined with the culture of collegiate sports, just as it had before with professional sports. There has been a trickle-down effect from professional sports right on down to the ranks of all athletic levels."

And remember, this is at a school known for its academics where you would think the athletes might be people who think for themselves. (Students there call Harvard the Stanford of the east, but really Stanford is the Yale of the west.) Think what it might be like at real sports factories.

It would be great to get Minaker together with Mike Mussina to see if this has changed at the school over time, of if this pressuring to use supplements went on in the early 90's as well.

Pete Rose admitted on the Dan Patrick show today that he bet on the Reds:

Rose spoke Wednesday with Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann on ESPN Radio to discuss the new Pete Rose exhibit that will be on display at the Great American Ballpark as part of the Reds Hall of Fame. The exhibit will be on display for 11 months.

"I bet on my team every night. I didn't bet on my team four nights a week. I was wrong," Rose said.

Rose said that he believed in his team so much that he bet on them to win every night.

"I bet on my team to win every night because I love my team, I believe in my team," Rose said. "I did everything in my power every night to win that game."

I don't know if this will help or hurt him get reinstated. The years of denial did a lot to damage him with the people who supported him all that time. And the more he talks, the more we find out it's all true. Some kudos should go out to the late Bart Giamatti for doing the right thing.

Update: One other point. An accusation I've heard over the years is that Rose didn't bet on the team every night, giving the bookies an idea of when Rose thought the team would lose. Saying he bet every night flies in the face of that, but he's lied so many times in the past it's tough to believe that's true.

Gary Matthews unequivocally denied using HGH:

"I have never taken HGH -- during the 2004 season or any other time," Matthews said in a statement. "Nobody has accused me of doing so, and no law enforcement authority has said I am a target of any investigation for doing so."

That's good. My feelings on these is to take the player at his word. I just hope time proves it to be better than Palmeiro's denial.

It looks like we'll get more names leaked in the Albany, NY drug investigation:

Albany, N.Y., district attorney David Soares told the New York Daily News in Wednesday's editions that he will send those athletes' names to the NFL, major league baseball and any other leagues.

"We're going to be sending information to vet those names, see if they are who they say they are," the newspaper reported Soares as saying.

The people who know the names, the more likely they'll get out to the public. We'll see if any other active players are revealed.

John Rocker is telling a different story than his publicity agent:

Former major league relief pitcher John Rocker told ESPN Radio on Wednesday that he was directed by doctors to take over-the-counter supplements that would raise his human growth hormone levels -- and that he never purchased human growth hormone with a prescription.

"I never had a prescription for any HGH. If somebody's got a beef to make with me, show me a prescription," he told guest host Erik Kuselias on ESPN Radio's "The Herd."

Rocker's account contradicted a report linking Rocker with a pharmacy in Alabama raided in connection with an investigation into sales of performance-enhancing substances. It also contradicted Rocker's own publicist, who told the New York Daily News that Rocker admitted using HGH but said he needed the substance for medical reasons.

ESPN actually took the time to call GNC and comfirm you could buy amino acids over the counter that promote HGH production. Nice to see.

David Bell and John Rocker join the list of players involved in the Signature Pharmacy case. Bell is not denying he took HGH (this is wrong, he took HCG,see correction below), and most importantly, he took it last year when the product was clearly banned:

David Bell, a veteran of a dozen major league seasons, received six packages of HCG at a Philadelphia address last April, when he played for the Phillies. The cost was $128.80, and the drug was prescribed in conjunction with an Arizona antiaging facility. Bell acknowledges receiving the shipment but tells SI the drug was prescribed to him "for a medical condition," which he declined to disclose, citing his right to privacy.

Is there a medical exemption for HGH in the CBA? (Giving the previous one a quick look, I don't see one.) As the article explains, giving HGH to adults is dubious at best:

HGH can be prescribed by doctors for legitimate medical purposes. Historically, this has meant combating rare pituitary disease and treating patients with progressively debilitating conditions resulting from AIDS and some forms of cancer. Yet lately some doctors have ascribed a liberal definition to "legitimate medical purposes," contending that aging is, in effect, a progressively debilitating disease and that any patients with diminishing hormone levels are eligible for the drug. The American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, a Chicago-based group that supports using HGH to replace growth hormone as its levels decline with age, counts more than 10,000 health-care practitioners among its members. This "off-label," or unorthodox, use of HGH is the source of significant controversy in the medical community. "It's a ruse," says Dr. Thomas Perls, an associate professor at Boston University School of Medicine, who maintains the website antiagingquackery.com. "The public has equated hormones with youth, and HGH is the drug of choice for these hucksters to push." (Through a spokesman the academy said in a statement to SI that Perls's comment "is on the level of that of a 'flat earth society' uninformed person.")

It seems MLB is within its rights to discipline Bell, just like the disciplined Grimsley.

Hat tip, Balls, Sticks and Stuff.

Correction: I misred the article. Bell admitted to using HCG, which:

In the male, hCG injections are used to stimulate the leydig cells to synthesize testosterone. The intratesticular testosterone is necessary for spermatogenesis from the sertoli cells. Typical indications for hCG in men include hypogonadism and fertility treatment.

So this drug is more in the class of drugs that encourage natural production of testosterone. Does anyone have a link to the banned drug list? I don't know if HCG is on it.

Gary Matthews finds himself stuck between a lawyer and an unhappy owner. Arte Moreno wants a statement from Matthews about the drug allegations against him:

"He needs to make a statement to the fans," Moreno said, clearly still unhappy 48 hours after Shapiro's statement. "Our feelings were the best way was to be pro-active and talk to the fans immediately."

Moreno issued his own statement Saturday night.

"Both the Angels and I have strongly encouraged Gary to cooperate with any authority investigating this matter," Moreno said. "Specifically, the Angels have asked him to come forward and fully answer all questions surrounding the recent allegations against him. The organization continues to expect that this matter will come to a quick conclusion."

Of course, Matthews' new lawyer is going to prevent Gary from saying anything incriminating:

Shapiro issued a four-paragraph statement Saturday from his offense in Los Angeles claiming he was "firmly convinced (Matthews) has not violated any laws or any rules established by Major League Baseball."

The attorney said Matthews would not comment further.

"Gary wishes to cooperate with Major League Baseball, the Los Angeles Angels and any other investigative agency that may look into this matter," Shapiro said. "He is eager to tell his side of the story and looks forward to providing a statement once all investigations into the matter have been completed."

Which is of course the right thing to do. The truth is, Matthews would be hurting himself legally before he finds out exactly what investigators know. And as much as Arte might bluster, there's little they or major league baseball can do about this unless they find Matthews receiving drugs now. Any suspension or punishment over this issue would be fought by the union and most likely won by the union.

From a fans point of view, however, the statement, "(Matthews) has not violated any laws or any rules established by Major League Baseball," is a pretty weak denial. I'd much rather hear, "I've never used performance enhancing drugs."

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive in March.

The Signature pharmacists plead not guilty.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive in March.

Jerry Hariston's name came up in the Albany prescription investigation. The drugs were delivered in 2004:

Llosa/Wertheim: Investigators tell us the drugs were sent to addresses in Maryland and Arizona that trace to Jerry Hairston, Jr. Also the document we reviewed indicates that the birth date for the patient file was listed as May 29, 1976, but the prescription database indicates a DOB of May 29, 1967; Hairston Jr.'s birth date, according to MLB.com, is May 29, 1976. The document indicates investigators' belief that the last two numbers of the birth year as noted in the prescription database were inverted.

It's a point worth stressing, though. To repeat: no one is alleging the use of performance-enhancing drugs. This investigation is about a distribution pipeline. With respect to the athlete-clients, the allegation is that drugs were sent to them through a DEA-raided compound pharmacy. In theory, anyone could go to one of these anti-aging Web sites, register falsely under the name of a prominent athlete, and get a prescription for a banned substance in that athlete's name -- that's how shadowy some of the anti-aging clinics and prescribing doctors appear to be.

The last is a good point, however:

Investigators, of course, are aware of this and are relying on more than simply a name when they allege someone is a customer. From the documents we've reviewed and information we've been told, there has, in each case, been some form of additional corroborating material, such as matching mailing addresses, credit cards numbers and/or phone numbers.

2004 Was Hairston's best season, although that's not unusual for a 28 year old. I suspect we'll be hearing more names in the coming days.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive in March.

I had forgotten that people were concerned about steroids in the 1970s. :-)

Major League Baseball expanded testing to include just about everybody:

A newly released and obtained 5-page memo from Commissioner Selig, outlining the breadth and width of attempts to eradicate drug use in MLB--including steroids--all personnel--players (Major and Minor League), non-players (Major and Minor League), Umpires (MLB), executives (Club front office personnel, managers, coaches, trainers), and the Office of the Commissioner (all employees of the Office of the Commissioner, MLB Enterprises, MLB Properties, MLB International, MLB Productions, and MLB Advanced Media)--will fall under the testing program as the players now currently have: unannounced testing for banned substances, including steroids.

Good. Now we can find out if Billy Beane's been jucing to keep the Athletics in contention. :-)

I guess this levels the playing field. The execs need to go through the same indignities as the players.

Hat tip, MetsBlog.com, which speculates:

...the $2,000,000 fine should raise eyebrows as to whether teams have attempted cover-ups of substance abuse...

You mean, maybe Oakland or San Francisco knew what was going on with their players? Where's Claude Rains when you need him!

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive in March.

There's new information on Gary Matthews' link to the New York/Florida drug probe:

SI.com: Gary Matthews, Jr., who had a career year in 2006 and signed a $50 million deal with the Angels this offseason, has already been linked to a customer list of a raided pharmacy. Do you have more information on him?

Llosa/Wertheim: Yes. According to law enforcement documents we've reviewed, Matthews is not just on a customer list, as was reported Tuesday. In August 2004, he was allegedly sent Genotropin -- a brand of synthetic human growth hormone typically prescribed to children suffering from growth failure -- at an address in Mansfield, Texas. We traced the address and it is the residence of a former minor league teammate of Matthews', who told us that he is friends with Matthews.

So that's how Gary's name made it on the list. Of course, in 2004, there were no sanctions in place for HGH, so there's not much MLB can do about even if the drugs were intended for Matthews.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive in March.

The Albany Times Union puts together a special section on Tuesday's drug bust, including photos and video. This article shows just how easy it is to buy drugs over the Internet:

The investigator logged onto Stephenson's former Web site, Docstat.com, and placed an order, describing himself as a 4-foot-tall, overweight airline pilot with a heroin addiction and drinking problem.

The reason for the prescription?

"I want to get high to fly," the undercover investigator wrote.

Two days later, the prescription drugs he ordered from Stephenson arrived via an express mail courier.

And this disturbing story discusses the doctors that are willing to write these prescriptions.

It was Feb. 5, and a judge methodically arraigned the disgraced physician from Queens on a 13-count felony indictment. He explained her predicament before ordering her return to jail without bail on charges ranging from forgery to criminal diversion of prescription medicines.

Santi, 68, a documented alcoholic, hasn't had a valid license to practice medicine in New York in eight years.

But authorities say that didn't stop her from writing thousands of prescriptions for Internet customers in multiple states. Every "script" was money in her pocket, and the Web sites peddling the drugs didn't care about her background -- she was in the game and had access to another doctor's legitimate Drug Enforcement Agency prescription number.

They did it for money:

Authorities in Albany said the Web sites compete for doctors, offering to pay them $25 to $50 per prescription or, in some cases, lump sums of between $5,000 and $8,000 a week.

And once again, it points out why this problem is so difficult to control. There is a huge demand out there for drugs. The amount of money drives research for ways to hide use, and ways to keep the supply pipeline open. Given the amount of drugs flowing out of this place, the lack of positive tests in MLB last year seems wrong.

I'm sorry to say this, but the leagues aren't going to fix this, no matter how long they suspend people. It's just too easy to produce new substances and too easy to find ways to hide them. The combination of risk of getting caught with the penalty for getting caught produces a cost too low to deter use. I fear the government needs to expand its focus to not only catching the suppliers, but also prosecuting the users. A supplier, unfortunately, is easy to replace. A star athlete is not. Jail time at the height of someone's career, plus the disruptions to a season due to trials and such might impose a cost that's not worth paying, either by the team or by the athlete. The state doesn't need a urine test. They just need to follow an order from inception to delivery. I wonder how different this whole mess would have progressed if the FBI took action in the early 1990s against Canseco and McGwire?

Peter Schmuck notes the history of drug scandals in professional sports don't really change over time. He also thinks MLB could be spending its drug money more efficiently:

Major League Baseball and the other major professional sports need to stay ahead of the curve, but baseball is sadly fixated on rehashing the history of the game's steroid problem through the multimillion-dollar investigation headed by former U.S. Sen. George Mitchell.

The Mitchell probe has bogged down because his investigators lack subpoena power to compel testimony, but Selig is convinced the investigation is necessary to determine the extent of baseball's steroid problem. He bowed to pressure from Congress in ordering the independent investigation. Those millions might have been better spent funding research to produce an effective test to detect the next generation of designer drugs.

Clearly, the job of uncovering the tawdry steroid truth is better left to federal and local law enforcement, which has shut down BALCO and now appears to have many of the bad actors in the mainstream pharmaceutical industry on the run.

Of course, we'd love it if this turns out to be the drug scandal that ends all drug scandals, but this is no time to be naive. It's only been 23 years since the last time we thought that.

The Authors of Game of Shadows write an afterword for the paperback version of the book. Apart from congratulating themselves for doing such good work, there's this very interesting bit about Bonds' growth:

The government subpoenaed the Giants to get the club's medical records on Bonds. Three team employees were ordered to testify - athletic trainer Stan Conte, equipment manager Mike Murphy and "Conehead" Harvey Shields, Bonds' stretching coach.

Like Ting, Conte could describe the changes in Bonds' body, and the Giants' trainer had expressed his own concerns about steroids on the ball club. In 2000, after the Giants heard rumors that Greg Anderson was a steroid dealer, Conte had wanted him banned from the clubhouse; fearing Bonds' wrath, the team's executives backed down.

For his part, Murphy could document Bonds' physical changes via the changes in his uniform size. Since joining the Giants, Bonds had gone from a size 42 to a size 52 jersey; from size 10 ½ to size 13 cleats; and from a size 7 1/8 to size 7 ½ cap, even though he had taken to shaving his head. The changes in his foot and head size were of special interest: medical experts said overuse of Human Growth Hormone could cause an adult's extremities to begin growing, aping the symptoms of the glandular disorder acromegly. Shields, meanwhile, had spent years hanging around the Giants clubhouse with Anderson and Bonds; Novitzky believed Shields knew about Bonds' use of drugs.

The foot growth seems quite unnatural.

New York and Florida officials raided a Florida pharmacy today:

A downtown pharmacy was raided by a law enforcement task force on Tuesday, the climax of a large New York state grand jury investigation into Internet drug sales that could expose widespread illicit steroid use by professional athletes and thousands of people across the nation.

The unprecedented inquiry, led by Albany County's district attorney, has taken New York Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement agents and an Orlando-based federal task force deep inside a maze of shadowy pharmacies and Web sites that have reaped millions of dollars in profit by allegedly exploiting federal and state prescription laws, according to court records.

More than two dozen doctors, pharmacists and business owners have been, or will be, arrested in the coming days in Alabama, Texas, Florida and New York on sealed indictments charging them with various felonies for unlawfully distributing steroids and other controlled substances, records show.

And it looks like they have one name:

The customers include Los Angeles Angels center fielder Gary Matthews Jr., according to sources with knowledge of the investigation.

This was the place that Jason Grimsley and David Segui used to obtain HGH. The couple that ran the pharmacy was raking in the cash, too:

The Orlando pharmacy is owned and operated by a Florida couple, Stan and Naomi Loomis, who are both licensed pharmacists. In 2002, the company reported revenue of about $500,000. Then, driven by a booming Internet prescription market, and the referral business Signature received from various Web sites, revenue topped $35 million last year, authorities in the case said.

Stay tuned!

Update: The initial reaction from Angels fans is to blame law enforcement!

George Mitchell seems like a pretty useless guy right now.

"The (players') association told us this is just a witch hunt," Sheffield told USA Today. "They don't want us to talk to them. This is all about getting (Bonds).

"If this was legitimate and they did it the right way, it would be different. But this a witch hunt. They're just trying to collect a lot of stuff that doesn't make any sense and throw the (expletive) against the wall."

Donald Fehr, executive director of the players' association, said he has offered advice to players but it's the players' choice whether to cooperate.

After the leaks of secret testimony in the BALCO case, the players will never cooperate again.

The defense attorney for Victor Conte will plead guilty to the BALCO leaks. That confirms the accusation made in December. As part of the agreement, the reporter from the San Francisco Chronicle won't go to jail. It's good to see the person who committed the crime going to jail for a change.

Update: One of the commenters wonders what will turn out to be the motivation for the leak. My guess is that Ellerman was looking for a way to get a guilty client freed on a technicality:

In March 2004, Ellerman signed an agreement that he would not disclose grand jury testimony given to him to prepare the defense. But in June of that year, he allowed Fainaru-Wada to come to his office and take verbatim notes of Montgomery, and the Chronicle published a story about the sprinter's testimony on June 24, according to court documents.

After telling Judge Susan Illston that he was angry about the leak, he filed a statement with the court swearing that he wasn't the source. And in October 2004, he filed a motion to dismiss the criminal case against Valente because of "repeated government leaks of confidential information to the media."

The following month, he again allowed Fainaru-Wada to take verbatim notes of the grand jury transcripts, this time of the testimony of Bonds, Giambi and Sheffield, the court papers show.

I find it quite distressing that the Chronicle reporters invoked Watergate in their pleas to be kept out of jail, yet were abetting a lawyer trying to commit fraud to free a client. That's a great reason to protect a source, so the source can commit a crime.

Congress is asking the prosecutors in the BALCO case to drop their prosecution of two reporters.

"The issuance of these subpoenas appears to run directly counter to the protections afforded to the press under the First Amendment," Rep. John D. Conyers, D-Mich. said in a speech at the National Press Club in Washington.

Conyers sent a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales asking him to withdraw the subpoenas. Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., also signed the letter.

"Like most Americans, we have watched with great concern as the Department of Justice issued grand jury subpoenas to the reporters and their newspaper to learn the identities of their confidential sources on some of the most significant reporting in the history of professional sports," Conyers and Davis wrote. "We write to you now to express my deep concern over the issuance of these subpoenas and to urge you to withdraw them."

The leaks justify the persecution of ballplayers by Congress, so they're okay.

From the Baseball Primer Newsblog:

USA Kevin Ryan, who had been the lead Balco prosecutor is apparently one of several federal prosecutors that have been pushed out by the Justice Dept. using a provision of the USA Patriot Act.

Except that's not exactly what the article says. While other federal prosecutors are being pushed out, when the article gets around to quoting people who know something about the situation:

But another legal observer said he doubts Ryan is being removed for political reasons.

"I don't see Ryan doing anything that doesn't comport with the ideological line out of Washington,'' said Peter Keane, a Golden Gate University law professor and former dean. He said other prosecutors who reportedly are under pressure to leave have been those who "don't meet the general conservative litmus test.''

"I don't think this was in response to a White House request'' aimed at Ryan, said Rory Little, a law professor at the University of California's Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco and a former prosecutor in the office under one of Ryan's predecessors.

Little said he'd known that Ryan had been thinking of leaving for about six months. He said he didn't know all of Ryan's reasons but that one must have been the need for a more lucrative job to pay the education costs of two college-bound sons.

Anyway, I doubt it will change anything. These prosecutions are usually run by the staff.

Mark Sweeney spoke up yesterday about the allegations that amphetamines came from his locker:

The New York Daily News reported Thursday that Bonds failed an amphetamines test last season and initially attributed it to a substance he took from Sweeney's locker.

"There was nothing I had for him to take or for me to give to him," Sweeney told The Associated Press in a phone interview Friday night.

Sweeney moved forward after being told by Gene Orza, the union's chief operating officer, that his name had come up with a failed test for the stimulants. He wasn't informed of the player's name or any other details.

"That was kind of a shock," Sweeney said. "I heard my name was mentioned. I didn't know who mentioned it. I didn't know how or why. I was angered and hurt a little bit that however it came out someone didn't know the facts. That happens in all walks of life. ... It's more frustrating for my family. That's who I'm frustrated for. I've learned to deal with certain situations."

Sweeney said he was tested several times for amphetamines last season and has never failed any drug tests.

Sweeney also appreciated Bonds' apology:

"From my side, I was hoping that (would happen). I understood that's what needed to happen," Sweeney said. "It's over and done with for now and we can move on. We can start talking about baseball. It's something that's said and it's unbelievable. You shake it off. ...

"I treat everyone the same way. I respect Barry just as much as I respect Noah Lowry and Matt Cain and the rest of the guys. Did I have a good relationship with him? Yes. Was it cordial? Yes. Did I hang out with him? No."

By the way, I love the way the reporter sets up the story:

Sweeney, respected around baseball for his candor win or lose, minding his own business and being a good teammate, expressed shock at learning that Bonds apparently mentioned his name in connection with the slugger's failed amphetamines test last summer.

Here's a good guy, so we should believe him. No opinion or bias there. Why not just get a couple of quotes from teammates or reporters who cover Sweeney?

Barry Bonds took the blame off Mark Sweeney this evening:

Barry Bonds said he did not get amphetamines from teammate Mark Sweeney, but did not deny a report Thursday saying he tested positive for the drugs last season.

According to a story in the New York Daily News, the San Francisco slugger failed an amphetamines test in 2006. The newspaper reported that when first informed of the positive result, Bonds attributed it to a substance he had taken from Sweeney's locker.

"He is both my teammate and my friend," Bonds said in a statement. "He did not give me anything whatsoever and has nothing to do with this matter, contrary to recent reports.

"I want to express my deepest apologies especially to Mark and his family as well as my other teammates, the San Francisco Giants organization and the fans," he said.

Interestingly, the Giants did not know about the positive test until this story leaked.

"Last night was the first time we heard of this recent accusation against Barry Bonds," the Giants said in the statement. "Under Major League Baseball's collective bargaining agreement with the Major League Baseball Players Association, clubs are not notified after a player receives a first positive test for amphetamines."

So I wonder how much this will play into the stalled contract negotiations? I doubt they can put a drug test failure clause into the contract since testing punishments are spelled out in the CBA. Maybe they'll take some money off the table.

The New York Daily News reports that Barry Bonds tested positive for amphetamines.

Barry Bonds, already under investigation for lying under oath about his steroid use, failed a test under Major League Baseball's amphetamine policy last season and then initially blamed it on a teammate, the Daily News has learned.

Under the policy, which went into effect only last season, players are not publicly identified for a first positive test.

But according to several sources, when first informed by the MLB Players Association of the positive test, Bonds attributed it to a substance he had taken from the locker of teammate Mark Sweeney. Sources did not identify the drug in question but characterized it as a serious stimulant.

Sweeney denies he had anything in his locker:

Sources said Sweeney, a first baseman/outfielder, first heard about the test when Gene Orza, the chief operating officer of the players association, called to say the player's name had been dragged into the controversy.

Orza told Sweeney that if he had anything troublesome in his locker, he should remove it and that he should not be sharing substances with other players. Sweeney told Orza that there was nothing in his locker that would be of concern, sources said.

Axelrod would not comment on the conversation between Orza and Sweeney. Orza also refused to comment on what he said to Sweeney or about Bonds' failed test, but added, "I can say unequivocally in my 22 years I've known Barry Bonds he has never blamed anyone for anything."

Sweeney apparently confronted Bonds, and Bonds told him that Orza had misunderstood, that he had not intended to implicate his teammate.

Barry Bonds continues to be a paragon of virtue. No wonder it's taking so long to work out the language in his new contract. At least he didn't get caught again. I'm not sure Barry could take a 25 game suspension and still break Aaron's record.

Update: This makes me wonder if the program really worked. Since no one was suspended for amphetamine use in the major leagues last year, it seems that either people stayed away from the serious stimulants, or one failed test got the message across. Does anyone know if the follow up tests are really random? I take it the player doesn't get a few days notice.

Update: Bonds' posse is also holding up the contract signing.

Ken Rosenthal suggests Mark McGwire confesses to get into the Hall of Fame:

A confession would end the talk that McGwire is hiding something, forcing voters to view him for what he is -- a product of his era, the Steroid Era, and hardly the only star player suspected of using illegal performance-enhancing drugs.

But a confession, if it is indeed warranted, is not coming anytime soon; the risk for McGwire, at a time when federal investigators are still trying to crack the steroids scandal, would be too great.

But there's another reason a confession shouldn't be coming, Pete Rose. Four years ago the problem of a Rose confession was clear. If he admitted to betting on baseball, people who supported him might change their minds, and that's exactly what happened three years ago. So if McGwire comes out and says everything in Canseco's book and the FBI investigation was true, how does that help him? Right now, supporters can offer the, "He used andro, which was legal at the time," argument. What happens if he confesses to using banned substances? Like Rose, I think the supporters disappear.

Update: Just to illustrate the dangers of confessions:

It looks like we'll all soon be learning the names of those who tested positive for steroids in 2003:

The names and urine samples of about 100 Major League Baseball players who tested positive three years ago can be used by federal investigators, a court ruled Wednesday - a decision that could have implications for Barry Bonds.

The federal appeals court ruling could bolster the government's perjury case against Bonds if his name is among those who tested positive. The slugger has been the target of a perjury investigation since he testified before a 2004 grand jury that he didn't knowingly use illegal drugs.

That's assuming, of course, that Bonds tested positive. I can imagine it could be embarassing for a lot of players, especially if they've denied use in the past.

However, I don't agree with this at all. Federal investigators in the 1990s were not interested in prosecuting players who used these drugs, just the dealers. Baseball worked out a way to get testing in place through anonymous tests. And in part because MLB held up their part of the bargain, the players and owners were able to make testing more stringent over time. Along with the leaking of the BALCO grand jury testimony, it is going to become extremely difficult for federal officials to get cooperation from athletes in the future. Twice now players have been promised anonymity or privacy in exchange for their cooperation, and twice that's been violated. Law enforcement just keeps making their own job more difficult.

Remember, this is why the union didn't want testing in the first place. I hope Don Fehr sends the players an "I told you so" note.

Update: Will Carroll has more in the comments.

Josh Peter at Yahoo Sports scores the scoop on the FBI investigation into the BALCO leaks:

The FBI has targeted a defense attorney for leaking confidential grand jury information linking Barry Bonds and other world-class athletes to alleged steroid use, Yahoo! Sports has learned.

The defense attorney, Troy Ellerman, has been the subject of an FBI investigation, according to Larry McCormack, a former private investigator who worked on the BALCO federal steroids case and who said he was a co-tenant in an office with Ellerman in Sacramento, Calif., where they worked together on cases, at the time of the alleged leaks. Other sources have said they were interviewed by the FBI.

McCormack, who said he did investigative work on behalf of BALCO founder Victor Conte Jr. in the early stages of the case, said he told the FBI that Ellerman relayed confidential grand jury information to a reporter from the San Francisco Chronicle in 2004.

"I felt it was wrong," McCormack said of the leaks during a recent interview. "I said it was wrong from the get-go."

Here's the most damming accusations:

McCormack said Ellerman leaked information from the grand jury to Fainaru-Wada. McCormack said he met Fainaru-Wada during a lunch meeting with Ellerman in the spring or summer of 2004. He also said he saw Fainaru-Wada again when the reporter visited the Sacramento office McCormack shared with Ellerman about a half-dozen times between June and December, when Fainaru-Wada and Williams wrote articles citing leaked grand jury documents.

On June 24, 2004, when McCormack saw an article in the Chronicle that reported sprinter Montgomery had testified Conte gave him weekly doses of human growth hormone in 2001, McCormack said he knew the confidential information had come from Ellerman. He then confronted Ellerman.

"What in the hell are you doing?" McCormack said he asked. "Man, this is nuts. I don't know why you dragged me into this."

He said, "Don't worry about it. They (the reporters) won't testify."

The interesting thing is Ellerman accused the government of supplying the leaks, and Bonds' attorney still holds to that belief. Of course, Barry's lawyer is trying to prove there's a witch hunt for his client, so I'd expect that.

Now, McCormack may be out for revenge here:

McCormack said he wrestled with his decision to contact the FBI because he has known Ellerman for nine years, shared an office with him for five years and still considers him a friend. But McCormack also said he expected some would question his motives because his relationship with Ellerman had become strained.

They worked together at the Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association (PRCA), the world's premier rodeo association, headquartered in Colorado Springs, Colo. Ellerman, a former bull rider, took over as commissioner in January 2005. McCormack said Ellerman hired him that March as chief operating officer and later appointed him as executive director of the PRCA's Hall of Fame museum.

But McCormack said he and Ellerman found themselves at odds over issues, such as Ellerman's aborted plan to move the PRCA to New Mexico. The board of trustees, by an 8-7 vote, fired McCormack on Aug. 30 and cited the museum's growing debt as the reason for his dismissal, according to McCormack. McCormack contends he was wrongfully terminated and that the PRCA's plan to uproot the headquarters and a public backlash created most of the museums financial problems.

About a week after his ouster, McCormack said, he contacted the federal authorities about the alleged leaks in the BALCO case. He also said he talked to Ellerman about a financial settlement but instructed his attorney to hold off on pursuing the settlement until the FBI completed its investigation. McCormack said he didn't want it to look as if he was trying to extort money from Ellerman.

Still, he's spent a lot of time in law enforcement, so you'd think he'd have something to back him up.

Update: As James points out in the comments, there's another leaker story as well. And Dontrelle seemed like such a nice young man.

The LA Times takes a close look at the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and finds it's not without problems:

What has evolved to protect competitive purity since then is a closed, quasi-judicial system without American-style checks and balances. Anti-doping authorities act as prosecutors, judge and jury, enforcing rules that they have written, punishing violations based on sometimes questionable scientific tests that they develop and certify themselves, while barring virtually all outside appeals or challenges.

It's a very interesting read, especially the part about nandrolone:

A statistical surge in nandrolone cases "allowed the testing program to puff out its chest and say, 'Look at how much we're doing,' " said Charles Yesalis, professor emeritus of health policy and administration at Penn State University and a leading expert on drug abuse in sports.

Studies performed by UCLA's Catlin and by researchers at the Cologne lab, then under the International Olympic Committee, showed in 2000 and 2002 that a wide range of nutritional supplements commonly taken by elite athletes were contaminated with nandrolone and other steroids.

Catlin's research, furthermore, made clear that it was not difficult for tests to distinguish a contamination victim from a cheater. His paper noted that an athlete taking nandrolone in a determined effort to cheat would show levels higher than 100,000 nanograms per milliliter, or parts per billion, of urine.

WADA's threshold for a doping violation, however, had been set in single digits: 2 parts per billion for men and 5 for women. It remains at that level today.

And anti-doping officials have continued to bring cases against athletes for positive tests almost certainly derived from contamination or for steroid levels that could not possibly have any performance-enhancing effect.

I'm glad baseball resisted the efforts of some to bring ballplayers under WADA. I'd actually like to see drug test results released, as in the case of Floyd Landis. Then experts outside WADA can comment on the results, rather than just taking the agencies word for it.

Thanks to Adam Sperling for the link.

Correction: Included link to article.

There's an investigation into throwing games in the Dominican Republic:

The announcement came four days after pitcher Pascual Coco and outfielder Enmanuel Sena were dismissed by Santo Domingo's Escogido Lions amid allegations the last-place team was intentionally losing games.

I always thought you wanted first place teams to throw games, so you collect on the long odds.

Via Instapundit, gene doping is on the way:

The ban on so-called "gene doping" or gene therapy by many athletic associations slows the rate of progress for the development of gene therapies that increase musculature. Eventually the athletic associations are going to split over this issue. New athletic associations will form that allow genetic engineering. Those associations and companies will put on competitions between the genetically enhanced that eclipse the competitions between natural humans.

Want big muscles without all the hard work? Genetic engineering of an enzyme is the ticket.

Dartmouth scientists have it working in mice. I suppose it won't be much longer until it's working in humans.

Sammy Sosa issues a very strong denial of steroid use:

"Yeah, everyone is surprised because, you know why? I hit 60 [homers] three times. I put up the numbers. But you know what? I put up those numbers by going to bed at 9 o'clock at night in Chicago because I have to play a day game every day at 1 o'clock. I prepared myself for that.

Guillermo Mota apologized for his drug use:

"I have no one to blame but myself," Mota said in a statement that did not explain how he ran afoul of baseball's drug rules. "I take full responsibility for my actions and accept MLB's suspension. I used extremely poor judgment and deserve to be held accountable."

"To my teammates and the entire Mets organization, I am sorry. I truly regret what I did and hope that you can forgive me. To baseball fans everywhere, I understand that you are disappointed in me, and I don't blame you. I feel terrible and I promise this is the first and last time that this will happen. I am determined to prove to you that this was one mistake."

Mota's agent, Adam Katz, said the pitcher intends to play next season.

"He is anxious to get back to work," Katz said. "I believe he'll be a better person and a better player moving forward."

Thank you, Guillermo for at least being man enough to admit your mistake.

XM MLB Chat just heard that Guillermo Mota violated MLB's drug policy and was suspended for 50 games. I'll try to find a wire story.

Update: Here's the AP wire. It continues to impress me how many relief pitchers are caught doing this. We think of cheaters as the power hitters, but the relievers need to be able to go every day, and the anti-inflammatory benefits of the drugs must really help.

He's a free agent, so not being able to play for the first 50 games next season really cuts down on how his marketability. Add to that, teams may not be able to judge his true ability if drugs were helping him collect his numbers. I wonder if any team will take a flyer on Mota?

Sports Illustrated is reporting that Patrick Arnold received a subpoena to appear before the grand jury investigating charges against Barry Bonds.

The source said that Arnold received the subpoena and should appear in a San Francisco courtroom in the next few weeks. Arnold's lawyer, Rick Collins, would neither confirm nor deny that his client had been subpoenaed.

"I can't say anything on that subject," Collins said and declined further comment. Arnold also declined to comment.

I like quote from Arnold:

"There is a future beyond steroids and its gene doping," he said. "It's the next step. The only way it can be detected now is through a muscle biopsy, though they may be looking for blood markers. They are making great advances and how they keep that out of the hands of people with healthy muscles who use it for performance-enhancing reasons I don't know.

"As drug and performance-enhancing science becomes more and more complicated, it is going to get to a point where you can't police it anymore. People might just have to stop taking sports so seriously."

Of course, if people don't take sport so seriously, there won't be as much money in the games to spend on performance enhancing drugs. There's a bit of a catch 22 there.

First Deadspin admits their source was wrong, and now this:

The federal prosecutor overseeing an investigation of steroids in baseball and the attorney for former pitcher Jason Grimsley questioned a news report indicating five players, including Roger Clemens, had used illegal performance-enhancing drugs.

The prosecutor said the report in the Los Angeles Times contained "significant inaccuracies," including the five names in the report.

If you can't believe someone with an agenda who is leaking redacted documents anonymously, who can you believe? It sounds like the media fell for another fake but accurate story.

Deadspin now says that its source that put Chris Mihlfeld's name in the Jason Grimsley affidavit was wrong.

So, a clearing of the decks, a mea culpa: We were wrong to trust our source's information, and we were wrong to print their claim that he was in the document. We apologize to Mihlfeld and deeply regret the error.

And I apologize for linking to the original story. Out the source, so no one trusts him/her again.

Earlier in the year we tried to figure out the names in the Grimsely affidavit. It turns out sources were just waiting to take attention away from the playoffs:

Roger Clemens, one of professional baseball's most durable and successful pitchers, is among six players allegedly linked to performance-enhancing drugs by a former teammate, The Times has learned. The names had been blacked out in an affidavit filed in federal court.

Others whose identities had been concealed include Clemens' fellow Houston Astros pitcher Andy Pettitte and former American League most valuable player Miguel Tejada of the Baltimore Orioles.

Everyone names denies the allegations. They point to Grimsley's own denial of the accuracy of the affidavit:

Edward Novak, Grimsley's lawyer, did not return calls. Previously, he publicly disputed the claims investigators made in the affidavit, saying his client did not volunteer the names of any teammates. He said federal agents asked Grimsley to wear a recording device to gather evidence against San Francisco Giants slugger Barry Bonds and that Grimsley refused.

Grimsley was not arrested and has not been charged. Since June, he has complained to friends that federal agents attributed statements and disclosures to him that he didn't make.

Pettitte is the name that surprised me. There's been speculation about Clemens for a while, and Tejada's name came up in connection with Palmeiro. I've never heard rumors about Pettitte before. It makes you wonder if the Yankees knew something when they let him go.

The two reporters who authored Game of Shadows are a step closer to jail tonight:

Federal prosecutors asked U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White to send the reporters to prison for the full term of the grand jury investigating the leak, or until they agree to testify. Both sides agreed to stay the ruling pending an appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"The court is hopeful that perhaps they'll reconsider their position when faced with the reality of incarceration," White said Thursday.

Williams and Fainaru-Wada have said repeatedly they would go to jail rather than comply with the grand jury's subpoena and reveal their source or sources.

I find this case fascinating. The reporters don't want to revel their sources because no one will talk to them otherwise. The government wants to stop leaks for much the same reason. In order to get citizens to testify, the government might need to convince them their testimony is private. Leaks like this hurt the government when they try to get such testimony in the future.

But of course, the most interesting aspect of the whole BALCO scandal is that everyone goes to jail except the subject of the probe, Barry Bonds.

ESPN receives information from a second hand source that Victor Conte said Bonds knew that he was taking steroids. Conte denies the statement. What would be more interesting is what Patrick Arnold might be saying:

The disclosure comes to light amid reports that Patrick Arnold, the Illinois chemist who created the designer steroid THG, has made the same admission to a national media outlet.

Since Arnold is higher in the food chain, and because he's a first hand source, I'm very interested in hearing his side of the story. Maybe the grand jury won't need Anderson's testimony if Arnold is willing to finger Bonds.

So far, this is the best I've found on whether MLB tests for ephedra:

II. Amphetamines

A. Suspicionless testing for amphetamines and other amphetamine-like stimulants during regular season and post-season

Since ephedra is specifically named as a banned substance, it would seem likely that MLB tests for that. Does anyone have a link to the actual text of the updated drug policy? I keep finding the original CBA, but not the updates.

Maybe Greg Anderson likes the food. I do and don't understand Anderson's position. He wants to protect a friend, but it would be nice if for a change, Barry did something to protect Greg, like give him permission to testify.

The authors of Game of Shadows are likely headed to prison:

A federal judge told two San Francisco Chronicle reporters they must comply with a subpoena and tell a grand jury who leaked them secret testimony of Barry Bonds and other elite athletes ensnared in the government's steroid probe.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White means reporters Lance Williams and Mark Fainaru-Wada must appear before a grand jury investigating the leak unless a higher court blocks the ruling. The pair have said they would not testify and would go to jail rather than reveal their source or sources.

Everybody seems to end up in jail except the player everyone is trying to get.

Padres minor league catcher Matthew Lauderdale is gone for 50 games.

San Diego Padres minor league catcher Matthew Lauderdale was suspended for 50 games Tuesday after testing positive for a drug of abuse.

I take it this means a non-performance enhancer.

A Yankees minor league pitcher received a 50 game suspension today.

Major League Baseball suspended New York Yankees minor league pitcher Daniel McCutchen for 50 games on Tuesday for testing positive for a performance-enhancing substance.

Given the hype over the years about home run hitters doping, I'm continued to be impressed at the number of pitchers caught. Maybe we should be looking as critically at high strikeout numbers as we are at high home run numbers.

Patrick Arnold, the inventor of the clear, is going to jail:

The rogue chemist who created the previously undetectable steroid dubbed "the clear" was sentenced Friday to three months in prison and three months of home confinement for his role in a widening sports drug scandal.

Patrick Arnold was the last of five defendants convicted of steroid-distribution charges connected to the Burlingame-based Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, a nutritional supplement company federal authorities exposed as a steroid distribution ring for top athletes.

"The behavior reflected here is destructive and damaging to Arnold, damaging to the community and damaging to the nation as a whole," U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston said. Arnold was ordered to report to prison by Sept. 19.

"I'm very regretful for what I've done and especially since what it has precipitated in sports and society," Arnold said outside court. "I do believe there should be a level playing field and that this whole things needs to be addressed."

I wonder how many more like him are out there, and if any athletes are employing chemists of their own to make designer steroids yet.

Via Deadspin, the story of an incident in 2001 connecting Juan Gonzalez to steroids. It's a good read, but once again, someone Canseco names in his book is found to have another connection to steroids. Jose's credibility on the subject just keeps growing.

Todd Zywicki at The Volokh Conspiracy looks at the evidence trail in the Bonds perjury case and decides Greg Anderson really is the key to an indictment:

In short, Bonds let Anderson handle everything, from protocol, to purchase, to shots, and to workouts. Clearly Bonds asked no questions about what Anderson was doing and simply trusted him to handle everything. Equally clearly Bonds knew what Anderson was giving him, especially in light of the physical side effects of the drugs. So common sense seems to suggest that he perjured himself, but a close sifting of the evidence that we know about the evidence seems much less clear. But he seems to have created an almost perfect intermediary in Anderson who could protect him. Every chain of evidence in the case seems to end at Anderson. Although common sense then connects Anderson to Bonds, I can't recall any specific, provable fact that provides that final link.

So if Anderson does not roll over on Bonds, can the prosecutors prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Bonds perjured himself before the grand jury when he denied knowingly taking steroids? For those who have followed the case and/or read the book, remind me of any specific, provable facts that I have forgotten, especially about any specific eyewitness accounts of Bonds getting shots or any paper trail that specifically connects Bonds to performance enhancing drugs, rather than just Anderson. This may explain why the government has so far been unable to indict Bonds without Anderson's testimony, as well as why they are pushing on Anderson so hard to get him to testify. Wihtout Anderson's testimony, I have serious doubts about whether the feds will be able to get Bonds on perjury (although tax evasion should be easier).

It seems Bonds and Anderson set this up very well to protect Barry.

John Perricone at Only Baseball Matters is very, very, very tired of the Bonds investigation.

WasWatching wonders if Sheffield might also be facing perjury charges? He also notes that Giambi was smart by not playing dumb.

The latest revelations from Barry Bonds' ex-friend Steve Hoskins are really getting juicy. There's even a Monty Hall reference. Carol Merrill, tell us what behind the doors!

Laura Enos, Bonds' attorney for business matters, told The Times that Hoskins threatened her client after Bonds confronted Hoskins in June 2003 over the alleged forging of Bonds' signature on contracts.

"He came and we met in a conference room," Enos told The Times. "He said: 'I have three doors. If you don't drop this memorabilia issue, I'm going to ruin Barry. Behind door No. 1 is an extramarital affair. Behind door No. 2 is failure to declare income tax. And behind door No. 3 is use of steroids. And I will go to the press and ruin Barry. His records will be ruined. He will never get into the Hall of Fame.'"

It's not clear if Barry was wearing a rubber chicken outfit at the time. Maybe Jay Stewart has something better in the box.

This didn't work out well for Barry Bonds:

Michael Rains, Bonds' lawyer, said memorabilia salesman Steve Hoskins, a longtime friend of Bonds, and Kimberly Bell, Bonds' former girlfriend who has twice testified against him before a grand jury, are the government's two main witnesses.

...

Rains told The Times that Bonds went to the federal government in June 2002 to complain that Hoskins was forging his name and stealing from him. The government then "turned around and used" Hoskins as an informant, Rains told the newspaper.

Hoskins' attorney, Michael Cardoza, disputed Rains' assertion to The Times, however.

"We made no deal with the feds," Cardoza told The Times. "We cut no deal with anybody. All we did was tell the truth and protect Steve and prove to them that Barry is not a truth-teller." Cardoza wouldn't tell The Times whether his client was called to testify before the grand jury investigating Bonds.

Is there no honor among thieves? I will bet tax evasion turns out to be a much more serious (and easier to prove) charge than perjury as far as Bonds is concerned.

The New York Daily News reports the latest on the likelihood of an indictment coming down on Barry Bonds:

Sources within Major League Baseball said they have no inside information, but expect that the troubled slugger will be indicted. On one of the next few Thursdays, the grand jury will meet in the Philip Burton Federal Building in San Francisco and may be asked to weigh the evidence. If at least 12 of the 23 members agree that there is "probable cause" that a crime has been committed and Bonds is the one who committed it, they will return a "true bill," otherwise known as an indictment. The grand jury could also return a "not true" bill, meaning it will not indict. The U.S. attorney could also decide not to seek an indictment at that point, or request an extension for the grand jury from the judge.

...

Several senior MLB sources said they believe Bonds likely will be indicted, and that they found plenty of damning information about Bonds in their own investigation, launched secretly a year before commissioner Bud Selig appointed former U.S. Senator George Mitchell to conduct an inquiry in the spring.

I guess Barry was on double secret probation.

I've seen a number of comments on this site wondering why Bonds was not indicted, postulating that the non-indictment meant there was nothing there. I believe the answer is, these things take time. Prosecutors like to build a very strong case. You heard the same things about Enron, but that appeared to be a very successful prosecution.

I disagree with one part of the article:

A Bonds indictment, coming just two months after he passed Babe Ruth on the all-time home run list, would be a public relations calamity for the game.

At this point, most people made up their minds about Barry. It will be a calamity for the Giants if he can't play due to an indictment, but it's not like they're running away with the division with Barry in 7/9 of their games.

Greg Anderson is back in prison:

Greg Anderson, who served three months in prison after pleading guilty last year for his role in the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative steroid scandal, was held in contempt of court and taken to prison Wednesday.

Anderson was led out of U.S. District Judge William Alsup's courtroom by two deputy U.S. marshals and taken to the Federal Correctional Institution in nearby Dublin.

But his stay may be short.

That's because Anderson will be set free once the grand jury's term expires, which will occur within weeks, Alsup said.

Somehow, weeks in jail does not seem like a short time to me. I really hope Bonds is worth it.

Greg Anderson may end up back in jail by the end of the day:

If U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup rules that Anderson is in civil contempt of court, he could be fined and/or jailed until this grand jury's term is completed, perhaps months from now.

Anderson's refusal to talk is not just about protecting a friend, said Paula Canny, a Burlingame attorney and television legal analyst who trains with Anderson.

"This isn't about Barry. This is about Greg's integrity," Canny said Monday. "Greg Anderson made an agreement with the government that said he would never cooperate with the government. He gave them six months of his life to be left alone. And now he isn't going to be a snitch."

I'm surprised anyone admits to training with Anderson at this point. I also wonder if the situation were reversed, if Bonds would go to jail for Anderson.

Greg Anderson is refusing to testify against Barry Bonds:

Geragos argued early in the day that his client shouldn't have to testify because the government had illegally obtained evidence that it failed to provide the defense.

The Los Angeles lawyer was referring to a secretly recorded tape in which Anderson allegedly said Bonds used undetectable steroids. The defense claimed, without offering proof, that the material was obtained by an illegal wiretap.

"I believe the proceedings may be tainted by the material," Geragos told the judge.

Later, the lawyer told reporters he planned to fight the contempt motion. He cited three major reasons Anderson should not have to testify: leaks of investigative material, illegal wire intercepts and violations of Anderson's plea agreement.

When Geragos made similar arguments Thursday, to try to prevent Anderson from having to testify, the judge rejected them.

The Baltimore Sun has more on the recording, which didn't appear to be illegal at all:

The details of the recording were first reported in October 2004 by the San Francisco Chronicle, which obtained a copy from a confidential news source.

Prosecutor Jeff Nedrow revealed yesterday that his office had obtained a copy of the recording last summer.

Alsup ruled that the recording was "not a wiretap, but a privately recorded conversation with a witness," and that there was no legal reason for Anderson not to testify.

Basically, Anderson doesn't want to give up Bonds. We'll see if he pulls a Susan McDougal and goes to jail rather than testify.

Anderson has enlisted a lawyer familiar with such disputes. In 1998, Geragos represented Whitewater figure Susan McDougal, who was indicted for refusing to cooperate with a grand jury convened by special prosecutor Ken Starr.

If you're wondering if there is a grand jury investigating Barry Bonds, here's one more piece of the puzzle:

The San Jose Mercury News learned that Greg Anderson, Bonds' boyhood friend, spent an hour in the grand jury chambers in San Francisco accompanied by celebrity lawyer Mark Geragos. Anderson, who spent three months in prison for his role in the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative drug scandal, had been subpoenaed to testify in an investigation of Bonds for perjury and tax evasion.

Geragos, the Los Angeles lawyer who defended Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson last year, declined to comment as he entered a courthouse elevator with Anderson. Chief BALCO prosecutor Jeffrey Nedrow also declined to speak when leaving the grand jury room.

Although the government has neither confirmed nor denied the existence of a grand jury investigation of Bonds, the appearance of Anderson and the BALCO prosecutors supports multiple sources' claims that a probe is under way.

I sometimes see comments wondering why Bonds hasn't been indicted if he did something wrong. Sometimes, it takes a while to build a case. If a prosecutor goes to trial, he wants to win.

Peter Schmuck does a nice job of putting David Segui's legal use of HGH in the proper perspecitve:

The fact that there were no doctors in his hometown of Kansas City, Kan. -- and certainly no endocrinologists (it's the Midwest, for goodness sake) -- wasn't a big problem for Segui, who knew a guy in Florida who is so legitimate that he blacks out his name on prescriptions because he doesn't want any more business.

Can't draw any conclusions from that. Lots of doctors write legitimate prescriptions for highly controversial and possibly performance-enhancing drugs and don't want their names revealed for completely legitimate reasons. How do you think I get my amphetamines?

(C'mon, that was a joke. Sarcasm is totally lost on you people.)

The only thing that bothers me about Segui's completely legal use of hGH is the price he had to pay for it. The receipt that he faxed to The Sun showed that his six vials of the magic potion cost a total of nearly $2,000.

I could have sworn that the Major League Baseball Players Association had one of the best health plans in the world and this guy has to shell out two grand for a completely legitimate, legally prescribed medication? I've got basic Blue Cross coverage and the most I ever have to come up with for my steroids is a $60 co-pay.

He notes that Segui's done a good job of getting ahead of this scandal:

Segui outed himself to ESPN, then contacted The Sun and spent a day or so doing radio interviews to spread his highly questionable side of the story. If Rafael Palmeiro had shown that kind of PR savvy last August, he'd still be headed to the Hall of Fame.

Meanwhile, Orioles fans wait for other Orioles names to leak out.

At this post, Deadspin tells you how to read the blacked out portion of the PDF in which the government makes its case for upholding the subpoena of the Game of Shadows authors. I don't know why Deadspin didn't publish the name of the suspected informant, but I've decoded section C. It seems the government has e-mails between the reporters and the suspected leaker. It's pretty funny how the three step around asking for the CD of the testimony, and suddenly (and rightly) get concerned about their e-mail being read.

Well, maybe there's another way of some sort to communicate; either pay phone or
cell or even meeting that would provide more comfort. Frankly, I wanted to make
a pitch about seeing some stuff and talking about a few things . . . . As to our email
exchanges, well, the only way they end up in our paper is if/when you give
me the green light. As with the CD-Rom, waiting, waiting, waiting . . . .

I don't want to get in trouble naming names, but you can have fun reading it on your own.

Update: SI is reporting it's Victor Conte. That's how he got his revenge on the athletes who testified against him.

The government is turning up the heat on the authors of Game of Shadows.

The Bush administration urged a federal judge Wednesday to force two San Francisco Chronicle reporters to divulge who leaked them secret grand jury testimony of Barry Bonds and other athletes who took part in the government's probe of the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative.

Noting that it is a crime to leak grand jury materials to the media, "there is no reporter's privilege in criminal cases, under the First Amendment or under common law," federal prosecutors Brian Hershman and Michael Raphael wrote in a 51-page brief.

Even if compelled, I doubt the reporters will testify. After all, their testimony might be leaked! So in an ironic twist:

Both Fainaru-Wada and Williams say they aren't going to comply with the subpoena, which means they could be fined and jailed until they reveal their sources if they lose their legal challenge. The reporters also could be jailed for a fixed term for contempt if U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White forces them to appear before the grand jury.

They face more jail time than any of the five BALCO defendants, as the largest prison term was four months.

There are good reasons grand jury testimony shouldn't be leaked, and it's pretty much along the lines of why reporters don't divulge sources. If grand jury testimony is routinely leaked, people are less likely to testify. The players whose testimony was leaked might take the fifth instead of helping out if they knew their testimony would be made public. The argument goes that revealing sources drys up future sources. Leaking testimony might do the same for future grand juries.

Peter Schmuck is waiting for the Orioles names in Grimsley's affidavit to be revealed:

Three of the blacked-out names in the leaked affidavit clearly are current or former Orioles, based on Grimsley's claim that he had a conversation with three teammates last year about "how they were going to play the baseball season next year when Major League Baseball banned the use of amphetamines and began testing for them."

It all sounds pretty damning, until you consider that amphetamine use has been one of baseball's dirty little secrets for generations ... and Grimsley's recollection of one casual clubhouse conversation is far from proof that any of those three players were guilty of using illegal drugs.

Don't misunderstand. I'm not running interference for anybody, but the same kind of conversation that Grimsley described in the affidavit probably went on in every clubhouse in the major leagues last year.

That could be. The more likely reason for including it in the affidavit, however, is that they were talking about their own use of greenies.

Via Deadspin, David Sequi tells ESPN he is named in the Grimsley affidavit, but that he took HGH legally under a doctor's care.

Schaap: Your name's been redacted. It's blacked out in the affidavit. Maybe people would find out; maybe they wouldn't. Why come forward?

Segui: One is because I know. Two, eventually names are going to leak out, and I don't want to have to make a public statement after the names leak out explaining myself ... if I knew a guy was named -- knew his name was in that affidavit, for a month or so, never made a statement, I'd question -- I'd question why ... I truly don't feel like I have anything to hide.

I remember a game from the 1990's in which the Mariners wore uniforms designed by Ken Griffey Jr. The shirts were sleeveless, and you really got a great view of the guns on these players. I remember being really impressed with the size of Segui's upper arms. My thought at the time was, if a lousy hitter has arms like that, no wonder so many home runs are hit.

Bud Selig published an open letter to fans today on what baseball plans to do about HGH abuse:

As Commissioner, I won't be deterred and will do everything I can to try to keep up with or even stay ahead of those who break the law and break our rules. But I suspect there will always be a few players who seek new ways to violate the rules, no matter how many we have and how often we toughen them. I also know that science can provide new ways to combat them and I will rely on our experts to keep on top of the science as it develops.

In the meantime, I want you to know that Major League Baseball is taking steps to address the issue. We are committed to funding a study of HGH and how to detect it. The study will be conducted by Dr. Don Catlin, a leading expert in the medical testing field. Also, we are willing to make additional contributions to fund other studies to determine how to detect HGH and are currently reaching out to experts in the field to ascertain what other studies can immediately begin. We invite other foundations, unions, sports and the Congress of the United States to join us in pursuing the detection and deterrence of HGH use.

A Padres minor league pitcher started serving a 50 game suspension Monday for a positive drug test:

Ellis was 0-1 with a 7.36 ERA in five relief appearances for Double-A Mobile. The 23-year-old righty started the season at Class A Lake Elsinore and was 1-2 with one save and 2.57 in 24 games.

The question is how much did the drugs help him earn the promotion?

Major League Baseball suspend Jason Grimsley for 50 games today, pending someone adding him to a 40-man roster. The big question here is will the union oppose this move, since Grimsley did not fail a drug test. Baseball is taking the position that admitting use to government agents is the same as getting caught by urinalysis, and I can't disagree with them. But lawyers make their money on the specific meaning of language, so we'll see how this plays out. In a just world, the players who have been pushing for stricter punishments will tell the union to let this one go.

Peter Schmuck explains the loophole in the MLB drug testing policy that MLB is trying to exploit with Jason Grimsley:

Call it a loophole if you want. Major League Baseball recently embarked on a wide-ranging investigation to determine the true extent of the sport's steroid problem, but it appeared powerless to punish past offenders because the collectively bargained anti-steroid program requires a positive urine test to trigger specific disciplinary action.

That might have changed when Grimsley was caught with a smoking gun called human growth hormone, according to federal agents.

Since hGH is banned under the current program but is not detectable with a urine test, the door appears to be open for baseball commissioner Bud Selig to discipline Grimsley for possession and admitted use of the synthetic hormone, which is illegal unless prescribed by a physician.

The players union will have little choice but to try to prevent Selig from setting a precedent that might be applied to players who are proved to have used other substances either during the steroid inquiry by former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell or the ongoing federal investigation that stung Grimsley.

The rumor is that Selig wants to suspend Grimsley for 50 games, even though with Jason out of baseball it would be a symbolic gesture. Then if Mitchell uncovers wrong doing, those players can be suspended as well.

If the point of the investigation is to find out what happened in the past, this is the wrong move. If players believe they are going to be punished if they co-operate, they'll keep their mouths shut. But if the Mitchell investigation is designed to punish past offenses, then Selig should certainly go this route. He needs to understand it will make Mitchell's job much more difficult.

The Big Lead notes that Barry Bonds asked that his lawsuit against the authors of Game of Shadows be dismissed. There is still the possibility it can be filed at a later date.

Although the headline of this article is "Barry Will Talk," the gist is that Barry won't talk:

"I'd like Barry to cooperate with Sen. Mitchell," Rains said. "He'd like to cooperate. We believe Sen. Mitchell's investigation will be fair, thorough and impartial.

"But here's the problem: Anything that happens there can become fodder for the federal government and fodder for another book that will make reporters rich."

A federal grand jury is trying to determine if Bonds lied about drug use in his testimony to the BALCO grand jury. Bonds, whose alleged steroid use was detailed in "Game of Shadows" by San Francisco Chronicle reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams, also could face tax evasion charges.

"I thoroughly distrust the federal government's commitment to protecting anonymity," said Rains, whose client's testimony to the BALCO grand jury was illegally leaked to the Chronicle. "I've been asking for four years if this investigation is done. All I've ever got was double talk."

I don't see how Mitchell can keep what Bonds tells him within Major League Baseball. I've thought the report would be made public when complete. If not, somebody is going to leak it. So I don't see how Bonds, given the above statements of his lawyer, is ever going to talk to Mitchell.

Chris Mihlfeld denied he was named in the Grimsley affidavit. Mihfeld's source is Grimsley's lawyer, who actually read the search warrant. Deadspin, however, is sticking by their source.

Cardinals Diaspora puts down his thoughts on Pujols and the possibility of PED use. I have to agree with the post. For example:

3. Just because Albert’s trainer was a point man for HGH it doesn't mean he took them.

True. BUT just ask Greg Anderson about this defense. Granted he followed Barry around like a lost puppy, but still when you're real tight with a guy and credit him for basically your whole career and then he becomes the target of a federal investigation, it's only right to be suspicious. Now Albert may have taken the high road, but in the past where there's smoke, there's been fire. Let's see how the whole thing plays out, but you can not assume that Pujols is clean because of his love of God or because he's a good family man or whatever reason. I ain't saying he did or didn’t take HGH, but as of this moment don't assume anybody didn't do anything.

I'd also point out that Albert plays for one of the great steroid enablers, Tony La Russa. He ignored a lot of use under his nose, so I wouldn't expect him to step forward and try to stop a young star from going down that road.

Deadspin uses sources to connect the dots in the Grimsley affidavit. Sosa's name pops out but so does a trainer:

Grimsley says that a former employee of [redacted] and personal fitness trainer to several Major League Baseball players once referred him to an amphetamine source. Later, this source — not the trainer — provided him with "amphetamines, anabolic steroids and human growth hormone." This trainer? His name is Chris Mihlfeld, a Kansas City-based "strength and conditioning guru." (And former Strength And Conditioning Coordinator for the Royals.)

But Mihlfeld is involved with more than just the Royals:

Does Mihlfeld’s name sound familiar? If it doesn't, he — and we assure you, this gives us no pleasure to write this — has been Albert Pujols' personal trainer since before Pujols was drafted by the Cardinals in the 13th round of the 1999 draft. We have no confirmation that Pujols' name is in the affidavit … but Mihlfeld's is. If you read the document, it doesn't say the trainer/Mihlfeld supplied all the HGH and what-not; it just says the trainer was the referrer.

Yeah. Sigh. We just report what we're told, folks. Ever hope your source is wrong? This is one of those times.

So much for the Pujols saves baseball from Bonds angle.

Jack Curry and Murray Chass in the New York Times take Kimberly Bell's refusal to talk to George Mitchell as a sign that charges are close to being brought against Barry Bonds. On the other hand, given that the feds thought they needed Grimsley to wear a wire to get evidence against Bonds, it might not be that close at all. My guess is that even if they were two years away from a indictment, Bell would be asked not to testify.

Was Watching notes Jim Leyritz's amphetamines confession.

I'm not shocked by the Leyritz confession. I believe, if you told him that he could get a base-hit if he washed his face before the game with his first urine of the day, he would do it. He always seemed like the type of player who was looking for an edge and willing to do it.

There are a lot of players like that.

Indeed.

Jacob Luft at Sports Illustrated asks "What happens next?" in the steroid scandal. I found this on HGH very interesting:

Anabolic steroids such as Deca Durabolin and HGH are not the same thing. Not even close. The human body produces HGH on its own; adding more of it just increases the effect of the hormone. Whereas the positive effect steroids have on on-field performance is still unproven, there is no doubt what HGH can do for you: "It makes you into a Super You," Carroll says. "It does everything." Not only that, but if you take HGH alone, in the right doses and under medical supervision, it doesn't have nearly the same side affects as anabolic steroids. Although it may cause some problems in the long term that are still unknown, in the short term there is almost no downside to HGH if you do it right. Plus, it has that wonderful added bonus of not being tested for. Is it any wonder this has become the drug of choice for ballplayers?

So I'm reading that properly used and administered, side effects are few and results are great. So why is this illegal? A lot (not all) of the objections to steroids are on the health effects they cause. If that's not a problem, why not use them? Again, go to a doctor, make the use public, and if fans don't like it they can stay away from games and kill the sport. Otherwise, we can all watch athletes push the envelope of human achievement.

And to those who object on the grounds that they want "natural" athletes, I say why should the luck of genetics be the sole criteria for success? Just because Frank Thomas was born big and strong, why should he get all the money? Or Manny. Or Thome. I'd rather watch Pedro pitch ten more years than suffer through more Jeff Weavers. Put Pedro and Maddux and Glavine and Clemens on it now, so we can keep enjoying their skills! I mean, look what it did for Grimsley! Oh, never mind.

In a comment to this post, a reader asks:

Why would you believe the defense attorney?... it would be an obvious way to get attention off Grimsely

Because IRS agent Novitzky started this investigation because he hated Bonds and thought he could get him on steroids. It wasn't like he got a tip that Barry was using, or hiding money, or anything else. This guy decided while watching TV that Bonds must be cheating, so he was going to turn over stones until he found something. This strikes me as exactly the kind of tactics Novitzky would use, blackmailing someone to make his case.

Even the New York Times doesn't fully buy the reasons for Novitzky starting the investigation:

How Novitzky came to initiate his investigation is unclear. Catlin said Novitzky told him the case had sprung from an inquiry involving money transfers. The agent declined to comment, as did other federal authorities involved in the case. But it is evident from public records and interviews that a chorus of whisperings about the supposed steroid dealings of Anderson and Balco had begun to reach the ears of federal law enforcement. Someone was talking.

Grimsley committed a crime. Arrest and charge him. Then offer him a deal to name names. Novitzky is really only interested in one name: Barry Bonds. So instead he threatens Grimsley's family and tries to use Grimsley as a mole. Remember, we're talking baseball players, not organized crime. It seems like a great deal of overkill on the part of this agent just to nail a guy who broke a home run record.

Why am I not surprised that the Grimsley investigation turns out to be about Barry Bonds?

The attorney for Jason Grimsley said Wednesday that federal agents tried to pressure the former Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher into wearing a listening device to lure other major league players into confidential conversations in an effort to find incriminating evidence against superstar Barry Bonds.

"It was a specific effort to target Bonds," said Edward F. Novak, one of the pre-eminent criminal attorneys in Arizona. "We were told that Jason's cooperation was necessary to their case."

Novak said Grimsley "was outed by the feds" because he refused to cooperate.

So I guess Game of Shadows isn't enough to convict Barry in a court of law.

Update: Of course, Bonds has the injury bug, too.

Jason Grimsely asked for his release today. The Diamondbacks granted his wish. I'm not surprised at all by this. There's no way his teammates could trust him anymore.

This wasn't the first time Grimsley was involved in cheating:

It's likely that in Sosa's apeal, his agents and the union will attempt to contrast his behavior with the behavior of Albert Belle, who was suspended for only six days (but seven games) after having his bat confiscated in 1994. Belle's teammate, Jason Grimsley, has admitted crawling through the ceiling of Jacobs Field to the umpire's room and switching the corked bat with another bat.

Albert and Jason are both having bad years in Arizona.

The Smoking Gun posts the search warrant affidavit for Jason Grimsley's residence. (Hat tip, Deaspin). It's pretty clear this search was payback for Grimsley no longer cooperating with federal agents. He's told when the agents show up, they trade not making a public search of his house for his cooperation. Now that's he no longer cooperating, he's been outed by IRS agent Novitsky.

It's very interesting. Note that Grimsley claims that since steroid testing went into effect, he's just used human growth hormone. That's against the rules, but can't be detected by a urine test yet. My guess is it's just a matter of time before the redacted names in the report leak out.

Jason Grimsley of the Arizona Diamond backs is now the center piece of the steroid probe:

Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher Jason Grimsley admitted taking illegal performance-enhancing drugs and said that amphetamines were used "like aspirin" in major league clubhouses, according to an affidavit filed by the lead federal investigator in baseball's steroid investigation.

The affidavit, filed in U.S. District Court in Phoenix, said Grimsley agreed to cooperate with U.S. Internal Revenue Service agents after Grimsley received a package containing two kits of human growth hormone April 19 at his Scottsdale home.

He's spilling the beans on amphetamines, too, and for the first time an active player is naming names:

Grimsley provided "extensive statements regarding his receipt and use of anabolic steroids, amphetamines and human growth hormone over the last several years," the affidavit said.

Grimsley also provided "details about his knowledge of other Major League Baseball players" using illegal performance-enhancing drugs, including several close acquaintances.

An hour before Tuesday night's game against Philadelphia, Grimsley told The Republic, "I have no comment about that and no idea about that."

It appears this story was leaked to the press. If true, I don't see Grimsley lasting long on a major league club. It also might hurt the government's case, since players under investigation might now be able to cover their tracks. Stay tuned.

Update: From the comments:

Latest news is that they have searched his house.

Hat tip, William K.

From this article, it appears that Grimsely is no longer actively co-operating.

Matt Rico tested positive for the second time and will miss 100 games.

Rico is in extended spring training, and hadn't played for a team yet this season. He was Tampa Bay's sixth-round draft pick in 2001 as an outfielder, but was converted to a pitcher last year. He had no record in eight games with short-season Class A Hudson Valley last year, finishing with a 2.53 ERA.

Another marginal player tests positive. Matt's probably not going to make the majors anyway, so he probably thought it was worth giving the drugs a try. If he gets away with it, the boost might be enough to give him a shot at the show.

The Baseball Zealot has the dope on Freddy Garcia at the WBC.

Patrick Arnold, the inventor of "The Clear", is going to plead guilty according to this AP story.

A San Francisco federal grand jury indicted Patrick Arnold in November of conspiring with BALCO founder Victor Conte to distribute the once-undetectable substance tetrahydragestrinone.

Since he was charged with three counts of illegally distributing performance-enhancing drugs, Arnold has maintained his innocence. But a source familiar with the case said Arnold will likely plead guilty to at least one charge in exchange for the others being dropped.

The source spoke on condition of anonymity Thursday because the proposed plea deal was confidential.

I wonder, with the fall of BALCO and Arnold, who is taking their place?

Angel Rocha, a minor league pitcher for the Diamondbacks received a 100 game suspension for violating baseball's drug policy. It was his second offense. Of the five minor league players suspended this year, four are pitchers.

I wonder if the penalty system is wrong for the minor leagues. If you're working your way up, the goal is to get a big payday in the majors. Since only a few make it, why not risk a 50-day suspension to get noticed? The thought process might be:

1. My chances of making the majors are slim.
2. I only have a 25% chance of getting caught if I take a PED.
3. If I get caught, I just don't make the majors sooner.
4. If it works, I get a big payday.

Maybe the penalty in the minors should be that the player can't be called up to the majors for two years. Taking the chance of going to the majors from slim to zero might be a better deterrent.

John Perricone continues his excellent coverage of the other side of the steroid issue, linking to an historical article by Steve Kotler.

Jim Bowden was arrested for drunk driving in Flordia:

"I intend to plead not guilty at a future date in a Miami-Dade court. I deeply regret any embarrassment that my arrest may cause the Washington Nationals and Major League Baseball," Bowden said in the statement.

"On the advice of legal counsel, I will have no further comment regarding this incident until the court proceedings are complete," he said.

Meanwhile, Stan Conte, the Giants trainer, recevied a subpeona.

Stan Conte, who is not related to Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative owner Victor Conte, was subpoenaed to appear in a San Francisco federal courtroom April 27, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Tuesday, citing three anonymous sources familiar with the investigation.

The panel has been hearing testimony for more than a month about whether the outfielder lied to a separate grand jury in December 2003 about his connection to BALCO.

Deadspin notes, after seeing Barry Bonds play in person, that he's not worth booing anymore:

To put it simply, Bonds looks like he’s about to break off into little pieces. He wobbles, Vito Spatafore-like, when he runs, and his knees shake perilously, like a dying dog trying to pee. Forget Hank Aaron; Bonds is going to be lucky to catch Ruth. Despite his, uh, rather ample upper body muscles, Bonds isn’t able to push off his legs enough to get the ball out of the park.

Bonds wants Ruth more than he wants Aaron. He's six home runs away from the Babe, and the way he's started the season there's no way that's a sure thing. His body is doing what all the investigations can't do; stop him from passing the two greats in front of him.

There appears to be a new grand jury investigating perjury charges against Barry Bonds. I can't say I'm surprised. I'm not sure I understand what's going on, however:

The panel has been hearing evidence for more than a month about whether Bonds lied to a different grand jury than the one investigating the BALCO scandal. The existence of the grand jury was first reported by CNN on Thursday.

So Bonds testified before another grand jury? When was that? Let's go to the source:

A federal grand jury is considering whether to indict San Francisco Giants slugger Barry Bonds for perjury because of testimony he gave to another grand jury in 2003, CNN has learned.

Bonds told the first grand jury in December 2003 that he was clean. The new panel has been hearing testimony for a month about whether the baseball superstar lied about his steroid use during the hearing, several sources said.

"This is extremely bad news for Barry Bonds," said CNN senior legal analyst Jeff Toobin, "because a federal prosecutor doesn't start looking into perjury unless he has a pretty good idea he's going to find perjury at the end of the day."

(Jeff Toobin was in my class at Harvard. He wrote a sports column for the Crimson called "Inner Toobin." He's going to love this.)

So, who was that first grand jury investigating? Were charges brought against anyone due to that investigation?

From the little we know about what's going on, the conflicting testimony between the two grand juries appears to be what's hanging Bonds. He told one jury he was clean, the other he used something he thought was legal. Did his knowledge of what he did change between those two testimonies? Or do prosecutors have evidence that both were lies?

I wonder when the tax evasion prosecution starts.

Via Deadspin, Sports Law Blog points to an article approving of player gambling on games.

You can download the article here. But I'm not sure I agree with this from the abstract:

This paper outlines the advantages of allowing athletes to bet on their games. Betting aligns player incentives with team incentives, encourages team-oriented play, helps sustain fan interest, lessens the nominal costs of owning teams or ticket purchases, and reduces the likelihood that players will conspire to throw games or beat the point spread.

Players might not conspire, but who's to say a bad egg won't throw a game all by himself? If you're playing an elite team, you're going to make a lot more money if you bet against the team and they lose. And what about someone playing for a lousy team? Why would you ever bet on your team. Unless the bets were transparent, so that everyone knew how players were wagering, or unless they were not allowed to bet against their team, I don't see why throwing games wouldn't become common. But I'll need to read the article.

Update: Having read the article, I can't disagree more. The author assumes teammates will police themselves. For example:

Assuming a league rule prohibiting bets against a player’s own team, a player who purposely throws a game, and is discovered, would forgo the chance to participate in team bets in the future.

Is there going to be a league betting office? This idea requires transperancy, but how do you enforce that?

On top of that, no one is going to want to play for a bad team. Right now, poor teams have a chance to get better by spending a lot of money on salary, bringing in good players through free agency. Why would a free agent sign with a celler dweller in this scenario?

It's an interesting idea, but I don't believe it's practical.

Catallarchy continues to do well in his quest to gain 15 pounds of muscle in 100 days. He's at nine pounds of muscle after just four weeks. For background, see this post.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports on a chance meeting between a federal judge and Greg Anderson in 2002. Barry Bonds sent Anderson to the Twin Cities to help Gary Sheffield out of a slump:

Boyle's account of the meeting provides an unusual glimpse of Anderson's activities before baseball's steroids scandal broke with the federal raid on the Burlingame-based Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative in 2003. The letter also supports aspects of Sheffield's testimony before the BALCO grand jury in 2003.

In his testimony, which was reviewed by The Chronicle, Sheffield denied knowingly using banned drugs. But he said that in 2002, Bonds told Anderson to provide him with substances called "the clear," an arthritis balm and pills called "Mexican beans."

Sheffield said Bonds told him the substances were legal. Prosecutors said they were steroids.

The real slump for Sheffield was in April and May. He was already coming out of it at the start of June, before Anderson's visit on the 11th. Not typical Sheffield, but not bad. In the next ten days, he's the Gary we all know and love. So did Anderson help, or was this just a continuation of Sheffield getting back to normal after a slow start?

