Official Baltimore Orioles 2013 Season Thread: (72-63) 9/02/2013 BAL @ CLE Game 1 of 3 Norris (9-10,

Not gonna get to go to the game today :smh: But I will be ordering my tickets soon for the end of the month from voting for the ASG.

I'll just have to grab a jersey the more orthodox way :lol:
 
Was good to see some O's in the All Star Game contributing. Great to see Manny make one of those great throws from 3rd to 1st.

Here's a great article from The Atlantic on Davis' HR chase.

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertai...ing-bondss-home-run-record-not-mariss/277857/



Chris Davis Should Be Chasing Bonds's Home-Run Record, Not Maris's
Disregarding the records set by performance-enhancing drug users like Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, and Mark McGwire gives too much credit to PEDs.
ADAM FELDERJUL 16 2013, 4:47 PM ET

700


Barry Bonds's 73 home runs in the 2001 season are the most hit in any single season. Baltimore Orioles first baseman Chris Davis has 37 home runs heading into the All-Star break, prompting discussion of his chances of breaking the all-time record.

For some, though—including Davis himself—the Orioles slugger is being measured not against Bonds's 73 home runs, but rather the 61 hit by Roger Maris in 1961. Bonds's total, along with that of 61+ sluggers Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa, is being disregarded amid hand-wringing over the sport's problems with performance-enhancing drugs.

But proponents of the Maris argument actually hurt the integrity of the sport by giving the role of PEDs in baseball far more credit than it deserves or has ever been given before. Davis' 37 home runs have him on pace to hit more than Maris, but fewer than Bonds—the first time this has happened since Bonds broke the record, and the first time the Maris vs. Bonds debate actually matters.

To be sure, MLB has a high-profile history of doping—enough that President George W. Bush explicitly called it out in his 2004 State of the Union address. Almost a decade later, the sport still has its share of PED problems; it is reportedly set to suspend several players after the All-Star break for their alleged involvement with a Miami clinic providing drugs. Stranger still, the suspensions circumvent MLB's own rules governing PED testing and punishment. That said, there are positive tests each year that demonstrate that doping still exists in baseball, though to a lesser extent than when PED use was at its peak in the 1990s and early 2000s.

What there is not proof of is of PED usage turning players into home-run hitters. When Congress released the Mitchell Report—the result of its nearly two-year investigation into doping in baseball—the list of players involved with PEDs was hardly a Murderers' Row of famous sluggers. For every Barry Bonds (762 career home runs) or Jason Giambi (435) listed, there were several players like Nook Logan (2) and Gary Bennett (22).

Additionally, it's important to note that even in the era of widespread doping, it wasn't just the users who started earning more home runs—league-wide, everybody started hitting more home runs. MLB has experienced a significant jump in the average number of home runs per game in the last few decades. As the graph below demonstrates, there was an enormous leap—nearly doubling the average from approximately one to approximately two in the early 1990s. Mark McGwire's 70 home runs in 1998 were hit in a season averaging 2.08 home runs/game. Bonds hit his 73 in a year where the average was 2.25. And as PED use has decreased among MLB players, the average number of home runs per game has maintained its high level: To date, Davis is hitting his home runs in a league with 1.99 home runs per game. If the increase in the early 1990s were solely attributable to PEDs, that number would have cratered back to its original in recent years—after more stringent testing was integrated into baseball. Instead, the power production in 2013 is far more similar to 2001 than it is to 1991. Clearly, there are variables in play beyond merely doping.

700


There is very little variation in the graph above after the 1994 jump. Between Bonds and Davis, there is a quarter of a home run per game's difference, which is far from the leap between the early and mid-'90s.

Quite simply, if one looks only at home runs per game, the league does not look that different between 2001 and 2013. Individual performances look similar to their 2001 levels, too: In 2001, 12 players hit more than 40 home runs, and in 2013, nine players are on pace to meet or surpass the 40-home-run mark. Both in the aggregate as well as at the individual level, there is little evidence that home runs are appreciably less frequent in 2013 than they were when McGwire or Bonds broke the record, even as PED usage has apparently decreased.

How can this be, then, if Bonds, McGwire, and Sosa all surpassed Maris's record due to PEDs? Presumably because the act of hitting a baseball is an incredibly complex action whose success cannot be directly attributed to PEDs.

Do they help? It's likely that they do, if for no other reason than their helping baseball players to remain on the field at full strength over the 162-game grind of the regular season. If there were a clear correlation to home runs, however, the chart above would demonstrate far more pronounced differences, and there would be far more big-name talent listed in the Mitchell Report.

This is not to defend Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, or any player that uses PEDs. Having grown up in St. Louis, I look upon my own McGwire newspaper reprints with mixed feelings. And MLB had its share of debacles during the Congressional investigation (e.g., McGwire refusing to talk about the past in 2007, Roger Clemens perjuring himself in 2008), so presumably it is eager to avoid further embarrassment.

Yet MLB records are full of individuals whose actions are rather embarrassing. One can simultaneously hold a record while also not always being a paragon of virtue: Pete Rose, banned from the Hall of Fame for gambling on baseball, nevertheless holds the record for career hits. Ty Cobb has the highest batting average in MLB history despite being a racist.

