MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 19, 2007 8:06:21 GMT -5
www.nypost.com/seven/05192007/sports/yankees/uneasy_roider__yankees_george_king.htmSurprised no one talked about this. Giambi all but admitted the obvious in an interview with USA Today. But this article is talking about possible punishment/suspension. Most exciting is they mentioned the possibility of going after the rest of his contract and kicking his juiced up ass off this team. I doubt it since that would be too good to be true.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on May 19, 2007 8:59:48 GMT -5
Much ado about nothing. People chasing ghosts once again. A suspension? LOL! A probe? Why not?
Here is a key part of the article, of course glossed over by Metssuckballs....
There is a difference in the Grimsley and Giambi scenarios because Grimsley retired shortly after he was the subject of a federal government investigation into performance-enhancing drug use. And don't forget Giambi never uttered "steroids" in the press this week.
Lets move on. Balls, give up on your witch-hunt of Giambi (who has a reason for his recent slump, an injury) and take a look at the likes of Cano, Mo Rivera, Abreu, and a whole host of others along with him.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 19, 2007 9:07:32 GMT -5
What does your little blurb have to do with anything other than trying to defend a juicer who had not done shit for this team except cash his check?
Cano, Abreu, and Rivera are all still contributing more to this team than Giambi, and that's saying a lot.
You've been making excuses for Giambi for years, but the fact is, there is only one reason he is hitting this way--he stinks.
Always has. But it amuses me watching you squirm and try to point the finger elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by mac0822 on May 21, 2007 8:20:19 GMT -5
If they are going to * Bonds, they should * the Yankees 03 WS appearance since Giambi hit 2 HR's in game 7 ALCS on the juice - as he admitted.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 21, 2007 9:04:37 GMT -5
It's hard to * team accomplishments.
There wouldn't have even BEEN a game 7 in 2003 had Giambi been able to hit a damn fly ball with less than 2 outs and a runner in scoring position.
Did he admit he was on the juice in 2003? But they should * his whole career at minimum. Bonds too.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 21, 2007 23:49:21 GMT -5
Also heard on my drive home tonight on the local ESPN radio station:
Apparently at some point (don't know if it was recently) Giambi was quoted as saying, "I don't care what anyone says, steroids don't help you hit home runs." To that, the local host remarked, "Then Jason should be able to tell us where his went."
The thing that's always annoyed me about the argument that steroids don't enhance the hand-eye coordination to be a good hitter is that argument completely ignores simple equation that states: steroids = more strength = more bat speed = longer/harder drives = X-amount of what used to be fly balls and long doubles now become home runs in many cases.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 22, 2007 5:57:38 GMT -5
Bottom line is this, why take steroids if they DON'T help your game?
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 22, 2007 6:44:35 GMT -5
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on May 22, 2007 7:38:41 GMT -5
more strength = more bat speed
Thats crap. That has been disproven so many times. In fact, if anything the more muscles you build up, the slower your swing would become.
As to steroids, besides taking them to look like a bodybuilder which is important to some guys, the "strength" that is added may add the 20 feet on a fly ball needed to get it over the fence.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 22, 2007 8:00:39 GMT -5
I'm no expert on steroids and what they do, but one thing I remember reading is that they help people recover quickly from working out, so they can work out more. That can also come in handy in preventing the wear and tear on the body that a full baseball season brings.
If you tailor your workouts toward speed, I would think steroids could absolutely improve bat speed.
But you are right about bulking up causing you to slow down. That hurt ARod last year. Like him or hate him, you have to admit that so far, 2007 is better than 2006 for him, and one difference was dropping some weight.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 22, 2007 10:37:18 GMT -5
"As to steroids, besides taking them to look like a bodybuilder which is important to some guys, the "strength" that is added may add the 20 feet on a fly ball needed to get it over the fence." -- Sheriff Tom
Tom, Balls - PLEASE do some brushing up on your physics. Where do you think that extra 20 feet comes from? Are you kidding me? It comes from BAT SPEED! Bat speed is the sole human factor in how hard a ball is hit. I mean seriously....this is as simple as it gets. If my 7 year old daughter swings a bat a X-mph and Barry Bonds swings a bat also at X-mph, both are going put the exact same amount of energy into the ball. Bulking up in muscle and strength absolutely does NOT slow down your swing...it may hamper your range of motion....but how you can possibly make the claim that a swing would be slowed by extra muscle, yet the hitter would hit the ball 20 feet further in the same sentence. By that rationale, taking steroids would actually take distance off of your batted balls.