Alex Belth points out an excellent article in the New York Times on how a ban on greenies might change baseball.

Rather than seeking replacements for amphetamines, some baseball people have prescribed increased rest.

"You can't be out in those bars with any regularity anymore because you ain't got help now," said Ron Washington, the third-base coach for the Athletics.

Payton said, "Guys who are 25 are going to have to treat themselves like they're 35."

Getting a good night's sleep? What a concept!

Victor Conte came up with a new word to describe Game of Shadows.

"I plan to provide evidence in the near future to prove that much of what is written in the book is untrue," Conte told the AP. He declined to list specific inaccuracies or what evidence he would provide, but said the book is "about the character assassination of Barry Bonds and myself."

"It's my opinion that the two writers of the book have a disease called fabrication-itis," Conte said, holding a copy of "Game of Shadows" as he stood on his front steps.

I can't wait to see the evidence. Of course, it may be one of those cases where Conte never gave Bonds steroids directly.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Trent at Catallarchy is up eight pounds in three weeks. He's not quite sure how much is muscle, but he's getting his body fat measured soon.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

I don't see an official press release yet, but Selig announced the steroid investigation this afternoon. As expected, George Mitchell will lead the charge, which should get Congress off baseball's back. It looks like the investigation will focus on BALCO, but Mitchell is allowed to take it wherever he needs to go. I suspect that will allow Selig to claim he's not simply going after Barry Bonds.

I suspect the final report will look like this:

• Player A, B, C, ...., Z used steroids.
• Shame on them!
• There's nothing you can do about it.
• Everybody's clean now because we're testing.

There's a line in Hal Bodley's piece that doesn't tell the whole story:

Selig's findings from the investigation — demanded by fans, media and some members of Congress following the publication of Game of Shadows, a book written by two San Francisco Chronicle reporters which detailed extensive use of steroids by Bonds and other major leaguers — will be made public.

I don't know how many fans are really demanding an investigation here. It seems the media the main driver here, goading the fans and congress into wanting this action because they don't like a player who is about to break the record. Unlike fans, however, the media get to express their displeasure when they vote for the Hall of Fame. At least they get a voice eventually.

Update: Ben Kabak live blogged the press conference. According to Ben, this investigation will only look at what's happened since 2002, to see if they can find loopholes in the current program.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Victor Conte is out of jail, although he'll be confined to his home for a while. I wonder what he's going to do with himself now? Write a tell-all book, maybe?

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

I don't agree with everything Michael Hunt (I wonder if he gets paged a lot?) writes in this article, but this is spot on:

And guiltiest of all are the players who cheated. A lot of people will argue that baseball alone is at fault here because steroids were not banned until recently, but that is a cop-out. Those who used steroids without prescriptions were breaking the law, and an unfair competitive advantage can never be rationalized away, no matter the circumstances.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

It looks like there will be an investigation into previous steroid use. We'll know the details Thursday afternoon.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

It seems no one's interested in sponsoring a celebration if Barry Bonds passes Hank Aaron. Maybe Proviant Technologies will chip in. :-)

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

The lawsuit brought by Bonds failed to get a restraining order against the authors today.

A judge on Friday denied a bid by Barry Bonds' lawyers to block the authors and publishers from making money on a book claiming the San Francisco Giants slugger used steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs.

Bonds' attorneys say the book's authors, publisher Gotham Books, the San Francisco Chronicle and Sports Illustrated, which published excerpts of the book, should be held liable for publishing "illegally obtained grand jury transcripts."

But Judge James Warren said free speech protections shielded the defendants from such accusations and that he thought Bonds' lawsuit had little chance of success.

We'll see if they continue the suit after this setback.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Crawfish Boxes compares the Giants and Astros when it comes to steroids and doesn't wonder if some teams are more likely to cheat than others:

When Bonds announced that he was filing suit against just about anyone involved with Game of Shadows yesterday, the Giants had no comment. Just as they have had no comment throughout the whole saga. Just as they have turned their backs on all the evidence that has been dug up by the San Francisco Chronicle or anyone else. It has been made plenty apparent that whatever Bonds did, the San Francisco Giants do not want to know about it.

And I just think about the Houston Astros organization, and the man at the top, and the way it's run, and I wonder whether it's not so much baseball, but the Giants, who are more to blame after Bonds himself.

I've gone to this well before, and I'll do it again here. At some point (and I don't think this was team generated), some of the Astros fans have adopted as their slogan "root for the good guys." It's a good slogan, and it could work for many teams, but I think it has particular aptness for the Astros. Because it does seem that there is an organization-wide commitment to "doing things the right way" and to simply trying to ensure that as many of the club's players as possible are quality individuals.

My quibble with the piece is that I start from the premise that ball players aren't good people, so I'm pleasantly surprised when they are. I don't know why I should think the Astros were any cleaner than any other team pre-testing. What does appear to be true is that there was a nexus in the San Francisco Bay Area that runs from Canseco to Conte, and both the Athletics and Giants turned a blind eye toward it.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Catallarchy continues to work out in an effort to gain 15 pounds of muscle in 100 days without drugs.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

The release of Game of Shadows brings new scrutiny to Gary Sheffield.

Upon being approached in the Yankee clubhouse before last night's game against the Red Sox and told about the HGH allegations, Sheffield said flatly, "Great." Asked if the claims were true, Sheffield said, "Nope," before adding, "Anything else that I'm linked to?"

Testosterone, someone said. "Great," he repeated.

It was a tense scene as Sheffield was forced to revisit an issue which he hadn't been questioned about since last spring. Sheffield admitted in 2004 that he had used a cream, saying that he thought it was intended to help heal surgical wounds but has always denied using any performance-enhancing drugs.

In reading the section of the book on Sheffield and Bonds (chapter 12, pages 129-133), what struck me most was just how despicable Bonds is. Sheffield is a peer, Bonds supposedly wants to help him, but can't help treating Gary like a naughty child. Sheffield ends up estranged from Barry, like everyone else Bonds seems to touch.

And that's the root of the current problem. People hate Barry Bonds. It's well deserved, but it's driving this idea to suspend him. A reader wrote to me yesterday:

I'm interested to hear your opinion on how the Giants should handle the Barry Bonds situation. Me and my core group of Giants fans are disgusted that we have been cheering for this cheater. Though the evidence has been trickling in for years and people across the country may have come to the conclusion that Giants fans are now forced to face, we had no other choice but to hold to "innocent until proven guilty". As it is obvious that the Giants organization turned a blind eye to what was going on to make a profit, I am finding it more painful to watch the team that I have loved for so many years; knowing that they could have stopped this from the beginning. The group of fans that I confer with have come to the consensus that it would be in the best interest of the Giants, and baseball as a whole, to drop or suspend Bonds. Although there would be a struggle with the Players Association regarding dropping a player for unconfirmed claims, it would send a message that baseball is starting a new era. If the Giants do not take action against Barry that we feel that baseball would essentially be talking about of both sides of its mouth; saying steroids are bad and baseball is in a new era by enacting a harsher penalty structure, but then allowing players to continue to play that have blatantly subverted the principles on which the game stands. I appreciate any opinion you have on this subject as well as any read of what the general baseball community feels (I only get to hear the opinions of Bay Area SportsTalk radio).

I won't reprint my whole response since they are issues I've discussed many times before. But let me suggest that the fans have lots of power here. If fans are cheering and going wild and fighting for the ball whenever Bonds hits a home run, I doubt MLB will take any action against him. But what if the fans stood up and turned their backs on Bonds whenever the slugger came to bat? The big thesis of the book is that Bonds was jealous of the recognition McGwire and Sosa received in 1998. What would 50,000 people refusing to watch his exploits do to him? What message would that send to major league baseball?

Up until now, sellouts, fights for home run balls, court battles over ownership tell me that the fans didn't care all that much why the players were getting bigger and hitting more home runs. They like the long ball; they like winning. But now the press has someone they hate going after a major record, and they're doing everything in their power to stop him.

So, if this book and other accounts convinced you that Bonds is a cheater, shun him at games. Stand up and turn your back. If you think it's a press witch hunt, cheer him on. MLB and the Giants will take their cue from you.

Update: Josh comments:

With all due respect, the NEW news today is about Gary Sheffield. That letter from a Giants fan could easily be written by a Yankee fan who ought to be equally embarrassed for cheering Sheffield (and Giambi). I, however, am not a Yankee fan.

Bonds has been made into public enemy number one. How he's any different than Gary Sheffield and Jason Giambi is utterly beyond me.

I agree with this. If you want Bonds suspended for past infractions, then you need to investigate everyone suspected of cheating and suspend those who are guilty. That means Giambi and Sheffield should also be suspended. McGwire and Canseco should be banned from the game for a period of time. It's hypocritical to go after Barry alone.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

A South Korean pitcher tested positive and is out of the World Baseball Classic:

South Korean pitcher Park Myung-hwan has tested positive for a banned substance and been thrown out of the World Baseball Classic, Major League Baseball said in a statement on Friday.

No further details on the test were immediately available.

Park appeared in just one game for South Korea, who stormed through group play as the tournament's only unbeaten team with a record of 6-0.

This means he'll also miss the next two years of international competition. Does anyone know if this will also get him banned from the Korean Professional Leagues?

Park did not allow a hit in two innings, although he did walk 2 and hit a batter. I guess we better get busy expunging those records.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Selig is going to investigate Bonds.

If Selig decides Barry used steroids, what does he do? Suspend him for 10 days? Suspend him for a year? Throw him out of baseball? At that point, don't you need to go back and investigate everyone who was named in a book? Or is it just reserved for unlikeable people who are about to break a record?

Update: Now they are denying an investigation.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

In response to this post, Catallarchy is attempting to gain 15 pounds of muscle in 100 days without steroids. Here's their first progress report.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Ken Griffey spoke to reporters about the latest Barry Bonds book:

“I don’t remember it ever happening,” he said. “The only thing that Barry and I ever really talked about was me coming out to San Francisco and working out with him. And I told him, ‘For six weeks, I can’t leave my family.’ I told him it’s like me asking him to come down to Florida for six weeks. It’s tough when you have families. As far as the other thing, that conversation didn’t happen.”

The headline, "Griffey denies ’roid talk," isn't quite right. A denial is saying that I remember that evening and Bonds didn't say that. "I don't remember," isn't the same thing. I would hope that there were multiple people at the dinner who did remember before something like that was printed in the book.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

ESPN posts a story about drug testing in the World Baseball Classic, and frankly, I don't know what to make of it. The World Anti-Doping Agency is saying that baseball sent an incomplete list of banned drugs to players. Orza is saying it doesn't matter what they sent to players, it's the player's responsibility to know what's banned.

I have to say I really don't like Gary Wadler of WADA. At the congressional hearings last March, Wadler seemed to want all testing brought under his authority. I'm not sure if he's power hungry or just want to make more money by testing baseball, too. This strikes me as a situation where WADA is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

However, once again baseball is shown to be incompetent in distributing documents. We saw this at those same Congressional hearings when representatives found a huge loophole in the punishment part of the drug policy. Having someone carefully proof documents before they go out would save Major League Baseball a lot of grief.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Jeff Perlman is about to publish a biography of Barry Bonds. He presents an excerpt adapted from the book in ESPN the Magazine. Here's the most damning paragraph, describing a dinner after the 1998 season:

On an otherwise ordinary night, over an otherwise ordinary meal, Griffey, Bonds, a rep from an athletic apparel company and two other associates chatted informally about the upcoming season. With Griffey's framed memorabilia as a backdrop, and Mark McGwire's obliteration of the single-season home run record a fresh memory, Bonds spoke up as he never had before. He sounded neither angry nor agitated, simply frustrated. "You know what," he said. "I had a helluva season last year, and nobody gave a crap. Nobody. As much as I've complained about McGwire and Canseco and all of the bull with steroids, I'm tired of fighting it. I turn 35 this year. I've got three or four good seasons left, and I wanna get paid. I'm just gonna start using some hard-core stuff, and hopefully it won't hurt my body. Then I'll get out of the game and be done with it."

It just keeps getting worse.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

According to this poll, fans want Barry Bonds records erased, but don't mind his election to the Hall of Fame. I'd like to see the wording of the questions.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Here's more evidence the steroid issue is under control:

More than 200 tests have been taken and no player has tested positive for any banned substances in the World Baseball Classic, the International Baseball Federation president told ESPNdeportes.com.

Aldo Notari said that the Classic has been a clean and exemplary tournament so far.

"We took 90 tests to players on the official rosters before the Classic, and have been taking two daily tests per team since the beginning of the tournament," said Notari before Monday's game between Cuba and the Dominican Republic at Hiram Bithorn Stadium.

"No player has tested positive so far," said Notari. "Zero positive tests after more than 200 of them."

And a positive won't hurt major league players.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Obstructed Seats pens a piece comparing Jose Canseco to Barry Bonds:

He is now on the verge of passing Babe Ruth on the all time home run list, and is a season and a half away from passing Hank Aaron as the all time leader. The most impressive record in baseball history could be held by someone who has been knowingly prejudice, a proven cheater (based on the latest allegations in the newest book about him), a selfish player, and quite possibly more hated than anyone in sports history.

His interviews cry out for attention and pity (my mind wanders back to when he was hobbling around on crutches last season and blamed the media for ruining his personal life), and he has no problem talking down to anyone. Think about this; He has knowingly cheated, yet would not have any problem holding the most prestigious record in baseball, one that will surely not be broken for a long time (this will be the only thing that will cause me to root for Alex Rodriguez).

Bonds still has support, however. Ferguson Vance writes:

In support of Barry Bonds - The best athletes will always do what they can to improve their bodies and skills. They constantly excercise and practice. They take advantage of every advancement in nutrition and medicine. The rules of the game and the laws of the nation do change and evolve over time. Baseball itself has a particularly history of pushing the envelope of it's own rules. Pitchers "doctor" balls, managers steal signs, batters swing from outside the box after erasing the lines in plain sight of everyone and base runners are called out from phantom tags. Bats are corked and spikes are sharpened. All these could be considered forms of cheating that occur right on the field during play and have a direct impact on the game. Pitchers can throw 95 MPH fastballs with fake tendons and football players can shock their muscles with cattle prods, but Barry Bonds can't take a medical suppliment to increase his strength or speed his healing? Does anyone see the hypocracy here? How many stolen bases would Ty Cobb have today with the modern Nike Baseball shoes, and training, diet, medical and nutrition of today instead of the 1920's methods. How about we put an asteric next to Rickey Hendersons records...It would read "*civilization advanced rendering the achivements yesterday irrelavent." Barry Bonds is only guilty of trying to succeed, just like you and I do at our jobs each day. He follows the example baseball sets, just like we follow the examples of our fellow drivers obeying the trafic laws.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

I want to point out this passage from Game of Shadows as a reason I'm not comfortable with what I've read so far (emphasis added):

Bonds worked harder in the gym during the 1998 off-season than he had in years. Wearing black gloves, pants and a sleeveless T, he showed up at World Gym day after day, Anderson at his side. The trainer talked quietly to his famous client or just sat and stared as Bonds went through the monotonous routine of pumping iron. Marvelously the Winstrol eliminated the pain and fatigue of training. And the results were equally marvelous to behold.

For the first time in his life, Bonds was buff. He often stood in front of a mirror, laughing, saying, "How do I look?" By spring training, his weight had increased from around 210 to 225, and almost all of the gain was rock-hard muscle. When he showed up a day late at the Giants' spring training camp in Scottsdale, Ariz., in 1999, angry at the club for refusing to renegotiate his contract, the change in Bonds's physique was startling. Around the Giants, they took to referring to Bonds as "the Incredible Hulk." When Bonds took batting practice, he was driving the ball farther than he ever had before. To teammates, writers and fans in Scottsdale that spring, and especially to Giants management, Bonds's appearance and performance raised a fundamental question: What in hell had he been doing in the off-season?

Sportswriters didn't press the question. Most attributed the changes in Bonds's body to a heavy workout regimen, as though a 34-year-old man could gain 15 pounds of muscle in 100 days without drugs. The Giants, from owner Peter Magowan to manager Dusty Baker, had no interest in learning whether Bonds was using steroids, either. Although it was illegal to use the drugs without a prescription, baseball had never banned steroids. Besides, by pursuing the issue, the Giants ran the risk of poisoning their relationship with their touchy superstar -- or, worse, of precipitating a drug scandal the year before the opening of their new ballpark, where Bonds was supposed to be the main gate attraction.

It's a case of, "Look at him, he must be using steroids!" But read what Jerry Crasnick wrote about Jason Schmidt today (again, emphasis added):

Giants starter Jason Schmidt changed his routine and spent part of his offseason at the Athletes Performance Institute in Tempe, Ariz. He played catch in the mornings with Boston's Curt Schilling, took a crash course in nutrition and hit the weights diligently enough to add 20 pounds, while simultaneously shedding body fat.

...

Schmidt, 33, has been one of Major League Baseball's most reliable starting pitchers in recent years. Since 2003, he ranks third in the game in strikeouts (624), fifth in wins (47) and 10th in ERA (3.24). His .712 winning percentage in that span is second best in the majors behind Minnesota's Johan Santana.

And Schmidt says he doesn't use steroids, although there have been rumors:

"You don't want to hear stuff like that in your own clubhouse," Schmidt said. "It makes you realize that people don't really know you. That's what made me mad. I felt like, 'These people should know what I stand for and what I'm about -- that I wouldn't do something like that.'

So on one hand, we are told that you can't gain 15 pounds of muscle in 100 days without drugs, but Jason Schmidt gains 20 pounds and insists he's clean. Which is it?

There's plenty of other evidence that links Bonds to steroids in the book. But that sentence is shoddy. It's speculation presented as fact, and things like that hurt the author's argument.

Update: Catallarchy is going to prove it can be done!

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

The Onion presents even more evidence that Bonds cheated. :-)

(Hat tip Ben Kabak).

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

J.T. Snow was one of Barry Bonds longest running teammates. He was asked yesterday about Bonds and steroid use:

''Did I ever see him use steroids?" Snow said yesterday, standing inside the Red Sox' clubhouse at City of Palms Park, a day after new and more detailed allegations against Bonds came to light. ''No. Did his body change over the nine years I was there? Yes."

Significantly?

''You could say significantly," Snow said. ''I don't know what he did in his own time and what his workout regimen was. I know he's a hard worker. But I really don't know [if he used steroids]. He's never come out and said it. Only he knows what he's done."

Snow feels Bonds will play through this:

''He'll probably just brush it off and keep playing," Snow said. ''He'll just let it roll off his back."

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Bonds' lawyer issues a statement.

The exploitation of Barry's good name and these attempts to eviscerate his sensational accomplishments in all phases of the game of baseball (throughout high school and college, as well as 20 years playing professionally) may make those responsible wealthy, but in the end, they need to live with themselves. Beyond this -- Barry has no further comment now nor in the foreseeable future. His focus remains on staying healthy, playing baseball and doing everything he can to help the Giants play in the World Series seven months from now.

Good name? Bonds spent his career intentionally making a bad name for himself, wanting to be disliked by his opponents and sometimes by his own teammates. All he can do in his defense is disparage others. Is it any wonder the media is out for blood? The people who hate Barry Bonds mean to drive him out of baseball before the season starts and before Bonds can pass another legend. Barry picked a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel, and now he's suffering the consequences. Remarks like this from his lawyer are just going to cause the media to tighten the screws.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Mike's Baseball Rants does his best to defend Barry Bonds although the point of his tables are not clear to me. They seem to be saying his home run percentage bounces around, but that's not what people are aguing. They're arguing a long term trend, not year-to-year changes.

However, I do wonder what Bonds would do if he just did the weight training. In the book excerpt it says Bonds had never been buff before 1999. He was already one of the greatest hitters who ever lived. What would an intense, every other day weight lifting regimen have done for Barry? Weights work wonders for individuals. It might have been enough for a player with Barry's talent. It's too bad we'll never know.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

The Contra Costa Times published two editorials today, each calling for a separation of Bonds from the Giants. Neil Hayes poses the question:

How the Giants will handle this is a similar mystery. No franchise has benefited from illegal steroids more than the Giants. Should they release Bonds now in an attempt to separate themselves from their tainted star, or is that hypocritical since president and managing general partner Peter Magowan long ago hitched his fate to a player he must have suspected was cheating?

Gary Peterson answers it:

Magowan has been a facilitator of Bonds' boorish act ever since. No doubt he has heard the whispers of Bonds' steroid use. He surely has witnessed the anecdotal evidence of their impact upon his performance. He undoubtedly is well versed in the dismissive and demeaning manner in which Bonds has treated team employees.

For years Magowan reveled in Bonds' on-field ability. He built a new stadium on Bonds' acne-covered back. He sold tens of millions of dollars worth of tickets to fans wearing No. 25 jerseys. But it has been a deal with the devil. For the past several years, Magowan has allowed his entire organization to be held hostage by his petulant superstar.

Now, with Tuesday's revelations, the man who once saved baseball for San Francisco risks it anew. Oh, not in the this-team-will-never-play-here-again sense, but rather in the it'll-be-years-before-anyone-respects-this-franchise-again sense.

The more you think about it, the more you realize there is only one recourse to the Barry Bonds Problem. The Giants need to divorce themselves of Bonds. As in -- yesterday, if someone can find the keys to the way-back machine.

And while all this venting is good for one's spleen, I really don't think there's anything either MLB or the Giants can do. As far as I can tell, Bonds is alleged to have broken laws, but until he test positive, he hasn't broken any rules. If Major League Baseball or the Giants took punative action against Barry, the union would reinstate him faster than you could blink.

Barry Bonds is every terrible thing you wish to think about him. But if he continues to test clean, there's nothing anyone can do to stop him from playing, short of the government putting him in jail.

Update: Dan LeBatard sums up the counter argument in two lines:

It's OK for us to want to win at all costs.

Its just not OK for people like Barry Bonds.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Sports Illustrated covers the release of the new book, Game of Shadows. The coverage includes excerpts of the book by two San Francisco Chronicle writers who spent two years investigating drug use by the slugger. The little I've read looks pretty damning.

The authors, Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams, describe in sometimes day-to-day, drug-by-drug detail how often and how deeply Bonds engaged in the persistent doping. For instance, the authors write that by 2001, when Bonds broke Mark McGwire's single-season home-run record (70) by belting 73, Bonds was using two designer steroids referred to as the Cream and the Clear, as well as insulin, human growth hormone, testosterone decanoate (a fast-acting steroid known as Mexican beans) and trenbolone, a steroid created to improve the muscle quality of cattle.

BALCO tracked Bonds' usage with doping calendars and folders -- detailing drugs, quantities, intervals and Bonds' testosterone levels -- that wound up in the hands of federal agents upon their Sept. 3, 2003 raid of the Burlingame, Calif., business.

The web site includes extensive documentation as well. It looks like this book will dispel any idea that Bonds didn't knowingly use steroids.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Teams are going to sell the players clean supplements:

Management and the players association are having NSF International, a company based in Ann Arbor, Mich., certify that products are clean. Once a supplement is certified, teams will buy the products and make them available for resale to players in the 30 major league clubhouses.

"They do all of the auditing and testifying of the products and certify they are clean," management lawyer Frank Coonelly said Monday.

I wonder what kind of markup the teams are going to charge?

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Jim Salisbury of the Philadelphia Inquirer interviews an anonymous player about amphetamine use:

"Speed," said the current Phillie, who asked not to be named, for fear of tarnishing his reputation. "It's bad for your cardio. It's unhealthy. But I did it."

He did it every day for the last few seasons, and so, he estimated, did half the position players in the big leagues.

It's quite a fascinating article. Players feel they can quit, but I wonder if the addiction will overcome their better judgement:

"Guys are definitely talking about it," the Phillies player said. "I haven't seen anything in this clubhouse. But I don't think it'll become an issue until the season starts.

"There are players who obviously think they need it, and I'm sure they will take it. But they'll pick their days and take their chances on testing."

Update: Was Watching notes another article on greenies. And Terry Francona doesn't think it will make a difference.

Baseball Musings is conducting a pledge drive in March. Click here for details.

Jerry Crasnick at ESPN.com looks forward to a baseball season without amphetamines:

So what will the stimulant ban mean for the product on the field? According to one popular theory, the "iron man" will become obsolete and bench players will assume a more important role. A total of 19 major-leaguers appeared in 160 or more games last season, and 45 players topped 155. Those who derived a lift from their neighborhood pharmacist will have to do it sans help in 2006.

Baseball Prospectus writer Will Carroll, an authority on injuries, also points out that fatigue is a contributing factor when players get hurt. So it might be worth checking the disabled lists this season to gauge if there's an impact.

Maybe teams will find they need to carry fewer pitchers and more position players as fatigue keeps more players out of the lineup.

Update: I left out the link earlier.

The Baseball Musings radio show will be on TPSRadio tonight at 8 PM EDT. Check out their other sports programming as well.

You can also call in at 888-985-0555 and leave a question for the show, or stop by the chat room at TPSRadio during the broadcast and leave a comment. Also, feel free to leave a question in the comments to this post and I'll be happy to answer it on the air.

Matt Lawton admitted he used steroids:

Lawton told Sports Weekly's Bob Nightengale that he was playing poorly and was hurting, so he turned to steroids.

"I wasn't playing well enough to be on a Little League roster, let alone be on the roster of the New York Yankees," Lawton told Sports Weekly in its current issue. "I just wasn't physically able to do the job. I had never been in the playoff hunt before. So I did something that will always haunt me."

Lawton said that he's never taken amphetamines, but injected the steroid on Sept. 20. The next day, he started in center field and hit a home run in his first at-bat. He said he didn't feel any pain.

He was tested the next day.

I wonder if someone tipped off MLB on this. Lawton goes on to say he was "talking to some guys," and I wonder if someone else heard the conversation and made a phone call.

It also makes me wonder if why we shouldn't use steroids for pain medication. I'm not an expert, but is there a dose that helps with pain while not doing much for building muscle? If Lawton weren't a baseball player, but someone who had a physical job, would a doctor treat him with steroids in such a case? Any comments by doctors would be appreciated.

Update: Lawton signed with the Seattle Mariners for a bit above the major league minimum. He'll miss the first ten days of the 2006 season.

Sometimes I get the feeling that steroids in sports are a new issue. But I was just over at the IMDB and noticed they were recommending Rock and Roll High School as a DVD. In looking at the cast, I noticed that one character is named Coach Steroid. Just another reason to love this movie. That and exploding mice.

Mike Fish of ESPN.com posts an interview with Miles Werre, the person who mixed the cream the Victor Conte and a government witness vs. Patrick Arnold. Miles did a good job protecting himself when the BALCO investigation became public:

Werre paints Conte as the original rat, a claim the BALCO boss vehemently disputes. But what's clear is that, as word of the federal investigation spread, Werre saw reason to keep his designer stash. So there the drugs sat, in their original plastic bottles, in the U.S. Postal Service Priority Mail box he claims they were delivered in, with an Illinois postmark and return address linked to Arnold, on a shelf in the bedroom of his apartment in Houston.

"So when all this stuff came up, I was like, 'Well, I'd rather -- you just have to look out for yourself,' " he says."Once this case broke open, being the way that people like to turn on people, I decided to hold onto it because you never know."

A nice touch here is that ESPN posts audio of the interview as well.

As if Pete Rose gambling wasn't enough, Red Reporter finds a story about a corked bat.

Steve Lombardi puts on his conspiracy hat to explore why the Marlins were so good in 2003.

I like this idea:

While everyone in Congress and the commissioner's office fought the union over tougher penalties, no one thought of looking at the top of the sport's food chain and sanctioning the people who collect gate receipts for juiced performances. The union wouldn't have blocked a proposal to fine an owner for every positive drug test in his organization, say $500,000 for the first, $2 million for the second, $5 million for the third.

If 50 games' unpaid leave is supposed to deter players from using, imagine the effect of having some of the boss' money at risk.

The money could go into a pool and be divided by the clean clubs that year. With this kind of penalty, you could be sure the teams would get the entourages out of the club house.

A former trainer for the Texas Rangers believes that amphetamine abuse was worse than steroid use.

The report says that Wheat "would frequently hear players say things like 'Who’s got ‘em?’ and 'I need another one’” in reference to amphetamines.

"He related an anecdote involving 'greenies,’ a name for amphetamines,” the report states. "He once asked a player, 'of the nine players on the field, how many took greenies today?’ The answer from the player was eight.’ Mr. Wheat indicated that the use of amphetamines remained prevalent throughout his tenure as the trainer.’’

One thing that bothers me about players like Jim Bunning complaining about steroids is that plenty of players from that generation used uppers. How many fewer home runs, or hits or strikeouts would that generation have without the stimulation?

Tarik Saleh in the comments to this post points out an article that is offering a different approach to controlling the use of performance enhancing drugs in sports. Don Catlin believes that the current way of policing drugs is flawed, and I agree. Drug enforcers can't keep up with drug creators. What does Catlin want to do about it?

Catlin has no intention of giving up, though. Instead, he's decided to mount a campaign to radically change the way sports go about fighting drugs—an idea that he's revealing publicly for the first time in Outside. Catlin's vision is to replace the current law-enforcement model—in which all athletes are treated as suspects who are monitored and tested to find evidence of specific drug use—with a reward model, one driven by a new voluntary system that, he hopes, would enable officialdom to actually prove that the athletes who take part in it are clean.

The meat of his proposal is on page 7. I find it very interesting that he wants to look at bio markers, and actually administer drugs to a control group of athletes to see how those bio markers change. That way, you can look for changes in an athlete without looking for a specific drug. It's an idea worth thinking about.

First of all, I was right about Jim Bunning. From the updated AP article:

Bunning said he would wait to hear more and would not be withdrawing his legislation immediately.

"This is what I had hoped for all along, for the two private parties to come to an agreement on their own without Congress having to do it for them," he said, but added that the deal is "not as tough as I would like."

He's not going to be happy until MLB passes a rule that says any record set by one of his contemporaries can't be broken.

I wonder what will happen if positives occur at the same rate? In my opinion, 12 positives out of about 1200 players is pretty low. When most of the positives come from nobodies, it's really difficult to conclude that the policy in place wasn't working. If the same number test positive next year, will Selig and Congress call for an immediate lifetime ban? If it continues at the same rate after that, will they call for summary execution? I'd just like to know what constitutes a plan working in the minds of a US Senator.

I'm glad to see amphetamines added to the list. They've been a big problem for a much longer time. I'm sure the players will find other stimulants to take their place, but at least it's good news for the guy who sells the clubhouse coffee. I also wonder if this isn't another good reason to expand the rosters to 26 players. Teams are carrying too many pitchers, cutting into defensive replacements and pinch hitters. A 26th man would help restore some of the maneuvering that went on in the game on the offensive side, and give the unstimulated players a rest.

It's also impressive that Bug Selig got everything he wanted in this deal. I guess a combination of players wanting steroids out of the game and fear of Congressional legislation led to Fehr caving. All in all, it hasn't been a great year for the union leadership.

AP is reporting that MLB and the MLBPA are in agreement on new penalties for testing positive. More importantly, they're including uppers.

The deal, which also adds testing for amphetamines, was described to the AP by two congressional aides on condition of anonymity because it had not been officially announced.

It looks like it will be a three strikes and you're out policy, with longer initial suspensions. I suppose someone will think this isn't tough enough either. I'm sure Jim Bunning won't rest until Henry Aaron's record is safe for eternity.

ESPN's six month investigative report on steroids in baseball is now on-line. It's well worth the read. It's told in a series of vignettes and names some new names, including Lenny Dykstra. None of it is surprising.

It also fails to tackle the real question; did steroids really make a difference? Or put another way, how much of the boom in power was caused by weight lifting alone? Also, which was closer to the truth, the estimates of use by Canseco and Caminiti, or the 11% positive tests in the minor leagues? Clearly, there were a number of players using these substances, but it's also clear there were a good many who weren't. I'd love to know where that line was drawn.

Rafael Palmeiro issued a statement today on his positive steroid test.

"Now that the House Government Reform Committee is finishing its work, I will address the facts as I have always said I wanted to do. Everything I have been working for all my life - to play the game that I love with dignity and earn the respect and admiration of my colleagues and fans - has been changed by my suspension. For this, I alone take full responsibility.

"I have never intentionally taken steroids. But I must also acknowledge that Stanozolol, a banned substance, was found in my system in May. Although I do not know how this substance came into my body, it is possible that a shot of vitamin B12 I took sometime in April might have been the cause. Under questioning by the Major League Player's Association - the player's union - I had to reveal the details of how I got the possibly tainted B12 and then had to testify about the facts of this case under oath. I have never implicated any player in the intentional use or distribution of steroids, or any other illegal substance, in any interview or testimony.

It would have been better for Palmeiro to face the press, rather than just issue a statement. The line "to play the game that I love with dignity and earn the respect and admiration of my colleagues and fans" flies in the face of years of rumors that Palmeiro wasn't such an honorable man while playing the game. My inclination is not to believe this statement by Palmeiro.

ESPN.com has a tease for ESPN The Magazine's investigative report on the history of steroid use in baseball. My only quibble with the series is that it starts too late:

The product of a six-month investigation, the "Who Knew?" special report is told in four parts, each weaving together a series of scene-driven narratives: "Steroids Meet Baseball" (1987-1994), "The Tipping Point" (1994-1998), "Busting Out" (1998-2001) and "Crash and Burn" (2002-2005).

Tom House was using steroids in the early 1970s, so starting the story in 1987 ignores earlier use. Still, I suspect it will be an interesting narrative. With luck, we'll learn something new.

Nice to see Matt Lawton not make excuses for his steroid use.

"I made a terrible and foolish mistake that I will regret for the rest of my life," Lawton said, in a statement to The Associated Press. "I take full responsibility for my actions and did not appeal my suspension. I apologize to the fans, the game, my family and all those people that I let down. I am truly sorry and deeply regret my terrible lapse in judgment."

It would be nicer to see players sticking to the rules, but it's better than blaming contamination or another player's vitamin shot.

As one person points out to me, the rumor was that the player was appealing his test. Lawton says he didn't do that. I don't think there's someone else out there based on that rumor. I just think the people who floated it got it all wrong.

Patrick Arnold was indicted today in relation to the BALCO scandal.

A federal grand jury accused Patrick Arnold of conspiring with Bay Area Laboratory-Cooperative founder Victor Conte to illegally distribute the once-undetectable substance tetrahydragestrinone.

Arnold was charged with three counts of illegally distributing performance-enhancing drugs. His attorneys say Arnold is innocent.

"Patrick Arnold is a respected chemist and researcher in the field of nutritional supplements," attorneys Nanci Clarence and Rick Collins said in a statement. "He is not guilty and will defend these charges vigorously in a court of law, not in the press. He looks forward to his day in court."

As noted earlier, Arnold isn't even a Ph.D. It's interesting that his lawyer describes him as a respected researcher. A Google Scholar search of "Patrick Arnold" Steroid (or combinations thereof) turns up no peer reviewed articles. If his lawyers don't want the man tried in the press, they shouldn't exaggerate his record.

If you're in the Boston area, here's your chance to grill Will Carroll on the steroid rumors.

NY Newsday confirms the Deadspin rumor that Matt Lawton tested positive for steroids. (Thanks to Sue at XM MLB Chat for the heads up.) Would a member of Congress please tell me which of Lawton's many records should be erased?

How many mid-level players are going to test positive before we all start to wonder if these drugs are any help at all?

My apologies to Steve Finley.

Deadspin has more information on the steroids rumor of last week. It turns out it's not someone important. I believe he wasn't even on the Yankees post-season roster. So much for rumors.

Congress is racheting up the pressure on sports and steroids:

"We have heard a lot of talk from professional sports leagues that they would do something to clean up this mess, but so far it has been just that: a lot of talk," Bunning said Tuesday during a conference call with reporters. "Hopefully Congress' action will light a fire under their feet to come to an agreement before we do it for them."

It's such a huge mess, too. Ten whole players suspended this year! What is the world coming to!

And since politicians are making the rules, they'll do their best to protect incumbents:

The new Senate proposal has a provision urging leagues to erase records achieved with the help of performance-enhancing drugs.

They can call it the Henry Aaron Record Protection Act of 2005.

Will Carroll offered me a chance to interview him about the steroid rumors, and I was more than happy to oblige. I submitted questions to Will by e-mail, and here are his replies.

Baseball Musings: You've helped confirm a rumor about an AL playoff outfielder testing positive for steroids. How did you come to have this information?

Will Carroll: This is false. I was involved in an appeals process, very tangentially. I don't know a name but have heard rumors, much as many journalists have. When Jamie asked the question, I confirmed that I had heard this rumor and due to my involvement with an appeal, I couldn't comment further. I didn't mean for this to be any confirmation.

As to my involvement, I was asked to comment on the nature of the substance, its use by players, and if I'd heard anything about the use of a certain "cocktail" of substances. There was nothing specific and I had no bearing that I know of on any hearings that may or may not have occurred. I'm certainly not an arbitrator or expert witness as some have speculated.

BM: I have heard from two sources that the player is not on the White Sox. Is this true?

WC: I don't know.

BM: When asked, "Is this a name we're actually going to care about?" by Jamie Monttram, you answered yes. Why do we care about this player?

WC: I think as baseball fans, we should care about any athlete. My perspective as someone that's followed this story as closely as anyone might be skewed a bit. If it is true that it's a playoff player, then it calls the integrity of the testing program into question and will be a media firestorm.

BM: Are we going to be surprised by the name? In other words, is it someone for whom the allegations are new?

WC: I don't know.

BM: Do you know if the drug detected is easily found in contaminated supplements?

WC: I can't comment on the actual substance, but cross-contamination of the substances that players have tested positive for this year is nearly impossible. Drugs like winstrol and the metabolites that are detected in drug tests are very specific.

BM: In your opinion, does the player have a good defense for why he tested positive?

WC: I do not know if he has any defense or what it is.

BM: When do you expect the decision to be made?

WC: I don't know. I still have a poor handle on how the process works. It appears to be much like the suspension appeals for a fight or hit batsmen - takes a while to get everyone together. The steps that the new policy calls for extends that period. It's too bad that this can't be enough of a priority to make everyone - agent, league, union - get together at the first possible opportunity.

BM: If the player is suspended, when does the suspension begin? Is it the first day of the 2006 regular season?

WC: That's consistent with the Heredia suspension, handed down recently.

Thanks, Will.

Mr. Irrelevant posts more on the latest steroid rumor, eliminating the White Sox from the mix. I have also received this same information from another source. It appears there is substance behind this rumor, as opposed to the 50 players testing positive one we heard earlier this summer.

The Lehigh Valley Yankees Fan Club will devote a segment of their Sunday Radio show to this issue, since a third of the rumored players come from their favorite team. It's a great show no matter the topic.

Mr. Irrelevant alerted me to rumors of an AL Playoff outfielder testing positive for steroids. The story starts at Deadspin, and Will Carrol confirmed it on Sports Bloggers Live:

Carroll: "I really can't talk about it right now. It should be coming out within the next two weeks."

SBL: "Is this a name we're actually going to care about?"

Carroll: "Yes."

SBL: "Is it a World Series champion?"

Carroll: "I really can't talk about it."

SBL: "I would hope not, because that might turn those White Sox black... Will, cough once if he's on the White Sox... Cough twice if it's Gary Sheffield."

Carroll: "I was involved in the appeals process so I can't comment at all."

So we know one of a dozen outfielders on one of the AL playoffs teams is in trouble. Which one?

First of all, we probably don't care about Aaron Rowand. That leaves eleven. I doubt it's Bernie Williams given his poor offensive year overall. Ten left.

Podsednik? He did have two post-season home runs after none during the regular season. Sheffield had injury trouble toward the end of the season. Maybe he needed a boost.

Vlad? Maybe the distraction of the appeal was responsible for his post-season performance. He sure didn't hit like a player on steroids. In a way, I hope it is Guerrero, because it will be another nail in the coffin of steroid use actually making a difference.

My money, however, would be on Steve Finley. I thought Finley was through after the 1998 season. He put together back-to-back years of low OBAs. He was 33, and it's not at all unusual for players to disappear from the majors at that age. But instead, he goes to Arizona, starts getting on base again, and starts hitting home runs like he never did before. He also played a long time with Ken Caminiti. Maybe, with Steve's career falling apart, he decided to seek some advice from his long time Astros/Padres teammate. It would explain a lot. Maybe he went off them this year as the drug policy got serious, but needed the extra boost when he struggled. I guess we'll know in a week or so if this speculation is correct.

I guess Barry Bonds won't be training with Greg Anderson much over the winter. Anderson, along with Victor Conte and others were sentenced in the BALCO case:

Conte, who will spend four months in prison and four months in home confinement, started the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, which, according to court records, counted dozens of prominent athletes among its clients, including Barry Bonds, Jason Giambi, Marion Jones and others. The case prompted pro sports to stiffen steroid policies and thrust performance-enhancing drugs into the spotlight. THG, a once-unknown steroid discovered in the investigation, is now banned throughout sports.

Conte pleaded guilty in July to money laundering and a steroid distribution charge; dozens of counts were dropped.

James Valente, BALCO's vice president, was sentenced to probation after pleading guilty to reduced charges of steroid distribution. Greg Anderson, Barry Bonds' trainer, was sentenced to six months after pleading guilty to money laundering and a steroid distribution charge. He must spend three months behind bars and three months in home confinement.

Anderson and Conte, who remain free on bond, are scheduled to surrender to prison authorities Dec. 1.

I wonder if Congress is going to pass a law that jails people for two years for selling steroids. It seems Congress wants to hurt the athletes more than the suppliers.

In related news, Felix Heredia was suspended for steroid use. I don't know when the test was administered, but given he's been recovering from aneurysm surgery, I wonder if he was using them to build his shoulder back to strength.

It seems that pitchers are getting caught as often as hitters. I guess PEDs are not just for sluggers anymore.

Arthur Devany publishes research to dispute the notion that steroids led to greater home run hitting. I have not had time to read through the paper, but I'll have more comments when I do. Thanks to Robert Tagorda for the link.

Carlos Almanzar was busted for testing positive for a banned substance. He's been on the DL most of year. He'll start his suspension at the start of next season. I don't know if it means anything, but 40% of the players suspended this season were relievers. It looks performance enhancers aren't just for sluggers.

And what happened to the 50 players who were about to be suspended? I'd like to know the source of this rumor, since the person obviously lied and shouldn't be trusted for future information.

It looks like the government raided the lab that produced "the clear."

BALCO founder Victor Conte and vice president James Valente identified Arnold as the source of a once-undetectable steroid called "the clear." Conte, Valente, track coach Remi Korchemny and Greg Anderson - the longtime friend and personal trainer of Giants slugger Barry Bonds - pleaded guilty to distributing steroids to elite athletes and will be sentenced next month.

Two sources with knowledge of the latest raids also told the Chronicle that the San Francisco grand jury is still hearing testimony in the BALCO case, suggesting the possibility of more indictments to come despite the four plea agreements.

A spokeswoman for the IRS would not confirm the latest raids, but Lt. Ed Ogle of the Champaign County sheriff's office told the Chronicle that deputies assisted federal authorities on a raid Thursday of Proviant Technologies, Arnold's lab in downstate Illinois. Federal agents raided the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative two years ago, carting away boxloads of documents.

Proviant doesn't seem like that large a company. And just to show how easy it is to make this stuff, Patrick Arnold isn't even a Ph.D.

Patrick Arnold received his B.S. in chemistry from the University of New Haven in 1990. While working as a synthetic-organic chemist at a major chemical company, Patrick was enrolled in graduate school programs at Montclair St. University and the University of Connecticut.

Imagine what a top-notch molecular biologist could do.

It looks like the players and owners will change the CBA again by the end of the post season.

I'm fairly floored by this. Reopening the agreement once was amazing, twice is unbelievable. Fehr must be getting lots of pressure from above and below to make this happen.

The union has countered Bud Selig's proposal for a 50 day first offense suspension with an offer of 20 days. Upcoming Congressional hearings probably moved the player's union along.

I actually like Tom Glavine's idea. Ten days for a first suspension so that if there's a mistake you don't ruin a player's career, but 100 days for the 2nd and then banishment for the third.

Rafael Palmeiro will not dress for the rest of the season.

"He won't be dressing for the rest of the year," Orioles executive vice president Jim Beattie said. "We felt it wouldn't be appropriate for the organization."

The abrupt end to Palmeiro's season came one day after it was learned that he cited a vitamin he received from teammate Miguel Tejada as possibly causing the positive steroid test. The Orioles said Major League Baseball absolved Tejada of any wrongdoing.

At this point, I find it unlikely that Palmeiro will play major league baseball again. His skill have diminished to the point where his OPS was under .800 two years in a row. Given that he's shown to be untrustworthy, I don't see another team taking a chance on him next year.

Another leak (was it the same person that named Winstrol as the abused substance?) says that Palmeiro claimed he received the steroid in a B-12 shot from Miguel Tejada.

Palmeiro testified that he received B-12 from Tejada, a person familiar with the grievance hearing said Thursday on condition of anonymity because the proceedings were secret.

"Right now I'm in shock," Tejada, a former American League MVP, said after Baltimore lost to the Yankees on Thursday night. "I've never given anybody steroids before. I've been checked out three times already, and I'm clean. I've been clean all my life."

Tejada said he gave Palmeiro the B-12 "a long time ago."

"It doesn't bother me because I'm not guilty. I've done nothing wrong. I just gave him B-12, and B-12 is legal," Tejada said. "You don't get caught for B-12."

Palmeiro's lawyer denied that the Baltimore first baseman named anyone:

Palmeiro's lawyers, Mayer, Brown, Rowe and Maw LLP, issued a statement Thursday night saying they "are disturbed about the misleading reports being leaked by unnamed sources who claim knowledge of the investigation."

"Rafael Palmeiro has never implicated any player in the intentional use or distribution of steroids, or any other illegal substance, in any interview or testimony," the statement said.

I like this idea:

Earlier this month, the Baltimore Sun reported that the House committee is uncertain whether there is enough evidence to refer the case to the Justice Department. However, the committee is considering several other options.

One scenario, officials familiar with the situation told the Sun, has the committee making the documents pertaining to Palmeiro's case public. The committee received the documents related to the first baseman's positive steroid test from Major League Baseball on Aug. 12. A document release could happen in the next two weeks and would allow the public to decide for itself about Palmeiro.

The documents include the results of Palmeiro's tests, the tests' dates and the record of secret proceedings before a three-member arbitration panel after Palmeiro appealed the results. The appeal was denied, and the documents would show how Palmeiro defended himself while not offering an explanation as to how the steroid entered his system.

When someone test positive, I'm all for letting the public know what drugs the test found and the level that caused the positive. In the case of Mike Morse, this information helped to confirm his story. Instead of wondering if a player is fibbing when he says he accidentally ingested a contaminated supplement, we'll have evidence to evaluate his claim. Maybe this can be addressed in the next CBA.

Ken Rosenthal at Fox Sports names the drugs Morse used:

Morse testified that he suffered a torn left-thigh muscle in 2000. As time passed, the muscle deteriorated to the point where the strength in his left thigh was about 50 percent of his right thigh.

In Oct. 2003, after completing Instructional League play, Morse feared his career was in jeopardy. In November and December, he took Deca Durabolin to increase the strength in his thigh muscle. In Jan. 2004, he took Winstrol to shed his excess muscle and weight. But by Feb. 1, 2004, he testified that he had stopped taking all substances.

So we can go to our handy-dandy half life chart and see if this makes sense. We see Winstrol has two different entries, one for 9 hours and one for 1 day, depending on the type of Winstrol taken. However, there is also this caveat:

Winstrol depot does not actually possess a classical half-life because it is un-esterified. Instead, the microcrystals dissolve slowly. Once they have all dissolved levels of the drug fall very rapidly. It is still an important consideration, and we have included it with a half-life of one day.

Could they be dissolving very, very slowly in Morse? The other steroid, Deca-durabolin has a long half-life of 15 days. I'm not sure when the test was administered, but let's say May for the sake of argument. That means 16 months went by since his last use of Deca-durabolin. That's 32 half-life phases, so there should be 1/2^32 the orginial amount in his body. In other words, it should be about 4 billion times lower. That's a pretty sensitive test MLB is using to detect that drug.

This site indicates Deca is likely culprit here.

During competi-tions with doping tests Deca must not be taken since the metabo-lites in the body can be proven in a urine analysis up to 18 months later.

So there you have it. Morse's story holds water. It also shows why a punitive suspension for a first time offense is dangerous. Here's a very low level of year-old drug use being detected. He's not an abuser. He's not juicing up to hit home runs. The anonymous slap on the wrist of the old system would be just fine here.

I hope the MLBPA continues to resist the idea of a two-year suspension for first time offenders. And when the CBA negotiations start again, I hope both sides adjust the rules for players like Morse.

Seattle shortstop Mike Morse was suspended today for steroid use.

An apologetic Morse said in a statement the positive steroid test was a result of trace amounts of the drug lingering in his system from "an enormous mistake" he made in November 2003 while in the minor leagues.

"This positive test was due to the fact there were still some remnants of the steroid left in my system from the 2003 off season," he said.

Morse said he took steroids in 2003 after tearing his thigh muscle. He was suspended under the minor league policy in May 2004 and "promised never to make the same mistake again."

Again, since we don't know the drug, there's no way of knowing if it could really last in a player's system for two years. If anyone has any information about this, please post a comment.

This also vindicates the commissioner's office. When there were rumors of lots of positive tests out there, MLB said that there was one player who was in the appeal process. Now we know who and why, and that the rumors appear to be false.

Update: Here's a link to a list of steroid half-lives. The longest I see on that list is 18 days. That means that after a year of not taking the drug, you should have 1/2^20 of the original in your system, or 1/1,048,576 of the dose. Either he took a huge dose two years ago, the steroid he took isn't on the list, or he's not telling the full truth.

Update: Much more here at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer:

Michael Weiner, the general counsel of the Major League Baseball Players Association, argued the case in front of the board. In a statement released Wednesday, Weiner was as unhappy as Morse and Levinson that Morse is being hit with another suspension.

"With respect, we believe this result is unfair and unfortunate," Weiner said in the statement. "It punishes Michael Morse again for conduct for which he has already been punished.

"At the hearing, Morse candidly admitted he had used steroids following the 2003 season, when he was a minor league player, but also testified he had not used steroids since. Morse tested positive and was suspended twice during 2004.

"Although he tested positive again in 2005 under the Major League program, it was for the same substance and at an extremely low level, a level which would give Morse no competitive advantage, and the Panel believed that the positive test was a result of Morse's prior use."

I find that fascinating. From my reading of papers on testing in general, you would need a fairly high level of a substance to test positive, since the testing wants to avoid false positives. I'd love to know what drug he took, and why it's taking so long to get out of his system.

Jason Giambi hit a home run off Ryan Franklin tonight. How do you count that? Do we wipe that off the records, or are home runs hit by a steroid hitter good if they come off a steroid pitcher?

David Wells agrees that Palmeiro's records should be erased.

Wells also offered his take on Rafael Palmeiro, saying a lie detector test may be the best method to show when the Baltimore Orioles first baseman used steroids. He said Palmeiro's accomplishments should be removed from baseball's record books if he used them for a while.

"The best way to solve it is probably a lie detector test and put him on it and say, 'How long have you been doing it, when did you take them, for what part of your career?"' Wells said.

"If he's been doing it a while, then go ahead and erase (his accomplishments). It's a shame to do it, but you know you have to do it."

In Juicing the Game, I thought he made sense. On page 302 of the book, Bryant describes Wells as believing "steroid use in baseball represented nothing more than a kind of Darwinism." I guess that Wells changed his mind.

First Frank Robinson and now Curt Schilling are saying that Palmeiro's stats should not count.

One day after Washington Nationals manager Frank Robinson said Rafael Palmeiro's records should be erased because of his failed drug test, Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling told Boston WEEI radio's Dennis & Callahan show on Wednesday he agreed.

When asked if he would just erase the statistics, Schilling said:

"Yeah. I read something the other day about his career, his career numbers and how a lot of his career numbers coincide with certain dates and he obviously sat next to me in Washington [before Congress] and lied, so I don't know there's any way to prove that anything he did was not under the influence of performance-enhancing drugs."

Of course, Schilling had to change his tune in front of Congress, too. The Congressmen asked him about his public statements on widespread steroid use:

Now Schilling is saying he grossly overstated the problem. He says he had suspicions, but he never knew that players were actually using.

What, by the way, are we erasing the statistics from? Does Palmeiro not get an Encyclopedia entry? Are they deducted from the Texas Rangers stats? Do we take wins away from the Baltimore Orioles? Do the pitchers who faced him get their ERAs lowered? The stats are there. They happened. You can't erase them. The best you can do is remove him from official lists of leaders. I wish people who said things like this actually thought about what it meant.

I find this article disturbing.

Jason Giambi has learned to live without having his personal trainer, Bobby Alejo, at the ballpark. Now he has to get by without him altogether.

Alejo, who left his job as the Athletics' strength coach to join Giambi in New York after the 2001 season, is taking a job as the head strength coach for all 18 sports at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He ended his final trip with the Yankees on Sunday, and he starts his new job Sept. 1.

Now, if I were a parent, would I want someone who was involved so closely with steroid using players (McGwire, Giambi) to be responsible for my 18-year-old's conditioning? Alejo was strength coach for the Athletics from 1993 until Giambi left for New York, then followed Jason east. Did he really not know what was going on under his nose? If steroid abuse happens at UC Santa Barbara, is he going to ignore it?

One of the big reasons sited for being tough on steroid abuse is to protect young people. I suppose Alejo has plausible deniability when it comes to the players he coached, but I would not want Bobby Alejo in charge of my child's conditioning, and I would write a letter to the UCSB athletic department telling them so.

I pretty much agree with this article by Nick Gillespie.

What about player safety? There's little doubt that, like most drugs, steroids can be used responsibly. As Charles Yesalis, a Penn State epidemiologist and steroid expert, has put it, "We know steroids can be used with a reasonable measure of safety." Yesalis, author of The Steroids Game, also pooh-poohs poorly documented tales of "'roid rage," noting, "What's perhaps just the intensity that's common to many athletes gets perceived as steroid-linked outbursts." In fact, if player safety is an issue, then it makes more sense to make steroid use fully legal and above ground. Whether we're talking about booze in the '20s or Dianabol in the locker rooms of today, prohibition creates or intensifies all sorts of safety issues by stymieing the flow of information and creating impediments to treatment. If steroids were used in the light of day, players and owners alike would be far more likely to regulate their use in their longer-term interests.

Two very different looks at Jason Giambi today in the New York newspapers. Mike Lupica takes the negative side for the Daily News:

You want to know the high cost of steroid use? Jason Giambi is the high cost, even if he never serves one of those 10-game suspensions, even if he never loses a day of salary because of a positive drug test. Giambi is the high cost of steroids because even when he is hitting the ball the way he is hitting the ball now, which is the way he used to, he is still a suspect.

Tyler Kepner presents the positive side of the Giambi saga in the New York Times:

And Giambi, improbably, is not a distraction anymore. In a year of unrest for the Yankees and for baseball, Giambi is their renewed slugger, swatting game-winning home runs the way he used to, reaching base at a higher rate than any other hitter in the major leagues.

Unlike the other prominent players linked to baseball's steroid scandal, it is Giambi who has emerged as the game's most redemptive story. Barry Bonds has been injured all season. The retired Mark McGwire, Giambi's mentor, broke down in tears before Congress in March. Sammy Sosa is a shadow of himself. Rafael Palmeiro, who pointed his finger at Congress and swore he had always been clean, was suspended this week for failing a drug test.

Kepner also points out something that I didn't know:

Giambi is aware of the perception that he developed the tumor because of steroids. The Chronicle story said that Giambi might have taken Clomid, the female fertility drug, and that medical experts had told the paper that Clomid can exacerbate a pituitary tumor.

But Giambi said doctors had assured him he had done nothing to bring the tumor on himself.

"They said, 'You get this,' " Giambi said. "You don't develop this. Everybody wants to try to associate something, but it doesn't do anything like that. You just have it. And as you get older, it gets bigger and bigger and it grows, and before you know it, it starts shutting down certain points."

Dr. Gary I. Wadler, a New York University medical professor and a member of the World Anti-Doping Agency, essentially supported that claim.

"I'm not aware of human growth hormone causing a tumor of the pituitary," Wadler said in a telephone interview. "I don't see how using performance-enhancing drugs could be related to developing a pituitary tumor. People develop pituitary tumors because they have pituitary tumors."

To me, the tumor was a big reason for Jason not to go back on steroids. If you were to ask me, "Is Giambi on steroids?" I would have said no, he won't risk making the tumor worse. But now I don't know.

Drugs abusers in general find kicking the habit very difficult. One reason is that drugs make them feel really good. As Lupica points out:

So here we are with Giambi, taking it all on faith. But then hasn't that always been the case with him? We took it on faith that he was apologizing for steroids, even though he never did. We took it on faith once that he had lost only a few pounds between the end of the 2003 season and the beginning of the 2004 season, even if he looked like a wide receiver after all the years when he looked like a tight end. We were supposed to take it on faith that he had some kind of benign tumor, even though he couldn't tell us what kind.

I'd like to think Giambi got back to this point through hard work. I'd like to hold him up as an example of what you can do without steroids. But I also have no reason to dismiss speculation that Jason may be enhancing his physique again. I can believe that he missed the boost he got from steroids, just as the abuser of a recreational drug would miss the high. The main thing in Giambi's favor right now is that he hasn't tested positive.

Polling Point is conducting a poll on the steroid scandal. The readers of this blog are welcome to fill out the survey here.

The Baltimore Sun has more on the Palmeiro scandal, including the time line for the suspension.

As part of baseball's new drug policy, players are randomly tested and the urine is divided into two samples, A and B.

The lab first tests part of the A sample. If it comes up positive for steroids, the rest of that sample is tested. If that is also positive, Major League Baseball, the players union and the player are informed.

The player has the option of asking that sample B be tested. Also, the player can challenge the test with baseball's four-person Health Policy Advisory Committee, made up of a union representative, a baseball representative and two doctors.

If any one of the four decides that the challenge has merit, it is forwarded to a three-person arbitration panel consisting of a baseball lawyer, a union lawyer and an independent arbitrator.

Conspiracy theorists have floated the rumor that MLB kept the test result quiet to allow Palmeiro to get his 3000th hit. That theory may have some substance:

Palmeiro challenged his drug test and won the right to plead his case before the panel. He wasn't the only one of the first seven suspended players to make such a challenge but was the first to receive a hearing.

Since then, Seattle Mariners pitcher Ryan Franklin also has received a hearing. It was announced yesterday that Franklin was also suspended for 10 days, becoming the eighth player found to have violated baseball's drug policy.

So Palmeiro tested positive for this drug:

"If it's stanozolol, this was a deliberate act," said Gary Wadler, a Long Island doctor who is one of the world's foremost authorities on steroids. "The likelihood of sabotage is remote and improbable, and to suggest as much would be to send people on a wild goose chase."

A drug that's difficult to take by accident, and he's the first to get an appeal? What did they do, give Franklin an appeal just so they didn't seem like they were playing favorites?

To paraphrase one of Palmeiro's fellow Cubans, lots of people "got some 'splainin' to do."

I guess not everyone involved in the MLB drug testing program respects the confidentiality agreement:

The person who said that Palmeiro tested positive for stanozolol did not want to be identified because the testing policy prohibits anyone in baseball from disclosing information about test results without authorization.

Then again, they were probably fairly disgusted by Palmeiro's statements:

Palmeiro said Monday that he had never intentionally taken steroids, but stanozolol does not come in dietary supplements and is among the most popular steroids on the market. It can be ingested or injected and usually remains in a person's system for at least a month.

"It's a mildly strong to strong steroid," said Dr. Gary Wadler, a professor at New York University who is an expert in sports doping. "Potent is the word I would use."

So now we know why Palmeiro wouldn't reveal the results of his test. The substance found indicates intentional, rather than unintentional use.

So things start to make sense. Palmeiro test positive for stanozolol. He goes to arbitration, and the arbitrator wants to know how he accidentally ingests this substance. Palmeiro can't explain it. This drug doesn't appear in supplements. MLB can't release the information, so everyone spins it as Raffy's an honest man who just couldn't prove he made a mistake. There's room for the benefit of the doubt for the man who just crossed the 3000 hit barrier.

Somebody didn't like the charade, and blew the whistle. I'd say the chance that Jose Canseco was correct in this book about Palmeiro just got very close to 100%.

And while it's good to know what's going on, I can't condone the whistle blower. It's quite possible that whoever was the source for this story did much more harm than good. The MLBPA and the owners had an agreement. They reopened the CBA to put a tougher policy in place. Part of the agreement was secrecy about the substances found. Now, I would prefer to see the results made public, but that's something that has to be won by the owners in collective bargaining.

The union and the players are likely pretty upset right now. They have another reason not to trust management. Selig wants an even tougher policy, but MLB can't even stick to the rules of the current regimen. Why would players give them anything else now? In fact, if I'm the union, I use this leak to get the players to remove testing all together in the next CBA. Fehr argued for years that privacy trumped testing. Now he has a concrete reason to back that up.

Update: Trent McBride offers this clarification of the word potent:

With regard to Dr. waller's statement that Palmeiro's steroid was "potent": As the word is used in pharmacology, potency speaks to the amount of a drug needed to reach its maximum effect, whereas the maximum effect, or efficacy, can be large of small. In other words, the strength of a drug, it smaximum possible effect is independent of its potency. A drug can be very potent, while at the same time have a very weak effect. This is a common mistake made in the lay press (usually involving illegal substances of all kinds) and I like to point it out whenever I see it.

From the context of his statement, Dr. Waller seems to
be trying to say that Palmeiro's steroid has a large effect. However, he technically misused scientific terms that have precise definitions, and so I think this undermines his credibility and expertise to some extent.

I'll just point out that before he uses the word potent, Dr. Wadler does describe the drug as strong, which I take it to mean the maximum effect.

Here's a roundup of all the reasons athletes give for testing positive for drugs.

Ryan Franklin at least has an explanation for why he tested positive:

Franklin would not discuss what he tested positive for. But he did say that he took supplements he bought at a nutrition store. Franklin said he gave up all supplements after the positive test. After that, he said he tested negative.

"I'll never take [supplements] again. ... I won't even take a vitamin until I'm done with baseball," he said. "I hate what's happened for the organization, for me, and my family. I'm done with taking anything."

Exactly. Why anyone is taking supplements any more is beyond me.

If this story is true, it also shows the danger of giving out a huge suspension for a first offense. Ten days is bad enough if you're in a pennant race, but 50 days for taking a contaminated supplement seems excessive.

There is a report on ESPN.com that Ryan Franklin will be suspended for testing positive for a banned substance. The story has not been confirmed by MLB.

Update: I find this from a two-day old Jim Moore article of interest:

And enough already with showering affection on Ryan Franklin, another nice guy and decent golfer. Even if I were Yao Ming, I would have had it up to here with stories about Franklin's blue-collar grittiness and lack of run support and quotes of "ya know with Ryan, you'll get everything he has."

Everything he has is just not good enough -- his 10-27 record and 4.75 ERA the past two years reflect as much. Like Pineiro, he's overpaid at $2.4 million.

I guess Moore won't be hearing those stories any more, but not for the reason he hoped. It's also another example of a marginal player being caught. There's not evidence in his record that cheating made Franklin a better player, unless he started using them at the start of June. He's allowed four home runs the last two months after allowing 13 in April and May.

Jayson Stark is going to vote for Rafael Palmeiro for the Hall of Fame when his name appears on the ballot.

As time goes by, and we become removed from the emotions of the day, I think Stark's arguments will win out. However, I do believe Palmeiro won't make it on the first ballot.

When I was young, getting in on the first ballot was a big deal. Sports writers seemed to divide the god-like from the merely great with a first ballot election. So Mickey Mantle got in on the first ballot, but Yogi Berra did not. It's never been clear to me why they had this distinction. If you're a Hall of Famer, you're a Hall of Famer. A player's stats don't change. His record of being a good guy or not doesn't change.

It seems writers still believe this makes a difference, even though most candidates seem to get in on the first ballot now. Last I looked, you can't tell by the way the plaques are arranged who got in on the first ballot, who got in on the tenth ballot, and who got in through the veterans committee. It likely won't matter to Palmeiro.

John Lopez of the Houston Chronicle notes how Palmeiro's positive test will taint denials of drug use by other players.

Today, the consequences of Palmeiro uttering those words, playing fans and members of Congress for fools, should infuriate every fan of the game.

But it should infuriate no one more than players whose similar denials will be met with skepticism.

Yes, that includes Jeff Bagwell. That includes players such as the Diamondbacks' Luis Gonzalez and Shawn Green, Detroit's Ivan Rodriguez and anyone else who ever has bulked up, seen home run numbers soar, then stood in front of reporters to state it clearly.

No. Never.

I thought I'd collect links to what various bloggers are saying about the Palmeiro suspension.

Negative:
Athletics Nation feels they owe an apology to Canseco.

Coalition of the Darkside is convinced of Palmeiro's guilt.

Humbug Journal says it with poetry.

The Juice Blog apologizes to Jose Canseco.

Neutral:
Will Carroll tries to answer questions about the test and suspension.

Orioles Warehouse asks a lot of questions.

Was Watching wonders what Palmeiro's test will make people think about Jason Giambi.

Forgiving:
Balls, Sticks and Stuff thinks the positive has something to do with Viagra. I think Viagra just shows he's not opposed to all performance enhancers.

Other:
Yard Work gets help from Ari Fleischer.

LyfLines wrote an excellent piece about steroids back in April. Given today's events, it's worth the read if you haven't seen it before.

It it possible that Palmeiro was caught by a new test? For example, growth hormone is on the list of banned substances, but there's no test for it. I wouldn't be surprised if other substances were in that category. But I remember during an Olympics a number of athletes were caught because they didn't know a test had been developed for a particular doping agent. Could something like that have happened here? Or maybe a more sensitive test for an existing drug?

Don't laugh too much, it may come to his someday:

“In concert with our new, stricter policy on performance-enhancers, we have determined that the Breakfast of Champions is giving some players an unfair advantage,” said Selig. “I mean, come on, have you seen how many B Vitamins are in that stuff? It’s ridiculous. And don’t even get me started on Folic Acid. That goes right to your biceps.”

Thanks to Jason for the link.

Rafael Palmeiro was suspended for 10 games today for banned substance use.

Palmeiro during the highly publicized March 17 hearing on steroids conducted by the House of Representatives Government Reform Committee said, under oath, he'd never used steroids even though former Texas Rangers teammate Jose Canseco said otherwise in his book, Juiced.

Palmeiro's statement: "Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Rafael Palmeiro and I am a professional baseball player. I'll be brief in my remarks today. Let me start by telling you this: I have never used steroids. Period. I don't know how to say it any more clearly than that. Never. The reference to me in Mr. Canseco's book is absolutely false. I am against the use of steroids. I don't think athletes should use steroids and I don't think our kids should use them. That point of view is one, unfortunately, that is not shared by our former colleague, Jose Canseco. Mr. Canseco is an unashamed advocate for increased steroid use by all athletes."

Oops. I can't say I'm surprised. I heard negative character stories about Palmeiro during my tenure at ESPN, but as they were all second hand, I took them with a grain of salt. It's of course possible that this is a false positive, but at this point I'd say the odds are pretty high that he lied to Congress.

Thanks to Scott Milholm for the heads up.

Correction: I should not have jumped to conclusions saying it was steroids. It was something on the banned list, but we don't know what it is.

Update: Here's Palmeiro's statement, which he'll read in an upcoming conference call. Basically, he said he didn't take the substance intentionally, but he couldn't prove that to the arbitrator.

Update: Welcome everyone from AOL! Thanks to AOL Sports News for the link.

Chris Wavrin at CommentaryPage.com notes a scandal in Taiwan. It seems players and bookies are conspiring to throw games.

I understand why an individual would want to fix a game. A big bet on an underdog would lead to a big payoff. I don't understand why bookies would want to fix games. Bookies make their money by setting odds that cause people to bet evenly on the favorite and the underdog, and make a profit by taking a small percentage of the bet, say by paying out 99 cents for every dollar won. As long as the odds are set correctly, they shouldn't care who wins or loses.

Two stories of interest involving the BALCO scandal and Barry's knee. Reports are that Victor Conte is copping a plea. My guess is that others will follow, which means we're not likely to see ballplayers testify publicly about what Conte did or didn't give them.

Meanwhile Bonds seems pretty pessimistic about returning to action this season (you can find video of an interview with him at the link as well). I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if Bonds doesn't return this season he's not going to break Aaron's record. I know Bonds has incredible skills, but a year away from baseball at his age is going to erode those skills. Does anyone believe he'll be able to play the outfield again? Is he even going to be able to run the bases?

His knees are bad. That is going to hurt every aspect of his game. He's a DH at best from here on out. I'm sure some AL team will be willing to pay him to hit home runs and walk to first, but it's not clear he'll be able to do the first part of that. How are fans going to react when he can't run fast enough to get a double on a ball in the gap? Or score from second on a single?

It's amazing. After 1998, McGwire looked like he had a good shot at Aaron. He never got to 600. After four straight 60+ seasons, Sosa looked like he'd catch Aaron. Now he's unproductive and is having problems reaching 600. Bonds put together an unbelievable end to his career, and Aaron seemed like just a matter of time. Now Barry may not even catch Ruth. I'm pretty sure that someone playing today will top 755, but it's an awfully steep mountain to climb.

From reader Jason Rennie, Todd Jones discusses what is and isn't considered cheating among the players in major league baseball. I found this section interesting:

I've been around pitching coaches who teach how to scuff or use pine tar. There's actually an art to scuffing, and there are two fatal errors guys make. The first: They scuff too often. To get away with scuffing, you have to know when to do it. Coaches and older players who have been around a long time know when they see a scuffed ball. So you have to pick your spots. You use it when it's a big part of the game and hope to take advantage of the small window of opportunity before the other team is tipped off. The umpire usually doesn't check the pitcher until the opposing manager asks him to.

That seems realistic. There's some probabilistic model to getting caught. The probability of getting caught is low, but if you cheat too often, the probability is that you'll eventually get caught.

Brendan Donnelly received a 10-day suspension for his pine tar infraction. Congress will now launch an investigation to determine if the penalty was too lenient.

Brendan Donnelly says he used the pine tar for a better grip.

Donnelly's glove has been sent to the Commissioner's office, which will determine any discipline.

Donnelly, who said he has used pine tar to better grip the ball, rather than doctor it, had a new glove Wednesday.

Like that's innocent? I would think giving the pitcher a better grip is one of the reasons pine tar is illegal.

Frank Robinson caught Brendan Donnelly with pine tar on his glove, and Donnelly was properly ejected. Scioscia then goes over to tell off Frank Robinson, and the benches cleared. No punches were thrown, but, Jose Guillen needed to be restrained.

According to the AP story, Scioscia told Robinson he was going to check his pitchers:

Robinson, a former vice president of discipline for the major leagues, said Donnelly simply got caught cheating and Scioscia was "way off base."

"He took me by surprise when he came over to me and I took it as a threat," Robinson said. "He told me that he was going to have every one of my pitchers undressed when they came out there to the mound -- no matter who it was."

Said Scioscia: "I told Frank we were going to undress his pitchers when they were on the mound to see if they had any pine tar in their glove. He obviously wasn't happy. He was screaming. We weren't making a lunch date."

Mike, your pitcher got caught cheating. You should be upset with him. Instead, you fired up the Nationals and your good friend Jose Guillen hurt your cause with a home run. Your team was winning at that point, then lost the game. You should have chewed Donnelly out instead of making statements like this:

Scioscia acknowledged that the use of pine tar is against the rules, but said it is "used around baseball," doesn't alter the flight of the ball and usually isn't an issue.

Sure it doesn't. And I'm sure it keeps the ball sparkling clean, too. Robinson deserves an apology.

Update: A reader notes in the comments that Donnelly was caught with a spare ball in his pocket against the Red Sox. That seems more suspicious now.

John McCain wants to create a federal bureaucracy to handle drug testing.

"It's obvious that a vital component of this whole business is who does the testing," McCain said. "If it's not USADA, then clearly it has to be an organization that is entirely credible. And USADA seems to me to be a likely candidate for that."

He was the only senator present for most of Tuesday's Commerce Committee hearing on a bill that would authorize funding for USADA, starting at $9.5 million in 2006 and rising to $11.1 million in 2010.

This is a waste of tax payer dollars. Does anyone think that there is really a majority of voters who want to spend money cleaning up professional sports? Let the leagues take care of this themselves. If the fans don't like what's happening, they'll stay away.

Freakonomics looks for the source of the name "Black Sox" and finds the dry cleaning story lacking in substance.

Jim Lampley has found the perfect solution to steroid use: Let's live in a police state!

In China, sports authorities determined after the disqualification of the women's swim team at the 1992 World Championships that they wanted to be on the clean side of this controversy. So these days in China if a state-supported athlete tests positive for an Olympics-banned substance they face a fine and a jail term. The second positive test brings a lifetime ban. When the Chinese try to win the medal count from us at the 2008 Beijing Olympics, they will be competing cleanly. Will we?

While we're at it, let's have the government kidnap talented children and force them to do nothing but train for their sport for the rest of their young lives. And forgive me if I'm skeptical of claims of the Chinese being clean. I find it hard to believe that a country that will go to the extent they do to train world class athletes would refrain from using drugs. They may not be using substances banned by the Olympics, but does anyone really think their not trying to develop other, undetectable substances? The biochemists are always ahead of the detectives.

Dave Fairbank:

Regardless of objections, Congress is moving on drug-policy legislation, full pee ahead.

Please read the whole thing.

Via Instapundit, Ron Bailey reports on a talk by Anjan Chatterjee on neuro performance enhancing drugs. I found this interesting:

The executive's son seems to be handling the divorce all right and has thrown himself into high school sports. He is a talented middle distance runner who can compete at the county level, but isn't quite good enough to compete at the state level. However, the executive's physician can offer his son Viagra, which not only corrects erectile dysfunction (presumably not a problem in an adolescent male) but also is known to boost the lungs' capacity to absorb oxygen, which might augment his running performance just enough for him to get a college athletic scholarship.

