Gordon Suspension Magnifies Concerns for League, Players

Major League Baseball is now in its second decade of testing and suspensions, so we should be past surprises when it comes to the type of players getting caught for using performance-enhancing drugs. The controversy surrounding Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire might have made PEDs famous in baseball, and Rafael Palmeiro, Manny Ramirez, Ryan Braun, and Alex Rodriguez have all been suspended by MLB for PED use, but there’s no single type of player using PEDs. Bartolo Colon, Freddy Galvis, and Dee Gordon have all tested positive, as well — Gordon representing the most recent case after testing positive for exogenous testosterone and clostebol. In most cases, a suspension is held up as an example that the system works and that MLB is catching users. Given Gordon’s contract situation, however, that might not be the case here.

Gordon is regarded as a bit of a late-bloomer, something upon which we can now look back and consider how PEDs might have helped him. While Gordon certainly has produced his best two years over the past two seasons, those also represented his age-26 and age-27 seasons — which is to say, years during which it’s not uncommon for a player to post career numbers. Gordon received decent playing time in 2011 and 2012. Despite having recorded considerably worse slash lines during that time, those seasons aren’t actually all that fundamentally different from Gordon’s most recent seasons. Gordon’s success has been heavily reliant on BABIP, which of course is prone to greater variance than other metrics.

In Gordon’s first season in 2011, he received 233 plate appearances, posted a strong .345 BABIP, and after accounting for his base-running, was a better-than-average offensive player. The next season, his BABIP dropped to .281 and his speed on the bases couldn’t compensate for that deficit. He barely got any playing time in 2013, but the Dodgers gave him a shot as a starter in 2014 and a .346 BABIP rendered him an average hitter. The extra speed on the bases made him an above average-offensive player, and the Dodgers, surely believing they were selling high, traded him to the Marlins in a deal that brought them Howie Kendrick.

Gordon’s batted-ball outcomes improved even more last season: a .383 BABIP led to a .333 batting average, and with defensive improvements, he was nearly a five-win player. Jeff Sullivan admitted he hadn’t seen this coming and touted Gordon’s improved defense. Eno Sarris wrote just yesterday how a combination of coaching and effort helped utilize both Dee Gordon and Adeiny Hechavarria’s talents to create one of the better shortstop-second base combos in baseball. Gordon’s BABIP was going to fluctuate, but with his speed on the base paths, it was reasonable to expect Gordon to be around average offensively — sometimes better — and the improvements on defense made the Marlins feel comfortable giving Gordon five-year contract worth $50 million.

That $50 million contract bought out Gordon’s final three years of arbitration plus two years of free agency and a potential third as a team option. It came with a signing bonus of $1.5 million and a salary of $3 million this season, which means Gordon will lose $1.3 million as a result of his suspension. And when he returns, the Marlins will still owe roughly $45 million to Gordon. That extension money is where the current controversy lies.

Earlier this week, Ken Rosenthal talked with multiple players about the current system for suspending PED users, covering a wide range of issues: the efficacy of the system (in light of players who’d been caught outside of testing), the penalty and whether it was too lax, and the possibility of tiering suspensions if a player knowingly took a banned substance. These are thorny issues.

While certainly some players have been caught outside the testing process, enough of them have been caught to presume the system works to some degree and that it makes players aware of the risks — professionally, that is — associated with taking banned substances. The length of the penalty could be modified, but there’s a delicate balance between players purposefully cheating and those who are negligent about what they put in their body. Eighty games with essentially no excuses available provides a significant punishment for cheaters. It acts as deterrent for those who might cheat, helps to increase awareness of what goes into a player’s body — and, at the same time, still provides some recourse for those without malicious intent. No testing system is perfect and innocent parties could get caught up. Eighty games provides a midpoint for the varying concerns associated with the testing and suspension process.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed. We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member. 1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other. 2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off. 3. Dark mode and Classic mode! 4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them. 5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects. 6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.) 7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only. 8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO. 9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members. 10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features! We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it. In case you didn't read all that, here's the short version. Membership includes:
✓Ad-free browsing
✓Unlimited FanGraphs & RotoGraphs articles
✓Historical & platoon projections
✓Leaderboard & player-page stat heatmaps
✓One-click data exports
✓Customizable player-page dashboards
✓Dark & Classic site modes
✓Weekly Members-only mailbag
✓FanGraphs Walk-Off, your year in review
✓Optional homepage photo removal
✓Gift articles to non-Members
✓Full postseason coverage

The issue here, when a player signs a big contract and is subsequently suspended, is whether the deterrent is sufficiently robust. Gordon loses less than 3% of his guaranteed money. Ervin Santana only lost around 10% of his $55 million guarantee. Ryan Braun is still paid under his extension. So is Alex Rodriguez. Jhonny Peralta signed for $53 million after his suspension. Nelson Cruz had to take a one-year deal before cashing in with Mariners. Players and owners can be upset about this, but a solution does not neatly present itself.

The idea of voiding a contract has been rasied, but who would be responsible for making that sort of decision? If a contract is voided automatically, players would have the incentive to fail tests. Take Giancarlo Stanton as an example. Stanton has a massive contract, but he would have been a free agent after this season without it. If the Marlins fall out of the race, Stanton could simply refuse to take a test, take an 80 game suspension, and then – -regardless of whether he’d used PEDs — become a free agent when his contract was voided. The same goes for other players who’d stand to benefit from such an arrangement, Madison Bumgarner, Jonathan Lucroy, and Buster Posey. On the other hand, if owners had the choice to void a contract after a suspension, they would likely make the decision based not on the grounds of integrity, but whether the player was still worth his contract. They could utilize the system as an easy out on a player’s decline years.

Anecdotally, using the names from the previous paragraph, players seem to have played close to reasonable expectations after getting hit with suspensions. However, we’ve also seen the Yankees benefit from not having to pay Alex Rodriguez. We’ve seen the Angels react adversely to a situation that allowed Josh Hamilton to avoid a suspension without pay. The players might want a greater punishment for PED users, but potential solutions take money out of players’ hands and put them in the owners’ pockets — not necessarily to be redistributed among players.

