ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>So does this elevate a guy like Greg Maddux ahead of Clemens in your mind? They are both racing towards Spahn's modern day record for wins and if Maddux can win 13 games in each of the next two seasons he will tie Alexander and Matty for 3rd with 373. Only Cy Young and Walter Johnson ahead of him...

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>JoAnn, the bigger question is who is so dumb as to write a check for such things, rather than paying cash? Why on Earth leave a paper trail?

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>lol Todd. I thought about that one too. I think players may write checks to clubhouse guys pretty routinely for various things. <br /><br />I read that at least one player was confronted by the commission with a check they got from a clubhouse guy that the player had written, and demanded to know what the check was for. The player said he didn't have the first damn idea what it was for - could have been McDonald's, could have been dues, could have been who the hell knows what, but all he knew was that it wasn't for steroids. I think this particular players ended up not being named in the report, and got the impression that checks between players and clubhouse guys aren't at all uncommon. <br /><br />Wish I remembered who it was or where I read it - it was only yesterday. But if it was more than 20 minutes ago and is not related to the Sales and Negotiable Instruments exam I have tomorrow, then it doesn't have a spot in my brain right now!<br /><br />Still though ... writing a check for steroids? What - they don't have ATM's in clubhouses?? They will now, I bet!<br /><br />J

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>I saw that too. I want to know of anyone who has ever written a check to McDoonald's. I mean, you don't have a twenty or less to pay for food? Dues? Payable to a clubhouse guy and not an entity of some sort? Gimme a break. What's the pricing on these steroids anyway--same as a Happy Meal supersized?<br /><br />OK Joann, if the player makes the check payable to the clubhouse guy, who then places a restrictive endorsement such as payable to John Doe only after January 1, 2008, is a party who takes delivery of the check from John Doe as consideration for another transaction a holder in due course? Is the answer different after January 1, 2008? Are you nervous about your exam? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>The check would not necessarily be written out to McDonalds (or Burger King, etc.) but rather to the club house attendant in payment for going to McDonalds. A large check could be a cumulative payment for going to McDonalds several times over the course of a week or a month. Or it could be payment for slipping a comely fan the players phone number. The point is that players routinely tip club house guys for any number of things so unless the player was stupid enough to write "steroids" on the memo line there is reasonable doubt as to what the checks were for.<br /><br />Howard

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Howard, there could be some doubt, but I won't concede it's reasonable. These were apparently often visiting players who come into town what, anywhere from three to ten days a year? They have plenty of food in the clubhouse, and although I suppose there could be some favors requested here and there, I have trouble believing them as being the subject of check transactions. It's been way too many years, but when I once saw the old Yankees roll into Minnesota and hang out, wads o' cash were being flashed for payment around the hotel and watering hole. It also seems with the proliferation of ATMS, cash is more readily available than ever. I just have difficulty believing these players are taking the time to write checks for every little favor or even for a bunch of them over time. That's why I say if the pricing for the roids at all matches up to the amounts shown on these checks, somebody's got a lot of 'splainin to do, and while it may not be proof positive, it is certainly relavant and likely probative.

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Richard Simon</b><p>Paul Loduca wrote out three checks for $3200 each to Radomski.<br />That would have been an amazing coincidence for him to tip the clubhouse guy $3200 each time he saw him.<br /><br />--<br><br>I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.<br />Unknown author <br />--<br />We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.<br />No retreat baby, no surrender.<br />The Boss

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>the juice is EXPENSIVE..........<br /><br />Wonder if that was for the Cream or the Clear.....?<br /><br />p.s. Todd.......Gonzo wasn't on the list I don't think......nor Williams or some of the other guys.......maybe second round, huh?<br />

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>howard</b><p>Todd and Richard, you both make good points. Checks like that are certainly pretty strong evidence.<br /><br />

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>shane leonard</b><p>I have heard some people discussing those that were on steroids had an advantage over the others. However, being realistic on the steroid thing, I would wager that the steroid issue has existed for the past 15 years and the percentage of users in the MLB is close to 85%. If this is true the level of play is equal. This list of 87 is just the list that got ratted out by their trainers/clubhouse managers. Usually the strength and conditioning coach would be the guy giving the drugs instead of a trainer. <br />The issue of using a substance to enhance your play has been around a long time. It started with drinking in the dugout or being drunk on the mound(1920s-60s), to being high on cocaine or speed(1970s-80s), using tobacco throughout the life of baseball and now the steroids. All of these are accelerants that allow a player to release their nerves.<br /><br />Shane

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Richard S. Simon</b><p>You really think alcohol, cocaine and tobacco enhance play?????????<br />--<br><br>I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.<br />Unknown author <br />--<br />We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.<br />No retreat baby, no surrender.<br />The Boss

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>shane leonard</b><p>Richard<br />Yes I do think so. When someone is nervous they smoke. <br /><br />SL

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Ed Ivey</b><p>Come to think of it, isn't the mere presence of athletically gifted genes/dna an unfair advantage?<br /><br />Just kidding. "There's no excuse for juice." I wrote that.

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Richard Simon</b><p>Shane - somebody may grab a smoke during a game, but doing lines of coke or drinking booze? Obviously they don't do that during a game and I never heard of either of those chemicals being called helpful to athletes, before, during or after a game.<br />--<br><br>I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.<br />Unknown author <br />--<br />We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.<br />No retreat baby, no surrender.<br />The Boss

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>It has been said that many baseball players from the 1880's and 90's used cocaine and that baseball had a problem with it. <br /><br /><br />Steve

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Dan</b><p>To think that only Barry is guilty, is a load of BS. MLB, just like NFL, NBA and NHL are LOADED with ROIDS. Anyone notice how these ballplayers, despite the sport, fill a piece of cardboard more than our players on T206? Yep, they are all on some kind of enhancement performance get more hits, homeruns, strikes (if a pitcher), touchdowns, catches, goals, dunks... &lt; you get my meaning. It is completely retarded to hang this entire thing on Bonds, there are multiple users and before the leagues lift "the rock" of information, they may want to think twice...

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>I'm unaware of a single person who thinks Bonds is the only one. Further, one only has to look at the reception for McGwire and Palmeiro to see Bonds is not the only one the receive the wrath or roids. A difference for Bonds is he chose to stay in the game and gun for popular records. McGwire and Palmeiro quickly moved to the sidelines. Presumably, if McGwire came back after the hearing to gun for Maris' record a second time, his reception wouldn't be as sweet as in 1998.

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Richard Simon</b><p>According to SI.com Andy Pettitte has admitted using HGH on two occasions.<br />Not from SI.com but I have heard now that Bennett and Santangelo have verified what the Mitchell Report said about their drug use.<br />--<br /><br />I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.<br />Unknown author <br />--<br />We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.<br />No retreat baby, no surrender.<br />The Boss

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>I'm very disappointed with Pettite. While he only claims to have used HGH twice, when confronted last year by Jason Grimsley's accusation, he flat out lied. As for Clemens, his weak and getting weaker denials are not helped by Pettite's admission: Pettite totally corroborated the version of events provided by the trainer that he and Clemens shared. If Barry Bonds is denied entry into the HOF, Clemens had best be as well.

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>Jerry Spillman</b><p><br />This NY Times Mitchell Report article shows a picture and a concise report on each player on the list. It includes a chart showing before and after performance-enhancing substances were used.<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/12/13/sports/20071213_MITCHELL_FEATURE.html" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/12/13/sports/20071213_MITCHELL_FEATURE.html</a>#<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

ESPN & THE MITCHELL STEROIDS REPORT
 

Posted By: <b>DD</b><p>Some of the names I was glad didn't appear include Bagwell, Ripken, Junior, Frank Thomas, Albert Pujols, and Ivan Rodriguez. Not surprised at all that Albert Belle and Juan Gonzales were named.