And I thought Rafael Palmeiro was taking it for the sex.

The article points out that about 1/2 the people polled think that same performance enhancers are okay to take, the other half consider them cheating.

What sets the stage for social and political conflict over enhancement technologies is that people on both sides in the poll were completely convinced that their view would be shared by everybody.

We're seeing the same thing in the debate about steroids. The comments I've gotten on steroid use show that many people are not willing to debate the subject. What is clear is that this debate is moving out of muscle and into the mind.

Jere Longman of the New York Times writes one of the more well researched pieces on steroid use I've seen. He's debunking the myth that steroid use was purely the slugger's domain:

Two of the five players suspended from major league rosters for steroid offenses this spring were pitchers, as were 29 of the 63 players who failed more stringent testing in the minor leagues.

This revealing portrait - 31 of 68 suspended players being pitchers - has emerged because baseball has begun suspending and naming major leaguers for first-time steroid violations and has begun publicizing the names of transgressors in the minor leagues, where suspensions have been levied since 2002.

"I think at the heart of the issue is, everybody is always seeking a competitive edge," said Tony La Russa, manager of the St. Louis Cardinals. "It just doesn't mean pitchers or hitters. If that gives you an edge, then everybody is going to seek to do it. So it probably shouldn't surprise anybody."

The reasons for pitchers using the drugs aren't clear yet. In general, many players aren't using them to bulk up.

Boston reliever Mike Timlin, who has pitched for six teams in a 15-year major league career, theorized that pitchers used steroids "more for recovery and longevity rather than just all-out strength."

"It's kind of blown out of proportion, even with hitters," Timlin said. "Hitters are not looking for all-out strength or size. What they're looking for is to have a regular amount of strength day in and day out. That's why they take it. That's why pitchers take it."

And finally, someone admits that we really don't know how steriods increase strength:

Although steroids and growth hormone are believed by many to facilitate recovery, allowing athletes to train more frequently over longer periods with greater intensity, scientists said the process was not well understood.

"It's tough to get rats to bench press or throw a fastball," said Yesalis, the steroids expert.

Alfonso Soriano believes the language barrier is the reason Spanish speaking players are testing positive for steroids.

"I can assure you that the guys who tested positive did so because they didn't know the rules and that none of them took steroids, but substances like caffeine that were legal before. I don't know if they still are," Soriano said.

This is very interesting. One way players could clear this up is to make public the positive substance.

Rob Manfred, baseball's executive vice president for labor relations, has indicated that there are programs in English and Spanish designed to educate players about the league's anti-doping policies, a claim Soriano questions.

"Since I arrived in the majors with the Yankees, nobody has told me anything in Spanish," he said.

Cleveland catcher Víctor Martínez, who is from Venezuela, said he believes adhering to policies is the responsibility of the player, although instruction in Spanish would help.

"That problem [doping] has always been around, but few took the time to learn the rules, be it because of a language barrier or a lack of interest," Martínez said. "The ideal thing would be for all teams to have bilingual trainers and coaches, but that would be hard to accomplish."

There have been Spanish speaking players in the majors since I've been watching the game, well over 30 years. It shouldn't be that difficult for teams to find Spanish speaking coaches. With the number of Latin American players in the majors, it seems it's almost a necessity to have someone who can communicate with the players.

Tom House blows the whistle on steroid use in the 1960's and 1970's. The records from those eras aren't so sacred after all. But here's the most interesting quote:

House said he gained almost 30 pounds while using steroids, blaming the extra weight for contributing to knee problems. He said the drugs helped improve recovery time and conditioning but did not add velocity to his fastball.

"I tried everything known to man to improve my fastball, and it still didn't go faster than 82 miles per hour," House said. "I was a failed experiment."

Pitchers should have told management they were recovering faster. Maybe we could have avoided the five-man rotation.

I just got back from spending the afternoon with my good friend Jim Storer. Today he and his wife went to court to finalize the adoption of their baby after their first year parenting her. It was a lovely ceremony and they had a wonderful reception afterward. Congratulations to Jim and Linda and their beautiful child.

The day wasn't so good for Juan Rincon. He becomes the latest casualty of the drug testing policy. Rincon did have a big jump in strikeouts in 2004; was it a new pitch, maturity, or help building his muscles with banned substances?

One thing I didn't realize is that suspended players can be replaced on the roster:

General manager Terry Ryan acknowledged that he was notified about Rincon's positive test and said right-hander Scott Baker, one of the organization's top prospects, would be recalled from Triple-A Rochester to fill the roster spot. Ryan declined to comment further.

Rather than make the suspension some longer time, I'd penalize teams more by not allowing them to replace the suspended players. Then, not only is the player losing money, but the rest of the team is really upset at him.

Update: Just to add a little information, the data I have from Baseball Info Solutions show Rincon's fastball averaged 91.3 MPH in 2002, 92.9 MPH in 2003 and 93.2 in 2004.

Update: The suspension has left BatGirl sassless. And Andrew Koch notes that Rincon had more win shares last year than all other suspended major leaguers combined.

Here's another reason we don't know if someone who tests clean really is clean.

Jorge Piedra was suspended today for steroid use. Now here's a player who's stats make him look guilty. He showed little power through the first half of 2002, but start slugging when he was sent back to A ball. Of course, he was in AAA in Colorado Spring last year, which I guess is a pretty good hitters park.

It appears Barry Bonds is still working out with Greg Anderson. I don't know whether to admire Bonds for sticking with a friend through a crisis or to marvel at Bonds over his stupidity. Giambi's story about how Anderson tested for steroids behind Jason's back shows how sleazy the man is. It's one thing to stay loyal to a friend; it's another to stay loyal to a man who used your name to help others break the rules of the game.

Web Surveryor wants to know what you think about steroids in baseball. You can fill out their survery here:

Steroids in Baseball Online Survey

Results are updated in real time and posted at:

Steroids in Baseball Online Survey Results

Full disclosure -- Baseball Musings will win a prize if it has the most referrals.

Baseball Widow asks all the right questions about the Alex Sanchez suspension.

Thirty eight minor league players were suspended today for steroid use. Looking at the list, I get the idea that this is a Western team problem. Could that be right, or have they only tested the western teams so far? There were no players suspended from NL East or AL East affiliates. Are the east coast teams doing a better job of keeping their players clean? Or are those players just better at masking their use?

Update: It looks like this set of tests was conducted in Arizona. With 925 tests, that's a four percent positive rate. These test have been going on for a few years now. I would have thought they would have reached a lower rate of positive test by now, given the positive levels we're seeing in the majors. Looks like the risk/reward is such that minor leaguers are more likely to try to get away with the drugs.

Alex Sanchez became the first victim of Major League Baseball's drug testing policy. He has been suspended for 10 games starting tomorrow with opening day. Sanchez denies use:

Sanchez said he was surprised by the suspension, adding that he uses milkshakes and multivitamins to build his energy -- and blaming the positive test on something he bought over the counter.

"I'm going to fight it, because I've never taken steroids or anything like that," said Sanchez, who was released by Detroit in mid-March and signed by the Devil Rays.

If taking steroids get you released by Detroit and signed by Tampa Bay, that's a good reason not to take them. :-) Sanchez's explanation follows Dr. Pellman's testimony to Congress:

12:34 PM EST. Dr. Elliot Pellman is addressing the two year ban. He's saying that a lot of positive tests come from accidental ingestion of contaminated supplements. He's saying that's why a first positive shouldn't lead to a long term ban, and he thinks that the MLB program compares favorably to the NFL's program. Finally someone is talking sense.

So we have a part time player testing positive who claims it was accidental ingestion. We don't know what came up positive. And because we don't know the substance, we can't evaluate the probability of a false positive, or the probability of a supplement being contaminated. You see here the advantage of the old policy. A first positive was kept quiet so if it was contaminated supplements, the player could stop taking them and be free from taint. Now, no matter how Sanchez came to be positive, he'll be branded as a cheater.

The New York Times has found errors and exaggerations in Dr. Elliot Pellman's resume. Dr. Pellman is the medical adviser for Major League Baseball and testified before the house committee two weeks ago. I found him one of the more interesting witnesses.

It's another case of baseball not being careful with what it sent to Congress. As much as I was against the hearings, they did serve a useful purpose in exposing the fine language. Whether is was baseball's intention or not, it sure looked like they were sticking a loophole in the contract. Now, the one person they send to testify on their behalf, who came across as reasonable and credible to me, has his integrity called into question. It wasn't a good day for building trust on the part of the lords of baseball.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Jayson Stark tries to look into the future to see how the war on steroids will effect performance on the field. I thought this was interesting:

Cashman says he believes steroid use is currently so low – if not nearly nonexistent – that it's more of a worry in evaluating potential draft picks (who have never been tested) than it is in judging big leaguers. And he isn't alone in that belief.

A middle-market NL GM says his team has spent very little time worrying about this because "we're down to one percent that are using it. That's what they're telling us – that last year it was one percent."

Asked whether he believed that figure – since Congress and the public clearly don't – he replied: "I do."

True, it might be in his best interest to spin the best possible light on this issue. But this is one of baseball's most down-to-earth general managers – a man not normally known for spewing excessive baloney. And the fact is, a number of his fellow GMs clearly agree with him.

One AL GM says the state of the current scandal has been "overblown, without a doubt" – and "it's also revisionist history."

"The peak of usage, in my opinion, was five to seven years ago," he says. "And there has been a steady decline since then."

Many GMs believe the minor-league testing program has had a major impact – both on young players and on the fringe players who used to be especially tempted to use steroids. And now, the theory goes, the major-league program – and fear of public humiliation – has all but finished the job.

So don't look for a big change in overall offense. The change appears to be in individuals; we haven't seen a big home run season since Bonds hit 73. Testing at both the minor and major league level appears to be having the desired effect.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Lots of speculation about how quickly Barry Bonds can recover from his knee operation, and even more about if he wants to come back.

On the knee:

Bonds had surgery on his right knee on Jan. 31, then banged it into a table at SBC Park; he had another operation on the same knee last week in San Francisco. Conte was relieved afterward because he said that Bonds's long-term prognosis was promising.

"It's not a matter of if he'll play again," Conte said. "It's a matter of when."

On any return:

What awaits Bonds now is anyone's guess. A month ago, you had to give $10 to win $1 on a "can-he-catch-Hank Aaron'' bet. Now, even Babe Ruth seems far away.

Besides, the home run records are now an afterthought. The specter of Bonds in the dock is just as compelling.

This story has grown so many tentacles that it often seems in danger of strangling itself. Tuesday's developments make it more tangled still. Every day there are more members of the "everybody" class, and fewer buffers between Bonds and a hard, cruel world that may get even harder and crueler.

This isn't the endgame, but you can see it from here.

Being a jerk is a big part of what brought Barry Bonds to this point. Unfortunately, it's also part of what made him the great player. The supercompetitiveness could not be left on the field. He wanted his opponents to hate him. His clubhouse perks set him apart from his teammates. He wouldn't tolerate the press. What's left is a reservoir of goodwill that could fill a thimble.

So when the feces hit the fan, there was no one to back up Bonds. After Sunday's revelations, I doubt he's getting much support from his family. Bill James would often write in his Abstracts that every strength covers up a weakness. Bonds ego driven competitiveness pushed him to the top of the list of great hitters. But in his hour of adversity it's left him alone and pathetic.

Will he be back? Probably. In the end, the competitiveness will win out. I wonder, however, if things will be the same on the field. Will pitchers be more willing to go after a weak kneed Bonds? Will he be able to drive his body with his repaired left knee? Will he be able to plant his right leg for the follow through on his swing? Will other teams take advantage of his immobility in left field?

I hope Scorsese makes this into a movie some day.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Oops.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Kate Zernike looks at the way drugs are used to enhance performance outside of sports and asks if these people are cheating also?

But if baseball players are cheating, is everyone else, too?

After all, Americans are relying more and more on a growing array of performance enhancing drugs. Lawyers take the anti-sleep drug Provigil to finish that all-night brief, in hopes of concentrating better. Classical musicians take beta blockers, which banish jitters, before a big recital.Is the student who swallows a Ritalin before taking the SAT unethical if the pill gives her an unfair advantage over other students? If a golfer pops a beta blocker before a tournament, is he eliminating a crucial part of competition - battling nerves and a chance of choking?

And as time goes on, the drugs are only going to get better. What's the right answer? On one hand, you have people with a vested interest in keeping PEDs out of sports; the natural athletes and people who want to protect the records of their heros (Maris didn't really break Ruth's record because he had 162 games and expansion; McGwire didn't really break Maris' record because of a juiced ball/expansion/smaller parks/diluted pitching/steroids). On the other hand if nature makes life easy for some people, why not use drugs to balance the playing field. If some excels due to naturally high levels of testosterone, why not raise other people to that level?

These are not easy questions. As always, I welcome your comments on the subject.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

I don't know who the San Francisco Chronicle has as their grand jury source, but I hope he/she is getting a lot of money. They have the most devestating article on Bonds I've seen yet.

Prosecutors in the BALCO steroids conspiracy case subpoenaed a former girlfriend of Barry Bonds to testify before a federal grand jury in San Francisco last week, questioning her about the Giants star's finances and whether he used steroids, The Chronicle has learned.

Kimberly Bell, 35, a graphic artist from San Jose who says she dated Bonds from 1994 to 2003, told the grand jury Thursday that in 2000, the left fielder confided to her that he had begun using steroids, according to two sources familiar with an account of her testimony.

Bell also testified that in 2001, Bonds had given her $80,000 in cash -- earned, she claimed, from his sale of autographed baseballs and other memorabilia -- to make the down payment on a house for her in Scottsdale, Ariz., near the Giants' spring training facility, the sources said.

Bonds' attorney, Michael Rains, said the Giants star had never used banned substances and had never made big cash payments to Bell. He said he had "no grave concern, none at all," about the grand jury inquiry.

Rains is putting on a pretty good spin here. Ms. Bell was smart, and kept evidence of her affair in answering machine tapes and receipts. Her story puts Bonds in legal jeopardy in two ways:

1. Her testimony indicates Bonds committed perjury.
2. Her testimony indicates Bonds dodged paying income tax on earning from selling memorabilia.

On the second point:

In 2001, Bell said, Bonds decided he wanted her to move to Arizona and offered to buy her a home in Scottsdale and, later, pay her college tuition. At the time, Bell said, she was earning about $80,000 as a graphic artist and was reluctant to give up her job, but Bonds persuaded her to go, saying he would take care of her financially.

Bonds is paid more than $17 million per year by the Giants, but Bell said he didn't want to spend his baseball wages on the house. Instead, he said he would raise the money by selling sports memorabilia. She recalled sitting in a San Francisco hotel room for several hours watching him sign baseballs that he said would pay for the house.

Eventually, she said, he gave her the $80,000 in lots of up to $9,000, each stack of bills banded together as though they had come from the bank. She said she had used the cash as a down payment on a $207,000 home in Scottsdale.

So she was laundering money for Bonds. Bonds would get paid in cash for his autograph sessions. He'd give her $9000 to deposit. Cash deposits of $10,000 or more get reported to the IRS. Finally, IRS agent Jeff Novitzky has some justification for his role.

And finally, it show Barry Bonds to be ..., well, I can't use the term on this site.

Bell told The Chronicle she had begun dating Bonds in 1994, during his contentious divorce from his first wife, Sun. The relationship nearly foundered when Bonds married his present wife, Liz Watson, in 1998, but Bell said she resumed seeing the Giants star after he returned from his honeymoon.

"He told me what a great girlfriend I was, because I didn't complain a lot, and I did what he told me to do," she said.

Over the years, Bell said she and Bonds had spent two or three evenings per week together at his condominium or her apartment. Bonds took her to his parents' home for dinner with his late father, former Giants outfielder Bobby Bonds, and escorted her to parties.

How very Victorian. It brings to mind Alfred Doolittle's speech from Pygmalion:

PICKERING. Have you no morals, man?
DOOLITTLE [unabashed] Cant afford them, Governor. Neither could you if you was as poor as me. Not that I mean any harm, you know. But if Liza is going to have a bit out of this, why not me too?
HIGGINS [troubled] I dont know what to do, Pickering. There can be no question that as a matter of morals it's a positive crime to give this chap a farthing. And yet I feel a sort of rough justice in his claim.
DOOLITTLE, Thats it, Governor. Thats all I say. A father's heart, as it were.
PICKERING. Well, I know the feeling; but really it seems hardly right—
DOOLITTLE. Dont say that, Governor. Dont look at it that way. What am I, Governors both? I ask you, what am I? I'm one of the undeserving poor: thats what I am. Think of what that means to a man. It means that hes up agen middle class morality all the time. If theres anything going, and I put in for a bit of it, it's always the same story: "Youre undeserving; so you cant have it." But my needs is as great as the most deserving widow's that ever got money out of six different charities in one week for the death of the same husband. I dont need less than a deserving man: I need more. I dont eat less hearty than him; and I drink a lot more. I want a bit of amusement, cause I'm a thinking man. I want cheerfulness and a song and a band when I feel low. Well, they charge me just the same for everything as they charge the deserving. What is middle class morality? Just an excuse for never giving me anything. Therefore, I ask you, as two gentlemen, not to play that game on me. I'm playing straight with you. I aint pretending to be deserving. I'm undeserving; and I mean to go on being undeserving. I like it; and thats the truth. Will you take advantage of a man's nature to do him out of the price of his own daughter what hes brought up and fed and clothed by the sweat of his brow until shes growed big enough to be interesting to you two gentlemen? Is five pounds unreasonable? I put it to you; and I leave it to you.
HIGGINS [rising, and going over to Pickering] Pickering: if we were to take this man in hand for three months, he could choose between a seat in the Cabinet and a popular pulpit in Wales.

Shaw did a marvelous job here of pointing out that the morals of the very poor were pretty much the same as the very rich; neither had any. The very poor couldn't afford them; the very rich could pay for them to be dismissed. Barry Bonds may find out that sometimes that latter statement is not true.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Peter Gammons comes down very hard on both Selig and Fehr in his latest column.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Via Jared Buck, the link to the transcripts of yesterday's hearings on steroids.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Via Instapundit, Steve Chapman in the Chicago Tribune sums up my feelings on the steroid hearings pefectly.

Update: Sam Jaffe has a different take on the editorial. I would like to point out a factual error in Sam's piece, however. It was the Supreme Court, not Congress, that gave baseball its anti-trust exemption.

Correction: Fixed a broken link.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

The hearings are underway. I don't have C-Span3 on my satellite, so I'm wathcing on the net.

Tom Davis bastardized Casey at the Bat in his opening remarks. That takes him down a notch in my view, as it's my favorite poem.

Jim Bunning is testifying, saying in his day ballplayers got worse as they got older, not better. He mentioned Hank Aaron and Willie Mays and how they didn't hit more HR in their late 30's than in their late 20's. That may be true, but Aaron came awfully close. He hit 163 from age 26 to age 29, and 159 from age 36 to age 39. I wouldn't say that's worse.

Bunning is for the nuclear option. He wants all record wiped out for players who have used steroids. He sounds like an old ballplayer who wants to protect his peers, especilly Maris and Aaron.

I'll keep updating this thread.

Update: 11:15 AM EST. The panel has taken a 30 minute recess to go vote. I still don't understand the hangup on a two-year suspension, just because the Olympics do that. The NFL has a four game suspension. They seem fine with that. We shouldn't be trying to drive people out of the game, we should be helping them to stay clean.

Update: The parents of teenagers who committed suicide after using steroids are testifying now.

Update: 12:10 PM EST. Dr. Nora Volkow of the NIH is testifying on the effects of steroid abuse. She's saying that the dose athletes take are about 100 times the dose used in therapy. Another reason I'd like to see steroids taken under a doctor's care.

Update: 12:15 PM EST. Dr. Gary Wadler, NYU is now testifying. He works for the Olympics on doping.

Update: 12:19 PM EST. Dr. Wadler brings up amphetamines. Good. Someone should have asked Bunning if he thought his teammates who used speed were cheating.

Update: 12:23 PM EST. Dr. Kirk Brower, University of Michigan pyschiatrist, is now trying to show a slide show, but it's not working. He's talking about the psychological effects of steroids on people and teenagers specificially.

Update: 12:27 PM EST. Kirk is talking about double blind studies of the effect of steroid withdrawl on depression. 10% were found to go into severe depression. The doses were high, 5 to 6 times a theraputic dose. Athletes take up to 100 times the theraputic dose, and the size of the dose effects the development of depression.

Update: 12:34 PM EST. Dr. Elliot Pellman is addressing the two year ban. He's saying that a lot of positive tests come from accidental ingestion of contaminated supplements. He's saying that's why a first positive shouldn't lead to a long term ban, and he thinks that the MLB program compares favorably to the NFL's program. Finally someone is talking sense.

Update: Pellman is the cheif medical advisor for MLB. He's also worked with the NFL on the same problem.

Update: 12:45 PM EST. Pellman is being questioned, and is asking the Congressman why all precursors weren't banned last year?

Update: 1:18 PM EST. Tom Lantos: Capitalism is to blame!

Update: 1:40 PM EST. Pellman was being pressed on loopholes in the agreement. He says the intention is to suspend and make the suspension public. He promises to resign if that doesn't happen.

Update: 1:45 PM EST. Sosa has issued a statement that he's clean. This article is written as if these event have happened, but people have just issued statements at this point.

Update: 1:47 PM EST. Olney is reporting that Gammons was talking to some players from the Angels, and they said the agreement they saw had nothing about a fine. But the agreement Congress has does mention a fine.

Update: 2:09 PM EST. That panel is over, and it was probably the most important one of the day, although it won't get the most publicity. There were two interesting conflicts of interest on that panel. Gary Wadler runs testing labs and wants MLB out of the business of testing. That, of course, would give him more business. Pellman advises MLB, so I expected his answers to put MLB in a positive light.

That said, I thought Pellman was the more interesting witness. He's the only one that disagreed with the general consensus. He appeared to have a lot of credibility in my view. I can't wait to see how Manfred and Selig explain the difference in language about the fines.

Update: 2:31 PM EST. Canseco is putting on a good act. He's even crying. Doesn't he know there's no crying in baseball?

Update: 2:34 PM EST. Jim Sharp (Sosa's lawyer?) is reading the statement for Sammy Sosa. Sosa is sitting next to him.

Update: 2:38 PM EST. Mark McGwire was just sworn. McGwire's crying, too. I guess teenagers committing suicide even get to these guys. The bash brothers are the balling brothers today.

Update: 2:40 PM EST. McGwire won't name names.

Update: 2:41 PM EST. McGwire doesn't like Canseco's book. I guess they're not close brothers.

Update: 2:43 PM EST. McGwire is directing his foundation to fight steroid use among young people. Now Palmeiro is up, and he's saying he's never used steroids.

Update: 2:49 PM EST. Schilling up now. He says steroids are not necessary for success. He's also warning the committee about glorifying Canseco.

Update: 2:52 PM EST. Schilling thinks that public disclosure of steroid use is the real teeth of the program. He says that being labeled a cheater is the biggest deterrent of the program.

Update: 2:54 PM EST. Frank Thomas sworn in via video link.

Update: 2:56 PM EST. Thomas says he never used steroids. The committee is going into a 20 minute recess.

Update: 3:20 PM EST. I was just looking at the NY Times, and found this picture of Selig. Do the photographers just wait for the worst look they can get on Bud's face? Selig should learn to smile through everything.

Update: 4:00 PM EST. They're still in recess. I'm wondering if the committee members are all getting autographs? :-)

Update: 4:15 PM EST. The committee is back and they're questioning the players.

Update: 4:18 PM EST. Palmeiro just said he never saw steroids used in the club house. Now Schilling is saying he grossly overstated the problem. He says he had suspicions, but he never knew that players were actually using.

Update: 4:23 PM EST. I don't think these legislatures get that suspending someone for two years from baseball suspends them for life. It's awfully hard to come back successfully from a year off; I can't see coming back from a two-year layoff and having any kind of career left.

Update: 4>29 PM EST. McGwire is refusing to talk about his Andro use.

Update: Canseco is being called on the contradictions of his book and his testimony. In his book, he says that use by all athletes would be good. Now he's saying they're bad.

Update: 4:45 PM EST. Someone just asked the players if they thought federal legislation could solve the problem, and they all said yes. Just what we need, more regulation. They should leave that question to their union.

Update: 4:47 PM EST. A South Park moment. McGwire was asked what his message to children would be. He said, "Steroids are bad."

Update: 5:06 PM EST. They should have fans testify. Why don't they have a panel of bloggers? There are bloggers on all sides of this issue. And we write because we're huge fans. Why not let us voice our opinions on this?

Update: 5:07 PM EST. Gil Gutknecht gets the Maris asterisk wrong. There never was an asterisk. The record book lists records for 162 game season and 154 game seasons where the 162 game record is higher. If someone breaks the doubles record, the same thing will happen.

Update: 5:10 PM EST. Now the players are saying baseball can clean itself up. 25 Minutes ago they said Congressional legislation would help.

Update: 5:13 PM EST. Schilling just flat out called Canseco a liar.

Update: 5:15 PM EST. Canseco just said his book drove steroids from the game! Amazing, a book that wasn't published until last month drove the rate down in 2004!

Update: 5:27 PM EST. Sosa is saying nothing. It would be nice if someone pressed him on some issue, like why we should trust his statement if he's a known cheater?

Update: 5:41 PM EST. McGwire was just asked flat out if he used anything other than andro and he refused to answer.

Update: 6:00 PM EST. ESPN is taking a break. I must admit, the players are pretty boring. I wonder if they're really going to get to Selig and others tonight? It's getting late.

Update: 6:32 PM EST. Just back from dinner. Selig is reading his statement.

Update: 6:36 PM EST. This is an important statement by Selig:

Some have suggested that greater penalties, particularly for first offenders, would be in order. With the guidance of my medical advisors, however, I agreed to the lesser penalties on the theory that behavior modification should be the most important goal of our policy and that the penalties in our new policy were well-designed to serve that goal.

I agree with this 100%.

Manfred is now reading his statement.

Update: 6:39 PM EST. Manfred is saying that all players who test positive will be suspended. That's the understanding of the owners and the players. He says the fine language should have been removed. The players union has agreed not to challenge any suspensions due to a positive drug test.

Update: 6:49 PM EST. Fehr is on now. He's not reading his statement, but it is being entered into the record.

Update: 6:56 PM EST. Fehr agrees that the fine is not an option. He says the players will be suspended and the union will not challenge.

Update: Fehr brings up gene doping. It isn't happening now, but it will happen in the future. Alderson is speaking now.

Update: Alderson Canseco was a developing star before he claims to have started using steroids.

Update: 7:08 PM EST. There is an appeal period if there is a positive test. That's good. This is the first time I've heard that a player can appeal a positive result.

Update: 7:11 PM EST. Manfred the fines are staying in to deal with drugs of abuse, not steroids.

Update: 7:20 PM EST. Interesting exchange between Waxman and Selig. Waxman says while the CBA didn't let Selig test everyone in the early 1990s, the MLB Constitution did let the commissioner investigate an individual if there was probable cause.

Waxman brought up the Manny Alexander case. Manfred said they did investigate, they did test, and Alexander was clean, so there was no suspension.

Update: 7:26 PM EST. Fehr doesn't want to destroy careers with tougher penalties.

Update: 7:28 PM EST. Batgirl has a re-enactment of the hearings. (Via Teepee Talk)

Update: 7:33 PM EST. Chris Shays is a blowhard.

Update: 7:37 PM EST. Elijah Cummings has no idea what rope-a-dope is.

Update: 7:47 PM EST Paul Kanjorski is making a calm point that other congressmen were ranting over. He wants to know why players who test positive aren't turned over for prosecution. Unfortunately, he used a speech rather than asking a question, so it's not getting answered.

Update: 7:56 PM EST. Fehr says that players aren't immune from prosecution. If they get thrown in jail, they don't get work and they don't get paid.

Update: 8:24 PM EST. This is getting boring now. It's the same thing over and over. The committee can't seem to get their heads around the idea that they got a draft, and the draft keeps changing. Advice to any one appearing before Congress: Don't send a draft of a document!

Update: 9:00 PM EST. Ruppersberger asked Selig if he would use tougher testing as a deal breaker in the next CBA. Selig was elusive. Fehr is elusive on the question as well.

Update: 9:12 PM EST. Waxman wants new leadership for baseball (I assume he means a new commissioner). While I agree with that for other reasons, Waxman is just grandstanding here.

Update: 9:15 PM EST. Thank goodness it's over.

To sum up, Congress doesn't believe baseball is doing enough. Baseball believes it's made great strides, and everyone should let testing go ahead to see if it works.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Balls, Sticks and Stuff offer an editorial cartoon. It's quite funny.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

There seems to be a difference of opinion on the penalties for a first time positive test:

The policy says that the penalty for a first positive test for steroids is "a 10-day suspension or up to a $10,000 fine," and there is no public identification of players who are fined rather than suspended. Baseball has said that first-time offenders would be publicly identified as having failed a test in addition to a suspension.

Davis said a player could buy his way out of a violation. "What's $10,000 to Barry Bonds?" he asked. He also noted that there could be no punishment at all. Olympic athletes, by contrast, are suspended for two years for a first positive drug test.

Baseball, however, disagrees:

Rob Manfred, baseball's executive vice president for labor, said that the language about penalties had been left in the new policy from the 2002 version and that the conclusions being drawn were inaccurate.

"In retrospect, that language probably should have been changed, but there is no debate about the substance," Manfred said. "Once a positive test is established, the union has surrendered its right and the commissioner can and will impose a 10-day suspension. It's automatic. There's no debate about it. The parties understood at the table that there would be a 10-day suspension for a positive test."

Discussion of this issue should be very interesting tomorrow.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

I'm watching Connected Coast to Coast, and the hosts are not well informed. They blame Lyle Alzado's death on steroids, but:

But in 1992, seven years after playing in his last regular-season game, Alzado died from brain lymphoma, a rare form of cancer. He was 43. Although there is no medical link between steroids and brain lymphoma, Alzado was certain the drugs were responsible for his cancer. He became a symbol of the dangers of steroid abuse.

This is really poor reporting.

Update: They didn't talk to Jay enough. They were more interested in Chris Shays. Shays wants players who test positive to give up the names of the people supplying them with the drugs.

One good Q & A with Shays:

Monica Crowley: Congressman, are you hearing from your constituents about this issue, is there a lot of public outrage about it?

Chris Shays: I wouldn't say there's a lot of public outrage, but what is interesting is I had a great hearing on Monday about how we're training Iraqi troops and the border police - the border patrol and police and I didn't have many people paying attention to that hearing, so I would say the press has been very interested in this issue.

The press has never liked the spike in offense that happened in the early 1990's. Remember how they kept talking about the ball being juiced 10 years ago? They never bothered to do scientific research, it just had to be true. When someone finally did look into it, they found that the balls were legal. Why don't they like the increase in offense?

It seems to happen all the time. The press didn't like Maris breaking Ruth's record. He's playing 162 games! Is it that the current crop of writers grew up with Aaron's push toward 714, and don't want to see that overcome? Smaller parks, bigger athletes, juiced balls, it's not fair to Hammering Hank! We'll just ignore that the records of the 60's and 70's were tainted by amphetamine use. Despite all their screaming, they haven't pulled a lot of fans along for the ride.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

There are problems testing for steroids that I've discussed in other posts, mostly in letting a lot of true positives go by in order to reduce false positives. One of the questions I'm sure Congress will try to address with hearings is how widespread the use of steroids is in major league baseball. And yet, I'm sure we have the answer to that question in the data that's already been gathered.

We're looking at that data from the wrong perspective. We see numbers quoted indicating 5-7% of players tested positive in 2003. But we also know the test produces a lot of false negatives. The test for testosterone looks at the ratio of that hormone to epitestosterone. The normal ratio is 1:1, but 6:1 is considered positive. You can be doping, have a level of 4:1, and be considered clean. In fact, the way to beat the test is to keep your level below six. You still get the boost, but you don't get caught.

So in 2003 and 2004, I assume all players had their T/E ratio measured. I would expect those ratios to be normally distributed; therefore we can describe the distribution by calculating the mean and standard deviation.

Meanwhile, someone somewhere probably knows the mean and standard deviation for the general male population. Given that data, it's easy to calculate the probability of T/E ratios in baseball players being the same as the general population! Low probabilities would indicate widespread use of testosterone.

You see, one player having a T/E ratio of 3:1 is just random chance. One hundred players having a 3:1 ratio is a trend. It's the Bill James idea of evaluting defense by starting with the team and working back to the players. Study the population. That will tell you if there is widespread abuse. And it will tell you at what level the abuse is occuring. If the distribution shows abuse at 3:1 then set the positive level there.

Singling out individuals with tests full on uncertainty does not fix the problem. The tests are not conclusive enough. A study of the population is more likely to be conclusive in showing whether or not abuse is widespread, and at what levels the abuse is occuring. We would finally know the extent of doping.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

The New York Times was given a letter by Stanley Brand, attorney for Major League Baseball, with some details of the drug testing results from 2003 and 2004.

There were 73 positive tests for the steroid nandrolone among baseball players in 2003, but only one for nandrolone in 2004, according to a five-page cover letter attached to about 400 pages of documents that Major League Baseball gave the House Government Reform Committee this week.

...

Dr. Gary I. Wadler, a steroids expert at New York University who has been called to testify to the committee on Thursday, said the dramatic drop in nandrolone could have two explanations, but he said it did not assure him that baseball has solved its steroids problem.

It could have been that many more players in 2003 than 2004 were injecting Deca-durabolin, one of the most powerful and long-lasting anabolic steroids, which contains nandrolone, Dr. Wadler said. Or, he said, a more likely explanation could be that players started avoiding dietary supplements that contained a related chemical, 19-norandrostenedione.

Dr. Wadler said steroids users would know to avoid the injectable form of nandrolone because it is long-lasting in the body.

Congress acted last year to add 19-norandrostenedione to the list of banned substances, effective this year.

This passage points out how difficult it is to know for sure what's going on. 19-Norandrostenedione was legal; when in became illegal, use dropped. But players also could have been using it unawares if it were in dietary supplements!

This is one reason I argue against draconian punishments for a first offense. All we ever get from these tests are probabilities that players are cheating. It's difficult in many cases to get a clear cut answer.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Those who are waiting to hear players testify in the BALCO case may never get the chance. Greg Anderson is working on a plea bargain. My guess is that Conte will get a deal, also, especially if part of Anderson's deal is to testify against Conte.

Prosecutors really prefer a deal to a trial. It saves time and money, and they get one in the Win column. I'm not going to be surprised if this never goes to trial.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

I just watched Will Carroll on The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch. Most of the show was devoted to an interview with Jose Canseo. Donny Deutsch, the host, appeared to be in the interpolating from small sample sizes school. So-and-so took steroids and got sick, so they must be bad. Will did a good job arguing against that point. I was also impressed with Jay Crawford, from ESPN's Cold Pizza. He wasn't buying into the hysteria, and seemed to have given the subject a lot of critical thought.

Deutsch also joined the "Penalties aren't stiff enough" chorus. I'm still surprised that people think the MLB penalty system is weak. As far as I know, most companies deal with employee drug problems not by firing or suspending, but requiring treatment. It's very difficult to fire someone, both on the employee and the manager. There has to be room for forgiveness and redemption. I actually thought the origianl policy had this right; you don't get outed as a user until your second positive. Players were given a chance to get clean. (That's not to say there weren't other problems with that policy such as frequency of tests.)

This goes to a point that Jay Crawford made; that these hearings may be glorifying steroid use. What if McGwire gets up and testifies that he used PEDs? He doesn't look like a monster. When he set the single season home run record in 1998, he wasn't raging; he was hugging everybody. He hugged his son, he hugged his teammates, he even hugged the guy who was battling him for the record. He's rich and famous. Women ask Tom Glavine, "Where's Mark?" Some young people might see all that as a good thing. They might be better off wondering about the truth. Or Congress might be better off bringing up people who have been hurt by steroids so the ugly side is seen.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Just a reminder, Will Carroll will be on CNBC at 10 PM EST tonight. Set your Tivos.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Via Brew Grit, The NY Daily News pens part one of an excellent investigative piece on the 1990's FBI probe of steroid trafficking. There are allegations that McGwire was using more than andro. In fact, they list his regimen:

The recipe called for 1/2 cc of testosterone cypionate every three days; one cc of testosterone enanthate per week; equipoise and winstrol v, 1/4 cc every three days, injected into the buttocks, one in one cheek, one in the other.

It was the cocktail of a hardcore steroids user, and it is one of the "arrays," or steroid recipes, Mark McGwire used to become the biggest thing in baseball in the 1990s, sources have told the Daily News.

It appears the dealers the FBI were after don't play nice:

The two convicted sources who connected Wenzlaff to Canseco and McGwire declined to be named, saying they feared retribution from some of the steroid dealers they informed on. But two FBI sources confirmed the men's identities and said they provided credible information throughout the operation and, like Wenzlaff, avoided jail time for their cooperation. One FBI source also said the men's fears about retribution are well-founded.

"That's why I'm amazed at what Jose said in the book," Wenzlaff says. "There are some people who might come after him."

It's also becoming clear that Canseco was a major vector for steroids coming into baseball (Emphasis added):

Stejskal, the agent who told the News last month that he warned Major League Baseball about a rising steroid problem at least 10 years ago, declined interview requests for this story. After he was quoted last month he was told not to speak to the media anymore. But before he was admonished, he told the Daily News what he learned about Canseco during the investigation.

"Canseco was one of those people that we heard would take orders from other people who would say 'Hey, can you get me some of this?' and he would do that. We didn't characterize that as being a dealer. That was just somebody acting as a middle man," said Stejskal, who put Major League Baseball security in touch with Wenzlaff to discuss Canseco's burgeoning steroid allegations about a year ago. "We were a little skeptical at first because Wenzlaff kinda comes off as he has a high opinion of himself. So consequently we weren't quite sure. But as we did some more checking and we were able to get his phone records and things like that, it was clear he did have a relationship with Canseco."

In addition, an undercover agent saw a photo of Wenzlaff with Canseco, recorded Wenzlaff on a wiretap talking about providing steroids to Canseco, and the FBI found Canseco's private phone number in Wenzlaff's phone book after they arrested him.

In hindsight, it might have done a world of good to look at Canseco as a dealer. If Hal Chase had been driven out of baseball 100 years ago, the gambling scandals of the teens might not have happened. Canseco was dealing with unsavory characters. I wouldn't be surprised if some of those people had gambling ties. That would have been enough for discipline by the Commissioner's office. But the players didn't want testing, and MLB didn't want a scandal, so nothing happened.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

There was actually a hearing on steroids yesterday in the US House by a totally different committee:

It was coincidental that the Energy and Commerce subcommittee had scheduled its own hearing for yesterday on steroids. It focused not just on baseball, but on steroid use in professional football and among college and high school athletes.

They also had someone with a scientific background to put testing in perspective:

Charles Yesalis, a Penn State health policy professor and sports-drug expert, told the subcommittee that a big problem is that drug testing is not a perfect science. "Just because you test negative does not mean you are a clean athlete. We are limited to what is technologically available," Yesalis said.

What I don't understand is why so many people think the drug testing policy has no teeth:

"The real deterrent is these public figures will be outed," Coonelly said. "In many circles, Sammy Sosa, who otherwise has a Hall of Fame career, is known as a cheater because he used a cork bat. It means a lot more than a slap on the wrist to be branded as a cheater," he said.

But several subcommittee members said embarrassing players was not enough. Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican, characterized baseball's punishment for first-time steroid-policy violators - a 10-day suspension - as "a slap on the wrist."

We don't even know if the original plan was going to work, because it was changed before we really got a chance to see what would happen. We have one data point, where the percentage of players testing positive went from 5-7% in 2003 to 1-2% in 2004, the first year of penalties.

And since when is a ten-game suspension a slap on the wrist? How many teams can afford to lose a star for ten games? I don't believe you can call up a replacement during a suspension, so the whole team has to play short-handed. You're really punishing 25 players, not just one. These politicians should get a clue.

Update: This article by Murray Chass is a must read.

Rob Manfred, the chief labor executive for baseball's owners, said the players were in the committee members' minds when they scheduled the hearing. At a March 2 meeting with committee members, Manfred said, he was told that the hearing would "give players a chance to clear their names."

The remark raised painful echoes from more than 50 years ago, when a fellow named Joe McCarthy, not the manager, held Congressional hearings into another matter and gave people a chance to clear their names (implicating others at the same time).

"Mr. Sosa, are you now or have you ever been a member of the Com ... I mean, a steroids user?"

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Sports Law Blog does some research and decides that Congress does have jurisdiction to hold hearings on the issue.

So if the issue goes to court, will Congress or Baseball win in this clash of the titans? I have done a cursory review of the relevant law*, so if I am missing anything, please do correct me. Though unstated in the constitution, it is uncontested that Congress has the power to conduct investigations in accordance with its primary function of passing laws. Thus, if a constitutional law could result from an investigation or hearing, then it appears to be a proper exercise of congressional power. Arguments that legislation will not result, or that the invalid legislation will result, does not relieve Congress of this power. In addition, Congress can hold hearings to determine if existing legislative schemes are functioning as intended. Congress cannot, however, investigate matters of purely private concern.

I've had no doubt Congress could hold such hearings. My question is why? There are more important matters to tend to, and baseball appears to be addressing the problem adequately. Unfortunately, Congressional grandstanding is not a reason to ignore a supoena.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

It looks like Congress is ready to issue supoenas to compell players to appear in Washington before the House Committee on Government Reform. In addition to suspected steroid users, the house is probably going to call some outspoken critics of steroid use.

Not all of the players on the list have been alleged by Canseco - or anyone else - to have used steroids.

Thomas appears to be on the list because of his public statements that the game needs to be cleaned up. He has said he would be happy to testify at the hearing, although he has expressed concern about the effect that flying to Washington from the team's Arizona spring training site could have on an injured ankle.

Schilling also spoke out against steroids before baseball's program of tougher penalties and year-round testing began during spring training.

He said recently that he was concerned the hearing could turn into a "witch hunt" and that he didn't know if he would voluntarily attend.

It's one thing to wage war against steroids in the press. It's another thing to sit in front of a committee under oath and answer the question, "Which players have you seen use steroids?" I'm not sure you can take the fifth on that one, especially if you claim to be innocent. Will the question be asked, and will Schilling and Thomas betray teammates? Or are they just speculating about the abuse? I can't wait to hear their testimony.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

One of the funniest moments in Casablanca:

Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?

Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]
Croupier: Your winnings, sir.

Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.

John Perricone finds Bud Selig doing his best Claude Rains in this daily news story:

But the case Selig presented yesterday - that baseball tried to get a testing policy as far back as 1991 - also undermines Selig's insistence over the last few weeks that baseball was unaware of a steroid problem before 1998, when a bottle of androstenedione - a steroid precursor - was spotted in McGwire's locker.

After the Daily News reported the contents of Canseco's tell-all autobiography last month, Selig began to deny Canseco's charges that owners were complicit in the 'roid rage of the 1990s. When the Daily News reported that FBI special agent Greg Stejskal, who convicted more than 70 traffickers in the largest steroids investigation in history, said he warned baseball in the mid-1990s of a steroid problem in the game, baseball attacked his credibility, essentially calling him a liar.

So just how complicit was MLB? They did try to get steroid testing into the CBA twice in the early 1990s. I suppose they could have made it the centerpiece of negotiations, but they were more interested in breaking the union at that point. The league certainly could have acted on the FBI warnings. While they could not take action against players, they could have started to look at the players associates. They could have gone to players and said, "We know you are friends with a steroid trafficker. We don't know if you're using steroids, but if you continue to see this person, we'll go public with our suspicisions." Or they could have leaked the story to someone in the press that the FBI was investigating suppliers of ballplayers. The owners give lots of money to politicians; they could have gotten Washington to open an investigation into the matter then.

Instead, MLB used the CBA as an excuse to do nothing. And to tell you the truth, I'm fine with that. Steroids (if as widely used as some would like us to believe) were helping the game, not hurting it. Baseball had taken a huge blow after the 1994 strike. Why hurt the game further with another scandal? The players were grown men; the union was full of very intelligent people. If they were willing to risk their bodies for a fame and money, why shouldn't owners make a buck off it also?

The owners couldn't even blacklist players, as that would be collusion.

But the owners should be candid about this. Selig, being a used car salesman, finds this difficult. But remember, the blame lies nearly 100% with the players. I haven't heard an owner or GM accused of encouraging steroid use. The players wanted the problem neglected, and the owners were happy to go along. Bu the owners weren't in the bathroom sticking needles in the players. Or providing the drugs (as the clubs did with amphetamines). The was the players problem, and the players deserve the blame.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

All sides of the steroids in sports controversy had their say in this article on SFGate.com. There were a number of people wanting legalized steroids used under medical supervision:

Sonbaty and others interviewed on the jammed expo floor this weekend said it's a losing battle for the government or organized sports to try to ban illegal substances. Rather, they suggested, the way forward is to allow the legal usage of such substances under a doctor's care.

Fighting to keep drugs out of sports, he said, is "like trying to put a speed limit on Formula One racing.'' It won't work.

Others don't see the need:

Women's pro heavyweight bodybuilding competitor Lisa Aukland of Bel Air, Md., a perky blonde with stunning musculature who holds a doctorate in pharmacology, said she's among those who refuse to take part in the "win-at- all-costs" drug mantra. As she joined a parade of toned females backstage applying gleaming body oils in the "pump room'' before taking the stage for the women's competition, Aukland insisted that those with a passion for the sport must get their hard bodies the hard way -- by careful diet and grueling exercise.

The drugs "can change your look'' and come at a high price, said Aukland, shaking her head sadly. "That makes me smart enough to stay away from all of it.''

Even Arnold has changed his mind about steroids:

Schwarzenegger, who first gained fame more than 30 years ago as a bodybuilder, admits he used steroids to build muscle. Back then, it was legal, if done under a doctor's direction. And while the governor has said he doesn't regret using drugs during a competitive career that ended in 1980, he said athletes and young people today should stay away from now-illegal substances. At the same time, he admits that several of the men who compete in his annual show use steroids and other illegal substances to build their massive physiques.

In an interview Saturday, Schwarzenegger took a much harder line than the fans and competitors that swarmed him at the annual festival he has sponsored since 1989.

"The problem is we want to get rid of the drugs," he said, rejecting the idea of deregulating steroids.

Schwarzenegger also said he'd like to see more stringent drug testing of bodybuilding competitors.

One of the arguments form steroids in body building is that fans want to see big muscles. They want to see power lifter approaching half a ton. I wonder if this is a chicken and egg problem, however. If body builders reach the limits of natural human growth, will the fans go away? Or do the fans want to see bigger muscles because that's what steroids keep giving them?

I'm in the medical supervision camp, simply because there's too much money out there for these drugs to go away. I'd rather have these players take the drugs safely than suffer for a season like Jason Giambi.

Thanks to Brian MacMillan for the link.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Jeff Kent wants drug testing to go further.

Steroid experts have taken shots at the new policy for several reasons, and Kent focused on two -- the lack of an independent firm overseeing the testing and penalizing, making it possible for MLB to cover up players' steroid use, and the lack of amphetamines on the list of banned substances.

Also, players still can take performance-enhancing drugs without consequences. For example, human growth hormone is on the banned list, but it's irrelevant because HGH can't be detected in urine, only in blood.

"We still need a third party to oversee the issue because some information could be suppressed, who knows," Kent said. "You need an independent party judging results. Without it, it's not a valid enough policy."

Regarding amphetamines, Kent said, "It's a daily pick-me-up. Without a prescription, it's illegal, like steroids. Guys get addicted and can't stop, and that's what Major League Baseball needs to fix, too."

I agree with Kent on the amphetamine question. It also brings into focus the point of yesterday's post, that just because someone test negative doesn't mean they're clean.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

The AP is reporting that steroid testing began today on some members of the Florida Marlins.

Third baseman Mike Lowell said most players were relieved something's being done so the majority "don't get thrown into the mud because of the minority."

Sluggers Lowell and Carlos Delgado said they had not yet been asked to provide samples.

As testing proceeds, it's important to remember that these tests do not give a perfect true-false result. There are going to be players who are using steroids that are going to come back negative. There may be one or two who are not juicing that come back positive (although, my guess is that the cutoffs are so high that false positives will be very rare). It actually would be good to have a warning go out what I'll call "High Negatives;" watch this guy. We can't suspend him, but he's probably using.

In fact, it would be nice if the results were reported as the probability of a player using steroids. People under 30% are considered clean. People in the 40 to 70% range would be "at risk." People over 70% would get a suspension. I like that better than the true/false split that gets reported, because we never can truly know if the classification is correct.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

Will Carroll covers the emgering drug testing agreement between MLB and the MLBPA.

The most interesting part of this piece is buried at the bottom. Don Fehr slips out that no one tested positive twice and that the numbers went down significantly in 2004. Looking closer, this means that we *did* have positive tests, something I’ve heard conflicting denials on this off-season. It also means that there were “significantly less” than the 83 positive tests in 2003.

I’m not sure what significantly less means here. We don’t have the full context. Fehr isn’t given to exaggeration or hyperbole, so let’s call it a 50% reduction. That’s still 40 positives, which would be higher than the roughly 30 we had in minor league baseball and much higher on a percentage basis.

Of course, if they wanted to see if the players were really serious, MLB might take this route.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

John Perricone at Only Baseball Matters continues his commentary on the steroids issue. He links to a Journal of the American Medical Association study on steroids and weight-training. John then states:

The authors concluded that there were no benefits from using steroids while weight-training.

While that's true, I want to throw in a big caveat that John missed. The article is looking at oral doses of androstenedione. When you take a drug orally, it has to go through the stomach. The stomach is a nasty place and can degrade chemical compounds. That's why athletes will inject steroids rather than swallow them.

Baseball Musings is holding a pledge drive during March. Click here for details.

It looks like the US House of Representatives will hold hearings on the steroid issue.

The players and owners are working toward a solution to the problem. The union has taken the unprecedented step of altering the CBA midstream. But if a few politicians can get face time on the networks, they'll have hearings. Of course, they might be a waste of time.

If the committee were to call Bonds and Giambi, the ballplayers almost certainly would invoke their Fifth Amendment right not to answer questions. "If their lawyers did allow them to testify without immunity, it would be legal incompetence," said Peter Keane, dean of the Golden Gate University School of Law in San Francisco.

He said the danger for the two players is that they might say something before the committee that contradicted their testimony before the grand jury, opening up potential legal troubles for them.

Another circus is on the way to town.

A bit of fun from the NY Times on Canseco's proposed polygraph test.

I continue to be amazed that anyone bothers with lie detectors anymore. As far as I can tell, the polygraph experts read whatever they want into the results. You don't need a machine, you need an expert in micro-expressions.

Rafael Palmeiro is considering taking Jose Canseco to court over Jose's steroid charges.

Palmeiro issued a statement last month in which he denied he ever used steroids, and he emphatically backed up that assertion Thursday after his first practice of spring training. Palmeiro also said he's considered hiring the law firm of Orioles owner Peter Angelos to take legal action against Canseco.

"The one thing I can say is I have the best law firm and the best lawyer standing in the wings in Peter Angelos," he said. "I have options available for me. He stands behind me and he's ready. I will look at all my options and I'll decide."

I'd actually like to see both Canseco and Palmeiro take the stand under oath and see who the jury believes is more credible.

Via both Will Carroll and The Birdwatch, Mike Davidson tries to look at Jose Canseco's face to see if he's lying during his 60 Minutes interview. This technique is discussed extensively in Blink by Malcolm Gladwell.

I first saw this technique discussed in The Human Face, the John Cleese documentary. They have a discussion of micro expressions, and the one for lying appears to be a brief vertical line forming between the two eyebrows (I'm doing this from memory right now; I'll go home and watch the DVD later). It then shows this forming on Clinton when he made his infamous quote about not having sex with that woman.

I may try to track down the experts profiled in Blink and see what they think of the Canseco interview.

Update: It's not a vertical line, it is a furrowed brow that lasts for about 1/5 of a second. Having rewatched that portion of the DVD, The Human Face uses the same expert Gladwell used, Paul Ekman.

Roger Clemens is looking for a replacement for Vioxx.

What was Clemens's youth dew of choice? A miracle lotion in the form of a steroid called "the cream"? A droplet of the steroid known as THG? Or an injection of a good old-fashioned steroid in the rumpus?

Actually, it was Vioxx, the prescription pain reliever withdrawn from the market in September because of a study that showed the drug doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke.

Vioxx could return to the market, but Clemens has been worried about the risk. Flush from opening spring training workouts with the Houston Astros yesterday, he admitted that his decision to return for Retirement Comeback Redux was made uncertain because of the Vioxx flap.

"To be honest, my thoughts were: 'O.K., how's my body going to hold up? I can't take Vioxx anymore,' " Clemens said. "I know I'm going to have inflammation. At the rate of speed and what I do to my body, I know I'm going to have swelling in my joints. And I'm going to be hurting many times when I'm out there on the mound, and I can't show it. I hope there is something out there that's good for me and that I can take for my inflammation. Health is always a concern when I try to push my body to stay up with the next guy."

Of course, the question this raises for me is was Clemens cheating? Vioxx, in this case, was a performance enhancer. It allowed Clemens to recover faster and workout more. It probably allowed him to pitch every five days.

One argument against steroids is that they do long term damage. It looks like Vioxx does long term damage as well. And I have to think it's worse for a young person like Clemens rather than the elderly who are nearing the ends of their lives anyway.

So where do we draw the line? Does the drug have to encourage muscle mass development to be cheating? Or does it just have to allow you to exercise more (which also encourages muscle mass development)? Or does it just need to allow you to perform on a day you otherwise could not?

Roger Clemens isn't a physical marvel. He uses drugs to stay in the game and collect millions of dollars. He didn't do it illegally, just like Jose Canseco didn't use steroids illegally in the 1980's. Is one okay and not the other? I look forward to your comments on this issue.

The Homerun Guys produced a cartoon that lampoons the steroid scandal. Not quite "This Land is Your Land," but amusing nonetheless.

Warning, they're using it to sell tee-shirts.

John Perricone continues his excellent coverage of the steroid issue.

A trial attorney with extensive experience in federal and state courts as both prosecutor and defense counsel writes in response to this post:

You wrote this:

"Folks, the only people who deserved to have fingers pointed at them are the players who illegally used steroids. These were grown ups who know the difference between right and wrong, and certainly know what's legal and illegal. In a way it's too bad the FBI investigation didn't go after the players as hard as the pushers. If the FBI had put a couple of big name baseball players in jail in the mid 1990's maybe we wouldn't be here."

Use of controlled substances is not a federal crime. The DOJ has no jurisdiction over it. Federal law enforcement has jurisdiction over possession and trafficking but not use. In fact, check the state laws on illegal drugs and I think you'll find that most -- if not all -- do not criminalize use. In the states, possession for personal use is such a low level misdemeanor that prosecution of an even smaller offense -- use -- wouldn't be worth the resources (and it might meet with very stiff public resistance).

There is an argument that if one used drugs then one necessarily possessed them, if not in hand then at least in the body, at least for a short period. In a legal sense that's a weak argument, but the argument has been made. But let's assume the theory is good enough to bring use under the jurisdiction of the federal courts. No US Attorney's office would pursue such a case. The amount involved would be so small as to be de minimus, and even if the case was proved it would be a very low level misdemeanor. It's simply not worth the resources, even if you can sustain the legal argument. States feel the same way. (Note: the feds do have jurisdiction over drug use if it occurs in a federal context, e.g., an airport or in the military. Airport cases are referred to the states. The military is unique for reasons that are probably obvious and the military keeps jurisdiction over drug use cases.)

Going after the pushers and manufacturers and profiteers is the only legal and practical way to address the problem.

Thanks for the clarification.

There's an awful lot of finger pointing going on right now regarding steroids. Jose Canseco, of course, has his book and 60 Minutes interview. Murray Chass is pointing fingers at Yankees management for not heeding a signal that Giambi was using steroids. John Perricone is pointing fingers at the press for not being on the story 10 years ago. And the FBI is now pointing fingers at MLB for not heeding warnings (although MLB denies the FBI talked to them).

Folks, the only people who deserved to have fingers pointed at them are the players who illegally used steroids. These were grown ups who know the difference between right and wrong, and certainly know what's legal and illegal. In a way it's too bad the FBI investigation didn't go after the players as hard as the pushers. If the FBI had put a couple of big name baseball players in jail in the mid 1990's maybe we wouldn't be here.

Jay Jaffe has much more.

Update: U.S.S. Mariner also has an excellent post on the subject.

ESPN.com has the details of Giambi's press conference. He didn't say much. I guess he has to treat his grand jury testimony as if it never leaked.

Bronx Banter has the details as Jason Giambi will hold two press conferences today, neither televised. It looks like it's going to be highly controlled by the Yankees; I take it Giambi's been practing his answers and won't stray to much from a script. At least he's finally talking.

Bronx Banter has the details as Jason Giambi will hold two press conferences today, neither televised. It looks like it's going to be highly controlled by the Yankees; I take it Giambi's been practing his answers and won't stray to much from a script. At least he's finally talking.

Will Carroll links to a story about a new designer steroid.

"We believe this was developed for the sole purpose of doping in sport," Rabin said. "We now have proof that THG was not a unique case. We now have proof that there are other designer drugs."

Ayotte said DMT consisted of a dangerous mixture of potentially toxic substances. Tests are continuing to identify the drug's properties and determine how it enhances athletic performance.

This is another reason I'd rather see transparent use. The doping police got lucky and found a designer drug, one that might be dangerous. But there's probably 10 others being worked on. They're not going to be FDA approved, their not going to be tested properly, and athletes are going to take them to get strong and earn more money because they can't be detected. Then you'll see really bad side effects. Make them legal, and make players disclose their use.

Here's one way to handle records set while using steroids. :-)

Will Carroll provides a number of interesting steroid links (although the British Weight Lifting Study link at present points to another article). The rat study shows how tendons stiffen with steroid use; I wish, however, they had also shown the effects on the rats muscles.

There are two comments to this post which deserve more attention.

The first:

David, why would you like to see a medical substance legalized? While the harm is not known for long-term use, they certainly are not good for you. At best, they don't harm you that much.

I'm not sure how much they help either, especially in the way most people feel they do, giving you the strength to hit for more power. If they are a performance enhancer, I would guess they increase stamina more than anything else.

But, if they even help a little bit, it creates a playing field that is not level. If they cause even a small bit of harm, I'm glad they are now banned. Finally, I'm curious if you feel all drugs should be legal, or just steroids, and how you came to that conclusion. Looking forward to your reply, David.

The second:

Well he** David, the criminal justice system sucks too. I mean there are people who are falsely convicted and the jury system is far from binary, it's "beyond the reasonable doubt" of twelve imperfect human beings, so in order to spare people from being falsely convicted let's just say to he** with the whole thing, and we'll let everybody get away with everything. Because it's an imperfect world after all.

How many NFL, NBA or Olympic athletes have had their lives ruined by a false positive? Really I'd like to know.

I'm all for libertarinaism, but you do need rules somewhere.

First of all, medical substances are legalized all the time. Ibuprofen used to be a prescription drug (it still is in high doses). And it's a performance enhancer. If you take Ibuprofen after exercise, your muscles recover faster, and you can exersice more often. You can lift every day instead of every other day. However, frequent use of Ibuprofen can also lead to liver damage. But you can control for this. You can get a physical once a year and have the doctor test your liver.

Ibuprofen is an example of a drug that is effective at lower doses than originally thought. The birth control pill is another. The pill is now so safe that teenage girls will take it to prevent acne. It could very well be that if we allowed steroid use:

1. Doctors might find that low doses of steroids are as effective as high doses.
2. That low doses do much less long term harm.
3. That researchers might develop something safer.

That's what many of the new drugs are about. Same result, fewer side effects. So my argument has always been legalize anabolic steroids and let players use them under a doctor's care and in the open. And then we can really learn about the risks and the rewards.

But since steroids are not legal, what would I do instead of testing? What should be the rules? My time spent in information retrieval research taught me that multiple sources of information are better than a single data point. For example, in retireving documents with a search engine you need to look at the frequency of search terms in a document. But you also need to look at the frequency of those terms in the entire collection of documents. Words with high frequency in a document but low frequency in a collection are good search terms, because they zero in on a few stories about the subject. Some search engines add other information based on links, word position, meta data, etc. So why not do the same thing in baseball drug testing.

For example, two players have a T/E ratio of 4. At that level either might be using testosterone or not. But one of the players has put on 25 pounds of muscle while the other hasn't changed. The guy who put on 25 pounds frequents a gym where arrests have been made for distributing steroids. Which one of these people is more likely to be cheating? Plus, with at least one drug test a year, you can establish a baseline for these tests. Was there a big change from previous results? If your T/E ratio suddenly goes from 1 to 5, that's good evidence something has changed.

So don't have a cut off. Look at all the evidence. Realize that no one piece of information tells you the truth, but a number of factors pointing toward cheating makes the offense more likely. Depending on one number from a test is the easy way, but it's error prone. Gathering more information is somewhat costlier and requires judgement, but in the long run will be fairer to all involved.

In a comment to this post, Al Bethke wrote:

I'm just not worried about false positives. I am worried about the integrity of the game, and with this strict policy, it is stronger than ever.

I'm very concerned about false positives. As Jayson Stark points out:

The worst part of testing positive would be getting that label Steroid User stamped on your forehead. That's a scarlet letter that these players would have to wear for the rest of their lives. If you don't believe their reputations will be tainted forever, just ask Jason Giambi -- if you can find him.

For a high-profile player, that means not just a life sentence of boos and insults. It means having everything he ever accomplished thoroughly discredited. And you sure don't want to be a utility infielder who tests positive. You'd be looking at playing the rest of your career in Korea.

So you can't evaluate this deal without remembering there are two levels of penalties -- formal and informal. There's a price to be paid to baseball -- and a price to be paid in the real world.

False positives happen because drugs tests are presented to the world as Bernoulli random variables (player was positive or negative) when in reality the tests measure some indicator of drug use in a continuous fashion, and use a cut off to indicate positive or negative. Depending on where you place the cut off, you're going to get more or less false positives. And it's a tradeoff. In general reducing false positives means increasing false negatives, and vice-versa.

A Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve is used to determine the cut off. The name derives from signal processing, the first use of this methodology. You can find a nice explanation of ROC curves at Steve's Attempt to Teach Statistics (StATS).

To understand an ROC curve, you first have to accept the fact that MDs like to ruin a nice continuous outcome measure by turning it into a dichotomy. For example, doctors have measured the S100 protein in serum and found that higher values tend to be associated with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. The median value is 395 pg/ml for the 108 patients with the disease and only 109 pg/ml for the 74 patients without the disease. The doctors set a cut off of 213 pg/ml, even though they realized that 22.2% of the diseased patients had values below the cut off and 18.9% of the disease-free patients had values above the cut off.

The two percentages listed above are the false negative and false positive rates, respectively. If we lowered the cut off value, we would decrease the false negative rate probability, but we would also increase the false positive rate. Similarly, if we raised the cut off, we would decrease the false positive rate, but we would increase the false negative rate.

Let's take testosterone as an example. It's a banned substance under the CBA (see page 160 of the CBA, page 171 of the PDF). Here's a research paper on the subject of developing a new way of testing for exogenous testosterone use. You see, you can't test for testosterone (T) directly, because we all make testosterone naturally. The standard test looks at the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone (E). The ratio (T/E) should be about 1.0. The IOC used a cut off of 6.0 for the Los Angeles Olympic games. But, as the paper reports:

The overall incidence of urinary T/E in the general population of healthy males not abusing steroids is <0.8%

In other words, .8% is the upper bound of how many people are going to test positive for testosterone abuse falsely. In other words, if you test 1000 baseball players using this criteria, 8 may come up positive, even if no one is using steroids!

Maybe 8 isn't a lot to Al, but it sure is a lot to me. But to get that number down to eight, you have to throw out almost half of the people who really are injecting testosterone! Take a look at this table from the paper. Using T/E >= 6.0 as a cut off, 25 of the 46 subjects getting injections of testosterone test positive, while 21 test negative. Even if you lower the cut off to 1.2, just slightly above normal, you still only catch 38 of the 46, while the false positive rate goes up five times.

And people do use this test. The National Center for Drug Free Sport, Inc. offers a package of anabolic steroid tests, and lists the cut offs here (last table). The T/E cut off they use is 15:1; they're obviously afraid of returning a false positive, but they are clearly tossing out a lot of true positives as well.

Where is the integrity in this? Half the players abusing these drugs are going to get away with it, while a small number of innocents are going to be branded cheaters. The union understands this, which is the reason they resisted testing for so long. The MLBPA's failure was not recognizing that their own rank and file didn't like their brothers using these drugs. Now those players have put their reputations and paychecks at risk to try to drive these substances from the game. I hope it turns out to be worth the risk.

P.S. If anyone has the information, I'd like to know if the T/E test is used, and where the cut off is set. If anyone has the actual ROC curve for this ratio, I'd love to see that, also.

Here's the press release from Major League Baseball on the tentative agreement reached with the MLBPA.

The agreement provides that every player will undergo at least one unannounced test on a randomly selected date during the playing season, and creates an additional program of testing randomly selected players. The agreement places no specific limit on the number of additional tests to which any player may randomly be subjected, and further includes random testing during the off-season, irrespective of a player's country of residence.

The agreement contains revised disciplinary penalties for positive test results, with first time offenders now being suspended for ten days. Second-time offenders will be suspended for 30 days. Third-time offenders will be suspended for 60 days. Fourth-time offenders will be suspended for one year. All suspensions will be without pay.

The agreement, when coupled with federal legislation going into effect this month, will broaden the list of banned substances in Baseball to include not only steroids, but steroid precursors and designer steroids such as THG, as well as masking agents and diuretics.

I'm really against a suspension on the first offense, simply due to false positives (if anyone knows what the rate of false positives is on the various steroid tests, please pass it on). Someone who doesn't use steroids is going to lose ten days pay for some false indication. And because they are testing for so many different compounds, false positives are going to be that much more likely. I personally believe the penalty for a first offense should be more extensive testing, maybe twice a week for six months. That way, if it is a false indication, there's no public stigma attached to the player.

Here's the ESPN report on the matter. Tom Glavine sums up the player's side:

"Everybody believed that the program we had in place was having an effect and definitely it was doing what it was designed to do," Mets pitcher Tom Glavine, a senior member of the union, told AP. "But having said that, with the stuff that was going on and whatnot, it forced us to take a look at revising it or making it a little tougher. It was not a question anymore if that agreement was going to be enough. It was a question to address some of the new issues that came to light and get our fans to believe we were doing everything we could to make the problem go away 100 percent."

The AP is reporting that major league baseball will announce a new steroid testing policy on Thursday (tomorrow). Details are sketchy but it looks like more frequent testing and penalties for a first offense. More tomorrow when the announcement is released.

CrimProf Blog speculates on the likely leakers in the BALCO case. (Hat tip, Instapundit.) He's narrowed it down to either one of the defendants or someone on the government side. I like his reasoning for ruling out the defense lawyers.

The defense attorneys and the defendants might have had an incentive to leak, since Bonds denied knowledge that the substances were steriods and said that he didn't think the BALCO defendant from whom he received the substances would have provided him with illegal steriods. It seems perhaps unlikely that one of the defense attorneys leaked the information, however, because leaking secret grand jury evidence to the media, and then moving to dismiss charges by blaming the government for the same leak, is a high risk venture that would take serious moxy if not insanity. Too much to lose, not enough to gain.

The Onion weighs in on stopping steroid abuse. My favorite:

Finally doing away with American League's much-debated "designated pisser" rule.

Will Carroll hits the big time with an op-ed in the NY Times! Sorry I missed it earlier, and congratulations to Will.

From the mind of Travis Nelson.

Quinnipiac University has released a poll showing high support for banning players who have used steroids.

By a 61 - 33 percent margin, American baseball fans say Major League players who test positive for steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs should be banned from baseball, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Steroid/drug use is a "major problem," 65 percent of fans tell the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll.

Fans oppose 57 - 36 percent the idea of expunging all baseball records of players who use steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs. But fans say 52 - 42 percent that steroid/drug users should be banned from the Baseball Hall of Fame.

I'm not sure what "banned" means here; banned for life, banned for a season or some other time frame. Here's the exact question asked:

Should major league baseball players who test positive for steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs be banned from baseball, or not?

I'd love to see people given a choice of time periods on this question. Still, an interesting result. Fans seem to be coming to the conclusion that if you take away time from players with a ban, you even out the record book. For example, if Bonds were banned for a year now, he probably doesn't break Aaron's record. This is sure to figure into the drug testing negotiations going on now between MLB and the MLBPA.

Stephen at Horsefeathers isn't upset by the steroids scandal. I love the closing quote.

Horsefeathers will, however, continue to enjoy the game, not expecting ballplayers to be noble role models for the youth of America, and recalling what Casey Stengel once said of Bobby Richardson, a virtuous man: "Look at him- he doesn't drink, he doesn't smoke, he doesn't chew, he doesn't stay out late, and he still can't hit."

Gwen Knapp totally misses what an amazing statement Donald Fehr made regarding drug testing.

Don Fehr made his big announcement as if he were reading a casserole recipe. The executive director of the baseball players' union has never been a particularly lyrical speaker, but Tuesday his delivery broke records for deliberate dullness. He doused a lot of other people's flaming rhetoric with a big, slowly poured pail of water.

"The Players Association and the commissioner's office have been engaged in discussions with respect to potential amendments to the steroid-testing provisions of the basic agreement,'' he read from a formal statement. "At its meeting today, the executive board received a full report and, after discussion, authorized us to attempt to conclude an agreement consistent with those discussions.''

Still awake?

Awake? I nearly jumped out of my seat! The players have convinced Fehr to do two things that go against what he stands for as a labor lawyer:

1. Allow his members civil rights to be further violated.


2. Reopen a completed negotiation.

This is a bombshell. The union has always been about protecting the richest of its members by driving up free agent prices. That was fine as long as the payoff appeared to be related to talent. But now the rank and file see steroids as taking money out of their pockets. The playing field is no longer level in their perception, and they want to go back to competing on talent, not drugs.

It's an amazing development. The owners, over the last 30 years have tried lockouts, scabs and collusion in an attempt to gain concessions from a strong union. For the most part, they've failed. It took players cheating against each other to bring about this change.

How this bodes for future negotiations is anyone's guess. By acting now, Fehr is likely heading off dissention that would weaken his hand in the next collective bargaining round. He'll likely have a united union behind him once again.

But it's an extraordinary opportunity for the owners as well. I hope they see this a chance to build a partnership with the players, rather than as a way to extract blood from them (figurative blood, that is). Building a level of trust here will go a long way to avoiding a work stoppage at the end of the current contract.

I'm hoping this is a defining moment in player-owner relations. Given their histories, it's not a big hope.

Jeff Kallman presents a history of cheating in baseball. It makes you wonder if the game ever had integrity.

David Gertsman send this article by John Lott and Sonya Jones of the American Enterprise Institute. They don't see the problem with steroids. They echo some of the arguments made on this blog.

But even if baseball players ended up crippled after their playing days as football players do, why isn't it their choice? What's next? Will government regulators protect white-collar workers from risking heart attacks when they pull all-nighters trying to meet deadlines?

The greatest risk to athletes may be the drugs' very prohibition. Getting the drugs in secret and not having the proper supervision may result in complications that could otherwise be easily avoided.

Update: Via Instapundit, the last paragraph of this article should be noted.

Karl Marx famously called religion the opiate of the masses. Today, he might point out that hysteria has become the heroin of talking heads.

Upate: Andrew Sullivan captures the feelings I've been trying to put in words for days.

The notion that there is some "pure" human being out there - unaffected by the technology that now enhances our lives in so many ways - is fiction. Why are sports the only arena in which this fiction is maintained? And why would it be so bad to aknowledge reality and celebrate the new frontiers that human science and human performance can now breach? I'm not that comfortable with that idea; but I'm having a hard time coming up with good arguments as to why I shouldn't be.

Carol Slezak finds a victim in the steroids scandal, Frank Thomas.

You remember 2000, the season the White Sox had the best record in the AL. Thomas hit .328 with 43 home runs and 143 RBI that season. But Giambi, then playing for the Oakland Athletics, beat out Thomas for the award by a narrow margin. I didn't understand it then. I certainly don't get it now.

Giambi hit a trace higher than Thomas, .333. But he had the same number of homers and drove in 137 runs, six fewer than Thomas.

Those are the numbers. They presented a compelling case for Thomas then. They present an even more compelling case now. Because Thomas might be many things, including mercurial, stubborn and weak-armed, but he is not a cheater. Anyone who is sickened by the thought of rampant steroid use in baseball -- and let's not kid ourselves that the problem is not widespread -- should have renewed respect for Thomas today.

Actually, Giambi had a superior season to Thomas in 2000, earning 38 win shares to Thomas' 34. And while Giambi hasn't admitted to steroid use during 2000, he's no longer getting the benefit of the doubt. How much did this hurt Frank? As this article points out:

As guys like McGwire, Bonds, Sosa and Giambi emerged as elite hitters, Thomas faded into the pack. He won a batting title in 1997 but turned in subpar performances the next two seasons.

He suffered the insult of having the White Sox invoke a "diminished-skills" clause in his contract after 2002, remaining with them only through a reworked deal.

If Thomas had won the MVP award in 2000, when he carried the White Sox to 95 wins with a vintage performance (.328-43-143), the diminished-skills clause would not have applied in 2001 and 2002.

That means he would have earned about $5 million more in '03 and could have earned $4 million more in '04, assuming the clause was not invoked after '03, when he delivered 42 homers and drove in 105 runs.

