The aftermath of McGwire's admission

Ever since McGwire admitted his steroid use, I have been reconsidering my whole outlook on performance enhancing substances, records, and the hall of fame. First of all, I am among the vast, vast majority who was not in the least bit surprised that Mac used illegal steroids. What does surprise me is the length of time he took them. I always assumed that he was clean during the early to mid 90s and bulked up with them from 96-00 when he had his home run explosion. I don't buy for a second that his home run totals were not substantially aided by the drugs, nor do I think McGwire should be in the hall of fame. McGwires hall of fame case is built on his massive home run, walk, and slugging totals, all of which were blown up with steroids. He has no chance without them and was barely an all star level player. My take is as it has always been: the old standards do not apply to players from the steroid era. You'd better have crazy off the charts numbers, or 10-15 very good years to get in in my book. So guys like Sheffield, Thome, Delgado, Guerrero, Kent, Sosa, Palmeiro, and a few others who would have been locks in the past just don't quite make it for me.

All that being said, the thing that pisses me off about the whole thing the most is how guys like Ken Griffey Jr. get painted as saints. Look, I don't know if Griffey used steroids. He has never been linked to it, or tested positive, or had a season where he just blew up or anything. But to totally dismiss it as impossible and treat the guy like the golden boy of the era doesn't make sense. I think it's very likely that playing in the era he did, Griffey used some sort of performance enhancing substance. That substance could have been a steroid, HGH, amphetamine, or supplement, but in any case, its not entirely natural. And thats ok. In this day an age athletes do anything they can to get an edge as in can be the difference in hundreds of millions of dollars. Anyone who says that they would not have taken drugs that were not banned at the time in order to stay in the majors or make themselves a star is either lying or very stupid. Look at McGwire: he was a good first baseman and a good hitter when he came into the league (emphasis on good) but he could not stay healthy and his career would probably have come to an end much sooner had it not been saved by drugs. Once he started taking the drugs, he probably felt much better and began to see more and more success. Without the possibility of consequences looming, why would he not continue? Ok, it was probably quite bad for his health, we'll find out later on that, but seriously, ask yourself or anyone you know if they would take 50-100 million dollars today in exchange for 10-20 years of your life later. Just about everyone, at least the younger people would say yes even if they won't admit it.

Now, maybe Griffey was a rare breed who was so talented that he could dominate a league full of juiced players based on talent alone. I like to think that Griffey and Bonds were both like this until about 1999. At this point, the paths diverge. Hands down, Griffey and Bonds were the two best position players of the 1990s and its not particularly close. Most people would put Griffey slightly ahead of Bonds, a position I do not share, but for this purpose, it's not important. Here's how I see the situation and where I make my point: Griffey and Bonds were hands down the two most talented players in the league, and along with Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, and Alex Rodriguez, two of the top 5 most talented players of all time. The difference is Griffey was amazing from day 1 whereas Bonds had to work his way up to stardom. Bonds' workout regime was well documented and it was intense. It was said that he was the only one who could handle what he did. Griffey on the other hand was never know as a workoutaholic. Sure, he'd work on his game: take batting and fielding practice, baserunning drills ect. but as far as I know, he was never much of a weight room or physical conditioning guy the way Bonds was. I think this is a large reason for his injuries in his early 30s. I could be wrong, but I have a lot of experience with athletics and I can tell you that the guys who kept themselves in great shape were much less likely to get injured than those who didn't.

Let's zoom to 2000: Griffey was dealt to Cincinnati and had his last really good full season at the age of 30. 30! Bonds has yet another monster season setting a career high in homers as well as leading the league in OPS+ and walks at the age of 35. Bonds goes on to blow up the next 4 seasons, putting together the greatest 4 year run in the history of baseball. Griffey basically falls off a cliff as he cannot stay healthy, and even when he's on the field, he's not the player he was in his 20s. So my question is which is the greater tragedy? They had essetially equal careers after the year 2000, when Bonds, by any means necessary sought to make himself the most dominant force in the history of the game. And he succeeded. Griffey, after years of getting by on pure talent could not keep himself healthy and in shape to stay successful as he aged. In 2000 if you had asked me which current player has the best chance to break Hank Aarons home run record, my answers would have been Griffey and Sosa. Bonds would not have crossed my mind. Bonds of course was the one who broke the record.

