The baseball book: Here's a whole bunch of it - draft form

For those who actually like reading online PDFs, here's a link to Bringin' Gas and Dialin' 9: 100 Years of Professional Baseball Development (1908-2007). It is not necessarily the lastest and greatest, but it includes all the chapters, appendices, structure and most of all, the research I did. For those who find baseball a bore, I understand. I don't expect you to digest a subject that upsets your stomach. (But if you look close, I included plenty of pictures, charts, graphs, tables that assist or liven the project up.)

There is plenty more I can do (as the linked post relates), but I think you can follow the structure of the book and understand what I was trying to accomplish.

Since more people stop by this site, I felt this might be a good way to get out the word. (In case I find a crackhead editor/publisher that wants it.)

I appreciate any feedback, complaints, or suggestions. In fact, unlike many authors, the more pointed the criticism or complaint, the more likely I am to reflect on it, possibly revised or investigate it.

(To get ahead of a complaint: the pictures are from various websites listed either in the Preface or the Bibliography. My placing of a copyright on the work is not legit:This is a draft. This is a forum to vet any concerns about the analysis/structure or mistakes....not to find a way to ruin a project before it gets published. Lawyers need not apply to this job.)

Realize this:
1) I used the local library for the research. This means, whatever the lending library had or I could access online, I used best I could.
2) No interviews or trips to Cooperstown (MLB Hall of Fame) or Kansas City (Negro League HOF). So, I don't get the words that I would have respectfully inserted from the original source. I could never leave "my post" because I was not properly relieved of my duties...(Mil people will get that.)
3) I did the bookstore reading too. However, once I lost my laptop's usage, hand writing notes was considered inefficient. Plus I could remember the gist of 80% of what I read.
4) Conflicting sources. As always, the stories told are not always the same, author to author. Many, many conflicts arise, even in 2007, over what exactly happened, whose fault was it or why was something done. Baseball has this problem in spades....The most vocal people usually win.

Enjoy Bringin'!!!!!

756: My Emails, Bonds and the Steroids fallacy (Part 1)

Barry Lamar Bonds on August 7, 2007 finally hit the record breaker. Over the past two years, I have been very interesting in the pursuit (both on and off the field) of Bonds, Steroids and the defining of the Enhancement Era. Below are excerpts from emails I have wrote to various people in the past 18 months:

June 9, 2005 : To Kevin Wheeler, Sporting News Radio, Responded

I attached an interesting Excel file on baseball stats w/graphs. (TheBaseball Archive website is the source of this information.)

First, in 1950, the strike zone was redefined as being from the armpits to the top of the knee. Evidently, the umps back then (or complaints from the players) were getting out of hand and hitters and pitchers needed this stated again for their benefit. (See: Baseball Encyclopedia for rule changes and game scoring changes.)

Second, in 1963, the strike zone was expanded to the top of the shoulders to the bottom of the knees. Analysis of pitching strikeouts per team during this era reflects greater strikeout percentages. With the Pitching Mound all ready ‘set’ at 15 inches (a rule change originally made in 1903), this did give power pitchers (or great curveball pitchers) an advantage over most all hitters.

In 1969, after 6 years of anemic offense, the mound was lowered and the strike zone shrunk back to 1950 standards. This did not however precipitate an enormous increase in offense in the impending years. Essentially, run scoring did revert back to pre-1963, post-1950 standards. But strikeouts continued much as they had for a decade. Hitters were probably more willing to expand their strike zones instinctually and it is generally reflected in strikeouts records of that era (the early 1970’s.)

The turmoil of the mid -1970’s and early 1980’s era was due to the introduction of unrestricted free agency (and the reentry draft), league expansion (a continuation of the 1960’s), owner lockouts, player strikes and the DH rule. All would have a significant role in the‘redefining’ of the AL versus the NL play, but also the players’ wants versus the owners’ greed and control. Statistically, this era shows the first significant change in run scoring for each league upon adoption of the DH. (But overstated usually...)

Oddly, the stolen base was the new weapon, at least statistically, that emerged during this era. Before 1974, the league average never top 100SB/per team since 1941. Since then, rarely has it dipped below that marker. Speed has always been a plus, but rarely have players taken advantage of using it like they do during these recent times. Homeruns/per team/per season did not rise until after 1994.

Whether it is just steroids, newer ballparks (designed for power – the ‘Coors Effect’, The Ballpark at Arlington, Minute Maid, U.S. Cellular or Kauffman Stadium to name a few hitters’ havens), overly aggressive league expansion (causing a watering down of pitching talent vs. better hitters) or just chance, something has skewed the offensive numbers significantly enough to have increased run scoring to new heights.

Strikeouts are higher than ever, though possibly due to ‘going for homeruns’ instead of solid contact hitting, like the 1950’s and 1960’s are deemed to have been. (Walks have never varied much by league during the last 65 years.

March 13, 2006 - Prior to Book research: Written to Dan Lebatard, No response

During the last few of years, Steroids have once again made a big splash in the oldest of professional sports: Baseball. Each day, somenew revelation, opinion, rumor or media storm transpires to include more players (or the same ones), deems steroids as serious threat toassaulting long standing records and to the frail human body, and mostoften mentioned as a ultimate deterrent: the usage by children.

Dennis Kurcinich, a U.S. senator, once stated , “it is important to show that steroids cannot get you ahead…and teaching children that steroidsare bad.”

First, steroids are not “bad.” Abuse of them through overdosing, improper usage and lack of proper medical prescription and guidance is the real terrorizing factor, not the drugs themselves. For those athletes that took them in the 1970’s, 80’s and early 90’s without medical supervision, inadequate personal knowledge of side effects and the 2nd rate resources, steroids did indeed have tragic results in someof these athletes, namely boxers, football players and track athletes,among others that "typically experimented."

Like anything else considered taboo, illegal and performance-enhancing against the 'rules', written and/or unwritten, people shied away from advertising their usage, even to their own personal doctors, and going against proper medical advice or getting no advice at all. This is more likely the reason for the adverse reactions to Steriods - in much the same vein as breast augmentation went so horribly awry in 1960's through late 1980's.

To say steroids do not help, as the senator said in misspeaking about the ramifications and/or results, he needs to look at these immediate results: Ken Caminiti, NL MVP; Barry Bonds, multiple-MVP with usage(confirmed in illegally leaked GRAND JURY testimony); Mark Mcgwire, former HR record holder; Jason Giambi, AL MVP; Ben Johnson, once the fastest man in the world (for a time); Jose Canseco, prodigious HRhitter; The 1970's Pittsburgh Steelers; and many others that weretransformed into better ball players, became faster, stronger, etc.

The caveat is to utilize them correctly; and to know how to reduce usage appropriately, while playing, and after retiring from a sport. My viewpoint is this: The ‘real’ business of athletics is to obtain or reach the highest levels of performance through any means available. However, this sometimes is deemed unscrupulous by the media & legal perspective, yet with the substantial rewards (the money) to follow, aplayer rarely rejects the ability to improve his/her performance.

And many GMs and owners, such as San Diego’s GM Kevin Towers, have understood that this is a player’s primary motivator. Owners & General Managers have turned a blind eye for years to continue to attract record numbers to the park, the arena and the stadium while padding their bottom lines, unscrupulously and callously doing so at thedetriment of the players and the fans. (The media has played its part too in the lack of focus on this issue for years at a time.)

Professional and collegiate sports have grown into multi-billion dollar industries which promote vigorously the business aspects of sport overthe dying respect of the supposely long-begotten days of youthful excitement of just playing the game for the game. And with this, persons that participate at an expert level, the game is no longer just fun, but a lifestyle, a career and end-all-be-all, to most players. With all the technology and desire to do it, would it not be better tomonitor all athletes, knowing they are using, but to keep the steroids at reasonable levels with doctor’s analysis?

Many experts (doctors, not users) have stated that these chemicals can be safe and effectivewith proper management, dosages and prescription. At least this would protect athletes, give a safeguard and possibly open dialogue to cleanup voluntarily, without accusations and asterisks. But more to the point, Steriods are to no greater detriment than othe ractions taken in sports to gain advantages.

As Dr. Norman Fost states,"Every athlete uses unnatural enhancements," as a University of Wisconsin professor of Pediatrics and Director of the program in Medical Ethics he has been outspoken in his regard of Steroid usage since the 1980's. Certainly, when one compares the usage of training methods that significantly improve performance, endurance and peak outputs, one can hardly argue against such usage of techniques solely based on their results. But Dr. Fost goes on, "My major point is that the multiple claims that these drugs are immoral are incoherent, disingenuous, hypocritical or based on unsubstantiated, false orexaggerated empiric claims."

Why?

Because there is no compelling evidence that Steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs pose a health threat and can kill. For Fost, there is no compelling evidence the use of the drugs causes cancer or other serious ailments. "I think athletes should be allowed to use them if they want, preferably under medical supervision," he said. In an interview, Fost recalled the day former Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson was stripped of the 1988 Olympic gold medal he won in the 100-meter dash after testing positive for taking steroids. On the same day, Fost said, world-class swimmer Janet Evans was bragging about the"slime suit" she wore that she said made her swim faster."She was quite sure it had shred precious seconds off her time. This was hailed in the press," Fost said.

In each case, Johnson and Evans used unnatural methods to achieve their goal of faster times and fame. But Johnson became the poster boy for drug use and Evans was acclaimed as America's sweetheart, he said."There are a thousand-plus drugs, chemicals, supplements, foods, etc.,that athletes take to enhance performance, most of which are allowed," Fost wrote. Should we ban them all? he asked. Another example of this false dichotomy: usage of high-altitude training to increase one’s red blood cell count, which is legal, while taking EPO is illegal to garner the exact same results.

The usually arguments against performance enhancers are: Character, physical disability and “rules are rules.”

Does it really take ‘character’ to carbo-load or utilize a special dietto enhance performance? Not if we define “character” as being of “Moral or ethical strength” which has nothing to do with the physical training process.

Physical disability is high prevalent in the NFL and NHL due to the violent natures of both sports, yet we rarely mandate much more than improved safety gear and regularly used Pain Killers (ala Brett Favre). After retirement, most players are forever plagued by nagging injuries suffered in their sport. It is a fallacy to place a singular cause ofthese aggravations (in the pre-testing era) on steroids.

“Rule are rules” mentality means we should be even more appalled at the clear cases of violations of any rules at all.

For example, Gaylord Perry for 20 plus seasons utilized a spitter which was flagrantly against the rules that outlawed it in 1920. Yet, a premier publicationin baseball, The Sporting News, condoned and “wanted legalization” ofthe pitch in the 1960’s. Also, the commissioner at that time, Ford Frick, condoned the cheating while lobbied for legalization. But Gaylord is a HOF pitcher and no doubt will continue to be, as will Mr.Frick.

It is quite circumspect to critique harshly so many Steroid users as"bad" or "bad role models" when we, as a society, blantantly over look others utilization of gaining "an edge" on opponents through ANY means necessary to win, garner records or moreover, gain monetary success. Have we ever stopped long enough to learn exactly what the long-lasting effects are, or what (if any) controls can exist? Or how we can change the usage, procedures or maintenance of any situation involving drugs (or other possibly useful ideas), without criminality introduced intothe foray?

We sometimes talk of an open society, a tolerant society, but it does not truly exist. In fact, more everyday, America becomes dead set against anyone trying to succeed or changing himself or herself, outside the perceived norm. Some ways are harmful, but it is not solely due to the drugs, or techniques or the direct personal reactionsto them. Some of it is driven by a freedom-restricting, quasi-pious society afraid to properly address (or cope) with the spectrum of human behavior which is driven by instinctual, psychologically motivating andpeer pressure-related factors.