The goal is an even playing field, and given the potential reward, there will always be those trying to game the system despite the risks. The current system works as both a deterrent and a punishment, and it is not really clear how changing the system as it stands would change that calculus without risking disastrous results for those who were merely negligent or the test failed for one reason or another. While we do not know if Gordon or the recently suspended Chris Colabello took PEDs on purpose — they both maintain it was an accident — there certainly are players who have, and punishing them for a season or more seems unduly harsh.

For the Marlins, a team with a slim margin for competing this season, the loss of Gordon for 80 games will definitely hurt. Derek Dietrich is a solid replacement as a low-average, decent power hitter. He might reproduce Gordon’s expected production in a different manner, although he likely doesn’t possess the same upside. For Gordon, this will be a stain on his permanent record, but in all likelihood, he will come back, play as expected over the next few years, and earn the money in his contract extension. For the testing procedures, this is a victory. For the players, they have some difficult decisions to make to ensure that the playing field is level without transferring too much power to ownership.





Craig Edwards can be found on twitter @craigjedwards.

107 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Dick Monfort
10 years ago

I used to laugh at that user named “Ben Revere Does Steroids”. Now I’m beginning to wonder.

Rational FanMember since 2020
10 years ago
Reply to  Dick Monfort

Speed guys are probably just as susceptible as power guys.

Being a base stealer in the big leagues is very physically demanding on your legs. The constant sprint/stop/sprint/stop tears up your muscles. In order to feel fresh each and every day, steroids are of great assistance. There’s a reason guys like Altuve steal the majority of their bases in the first half; legs wear down as the season goes on.

philosofool
10 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

Ben Johnson.

JediHoyer
10 years ago
Reply to  philosofool

Marion Jones.

John Elway
10 years ago
Reply to  philosofool

Big Brown

JediHoyer
10 years ago

I don’t understand what frame has to do with anything… Sprinters use steroids, I view Gordon as a sprinter with good hand eye coordination.

aschrag83
10 years ago
Reply to  JediHoyer

so, as a very fast baseball player, then?

JediHoyer
10 years ago
Reply to  aschrag83

His game is 80% speed based, contrast with David Ortiz, Nelson Cruz, billy butler or any pitcher. None of those guys rely on speed. That is more what I was getting at.

#KeepNotGraphs
10 years ago
Reply to  JediHoyer

Quiz – which two players featured in the NotGraphs classic below have been suspended for PED use?

A. The 6’6″ 285-pound guy
B. The 5’11” 170-pound guy
C. The 5’11” 285-pound guy
D. The 6’2″ 195-pound guy

http://www.fangraphs.com/not/dangerous-experiment-a-roster-of-25-adam-dunns/

I Balthazar
10 years ago
Reply to  JediHoyer

‘Didn’t see this coming’ mentioned in the post for Gordon. . . . Really? His 2014 was scarcely believable. His 2015 was flatly not credible, an out of nowhere, later career 90 degree performance deflection. Look, these things aren’t subtle . . .

Contracts should and must become voidable for PED suspension. And will. Automatic, but team has option to reinstate, I suppose (if they’re stone crazy). These contracts and dozens of past situations that reek of post-PED performance collapse have been simply ruinous for teams for 30 years. It’s absurd that Braun, Santana, and Gordon will get paid: their cheating has totally paid off even if they never set foot on a professional diamond again: that is massive incentive to use. Some guys will always go around the corner looking for an edge, but the best disincentive is simply this: keep ‘their’ money.

The real problem, of course, is that baseball has gotten itself addicted to long term contracts. I get how this is great for players. And baseball players do have comparatively long career potentials relative to some other pro team sports. But long term guarantees are simply corrosive to team performance. Baseball owners have long been better known for greed and self-delusion than for objective protection and promotion of their sport, so there they jolly well sit, pockets picked and everything. Hard to sympathize with a pack o egomaniacal f billionaires, I quite agree, but the fans are the ones who get to watch wrecks like Milwaukee with a payroll pared by Braun’s heist, and so on.

Rational FanMember since 2020
10 years ago

“While we do not know if Gordon or the recently suspended Chris Colabello took PEDs on purpose — they both maintain it was an accident — there certainly are players who have, and punishing them for a season or more seems unduly harsh.”

I’m pretty sure it’s safe to say they both took them on purpose. Colabello didn’t exactly have a commonly found substance in his body; it’s not as if he could have accidentally consumed it. It sure would be nice if these guys would just own up to their decisions, and not always hide behind some absurd “how did that get there” argument that kids use when they are 5 years old being called out by their mother.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

Agreed. I mean, we don’t know but then again everyone, everyone, everyone plays the “OMG HOW DID THAT HAPPEN?! I WOULD NEVER!” card, such that it has close-enough-to-zero credibility that it can be safely ignored.

Shirtless Bartolo Colon
10 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

I never took any stuff on purpose.

Who would have thought that eating Manny Alexander could make you have a positive urine test?

dovif
10 years ago

I think colon was innocent, the amount he ate probably means that every toxicology level was heighten

1993TriplePlay
10 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

You ever been to a GNC store and read the ingredients on some of that stuff? I’d wager to say that 90% of the stuff in that store cannot be consumed by pro athletes because type would fail these types of tests. Unfortunately this isn’t common knowledge to everyone.

Owen S
10 years ago

I don’t know how anyone can buy the “I didn’t realize what I was putting in my body” excuse. That may be a believable excuse for a lay person, one who does not make a living off of maximizing the limits of one’s body, but for an athlete, such an excuse is far-fetched.

These guys really do treat their body’s like temples, save perhaps Sandoval, and are comprehensivley aware of what they are ingesting.

“Barry Bonds made me do it” would garner more sympathy from me.

Rational FanMember since 2020
10 years ago
Reply to  Owen S

Exactly. My favorite part of Colabello’s interview was when he went on some tirade about “why would I do it now?” I was in independent ball for years – I didn’t do it then…. says who Chris? Independent ball does not test for steroids. I was injured, why didn’t I do it then? Chris, you probably did. The public is not as stupid as you think they are.