Yes, we should appreciate Thomas more (no pun intended). Maybe if Frank has a great season in 2005 baseball can use him as an example of what you can accomplish while you're clean.

In the previous post, Peter Gammons is quoted:

Certainly as the Bash Brothers ushered in the Home Run Era -- now known as the Juiced Era -- the people who run baseball encouraged everything powerful.

One of the sad things is that it would have been the home run era without drugs. For a long time, the belief in baseball circles that too much weight training was bad for you. Here's a paragraph from Jack Aker's Baseball Fundamentals Handbook:

Players up to age 12 shouldn't worry about staying in shape, as (hopefully) their normal daily activities give them plenty of exercise. There are exercises and drills that a player who wants to improve coordination and skill can do, however concentrating on physical conditioning is not necessary until about age 13. Many of today's amateur coaches are pushing their young players to pump iron, but this is, at the least, ILL-ADVISED, and can be DANGEROUS for young players. Baseball players need to be lean, loose and flexible, not muscle-bound. The greatest players of all time did NOT lift weights, and the players whose careers last the longest are those who keep their bodies
limber -- not bulked up. The players who do too much weight training are the ones who suffer the most injuries.

Actually, it's been known for a long time that weight training is very good for you. At some point, baseball players started to realize this, and started building their muscles the old fashioned way. The big boppers discovered they could hit more HR with bigger muscles. The skinny shortstops discovered they were better fielders with bigger muscles, and a few more HR came along as a bonus. Smaller parks, higher altitudes and a better manufactured (but still legal) baseball helped, too. But basically, ballplayers as a whole realized that the stronger you were, the better you hit, and the more money you made. It wasn't difficult to take the next step in building those muscles.

I'd still love to know how much of a difference these drugs make. The scientist in me would love someone to do a blind placebo study to see how much stronger people get when they are taking these drugs vs. when they think they are taking the drugs. My guess is that the HR records could have been broken without the juice. Maybe the next generation can prove me right.

Peter Gammons is at his best when his writing springs from his love of the game. He takes on the steroid scandal is this brilliant ESPN column. There's plenty of blame to go around. Money as the root of all evil.

This is an American story. It's about money, obscene amounts of it. Did, as Canseco alleges, teams have a pretty good idea what was going on? Maybe. Certainly as the Bash Brothers ushered in the Home Run Era -- now known as the Juiced Era -- the people who run baseball encouraged everything powerful. There is no question that, after Cal Ripken and the dignity of the Joe Torre championship Yankees, what took baseball out of its recession and back into the high life (again) was the Mark McGwire/Sammy Sosa Summer of '98, and how it took all of us in, from grandparents to children. It was all about what one would do to get rich, be it look the other way or chemically recreate one's body.

A union leadership that did not listen to its employers.

What is absurd here is that in the summer of 2002, when Canseco and Caminiti issued their original allegations, several players began speaking out. USA Today released a poll in which 78 percent of major league players said they were for serious testing, and more than 50 percent said they felt the pressure to use steroids or performance-enhancing drugs because of peer pressure. At the All-Star Game, Mike Sweeney told ESPN, "I want strong testing because I don't think it's fair for someone to have an illegal advantage over me." Lance Berkman said, "I want the testing because I don't think I should have to have anyone question how I hit my home runs."

But Fehr and Orza always believed that any form of drug-testing was un-American in that it forced an individual to prove his innocence. However, by adamantly sticking to that civil libertarian line, they in fact have led players to a point where, because of this BALCO scandal, every player who hits more than 40 home runs is subject to having to prove himself innocent.

And the war between the players and the owners.

Much of this can be laid to 30-something years of cold war politics between the Players Association and owners, with its resulting distrust and contempt. But the union lawyers have always considered themselves civil rights and labor lawyers. They are not. This isn't Edward Bennett Williams defending John Connelly, or Sacco-Vanzetti. They're not civil rights lawyers, they are entertainment lawyers.

The players these lawyers represent are the product that the owners and the industry present to the public, the consumers. And because they have stonewalled and litigated and arbitrated and filibustered so masterfully, the product they represent is tainted. As a result, the consumers have lost the trust that the players need, all because of a minute minority.

Finally, Gammons puts the resolution of this scandal on the players.

The dirty little secret is a major scandal. It is not going away. Curt Schilling has long said that we can't love the game as much as the players because we don't play, and now is the time that no one can do as much to restore the game they love as the players themselves.

So what can the players do? Mea Culpas would be the first order of business, I would think. How about a news conference from Jason Giambi saying that he lied to the press. Jason, say you're sorry, ask for forgiveness, and promise you won't do it again. Barry Bonds, how about giving back some of your salary of the last four years? Donate $20 million to rehabilitation clinics or whatever charity you like. How about some names that haven't been mentioned coming forward? How about a team getting together and pledging to stay clean? And then working together to stay clean?

I hope you'll read the entire article.

I'll be watching the Conte interview in a minute. I'll be posting my thoughts here. Feel free to post yours in the comments.

Update: Victor Conte must feel he's going to be convicted or at least has a plea bargain in place. He's basically admitting to illegally supplying drugs.

Update: He's also trying to sell us that he was trying to help the players by giving them the drugs properly. I don't see a Dr. in front of his name, and given Giambi's testimony, I sounds like he wasn't doing a good job of that.

Update: This report is focusing on Marion Jones. I guess that's what you get when a British journalist does the interview. Jones may be a more famous athlete world wide than any baseball or football player, but I doubt most people in this country care about track.

Update: I love this stuff. They show a picture of Tim Montgomery in 1997, then a picture in 2002. Look at the difference! No one could go from skinny to muscular in five years!

Update: Now we're getting to baseball.

Update: He's saying that more than 50% of players are taking anabolic steroids. He's also pointing out that 80% of players are taking stimulants before games.

Update: Conte says he gave clear and cream to Greg Anderson for Anderson's own use. Conte says he doesn't know if Anderson passed them on to the players.

Update: Wow. Not much on baseball at all. This is all about track. Disappointing.

Update: Conte thinks he should be in charge of the anti-doping agency. It may not be a bad idea. Like hiring hackers to fight hackers. Maybe when he gets out of jail. :-) He also keeps saying that if everyone is cheating, it's not cheating. Sorry Victor, cheating is cheating. Maybe if you told anti-doping agencies how to fight this five years ago, you would have been a hero. For now, you're just a criminal.

In the post-script to the interview, Martin Bashir brings up the idea of legalizing the drugs and having the athletes take them under a physician's care. I'm all for that.

Talking Baseball disagrees with Tim Kurkjian's claim that Pete Rose's transgression was worse than Barry Bonds'.

I simply do not agree with this assessment. What Rose did was wrong; he broke the rules, and he suffered the consequences. But he didn't cheat. What Bonds, Giambi, Sheffield, and countless other ballplayers have done is cheat. They broke the laws; they cheated. It's as simple as that. But baseball has a problem: Their collective bargaining agreements do not stipulate a punishment for this kind of action. While they have a clear policy against betting for fear that it would lead to cheating, when it comes to body-altering and performance-enhancing drugs, baseball has no policy.

Is this why Tim Kurkjian thought it was worse that Pete Rose bet for his own team? I am in no way excusing Pete Rose's behavior. But what these men have done over the past few years is much worse than betting. They used drugs, illegal ones at that, to cheat and gain an edge. That is, in my mind, all there is to it.

Will this trump the 1919 Black Sox scandal as baseball's darkest hour? Obviously, only time will tell. We might find out sooner rather than later as this evening at 10 p.m., Victor Conte will go on ABC's 20/20 ostensibly to name more names about steroid users. But until we have a historical perspective on this developing scandal, it's hard for me to see how betting on baseball could be worse than outright cheating especially when those who have bet on baseball like Pete Rose did were betting for their team to win.

Betting on your own team to win is a form of cheating, because Pete didn't bet on his team in every game. So he sent a message to gamblers on days he didn't bet on the Reds that the Reds were going to lose. He also very well may have managed differently with money on the game or not. It's not a victimless crime.

Right now I tend to agree with Tim. There's been plenty of drug abuse by players over the years. How much did greenies help players during the 60's and 70's? How much did cocaine help players in the 1980's? And who knows what else they were taking?

I want to throw out a hypothetical here. What if a surgeon invented a way to make you stronger with muscle implants? We already harvest hearts and lungs and corneas and livers for transplant. What if there was a way to graft more muscle onto your thighs? Is it different than laser surgery on your eyes so you see as well as Ted Williams? Is it different than getting a new arm through surgery to repair a blown tendon? Hypothetically, the effect would be the same as steroids; a stronger body hitting the ball farther. Would this be okay? Where do we draw the line and why do steroids seem to cross it?

We want to watch big guys hit home runs. That sells baseball. That helps our teams win. That's exciting. Why do we care so much about how they sculpt their bodies to become those hitters?

Afterall, we don't see to care so much about actors and actresses having plastic surgery. We go see them in movies because they look good, and when they stop being beautiful, we stop watching. Should there be a rule that only "natural" actors be allowed to make movies? Should Hollywood ban everyone who gets a face lift or tummy tuck?

Of course not. Becuase these people are hurting no one but themselves. And the same is true of baseball players. They're not hurting me. I've found baseball very enjoyable the last few years. Are they hurting the players of the past? Is Aaron going to be less popular because 755 isn't the pinnacle of home run power anymore? I don't remember Ruth's popularity dropping when Hank hit homer 715. He's as popular as ever today. (Note the authors name. Hey Moe!) The assault on Aaron's record will just bring Hank back into the spotlight so a whole new generation of fans will know the story of Hammerin' Hank. It's the best thing that can happen to Aaron. So who are they hurting?

As for the integrity of the game, baloney. Ruth and Mantle and all the other drunks who ever missed a game due to their drug of choice hurt the integrity of the game. The jar of greenies in clubhouse hurt the integrity of the game. They allowed players to function when they otherwise couldn't. Playing high on cocaine or narcotics hurt the integrity of the game.

So do we want ballplayers who go to bed on time, eat well and exercise regularly or do we want big guys who can hit the ball a mile?

A manager betting on baseball games hurts the whole team. It can force him to make decisions not in the best interests of the club or the players, but his own pocketbook. Steroid users hurt themselves long term for short term monetary gain. Make it legal under a doctor's supervision. Make sure they know the tradeoffs. Make sure they make an informed decision. And make sure their use is public knowledge. Then, let the fans vote with their cash on whether this is good or bad for the game.

Update: Some of the comments below suggest that I'm saying two or more wrongs make a right. I would prefer the clean living athletes myself. But this scandal is no different than any other that has plagued baseball in its history. Sixty years ago it was race. Ninety years ago it was gambling. One hundred years from now it will be electronic implants that enhance a player's ability. This scanal, too, will pass.

Signifying Nothing links to the next shoe to drop, Barry Bonds' testimony.

Bonds testified that he had received and used clear and cream substances from his personal strength trainer, Greg Anderson, during the 2003 baseball season but was told they were the nutritional supplement flaxseed oil and a rubbing balm for arthritis, according to a transcript of his testimony reviewed by The Chronicle.

Federal prosecutors confronted Bonds during his testimony on Dec. 4, 2003, with documents indicating he had used steroids and human growth hormone during a three-year assault on baseball's home run record, but the Giants star denied the allegations.

You should read the whole article. It's an interesting insight into Barry Bonds thought processes. It's very clear that he likes Greg Anderson, but it's also clear that Barry's not willing to make Anderson rich.

"Greg is a good guy, you know, this kid is a great kid. He has a child," Bonds said. At another point, he told the grand jury:

"Greg has nothing, man. ... Guy lives in his car half the time. He lives with his girlfriend, rents a room so he can be with his kid, you know?

"... This is the same guy that goes over to our friend's mom's house and massages her leg because she has cancer, and she swells up every night for months. Spends time next to my dad, rubbing his feet every night."

Bonds told the grand jurors that he had given Anderson a $20,000 bonus and bought him a ring after the 73-home run season. He also bought the trainer a ring to commemorate the Giants' 2002 World Series appearance. When a juror asked why the wealthy ballplayer hadn't bought "a mansion" for his trainer to live in, Bonds answered:

"One, I'm black, and I'm keeping my money. And there's not too many rich black people in this world. There's more wealthy Asian people and Caucasian and white. And I ain't giving my money up."

Which brings me back to the con game aspect of this story. Anderson is training Bonds and getting good results. So he then gets players refered to him. He says he's going to test them for mineral deficiencies, but tests them for steroids. When he finds a positive, he knows he has a player he can exploit. He doesn't need to have Barry on steroids for this to work, he just needs Barry to be successful.

So do I believe Bonds? Not really. Bonds probably has plausible deniability.

"I never asked Greg" about what the products contained, Bonds testified. "When he said it was flaxseed oil, I just said, 'Whatever.'

It's flaxseed oil, nudge nudge, wink wink, say no more say no more. It's like saying that you don't know that McDonald's coffee is hot.

One point where I am on Bonds side, however, is the witch hunt aspect of this case.

Bonds' attorney, Michael Rains, said he was upset, though not entirely surprised, his client's secret testimony had been revealed. He said he had no proof but suspected the government was the source of the leak, insisting it had been out to get Bonds from the beginning.

"My view has always been this case has been the U.S. vs. Bonds, and I think the government has moved in certain ways in a concerted effort to indict my client," Rains said. "And I think their failure to indict him has resulted in their attempts to smear him publicly."

Playboylooked at the Balco Case. (Link is to my post, the article is no longer on-line). The gist was that IRS agent Jeff Novitzky wanted to get Bonds because he didn't like Barry. It wasn't "steroids are doing damage to the game I love, let's do something to clean it up" or "this is going to hurt our children if we don't stop it." It was driven by out and out hate. And that is wrong.

Bonds isn't the only name mentioned in the article, but he is the biggest. What happens next is anyone's idea. Will Selig have the guts to ban Barry? Should he ban Barry and Giambi and Sheffield? If you suspend Bonds for a year, you pretty much finish his chance at Aaron's record. If you ban him for life, you also prevent him from breaking Babe Ruth's record for a left-hander (somehow, I think Bonds wants to pass Ruth more than he wants to pass Aaron) and you keep him out of the Hall of Fame. Does the BBWAA revoke his last three MVPs? This story is far from over.

One other aspect of the Giambi testimony struck me as interesting. Greg Anderson had a pretty good con going.

Giambi said Anderson had suggested getting his blood tested for mineral deficiencies and taking supplements to counter those shortages; it was a snapshot description of the legitimate business BALCO performed for athletes.

Giambi called Anderson upon returning to the States, then flew to the Bay Area in late November or early December 2002 and met him in Burlingame at a gym down the street from BALCO, he told the grand jury. From there, the two men went to a hospital for Giambi to provide blood and urine samples, which were taken to BALCO, Giambi testified.

Either during that meeting or in a phone conversation shortly thereafter, Giambi said, Anderson began discussing various performance-enhancing drugs he could provide the ballplayer. Also, when Anderson received the results of Giambi's blood and urine tests, Anderson told him he had tested positive for Deca Durabolin, the steroid Giambi said he had obtained at the Las Vegas gym. Giambi said Anderson had warned him to stop using it, saying it could stay in his system a long time.

At the time, baseball was implementing its first-ever steroids-testing program at the major-league level, during the 2003 season. It is illegal to obtain steroids or human growth hormone without a doctor's prescription.

So Anderson would use the excuse of testing for "mineral deficiencies" to really test for steroids. Probably, once he knew that an athlete was already taking the drugs, he would tell them to stop the ones they were on and take his. I'd like to know what happened if the player came back negative; did Anderson not take those players on assuming he couldn't sell them the expensive illegal drugs?

Sorry I'm late with this. My dad had eye surgery this morning. He's doing fine.

Eric McErlain has a linked filled post on the revelations of the Giambi brothers steroid use. The SF Chronicle article is here.

I must say I'm very disappointed, both at Giambi's stupidity and his dishonesty. First the stupidity:

Nedrow also asked Giambi about several different-colored pills Anderson provided; they were denoted on calendars as "Y" for yellow, "W" for white and "O" for orange, according to the ballplayer. Giambi testified that he didn't know what the pills were, though he thought the white one might have been Clomid, a female fertility drug that can enhance the effectiveness of testosterone. His use of the drug was reflected on a calendar, the prosecutor said.

"I don't know what they were," Giambi testified. "He didn't really explain them. He just had told me to take them. And it had -- he explained it has something to do with the system. ... He just said to take it in conjunction with all the stuff."

It's too bad Anderson's not a doctor; then Giambi could sue him for malpractice. Next, the dishonesty.

Giambi, a five-time All-Star, played his first seven seasons in Oakland, emerging as one of the game's top stars. After the 2001 season, the 6-foot-3-inch, 235-pound slugger signed a seven-year, $120 million contract with the Yankees. Two months after testifying before the grand jury, Giambi reported to spring training this year looking considerably thinner, though he insisted he had lost just four pounds.

There was speculation that the weight loss stemmed from Giambi's stopping the use of steroids. Asked by reporters during spring training whether he ever used performance-enhancing drugs, Giambi said, "Are you talking about steroids? No."

Don't these people know how not to answer a question? How about no comment or I'm not going to talk about that? The coverup is always worse than the crime.

What should happen next? Giambi was taking the steroids during 2003, the year the steroid ban went into effect in baseball.

Anderson kept him supplied with drugs through the All-Star break in July 2003, Giambi said. He said he had received a second and final batch of testosterone in July but opted not to use it because he had a knee injury and "didn't want to do any more damage."

Can the commissioner's office take action? A judge Landis like Black Sox ban? Probably not, since the procedures for dealing with cheaters are built into the basic agreement. But things have changed. The basic agreement was designed to protect the privacy of the players. The results were to be secret, and would only come to light if the ballplayers continued abuse and were suspended. It seems a ban is out of the question.

Can the Yankees do anything? It will be interesting to see if they can nullify the contract based on Giambi's 2003 usage. What will be more interesting is if Giambi can no longer play, will the insurance pay off on the contract? I wonder if they wrote the policy to exclude problems from illegal drugs?

Can some good come out of this. I hope players read this testimony and think, "I don't want to be that much of an idiot." My guess is that the lure of big bucks from big muscles will keep athletes shooting up.

Which brings me back to a point I've made before; let athletes take these under a doctor's care. Do you think a physician would have given a player female fertility pills? We're not going to stop steroid use by banning it. But maybe we can control the bad side effects controling the use.

It will be interesting to see Conte's interview. I expect this will get a lot worse.

One final thought. I'm disappointed as well that the transcript of the grand jury was leaked.

Anderson has denied wrongdoing in the BALCO case. His attorney, J. Tony Serra, declined comment, citing a court order aimed at preserving the secrecy of grand jury proceedings.

So in the future, players are going to be less willing to testify about people like Anderson. They'll go to court and take the fifth amendment, and the Greg Andersons of this world will keep on pushing their drugs. I'm sure the Chronicle is happy they got a big scoop, but I doubt there will be any cooperation with grand juries in the future.

Update: Jeff Quinton is keeping track of other bloggers commenting the subject.

Update: James Joyner has more.

Umpire Joe West is threw Julian Tavarez out of the game after examining Taverez's hat. I assume he found an illegal substance on the hat. The announcers claim that Larry Bowa has had the umpires check this in the past. Tavarez threw his hat into the crowd as he entered the dugout, and the fan who caught the lid is having a good time impersonating Tavarez and posing for pictures.

Here's a picture of Jack LaLanne from the 1940's. Seems he was able to build big muscles without the juice.

Here's the latest story from the BALCO scandal .
Of course, there's now a scandal over the scandal, as leaking of grand jury testimony is illegal. I thought this was the most interesting thing I read in both articles:

Montgomery did testify that Conte began giving him banned substances soon after the 2000 Olympics, the newspaper reported.

"How many times did he give you human growth hormone?" Nedrow asked Montgomery at one point.

"He would send four vials a month," Montgomery answered.

Montgomery told Nedrow he had followed the regimen for "maybe eight months." He said he got no benefit from "the clear" and split with Conte in September 2001 over a money dispute. He broke the world record the following year.

So we're investigating people over something that didn't work? This investigation and the press coverage of it smells more and more like a witch hunt to get Bonds.

The BALCO probe took a new turn yesterday with federal investigators obtaining all the results from all the drug tests taken last year. Doug Pappas has the politics pretty well covered here. But I really wonder about this series of events (from the ESPN article linked above):

1. Investigators wanted all the results from 2003.


2. The MLBPA, MLB and investigators negotiate that down to the ten who testified.


3. The union reneges on that agreement.


4. Federal investigators sieze all the results.


5. The Union had a chance to destroy the evidence and didn't.

When the MLBPA is involved, I always work on the assumption that Donald Fehr and company are the smartest people on the planet. Since what the union wants is no testing, what better way to get there than by having confidential results released by the federal government? Now, the MLBPA can break the agreement because the results were not kept confidential. And because they didn't destroy the results, they don't look like they were trying to hide something.

Yes, a few players have to sacrifice their reputations, but it will keep prying eyes out of their toilets for good. I think the tradeoff is worth it.

Nick Schulz links to an article suggesting that we allow but regulate performance enhancing drugs. I've taken a similar position in the past. But this article also suggests creating two leagues; one for the natural athletes and one for the juiced up players.

The two leagues would not work. The natural league would go out of business very quickly. It's like when Bob Cousy tried to start a basketball league for smaller players. I don't know if it's still around, but I haven't heard much about it lately. People want to see the best athletes perform at their best. They'd go see the stronger athletes. Of course, wouldn't it be funny if after forming the two leagues, you couldn't tell the difference?

Correction: Included link. Sorry, Nick.

Federal investigators have dropped all charges against the defendents in the BALCO case, saying it was just a bit of fun.

"Everyone thinks IRS agents are just boring accountants," lead investigator Jeff Novitzky explained. "We wanted to have some fun and get to meet some major leaguers. We know they don't take steroids. They don't have to. Just look how big Iran White got working out with Greg Anderson, and he never took the juice!"

Bonds' income generates about six million dollars worth of taxes a year. "Thank goodness the money is being put to good use!" he exclaimed when he heard he was in the clear. "That was a great joke. They almost had me believing I used steroids."

The Baseball Crank links to Jody Gerut on steroid testing. From Gerut:

MLB's drug program goes like this: last year a serious survey was done to determine if there was a problem with steroids in the game. If 5% or more of players tested positive then our drug deterrence program would be enforced and in 2004 we would have random, unannounced testing. Just over 5% of players tested positive but those test results were skewed. Problems occurred when those players who were randomly chosen to test more than once during the year and tested positive were counted twice, not once. Those players were counted as two positives not one, thus increasing the amount of overall positives and lifting the percentage of positive tests into the 5% range. Some players were mistakenly tested three times and if by chance they tested positive those were counted three times! 5% may not have been 5%.

That's not something I heard before. I'm surprised that the union would have agreed to such testing. Reading the basic agreement (page 161), I think Jody has this wrong. It says, "5% of players tested." That says to me, if you test 1000 individual players, 50 individuals have to test positive, not if you conduct 1000 tests, 50 have to be positive. I don't think the union would let management get away with that.

Update: In the comments below, Marty Cortinas of Across the Seams confirms Gerut with testimony by Donald Fehr. It seems to be that the union agreed to more stringent testing that the wording of the labor agreement would indicate.

Darren Viola writes that the NY Post has picked up on Will Young's blog entry on John Dowd's lecture. The blogosphere had this story days ago.

Chris Lynch links to this article on Playboy's web site. It's the story of the BALCO investigation, with extensive statements from the undercover agent who was shadowing Greg Anderson. This article has done more to convince me that these players really are using steroids than any other I've read. However, it also troubles me.

To White, Novitzky -- who did not participate in this article -- seemed to have an unusual interest in the ballplayer. He mentioned Bonds frequently after a sighting or a Giants game. One day at court Novitzky struck up a conversation with White that went beyond the usual talk-radio banter.

"That Bonds. He's a great athlete," White says Novitzky told him. "You think he's on steroids?"

White took a moment before replying, in his bourbon-and-cotton voice, "I think they're all on steroids. All of our top major leaguers."

Novitzky seemed to care only about Bonds. "He's such an asshole to the press," he said. "I'd sure like to prove it."

White is undercover agent Iran White. Novitzky is is Jeff Novitzky, an IRS agent. It was Novitzky who pressed the investigation. However, given his statement above, I wonder if it would have ever happened if Bonds had been a nice guy. It seems to me Novitzky, for some reason, was out to get Bonds, rather than catch criminals or clean up a sport.

The other interesting thing is that Iran White, just as he was closing in on Anderson, had a stroke. (The stroke was a result of a muscle that tore during weight lifting. I'm sure if that had happened to an athlete, someone would have blamed steroids.) So White never got the goods on Anderson, never made the drug deal he wanted to make, never got him to talk about juicing up Bonds or anyone else. So what does Novitzky do?

Shortly before noon on September 3, 2003, helicopters pound the air over BALCO's tiny offices. A pack of unmarked sedans surrounds the building. In a move other agencies would later question, IRS agents are told to place IRS placards on the dashboard of their cars. Nearly two dozen agents, several in black IRS flak jackets, along with a doctor the USADA has sent, crowd through BALCO's front door. Down the hall is a refrigerator for blood samples and a machine that resembles a mass spectrometer. A gym is farther back, its walls covered with framed signed jerseys of Bonds, Jones and other athletes.

...

Conte turns on Anderson, too, telling cops the trainer is supplying baseball players with testosterone cream and THG. He agrees to take investigators to a storage locker across the freeway, where they find THG, cream, human growth hormone, other steroids and files on athletes. As Conte leaves the BALCO offices a wave of news cameras and reporters engulfs him.

"Are these TV cameras?" he asks, clearly stunned. "How did this happen?"

Many agents -- everyone, in fact, who doesn't work for the IRS -- are angered by the publicity. The search of BALCO, which was supposed to remain secret for countless investigative reasons, now resembles an episode of Cops. Members of other law enforcement groups are furious at the publicity stunt. The search was designed as a pressure tactic, not as the end of the investigation; there are no plans to arrest Conte, who walks free.

So Novitzky jeopardizes the investigation with a poor search warrent execution. Why?

These days White wonders whether political headlines weren't grabbed over the possibility of larger and broader charges. Was Novitzky's intent to shape his investigative exploits into a book? Or did ego and one federal agency's desire to control the investigation determine the focus of what now plays across TV screens?

I'm eager to see how this plays out. I'm eager to see what names come to light, and how much evidence is againt them. I'm also eager to see if Novitzky profits from this investigation.

The author of Welcome to Funkstown recently attended a lecture by John Dowd, and reprints his notes here. I didn't realize how much Dowd dislikes Bud Selig:

After losing the suit in the courts, Rose’s agent finally agreed to settle. Rose claims that there were negotiations with Giamatti, but Dowd insists that Giamatti only held one position. Throughout the entire discussion, Giamatti always was supporting the permanent ban of Pete Rose from baseball for his actions. Unfortunately, a week after the case was settled (and Rose agreed to the ban), Giamatti died and was replaced by Fay Vincent. For the next fourteen years, Rose constantly tried to drum up public support, and he finally found an ally in the “present stooge” in the Commissioner’s Office.

It's also interesting that the suspension of Rose did have an effect on at least one other player:

One of the lasting effects of the Rose case was the way it eliminated some other gambling problems in baseball. Lenny Dykstra, for example, had a gambling problem but only bet on cards. When John Dowd went to speak with him on behalf of Major League Baseball, Dykstra notified him that he had completely stopped gambling solely because Pete Rose was caught. In fact, Gene Orza tried to stop Dykstra from talking, but he was thrown out of the room.

(Hat tip Will Carroll.)

This story makes me very apprehensive.

Will commissioner Bud Selig stiff-arm baseball's collective bargaining agreement in order to implement a more aggressive testing plan for performance-enhancing drugs?

An industry source told the Houston Chronicle that Selig is contemplating such a move. Unless significant progress is made in negotiations between the owners and the MLB Players Association, Selig may act within the next 10 days, the source said

To do so, the paper reports, Selig would use his far-reaching "best interests of the game" clause in an attempt to bypass the collective bargaining process and establish a testing plan similar to the one used in the minor leagues. That plan, the paper notes, would include a zero-tolerance policy in which one positive test will result in an immediate suspension of approximately two weeks. Additional positive tests would result in longer suspensions.

I have no doubt that if Selig tried this, the union would call for a strike. What would happen next would be very interesting. ESPN Insider (link requires subscription) has an article by an anonymous player that indicates players want tougher testing. Now, I don't put a lot of stock in anonymitiy, but if true, Selig may have found finally found a wedge to drive between the players and the union leadership. Can you imagine Fehr calling for a strike and the players refusing to ratify it? But Fehr knows if he gives ownership and inch they'll take a yard. Afterall, look where the testing program implemented has brought them so far.

Update: Doug Pappas relieves my worries about a strike. I had forgotten about arbitration. He also makes a very good point about the players:

And however divided the players may be on the subject of random testing, it's hard to imagine any issue unifying them faster than Bud Selig's asserting the unilateral authority to replace collectively bargained terms with those more to his liking.

I agree with that. But I do wonder how vocal the players will get about this subject.

John Molori takes the media to task for their coverage of the steroids scandal.

It's been a busy couple of days, so I haven't had time to address these two articles on baseball and steroids.

The first is a column by Thomas Boswell that appeared in the Thursday Washington Post. From the tone of the column I would say that Boswell favors the tougher testing called for by the Senate committee. However, I can't believe Boswell wrote this (emphasis added):

That was the last straw for McCain, who interrupted incredulously, "And you don't believe that 'further compromises' [by the union] are necessary?"

Fehr's voice was soft in the hearing room. He explained that his gall bladder had been removed two weeks ago, but he appeared to have a bit of gall left. In defense of baseball's current (improved but still weak) drug-testing policy, Fehr invoked the highest of American ideals: invasion of privacy and the presumption of innocence.

"We believe that testing of an individual, not because of something he is suspected to have done, but simply because he is a member of a particular class, is at odds with fundamental principles of which we in this country have long and rightly been proud," said Fehr. "It is not up to the individual to prove he is innocent, especially of a charge of which he is not reasonably suspected."

Thus do low goals, such as protecting rich cheats and their union-backing agents, produce lofty rhetoric.

So constitutional rights don't apply if you are rich? A presumption of innocence doesn't apply to MLB players? If a few are guilty then all are guilty? Aren't these the sort of excuses that led to the detention of Americans of Japanese decent during World War II? What will Boswell have us do, insert nanoprobes into ball players that detect any foreign susbstance that enters the body and immediately report it to the police? Just so he can be sure each and every home run hit is legit? Please. If the constitutional rights of a reporter were at stake, Boswell would take a much different tone, even if the reporter helped in the committing a crime. If Boswell believes there is a problem that needs tougher enforcement, fine. But don't dimiss someone's rights, just because they are rich. That's loathsome.

Speaking of loathsome, the second story concerns Reggie Jackson mouthing off over steroids. Reggie plays the role of the old-timer who can't believe the younger players are better than his generation.

"Somebody definitely is guilty of taking steroids," the former slugger told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution for Thursday's editions.

"You can't be breaking records hitting 200 home runs in three or four seasons. The greatest hitters in the history of the game didn't do that," said Jackson, who hit 563 home runs.

San Francisco's Barry Bonds is just two home runs shy of tying his godfather, Willie Mays, for third place on the career home run list with 660. Babe Ruth is second with 714 and Hank Aaron first with 755.

"Henry Aaron never hit 50 in a season, so you're going to tell me that you're a greater hitter than Henry Aaron?" Jackson said. "Bonds hit 73 [in 2001], and he would have hit 100 if they would have pitched to him. I mean, come on, now. There is no way you can outperform Aaron and Ruth and Mays at that level.

"There is a reason why the greatest players of all time have 500. Then there is that group that is above 550. There is a reason for that. Guys played 19, 20, 25 years. They had 9,000 to 10,000 at-bats, and it was the same for everybody.

"Now, all of a sudden, you're hitting 50 when you're 40."

Last I checked, no 40 year-old had hit 50 HR. But you know, Aaron had his greatest five-year stretch of HR hitting between the ages of 35 and 39, inclusive. In other words, Aaron broke Ruth's HR record because he performed better when he was old. Now, I know that one big reason for this was the move from Milwuakee to Atlanta, from a tough HR park to an easy HR park. But I could easily traffic in the kind of speculation that's going on today.

• There were (are?) a lot of amphetamines used by baseball players.


• Aaron's performance late in his career was abnormal for someone his age.


• Aaron must have used amphetamines to keep himself going.


• Aaron's HR record, therefore, should have an asterisk.

And I believe there were a lot of people who would have loved to use this excuse to knock down Aaron's record. But enough speculation. Let's look at a factual case.

Pete Rose used speed. I know this from an eyewitness source. That is, I was in on a conversation where a former ballplayer said that he saw Rose with a greenie on his tongue (Rose had stuck his tongue out at this ballplayer to show off the greenie). As Rob Neyer wrote:

I know a lot of people think he's admirable because he hustled for 24 seasons, but I think that admirable quality is more than balanced by the credible allegations that he gulped amphetamines ...

Amphetamines are a performance enhancing drug. They allowed major leaguers to party all night and play the following day. So would Pete Rose have been able to break Cobb's record without amphetamines? Should there be an asterisk next to his record? It's too bad Reggie has been gagged by the Yankees. I'd love a reporter to ask him about the use of speed in the 60's, 70's and 80's and if Aaron's and Rose's records, and for that matter, his 500 HR are tainted at all by that.

In response to my post about the Senate hearings on steroids, Frank made the following comment:

I don't understand why so many of you hold such cynical views about this. Look, the MLB exists only because Congress is willing to grant it an exception from anti-trust laws. Congress does this because it believes that the benefits of baseball outweighs the evils of a monopoly, right? So what happens when baseball becomes disgraced sport played by many players who cheat by taking illegal substances?

MLB's anti-trust exception gives Congress the right and the responsibility to make sure that baseball remains a public good. That's why senators are getting involved in this controversy. Besides, isn't it possible that these senators are baseball fans who care about the game?

It's clear that the union has no desire to fix this issue and the owners are too weak to fight them on it. I think Congressional pressure is the impetus that baseball sorely needs to institute a rigorous testing regime.

MLB wouldn't exist without the antitrust exemption? If anything, Major League Baseball would be stronger without the antitrust exemption. It would have to compete against independent minor leagues. We would have seen free agency sooner without the antitrust exemption, and free agency is responsible for the growth in the game over the last 30 years. There's a high probability that if the antitrust exemption had not been in place, the players would have never formed a union to protect them from the evils of drug testing! Look at the NFL. Lousy union, tough testing rules.

Also, Congress did not grant the exemption, the Supreme Court did. When people tried to challenge the decision, the Supreme Court punted and said it was up to Congress to resind it. So Congress is now responsible for a rule that it had no hand in forming.

I don't think it's clear that the union has no desire to fix this issue. The union is run by very smart men, who I suspect understand the steroid issue much better than the Senators questioning them. They understand that tests consist of false positives and false negatives, as well as real results. That's why players are only being reprimanded after long term failures, and why the players privacy is protected. The program they put in place may not be intrusive enough for a lot of people, but I think that the fact that 5 to 7% came up positive instead of the 70% that some people speculated about means that testing may be working.

Donald Fehr got an earful from all sides today. Senator McCain, Bud Selig, Paul Tagliabue and Gene Upshaw all agree that baseball should have a tougher drug enforcement policy. Fehr stood on principle, however:

Fehr said that he couldn't commit to any changes in the 2002 collective bargaining agreement, which called for anonymous tests last year for the first time. Five to 7 percent of those survey tests came back positive for steroids, which triggered testing with penalties this year.

McCain and other senators on the panel called the policy inadequate, noting that a player doesn't face a one-year suspension until the fifth offense. The NFL, by contrast, has a year-round random testing program for players and imposes immediate suspensions on those who test positive for banned substances.

"I believe that the program that we instituted has had some effect," Fehr said.

I have a feeling this is all theater. The Senate has better things to do than worry about steroids in baseball. I also wondered if Selig had donated to McCain. He hasn't. You can see his political donations here. Looks like he gives to Democrats. If you can scroll down, you can see Wendy's donations as well, also to Democrats. I guess there's no direct payoff here.

The Cubs are trying to get around the restrictions on clubhouse visitors:

Cubs president Andy MacPhail reiterated Saturday he was confident Julian Martinez would be retained as a member of the team.

MacPhail made that statement after commissioner Bud Selig vowed earlier in the day during a visit to HoHoKam Park that there would be no exceptions to his new restrictions on clubhouse and field access as Major League Baseball tries to eliminate any possible evils that unsanctioned outsiders might bring in.

I think this is a very bad time for clubs to be trying to find loopholes in this rule. If the Cubs want to hire the guy full time as a trainer, fine. Otherwise, they should keep him out of the clubhouse.

Eric McErlain of Off Wing Opinion writes me on the issue of steroids:

Been reading a lot of the stuff on steroids with growing alarm. While I can understand the libertarian point of view regarding every adult's right to ingest whatever they like (and generally believe that people can take care of their own business), that changes when it comes to terms of employment. MLB has every right to put steroids on the table with the union membership -- a membership that seems to be deeply divided over this issue (witness Schilling and Wendell's comments for starters).