If you're stronger, you can swing the bat faster, if you swing the bat faster, you put more energy into the baseball, the ball goes farther.
*********************
"Boosting two factors — the mass of the bat and the speed of the swing — can raise batted ball speed (BBS), which adds distance to a hit. But swing speed can affect BBS more dramatically.
Research has shown that doubling the weight of a 20-ounce wood bat can raise a BBS of 68.5 mph to 80.4 mph — a 17.3 percent increase. But Daniel Russell, a professor at Kettering University in Michigan, found that doubling the swing speed of a 30-ounce bat can raise a BBS of 62 mph to 83.8 mph — a 35.1 percent increase.
In terms of turning a hit into a homer: Against a 94-mph fastball, every 1-mph increase in swing speed extends distance about 8 ft." --popularmechanics.com
Freshman Physics 101 boys!
********************* "Adair provides an equation relating bat speed to player weight:
V = k sqrt(M/(m+M/81))
Note: V is the velocity of the bat in miles per hour, m is the bat weight in pounds, M is the player's weight in pounds, sqrt means square root and k is a constant, 10, in mph.
In an article on ESPN.com by Patrick Huber, entitled 616*(*No Asterisk Required), he relates Adair’s formula to Bonds.
According to Adair's formula -- and don't worry, we asked him to double-check the calculations, since our last math class came in high school -- the 206-pound Bonds generates a bat speed of 67.34 mph, while the 228-pound Bonds swings the same 32-ounce bat at 68.81 mph, an increase of 1.48 mph.
Hruby goes on to make the reasonable claim that while Bonds bat speed was increasing in his late thirties, it should have been decreasing. Page 2 charted every Bonds home run from 1999 to May 2006 and subtracted the 83 home runs that would have landed on the warning track." - thesteroidera.blogspot.com
****************** "It (steroid use) does a tremendous amount for bat speed," says Merv Rettenmund, now a roving hitting instructor for the Toronto Blue Jays who previously coached Canseco, McGwire and Caminiti. "The idea of hitting is to have a nice, easy swing. Well, some of these guys are putting no effort into swinging the bat – and making the ball talk."
|
|
|
Post by elliejay21 on May 22, 2007 11:41:41 GMT -5
Do not waste your fingers...Tom doesn't believe in physics.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 22, 2007 11:48:44 GMT -5
Well, per his last post, Tom has admitted to believing that steroid use can indirectly lead to 20 more feet on a batted baseball. Science has proved without a doubt the the single most important factor on distance of a batter ball is bat speed. So perhaps Tom believes in the transitive property of mathematics:
A = C, B = C => A = B
(Given: per Tom) Steroid Use = Greater Distance (Given: per Science) Greater Bat Speed = Greater Distance (therefore) Steroid Use = Greater Bat Speed
|
|
|
Post by Domi on May 22, 2007 11:59:51 GMT -5
What's your take on corked bats? I thought science proved that those don't help.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 22, 2007 12:14:23 GMT -5
If you'll read the popular mechanics article I posted, it said that there are two factors involved in the distance a batted ball travels (that's assuming that the ball is hit squarely which is a function of hand-eye coordination. Hand-eye coordination isn't aided by steroids (strength) or corked bats or aluminum bats or fatter or skinnier bats). Those two factors are bat speed primarily, and bat vibration (which comes into play with the bat's mass - more mass = less vibration) to a lesser degree.
My initial guess is that since cork is less dense than wood, it creates a lighter bat, thus more bat speed. The trade off is less mass, but as shown bat speed is a more influential factor than mass (reduced vibration) so it's worth the trade off. But maybe cork has something to do with reducing vibration as well...I don't know, I haven't researched it...but the bottom line is if you are using methods to increase distance on your batted balls that don't affect bat speed or bat vibration, you're not helping a damn thing.
But I will say that the notion of a bat full of rubber balls is stupid. Rubber balls can only decrease the mass of the bat, since there would clearly be empty space inside the bat, since the balls are round, it weakens the strength of the bat, and if by some weird voodoo like osmosis that bat actually inherited some of the bounciness of the rubber balls, that would decrease the energy put into the batted baseball - the bat needs to be less forgiving and less "elastic" in order to increase distance. It's like jumping on tight trampoline versus a loose trampoline...you're going to get more spring off the trampoline that gives less.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 22, 2007 13:25:14 GMT -5
You didn't read what I wrote.