Accountability for steroids is mutual; and no one wants to address that, because it lessens the societal impact of the perceived wrong or future punishment to be meted out forthe objectionable action.

Lastly, we overlook (and ignore) countless flaws of men or punishdecent men (ruthlessly) without merit. Kenesaw Mountain Landis was the first commissioner of MLB. He's well-known for the "Eight Men Out"scandal involving gambling and the throwing a World Series. What he's little known for is his racism and bigotry in including blacks in MajorLeague baseball. Yet his 'overall' service is given induction into the Baseball HOF.

In Ali v. United States, the Justice Department refused the petitioner Muhammad Ali to forgo entry into the U.S. Armed Services under the conscientious-objector claim. At one point, before his Supreme Court ruling, he was under a 5-year federal sentence. Additionally, because of this, he lost his World Heavyweight Championship and the ability to box in the United States. Yet, after appealing the ruling of lower courts, he was justly set free of all commitments. His is a case of injustice for no productive reason but spite.

We are hunting for reasons to keep intact records (in baseball) that are in fact 'all ready tainted' by racism, obvious cheating, gambling and various other on-field methods (scoring of fielding errors) of enhancing the records of individuals and teams.

We should let it all alone because to 'pick and choose' which players, managers,commissioners sought to fairly play the game, or right the wrongs in the past, justly and/or unjustly, is a total waste of effort and uses only Situational Ethics.

March 30, 2006: Various friends and sports minded people, one response

Once again, MLB is trying to dress up the whole steroid issue. By hiring (or appointing) Mr.George Mitchell (a former senator and current Boston Red Sox director) to inquire into usage by baseball player post September 30, 2002.

(Assuming) Do we think they are going to garner any evidence new to the fray? Are they just going to investigate power hitters (which seems flawed, since I would think Pitchers would benefit immensely from faster recovery times after pitching) and put blinders on for the time prior to 2002?

MLB has know about Steroids long before 2002 and even 1998. Owners, GM, top executives all had intimate details about who was using as early as 1994. So this whole ruse to portray certain players as engrossed in acon, sham or call-it-what-you-will is pathetic given prior knowledge.

If you were paying a guy $5 Million, $10 million or $15 million a year,wouldn't you know what this guy does in is private life? As an owner, spending $200 million a year, you would. Not paranoid, but common business sense - that's why they make money too. To understand risk/reward and the fallout that sometimes is beneficial to the bottomline.

Our POTUS (acronym) was once part-owner of the Texas Rangers back in the early 1990's. At one point in 1992, Jose Canseco was traded to Texas.

Now, I ask you: you think they (Texas ownership) was unaware of his usage at all? Mr. Bush's daddy, George the elder, was the former Director of the CIA. Intelligence gathering runs literally in the blood. People that are in high powered positions don't go into situations without the slightest inkling of what are the character flaws of people hired. They actually make it a point to know. (Trust is a rare commodity where money and power is involved.)

The witch hunt now is driven by those dead set against Mr. Barry Bonds breaking a hallowed record. Funny though, it was originally set back in the 1930's when blacks couldn't play. Josh Gibson was every bit the power hitter the Babe was, and could have very well held that HR title. But that didn't happen. Henry Aaron hasn't said much regarding the chase that I've heard. Probably because he played with Barry's father, and godfather, Willie Mays.

Or more to the point, he understands the striving for excellence leads people to do less than what is morally acceptable. (He saw plenty of it, even in the 50's and 60's.) Players have used drugs for years. Engaged in harmful activities, like Mickey Mantle drinking, that did the polar opposite of using Steroids. Course if hitting was just a steroid shot away, then anyone could doit, right?

No. Inherent talent must exist. Bonds genetically, through his daddy,was a superior ballplayer to begin with. Probably a first ballot HOFer before he injected or smeared steroid one. The jealousy and (paranoia) at having sub-par ballplayers hit 50,60 or 70 HRs may very well have motivated such an athlete. Especially when it's the difference between a 9-million-a-year contract and $20-million-a-season gig.

But when people call Bonds paranoid now I say, "How can you be paranoid when people ARE ACTUALLY investigating EVERY last detail of your lifefor the last 10 years???" And even after testing all last season, they didn't get a positive test? (Granted HGH doesn't have a test from allaccounts...)

Then there is 'Game of Shadows.' Investigative reporting -leaked grand jury testimony (only illegal, mind you) - and all the TALKRADIO teems with negativity about one guy: Bonds, Barry Bonds.

It does put our little worries in perspective, given all the tabloids,media hype and circus and ESPN(Especially Suited for Pathetic News)reporting of Bud 'the Dud' Selig and his minions of silly baseball executives trying to STOP Bonds from approaching the record of putting balls over a fence from 330 feet or more away.

I use to adore baseball - played it everyday I possibly could growing up - but as my heros became frauds, my coaches turned out to be idiots,and the world became an ugly place, I lost my faith, in even baseball.

I still play 'fantasy baseball' because it's a cold-hearted business attimes. Performance, not likeability, drives my decisions toadd/drop/trade a player. It's math - the unbias science of numbers -that makes it enjoyable. Well, that's my rant. If you read it, you might think I'm paranoid. ;)

TimeLine: From the Baseball Project

Using Powerpoint, I made this little image related to my project. It's a bit sloppy looking here, but it should impart some information. Hopefully it spells out some of what has happen in baseball history. The Presidents are guideposts to chapters I wrote. Either they were in office at the start of the period or more closely tied to the era that existed...Just my opinion.

ESPN Poll: Barry Bonds Divides World, via his race

Barry Lamar Bonds was a topic on Baseball Tonight, prior to the Philadelphia and San Francisco game. This time via another "scientific" poll. The results were displayed on the TV broadcast, but I lack the link to the final results...They were "interesting"...to say the least.