Maybe it was just the stress and inevitable outing for testing positive, but I find it mighty telling that Colabello and Dee Gordon were both having dreadful starts to their seasons without PED assistance.

The sad thing is I don’t blame Colabello. I played baseball at a relatively high level, and if someone would have told me that if I took steroids I could have made the big leagues and support my family for life, I would have undoubtedly considered it. If the difference between being a career minor leaguer and a big league ball player was a little assistance, the temptation would have been difficult to turn down. I get why someone like Colabello did it, but I don’t respect his blatant disregard for the general public’s intelligence.

Twitchy
10 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

I’m not defending Colabello, but he claims he was tested multiple times last year and passed the tests. So did he switch PED between last year and this year to something more detectable? Cause it makes far more sense to have been using PED last year when he was a bubble major leaguer, as opposed to this year when he had a guaranteed spot. He could be lying about those tests, certainly, but I’ve gotta figure he was tested at least once before October, and it makes more sense for him to have been doing it last year than this. I think we’re in agreement on that.

Also he claims he was informed in March that he failed a test and knowing that probably is why he struggled to start the year, certainly more than not having PED.

I don’t buy the “accident” excuse. And I’m not defending him. But he was tested last year and passed, supposedly, so the idea of him doing it to get from the minors to majors and get a big payday may not be the reason. But I’d be willing to bet at some point he did, as it makes little sense for him to have started after October when he had the guaranteed spot.

JediHoyer
10 years ago
Reply to  Twitchy

Could it be possible the testing has simply improved. Or he increased the level of usage because he still isn’t an everyday player not even in arbitration so while good money he wasn’t set for life.

cmpody
10 years ago
Reply to  Owen S

I’m not a professional athlete by any stretch. But I workout hard 6 days a week and I know exactly what I use for supplements and what they are supposed to help with. I also know that to use steroids you have to actively acquire them.

philosofool
10 years ago

Quick note on the nature of deterrence, from another source: criminals tend to reason much more about the probability of getting caught than on the size the punishment. As long as people believe they can escape detection, they try to. For the reason, increasing the length of suspensions is unlikely to decrease infractions.

Of course, draconian punishments do have some deterent effect over and above the “getting caught” assessments.

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
10 years ago
Reply to  philosofool

I mean, if they just gave everyone a lifetime ban, there would no repeat offenders!

philosofool
10 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

It seems overly harsh to me, it’s not what I meant to be recommending.

I just think we’re too focused on whether players need to suffer 5% or 20% of salary loss and not focused enough on:
-false negative rates for the test
-frequency of testing
If I only have a 10% chance to get tested and I think that cycling or masking agents or whatever can reduce my chance of getting caught to 1/3 the base rate, I have just a 3.3% chance to suffer a penalty. That’s too low to create much deterent effect regardless of the size of the penalty. (At that rate, less than 30% of all offenders with a ten year career would get caught at least once.)

Even draconian punishments can do very little for some cases: if I see my situations as PEDs, Kepp Job/No PEDs, Loose job, suspensions or salary penalties are meaningless and the dominant strategy is to take them regardless of the chance of getting caught. That’s just something MLB has to live with (though the PR problems with fringe players are a lot smaller.)

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
10 years ago

General critique:

Not enough players are getting caught: Obviously the system isn’t working
Too many players are getting caught: Obviously the system isn’t working

What exactly is the Goldilocks number of players caught that *proves* the system is working?

Also, unless I am mistaken, Gordon was caught after he’d already signed his deal, so it wasn’t like he was cheating in order to get a better contract. He already had the contract.

Swfcdan
10 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Who knows how long Gordon’s been juicing for though? Could easily have gone back well into last year.

philosofool
10 years ago
Reply to  Swfcdan

I think the point is just that, having secured the contract, he had no strong financial reason to cheat this year: So what was his reason?

WARrior
10 years ago
Reply to  philosofool

You think a player who gets a big contract based on a strong performance has no incentive to maintain that performance? You think Gordon would have been fine performing well below the level that his contract was based on? I understand that once the player gets the contract, he feels more secure, but I don’t think players are generally so secure at that point that they stop caring how well they perform.

polama
10 years ago

I don’t like the teams getting their money refunded. For a player on the back end of their contract, that’s almost like a reward. At some level, this was going on under the team’s watch and they were benefiting from it.

A better solution to me is to pay out to the folk hurt most by cheaters: minor leaguers not making it to the show. The A-Rod suspension could have cut them all a nice $4,000 check.

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
10 years ago
Reply to  polama

And I don’t think it is paranoid to think that a team might try some shenanigans to get a player suspended, even though doing so would almost certainly involve a criminal act.

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

That’s not only paranoid, it’s completely silly.

I think that a lifetime ban on first PED offense is a very good solution. Players would be VERY careful about what they put in their bodies if they knew they were looking at that big hammer.

I Balthazar
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

I have a long history of being highly negative on PED use, but I’m not supportive of a lifetime ban for a first test in most circumstances. There are players of actual baseball talent who have nonetheless used to cash in and for ego-driven reasons. There are guys who got injured and panicked over the potential for their career to end. I see some of them in a position to come back and contribute to the game with the talent level they actually have for fair compensation someone chooses to offer them, and that being a net positive for all. Losing huge money to contract voids and coming back to play for comparative peanuts the rest of one’s career: that’s exemplary punishment enough.

Of course some folks should just be banned. It’s repulsive that A-Rod was ever allowed back in the game, for instance.

Jim Lahey
10 years ago

I’m so over the PED issue… why is it every time somebody gets suspended in baseball for cheating we act like we need to revolutionize the game?

I’ve gotta say I like the NBA – they’ve barely suspended anybody for PEDs, when they did it was for 10 games, and they’ve got their best players staying on the court for 95% of the game for 95% of the season… Let’s just assume they’re looking the other way on certain things or have an “easy” testing policy.

