Via Deadspin, Raul Ibanez is angry someone might think he’s on PEDs. So the way to fight that is to denigrate bloggers!
“I’ll put that up against the jobs of anyone who writes this stuff,” he said. “Make them accountable. There should be more credibility than some 42-year-old blogger typing in his mother’s basement. It demeans everything you’ve done with one stroke of the pen.
“Nobody is above the testing policy. We’ve seen that.”
For the record, I own my blogging basement. Would it make a difference if the blogger was actually an executive at Microsoft who was blogging from his plush corner office? A government employee blogging from some 19th century historic register building? A reporter who secretly does this on the side? Raul has no clue about the person, he’s just trying to cut him down to size because the blogger had the gall to just consider the idea that someone at age 37 might have gotten some help to stay in the game!
“You can have my urine, my hair, my blood, my stool – anything you can test,” Ibanez said. “I’ll give you back every dime I’ve ever made” if the test is positive.”
No need for that, Raul, but since you’re so willing to help, release the results of all your drug tests since the program began. I’d like to see your Testosterone:Epitestosterone Ratio over time. There’s no way it would have gone from 1:1 to 3:1 recently, is there? Enough to help, but not enough to get caught, maybe? Let’s see the time series, if you’re so sure you’re clean.
I’ll have to agree with Ibanez on this one. Some random blogger throws some crap against the wall to see if it sticks with absolutely no proof whatsoever. It’s irresponsible. Why not accuse everyone who is doing well this season? It’s only been 1/3 of the season. How many players in the past have gotten off to a flying start with huge numbers, only to fade as the season grinds on. I’d have to say a LOT. Accusing him of PEDs with absolutely no research and no proof is the epitome of irresponsibility.
@sabernar: Actually, he did quite a bit of research.
I must also point out, bloggers probably use the stroke of a keyboard, not a pen 🙂
For what it’s worth I understand both sides of this. I guess my big issue with this post is that you come off as if you really, really want him to get caught cheating. Why would you write, “…since you’re so willing to help, release the results of all your drug tests since the program began”? Your implication being that if he doesn’t release the results, then he’s guilty–knowing full well those results will never be released. Then you tag this under “Baseball Jerks” and “Cheating,” further implying the same thing, when you have nothing but speculation to base this on (I will cut you some slack for the Baseball Jerk thing, but to put Raul in the same category as Reggie Jackson and Tony LaRussa is pushing it a bit.)
The basement blogger thing really upset me. All he really had to say is, “I’m sorry it came to this. I don’t blame people for having suspicions, but I’ve never used PEDs and my drug tests back up that statement.” I’d be cool with that. Instead, he insults the blogging community. Fine. He offered urine and hair samples to be tested. The Philadelphia press should take him up on the offer. Or, as I suggest, release the past tests.
I’m definitely with Ibanez here. You are bordering on a lynch mob. What ever happened to being innocent until proven guilty. Having to prove a negative is hard (see Sadam Hussein on saying there were no WMD, no one believed him yet…)
In terms of test results, I believe baseball players have a right to privacy and releasing the results of that test would be an invasion of that privacy. If he is found guilty then he is suspended and then the results can be released. But if he not suspended then we have to assume he is clean. To cast aspersions otherwise is bordering on libel.
Also I believe the point of Ibanez is that the blogger is not accountable if he is wrong. He can just accuse and have no consequences of his action. Whereas Ibanez has to answer these questions even though he has done nothing wrong.
I’d imagine most people would have never even heard about the blog post in question if Ibanez hadn’t reacted in such a negative way. The player doth protest too much, methinks.
Also, is it more responsible for the entire media to completely ignore all signs of a steroid epidemic for over a decade than to suggest that something might be a possibility? The fact that a blogger can make a suggestion and leave it to the reader to decide is yet another advantage of blogs over traditional media.
Lastly, half the crap that the traditional media peddle is b.s. anyway; they just manage to shovel it out without any potential defamation issues.
“In terms of test results, I believe baseball players have a right to privacy and releasing the results of that test would be an invasion of that privacy.”
I think that went out the window with the release of A-Rod’s confidential test. And I think all of baseball (and other sports, especially the NFL) have forfeited innocent until proven guilty. There’s too many positive tests, and too much ‘look the other way’ in the past by other players, management, and the press.