Let's stop making Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, Clemens and the rest out to be monsters. They took illegal drugs. It was bad. We get it. But the drugs alone did not make them great players. Steroids really only help you get strong and stay healthy when supplemented with physical fitness. These guys were all workout gurus. Ken Griffey was not. He was a great talent. He wasted some of it. He was not the player he could have been. Not all of this can be blamed on steroids.

If you want to make a player out to be the golden boy of the era, for god sakes, pick Greg Maddux. He is probably the one player who got the most out of his talent in the history of baseball. He was a stand up guy. He was great for 20 years. He may have been the best pitcher ever to live. And he, not Ken Griffey, should be the first unanamous HOF inductee. He won't be, but how can you possibly construct an argument against him?

Farewell Greg Maddux

The best pitcher of the live ball era is calling it quits. Despite posting solid numbers at 42, pitching in the playoffs for the 13th time, and sitting just 8 wins shy of Warren Spahn's live ball record of 363, Maddux is done. We will probably never see another pitcher quite like Maddux who had perhaps the best command in the history of the game pitching over 5000 innings while walking less than 1000. At his best, he walked 20 batters in 232 innings a microscopic 0.77 per 9 innings. Despite being around the strikezone so much, Maddux allowed very few long balls allowing just 9 homers in that 1997 season. Only once did he allow more than 30 homers in a season and in only 5 of his 23 season did the long ball tally top 20. Maddux also got a fair number of strikeouts for a control pitcher. He will finish his career 10th on the all time strikeout list with 3371 ahead of famed power pitchers Bob Gibson, Bob Feller, and Don Drysdale. Of the 16 members of the 3000 strikeout club, only Curt Schilling and Pedro Martinez boast better K/BB rates.

Only Pedro Martinez, Randy Johnson, and Roger Clemens can match Maddux's peak during the steroid era, but each has their issues. Pedro was better at his best, but his best really only lasted 1997-2002 other than that he was very good then good, then mediocre and last year down right bad. Johnson didn't figure it out until he was 29 and although his Houston and Arizona years from mid 1998-2004 may have been the most dominating 6+ years in the history of baseball (ok, 6 since he missed most of 2003). They still were not as good as Maddux's 1994-1995 years and Maddux's pre 29 stats already included 131 victories, 1911 innings and a 3.02 ERA. Johnson's 30s and 40s may be the greatest for a pitcher in history with only Spahn and Grove having legit claims against him. Johnson had a gargantuan 3663 strikeouts after turning 30, a total that would place him 6th in history and is only rivaled by Nolan Ryan's 3629 (for now anyway). Still a players 20s count and Maddux was great for them. Clemens has the only statistical claim to be even clost to Maddux, but his peak years were not as good, his durability was not as good, and there's that whole Mitchell Report thing to consider (or does Mr. Clemens perhaps misremember that?).

You were the best I ever saw Greg, and you will be missed.

50 greatest players: 10-1

#10: Greg Maddux
Score: 1105.1/1399.5/24.3/0/2528.8
The #2 pitcher on the list truly has it all: great longevity, better peak, a world series ring, 4 Cy Youngs, and is a member of virtually every number "club" pitchers have. All this despite throwing considerably softer than any of the other great pitchers of his generation. Maddux threw low 90s when he was posting ERAs below two and 19/20 win seasons left and right. The only real knock on him is his lack of postseason dominance, but that's nit picking because without his regular season success, there would be no playoffs. Maddux didn't even make TSN's top 50 back in 2005 somehow ranking behind Nolan Ryan, Bob Feller, Carl Hubbell Bob Gibson, and Steve Carlton among others. WTF??? Did he not strikeout enough guys? Maddux vs. Ryan isn't even remotely close. I would take any of about 7-8 Maddux seasons over any of Ryan's seasons. Maddux has more wins, fewer losses, better ERA, waaaay better ERA+, and a better WHIP. Maddux is also hurt be the fact that his two best seasons occurred in strike years which prevented him from having gaudy counting stats