The biggest results of this poll is that RACE and RACE RELATIONS are still skewed. Not a shocker, not a surprise, given the subject matter: Bonds, Steroids, Successful African American males in Sports.

Bonds has done little good for his image, with his off-the-cuff, coming-across-as-arrogant nature. But I think he's used almost solely as a scapegoat for the inability of commisioner Bud Selig to manage his quasi-monopoly properly. Bonds made trouble for himself - via words and his friction laden relations with the all-powerful sports media - and gets the spotlight shown on his career as a sham.

Steroids, steroids, and more steroids. Right before the Giants-Phillies game, another Steroids Ad was ran to show what steroids do...Another generalization to anyone who has taken them or knows about the 600 types of steroids.

Lastly, successful black athletes don't get the bypass that caucasians do often for their behavior. While they will both get media, black athletes will be more scrutinized, more vilified, and otherwised dismissed as a "product" of their upbringing, not knowing what is right or not knowing how to handle success. Both an overgeneralization, but done by the majority white media...

More to come - and read the second post I made on the STEROIDS FALLACY. It's long, but the GRAPHS (clickable) reflect some analysis about what did not cause this problem...

Three Baseball Control Charts, A Sample on the book

Chart #1 - Comparison of Two Eras of Baseball

Chart #2 - Dead Ball Era Revisited


Chart #3 - Post 1950 Home Run Control Chart

All about the Money, Statistics and Steriods: An Excerpt
But the ultimate statement of the steroid ‘Problem’ is: What percentage of steroid users in baseball actually improved statistically to caused the huge rises in offense seen in this 10-plus year barrage of runs? Could not using better nutrition, maintaining off and in-season physical training and utilizing video methods, be more important than the use of steroids? Or how about another, more logical, reason or reasons? Why has the offense seen not reduced back to pre –1993 levels since the outing of steroid usage in the MLB and the enforcement of a steroid policy? Is it possible hGH was far more significant (even given Jason Grimsley’s mediocre career) or is that too a fallacy? (Or is prior weight training also a prerequisite to improved performance on the ball diamond.)
As Dr. William N. Taylor in Macho Medicine determined in a study performed on those who were prior trained in weight lifting and those who were not, the study reflected that gains in performance, muscle mass and strength while using steroids could only be conclusive with prior weight trained subjects.[1] With that said, it is nearly a prerequisite to be properly trained in weightlifting techniques in order to gain the requisite enhancements for the sport of baseball - that which could affect bat speed, arm strength and base running ability.
Several analyses of the recent years reflect changes far earlier than anyone currently reports which would have affected even the ‘pure’ ballplayers of the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. But these changes have little to do with steroids, but what could be the conspicuous causation of the changes?
[1] Taylor WN. Macho Medicine: A History of the Anabolic Steroid Epidemic. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc.; 1991. 30-33.

Once again, we turn back to the idea that baseball changed significantly prior to the 1994 season. That in a period of one off season, the ratio of home runs and doubles per at bats for players jumped significantly, far out of bounds to any other period/year in Major League Baseball history. The reason for this selection of measuring of power hitting (Doubles added) is that doubles do generally reflect a propensity to hit for home runs and make up the majority of extra base hits for any team, and thus are significant to both runs scored and slugging averages.
This can be seen in Chart #3.

It is obvious to this observer that in 1994, a distinct and significant change happened in both leagues. The ratio of Power Statistics increased sharply, more than 3 standard deviations from the normal averages seen between 1950 and 1985, inclusively; the offensive outburst has continued well into the 21st century, more than 10 years.
That steroids is ‘just a convenient excuse’ but is not an actual definitive causation of this outburst is fairly clear. Taking a shot, applying a cream or popping a pill does not suddenly result (in less than a year) in 2 or 3+ standard deviations of enhanced performance for all full-time ballplayers in MLB (once again, the players included were those that had 150 At bats per season each year since 1950) and continue on to the present day (2006) with zero abatement, even after steroid policies were instituted.

To fall outside the 6-sigma chart on a consistent basis means a process is out of control and is 99.75% unlikely to happen in a normal working process once without a concrete cause. But to continue to happen, reflects a process change that is attributable to unique factors…


What has changed the offense of baseball must been seen in the context of the past as well as the present day. In the prior years, mound changes, strike zone adjustments, ball changes, ballpark changes and the addition of an entire classification of people (African Americans), had their effects on the game. Why is it that these same culprits could not be the same causes to the outbursts in offense?

Looking at Chart #1, comparing two eras – Coolidge (1919 –1932) to Clinton (1992–2005) – the similarities in the slopes of each line are clearly evident. The first three seasons of each reflects the transition between the old offenses to the newly found power ratios seen in each. As discussed in prior chapters, Babe Ruth uppercut, cleaner and more fresh balls, rules changes and possibly internal changes to the ball yarn, likely caused the rise to the ‘modern day’ levels from the first twenty seasons of the 20th century. (Chart #2) But a second offensive explosion was to be experienced in the 1990’s and has continued on with zero regression back to the good old days of baseball.

In 1992 through 1994, little if any talk about steroids could be tied to the explosion. The outburst came during the heels of labor disputes, a few ballpark changes and likely (if unreported) baseball manipulations. Furthermore, after the strike, the impetus to rebuild fan bases and pack the ballparks would only be done through offenses dominating, not pitchers’ duels. As stated before, it is not difficult to understand the marketing of the ‘long ball’ to sell baseball after losing the most important games of the 1994 season: the seven games of the World Series...

