Rafael Palmeiro: Was he treated fairly?

[metsbats]

I wanted to find out your thoughts on Rafael Palmeiro.

Yes he was tested positive for steriods but he at least vehemently denied it unlike McGwire. I find it interesting that he was not able to get any interest and get a second chance by any teams since his suspension in 2005. In Jan 2007 the Boston Globe had an article about Palmeiro's desire to make a comeback but obviously there were not takers. I 'm surpised the Yankees with Giambi and their history of giving players a second chance didn't bite.

It may be too late for Palmeiro now but did he deserve a second chance and was he treated fairly?

I don't think he was if you compare him to Giambi, Bonds. And what will happen to Giambi since he respoke about this steriod use and may have confessed? Another suspension and back to Yankee Stadium after?

What are your thoughts?

-David

[MooseDog]

Palmeiro flat out lied about taking steroids and got caught and still denied it.
Palmeiro clearly extended his career with the stuff as without it apparently he couldn't hit any more.

No team in the league needs a slugger who can no longer slug.

At least Giambi has been man enough to admit he's cheated (and still does, apparently).

Until Bud Selig removes his head from his you-know-where they won't clean up the game.

[staindsox]

Palmeiro broke the cardinal rule: he named a name, he pointed at Tejada. That's why. When you 're in that inner circle, you're in...and when you're out, you're out. If he had shut up and taken the suspension, he would still be in baseball. Giambi can blather on all he wants, but until he names some names, it's all hot air. He's smart enough not to do this because it would end his career. Once you rat out another player, you're done. Like it or not, that's why Palmeiro will never have anything to do with baseball again.

[richpick]

For me I am getting a little tired of all the steroid talk. I believe that a large number of players did take steroids and that it has helped them and has gave them a clear advantage versus players of yesteryear. I wish that baseball would give amnesty to any player who comes forward and admits that they have taken steroids. Then all players as a whole who have can come forward admit their wrongdoings and we can move on with the great game of baseball. Lets admit it collecting game used items has also evolved into big business. In the 1970's how many uniforms did a player go through in a season? It seems today players are going through the same amount of jerseys in one game as back in the entire season in the past. I wish there were never steroids and we could compare todays players to those of the past but clearly we will never be able to do that so we must correct the problems and move on.

[B1SON]

For me I am getting a little tired of all the steroid talk. I believe that a large number of players did take steroids and that it has helped them and has gave them a clear advantage versus players of yesteryear. I wish that baseball would give amnesty to any player who comes forward and admits that they have taken steroids. Then all players as a whole who have can come forward admit their wrongdoings and we can move on with the great game of baseball. Lets admit it collecting game used items has also evolved into big business. In the 1970's how many uniforms did a player go through in a season? It seems today players are going through the same amount of jerseys in one game as back in the entire season in the past. I wish there were never steroids and we could compare todays players to those of the past but clearly we will never be able to do that so we must correct the problems and move on.

Great analogy. I agree 100%. :)

[David]

"Yes he was tested positive for steroids but he at least vehemently denied it"

That's the silliest statement I've heard in a while. That's like saying "Yes he robbed a bank but at least he used a stolen gun." Two wrongs don't make a right, as the saying goes.

I believe in forgiveness, but the offender must first admit to an error and ask for forgiveness. For one to accept an apology, there must be an apology to accept. Palmeiro has neither admitted using steroids nor apologized. Two years ago or so, he said said he's explain the steroid test to the public, and he hasn't said a word since.

[staindsox]

I saw the MSN article too. I think amnesty is naive.

1) If a person came forward, it assumes they are no longer taking anything. That's a big assumption.

Baseball is only testing ancient steroids, not the designer drugs using by big dollar players. Yes, it also doesn't test HGH, which is an even bigger problem than steroids.

2) It also assumes that the players want to stop taking drugs.

Players are still using as much as ever. There is too much money in it. You can hit another 20 homers a year by using...that translates into a big paycheck. Why would they stop a paycheck?

We're assuming baseball's intentionally substandard testing is doing the job, which it isn't. And, if anyone ever did admit it, they would basically be removing any claim to legitimacy on records they achieved. Yes, baseball can forgive them, but the fans will know that that record, or that bottom on the 9th game winning homer was a cheat. Why would they risk tainting their legacy? This could also affect their marketability. Staying quiet is more economically viable than amnesty.

I think the thought of amnesty is idealistic and naive. It overlooks some big factors.

Chris

[metsbats]

"Yes he was tested positive for steroids but he at least vehemently denied it"

That's the silliest statement I've heard in a while. That's like saying "Yes he robbed a bank but at least he used a stolen gun." Two wrongs don't make a right, as the saying goes.

I believe in forgiveness, but the offender must first admit to an error and ask for forgiveness. For one to accept an apology, there must be an apology to accept. Palmeiro has neither admitted using steroids nor apologized. Two years ago or so, he said said he's explain the steroid test to the public, and he hasn't said a word since.


Palmeiro was under oath and vehemently denied that he ever took steriods. McGwire was under oath and invoke his fifth amendment rights was to most of us was an admission of guilt.

