Actual Mitchell Report (in pdf)

by Guyute on Dec 13, 2007 2:31 PM EST Comment 63 comments

Here's the link:

http://files.mlb.com/mitchrpt.pdf

it's 409 pages, I think I'll wait and get the cliff's notes version from the internet but for those of you that have the time...enjoy.

Frankly, I'm not sure whether I care or not. I see both sides of the argument. Just think it's more interesting than anything and I hope this report sheds some light on the subject.

0 recs | Comment 63 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

nobody big who hadn't been named/suspected before

Gagne, Clemens, Mo Vaughn, Tejada, Brian Roberts, Dave Justice, Kevin Brown, Lenny Dykstra all listed.

No Arod. No Pujols. No Schilling.

by Galt on Dec 13, 2007 2:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I was shocked

no mention of Brady Anderson

by mtk52983 on Dec 13, 2007 2:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

One helluva...

boring press conference. The Report seems like it might be pretty interesting if you have the time to read it, or at least the stories in it that I saw while skimming it.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Dec 13, 2007 2:35 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

The list.

Deadspin has the complete list. I'm looking through the report right now and it seems to check out.

http://deadspin.com/sports/the-official-list/the-complete-list-of-players-mentioned-in-the-mitchell- report-333634.php

That list does NOT include Derrick Turnbow (a semi-big name, though a known one), whose positive test in the Olympics is mentioned. I haven't had time to find any more like that yet.

Most disappointing to me was the lack of amusing names... Fernando Vina probably tops that list, with honorable mentions going to Kevin Young, Nook Logan, Gary Bennett Jr., and Darren Holmes.

It includes a lot more hitters than pitchers, by my eyeball judgment, which is mildly surprising to me.

It's certainly not the be-all, end-all document that many (including Mr. Alan H. Selig himself I believe) were hoping for, but it's yet another data point showing that the vast majority of steroid-users weren't/aren't stars... the drugs don't just make people into good players. Most intelligent people already realize that of course, but "intelligent people" doesn't seem to include the mainstream media commentators whose opinions feed the general public perception of the issue.

"I feel like I've been around long enough at shortstop to be the leader of Jose Castillo." -- Jack Wilson

by delomir on Dec 13, 2007 2:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

amusing

i've always thought F.P. Santangelo was a pretty funny name.

by wily mo on Dec 13, 2007 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

lol...

I was thinking the same thing when I read the list. If I am not mistaken (he hasn't been around awhile, so I heard this a long time ago) he was a popular person near where I grew up because he came out of El Paso, TX. So I noticed that name more than most will.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Dec 13, 2007 3:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Oh yeah, he should be on there. I regret the error.
:)

"I feel like I've been around long enough at shortstop to be the leader of Jose Castillo." -- Jack Wilson

by delomir on Dec 13, 2007 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Vina

Fernando is a commentator now for Baseball Tonight, isn't he? What kind of an effect do you think his inclusion will have on his post baseball career choice?

by jumanjifan01 on Dec 13, 2007 3:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Vina

Vina was NOT included.

by jonk1982 on Dec 13, 2007 4:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Vina

Or was he? The above post is confusing. "The lack of amusing names" -- does this mean his name was lacking from the list, or that you wanted more goofy names like his and that he was included?

by jonk1982 on Dec 13, 2007 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, Vina's on there

I looked through it from pages 200-300 and as I was skimming, I most certainly saw Fernando Vina's name in there with a paragraph or three dedicated to him.

by lenred on Dec 13, 2007 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmmm?

Vina is in the report. Page 213.

I was just hoping for more Ecksteins and Tyners, basically. Semi-famous bit players with little to no home run output.

"I feel like I've been around long enough at shortstop to be the leader of Jose Castillo." -- Jack Wilson

by delomir on Dec 13, 2007 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nook Logan?

And Alex Sanchez was the first player to get caught red-handed....