Rational FanMember since 2020
10 years ago
Reply to  Jim Lahey

The majority of NFL players take performance enhancers and no one cares. Baseball has been a game at the center of America’s moral compass for 100+ years; it is viewed in a different light. Partly because of the games vast history and numbers/records, and partly because people have always been able to “relate” to baseball players more than basketball and football players because of their “they look like you and me” appearance. They are not all 6’6 250+ pounds. The hypocrisy has always driven me mad, but it’s a part of the game I guess…

I Balthazar
10 years ago
Reply to  Rational Fan

Some of us care about PED usage in the NFL, but it’s very clear that the very large majority of fans do not. I think that’s a problem, but the ability to talk about it doesn’t exist. I have to say that anybody who plays football is, basically, crazy given the already obvious, massive, chronic, and lifelong health degradation which results so my response is somewhat different there. Even guys who aren’t using are destroying themselves voluntarily: This is why it’s impossible to really talk about PEDs there. If one’s dealing with a playing culture where everyone involved has clearly taken a collective suicide pact, it’s hard to argue that guys using PEDs put pressure on others to cheat or lose jobs, that cheaters are siphoning money away from non-cheaters given how brutally short most careers are, or that franchises are crippled by guys who go off PEDs given that long term contracts are minimal, and far franchises are hurt by guys who are physically crippled as a direct consequence of the nature of football as a sport.

The alternative is simply not to watch, which was my decision on the NFL for some fifteen years. I simply refuse to watch the Olympics, as even with the most stringent testing protocols, swimming, cycling, and track and field are still riddled with dope to the point where the attainments stink of a sick joke; very sad but human beings can ruin anything they create, and in this case they have. I won’t say I’m happy watching pro football again for a few now.

Fayld
10 years ago
Reply to  Jim Lahey

It is like this in baseball because Selig was raked over the coals for his role in allowing this during the 90s. It is like this because sports writers were complicit in allowing the sport to be overrun with steroids while saying nothing. But most of all, it is like this in baseball because many of the “sacred” records were shattered during the steroid era and now everything demands some kind of escalation.

Richie
10 years ago
Reply to  Fayld

The sportswriters were not complicit. They could only allude to it without getting the pants sued off them and getting fired, but allude they did. I ‘knew’ Sosa was taking, I ‘knew’ McGwire was taking, I ‘knew’ Bonds was taking, I ‘knew’ Pudge was taking, I ‘knew’ Bret Boone was taking. The only reason I ‘knew’ any of that was through the press.

tramps like us
10 years ago
Reply to  Richie

Well, I guess the media was part of the equation for me…how I “knew”….but just seeing Bonds, or Pudge, or Sosa, or McGwire from one year to the next, their bodies, how they’d transformed themselves into muscle-bound brutes in mere months was how I “knew.”

channelclemente
10 years ago

Waterboard him to get the truth! Seriously, you want to stop this nonsense, ban the agents of the offending players for life.

The Duke
10 years ago

I like this for whenever anything bad happens. Take the people you dislike the most, regardless of their relationship to the offense, and punish them horribly. Basically this is how politics works.

Johnston
10 years ago

As long as that agent is Scott Boras? Oh heck yes.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago

“If the Marlins fall out of the race, Stanton could simply refuse to take a test, take an 80 game suspension, and then – -regardless of whether he’d used PEDs — become a free agent when his contract was voided.”

Maybe, but that would also create some disincentive for a team to sign a player who did that. If they just willingly ditch their teammates and sit for their last team when they’re not happy, who’s to say they won’t do it again when they’re not happy with the contract that YOU gave them.

staypuft
10 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Right, but it’s doubtful that the player would be dumb enough to come right out and say that he tested positive just to get his contract voided. So he’d be looked at as just another PED user.

staypuft
10 years ago
Reply to  staypuft

Never mind, I completely missed the “refuse to take a test part.” So yea, you’re right. Sorry, haven’t had my morning coffee + reading comprehension is hard

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  staypuft

No worries! I just can’t envision owners willingly agreeing to create a scenario where players can void their contracts without getting something pretty big in return. Or the players for that matter; going from guaranteed contracts to ones that could be voided for any reason (even PED’s) would be a huge give-up on their part also.

Fayld
10 years ago

#sigh. What incentive do the players have to allow any contracts to be voided in this manner? The tired “evening the playing field” argument is weak at best and comes off as very pro-ownership. It always sounds like the players should just “gift” this to the owners in the next CBA without getting something like limitations on the QO system or setting more stringent rules around the use of service time.

Basically, this sounds like pandering to the sensibilities of the fans in an effort to help a bargaining position rather than solving an actual problem. The testing system does work. It could afford to be harsher. But there is a vast ocean of options between the current system and “voiding a contract” that no one bothers to consider.

Let me give a single example: What about increasing the percentage of salary lost due to a PED suspension?

Richie
10 years ago

I just want to commend this board – so far, anyways – for a very reasoned discussion of this. This, on this comment board, has been an excellent discussion of the issue. I started reading wondering just how much axe-LOOKHOWMUCHSMARTERIAMTHANTHEGOOBERS!!-grinding I’d find on this PED discussion here, and I don’t find any. I am happily disappointed, and a slight bit humbled. (no more than that, mind you)

Damaso
10 years ago

forfeit 10% of next 5yrs salary or current contract, paid into an mlbpa fund of some sort.

Joe
10 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

The team the player is on loses out on that player’s playing-time production, but still has to pay the MLBPA during the suspension time? I doubt the owners would ever agree to this.

LHPSU
10 years ago

Worth thinking about is the use of PEDs in Rule 5 draftees (and potential draftees). Those players have significant incentive to use PEDs and very little to lose. In fact, the teams drafting them/planning to draft them also has a lot to gain by having them use PEDs.

philosofool
10 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

These players are not PR disasters for MLB though. If anything, catching a bunch of nobodys with incentives to cheat shows that MLB is catching people and the system works.

rubesandbabes
10 years ago

Okay, so,

If you take the list of say the eight most recent guys that have been popped for doping, and then search them on Fangraphs, you will find no links to any type of mention of their suspensions, yet every other trivial mention recorded and linked. Just a total Fangraphs info blackout/whitewash on doping in baseball.