Even on-field indiscretions and cheating haven't nullified other record holders' place in history. The man Bonds passed for the career home run record, Hank Aaron, admitted to using amphetamines. Hall of Fame pitcher Gaylord Perry made a career out of altering the baseball with illegal substances from spit to Vaseline, and admits as much in his autobiography.

Baseball is a different game in 2013. Home runs are relatively easier to hit than they were 30 years ago. Why? There are several reasons. Players are bigger and stronger than they used to be. Bats are better crafted than they once were. Scouting techniques and video documentation have evolved to allow instant reviews of an opposing pitcher. Training techniques have evolved to allow players to stay on the field. And yes, pharmaceuticals—legal or otherwise—exist that almost certainly make some improvement in performance.

Discounting Bonds, McGwire, and Sosa, however, denies the systemic changes above that have nothing to do with PEDs and attributes home runs solely to drug use. Ironically, this may actually have the opposite effect that MLB intends: By accentuating the link between doping and on-field success, MLB may well incentivize players to attempt to use drugs. Chris Davis does, in fact, have a home-run record in sight, but the number he aims for needs to be 73. For the good of the game, it needs to respect its records even if it does not respect its record-holders.
Click to expand...
 
Jking0821 said:
Damb JS you are a ******** fan and an O's fan...just like my self...que the Denzel My Man gif.
Click to expand...

1000



I see you.

Growing up in VA since 91...I've always adopted these local teams as my teams since moving from New York.

O's and Skins over the Nats and Ravens....all day everyday. :smokin
 
Last nights loss was pretty painful :smh: looks like buck is showing why he never won a ws.

I don't understand the krod trade. We have oday and hunter who could be potential closers and the starting rotation should be the focus. Giving away a young talent like delmonico will bite us in the *** later on.

O's and skins baby :pimp:
 
Delmonico was stuck in A ball and he couldn't stay healthy. K-Rod gives us more options out of the BP. It's a move you make if you're serious about contending.
 
I like the K-Rod trade in terms of talent, but that dude is a hot head with a bad attitude. Hope he doesn't unsettle the locker room. I also hope he doesn't go beating up his father in-law again or any such nonsense.
 
Last edited:
But we now have 8 out of the bullpen an still no established #1. I'm fine with matusz, oday, hunter, Johnson, McFarland, Patton and ascenzio. If you wanna be in contention you need that guarenteed win or close to it which we still don't have and looks like well never get. Urrutia could end up being that missing link on offense we needed but who's gonna face the cc's verlanders and scherzers? Contact pitchers are nice, but I feel like if we don't have that ace we won't be in contention
 
There isn't a #1 out there for the Os to trade for, also without giving up assets (that the Os shouldn't give up).

We "might could" be able to make due. There is no clear cut favorite in the AL so I think it all depends on who can go on a roll late in the season & sustain it (one game at a time).
 
Getting another reliever we didn't necessarily need isnt gonna put us over the hump to win is what I'm tryin to say.
 
We got plenty of options in Norfolk. Gausman, Garcia, and gausman. Idk about wada an Stinson this year but I wouldn't say krod is that big of an upgrade compared to those guys. Glad to have him still but out lack of a stud ace worries me. Only way I see us winning it all is if the offense gets hot and we can depend on using hammel in the postseason

Edit: I meant Garcia, gausman and britton

And I hope you guys are right and ill be wrong
 
Last edited:
tkim1343 said:
We got plenty of options in Norfolk. Gausman, Garcia, and gausman. Idk about wada an Stinson this year but I wouldn't say krod is that big of an upgrade compared to those guys. Glad to have him still but out lack of a stud ace worries me. Only way I see us winning it all is if the offense gets hot and we can depend on using hammel in the postseason

Edit: I meant Garcia, gausman and britton

And I hope you guys are right and ill be wrong
Click to expand...

You really think we have options in Norfolk?!

I'd gladly give up Britton, but I don't think anyone will take him for what the O's would like to get.

Nobody is going to take Freddy Garcia, he's too old & there is no way I'd give up Gausman unless you're getting someone like Jim Shields.
 
Well you guys were talking about winning now as in this season right? Garcia is good for this season and so are the others I named. Arrieta did well from the pen last year, britton could do the same
 
Win now? The only thing I said was the O's have as good a chance as anyone in the AL (or the NL for that matter) to make a run. Getting K-Rod for a 6 rd prospect in Nick Delmonico was a nice move (unless K-Rod continues with his bad attitude).

K-Rod improves the bull pen rotation with a ERA of 1.09, a WHIP of 1.05 in 25 appearances this season, & 10 for 10 in save opportunities as of a couple of days ago.

However thinking about it more, Buck may use K-Rod as a set up man for Jim Johnson but if Johnson continues to struggle, K-Rod will proly become the closer.

Man it sucks the O's continue to provide little run support when Chen's on the mound.

That Royal's pitching staff is nice...
 
Yeah that royals staff... Two of our old guys beat us, and we got Guthrie again tonight. Gonna be tough
 
I agree K-rod is basically our Jim Johnson insurance. I like Johnson as our closer but he has struggled...so if anything happens....K-Rod can step in...but for now he is just our set up guy.

KC series was tough...but boston coming to town and we need to get some W's out of this series :nthat:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom