I don't remember seeing Juan Gonzalez

Check pages 95-96

Kevin Brown is missing from the team. That is a pretty fair front three...

I would never allow Mike Stanton on any team I had control over.

Kevin Brown is missing from the team. That is a pretty fair front three...

Please click through for the second team- a pretty deep reservoir of talent.

C Paul Lo Duca
1B Mo Vaughn
2B Brian Roberts
3B Troy Glaus
SS Randy Velarde
LF David Justice
CF Rondell White
RF Jose Guillen
DH Jose Canseco
SP Kevin Brown
SP Denny Neagle
RP Brendan Donnelly
RP John Rocker

Honorable Mention: Benito Santiago, Hal Morris, Fernando Vina, Ron Villone, Gregg Zaun, Kent Mercker, Jack Cust, Glenallen Hill

I'm fairly surprised that MLB felt the need to throw its players under the bus in this fashion, in effect putting an official stamp of certitude on the alleged PED use of these players. We saw from the shrill treatment Bonds and others have received that the public isn't rational on this issue and that it can really cloud a great career, and so allowing their players to be dragged through the mud in this manner -- remember, none of these players to our knowledge ever failed a drug test -- is pretty amazing.

The entire source for the Clemens information is Brian McNamee. So in effect, MLB is saying to Clemens "You've been a star for us, someone whose career has helped us market the game for two decades, one of the greatest players of all time -- and yet we're going to let this one person sully your great career."

Not to mention that McNamee has told two stories here; in December of 2006 he said "I never, ever gave Clemens or Pettitte steroids. They never asked me for steroids. The only thing they asked me for were vitamins."

The players deserved better.

And I find it odd that the same people who think that McNamee must be telling the truth now because he was granted immunity, simply assume that Bonds -- under the same grant of immunity -- was lying.

And the same people who said this report will provide "closure" to the steroids era so that baseball could "put this behind them" are also the ones who said that testing would accomplish those goals.

Please click through for the second team

Pettitte over Brown? Really?

The players deserved better.

Ray, did you read the report? They had the ability to cooperate at every turn, and didn't. The players that were named got what they deserved. I do wish that the report named the teams that wouldn't provide the files that were asked for as Mitchell says "some teams" provided the documentation asked for. So that those team can be shown in as negative a light as the players and the union who were largely uncooperative. I only wish, a few more of the rings can get turned up and maybe those players that are uncovered will be motivated by the changing scenery will be able to Man-up and do the right thing.

Kudos to Frank Thomas for being interviewed.

Kudos to Frank Thomas for being interviewed.

Indeed; go Big Hurt.

Pettitte over Brown? Really?

Hmm- you're probably right. Working on deadline, and I always think Pettitte is better than he is.

The players that were named got what they deserved.

To get implicated by a drug dealer with an immunity deal? There's a reason you get to face your accuser in trial law.

The players that were named got what they deserved.

Yeah, especially Brian Roberts. What a jerkoff that guy is.

In order to provide Roberts with information about these allegations and to give
him an opportunity to respond, I asked him to meet with me; he declined.

I don't know if he was a user of PED, nor do I claim to. Mitchell doesn't claim to know either... Yet Roberts knows and refused to comment, on validity of the information that was provided. I agree, he is a jerkoff, he should have commented.

I agree, he is a jerkoff, he should have commented.

You're pretty thick huh?

I tend to agree with Ray for a lot of the individual cases. Take Jack Cust, for instance. The whole substance of the allegation, on p. 159, is that Larry Bigbie says he once had a locker next to Cust and that Cust said he knew a source for steroids. No cancelled checks, no corroboration, no nothing, basically – yet Cust will forever go down as one of the Named. This may not hurt him too much in the pocketbook if he continues to hit well, but it is a case of tarring with a pretty broad brush.

This may not hurt him too much in the pocketbook if he continues to hit well, but it is a case of tarring with a pretty broad brush.

I think this is an extremely important part of the story- I made sure it was in my second graf.

Just so you know, photocopies of the personal checks the players gave to Radomsky are included in the report.