In 1999, Nike creatively infused the catch phrase, “chicks dig the long ball,” into a commercial featuring Tom Glavine and Greg Maddux – future hall of famers – getting shown up by Mark McGwire hitting home runs. As Howard Byrant opines, “ The sport that could never properly market itself had finally found a marketable star: the home run.”[1]
Not completely correct. The home run was ‘properly marketed’ back in the 1920’s and certainly used that initial impetus to further the game ever since with every home run star born from Babe Ruth, DiMaggio, Williams, Mantle to Mays, Banks, Aaron, Jackson, Schmidt and Bonds, along with numerous others that predicated their careers on the big fly. Even a cursory glance at the past reflects the biggest contracts have been in the hands of home run hitters, and the marketing of those players has been nearly always in relation to (and a reflection of) their careers as the big boppers, and ultimately to the demise of their careers in a town if they could not hit the ball in the stands.
Sammy Sosa’s lucrative career in Chicago would provide an interesting study in the rise and fall of a slugger’s popularity and marketability as the fortunes of his home run prowess and the Cubs team turned south together after 2003. “Yet going from 30-30 [HRs and SBs] to 64-0 in just six years was exactly the kind of statistic that spoke for an era in which power had trumped every nuance baseball had to offer.”[2]Once again, this is not correct. In looking at stolen bases, the numbers are significantly higher in the Clinton Era than say the IKE or FDR Era, on average. Which means it isn’t just a home run show; yet even in that ‘jaded reality’, the analysis time and time again reflects that OBP % and SLG % translate into runs scored; and not necessarily stealing bases by the truck load.
[1] Abid. 144.
[2] Abid. 150.

Stolen bases are hardly indicative of run scoring success to any large degree. Players on some MLB teams are conditioned not to risk outs for a stolen base (or even a sacrifice bunt) unless it is nearly assured. Speaking to this risk logic, General manager J.P Ricciardi defines Toronto’s philosophy when asked about sacrificing. “Give up outs to score runs? We don’t do that here.”[1] (But this does not mean a few base stealers will not or do not take such risks.) And why is not steroids a factor in that portion of the game? To examine Juiced, Jose Canseco contended that steroids helped him “build strength, quickness, and, most importantly, stamina.”[2] So why haven’t more base stealers taken advantage of steroids, or have they? (Ben Johnson did it in becoming the fastest human on earth in 1988; and former 100-meter world record holder (9.77) Justin Gatlin was recently suspended for eight years from track and field competition for his usage of banned substances.)
[1] Bryant H. Juicing The Game: Drugs, Power and the Fight for the Soul of Major League Baseball. New York: Penguin Group; 2005. 245.
[2] Steinberg A. In Defense of Steroids: Jose Canseco’s Surprisingly Sensible Case for the Juice. Unknown: http://www.highbeam.com; 2005 June 1. Last Accessed: June 8 2006.

Yet, it shows the misinformation allowed to permeate the average fans psyche. By recent accounts, home runs are considered ‘bad’, by the current media, under the inauspicious cloud of steroids. Because they were hit by guys that are reported as ‘steroid abusers’, ‘bulked up’ or ‘have suddenly found unusual power.’ Yet even that assessment is relative to the expert reasoning of the media when they conveniently overlook certain players (Albert Pujols, Alex Rodriguez, Ryan Howard, Jim Thome, Alfonso Soriano and Derrek Lee for a few current examples) as being clean and free of any steroid implications, even when they are playing still under this dark cloud of the ‘Steroid Era.’
The Steroid Era label says something about the players to the average fan. Unnatural. Fake. Cheating the game. Not like before. But the evidence of a vast steroid usage scandal supporting huge Home Run (and Doubles) totals is almost solely without merit. Given that the offense was precipitated long before the steroids can be solely attributed to those rises.
If only because the time frame (1993-94 to 2006) and consistency (of the numbers, year to year) are too opportune across the board to be unnaturally enhanced by just steroids or hGH (human growth hormone.) In the past, pitchers eventually adjusted to players. Why not now? Why are just hitters getting the presumed power benefits from steroids and not pitchers in their recovery and ability to gut out longer performances? (Even though Major League Baseball reported more pitchers caught for steroid usage than position players through 2005.) Or does it point to something else altogether, unreported, that is much more logical and possibly, measurable?
It is nonsense to predicate the entire decade of offensive outburst discussed on just steroids as the ‘bad’ guy. Given the countless changes to ballparks (19 new since 1991), baseballs, bats, strike zones (QuesTec monitoring of strike zones calls and instituting the UIS), on-field conditions, training regiments, video tapes and a myriad of other realities, steroids are not the only ‘Foundations of Power’ to be reviled by the sports media, upset fans and curiously, involving a former team owner, now a United States President, numerous Senators and Congressman.
(Who I think have better, more important things to consider daily: like obtaining better paying jobs for underprivileged, fixing health care payments and options, developing real solutions to inner city realities, funding the discovery of cures and causes to diseases, re-codifying (properly) all criminal laws, improving environmental stances on urban sprawl, hazardous chemicals produced by manufacturers and ozone/global warming predicaments and improving our ‘standing’ in the world’s estimation, amongst the ‘short’ list of ‘things to do.’)


Other Theories on Power Explosion
Amid the intense media backdrop of steroids, lays a variety of theories on the causation of the power outburst and the variety of changes seen in the game of baseball in the past fifteen years:
1) “That baseball encouraged the construction of hitter-friendly parks…”[1] The ‘Ballpark Effect’ can almost be directly tied to one firm: HOK Sport. “Helmuth, Obata & Kassabaum (HOK) Sports Facilities Group has been integral to ballpark renaissance that began in the 1990s. Formed in 1983[2], the Kansas City-based company has designed many of the sports new facilities…Comiskey Park (U.S. Cellular), Oriole Park at Camden Yards, Jacobs Field, Coors Field, Comerica Park, SBC Park, Minute Maid Park, PNC Park, Great American Ballpark, PETCO Park and Citizens Bank Park.”[3]
The almost yearly opening of a new stadium with ‘an old-time feel’ most likely utilized ‘new CADD’ and modeling of ‘wind and carry’ effects to the benefit of the offense. (Not always, but certainly the numbers from many of the parks reflect an impressive barrage of extra base hits.) “In the wake of Camden Yards fourteen teams moved into new parks in the decade between 1994 and 2004, including the expansion Arizona Diamondbacks, who had a new stadium built in Phoenix before their first season.”[4]
Even one national writer, Jeff Passan of Yahoo! Sports, suggests that the lead architect of HOK Sport + Venue + Event, Joe Spear, should be considered for a special award: the currently fictitious Buck O’Neil award for meritorious service to baseball.[5] Though a very unique and deserving honor to bestow on an architect, it may overlook the possibility that Mr. Spear was partly instrumental to the rise of offenses in the 1990’s and present day that has drawn such an outcry from the baseball purists and media pundits.