#9: Stan Musial
Score: 1383.0/1096.5/120.4/12/2538.4
Stan the Man is often overlooked because he only had good but not great home run power. He doesn't have 500 homers and he was overshadowed by Ted Williams who played in almost the exact same years. Still Musial has plus power, great contact, and good discipline and deserves to be in the top 10.

#8: Rogers Hornsby
Score: 1320.0/1372.1/89.2/0/2684.5
The last man not named Ted Williams to hit .400, and the last right handed hitter to do it. Hornsby is probably the greatest right handed hitter of all time and certainly the best hitting middle infielder. He was the first national league player to hit with regular homerun power and served as the NL version of Babe Ruth during the 1920s.

#7: Willie Mays
Score: 1410.1/1182.7/156.6/0/2686.3
Mays is in the top 2-3 of almost every list, but he simply did not have as great a peak as the guys ahead of him. He would likely move up if his fielding were more quantifiable.

#6: Walter Johnson
Score: 1397.3/1321.9/19.0/0/2738.2
Without question the greatest pitcher ever. He is the only pitcher to rival the peaks of Pedro and Maddux and has the best all around career numbers. He managed to post ERA+s of over 240 at an era where the league average was below 3.00. Now that's impressive

#5: Barry Bonds
Score: 1235.3/1477.7/145.2/-20/2764.4
Yes the steroids certainly boosted him from about 10 to here, but you can't take away all the great years he put in during the 1990s, and his steroid years, when everyone was on steroids, are much much better than anyone else's were. His 2001-2004 seasons were absolutely ridiculous. I guess that's what happen when you take the most talented player in the league and load him up on PEDs. I wonder what Williams and Ruth could have done with that kind of help. Bonds is the highest ranking player who was not a member of the all century team. Had the vote been held 2 years later, he certainly would have been on it.

#4: Ty Cobb
Score: 1488.5/1297.8/85.2/0/2768.4
The best player of the dead ball era and still the all time leader in batting average was also a very good centerfielder in the days of enormous outfields. Some of his other records have been broken, but its going to be hard for anyone to top a lifetime .366 average.

#3: Babe Ruth
Score: 1428.0/1347.8/96.6/0/2774.7
No one is going to like this. Ruth is 1 on just about every list you see, but he played against vastly inferior competition to the two guys in front of him, and he played a less than premium defensive position. Still it was very very close between the top 6.

#2: Ted Williams
Score: 1419.8/1302.0/126.7/20/2785.3
The best damn hitter who ever lived. The last man to hit .400. The all time leader in OBP. And he missed 5 years due to wars, 3 of which where he might have topped his 1941 season of .406/.553/.735. He likely would have 3500 hits and 700 homers with 5 more seasons of being Ted Williams. His lifetime on base percentage of .482 ranks first all time and is better than the career high of any current player other than Frank Thomas or Barry Bonds. It has only been topped 8 times since WWII by someone other than Williams. It would be a stretch for anyone to ever break it.

#1: Mickey Mantle
Score: 1344.9/1403.5/130.0/0/2796.2
Somebody want to explain to me how he was 19th on TSN's list? I'm sorry, but there is absolutely no argument for having Dimaggio ahead of the Mick. He is one of only 7 players with 3 OPS+s over 200 and the only one to do it post color barrier while playing a premium defensive position. If I could choose any season to have on my team in would be Mantle in 1957. 16 all star games, 7 rings, 3 MVPs. Mantle may well have been the most talented player in history but his career was hurt by an early injury that took out much of his speed, and later due to too much booze. Mantle didn't have performance enhancing substances, he had performance hindering ones. He had to overcome his drugs.

Interesting notes on my list:

Number of players on the list by primary position:
P - 16, CF - 7, RF - 6, 2b - 5, 3b - 4, LF - 3, SS - 3, C - 3, 1B - 3.

Not surprisingly, the Yankees are the most represented team with 10 players: Mantle, Ruth, Clemens, DiMaggio, Gehrig, Randy Johnson, ARod, Berra, Rivera, and Boggs. The Red Sox are next with 9 with Ruth, Boggs, and Clemens represented on both. There are no representatives for the Rockies, Marlins, and Brewers although Milwaukee can lay claim to a number of Braves.

Pujols is the youngest player on the list at 28, while Cy Young is the oldest at 141. The oldest living member is Stan Musial at 88. 21 players on the list are deceased, most recently Warren Spahn in 2003.

Every player on the list that is eligible is in the Hall of Fame, but it will be interesting to see what happens to Bonds and Clemens. Pete Rose and Joe Jackson will likely never make the Hall.

There are 9 players on the list who have not officially retired from baseball, but Clemens and Bonds both did not play in 2008. The next HOF eligible player is Mike Piazza who retired after the 2007 season and will be on the ballot in 2013. He will likely be elected in his first year of eligibility.

Pete Rose and Roger Clemens had the longest careers at 24 seasons, while Sandy Koufax had the shortest at 12.

Mariano Rivera and Pedro Martinez are the only two non americans on the list although that will certainly change.

The players who enjoyed the best peak years were Pedro and Maddux for pitchers and Bonds and Mantle for hitters. While the best longevity was enjoyed by Cobb and Ruth for hitters and Johnson and Young for pitchers.

16 of the players won at least one gold glove, and award that began being awarded in the 1950s after a good portion of the players had retired. Maddux leads the way with 17 gold gloves, with Mays topping the position players with 12. Schmidt, Griffey, and Bench all have 10.

42 of the players on the list won at least 1 world series including all the pitchers. Berra has the most with 10, DiMaggio follows with 9, 7 each for Mantle and Ruth, and six for Gehrig. The most by a non Yankee is Eddie Collins with 4. Williams, Cobb and Bonds are the only players in the top 20 with no ring. A Rod, Griffey, Carew, and Lajoie are the only players not to play in a World Series, and Lajoie the lone player not to play in the postseason.

A Team for All Time

One of my favorite things about baseball is looking as statistics. I think the thing that separates baseball from all other sports is the massive amount of statistics that can be used in all manner of ways to debate who the best players are. Sure you can look at stats in basketball, football, and hockey, but these are much more influenced by uncontrollable elements than baseball statistics. Example: Tom Brady put up good numbers from day 1, but it wasn't until Randy Moss arrived on the scene that he put himself into the record books. Was Brady just much better last year than he had been in the past or was Moss just a tremendous upgrade from his previous receivers? I'm leaning towards the latter. I however can say with 100% certainty that Cliff Lee has played better this year than he ever has in his career.

So I thought who has had the best years in the history of baseball? And why not take those best years and assemble a team of superstar seasons? There must be a few rules of course:
1. Only one season per player can be used (so that we don't have a lineup composed entirely of 1 player)
2. There must be 15 position players, and 10 pitchers (at least 3 relievers) and each position must have at least two players who could conceivably have played the position during the selected year.
3. Defense counts, but it is much harder to measure statistically, so it will be a secondary consideration.
4. Seasons will be judged based mostly on comparison to peers. Therefore OPS+ and ERA+ will be weighted heavily.
5. All players must have at least qualified for the batting title, and all pitchers with the exception of relievers must have qualified for the ERA title.
6. There will be no designated hitter, but pitchers hitting will not be considered since many pitchers since the inception of the DH did not have to.
7. No "steroid" guys will be considered. This includes anyone who has been suspended for use, appeared in the Mitchell Report, or appeared in one of Jose's books.

That being said, I present the greatest team ever assembled:

The Starting lineup

C. Johnny Bench - 1972
Here's where defense makes a difference. Piazza's 1997 is the greatest ever for a catcher, but Bench is widely regarded as the greatest catcher in history, oh and he hit .270/.379/.541 with 40 homers, 166 OPS+, 100 walks, and only 84 strikeouts. Pretty good for a catcher best known for his defense.

1B. Jimmie Foxx - 1932
Gehrig 1927 or 1934 would be a good choice, but Foxx in 1932 is the one I picked a nice line of .364/.469/.749 for an OPS+ of 205. Plus he's a right handed hitter and I have this feeling that there will be a lot of lefties in this lineup.

2B. Rogers Hornsby - 1924
There really was no choice here, the only question was which of his seasons to pick. He hit with more power in others, but its hard to say no to .424/.507/.696 for a 220 OPS+ with 89 walks, and only 32 Ks. He'll likely bat 1st or second and drive opposing pitchers crazy by being on base all the time.

3B. George Brett - 1980
The first real tough choice in what will be a series of tough ones. Brett only played 117 games that year, but absolutely cleaned up when he did to the tune of .390/.454/.664 in addition to playing great defense. So apologies to Schmidt, Boggs, and Rodriguez, Brett gets the starting spot.

SS. Honus Wagner - 1908
Hard to believe that in 100 years, no one has topped this, but the Flying Dutchman put together a line of .354/.415/.542 in the dead ball era for a 205 OPS+. For the next 90 years or so, shortstops became fielding specialists who usually couldn't hit for shit, but a resurgence in the mid 1990s led by ARod, Jeter, and Nomar put shortstops back into the middle of the order. Still none ever had a year where they were that much better than their peers. And while Hanley Ramirez could probably put up the offense to challenge it in a few years, he might be doing it as a second or third baseman base on his defensive skills, or lack thereof.

LF. Ted Williams - 1941
After second, the three outfield postions were the easiest to pick. None were close, and thankfully all three players played a different spot in the outfield. Ted's 1941 season is something incredible that will probably never be topped, and IMO is the greatest ever for as hitter. A line of .406/.553/.735 for an OPS+ of 235, 147 walks, only 27 strikeouts. 27! Ryan Howard strikes out 27 times in three weeks. The closest thing to Ted since Ted is Pujols, and even he can't come close to this kind of production. The amazing thing is Teddy lost the MVP to DiMaggio this year because it also happend to be the year of the streak.

CF. Mickey Mantle - 1957
If Ted's 1941 is the greatest ever for a hitter, Mantle's 1957 is probably the greatest ever all around. 146 75 .365/.512/.665 OPS+ of 223, 146 walks to 75 ks, and 15 steals while being caught only 3 times. Great hitter, baserunner, and fielder. Probably one of the top 5 talents in the history of the game.

RF. Babe Ruth - 1921
The hardest part here was picking the season. Claims can be made for '20, '23, and '27, but I'll take '21 when the Babe launched the Yankee dynasty with a line of .378/.512/.846, 59 bombs and an OPS+ of 239.

Bench
C. Mike Piazza - 1997
The best hitting year for a catcher ever .362/.431/.638, 185 OPS+, 40 bombs, and better defense than he gets credit for.

IF. Joe Morgan - 1976
As much as Joe would hate to admit it, he was a moneyball player this year. A line of .320/.444/.576 OPS+ of 187, tons of walks, hardly any strikeouts, and a great stolen base percentage.

IF. Alex Rodriguez - 2000
The lone postion player from this century had better years but this was his best as a shortstop which matters. An impressive line of .316/.420/.606 for a 162 OPS+, decent defense, and great baserunning.

IF. Lou Gehrig - 1927
.373/.474/.765, 221 OPS+ I once heard some idiot talking about following a good act: "There are certain things you just don't do, you don't bat after Babe Ruth..." Well this guy did, and at least for this year was just as good if not better.

OF. Ty Cobb - 1912
.409/.456/.584 , 200 OPS+. A .400 hitter on the bench - wow. He'll be a great pinch hitter or pinch runner in the late innings.

OF. Stan Musial - 1948
One of the most underrated players in history, and this was his best year: .376/.450/.702, 200 OPS+, 79 walks, 34 ks. Ted Williams light.

OF. Carl Yastrzemski - 1967
The player to win the triple crown did it with one of the greatest seasons ever. His line of .326/.418/.622 is one of the worst on the team, but when you factor in the fact that he did it at a time when pitchers ruled the league, it ranks right up there with all the other members of the team as shown by his 193 OPS plus. Yaz would rank a lot higher on the all time lists had his debut come 10 years ealier or 10 years later so his peak would have come at a more hitter friendly time.

The Pitchers

SP1. Pedro Martinez - 2000
His 0.75 WHIP is the lowest ever, his 291 ERA+ is 2nd and the best since the 1800s, and he did it at the absolute height of the steroid era. With great velocity, sick movement, and pinpoint control, Pedro at his peak was the best there has ever been.

SP2. Greg Maddux - 1995
A tough choice between the two strike shortened seasons that were coincidentally the peak of Maddux's career, but a 0.81 WHIP, 262 ERA+, 181 strikeouts and only 23 walks - sick.

SP3. Steve Carlton - 1972
27-10 for a team that won less than 60 games, 41 starts, 346 innings, 1.97 ERA, 0.99 WHIP, and only 17 homers in all those innings. Carlton was an absolute horse who dominated the hell out of the league that year.

SP4. Christy Matthewson - 1909
25-6, 0.83 WHIP, 1.14 ERA, 222 ERA+ his best season. It of course pales in comparison to his incredible 3 shutout performance in the 1905 world series.

SP5. Walter Johnson - 1913
By raw numbers this is probably the best season ever. 36-7, 1.14 ERA, 0.78 WHIP, 259 ERA+, and 11 shutouts. Wow.

SP6. Sandy Koufax - 1965
The only reason he's this low is the era in which he pitched. But he absolutely dominated that era and probably should have won 30 games at least once. 26-8, 0.86 WHIP, 2.04 ERA, a then record 382 strikeouts, and an absolutely unhittable curve. Perhaps the best pitch anyone ever possesed .

SP7. Randy Johnson - 2001
This was a tough choice, but Randy was the best pitcher not on the list and pitching at the height of the steroid era puts him ahead of Guidry, Gooden, Gibson, and others whose name doesn't start with a G. 372 strikouts in only 250 innings for 13.4 k/9 - 1st all time, 188 ERA+, 1.00 WHIP. One more start and he'd probably have the strikeout record. Johnson also had a hell of a career, the master of the strikeout - more than 1 k/9 more than Nolan Ryan. It's too bad he didn't start sooner or he might have every major pitching record established after WWI.

RP1. Dennis Eckersley - 1990
0.61 ERA, 0.61 WHIP, 606 ERA+, 2 homers, 4 walks and 73 strikeouts in 73 innings. 18.25:1 K/BB ratio. Pinpoint control and still unhittable.

RP2. Willie Hernandez - 1984
What a relief pitcher should be. 80 games, 140 innings, 1.92 ERA, 204 ERA+, 0.94 WHIP.

RP3. Mariano Rivera - 2008
The year's not over, but barring a total collapse in September, this will be the best year for the sandman. As of now 0.68 WHIP, 1.43 ERA and 299 ERA+.

Now that is an incredible team.

As for a batting order, I'm thinking:
1. Wagner - SS
2. Hornsby - 2B
3. Williams - LF
4. Ruth - RF
5. Mantle - CF
6. Foxx - 1B
7. Brett - 3B
8. Bench - C
9. Pitcher

I think Wagner is the best candidate to leadoff with his speed, on base skills, and lack of power. But oh my god can you imagine facing that 2-7 part of the order? You can't walk anyone. You don't want to pitch to anyone. You just hope you can get through to face Bench and the pitcher without giving up the big inning.