Juan Gone denied using, to Congress, and then suddenly started using a couple weeks later?
Ibanez has to know that there’s a cloud over baseball at the moment and that outlier seasons are going to raise suspicions. (Heck, Papi’s drop off raises suspicions to me as well). Doesn’t mean he used PEDs, but he’s got to understand that there will be suspicions. And rather than trot out a tired old cliche as a denunciation, show the proof. Heck, I’d be satisfied with a letter from the commissioner’s office stating he’s passed all tests with flying colors.
Having to prove a negative is hard
No it isn’t. He can just do what David P. suggests. That would prove, to my satisfaction, that he didn’t take PEDs.
As to “presumed innocent till proven guilty”, that’s fine for a court of law. The court of public opinion rules on the basis of the information available, and not according to forensic rules of evidence.
At age 37, Hank Aaron had his highest HR total (47), highest SLG (.669), highest OPS (1.074) and highest OPS+ (194). His best 3 year HR total was from ages 35 to 37, and he hit 40 HR’s at age 39.
Do you really want to go there?
Just for the heck of it, let’s make every reporter submit their works into a computer program to see if they have been guilt yof plagiarism – and if they have, ban them from their profession forever!
@Bob Tufts: Please. Hank Aaron hit over 40 home runs six times before 1971. He was one of the great sluggers of all time. While Aaron’s 1971 season was out of line for his age, it wasn’t out of line for his career. Ibanez’s season is both out of line with his age and his career.
Come to think of it, when fake journalists get caught, they tend to blame bloggers in basements, too.
How many standard deviations away from the mean must a baseball statistic be in order for us to examine it as not just a Norm Cash 1961 outlier but a potential drug offense?
“lynch mob” is right. OMG!!! A baseball player hit a lot more home runs than usual! It can’t possibly be a statistical outlier, or a combination of a lot of factors (plus luck), it’s gotta be PEDs!!11!!!!!!
Like I said above, only 1/3 of the season has been played. Let’s see if he continues his torrid pace or not. Of course, if he does, that still doesn’t give people the right to claim that Ibanez is on PEDs from the safety of their mom’s basement.
If anyone deserves blame, it is John Gonzalez for misrepresenting the thrust of JRod’s piece. I agree that the original blog post was awkward at best for how it raised the PED issue, but come on, the number-crunching was otherwise quite informative. There was no intent to libel Ibanez.
JE is on point. There was a solid attempt in the original piece to try to explain and quantify the 2009 season for Ibanez. Then the article relied on speculation by raising the use of illegal PED’s and lost it.
If I want opinions unsupported by fact, I’ll waste my time listening to sports radio.
I looked at Ibanez’s seasons prior to 2009 in which he collected 100 or more plate appearances, and figured his home run rate, HR/PA. For Ibanez, that’s 11 seasons, 1998-2008. His mean was .0324 and his standard deviation was .0105. His HR/PA in 2009 is 0.08. That’s 4.55 standard deviations above the mean. For Aaron, he collected at least 100 PA in every year of his career up to 1971, 1954-1970. Aaron’s mean for those years was .0528 with a standard deviation of .0125. In 1971, Aaron’s HR/PA was .082, which was 2.33 standard deviations above the mean. So Ibanez is a much bigger outlier than Aaron at age 37.
Does the amount of standard deviation related to the new ballpark, team/lineup, inferior pitching have to be determined in order to make a comparison between the two, or is that incorrect?
I’m not trying to be difficult, David. I thank you for displaying that Ibanez is more of an aberration than Aaron at age 37 – I just fear the end result is that we will discuss that someone is X percent more likely to have an unexplained “reason” for better performance or be deemed 2x more likely to have used illegal PED’s.
@Bob Tufts: No, it’s not adjusted for anything. Aaron, too, moved to a better home run ballpark late in his career, but by 1971 he had played in Atlanta for a while. It’s quite possible without the move to Atlanta, Aaron doesn’t pass Ruth. Aaron also must have benefited from the lowering of the mound in 1969, which as you note started his best home run period. I’m working on a post that will show this graphically.
I don’t think you’re being difficult. I have great respect for your opinions. I just think, especially after Manny’s performance in 2008, that we have a right to be suspicious of sudden increases in performance.
Pingback: Baseball Crank
@Bob Tufts: BT! Cited in National Review on a Baseball Musings post–epistemic closure!