14 HOK Sport Ballparks and 1 in Construction
q U.S. Cellular Field
q Minute Maid Park
q Tropicana Field
q Oriole Park at Camden Yards
q AT&T Park (SBC)
q Great America Ballpark
q Jacobs Field
q PNC Park
q Dolphin Stadium
q Coors Field
q Citizens Bank Park
q PETCO Park
q Comerica Park
q Busch Stadium III
q Washington (2008)

In an interview by Peter Handrinos for Scout.com, HOK Sport’s Joe Spear reflects on his designing of Pilot Field in Buffalo that led to the Camden Yards project, “…You know, baseball doesn’t have to be played in a concrete behemoth. It can be played in a smaller ballpark with better sight lines, better proximity to the game, and real intimacy for the fans.”[6] These smaller ballparks would certainly allow players to hit more home runs and doubles while keeping fans happy at the park while also giving the fan the intimacy of being in the action.
Probably the most important aspect of each of these $200-350 million dollar projects (now upwards $750 million) were their approximating of old downtown parks like Boston’s Fenway or Chicago’s Wrigley to generate huge local revenues by allowing fans to saunter in from their cars to the ballgame and back out to neighborhood watering holes or other fun places located nearby. As Spear continues on, “I’m personally thinking of the ball park in terms of a fan’s experience. The real success stories from our projects aren’t in the architecture or engineering, but in the way the fans enjoy the ballpark…That’s so crucial. I think that’s why places like Wrigley and Fenway have stood the test of time - they embrace their surroundings in such an effective way. The question for my current plan, for instance, has to be, ‘How can we make sure that this project is completely about Washington?’”[7]
But the in-the-field affects to these ballparks were also discussed. As one exchange offers:
Peter Handrinos: “In those early projects, you broke with past tradition in another way - for the first time in a long time, your ballparks had asymmetrical outfields and outfield wall features. Why did you go in that direction?”
Joe Spear: “Oriole Park at Camden Yards was the first real taste of that.
The team, from day one, wanted that and rightly so. It makes it interesting; to debate whether Barry Bonds would have hit a home run in a particular playing field or some other particular play would have been an out in another field. That sort of thing can change the outcome of a game, so it adds a layer of richness.
The challenge was for us to find a genuine reason to [vary ball park dimensions], almost like making art out of a found object. In each project, we’ve looked for logical, genuine reasons to do that without just copying the Green Monster or B&O Warehouse or something else.”[8]
This statement reflects that ballparks were intentionally designed for their variations and that these variations could change outcomes of games – and possibly home run records.

2) “They also knew that hitters were using harder bats made of maple and dipped in lacquer in the place of the untreated ash bats of old...”[9] New technology and chemicals are not unusual to find in competitive sports. The NFL, NHL, PGA, NASCAR, IRL, NTA and any other multi-billion dollar operation have to advance safety and performance with state-of-the-art information and equipment.
Golf and Tennis has seen numerous changes in the length and power of balls hit using oversize drivers and rackets, so much so that the courses in golf are regularly ‘lengthen’ to increase difficulty to score pars and birdies. The NFL has instituted better helmet technology, has taken advantage of medical breakthroughs and certainly prescribes cortisone shots for pain relief. (Future HOF Quarterback Brett Favre was dependent on them, at one time.)
NASCAR has established better helmet technology, added restrictor plates to engines for reduced speeds and constantly monitors the cars with on-board telemetry. IRL designs cars that absorb energy in crashes and consistently improves the horsepower performances of their vehicles while maintaining very strict adherence to safety concerns.
And the NHL changed the rules to require all players to wear helmets and uses video technology to reevaluate goals made. It is no surprise that baseballs and ball bats have undergone numerous changes, as stated before by Dr. Adair.
In the MLB, the use of maple and lacquered bats in place of ash could be a primary cause of increased distances seen on current baseballs. As one 1994 article reflects, “To simulate hitting conditions, says [Scott] Smith, ‘we fire the balls out of an air cannon [at 58 mph] against a northern white-ash wooden wall, which is the same material that baseball bats are made of.’ Their objective: to measure how much energy the balls retain when they bounce off the wall.”[10] If the testing process does not mirror the current technology [the bats], it could be possible the values are higher than what is allowed via the testing process.
These lacquered baseball bats are predominately made by big outfits – Louisville Slugger, Rawlings, Mizuno, Sam Bat – but one maker, Maruccibats.com located in Baton Rouge, Louisiana has developed an impressive clientele of sluggers: Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz (50 Home Runs in 2006), Albert Pujols, Carlos Beltran, Vernon Wells, Miguel Tejada, Ryan Howard (58 Home Runs in 2006), Gary Sheffield, David Wright and former stars Sammy Sosa and Rafael Palmeiro.[11] Founded in 2002, each bat is selected from a billet sent by Hogan Hardwoods of Ruston, LA[12], hand made on a lathe to spec, boned with a cow femur and sent out to the major leaguer. The fact that a small outfit (one that turns out 1,000 bats per year in an 8’ by 10’ shop) can produced bats of the superior quality sluggers of this caliber love, while adhering to the specifications MLB puts on the bats, likely means the specifications may not be all that tight on equipment being used or is not overly inspected by officials. Or certainly not checked for tampering without incidence. (Sammy Sosa’s corked bat fiasco.)
To further explain why an outfitter in Louisiana has cornered the market for sluggers, a study done by University of Massachusetts engineers on bats of various levels of the sport reflects that a higher moisture content may also provide additional pop in the bat. As one part of the report reflects, " Different baseball stadiums will, therefore, expose wooden bats to different conditions at different times of the year. The Wood Handbook (1999)…identifies the equilibrium moisture content for Phoenix, Arizona in the month of June to be 4.6% on average, whereas Los Angeles, California is 15.1% in …August…the bats which are stored in the environment for even a few days will show a change in moisture content. It is, therefore, important to determine the effects…"[13]
This study analyzed bats utilizing a setup that would mirror MLB players typical usage of either:
1) Using the same bat in various cities around the country (with moisture content modifying)
2) Using a variety of bats based on feel at the time (bats that differ, though physically are the same in ordinary measures)
The results show that a slight, but unmistakable, increase in batted-ball velocity of nearly 1% held true across the board when moisture content was changed from 6.7% to 10.9%. This additional velocity does explain why Louisiana-made bats are more lively, since the humidity is a well known aspect of the climate. And later, Dr. Adair's analysis will further this point.

As Peter Handrinos writes on his website, www.UnitedStatesofBaseball.com, about this phenomenon in Barry Bonds, Pt. II: ‘Too Good’: “ And, with the one-year spike in 2001 accounted for, Bonds performance surge from 2002 and 2002 to 2004 is easily adjusted…just over 46 home runs per year…it’s hardly an other-worldly mark in an era fueled by smaller ballparks, smaller strike zones, hard-lacquered bats, and body armor…”[14]

3) “Most significantly, two tools that pitchers most needed to be effective…the strike zone… and the freedom to intimidate hitters by throwing inside.”[15]
With the implementation of video technology and consistent manipulation of what a strike is suppose to be, it is little wonder that pitchers, most effected by those changes, have found it harder to consistently get out hitters. As shown before, the expansion of the strike zone led to the worst offensive season (1968) in the modern era. Now, the contraction and monitoring of the strike zone, has likely assisted in the fattening the totals of MLB offenses.No one is particularly immune to these changes. Power pitchers that throw in excess of 95 MPH are being combated by a shrinking strike zone, inability to pitch inside without getting tossed and batters that have thinner-handled bats, better video tools to fix errors in swings and plenty of motivation to achieve totals. (Financial motivation, not necessarily winning games motives.)
[1] Bryant H. Juicing The Game: Drugs, Power and the Fight for the Soul of Major League Baseball. New York: Penguin Group; 2005. 210.
[2] Unknown. HOK Sport & Event & Event. Unknown: http://www.wikipedia.com; 2006 April 9. Last Accessed: 4/10/2006.
[3] Leventhal J, MacMurray J. Take Me Out to the Ballpark: An Illustrated Tour of Baseball Parks Past and Present. New York: Black Dog & Leventhal Publishers; 2006. 15.
[4] Bryant H. Juicing The Game: Drugs, Power and the Fight for the Soul of Major League Baseball. New York: Penguin Group; 2005. 153.
[5] Passan J. Re-examining the Hall. Cooperstown, New York: Yahoo! Sports; 2006 July 30. http://www.yahoosports.com Last Accessed: August 8, 2006.
[6] Handrinos P. Baseball Men – The Architect. Unknown: http://TheSTLCardinals.scout.com; 2005 November 11. Last Accessed: April 22, 2006.
[7] Handrinos P. Baseball Men – The Architect. Unknown: http://TheSTLCardinals.scout.com; 2005 November 11. Last Accessed: April 22, 2006.
[8] Handrinos P. Baseball Men – The Architect. Unknown: http://TheSTLCardinals.scout.com; 2005 November 11. Last Accessed: April 22, 2006.
[9] Bryant H. Juicing The Game: Drugs, Power and the Fight for the Soul of Major League Baseball. New York: Penguin Group; 2005. 210.
[10] Stein BP. Major-league Mystery. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale Group [Scholastic, Inc.]; 1994 September 2. Last Accessed: June 8, 2006. http://www.highbeam.com
[11] Marucci J. The Marucci Bat Company. Baton Rouge, LA: http://www.maruccibats.com; 2006. Last Accessed August 24, 2006.
[12] Davis B. Marucci Bats Have ‘Major’ Punch. Ruston, LA: http://www.rustonleader.com/news.php?id=1538; 2006 July 24. Last Accessed: August 24, 2006.
[13] Sherwood JA, Drane PJ. The Effects of Moisture Content and Workhardening on Baseball Bat Performance. Lowell, MA: Baseball Research center, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Massachusetts; 2000?. 3.
[14] Handrino PC. Barry Bonds, Pt. II: ‘Too Good’: More Vague Rumors and Clear Facts on the Giant. unknown: http://www.unitedstatesofbaseball.com; 2005 April 7. Last Accessed: August 24, 2006.
[15] Bryant H. Juicing The Game: Drugs, Power and the Fight for the Soul of Major League Baseball. New York: Penguin Group; 2005. 210.