That's a fact.

Either Palmeiro really inadvertenty put steriods into his body like he claimed (blaming Tejada was his explanation) or he 's really dumb lying in court.

Palmeiro is not admitting or apologizing because he is still taking the stance that it's not his fault and it was that someone else who gave him the steriods and he didn 't know it was steriods. (sounds familiar).

Giambi on the other hand tested positive and still never admitted (up until last week that is) but at least apologized.

So judging from the opinions so far, Palmero was never allowed to play baseball after his suspension was up because 1) he was blacklisted by breaking the code of silence about what goes on in the clubhouse 2) never apologized for being in his situation regardless of it being intentional or unintentional.

Thanks All.
David

[3arod13]

I wanted to find out your thoughts on Rafael Palmeiro.

Yes he was tested positive for steriods but he at least vehemently denied it unlike McGwire. I find it interesting that he was not able to get any interest and get a second chance by any teams since his suspension in 2005. In Jan 2007 the Boston Globe had an article about Palmeiro's desire to make a comeback but obviously there were not takers. I 'm surpised the Yankees with Giambi and their history of giving players a second chance didn't bite.

It may be too late for Palmeiro now but did he deserve a second chance and was he treated fairly?

I don't think he was if you compare him to Giambi, Bonds. And what will happen to Giambi since he respoke about this steriod use and may have confessed? Another suspension and back to Yankee Stadium after?

What are your thoughts?

-David

Palmeiro got exactly what he deserved! Straight up lying to congress and then calling out another player to cover his butt. That's why he's not playing today!

I'm sick of all this steroid talk also and wish it would end.

[sportscentury]

Hi David,

What do you think the likelihood is that Palmeiro's story is true? I estimate the likelihood to be 0% chance. He is a liar, cheater, and rat. I had one of the finest (if not the finest) Palmeiro gamers in the hobby (from MeiGray) and when I heard the news that he tested positive, I couldn't wait to dump it. Then, I heard his explanation of his positive test ... wow. Raffy, it's time to man up.

As for McGwire, do I think he used steroids? Yes. Did my interest in him go down significantly after I heard his testimony? Yes. However, he did not compound things by lying under oath; nor did he rat out his peers, a la Palmeiro (Tejada), Sheffield (Bonds), and Canseco (everyone under the sun).

Mac garnered only 23.5% of the writers' votes for the Hall of Fame this year. It may be a pretty tough road for him. I wouldn't be surprised if Raffy doesn't break double digits his first year on the ballot. (As a complete aside, why are the writers torturing Jim Rice?).

Best,
Reid

[kingjammy24]

i don't understand this negative connotation with rats. remind me again, where is the ill in exposing unethical or illegal behavior? should sherron watkins or jeffrey wigand have kept their mouths shut? how are they different than canseco? if there are unethical things going on, would you prefer to have noone speak up? sounds like the enron training course.

thank goodness mcgwire didn't finger anyone else. baseball and the public are much better off having it kept secret. canseco's admissions were a huge catalyst in bringing about baseball's positive reforms. mcgwire's silence, on the other hand, has not benefitted anyone but himself and the players he was covering.

the only instance where being a rat is considered a bad thing is amongst those who stand to lose if their illicit dealings are revealed.

rudy.

[David]

Duly note that, beyond the standard 10 day suspension for testing positive, no one's done anything to Palmeiro. Palmeiro did come back and played for the Orioles after the suspension was finished. He soon after quit or retired by his own choice, as he didn't like the booing-- though obviously lots of players are booed (ask Alex Rodriguez).

Beyond the boo birds, the only punishment he got was being prevented from playing 10 games. Many would say, if anything, he go off awfully easy. Even by today's standard 50 game for first positive, he got a short supension.

[kingjammy24]

david,

i agree with your post and find that it alludes to a larger issue; the real benefits vs the risk/consequences of using steroids in major league baseball. palmeiro made over $89mm in his career. for many, especially those coming from impoverished backgrounds, the possibility of money like that far outweighs any suspensions or even expulsions from baseball.

who cares about a 10, 20, 50, or 100 game suspension if you can collect on a $15mm contract? the 2 aren't even in the same ballpark. you're looking at being set for life vs the relatively trivial "punishment" of suspensions, expulsions, and not getting into the hall of fame. i'm not sure how heavily any of those weigh on a person as they're enjoying a mai tai on their palatial caribbean estate. set for life at age 30.

in a way, it's easy to see how some see steroids as justified. in light of the money to be made, the consequences are trivial. even if you get booted out of baseball permanently, it's hardly a big deal as you walk away with millions, laughing all the way to the bank.

rudy.

[sportscentury]

i don't understand this negative connotation with rats. remind me again, where is the ill in exposing unethical or illegal behavior? should sherron watkins or jeffrey wigand have kept their mouths shut? how are they different than canseco? if there are unethical things going on, would you prefer to have noone speak up? sounds like the enron training course.

thank goodness mcgwire didn't finger anyone else. baseball and the public are much better off having it kept secret. canseco's admissions were a huge catalyst in bringing about baseball's positive reforms. mcgwire's silence, on the other hand, has not benefitted anyone but himself and the players he was covering.

the only instance where being a rat is considered a bad thing is amongst those who stand to lose if their illicit dealings are revealed.

rudy.

Rudy,

Let me go out on a limb here and guess that you haven't been involved in team sports much. Teammates place incredibly high value on trust - they see each other as brothers, as family. It's hard to trust a guy who will sell you out. David asked what was different about Raffy (as opposed to Giambi, for example) in terms of why Raffy did not get picked up by a team and get a second chance. The answer is that he sold out one of his brothers, and by doing so, sold out his entire team. If I were a GM, you couldn't pay me to pick him up.

Reid

[metsbats]

I have to agree that it's Palmiero's been blacklisted and that's the main reason he's not back. If you look at the history of players given a second chance and the reasons they were out of baseball in the first place none of them did what Palmeiro did when he broke the code of silence. And we are talking about guys who took illegal drugs, alcoholics,etc.

So whether the story he is telling is true or not became irrelevant and fell on deaf ears after the damage was done.

Given Palmiero's numbers steroids or no steriods I now believe he would have been given a second chance if he didn't break the code of silence of what goes on in the clubhouse stays in the clubhouse.

David

[kingjammy24]

reid,

i understand what happened to palmeiro. my original point didn't debate what happened but whether it was "right". even with your impressive involvement in team sports, i have to think that even you feel that there's a limit to what stays in the clubhouse; the expectation of trust can only go so far in light of the severity of the crimes. apparently, for you steroids don't reach that breaking point. for others, they do.

noone is stupid enough to think that being a teammate is carte blanche for being able to do anything and have it kept quiet. even "brothers" have limits.

canseco was blacklisted but it's hard to argue that, ultimately, what he did wasn't a good thing.

"It's hard to trust a guy who will sell you out"

it's even harder to trust a guy who's engaging in unethical behavior.

rudy.

[David]

What I found ludicrous about MLB and the old 10 day suspension is that steroids stays in your body for far longer than 10 days, often months. The player's steroids built bulk, strength and speed doesn't disappear in 10 days. In other words, MLB knowingly allowed players benefiting from steroids to play baseball. It can be reasonably argued that the 50 day suspension isn't much different.

[sportscentury]

reid,

i understand what happened to palmeiro. my original point didn't debate what happened but whether it was "right". even with your impressive involvement in team sports, i have to think that even you feel that there's a limit to what stays in the clubhouse; the expectation of trust can only go so far in light of the severity of the crimes. apparently, for you steroids don't reach that breaking point. for others, they do.

noone is stupid enough to think that being a teammate is carte blanche for being able to do anything and have it kept quiet. even "brothers" have limits.

canseco was blacklisted but it's hard to argue that, ultimately, what he did wasn't a good thing.

"It's hard to trust a guy who will sell you out"

it's even harder to trust a guy who's engaging in unethical behavior.

rudy.

Rudy,

I didn't mean to offend or upset you, I'm sorry.

Best,
Reid

[cjclong]

One thing that makes the whole steroid question a problem is trying to figure out how much the use may have impacted a player's performance. Assuming that Palmeiro was an intentional user at some time (and there was an interesting article by a while back by a writer who initially believed Palmeiro was 100% lying and after looking at all the facts came to believe his denial of intentional use just might be true) then how much did it enhance his performance. Palmeiro never fit the traditional profile of a steroid user. He only had about a 10 pound weight gain over his career which is normal for a man going from his early 20's to middle 30's, never had a big homerun spike hitting between 39 to 47 playing in home ballparks favorable to lefthanded hitters. He didn't hit tape measure homeruns relying on what other players described as a "sweet swing" to pull the ball. He wound up with 569 homeruns and I think its safe to say he would have hit more than 500 whether he used steroids or not. Assuming they used how much difference did it make to McGuire, Sosa Bonds, etc? Some people treat Bonds as without steroids he would be nothing. But without his eyesight, reflexes, hand eye cordination, etc. he and Arnold Schwarzennegger would have the same number of homeruns. This is a little off the original question, and isn't intended to absolve players who used steroids, but I think that while they gave some players some advantage we exaggerate their impact on the game. Possibly the longest major league homerun meaured was at 565 feet hit by Mickey Mantle and not one of the current playrs suspected of steroid use.

[TNTtoys]

Possibly the longest major league homerun meaured was at 565 feet hit by Mickey Mantle and not one of the current playrs suspected of steroid use.

Yes, the longest home run in history was hit by Mantle... but as for the measurement, I think you may be mistaken. The longest home run ever hit (according to Broadway Rick in his classic description of "Mantle pants") was measured at 550 yards, some 985 feet longer than any of us may have previously thought.

http://cgi.ebay.com/1954-55-Mickey-Mantle-Game-Used-Yankees-Road-Pants_W0QQitemZ290089750843QQcategoryZ50117QQrdZ1Q QcmdZViewItem

(sorry, couldn't resist the opportunity to revisit a classic belly laugh)