As for the health issue, I've read a lot of the current stuff -- enough to say that I'm almost ready to concede that the issue is in serious dispute. But health issues aside, aren't you concerned with the effects on competitive balance within the sport? Health issues aside, isn't regulating the use of steroids in baseball a lot like the rule outlawing aluminum bats? It isn't about personal freedom, it's about the terms of competition, and how a number of players are attempting to leverage a clear and unfair advantage over others.

And if an individual player decides not to use steroids for reasons of his own health (after all, it's his decision, isn't it?), why should he be placed at a competitive disadvantage vis a vis his fellow union members?
Shouldn't his choice be supported?

Interesting in hearing what you have to say. If you'd like to take this offline, that's fine too.

Here's my reply:

I agree with you in principle, but I don't know that your statement that a person who doesn't use steroids is placed at a disadvantage is true. That is another assumption that just hasn't been proven.

If steroids were allowed, I would want full disclosure. I would want to know who is using and who isn't. Then we can tell if steroids really make a difference. It very well could be that the ability to hit a ball squarely is much more important than how much bat speed you are generating. It could very well be that strength training without steroids does just as much as strength training with steroids. Right now, we suspect that steroid training does help. We know from body building that it helps make muscles large, but that's not the same as knowing it helps in baseball.

(As an aside, I am surprised that the people who get the most attention are Bonds, Sheffield and Giambi, who were great players before suspected steroid use began. I think the poster child should be Bret Boone. Boone was someone with a lot of potential whose career was a disappointment. Then he got bigger and became great. I would love to know what he did that off-season before he joined the Mariners. Was it a super physical training regimen, or was it steroids? If it were steroids, I'd be solidly in your camp. If it wasn't, I think my current position would be stronger.)

So we're facing our own version of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. To judge how steroids are affecting the game, we need to know who is using them. But knowing that would mean that there would be no more testing, since player privacy would be violated, and the union would stop the testing. We would go back to being in the dark. Not knowing, we have to trust the union and MLB to clean up the game, something I'm not very confident about. And of course, there's always the problem of the biochemists being ahead of the testers, as new and better drugs come on line and are undetectable.

My idea is regulation. It allows the use of steroids in a controlled way, for short periods of time, only in the offseason. I'm worried that players health is being hurt by not using these substances properly. I don't think testing will stop the use. So I would rather see players monitored under a doctors care.

To sum up, we don't have enough information right now to know what speculation is true and what isn't. I think my idea is a way for us to get that information.

To quote Donald Rumsfeld,

We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we know there are some things we do not know.

There is way too much we don't know here. We don't know who used steroids and who didn't. We don't know which drugs were used. We don't know how much the results of a weight training/steroid regimen are attributable to steroids. We don't know if the doses taken can be severely reduced with the same results. We don't know if there is a level of use where health risks are acceptable.

I want to know these things. Until we do, I believe that monitored, public use is the best way of dealing with the situation.

Update: You can find Eric's posts on steroids here.

Update: Eric reponds to my reponse here.

John Perricone at Only Baseball Matters has a number of posts on the steroids issue. Start here, and work your way forward in time.

A couple of interesting items in this article. The second is on the popularity of baseball:

Here's one example of what bad trouble baseball is really in: Fox will kick off its coverage April 16 with a broadcast of the Yankees-Red Sox game at 7:05 p.m. It will be the first national prime-time broadcast of a regular-season game since Mark McGwire broke Roger Maris' home-run record in 1998. Here's another: ESPN says ad sales for its regular-season games are up 15 percent over last year.

Baseball was front page news a lot this winter. Between the trades, aborted trade, high profile free agent signings and steroids, baseball had a ton of publicity. And there's no such thing as bad publicity. Add to that the great playoffs, and interest in the game appears to be growing.

The first part of the article talks about how the BALCO case has turned into a witch hunt. This paragraph made me think:

The second is that for all of Selig's public protestations to the contrary, I am betting that immediate public testing is the last thing he wants. Suppose Bonds, Sheffield, Giambi and the rest are found to be using steroids. What does baseball do then? Fine them? Suspend them for a certain period? Kick them out of the game? And would these public revelations quiet the current blood lust or exacerbate it?

If Selig had the chance to punish the Yankees by suspending Sheffield and Giambi, would he do it? Other teams seem to be upset that the Yankees are so far over the luxury tax limit. Getting rid of Jason and Gary would take the Yankees down a notch. I don't think the player's union would allow it, but if Selig tried such a move, I would not be surprised at all.

He's from BALCO, and will be holding a press conference at 5 PM EST on ESPNews.

Update: Here's a link. It's Victor Conte's lawyers, not Conte himself. Conte is the founder of BALCO.

Update: Conte lawyer denies leaking information.

Update: The lawyer is saying that statements were taken from Conte and others during the initial search of BALCO. There is no audio recording of those statements, only the written record of the agents. He's insuating that the information being leaked is from those transcripts, and that information is being spun to smear the athletes.

Update: I think you can sum up their line of reasoning as "don't trust an unnamed source."

Ryan Wilson speculates on how steroids could have helped Randy Velarde hang on to a job.

Brian Gunn of Redbird Nation posts his thoughts on the steroid issue.

Steve Bonner cites a post of mine in his post on today's naming of players. Let me just say that I don't think players should be breaking the law to take steroids. I think the laws and rules of baseball should be changed in order to allow them to take them under a doctor's care.

Would I prefer they not take them? Of course. But I'm trying to be realistic. There's too much money at stake, so players are going to try to get that extra edge. And as Nick Schulz points out, the physical downside may be exaggerated. (Make sure you read all of Nick's entries on the subject.)

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Sheffied, Bonds, Giambi, Santiago, Marvin Benard and Randy Velarde all received steroids.

The baseball stars allegedly got the illegal performance-enhancing drugs from the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative through Greg Anderson, Bonds' personal weight trainer and longtime friend, according to information furnished the government and shared with The Chronicle.

The Chronicle is very quiet about the source. The informant doesn't know if these players actually used the substances:

The information shared with The Chronicle did not explicitly state that the athletes had used the drugs they were said to have obtained. Bonds, who is baseball's single-season home-run king, and Giambi, who won the American League Most Valuable Player award when he was with the Oakland Athletics, have publicly denied using steroids. So has Sheffield. All three declined to discuss the matter Monday.

The biggest charge in article is that Bonds used Human Growth Hormone during the 2001 season, the year he broke the HR record. The players continue to deny using these drugs.

Update: In the comments, John Gibson asks:

Why the distinction between obtaining and using? Would anyone on this planet actually believe they obtained steroids but chose not to use them?

I think the distintiction comes in using the word "obtained" vs. "received." The way it's being portrayed in the media, I get the impression that the trainer gave these substances to the players, as opposed to the players asking for them. Sort of, here try this, it will make you stronger. Maybe the players took the drugs and didn't use them. Or maybe they were told the drugs were not illegal. I know it's farfetched, but it's something to consider.

Now I could believe that BALCO used the pitch, "This is new, it's not a steroid so it's legal." If so, the ballplayers would be no more gullible than the people who buy the herbal supplements I see in my e-mail spam all the time.

All-in-all, I'd like to hear these allegations from a named source.

Update: Off Wing Opinion picks up on something I missed. And through that link, Stick and Move finds the humor in Velarde using steroids. I guess you have to be good in the first place for these drugs to earn you a lot of money.

Skip gets it right. As I've said before, the owners and players need to form a partnership of trust. Then salary and other issues will be much easier to handle.

The Baseball Crank notices the chatter about baseball players on steriods is heating up. It won't be long before more names are named.

Update: Sheffield is denying he used steroids.

Will Carroll links to the Smoking Gun, a web site famous for publishing mug shots of famous people and intriguing court documents. Will points to the search warrant affidavit in the BALCO case that leaves out the names of ball players, save one, Gary Sheffield.

Now, this doesn't prove anything. I assume BALCO was also sending legal supplements to players. But now Gary is open to questioning by reporters. Between A-Rod and Sheff, there aren't going to be enough reporters left to cover the rest of spring training.

Update: Sheffield denies using steroids. He says he bought vitamins.

According to this article on SFGate.com, MLB is going to make teams enforce the rules about unregulated personnel in the clubhouse. What I hadn't realized before reading this story was how much like the 1980's cocaine scandal this is:

Strong (along with six Pittsburgh men) was convicted and found guilty of 11 counts of distributing cocaine. He received a 12-year sentence and was released after serving four years. As in the current steroid case, attorneys for the defendants questioned why the drug-purchasing players weren't indicted.

Although then-Commissioner Peter Ueberroth handed down suspensions to 11 players -- seven for a full season -- all avoided the suspensions by agreeing to donate a small percentage of their 1986 salaries to a drug program and do community service work.

Afterward, Ueberroth made his ridiculous statement that "baseball's drug problem is over."

Nearly 20 years later, it's not cocaine. It's steroids.

It's not a caterer with complete access. It's a personal trainer with complete access.

Interestingly enough, Dusty Baker's name comes up in both of these cases.

Cubs manager Dusty Baker, who managed Bonds for 10 years in San Francisco, told The Chronicle in October that the steroid scandal could turn into something similar to baseball's cocaine scandal in the '80s.

"This is similar to, back in my day, the Pittsburgh drug trials," said Baker, referring to the case in which several players were called to testify in a drug probe, leading to the conviction of Phillies caterer Curtis Strong, who distributed cocaine to players. "That's bad. I've been through (guilt by association) already. When your name is mentioned, some people, all they see is guilt."

Baker's name was mentioned in testimony, along with names of dozens of big-leaguers, but he wasn't called to testify.

Too bad Dusty didn't notice the similarities sooner.

It looks like federal agents know the names of some players who have taken steroids:

"Inside Anderson's residence, agents found steroids, syringes and other paraphernalia associated with steroid distribution activities," the documents said. "In addition, agents found files identifying specific athletes. These files contained calendars, which appear to contain references to daily doses of steroids and growth hormones."

The indictment announced last week said federal agents found about $63,920 in cash in a locked safe at Anderson's residence during the first raid.

"Some of the money was broken up into separate envelopes with the first names of known athlete clients written on them," the documents released Tuesday said.

My mom used to use the envelope system for budgeting my dad's paychecks until we were robbed and she switched to a checking account. Low tech, but under most radars. I have to believe this information is going to come out in the trial.

Only Baseball Matters is taking an in-depth look at steriods. Start here and follow the links.

Doug's Business of Baseball Blog points out a paradox of the BALCO trial. That case threatens to identify players who have tested positive, and the union won't stand for that. If players are outed, drug testing in MLB will stop.

ESPN is reporting that four people will be charged in the BALCO case. The interesting thing is that the athletes are being kept out of this to a great extent.

The charges include conspiracy to distribute steroids, possession of human growth hormone, misbranding drugs with intent to defraud and money laundering.

An affidavit from an IRS agent who investigated the case cites e-mails from Conte to unidentified athletes indicating that the scheme was aimed at fooling drug-testing programs used by pro sports leagues, the Olympics and other competitions.

According to the indictment, the four were involved in the scheme between December 2001 and Sept. 3, 2003, in which steroids were distributed to athletes on six different occasions.

One steroid, called "The Cream," included a substance that masked an athlete's use of the drug during testing. Another, called "The Clear," was sold to the athletes as a substance that would provide steroidlike effects without causing a positive drug test.

If there is a trial, you would think the unidentified athletes would be asked to testify. Until then we'll have to wait.

I didn't think I'd have anything to blog about during the State of the Union address, but President Bush just called athletes on the carpet for using performance enhancing drugs.

Rob Neyer offers a history lesson on gambling in baseball.

There is a problem, though. The timeline really isn't a timeline at all, but rather two broad points.

1865-1920: Stinking Cesspool of Greed 1989-2004: Pete Rose

Is this a gross simplification? Sure.

Is this gross simplification generally accurate? Yup.

Darren Viola points me to this opinion piece in the NY Times by former commissioner Fay Vincent:

So word is that Pete Rose finally admits in his new book that he bet on baseball. I guess I am supposed to feel vindicated since he spent the last 14 years calling John Dowd and me names. Mr. Dowd was the baseball lawyer who did the investigation of Mr. Rose and prepared a report we're now told was accurate. Next we're likely to have the spectacle of Mr. Rose being embraced by Bud Selig, the baseball commissioner, and, like the Prodigal Son, ushered to the front row of baseball's most honored citizens.

Pardon me while I rise to urge some caution. Ever since St. Augustine set the bar pretty high, there has been a certain style to confessional tomes. Now we have a mea culpa by Mr. Rose and no saint is he. Augustine, having lived it up, saw the light and wrote with a sense of guilt and regret. He even anguished over having stolen a pear. Early reports are that Mr. Rose confronts his past with very little remorse. Between him and Augustine, there is little doubt whose book will live longer.

This basically confirms Rob Neyer's theory that Rose was going to admit gambling in the book. It also reinforces the Pete Rose paradox; if you deny betting you're suspended for life, but if you admit you broke the rule that got you suspended, you're reinstated.

If Rose is to come back to the game, I hope he's not allowed a complete return. Let him in the Hall of Fame if the voters see fit; let him visit ball parks and talk to players. Let him be an advance scout. But don't let him back in a dugout. I don't see how he can be trusted with a team again.

Seems the government ban on ephedra hasn't hurt sales too much.

Ephedra is flying off the shelves at Absolute Nutrition in Chicopee.

The federal Food and Drug Administration's recent ban of the weight-loss stimulant is boosting owner James P. Magagnoli's sales of the product, not reducing them.

"I had a guy call up yesterday and order five, two-month supply bottles and others have called to get things put on hold or charge (large quantities) to their credit cards," he said. "I am buying a couple of cases for myself."

Despite the FDA warning and that the product has been linked to 155 deaths as well as strokes and heart attacks, consumers and health professionals remain divided about the stimulant's safety.

People are dying from using this herb, the federal government thinks it's dangerous enough to ban sales, so let's go out and stock up! Sounds like some people are trying for a Darwin Award.

The US government has announced a ban of ephedra, an herbal supplement linked to the death of Orioles pitcher Steve Bechler. I'm not crazy about bans like this. The people who want to use ephedra will get it; and since they will get it illegally, I suspect it won't be as good as the over-the-counter supplement, and even more harm may be done.

Earlier this year, I suggested a get tough policy for the minor leagues, similar to the one used with tobacco. The ban will make some people happy, and the government looks like it's doing something, but I doubt it will be very effective. You would think a few deaths would be enough to turn people off, but I don't remember cocaine use going down after Len Bias.

Thanks to Instapundit, I found this article by Arnold Kling on regulating biotechnology (he uses steroid use in baseball as an example). His point is that regulation of biotech will lead to a world-wide dictatorship:

The Bioethics Council's report has been widely praised, at the symposium and elsewhere, for raising the critical issues and moving the debate forward. I do not see it that way. By concentrating on ends and ignoring means, the Council has ducked what I see as the most fundamental ethical issue of all, which is whether concerns over biotechnology scenarios warrant a worldwide totalitarian dictatorship. If, as I would argue, such a dictatorship would be more dystopian than any of the scenarios that technology might create, then the report is really a cop-out.

Some of the toughest issues in bioethics involve means as well as ends. Will we curb freedom at the level of research, the level of development and marketing, at the level of consumption, or at all three?

Under decentralized decision-making, we are going to continue in the direction of conscious genetic selection, new techniques for physical and mental enhancement, artificial mood creation, and greater health and longevity. We have been doing these things for thousands of years by cruder means, and we are not going to stop now in the absence of a complete social redesign. Such a social redesign strikes me as more frightening than the dangers that it proposes to avoid.

As I've said before, it's not long before a rich ballplayer can afford to have his own private biotech lab in his basement, making performance enhancing drugs tailor-made for him. They won't be detected, because he'll be the only user. People will suspect, but will that suspicion be enough to break down the player's door and look for the lab? I hope not.

Barry Bonds will testify today before a federal grand jury in the BALCO case. Ann Killion of the San Jose Mercury News sums up what we will learn very nicely.

What happens in a federal courtroom today won't mean the end of Bonds' baseball career. It won't be an apocalyptic moment for the sport or the man. It won't mean that either the cynics or the Pollyannas are right.

The cameras will try to capture Bonds' image. The reporters will try to get a quote. We'll see how he walks up the steps and down the hall.

But that is about all we'll learn.

The testimony is confidential. We may never learn what Bonds talks about today.

Rob Neyer has a very sane piece on the steroid problem at ESPN.com.

I wish somebody could wave a magic wand and eliminate all illegal and/or dangerous performance-enhancing substances from professional sports. Who knows, maybe we'll get there someday. But today, right now, steroids and Human Growth Hormone and all the rest are a part of the environment. Not a positive part. But a part.

Is this a problem? Sure. But baseball's always had problems, and somehow it's always survived.

Yes, all of the great home-run records may be falling. But the sky isn't.

ESPN.com is reporting that substances retrieved from Greg Anderson's home may be anabolic steroids. Of course, it's from an unnamed source, so take that for what it's worth. Anderson is Barry Bonds trainer, and the raid was part of the investigation of BALCO.

A search of Greg Anderson's house also discovered information that detailed athletes' names, the names of drugs they may be using and apparent drug intake schedules, according to the Chronicle report. There was no information in the report linking Bonds himself to the drugs or the recorded information.

If this is true, I'd love to see those documents.

Charles P. Pierce writes in Slate about the media obsession with steroids. My position is evolving on this. On one hand, I'm concerned about illegal drug use. On the other, steriods are a lot less harmful than alcohol or crack, especially if used properly. By penalizing steriod use, it's pushed underground, and trainers, rather than doctors are administering the drugs. Do they know the proper dose? More importantly, do they know how to bring the players off the drug properly? My late mother took steriods to help her breathe during asthma attacks. She did not react well to them, but once she started taking them she had to be brought off of them very slowly to prevent an even worse reaction. I'm afraid abusers take doses that are too large and do not come off them properly.

It could very well be that used properly, steriods are a good way to maintain and build strength. It could very well be that players who use an off-season regimen of steriods and strength training are better hitters and better pitchers, and that the short time period of exposure does not cause long term health problems. And with new drugs being developed all the time, steriods are probably going to get safer to use. So my position is becoming, why not let players who want to use steriods under a doctor's care for a short time period during the off-season? It has to be better and safer than what's going on now.

(Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan for the link.)

Barry Bonds is in the news twice today. On the business side of things, he's withdrawn from the MLBPA group licensing agreement, and will negotiate these on his own.

Bonds informed the union that he would not be signing the organization's group licensing agreement next year and would instead pursue licensing opportunities on his own.

Players usually sign the group licensing agreement, which allows companies that obtain MLBPA licenses the right to use players' names and likenesses on their products. In exchange for their rights, the players get a percentage of the sale of the products such as trading cards and video games.

The signing of the agreement is usually a formality. In fact, Bonds will become the first union member in the 30-year history of the licensing program not to sign it, said Judy Heeter, director of business affairs and licensing for the MLBPA.

This is a pretty major deal, and a slap in the face to the union. The MLBPA has always been about the the big contract players; to have one of the best abandon them like that does not bode well for that licensing money to continue to flow in. If Bonds starts landing big deals, how long before A-Rod and Sosa and the other big stars follow suit? I'd be surprised if the union didn't exert a lot of pressure to get Bonds back in the fold.

The second story involves Bonds' personal trainer, Greg Anderson. Anderson has been indentified as the target of the probe into THG. Bonds is going to testify, and it will be interesting to see if Barry is implicated in using THG.

More than five percent of major league players tested this year came up positive for steriods, so testing will continue next year:

But on Thursday, the results came back and proved what many in baseball assumed and what former MVPs Jose Canseco and Ken Caminiti had already admitted.

"Hopefully, this will, over time, allow us to completely eradicate the use of performance enhancement substances in baseball," commissioner Bud Selig said.

MLB said of 1,438 anonymous tests this season, between 5 and 7 percent were positive.

My first reaction is, this seems to be a long way from the 50% Sports Illustrated claimed Ken Caminiti told them. Of course, as THG, the testers are always going to be playing catchup with the drug users, especially as designer drugs become more and more common.

I still think this is a bit of an overblown issue. We'll see if usage declines over time. My guess is that players who do abuse steriods will find ways to cover their tracks.

Bryan Christopher writes:

Barry Bonds' appearance as a witness in the BALCO investigation led me to beat baseball's steroid controversy into the ground one more time before the winter.

   No one has ever told me exactly how the players are being tested. It seems as though most media outlets are assuming that justice is being served. I wanted more detail, and started looking around. I found a description in the MLB players association 2003-2006 basic agreement, and after reading it over, I'm more suspicious than before.

   If I interpreted it correctly, the agreement states that the Major League Baseball drug prevention and treatment program is headed by the Health Policy Advisory Committee(HPCA), made up of two representatives for the players association and two for the owners. They were to oversee this year's initial "program" testing of all players at a random time during the season, as well as a follow up test five to seven days later. Commissioner Bud Selig could then if he so chooses, test as many as 240 players again.

   If the results show that more than five percent of the players tested positive, the same procedures will take place in 2004, as a "survey" program and continue every year until the results show less than 2.5 percent of positive tests in two consecutive years combined. If less than five percent tests positive, the same "program" testing will also occur in future seasons. Ultimately, regardless of the results, the league-wide procedures will remain the same.

   Players that test positive, those exceeding the set limit (set by the HPCA), refusing to take a test, or caught tampering with samples, are placed on a "clinical track," which requires further testing. If the player tests positive again, he will be placed on an "administrative track." Players on the administrative track are monitored by the HPCA, their team's manager is notified, and they must take part in counseling, treatment, and commissioner-appointed follow up testing.  

   The agreement says patients will remain confidential, and their identity and test results will not be released to the public, the media or other teams.

   The degree of disciplinary action is left up to the commissioner. All offenses result in progressively longer suspensions or costlier fines, leading up to a minimum one year suspension or $100,000 fine for the fourth offense. Like all other disciplinary actions, players are allowed to appeal.

   What does all of this mean? The way I see it, testing will not change a thing. Whether this year's results show up 90 percent positive, or completely steroid-free, the steps taken bring no added responsibility. Theoretically, a player can test positive over and over again, receive counseling, fines and placement in rehabilitation programs, but never miss an at bat. Bud Selig holds the power to penalize players by handing out fines or making them sit out games, which means someone's career will be forever tainted and used as an example.

   The agreement was drawn up in a cowardly (or perhaps brilliant) fashion. It brings new integrity to the game without holding anyone truly accountable. If the test results came back and half the league was using banned substances, suspending hundreds of players would pose more serious problems than some skewed home run totals. The current regulations protect the commissioner from facing a catastrophe by giving him the option letting them continue to play. Bud Selig can follow the rules and still let them take their supplements. He can penalize players, and require them get treatment, but if they keep paying fines, they can keep playing. What if late in his career a player tests positive during each of his final five years, as he pads his hall of fame credentials and climbs towards the top of the record books? Or an up and coming superstar plays while using illegal substances for almost his entire career? Who is going to put the asterisk next to their stats? Not Selig, unless he thinks it would be in the game's best interest. Keep in mind this is the same commissioner who left the 2002 all star game a tie, and in my opinion threatens to implement programs (contraction) just to create leverage in negotiating with the players. He cannot be trusted, but that's a whole other story. Right now, using steroids does not put a player's career at legal risk, and until it does, nothing will change.

   Selig still has too many problems to mend before he can make time for another angry players union. Plus, the next three years of inadequate testing will perhaps allow for the games economics to improve. The offensive mindset many of today's teams embrace would suffer from suspensions. Sitting hitters for juicing would take away from the revenue gains made in the past few years, and erase the benefits that avoiding the work stoppage in 2002 appeared to create. How many fans are going to show up to watch a below .500 team if their leading power hitter sat games out for weeks? Would a small market team make the playoffs if their numbers three and four hitters had to miss time in September? These don't sound like profitable options, and perhaps that what these policies boil down to. The rules show that revenue can increase while integrity fades away.

   Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the fans will never find out. We won't know who is juicing, or if he quits after getting caught. We can't verify Ken Caminiti's allegations in Sports Illustrated, or the numbers in Jose Canseco's book. We will have no choice but to analyze every piece of information reported and decide for ourselves if it is true. Unless someone surprises baseball (like a BALCO investigation), Selig will keep worming his way out of difficult situations, and this debate might be left to be beaten into the ground, in hopes that fans will assume the players are getting tested, and the problem goes away on its own.
   You be the judge.

Source: MLBPA 2003-2006 Basic Agreement
   http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/spo/mlbpa/mlbpa_cba.pdf pgs
157-175

Bryan makes many good points here. We do have to put a lot of trust in the Lords of Baseball to make sure this is done properly. I have the same reservations that Bryan has. We can only hope that future labor agreements lead to better testing.

David Aceto comments on this post:

A minor point ... The emperor at Mozart's time was the Holy Roman Emperor, a title that had become almost hereditary to the Habsburg family (There was a slight problem in the 1740s, and the family became known technically as Habsburg-Lorraine, but this is all getting too complicated ....) . True, the person who was the emperor was also Habsburg ruler of Austria, too, but not as "emperor" of Austria. Not until 1804 was Austria proclaimed to be an empire, in response to Napoleon's self-proclamation as Emperor of France (or maybe it was emperor of the French - I'm getting rusty on some of the fine points) and the impending dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire, which happened in 1806.

Napoleon was fired after losing to the British in seven games, despite bringing the French back from a 3-1 deficit due to his exile to Elba. Napoleon had home field advantage in game 7, but a postponement due to rain gave Wellington's starters an extra day of rest. Although Nappy's position had been in jeoparday for over 100 days, many blame his firing on the misuse of Marshal Grouchy in the 8th, allowing Wellington to bring in Blücher (sounds of scared horses) from the bullpen to shutdown the French in the ninth.

The FDA has declared that THG is an illegal drug, not a dietary supplement. This is the part I find most interesting:

Exactly who developed THG is unclear. Dozens of top Olympic and professional athletes have been subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury probing a California lab that sells nutritional supplements. Its owner has denied supplying THG, and federal officials, including FDA's Taylor, refuse to comment on the scope of their investigation.

Troubling to lawmakers is that THG apparently was sneaked onto the market in the guise of a dietary supplement. It's not a supplement but an unapproved drug, making any sale or usage illegal, FDA's Taylor said.

Currently, however, "There's nothing to stop another group of folks in another lab from concocting another designer steroid that will circumvent this FDA ruling," said Joe Shoemaker, spokesman for Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

So they are saying that something got into the food supply, and we don't even know who invented it? And with this type of science getting easier to do, it won't be long before rich athletes have their own designer factory in their basements. One can imagine a star making 25 million a year putting aside $2 or $3 million annually to produce drugs designed specifically for him. And not necessarily performance enhancing drugs as we understand them now. Drugs that cause muscle not to break down (as opposed to build up) might extend a player's career, giving him more years to earn high pay. It would be like the Emperor of Austria hiring Mozart to write music for him; these athletes would be patrons of science.

Here's the latest story. Looks like Bonds will co-operate. He's been told he's not a target of the probe.

I'll keep my eye on this story to see if anything develops.

Sammy Sosa had his suspension reduced to seven games, and will begin serving the suspension today.

"I am convinced of the sincerity of Sosa's explanation and his contrition," Bob DuPuy, baseball's chief operating officer, said. "In my opinion, his candor and the promptness of his apology on the night of June 3 were exemplary.

"However, at the end of the day, each player must be accountable for his own equipment complying with the rules, whether the violation is deliberate or inadvertent."

Of course, the support he's getting makes one wonder:

Clinton and Sosa became friends when Clinton was in the White House, and the former president counseled Sosa by telephone.

"He told me to stay strong and don't give up," Sosa told the Sun-Times. "It's something that happens to people. It'll go away." Donald Trump, whom Sosa considers a friend, also was quick to phone Sosa and express support. "The support I've been having is tremendous, unbelievable," Sosa said. "I never have seen so much support in my life, because I say the truth. When you say the truth, people will believe you. At the beginning, they don't.

I'm waiting to hear from Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. :-)

Looks like the Cubs might make some money off this Sosa scandal, according to Scott Ott. :-)

Sammy Sosa's appeal will be held Tuesday in Baltimore at an undisclosed location. How they found out where Dick Cheney is staying, I'll never know. :-)

Sosa's agent, Tom Reich, told Stark that while the eight-game suspension was within range of previous suspensions for this offense, Sosa decided to appeal because they believe the penalty to be "on the high side" of that range. So they will try to get the suspension reduced by a game or two, which would bring it even with most of the other bat-tampering suspensions of the last 15 years.

"But this is not a hostile proceeding," Reich said. "We do believe some of the treatment of Sammy has been hostile -- not just by the media, but in the court of public opinion. But this is not going to be a hostile process. It's simply an opportunity for the union and Sammy to present a fair defense. And that's all we ask."

Reich said Sosa acknowledges that "a mistake was made, and a rule was broken," that there was "no question there was going to be a suspension" and that once a decision is made on the appeal, "everybody will abide by it."

It's likely that in Sosa's apeal, his agents and the union will attempt to contrast his behavior with the behavior of Albert Belle, who was suspended for only six days (but seven games) after having his bat confiscated in 1994. Belle's teammate, Jason Grimsley, has admitted crawling through the ceiling of Jacobs Field to the umpire's room and switching the corked bat with another bat.

I agree that Sosa has handled this much better than Albert Belle did. However, one could argue that if a six-day/seven-game suspension wasn't enough of a deterrent, then uping the days is quite right. They haven't said when the decision will be handed down. I wonder if they'll wait until after interleague play is over so the AL teams hosting the Cubs get the full Sammy attendance effect?

Aaron Loomis properly chides me:

Let me start off by telling you that you have a great site and I’ve been reading for quite a while now.

I wish you would have taken a different tact with your disagreement with the suspension/appeal rule. You could have mentioned that this problem has reared its ugly head again with the suspension and left it at that. I would have then switched the post to a problem with MLB. This problem happens for every player that is suspended. If they feel they have an important series coming up, they just appeal to delay the suspension.

I know that Sosa was cheating with the corked bat, but he’s not cheating with the appeal. He’s using the rules to his advantage and the omplaints should not be linked with Sosa, rather use his case, along with thers as evidence for your concern with the current process.

Thanks for listening and keep up the great site.

Yes, my problem is with the suspension process, not with Sosa. I object to players being able to time their suspensions to do the least harm to the team. If anything, these suspensions should be timed to do the most harm to a team, since that's the only way they are going to have a deterent effect.

Jim Kaat suggested yesterday that Sosa be made to serve his suspension vs. the Cardinals and Astros, the two teams closest to the Cubs. That's probably a good way to implement suspensions; make them be served against the toughest clubs in the team's division, or if they are through with the division, the toughest clubs from the league. Then you know, no matter how much you appeal, the suspension is going to hurt your club.

I had an interview up with someone from the commissioner's office, but I misunderstood the use of the answers and had to take down the post. I'll try to get someone official to speak with me.

Update: I just spoke with Patrick Courtney of Major League Baseball. I asked him when the Sosa appeal would be heard. He told me as soon as possible, but a date had not been set. It will be heard by Bob DuPuy. I also asked why Bob Watson couldn't stay in Chicago, since there would likely be an appeal and hear it right away. It basically comes down to the Player's Association, who does the appeal, needing time to prepare. I also asked if he thought this was fair to the Yankees, given that the appeal would likely be heard Monday, and he said that this system has been in place, and they can't change it for one incident. My thanks to Patrick for taking the time to talk to me.

Sammy Sosa has been suspended for eight games. But he's appealed, so he dosen't have to start the suspension yet. I'm waiting for Steinbrenner's reaction. He wasn't happy that the Yankees had to play the four toughest teams in the NL Central, while the Red Sox got the two eaisest. So now Sosa gets to play against the Yankees, but will likely miss the Orioles and Blue Jays, two teams chasing the Yankees, and well within striking distance.

Bob Watson, baseball's vice president in charge of discipline, met with Cubs manager Dusty Baker and Hendry at Wrigley Field on Thursday, then returned to New York. Watson did not talk to Sosa.

Why did Watson leave? I could have guaranteed you Sosa would appeal. Why not stay in Chicago and hear it? Bud's only a few miles away in Milwaukee, why doesn't he drive down and hear it? There are planes that leave NY for Chicago quite often, why doesn't someone from MLB get his behind on one and go hear the appeal? Why doesn't Sammy Sosa, if he's so contrite, take his punishment like a man and just be happy it wasn't 10 games or 30 games????

I get the feeling Fox and ESPN wanted Sosa playing for their national audiences. This is one case where it's really not fair to the Yankees.

Update: Here's a look at what's going on behind the scenes at Fox for Saturday's big game from the NY Daily News.

Robert Tagorda of Priorities & Frivolities does a nice job of summing up his feelings on the Sosa situation, from the physics of the baseball bat to Jose Canseco's comments. I've been ingnoring Canseco's comments to this point, because I don't agree with the racist part. However, when Canseco says the media is destroying the game, I think he has a good point. Go back and read my posts in the month leading up to the strike deadline to see what I mean. Lots of positive news was given a negative spin.

I found this through Mike's Baseball Rants. Seems the Fort Myers Miracle are having a Sammy Sosa night, although I don't think this is the way Sammy wants to be honored.

Dan Anderson pointed this article out to me, which seems to indicate that Adair was incorrect in his conclusion about a corked bat not adding any distance. I believe these are the same people that concluded that the baseball wasn't juiced, but were at the upper end of the legal limit on tightness.

By the way, Dan Anderson is one of the driving forces behind Blues Clues and Dora the Explorer.

Update: Sosa is in the game today and had an rbi single in the first inning.

Mark Grace is a funny guy.

Rob Neyer weighs in on the Sosa controversy.

I have to admit, I'm a bit puzzled by all the hullabaloo surrounding Sammy Sosa, who's not anything like the first player to cork his bat, nor the last.

I think this is a big story, but I don't think it deserved a two-hour ESPN special, especially before all the facts came out. I didn't see the special; if someone did, can they tell me if they dug out old footage of Sosa breaking bats? My guess is that most legal bats break in two, with the handle in the player's hand and the barrel whizzing toward Roger Clemens. But corked bats, I bet tend to shatter or break lengthwise. I know ESPN and Fox and WGN have video of Sosa's bats breaking. Pull it out and let's see how bats over the last five years have broken.

Neyer goes on to repeat something on physics that I think is being misinterpreted:

What's more, Adair suggests that while lightening the bat will result in slightly greater bat speed, this effect is largely (completely?) balanced by the smaller amount of inertia, and thus the ball won't travel as far as it might otherwise have. Which is to say, corking the bat doesn't really make any difference.

One of my co-workers is a physicist, and we worked out an approximation of the increase in bat speed over lunch yesterday. The increase is about 3%. Yes, the ball might not travel as far, but remember, the decrease is only 3 feet over 400 feet. The increase in bat speed, however, could make a real difference in the ability to hit the ball square. And if Sosa hits a ball square, cork or not, it's probably going out of the park.

So for the moment, I'm staying cynical, especially after reading this in the Sun-Times:

Alderson was careful to point out that baseball security didn't reach the Cubs clubhouse to confiscate Sosa's bats until several innings after Sosa was ejected in the first inning. Could some illegal bats have been spirited away?

''That doesn't mean we have them all,'' Alderson said. ''But we are reasonably confident we have tested all the bats. It's conceivable, because we didn't have a physical presence in the clubhouse for several innings, that we do not have them all. But we are very confident we do.''

Here are the questions I would like answered:

• From video, is there any evidence that other broken bats were corked?


• Was Sosa corking one bat at a time, so if he got caught, he had an excuse?


• If it was a corked batting practice bat, why was it anywhere near his game bats? He says he's done this before in batting practice, what did he do differently this time?


• Who corked the bats? Let's go ask him how many he's corked for Sammy.

Sosa's story checks out so far. I think writers need to back off the angst and concentrate on figuring out if Sosa's story holds water.

I read that Sammy's other bats were clean, so it looks like he was telling the truth. However, he's not catching up to pitches tonight, striking out three times in three AB so far.

Michele at A Small Victory is not happy about Sammy Sosa, and puts her feelings in song.

The Cub Reporter has a lengthy post on the Sosa affair, including a lengthy reprint from the Physics of Baseball. I'm going to have to talk to my physics friends about this.

I just went upstairs to get some peanuts, and told my wife and daughter (who are not real big baseball fans) about the Sosa corked bat incident. My wife's comment:

Corked bats are so 80's.

My daughter had the comment:

Why does he need a corked bat? He's so good!

Why indeed? My daughter also thought I said quark. A quark filled bat would certainly be light...

It sounds like Sammy Sosa has been caught with a corked bat. He's out of the game. I wonder how long he's been using an illegal bat? This certainly takes some of the luster off his 500 HR.

Update: Here's the ESPN.com story. Seems the Cubs lost a run when the runner was sent back to third after the groundout.

Update: Looking at Sosa's career, you'd have to pick 1998 for the start of the corked bats. He hit 137 in the four previous seasons, and 243 from 1998 to 2001.