"If you tailor your workouts toward speed, I would think steroids could absolutely improve bat speed. "
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 22, 2007 13:39:02 GMT -5
You don't need to TAILOR your workouts toward speed. Steroids add strength (amongst other things - ability to recover more quickly from physical strain). Even if you were a sedentary slob, taking steroids would provide you with some tangible amount of increased physical strength. The stronger you are, the harder/faster you can swing a baseball bat, regardless of whether or not you work out like a madman, or if you're a couch potato. Obviously if you are already physically impressive and have a regular workout regimen, the added effect of steroids is exponentially greater.
I think you're confusion lies in the concept of speed versus mobility. A-Rod didn't lose bat speed by bulking up last season. He lost the range of motion, mobility and flexibility in his body...he probably felt a reduction in some of his motor skills, not in his strength and bat speed.
Jason Giambi has an entirely different approach to hitting than A-Rod. Jason Giambi doesn't have much plate coverage...doesn't have much range of motion and flexibility...he has a good eye that allows him to (theoretically) wait for a pitch he can handle and crush it with pure brute force...he has tremendous bat speed and when he gets a pitch in his comfort zone he whacks the shit out of it...and even if he gets under it a bit, the added bat speed thanks to his added strength allows that ball to travel farther....so what might have been a high fly to deep right before steroids, now clears the wall by a couple of feet.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 22, 2007 13:41:15 GMT -5
Jason Giambi has an entirely different approach to hitting than A-Rod. ===============
True. He doesn't hit.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on May 22, 2007 13:49:27 GMT -5
HA HA...thus my "theoretically" disclaimer!!!
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 23, 2007 6:06:58 GMT -5
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on May 23, 2007 7:55:06 GMT -5
Apparently "around 80" players failed the test for amphetamines. Considering not everyone is tested regularly, that is an absurd amount. I dont really care about this, especially as Mickey Mantle admitted using "greenies" which is essentially the same sort of thing.
So you can continue to shred Giambi on the one hand, and continue to bitch that the Yankees are not getting enough for him with the other, you ass.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 23, 2007 7:57:59 GMT -5
So now you're down to the old 80 wrongs make a right defense?
You're an idiot. Just admit it.
I am right about Giambi.
You are wrong about Giambi.
Or you can just continue life as a Giambi Apologist.
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on May 23, 2007 8:02:04 GMT -5
If its good enough for the great Mickey Mantle, I am not going to crucify Jason Giambi for it.
I'm not the Giambi apologist, YOU are the one that thinks we should have permission to raid Anaheim's prospect closet for him cause he is so supremely talented. Sounds like YOU are the one with the warped sense of reality.
Now get the Hell out of this thread until you do your job and post the fantasy numbers.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 23, 2007 8:18:00 GMT -5
Again, the two wrongs make a right defense is about all you have left, which means you're done.
Do I want more than Chone Figgins for him? Sure. That doesn't mean he isn't a piece of shit.
Giambi's value just dropped even more. We'd be lucky to get Figgins for him now.
At this point, I would give him up to any team willing to pay off his contract.
As for the fantasy numbers, they are up you goof.
|
|
|
Post by 9 on May 23, 2007 12:42:26 GMT -5
I think Jackass would shoot a load if the Angels got rid of Chone Figgins.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 23, 2007 12:44:21 GMT -5
Just as long as he's pointing in a different direction.
|
|
|
Post by kingdzbws on May 23, 2007 12:50:37 GMT -5
Tom, you make an important point about our 'heroes' like The Mick. I read this online some time ago and it is a hard question to answer;
" Consider who is really respecting the game: Mickey Mantle, who showed up to countless games drunk or hungover after a night of debauchery, or Joe the Juicer, who watches his diet, works out every day, and injects himself with steroids in order to be the best ball player he can possibly be? "
However much hate there is for Giambi - he WAS trying to improve his game. The Mick, on the other hand, was ONLY hurting his game by showing up wasted.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 23, 2007 12:51:12 GMT -5
Giambi was cheating. Mantle was not.
|
|
|
Post by kingdzbws on May 23, 2007 12:53:24 GMT -5
Mantle cheated the fans - thats worse......and what about the speed? Is that an accepted performance enhancer?
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on May 23, 2007 12:56:21 GMT -5
Mantle cheated himself more than anything.
If anything, his off the field antics robbed him of being the best player of all time.
|
|