The Sports Curmudgeon

Obviously, the steroid usage by Rafael Palmiero and his 10-day suspension from baseball is the “flavor of the month” in the sports media now. I have a couple of things to say about the whole mess but let me start by tipping my cap to Scott Ostler in today’s San Francisco Chronicle. Normally, when I cite something by Scott Ostler, it is because of its wit or his clever use of the English language. Both of those characteristics are in today’s column but there is also some incisive commentary there on the mendacity and the wordsmithing that abound in the whole steroid mess. Here is one small sample:

“Palmiero appealed his positive test result to a four-person panel, which, while offering no public details, found his case ‘compelling’ and sent it to arbitration, which he lost.

“What the hell does that mean, ‘compelling’? Was that a steroid hearing or a wine tasting?”

In the midst of this flurry of news and commentary, you may have missed the news that José Canseco is contemplating another book. If you know anyone on the Nobel Committee for Literature, please alert him or her because this could put Canseco over the top for next year’s award. Since Canseco “fingered” Palmiero as a long-term user in his book and had to listen to Palmiero’s denials in front of that Congressional Committee hearing that accomplished little if anything of value, Canseco is feeling “vindicated” about now. And that is in fact the working title of his proposed new literary oeuvre. Vindicated will – according to Canseco’s mouthpiece – reveal the identities of even more steroid users and abusers in baseball. Why they escaped mention in the previous “tell-all book” is left as an exercise for the student who might have expected “tell-all” to preclude any sequels.

This time, Canseco will identify managers and team doctors who are implicated in this mess. Isn’t it great that Canseco gets to finger a team doctor? That may be every player’s fantasy as a way to exact revenge. Vindicated will show the public a part of baseball that the public just doesn’t understand and open it all up to scrutiny. So, when you are forced to deal with yet another round of literary pabulum from José Canseco, the culprit is Rafael Palmiero. Canseco would not be writing another book if Joe Flabeetz had tested positive… Thanks, Rafael Palmiero.

Canseco was on Sporting News Radio and was quoted saying:

“I think people are realizing – or starting to realize – that every word, more or less, I said in the book is the absolute truth.”

Let’s ignore for the moment the logical fallacy that a positive steroid test in 2005 does not validate his assertion that Palmiero used steroids back in the 1990s. Folks, just look at what he said. This published author and this person who wants you to take him literally said:

“…every word, more or less, I said in the book is the absolute truth.”

Memo to José: Either every word is the absolute truth or every word – more or less – is true. You can’t have “the absolute truth” associated with the words “more or less”. Hopefully, your editor for Vindicated will catch that kind of stuff for you.

Palmiero’s positive test and suspension have also generated the potential for conspiracy theorists to come out of the woodwork. That’s never a good thing for those of us who are not compelled to find an evil genius behind every unfortunate occurrence on the planet. But let me just offer up one scenario that will surely play itself out sometime soon.

People have pondered why it took so long for MLB to announce this failed test and to enact the suspension. They “waited until” Palmiero had his 3000th hit; they “waited until” after the Hall of Fame weekend; the powers that be in baseball are still silent on the matter - - meaning of course that they are not yet finished with their cover-up. OK, run with that ball just a short distance and put it in juxtaposition with the fact that we know that Barry Bonds took a drug/steroid test earlier this year because he said he did. Now factor in that Bonds said he wouldn’t be playing any time this season on the day that the Palmiero suspension was announced. And your conclusion could be:

Bud Selig and Don Fehr are so busy trying to figure out how not to reveal the results of Bonds’ test that they convinced him to sit out the year so that they can hide behind the fact that he is not an active player and so his privacy needs to be maintained.

I don’t believe that for even a minute, but that kind of speculation based on the extrapolation of feeble evidence is bound to happen. Once again, thank you Rafael Palmiero.

And by the way, just what did happen to Bud Selig and Don Fehr in the past week or so? Were they secretly on that Space Shuttle launch that NASA is fretting about so much? Are they so busy repairing tiles on the Space Shuttle that we haven’t heard from them? I doubt it. My suspicion is that their spinmeisters have yet to come up with some talking points for them that pass the “giggle test” – meaning they can’t utter the talking points twice without giggling.

Other players’ stats will come under the intense kind of scrutiny that only a seamhead can relish. I got an e-mail from a reader several months ago saying why he believed that Sammy Sosa was – but no longer is – a steroid user. Here is his argument:

Sosa has hit [as of the beginning of 2005] 574 homeruns.

Sosa has been in the major leagues for 16 seasons.

In the 8 seasons from 1996 to 2003, he hit 408 homeruns (71% of the total in half the seasons).

In the other 8 seasons, he hit only 166 homeruns (29% of the total in half the seasons).

This reader uses this statistical pattern to conclude that Sosa used steroids to gain strength in the mid-90s and then stopped using them as scrutiny began to focus on that kind of substance use/abuse. All I can say about that is that if you are inclined to believe that Sammy Sosa is a steroid user, that data could convince you beyond a reasonable doubt. On the other hand, if you think Sammy Sosa is the most wonderful hominid on the planet, that data would be deemed to be meaningless. Me? I’d prefer to rely on the results of drug tests. Thanks again, Rafael Palmiero.

Some controversy exists about how to deal with steroid users when it comes to Hall of Fame voting. I don’t have a vote – obviously – but let me make an observation here. Pete Rose is not in the Hall of Fame because he bet on baseball and that is verboten. However, it is inconceivable to me how anyone could conclude that his gambling activities aided him in collecting 4256 hits; and it is that on-field accomplishment that puts his name in nomination for the Hall of Fame.

Now think of steroid users. They would have done something illegal in order to enhance their ability to generate positive statistics in their baseball careers and those statistics are now the basis for their nomination for Hall of Fame induction. It seems to me that steroid use is far more damning when it comes to Hall of Fame candidacy than gambling. One inflates the very statistics that are used to decide on the merits of a particular candidate; the other violates a baseball rule that is posted in every clubhouse but has no inflationary effect on stats.

But worst of all, it looks as if the Congress of the United States will take yet another opportunity for a foray into sensationalist TV. More investigations are indicated; someone mentioned the word “perjury” in a serious tone of voice; more hearings will be held – but probably with no increase in purpose or in dogged interrogation. The only question that remains a wagering proposition is this one:

Will the literary value of Canseco’s upcoming book, Vindication, be greater or less than the sociological impact of the orchestrated hearings to be held by the Congress?

Thanks a whole lot, Rafael Palmiero.

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports…