Mitchell Report

spudlyff8fan

Super Senior Staff
Registered
Jun 23, 2005
4,550
3
0
37
somewhere
Well, the Mitchell Report is out, and it's a long list of juicers. For those who don't know, the Mitchell Report is a study into juicing in MLB, and a list of names was released.

Biggest names of players still playing (who we didn't already know about) are Eric Gagne, Andy Pettitte, Roger Clemens, and Miguel Tejada and then a buncha people we already knew about. My Sox and Stan's Yanks are the two teams with the most players appearing on the list.
 
Last edited:
This is only sorta on topic, but how is basketball skating on the issue of performance enhancing drugs? They play like 82 games, are we really to believe they don't take anything during that long season and post season in order to get or stay healthy for their teams? I'm not talking about bulking up like in football, just purely for recovery purposes (which is a main reason many in MLB say they've taken or thought about taking HGH right?).
 
I don't really see how juicing would really help in basketball.

It's kind of like wide receivers in the NFL. A WR can become great through route-running and having soft hands. Neither of which are aided by steroids, or effected directly by anything steroids contribute to. That's why you see guys like Jerry RIce play until he's 40, and Terrell Owens still performing in top form at 35.

Basketball is similar in that way, you can run and jump and shoot effectively, and steroids, I don't think, would help that much. And it's not like in football, where you need a great deal of strength to perform, and any down time would greatly reduce that.

Even in hockey (which is a contact sport, unlike basketball), though, it wouldn't help much because most of the essentials in hockey don't translate to strength.

Point: Players take steroids after injuries because they want to get back raw muscle mass. In basketball and hockey, you don't really need to be hulkingly massive to perform well, so there's not too much incentive to do it.