Fangraphs made so many bloated articles defending Ryan Braun, and eventually failing at this, Fangraphs apparently just decided to ostrich down. It’s not any great legacy in journalism, or even sports fandom/whatevs.

Until this article. Hi. Welcome to the actual baseball discussion, Fangraphs? These guys are on the stuff. Get real.

(easily worth $20 to get to say this – thanks for all the stats, too. keep it real, kids: xFIP = the the strikeout K stat, and there is no such thing as a replacement level player.)

Okay, it’s always the fan defense of the athlete from every direction possible, and apparently enough time has passed since the last round that people forget this. However, the concept of Bumgarner refusing a drug test to get even more money is a high point in concocted super unlikely scenarios. Bravo!

—

So why is Jake Arrieta lying about how many times he is tested per year? He says ten times – no, he is not tested ten times each year. Why are you lying about this, Jake? I think you were tested by needle once and by urine about two or three times. Right?

Anyway, the testing is totally inadequate: A-Rod timed his doping down to the hour for tests that never came. Dee Gordon is likely a feeble doper or was supplied badly/something. Dee just screwed up.

Every ballplayer who has a huge second half is under the cloud of suspicion – maybe he got his second drug test out off the way and became free to dope.

Yep.

Ozzie Albies
10 years ago
Reply to  rubesandbabes

Good

If you have a list of eight recently appeared for performance-enhancing drugs and then for more information, visit the Fangraphs, and is not affiliated with the mentioned suspension and other trivial claims ever recorded and the affiliate. All information/Fangraphs beam about doping in baseball.

Fangraphs has a lot of bulky items to protect Ryan Braun, and in the end it doesn’t work, he just decided to Fangraphs position down. It’s not a great legacy in the press, or even sports fandom, very angry.

This article. Hello. Welcome to the discussion, Fangraphs baseball. These guys have things. Get down on the ground.

(Easily worth 20 bucks to say thank you for all the stats, too, hold on, my son: such Gaich = xFIP folder now, there’s one thing as a student players instead.)

OK, it’s always a fan of the athletes on defense in every direction possible, and clear enough time since the last set of people forget. However, the concept of Bumgarner declined another test to get more money than the top point of the script is very hard to think big. Congratulations!

–

Why yearly checking Jake Arrieta to lying about how many times? He said that ten times-no, that’s not tested 10 times a year. Why lie? I think that is tested by a needle and urine for two or three times. Is that right?

In General, the test is not enough: A-Rod obstructed doping test, this time for the sound never came back. Dee Gordon low, maybe drugs or worse, something. Dee fucked us.

Every player in this business, it was a great half is under a cloud of suspicion is probably his second trial is in the way and become the free drugs.

There.

rubesandbabes
10 years ago
Reply to  Ozzie Albies

This is too awesome, but really you just didn’t have anything to say – so prank.

rubesandbabes
10 years ago
Reply to  rubesandbabes

Yes, you all forced me to have an internet handle, and now that they are out of style, I still keep mine.

xo
Mike

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
10 years ago
Reply to  rubesandbabes

Permaban everyone who comments on steroid articles.

Richie
10 years ago
Reply to  rubesandbabes

Well, in Mike’s very partial defense, Fangraphs did very actively defend Braun.

Mike implies there’s a limit of 2 tests per season for players. Is this true?? I sure thought not. Or is he suggesting there’s a limit of 2 needle/blood tests per season?

JediHoyer
10 years ago
Reply to  Richie

2 tests is the minimum. Every player gets tested in spring training and then its random during the year and everyone gets one before the playoffs. So spring training positives means the guys are dumb.

WARrior
10 years ago
Reply to  rubesandbabes

Why is Mike getting so many dislikes? He’s right that the testing is inadequate. There is lots of literature documenting the probability that a doper gets caught even in a fairly rigorous program, and it’s pretty low. ARod did time his usage, Conte goes into that. Gordon probably did screw up. Conte in fact said that the drug Colabello got popped for has a long half life, and either he was dumb to take it, or it was a contaminant in some other drug he was taking.

I don’t know how many times Arrieta is tested every year, but I doubt it’s ten. Pro cycling has a stronger anti-doping program than MLB, and riders are generally not tested that many times.

Baller McCheeseMember since 2016
10 years ago

This couldn’t happened to a worser organization. I have no sympathy for the Marlins being saddled with sunk costs.

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
10 years ago

No. Dee Gordon would happily take a full release from his contract. He’d make way more than $50 million as a free agent.

MyDreamToPitch
10 years ago

Think of what happened to Chris Davis a few years ago. He obviously did not take those medications with an intent to enhance his performance, they were prescribed to him.

Famous Mortimer
10 years ago
Reply to  MyDreamToPitch

What? Are you serious?

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago
Reply to  MyDreamToPitch

Maybe he sought a prescription because the drugs enhanced his performance?

exxroxMember since 2016
10 years ago
Reply to  MyDreamToPitch

The idea here is that not all drugs are created equal. Testing positive for an OTC stimulant is not the same as for a scheduled anibolic steroid. Yes, stimulants are performance-enhancing, but a blanket punishment that equates a prescribed ADHD medication (which does not act like a stimulant for those to whom it is properly given) with testosterone boosters isn’t doing a very good job.

Some people take PEDs with every knowledge and intent, others take it by accident because they forgot to apply for their exemption (Chris Davis, who thought it carried over every year) or didn’t read the fine print properly (Stroman got dinged for a substance in the minors that is actually still legal in the majors due to inconsistent drug programs). Separating intent is really difficult, but I think there is enough room for error in the testing and on the players’ side that you can’t just “ban everyone for life”.