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Dec 13, 2007 5:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Good question

That is a very good question. I feel kinda bad, because I liked Vina as a player and thought he was pretty good on BBTN. I really, honestly don't care one iota, but I'm afraid it's going to cost him a lot of opportunities in the next 15 years.

"I feel like I've been around long enough at shortstop to be the leader of Jose Castillo." -- Jack Wilson

by delomir on Dec 13, 2007 4:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

David Justice

He does games for ESPN sometimes as well. Interesting is they will be asked about it.

by count sutton on Dec 13, 2007 6:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

In case you didn't feel like showing up

Here are the names I gathered from the report. By no means is this everyone, but hey.

Lenny Dykstra, David Segui, Larry Bigbie, Brian Roberts, Jack Cust, Tim Laker, Josias Manzanillo, Todd Hundley, Mark Carreon, Hal Morris, Matt Franco, Rondell White, Roger Clemens, Andy Pettitte, Chuck Knoblauch, Jason Grimsley, Gregg Zaun, David Justice, F.P. Santangelo, Glenallen Hill, Mo Vaughn, Denny Neagle, Ron Villone, Ryan Franklin, Chris Donnels, Todd Williams, Todd Pratt, Kevin Young, Cody McKay, Kent Mercker, Adam Piatt, Miguel Tejada, Jason Christiansen, Mike Stanton, Stephen Randolph, Jerry Hairson Jr., Paul Lo Duca, Adam Riggs, Bart Miadich, Kevin Brown, Eric Gagné, Mike Bell, Matt Herges, Gary Bennett, Jim Parque, Brendan Donnelly, Chad Allen, Jeff Williams, Howie Clark, Nook Logan, Rick Ankiel, David Bell, Paul Byrd, Jose Canseco, Jay Gibbons, Troy Glaus, Jose Guillen, Darren Holmes, Gary Matthews Jr., John Rocker, Scott Schoeneweis, Ismael Valdez, Matt Williams, Steve Woodard, Marvin Bernard, Barry Bonds, Bobby Estalella, Jason Giambi, Jeremy Giambi, Benito Santiago, Gary Sheffield, aaaaand Randy Velarde.

"...and the only things I've found better than listening to Vin Scully are listening to Keith Jackson and uncut cocaine." (bleedjaxblue)

by drjayphd on Dec 13, 2007 2:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

report

So the question is, are people now going to admit that Bonds is not some sort of unique avatar of baseball evil? He's a jerk and he used steroids. A LOT of people on this list are jerks and used steroids.

People are saying that Bonds should be kept out of the Hall of Fame because of steroids. The same should go for Clemens and any of these other guys, too, if that is the criteria.

by John Sickels on Dec 13, 2007 3:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

My problem with Bonds has been and...

always will be that he, single handedly, through cheating flatted the statistical history of baseball. He is #1 in so many categories, categories that used to span different eras of baseball and world history. The history of baseball is what makes it unique, and he undermines that unique strength baseball has over football or any other major sport.

It was always so interesting to read leader boards because it would inspire me to research these different players and the era in which they played.

To a certain extent, Bonds ruined that, not by playing the game better than anyone else, but by being a liar and a cheat. He's not the only liar or the only cheater, but he is the only cheating liar who is the reigning champ of several different baseball records. And for that I can't forgive Bonds and I hope he isn't allowed into the hall of fame.

I'll admit, there are other cheaters already in the hall, but that doesn't make allowing Bonds in right.

I wish I could sit with my kid and pour over baseball stats, talk about Williams, Maris, Ruth, Cobb, Mantle, and all those other guys and not have to talk about Bonds, McGwire or Sosa. But it is what it is, they have ruined a part of baseball that I loved, which was it's history. And that can't be restored.

by beastball on Dec 13, 2007 3:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh and Clemens is up there too...

