The Great Debate |
|
|---|---|
Should steroids be allowed in the MLB? |
|
Juicing provides more adrenaline |
Ban is a normal phase in the game |
 As a 9-year-old in the summer of 1998, my mind and time were both quite consumed with the idea that Roger Maris’ 37-year-old record of 61 home runs in a season was going to be broken. I watched with great attention as Mark McGwire of the St. Louis Cardinals inched closer to history with every dinger. I still remember sitting in my parents’ bedroom glued to the TV as No. 62 landed in the stands.Not only would McGwire go on to shatter Maris’ long-standing mark by hitting 70 baseballs out of the park that year, but Sammy Sosa of the Chicago Cubs eclipsed Maris as well by hitting 66. Over the next three years, Maris’ mark would be topped four more times. Barry Bonds of the San Francisco Giants hit 73 homers in 2001, which still stands as the number to beat. It was a fun time to be a baseball fan.The big elephant in the room during this time, however, was that everyone assumed that the players who were hitting so many long balls were being aided by performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs). There was no way, the thought was, that these athletes could be doing this without the help of PEDs. The notion proved to be true, as McGwire, Alex Rodriguez and others either admitted to using PEDs or were found to be doing so. In 2005, Major League Baseball put strict penalties in place for players who were found to be “juicing.” Over the past eight years, home run totals have been dwindling as the use of PEDs has presumably declined (though the ability to mask the use of steroids has improved). Since 2007, only Jose Bautista has reached the 50-homer mark in the 2010 season. In my view, this has led to baseball becoming both less entertaining and more difficult to market. Allowing players to use performance-enhancing drugs without penalty would make the sport much better in both regards. Baseball purists will point to the idea that baseball provides a different kind of excitement than basketball or football. They’ll say it requires much more mental capacity and that each at-bat, each pitch even, is a chess match. Maybe I’m just not enough of a purist, but the mental games just don’t get my blood pumping like a watching a sweet dunk in the NBA or a bone-jarring hit in the NFL. Home runs do, though. It was an absolute blast as a kid to watch McGwire consistently crush balls into the stratosphere. If using PEDs was allowed, awe-inspiring bombs would return, as would a higher level of adrenaline in the sport. While the qualities of what makes a sport great will differ in the minds of fans, one clear problem Major League Baseball seems to be having is a lack of marketable stars. Last year, many expected the rookie trio of Mike Trout, Yu Darvish and Bryce Harper to take the reins as the next marketable players, but that hasn’t really happened. This year’s rookie sensation, Yasiel Puig of the Los Angeles Dodgers, might become the next household name, but that remains to be seen. Beyond those players, there isn’t really anyone for young fans to get excited about. Back in the late 1990s, there were a lot of players to become fans of, and most of them were the guys hitting all the home runs. Baseball needs players who can crank ‘em out. Allowing performance-enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball is probably not the most ethical decision commissioner Bud Selig could ever make, but it’s certainly one that would make his league much more exciting. In that regard, Major League Baseball needs to bring the PEDs back. |
 According to some, the sky is falling on baseball.“Ah,” they exclaim. “There are so many strikeouts and so few home runs that the game is getting boring and people are going to stop watching. What ever shall we do?”True, strikeout rates are at a record high in the big leagues. Even though baseball has survived other strikeout panics in the past, people are desperate to find what is causing the record-setting number of Ks. One such theory is that the rise in strikeouts and the drop in home runs was caused by Major League Baseball cracking down on the use of performance-enhancing drugs. PEDs should be banned in baseball, but not to preserve the purity of the game. Baseball lost its innocence a long time ago. PEDs should continue to be banned because they are not always safe or healthy and their benefit has not been proven. Their effect does not guarantee a more interesting game either. The only possible justification for legalizing PEDs is because they may lead to more home runs. I say “may” because there is no proven correlation between PEDs and home runs. Just because MLB cracked down on PEDs, then the number of home runs went down and strikeouts went up does not prove a causal relationship between the two. It only proves they happened at the same time. There are other possible reasons for the increase in strikeouts. We are in an era of great pitching. Even mediocre fifth starters can pitch at 90 miles per hour. Relief pitchers often only pitch for an inning or less, which allows them to use all their best stuff. Sometimes specific pitchers are brought in only to face specific batters and then they are taken out of the game. Teams have unprecedented access to video of batters, which allows them to plan for individual batters. With this kind of specialization is it any wonder that Ks are up? Strikeouts are also losing their stigma. While striking out was once an embarrassment, players and managers are starting to see it as only another out. Whiffing is better than hitting into a double play. Players are more willing to swing at more pitches, which leads to more strikes, which leads to more strikeouts. Even if PEDs led to more home runs, baseball would not necessarily be more interesting. If every game turned into a home run derby, baseball would be pretty boring. It would be like a football game in which every kickoff was returned for a touchdown. There would be no drama. Solo shot home runs in the early and middle innings of a game are not super exciting. However, a home run in the last three innings that ties or changes the lead of a game is really exciting. So is a line drive in the same situation. A double play that ends a rally is also exciting and so is a reliever striking out the last batter of a close game with the tying or winning run on base. It is like free throws in basketball that are more interesting in close games with under three minutes left. It is all about the situation. Now, let’s all take a step back and breathe. Baseball is going through a normal phase and I like it. Watch Yu Darvish pitch a game and tell me this is not a great time for baseball. |
The Great Debate: Should steroids be allowed in the MLB?
July 15, 2013
0