And no one is (at least, I don't think they are) questioning the guilt of those players who have their personal checks in the mail. They deserve everything they get.

No cancelled checks, no corroboration, no nothing, basically – yet Cust will forever go down as one of the Named.

Along those lines I note this bit of the Clemens portion:

"McNamee attended a lunch party that Canseco hosted at his home in Miami. McNamee stated that, during this luncheon, he observed Clemens, Canseco, and another person he did not know meeting inside Canseco's house, although McNamee did not personally attend that meeting."

You mean two teammates were seen talking at a party -- along with someone McNamee didn't know?

Shocking.

Obviously they must have been talking openly at this party about how to cycle and stack steroids. And this person McNamee didn't know must have been a dealer or something. And this must have been a steroids "meeting." Must have.

There's no other explanation.

I tend to agree with Ray for a lot of the individual cases. Take Jack Cust, for instance. The whole substance of the allegation, on p. 159, is that Larry Bigbie says he once had a locker next to Cust and that Cust said he knew a source for steroids. No cancelled checks, no corroboration, no nothing, basically – yet Cust will forever go down as one of the Named. This may not hurt him too much in the pocketbook if he continues to hit well, but it is a case of tarring with a pretty broad brush.

You can be a steroid hawk, and still be very troubled that they created a permanent list of the Named after this process. That's me.

Just so you know, photocopies of the personal checks the players gave to Radomsky are included in the report.

Which proves conclusively... that they gave money to Radomski.

Why should players cooperate with this witch hunt? It's like saying that someone who refused to appear in front of McCarthy deserves to be branded a Communist.

Which proves conclusively... that they gave money to Radomski.

This is a very shoddy piece of work. I'm having a hard time even seeing the point of naming players at all. Two pushers plus a rehash of BALCO, plus a couple minor turncoats. Even if the pushers are credible, and they probably are for the most part, you're still getting a completely unrepresentative sample, centered around the players who had contact or connections with the pushers.

How about players step up name managers/GMs/owners who knew of ongoing steroid use. And then testify after all those people have testified too.

I gotta believe that Benito Santiago makes the A list.
I would rather have him in his prime over Hundley

Why should players cooperate with this witch hunt? It's like saying that someone who refused to appear in front of McCarthy deserves to be branded a Communist.

No, I'm saying someone who McCarthy recieved inteligence about maybe being a communist then refused to cooperate, has no business bithcing if McCarthy then publishes THE INFORMATION HE HAS ON THE SUBJECT. Which is what Mitchell did, he published the information he had, would it have been better if someone if could have been better checked. Yes, absolutly... but he published the information he had. Anyone who paints Brian Roberts with the same brush as Jason Grimsly is a moron, and not publishing doesn't change that.

Gary Sheffield should be on the A list too.

I'd take Lo Duca over Hundley.

I'd take Lo Duca over Hundley.

That's crazy. Hundley had an OPS+ peak of 131-140-148. Lo Duca had a 142, his next highest was 102 five years later.

The thing is about the checks to Radomski is that they were generally for $1600/$3200--IOW for one or two shipments of HGH. Clearly Radomski was selling the same type of 'merchandise' to multiple players.

Best Regards

John

I have a question, although it may have been addressed in one of the other 1,700 threads on the Mitchell report. Can Selig/MLB do anything to discipline Tejada and other active players named in the report? Or do they need a failed drug test for any punishment? (I'm not saying MLB should be able to do something, just wondering.)

Can Selig/MLB do anything to discipline Tejada and other active players named in the report? Or do they need a failed drug test for any punishment? (I'm not saying MLB should be able to do something, just wondering.)

Selig can try to descipline anyone and everyone who is listed in the Mitchell Report as having use PEDs, but the chances of any suspension getting through seems pretty remote. You can bet the Players Union is going to fight any punishments that use the Report as the only evidence tooth and nail.

Selig "disciplined" Jose Guillen outside the terms of the drug policy. That MLBPA has filed a grievance. That test case will determine what the Commissioner can do.

I am betting on the MLBPA in that one. This is labor law/CBA interpretation 101.