I can't forgive these guys. To a certain extent, I can ignore the others, act like what they'd done never happened. But I can't do that with guys like McGwire, Sosa, Bonds and Clemens. And I really hate that.

by beastball on Dec 13, 2007 3:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

the other difference

is that unlike Bonds after the '96 season, Clemens wasn't a surefire Hall-of-famer.

by Galt on Dec 13, 2007 3:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd say he was

3 Cy Young Awards and an MVP tell me he was ticketed to the HOF. Was he going to be inner circle the way Bonds was pre-1998 (or 1996, if you're against andro use)? No. But Clemens was DEFINITELY an HOF-bound superstar.

by GuyinNY on Dec 13, 2007 3:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

maybe

Saberhagen won two CY Young awards and finished 3rd once.

Clemens last few years with Red Sox were pretty mediocre in aggregate. If you replace his last 10 years of performance with 3-5 performance more in line with his last few years of (non chemically enhanced regression) 3.50-4.00+ ERA, he goes from being a 350 win 4,500 K guy with a lifetime 3.15 ERA to a 230 win, 3,200 K guy with a lifetime 3.50 ERA, which is a step below Burt Blyleven. Now the CY Youngs likely would have pushed him over the top, but if he went from being pretty dominant until 30, and then continued his regression he would clearly not be the icon he is now.

I picked '96 for Clemens because that's when he went through his "miracle" resurgence.

After '96, Bonds was still a 300/300 guy with a lifetime .950 OPS and 6 top 5 MVP seasons (3 he won, and he should have won 4 in a row)

by Galt on Dec 13, 2007 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ehhh...

I do agree that Clemens would be pretty far from where he is today, and I don't know that I even think he'd have done as well in his decline as you postulate, but I think his 8 season clean prime of :
3 Cy Young Awards (5 Top-5 Cy Young seasons)
1 MVP (2 Top-3 MVP seasons)
4 ERA Titles (3 in a row, 7 top 5 finishes)
2 Win Titles (6 Top-4 Finishes)
1 IP Crown (7 Top-6 IP Seasons)
3 K Titles (9 Top 4 Finishes, including 7 in a row)
2 CG Titles (8 Top-4 Finishes)
Led the league in Shutouts every year from 1986-1992 except 1989
5x All-Star, including starter in 1986

would have been more than enough to get him in. And that MVP as a pitcher is a REALLY big plus in his favor.

by GuyinNY on Dec 13, 2007 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

did Clemens ever publicly state

that he never took steroids?

I have a problem with liars in these contexts....

by SLK on Dec 13, 2007 3:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not yet...

but it's coming. His lawyer has already issued a statement, no way will he admit it.

by bl on Dec 13, 2007 9:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Doesn't change

anything for me one iota, if anything it solidifies things for me. You seem to be saying this is some sort of vindication for Bonds, John. Most of us knew baseball was saturated with PED's. Others stuck their head in the sand - the Bonds apologists did so most noticeably. I think the question is now - where are all the people that supported him so loudly, usually saying "so me actual proof?"

Bonds will get in as will Clemens. Some of the tweeners are the only guys that will be hurt by this ultimately.

Send your top 50-100 prospects to slurveone@yahoo.com!!!

by slurve on Dec 13, 2007 4:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Clemens should be kept out - or at least, should be voted in or out solely on the basis of his record as it existed on the day before he signed with the Blue Jays.

Barry's a special case (along with McGwire and Sosa) because he used roids to put his name in the record books at the expense of guys like Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron and Roger Maris, who did it clean.

by Locke000 on Dec 13, 2007 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not too concerned about Bonds or Clemens

I wonder about Rafael Palmeiro now. Does this cast any doubt that maybe he WAS telling the truth? Now that Miggy was named, did he perhaps give something to Raffy that was tainted? I don't know the answer. Palmeiro probably knew what he was doing, but this could shed some light on his situation.

This wasn't mentioned on any of the coverage I saw yesterday, but it's the first thing I thought about.

by count sutton on Dec 14, 2007 11:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Reason 104,295 to hate the Yankees

Former/Current Yankee players by far make-up the bulk of the cheat list. Scumbag organization.

by fartballs on Dec 13, 2007 3:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

awww shut the

hell up

by NYYLover1000 on Dec 13, 2007 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

They make-up almost 20% Coincidence?

Hal Morris, Roger Clemens, Andy Pettitte, Chuck Knoblauch, Jason Grimsley, David Justice, Ron Villone, Mike Stanton, Kevin Brown, Jose Canseco, Jason Giambi, Gary Sheffield, and Randy Velarde.

by fartballs on Dec 13, 2007 3:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Riiight

Canseco never touched steroids until he came to the Yankees in the mid-'90s. Damn yankees

by OldProspects on Dec 13, 2007 5:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

nice

I'm sure if a Yankee henchman were running the witchunt instead of the Red Sox guy, the list may have come out differently.

And my IP trace of you shows you are posting from lower Manhattan anyway. Don't be a hater.

by Galt on Dec 13, 2007 3:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

I wonder how much Boston athletes were protected here. (Milwaukee too.)

by bl on Dec 13, 2007 9:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

George Mitchell

is literally beyond reproach. The guy's a saint (and helluva nice guy too, BTW).

No way he or his staff pulled any punches.

by Yakker on Dec 13, 2007 9:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

because

Mitchell only had a limited amount of sources.

Todd Frazier for President

by FrazierFan on Dec 13, 2007 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

YUP

Big source was NY trainer so obviously it will slant towards NY players

by goalieguy on Dec 13, 2007 3:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually

the big source (or at least the must publicized source) was a clubhouse attendant for the Mets between between 1985 and 1995. Right? If I do remember correctly, then I don't see what that has to do with anyone who plays or played for the Yankees. And to accuse Mitchell of playing favorites (or least favorites) is ridiculous considering the amount of Red Sox on the list as well.

by kaisertown on Dec 13, 2007 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Big source

Kirk Radomski (mets clubhouse attendant)
Macnamee (Clemens personal trainer he brought with him from toronto to the yanks)

by Locke000 on Dec 13, 2007 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I loathe the Yankees

But steroid use will never be among the reasons why. I can honestly say, seeing that list of names, there isn't a single player whose inclusion on the list has changed my opinion of them in any way at all. Though in fairness, I've posted on more than one occasion that I just don't care about any of this nonsense.

If you want to hate the Yankees, you only need one reason: They have no souls.

"A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day." - Calvin

by RVachon on Dec 13, 2007 3:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

the other thing

there is actually email trails with Theo Epstein talking about Gagne (in '06) where he someone to check in about Gagne and steroids, and he was told that, indeed Gagne was a 'roids user.

Of course that didn't stop the angelic Red Sox from trading for Gagne last year.

God got them back.

by Galt on Dec 13, 2007 3:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He sure did

That 2007 World Championship really brought the smite down!

"A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day." - Calvin

by RVachon on Dec 13, 2007 3:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Lets be honest ,

if you really think about it, this is all popularity contest in a way.

People love clemens and were stubborn to believe that he took the stuff, while people hate bonds and wanted to expose him any type of way.

In a way, Bonds is really unlucky here. Not to make Bonds a victim because he isn't but he really took all the bullets for Sosa, Clemens and McGwire here.

by NYYLover1000 on Dec 13, 2007 3:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I

Love Bonds and despise Clemens. Always have.

by Galt on Dec 13, 2007 3:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It really comes to how much like you in this world

and all that other stuff.

Bonds is being killed by everybody (right fully so) and people writing books about him and being the poster for steriods which was so unfair.

But hey, people love Clemens so they sugar coat everything he did, just like the same people who sugar coat (us fans included) the 98 hr chase.

It's Ironic that in 98, the few people who knew McGwire and Sosa were jucing was Mr. Bonds

Really this was fucked up man, they basically let Bonds be the shield for almost everything that dealt with this situation.