“To Jim Palmer, the HOF Baltimore pitcher, the zone deserved more discussion than it received…the loss of the high strike contributed to skyrocketing offense as much as drug use or anything else…the beauty of the ‘old’ strike zone, thought Yankees pitching coach Mel Stottlemyre, was that there were pitches that were called strikes that could not be hit…since 1968, when Bob Gibson dominated the game, umpires had been systemically reinterpreting the strike zone on their own.”
Due to this, QuesTec, installed by new umpiring head Ralph Nelson into the game, was used to monitor (and evaluate) umpires calls behind the plate, starting in 2001. The technology was unreliable, by most reports – but has continued to be used in baseball parks. “Robert Adair were not completely dismissive of QuesTec, nor did Adair absolve the umpires. His conclusion was simply that the technology was not quite ready to be an evaluating tool.”[1]

4) Baseball Changes - “In May 2000 Bud Selig sent Sandy Alderson (former Oakland A’s executive until 1999) to Costa Rica to investigate the baseball. Alderson left the Rawlings factory in Turrialba convinced that the ball was unchanged from the previous season. Still, Alderson believed the trip was in part fruitless; there were too many variables involved – from the actual cowhide which may have varied from year to year, to the personnel – to make an accurate assessment…pitchers and hitters alike, remained convinced the ball was tighter…The ball was too smooth, (David) Wells thought, estimating that only one and ten balls he used during a game had seams raised high enough for him…to give the ball some action….Ken Macha, the manager of the Oakland A’s who had a collection of 1987 balls in his garage from his days as an Expos coach, was convinced that no part of the game had been juiced like the ball itself. ”[2]
In early 2007, a report was released on the usage of a CT scan done by Universal Medical Systems, Inc., supplier of open-sided MRI and CT scan equipment for more than 20 years, that reflects that Mark McGwire 70th home run hit had a synthetic rubber ring around the "pill" of the ball, against the MLB specifications. The following is a long excerpt of that article:
"Mark McGwire's 70th home run ball from his record-breaking 1998 season contains a synthetic rubber ring or spring ("the ring") -- a material not outlined in official Major League Baseball ("the League") specifications. The ring and enlarged rubberized core of the baseball are clearly visualized in a computed tomography (CT) scan of the baseball…
UMS, with assistance from Dr. Avrami S. Grader and Dr. Philip M. Halleck from The Center for Quantitative Imaging at Penn State University, utilized a CT scanner to study additional League baseballs from 1998 and found the baseballs have significantly enlarged cores in a variety of shapes and sizes.
The League Specifications vs. McGwire's 70th Home Run Ball According to the League's specifications, "the pill of the baseball shall consist of a compressed cork sphere surrounded by one layer of black rubber and one layer of red rubber." The League does not specify a synthetic rubber ring or any additional material.
'Examining the CT images of Mark McGwire's 70th home run ball one can clearly see the synthetic ring around the core -- or 'pill' -- of the baseball,' states David Zavagno, president of Universal Medical Systems. 'While Mark McGuire may or may not have used illegal steroids, the evidence shows his ball -- under the governing body of the League -- was juiced.'
In 2000, in response to concerns about an altered ball contributing to increased home runs, the League commissioned and paid [along with Rawlings, $400,000 in 1998 to the Center][3] for a study from the UMass-Lowell Baseball Research Center. The report found no change in the ball. However, photos within the report show the synthetic rubber ring and identify numerous other problems.
The league publicly announced the baseball was not a cause of increased home runs. However, the historical words "cushioned cork center" were later removed from baseballs. In addition, computerized strike checkers were installed in the League's parks to expand the strike zone, and the League worked towards establishing drug testing standards. In fact, Commissioner Bud Selig named former Senator George Mitchell to lead an investigation into the use of illegal steroids by baseball players. Another interesting action, the Colorado Rockies utilized a humidor for their balls. 'The League is as guilty as the individual players,' says Zavagno. 'Its desire to protect the image of the game, while recording huge revenues and setting new performance records, allowed scandalous problems to escalate. Only after Congress stepped in on the steroid problem did the League begrudgingly act. Now it may take similar scrutiny for the League to admit the modern-day baseball does not conform to its own specifications. Because of the scandals -- baseball material alterations, lax rule enforcement and rampant use of steroids -- the Hall of Fame voting process could be tainted for decades. Hall of Fame voters need to understand many historical statistical comparisons are no longer relevant.'"[4]
[1] Bryant H. Juicing The Game: Drugs, Power and the Fight for the Soul of Major League Baseball. New York: Penguin Group; 2005. 234.
[2] Bryant H. Juicing The Game: Drugs, Power and the Fight for the Soul of Major League Baseball. New York: Penguin Group; 2005. 211-12.
[3] University of Massachusetts Baseball Research Center Website. Last Accessed: January 4, 2007.
[4] Zavagno David. McGwire's 70th Home Run Ball Juiced, CT Scan Finds. Cleveland, OH: PR Newswire Association, LLC.; January 3, 2007.

Besides the revelation of a 'rubber ring' around the inside of the cushioned cork center area, the fact MLB paid a engineering research firm (initially $400,000) to conclude a result it desperately wants, that the ball has not been affected, is additionally suspicious. The existence of this manipulation should warrant a more thorough investigation, preferably from outside the MLB circles.
In addition to those thoughts, a telling assertion: “Sandy Alderson and Bill James had something else in common: Neither tended to think steroids were the primary reason for the explosion in offense.”[1] Bill James. At the very least, he is considered somewhat objective in his analysis of the sport – not tied financially to the ‘old school’ of baseball – that has to been seen as contrary to what should have been in the cases regarding African Americans up to the Reserve Clause. As Jeff Passan recently opined: “ No matter what someone thinks of statistics and their place in baseball, James’ influence is undeniable…James is the godfather of sabermetrics – he coined the term – and author of the groundbreaking Baseball Abstract books. “Moneyball” does not exist without him. Neither does Baseball Prospectus…that help accent traditional analysis with concrete data.”[2]
[1] Bryant H. Juicing The Game: Drugs, Power and the Fight for the Soul of Major League Baseball. New York: Penguin Group; 2005. 249.
[2] Passan J. Re-examining the Hall. Cooperstown, New York: Yahoo! Sports: 2006 July 30. http://www.yahoosports.com Last Accessed: August 8, 2006.