Here is a quote from Stroman after his suspension a few years ago:

Stroman offered his explanation of what happened. As part of his personal workout program, he had been consuming an over-the-counter product for a pre-workout boost that he obtained from a health store similar to GNC. It contained OxyElite which is on the banned substance list in the minor-league program, slightly different and more inclusive, more extensive than the major-league list.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/baseball/2013/02/25/blue_jays_prospect_marcus_stroman_says_drug_suspension_was_an_honest_mistake_vows_that_height_doesnt_measure_heart_griffin.html

exxroxMember since 2016
10 years ago
Reply to  exxrox

Oops, here is the quote.

“It’s just like Jack-3D and all that stuff like you take in college,” Stroman said. “I had no idea it was illegal, so it was an honest mistake. We do get a list. It was definitely neglectful on my part because I didn’t look at the list, so it was definitely my fault and I owned up to it. I understand exactly what it was. I’ve kept my head and down and worked harder than I ever have this off-season just to be prepared for this upcoming season.??

Beer
10 years ago
Reply to  exxrox

The only stuff I ever took in college was Jack D. 3 shots at a time maybe, but never 3-D.

db8r_boi
10 years ago

What if everyone was just tested more often? Have a tester assigned to each team, and before each game (or after, if you prefer), that tester randomly selects one player on the team to test. On average, each player who stays on a 25-man roster all season would be tested 6 or 7 times per season at semi-regular intervals (plus, spot test during the offseason for added controls). Then, in addition to punishing the players for positive tests, fine the team for positive tests, with the money to go into a redistribution pool that goes to the teams with no positive tests at the end of the season (thus giving teams a positive incentive to discourage PED use).

A masking agent would have to be 85% effective for you to have a reasonable expectation to not get caught in a single season, and nearly 100% effective for you to not get caught in consecutive seasons. The chances of tests being close together so that you don’t have the opportunity to time your doping would also limit how much you can evade detection.

This wouldn’t be too expensive, either. Assume the testers make $100,000 per year, you’re looking at $3 million for personnel. Then assume another $3 million for overhead and another $10 million for lab fees (30 x 162 x $2000 per test), and you’re only looking at $16 million per year to just be constantly testing every player in the league. At the point where testing is constant and the likelihood of getting caught is high, then I think the 80/162/Lifetime suspensions will be adequate deterrents.

The Duke
10 years ago
Reply to  db8r_boi

The Tour de France has had and continues to have robust testing and people still cheat constantly – not sure that will solve any problems and frankly why would you as a union consent to have your members constantly be jabbed. Peeing in a cup every night, maybe but I wouldn’t want people drawing my blood constantly

philosofool
10 years ago
Reply to  db8r_boi

I am sure that more frequent testing will be more effective than increased penalties. There’s a lot of evidence from criminal psychology that rule breakers tend to reason mostly about how to escape detection, not about what happens if they get caught.

I agree that players probably won’t submit to regular blood testing but we shouldn’t let perfection be the enemy of the good either.

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  philosofool

Both more testing and drastically increased penalties are needed.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

Are they? Players occasionally still get caught, and are then forced to miss half a season. I kinda feel like the system is working just fine?

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

Make the penalty for a failed test a year off without pay, and the second one a lifetime ban. I’m seeing and hearing that elsewhere and it ought to do it. Hit them in the pocket book.

MetsOptimist
10 years ago

As some commenters above have said, I don’t think that you can assume that some players were “only” negligent; even if they were, that’s not an excuse.

BipMember since 2016
10 years ago

This is such a bummer story. Gordon was one of those guys who, even after being traded away by my team, I had to like. Everything about him is great. He’s got such a fun personality, he has so much fun when he plays. He was razzing Puig and Crawford in the outfield while he was running the bases. I love it. There was nothing uncouth about him.

PEDs cannot make me totally reverse my opinion of someone, but he still has gone from being totally lovable to lovable except for that one thing.

Fernando
10 years ago

So…how long before the narrative becomes “Bonds musta been passing this stuff out like Halloween candy”? I’m not saying I think that happened, just that the stories sort of write themselves.

HarryLives
10 years ago

The potential problem of players intentionally failing tests in order to void their contract is pretty easily circumvented. The contract could just be voidable at the option of the team if a player fails a test. Of course, the problem here is that this change would have to be collectively bargained, and I doubt the players union would be amenable to such a change in the nature of player contracts. That’s really the problem with any additional financial penalties that the league’s owners may wish to impose on PED users. Remember what it took to get to the current penalties? There’s just not the same external pressure to crack down on PED users that there was ten years ago.

LHPSU
10 years ago
Reply to  HarryLives

The player is only one side of the equation. I can already see the Yankees spiking A-Rod’s herb tea in order to void THAT contract.

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

Paranoia. You make the Yankees sound like the old KGB.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

When they are really more like the current FSB?

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

They are just a business. George is dead, in case you missed the news.

JoeIQ
10 years ago

Time to expand the strikezone to kill offense further.

Walter Johnson
10 years ago

Yes Virginia, when players are caught outside of testing it’s a sure sign testing doesn’t work. Any kid with half a chemistry degree and a little equipment can tweak a molecule to the point where it no longer shows up on a test.

The stakes are you get more money than you could ever spend, or you get diddly. Get caught, keep the money. An environment can’t get any more criminogenic than that. It’s not that all ball players cheat. It’s that the guy who cheats gets called up more often than the guy who doesn’t. I find it so strange that a fan-base of rabid statisticians doesn’t consider the slim likelihood of making it up the MiLB ladder without cheating, if some are able to cheat without detection.

Pandora’s box doesn’t close. A 34 year old pitcher coming off of back surgery HAS to take PED – to follow the rules compounds the risk of career ending or crippling injury. What idiot doesn’t hook up with another doctor hawking another variant that doesn’t get tested for?

Get a new designer drug every other year.
Don’t ever hit .400. Don’t hit 60 HR in a season. Don’t steal 100 bases in a season. Don’t throw 104 mph in the 9th inning of your no hitter. And for Christ sake don’t take an “over the counter” ‘roid when your hookup falls through, Dee. Fake an injury. Odds are you’ll die with few regrets and a legacy of “post steroid era” excellence. Hard to say “man I should have been more honest” when all those loving grandkids will never want for anything.

Dick Monfort
10 years ago
Reply to  Walter Johnson

Best user name ever.

Johnston
10 years ago
Reply to  Walter Johnson

Posts like that one make me ashamed to be a human being. You should lie, cheat and steal, it doesn’t matter just as long as you get the money and your offspring are well off!

Nonsense. And I’ve got news for you, that’s the moral philosophy of an animal, a savage beast. As a rational human being we are all expected to be better than that. Sadly too many baseball players aren’t.

Dick Monfort
10 years ago

So why is Jake Arrieta lying about how many times he is tested per year? He says ten times – no, he is not tested ten times each year. Why are you lying about this, Jake? I think you were tested by needle once and by urine about two or three times. Right?

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
10 years ago
Reply to  Dick Monfort

You see what happens, Jakey? You see what happens when you FanGraphs-answer a stranger in the comments?

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Dick Monfort

I feel like you’re crazy Joe Davola, with pictures of Elaine littering your tiny hovel of an apartment.

Except your Elaine is Jake Arrieta.

Matt
10 years ago

The funny thing about the faux-outrage by current players (Verlander and Doolittle on twitter) is that these guys are all represented by the same Union. In Doolittle’s case, he is his team’s Union rep. These guys all talk about wanting increased testing and increased suspensions for offenders, including a suspension DURING the appeal process. If this is such a big deal for players, why are they not demanding their Union do something about it?

I find it hard to believe MLB or Owners would fight the MLBPA when it comes to increased testing and penalties, in part because increased testing and penalties will help protect their investment. The problem is that the MLBPA has no interest in giving up guaranteed money for players, they have no interest in providing a loophole to have a contract voided and they have no interest in seeing their Union members potentially kicked from the sport.

Until the MLBPA, via the players themselves, is willing to take a hard stand on PEDs, nothing will ever happen. There was a comment above that there is zero disincentive for fringe players to not take PEDs, and that is dead on. If you could take PEDs to go from fringe AAAA type to MLB regular and sign just one MLB contract, you’re more or less set for life and even if you’re caught, you’re barely losing a fraction of that money. If players are serious about PEDs, they need to get together with their team’s Union rep and demand the MLBPA agree to increased penalties. I’m not holding my breath.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago

Maybe we should just end the PED witch hunt?

Prohibition is never effective, and it is utterly absurd to expect the policy to defy history when millions and tens of millions of dollars are at stake.

What the anti-doping policies have actually accomplished is to create an arms race between the testers and the maskers, where pretty much everyone involved agrees is being overwhelmingly won by the maskers.

It’s ineffective, pointless, and counterproductive.

Johnston
10 years ago

It’s not a “witch hunt.” It’s an going criminal investigation.

It needs more and better testing and draconian penalties. Otherwise players like Gordon will cheat.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago
Reply to  Johnston

draconian (adj.) Look up draconian at Dictionary.com
1876 (earlier Draconic, implied from 1640s), from Draco, Greek statesman who laid down a code of laws for Athens 621 B.C.E. that mandated death as punishment for minor crimes. His name seems to mean literally “sharp-sighted” (see dragon).

What could be more draconian than denying someone half of his annual salary for a first offense, based on the result of a flawed detection process?

I know: let’s burn those witches!

The irony here is that the hysteria is being driven by a bunch of old guys who are addicted to viagra.

Fernando
10 years ago

You are not a reasonable person. Good day, sir.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago

It’s unreasonable to adduce the etymology of the expression to which I was responding, and mention one notable previous example of it’s application?

Alrighty then. Score 1 for the arbiter of reason.

Johnston
10 years ago

Draconian would be a lifetime ban on first offense. I like the idea of a compromise between that and what we have now: a year off without pay for the first offense, and a lifetime ban without further pay for the second.

And I have no idea about who here takes Viagra, but I don’t. You can do better than ad hominem attacks, they make you appear to be a teenager.

Fernando
10 years ago

So are you say saying MLB players should be able to take whatever they want? I don’t mean to sound prudish, but that’s really not a good option for society. Baseball is entertainment and when kids see their heroes taking this junk it incentivizes them to do the same. They wreck their bodies to be like Bonds or Sosa or McGuire. That’s deplorable and I can’t imagine sending the message that a 16 should do whatever it takes to get ahead. As much as I love baseball, it’s still only a game, and not something we should condone teenagers trashing themselves for.

Now of course that doesn’t mean kids will stop just because Baseball isn’t popularizing steroids, but we only exacerbate the problem by encouraging it.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago
Reply to  Fernando

“Won’t somebody please think of the children!”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children#Debate_tactic

Fernando
10 years ago

Uh, yea, not what I said. I made a perfectly valid argument that any reasonable person could engage. But since you are clearly not reasonable, you tried to dismiss it. The very link you cited decires those who try and shut down debate. Well, hate to break it to you, pal, but what you’re doing fits that category a whole lot more easily than what I said.

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago

Your characterization of your post as a “perfectly valid argument” does not make it so. You did in fact invoke the protection of children as the only thrust of your argument.

I find it entirely unreasonable to justify the persecution of individuals for behavior that you find distasteful for the supposed benefit of some hypothetical minor who is unfortunate enough both to have chosen a professional athlete as a role model, and to have negligent parents (and coaches and trainers) who are unable, unwilling, or or insufficiently ethical to prevent his access to PED.

The continued denial of the basic (adult) human right to determine what substances enter one’s own body, justified by the intellectually sloppy rationalization presented, remains entirely too common in the modern discourse on drug consumption. Which is why we continue to prosecute the utterly idiotic War on Drugs, in which anti-doping and PED witch hunting is only one theater.

Chickensoup
10 years ago

The “think of the children” argument is a common one used for banning drug use, and it actually has almost no basis in reality. If you think about it in the frame of the war on drugs, the stated goal is that we want to rid society of the evils of addiction and keep Americas youth from delving into a practice that ruins their lives. What has actually occured is that we have become the most imprisoned society in the world, thus ruining those peoples lives at a far higher rate than if those same drugs were simply legal to consume.

In places of the world where decriminalization has occured a weird thing has happened. Use has gone down and addiction is far less common. Part of the attraction is actually the fact that it is banned in the first place. Part of the dangerousness of it is that illegal drug manufacturers have incentives to keep price down, so unknown chemicals are intruduced into the drugs. They become more potent as a result.

Despite what people believe, steroids actually have legitimate uses. Thats the kind of thing best handled between a patient and doctor. So why not make that the norm? What people fear is the back alley steroid use amongst the nations teens hoping to become a baseball player but it never has to be that way. It can be administered by people that actually do things in a responsible manner instead of shady people showing up to gyms to hand out random things that the kids know nothing about.

Chickensoup
10 years ago
Reply to  Fernando

Trying to ban substances has never worked in the history of humankind, so why would it work here? That is the ultimate problem I have with the whole PED thing.

In some places in the world, if you are caught with a certain amount of drugs, you are literally executed. You know what? People are STILL caught with drugs and then executed for it. If you can’t get people to stop when the penalty is the end of their life, there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop it. It may decrease usage, but it never stops it.

You have to have actually draconian (in the most literal sense of the term) laws in order to really have an effect. It comes down to cost benefit analysis and it’s firmly on the side of breaking the law or taking PEDs to get paid. So why go through the facade?

Wouldn’t it actually be easier for baseball to give an option? Say to players: these are the “PEDs” you can take at this frequency or when injured to be administered by the league? At the very least it would even things up, keep people from having to do the kind of back alley deals they have now, and keep shady individuals from getting rich off of it. It would likely be safer for the players as well. Some players would even decide to not do it, that’s their choice.

I know it sounds weird to propose something like that but really what they are doing is completely ineffective and it can’t be basically ever because MLB can’t murder players (which still wouldn’t stop it). It takes year one of your big pay day to never have to work for the rest of your life. The cost/benefit is far too in favor of taking the risk.

thestatbook
10 years ago
Reply to  Chickensoup

I’m taking your phrase and substituting the term PED with something else, just watch:
__________________

Trying to ban murder has never worked in the history of humankind, so why would it work here? That is the ultimate problem I have with the whole murder thing.

In some places in the world, if you are caught murdering someone, you are literally executed. You know what? People STILL murder people and then executed for it. If you can’t get people to stop when the penalty is the end of their life, there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop it. It may decrease murders, but it never stops it.

Blah, blah, blah

Wouldn’t it actually be easier for the governmentl to give an option? Say to players: these are the people you can murder or these are the times and scenarios when it’s acceptable? At the very least it would even things up, keep people from having to murder in private, and keep shady individuals from murdering just for the hell of it. Some people would even decide to not murder, that’s their choice.
_______________________

The idea of “we can’t stop it, so just let it happen” has to be the most non-sensical idea I’ve ever heard.

RodneyDangerfieldFanGraphsWriter
10 years ago

Children? I told my wife the other day– hey why don’t we have children? She said, ‘oh no you don’t! You’re not getting me into bed that easily.’ When we got married (oh boy–when we got married) she said she wanted to have kids. Turns out, it just wasn’t with me! I tell you, no respect at all!

bglick4
10 years ago

I guess I’m generally ok with the testing policy, but the Chris Davis suspension shouldn’t have happened. If someone can, after the fact, con a doctor into giving them a prescription for it, you have to cancel the suspension. They were taking medicine a doctor said they needed, regardless of whether or not they had a current prescription. ADD can be faked, but it’s easy with a complicit doctor, and it’s clear that Davis performs better when he’s taking it, so he has tens of millions of reasons to find and encourage a complicit doctor. I kind of think he’s faking it, but someone seemingly more qualified than myself or Manfred said he isn’t, so neither I or Manfred have grounds to argue. If MLB wants to at least somewhat close this loophole, they need to begin to have list of vetted doctors that can give players prescriptions.

Dr. DaveMember since 2016
10 years ago

“The idea of voiding a contract has been raised, but who would be responsible for making that sort of decision?”

Um. The same people who make that sort of decision for every other industry?

We tend to think of baseball labor negotiations as being strictly between the owners and the MLBPA, but US labor law still applies. That includes players and owners being able to sue each other for breach of contract, in a court of law in which both MLB and the MLBPA are just another company and union. That’s how Catfish Hunter became the first big-name free agent, back in the day.

Southpaw Slim
10 years ago

There should be a PED clause that lessens a player’s remaining contract by a percentage. I’m not sure where the sweet spot would be for that, but let’s say 20%. If a guy has 5 years left on his contract, he’s basically playing one year for free after gettin caught.

Jason BMember since 2017
10 years ago
Reply to  Southpaw Slim

Of course the biggest incentive to use typically comes at the end of a contract when the player is playing for a new contract, so there would be a much lesser penalty (dollar-wise) at that point. If you’ve got half a season left you’d only be forfeiting about 16 games’ pay (which is not nothing, but not a huge deterrent either).

Paul22
10 years ago

In this environment the extremists can pretty much get anything they want implemented, like after 9/11. Those players with legitimate concerns about penalties being too harsh are afraid to speak out for fear of being accused of being a steroid sympathizer or even a steroid user, and perhaps fears their views get out and they become a target for more frequent testing (and nobody likes to have to piss in a cup with somebody watching them , or have someone come to your home unannounced)

Why does every positive test lead to cries for harsher penalties. Frankly, I am rather encouraged as it shows the testing is becoming ore effective. Those years where nobody who was notable testing positive had me thinking there were way too many loopholes.

The focus should be on closing whatever loopholes there are. We can’t know since nobody is allowed to talk about the testing program, but more frequent tests, especially in the offseason would go a long way.

Frankly, I think guys like Verlander who sign a big contact for a lot of money and then pitch like crap should have their contracts voided. They are the ones I suspect the most of having used PED’s and then they just stop after they lock in the big money because they have too much to lose.