Bleed Cubbie Blue: We now know, presuming the report on Sosa is true, that the joy [of the 1998 home run race] was indeed stolen from us. The numbers put up were put up by cartoon figures, not baseball players as we had known them for decades earlier. I know, I know, amphetamines in the 50s and 60s, other PEDs, other ways of cheating, ad nauseum . . . we were sold a bill of goods. They all swore up and down that they were honest -- "Flintstone vitamins," Sammy told us with a straight face. Now we know that face was lying to us, presuming the report is true.Speak for yourself, homie. I still feel perfectly joyful about the homerun race because--sorry to burst your bubble--pretty much every pro athlete you watch is, on some level, cartoonish. And here's another eye opener--you probably haven't lived a single day on this planet in which someone, somewhere hasn't lied to your face about something. People lie. I lie. You lie. We all scream for lie lie. Get over it. Whenever I read / hear stuff like this, I wonder--How much of the 'roid (out)rage has to do with fairness to the other players, the record books, etcetera, and how much has to do with the critic's own feelings of lost connection? "Sammy, I thought we were best buds! I thought we shared all our secrets! But you lied to me! I don't know if I'll ever be able to love again *tear*."
Bugs & Cranks: It's expected because Sosa's career progression and statistics smack of performance enhancing drugs; there's such a dramatic spike in his power later in his career it almost moronic no one though to question Sosa at the time. Sosa's halfhearted denials and severe drop in performance after baseball began drug testing only amplified the expectation that his superstar turn was aided by the juice.Hmm, that's an amusing take on things. You'd be right if you consider age 29 to be "later in his career." Then again, you'd also be a fool. One need only click through a few of Slammity Sam's highest comps on BR (Killebrew, Stargell, McCovey) to notice that peaking during the 29 to 32 range (or later) is perfectly normal. Maybe the leap was more dramatic, but again, unless you're Fergie Jenkins, you have no idea how much of this improvement may or may not have been due to PED use. Attribution to a smoking gun, e.g. steroids, is super easy when you have post facto knowledge that, yes, this factor was in play. And we should all have such selective memory. People did question his production at the time, especially following the McGwire andro controversy (See: Flinstone vitamins).
And lastly, the only useful sentiment on this topic:
Deadspin: The real outrage here, as it was with A-Rod, is not who's on the list but who's doing the leaking, a story that for obvious reasons The New York Times will not be writing. You'll remember that those tests results were supposed to be confidential--a perfectly reasonable expectation of any employee who submits to a drug test--yet now they're trickling into public view, merely because somebody wants to remind you to care deeply about steroids in baseball again.