It was almost like Bud or anybody was saying "as long are people bonds and not the people we like, we are cool". Funny world uh?

by NYYLover1000 on Dec 13, 2007 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah.

people probably start to forget now that it was cool to hate bonds long before this steroid stuff ever even started - before he probably even started taking them. the press always hated bonds, because he was a dick to them, because of what he feels they did to his dad. (is my understanding.) the steroids are just a fun new toy for them to bash him with.

by wily mo on Dec 13, 2007 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

David Segui

not a good day to be him...

he comes off as the "steroid user zero" of the report....

by SLK on Dec 13, 2007 3:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Segui

Yeah, he does. Which is interesting - didn't some people peg Bagwell as the "SUZ" (nice name, btw) a while back?

by waka25 on Dec 13, 2007 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm guessing

some player introduced steroids to Segui, but he didn't talk...

It's similar to trying to root out your family tree, but a great grandparent can't remember anything anymore...

by SLK on Dec 13, 2007 4:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not exactly

He set of Radomski per the report, but Canseco admitted to use a good 6 years before that happened.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Dec 13, 2007 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I Always Knew Cody McKay was a Juicer

No way someone goes from a 210 OPS+ to a 38 OPS+ in only two years. Clearly he stopped using during those two years...

by Dfarth on Dec 13, 2007 4:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Ah Baseball Reference

Complete list with links:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/mitchell-report-players.shtml

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Dec 13, 2007 4:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Gary Bennet

I work with his cousin.... Maybe I should tell her.

by colinadam on Dec 13, 2007 4:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

So

basically this guy spent all this time and money to put together a list of players that most people already knew had taken steroids? He only found 77 players? Out of the thousands of players that played in MLB he could only find 77? What a waste of time.

by nyy601 on Dec 13, 2007 4:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

another way to look at it is

that he got 77 players from only from two or three sources.

by Galt on Dec 13, 2007 5:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sad Day

for baseball, and, to me, the interesting thing for MLB now is what they're gonna do about this. Clemens's HOF candidacy is already up-in-the-air now, but what about some of the other guys who are still playing/working in baseball?

by Yakker on Dec 13, 2007 6:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Not a big deal?

Bonds = arguably the best player ever
Clemens = arguably the best pitcher ever

Hitters like Griffey looked to be one of the best hitters ever. But injuries slowed him down.

Pitchers like Maddux looked to be one of the best pitchers ever. But age slowed him down.

This is true in every generation.

Until steroids & hgh.
Then Bonds stopped being hurt and improved when age should have kicked in.
Then Clemens won several Cy Youngs when it looked like his stuff was dimishing. Doing this as he is aging and actually had some of his best years when you would think age would slow him down.

There is no "proof" steroids help. And probably never will be because of what they would have to do to have proof.

But I think it's a big assumption to believe they didn't play a part in creating the best pitcher ever and the best hitter ever in one generation, the steroid generation.

As far as all the weaker players that would have been AAAA players? If they didn't take they would be in the minors. And someone else would have their job. Someone deserving. This forced weaker players to take or lose out on a career. This is the worst part of it IMO.

Just think if you were a player in AAA that realized you were good enough to make the pro's (but only marginally) and were about to get the call in a year or two. Then a large group of players, slightly lower in talent, passed you on the depth chart because of taking steroids.

You either are forced to take. Or stay clean and lose your career.

by pedrophile on Dec 13, 2007 7:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Oft-injured

Doesn't it seem like a lot of the named players were chronically injured? Which way does the causality go? Were they injured so often because the chemicals took a toll on their bodies, or were their beaten-up bodies the reason they turned to the chemicals?

by FlipYrWhig on Dec 13, 2007 7:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Ouch

The scary thing about this is that all of this came from 2 new sources and existing names. What happens when the Feds bust someone working out of the South that was supplying the teams there? Or the teams in Calif? Why isnt there any looking into who was supplying the bash brother club house of the A's?

Mitchel did a good job of painting a broad view of steriods in baseball, but think what would happen if he had some form of subpena power other ways to make these guys talk.

Batting practice tomorrow you be there....I have Pop, everyday

by laxtonto on Dec 13, 2007 7:54 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

ESPN

The one thing that I really do want to put down on the record is the absolutely shameful, apologist rhetoric currently being spouted on ESPN's website.

It is obvious in ESPN's blatant attempts to promote a souped-up sports culture that they could give a damn about the integrity of the game, preferring to fatten their ratings on dingers and 100mph fastballs.

ESPN would rather baseball simply morph into their beloved broadcast partner, the NFL, and rely on the fan's suspension of disbelief, rather than a proactive drug policy, in protecting the integrity and future of sport

Do yourselves a favor and go read SI, or at least a blog where the apologists have some decent rationale.

by GuyinNY on Dec 14, 2007 2:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

-1

Yeah Rick O Reilly ohhh wait he left for ESPN.

Baseball, the Media etc noone did anything a PEDS' etc

The Report is a sham.... Full of 'he said, she said, and witnesses that wouldnt hold up in a criminal or civil case.

Mandatory drug testing and frozen samples For ALL Pro sports is the only way to clean it up.

Not some 409 pg rehashing of crap we already suspected.

Am I surprised by any name? NO That less than 1% of players are named? NO

Worthless, toothless waste of paper

Bring on more Farnsworth tackles of P Wilson!!!!

Jimuhendori sensei at Rigurefirudo

by gmsnctry on Dec 14, 2007 7:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ESPN

They are filled with ex-athletes who are still part of/connected to the union. They will not come out in favor of this report.

The problem with many sports journalists is that they are not true "newspeople". Their reputation depends on the athletes, coaches, executives, etc liking them and they are very motivated by that. They prefer "puff" pieces to real journalism. This is a generalization, of course, but it applies to many of them on ESPN, Fox, and SI.

by count sutton on Dec 14, 2007 11:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well Aware

Very well aware, and fair points Count Sutton. That having been said, it was just general disgust with the treatment of the Mitchell Report by the folks at ESPN. They are the leader in sports, largely because they've adopted a saccharine strategy to sate their sports fans. But, they're also clearly much closer in bed with the NFL than they MLB (or the NBA for that matter), and they obviously condone steroid use as an organization.

And yet, ESPN's newly assembled I-Team of Quinn, Bryant, and Farinaru-Wada promises to be an extremely provocative and intellecutally curious bunch. I just hope they don't get muzzled.

I think it deserves to be noted that when Jon Heyman and Tom Verducci(the man who REALLY brought this whole steroid issue to the fore with Ken Caminiti) both tear into the drug culture of sports, they seem to do so without losing any contacts inside the game. Same goes for your local beat writer, who's likely spent the last 3-4 years with steroids as his easy article for righteous indignation, and yet still manages to et scoops about the team he covers.

I am in what I consider a silent majority jowls wag, assertion that I am not a crook that doesn't very much care for steroid use by my athletes, and would like to see a decent effort to clean up the sport. Is the Mitchell Report flawed? Yes, and no. As a former U.S. Attorney and federal judge, I'm inclined to believe that Mitchell wouldn't be so wily-nily is thrusting about such potentially injurious claims, particularly when such a longstanding and hard-earned reputation as his is on the line.

So, perhaps Brian Roberts has reason to be perturbed at his seemingly thin connection to baseball's doping culture, but the point of the report was to give a peak into, and a general sense of the steroid culture, how and why it happened, and moreover, what to do to get rid of it. And on that front, if only because of the tremendous amount of publicity and scrutiny which the Report has brought the game under, I do expect this problem to be ameliorated as much as can be in the near future.

by GuyinNY on Dec 14, 2007 12:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs