Which report are you reading? There are a bunch of former Red Sox players throughout.

I love a pony show!

Bring on the dancing poodles!

Weeee!

Which Yankees were named?
7 Which Sox were named?

What it ends up being is a mostly circumstantial, dimly lit path linking a few networks of players. The names are mostly those already suspected or known and the report is going to fizzle into the ether once pitchers and catchers report in February. The importance of the whole research and its place in baseball history is suspect and the hype that has accompanied any discussion of it for all these weeks and months is like everything else in the 24-hour news cycle: sketchy, fleeting trivia.

Miguel Tejada
Jason Grimsley
Paul LoDuca
Scot Schoenweis

The last name is not surprising, given that he came from a steroid-fueled college culture that was Duke baseball. I didn't get to the university until the aftermath, where the coach was fired and one kid reportedly committed suicide due to the pressure to take testosterone.

10 Names spread out, separated by informant by the most part.

f- that nonsense.. i think im cool with that.

But the Dodgers were well ahead of both with 54 mentions, while the Giants got 55.

What a complete bore this report was....wow...Tejada, Clemens, Bonds, Petitte were name. This guy sure went "deep cover" to figure this all out.

Zzzzzzz....Zzzzzzz.

Gammons defending Mitchell who defended Selig. Another big WHATEVER.

I think the report needs to separate out players who used HGH, specifically for an injury, specifically for a limited amount of time. I assume the HGH was doctor prescribed and specifically for healing of any injury.

If so, if was not 'used' as a PED, but as a medicine.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3153509

i dont see that anywhere in the report.

Mitchell barely called out Selig. I wish Marvin Miller was still the head of MLBPA. He would take huge chunks out of Mitchell and Selig. This whole thing is so sickening. It is all scapegoating the players.

19 HGH is not a "Performance Enhancing Drug." It does not increase muscle mass... As a supplement, it may increase fat burning, it may increase the growth of bone and other tissues, and it may help the immune system. It has about the same side effects as massive injections of vitamin B12.

The primary difference is that HGH is a controlled substance and possession/illicit use can result in jail time and significant fines.

I personally don't think Pettitte is stained much by this report. We know HGH wasn't on MLB's banned list until 2005. I am not sure if it was illegal to possess. If not, I really don't see what Pettitte did wrong?

"Obviously, the players who illegally used performance enhancing substances are responsible for their actions. But they did not act in a vacuum. Everyone involved in baseball over the past two decades – Commissioners, club officials, the Players Association, and players – shares to some extent in the responsibility for the steroids era. There was a collective failure to recognize the problem as it emerged and to deal with it early on. As a result, an environment developed in which illegal use became widespread."

...remember all of those articles written about giambi's great eyesight way back when? i am genuinely curious to know if he still has that going for him.

Now, Yankee-hating fools will hurl insults and syringes at him before games and between innings.

Fucking stinks, but what can you do?

Hopefully, he and the Yanks (hello Hank) won't overreact too much to the smear. Could make it worse.

Best they can do is calmly present his case to a national media outlet, and then stifle themselves.

Just what the Yanks need -- another overblown distraction. Fuck.

"Clemens, Miguel Tejada and Pettitte were named in the report, an All-Star roster linked to steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs that put a question mark -- if not an asterisk -- next to some of baseball's biggest moments."

Yeah, that's a crappy, sensationalist sentence. Someone was getting far too creative there. That article has been expanding since the press conference started and that line was in there from the beginning. My guess is that someone wrote that before they actually got their hands on the report and then just checked to make sure those names were actually in there. Big media at its best.

That's why I said that the existence of the report is more interesting than the content. It is less a piece of paper with information than a symbolic cleansing of the public palate. It's a facilitator of purgation that allows us to move on. That is the only importance of the document.

Were owners and the commish turning a blind eye because revenues were up? Sure. But the balance of power in baseball is clearly on the side of the MLBPA.

Yes? No? Isn't this a MAJOR MAJOR issue?
Aren't there many people, including the press, that see HGH and Steroids as the 'same thing'?

It's a little like lumping Pot and shooting Heroine together?

What I've read - thank you sabernomics.com - doesn't say anything about hGH improving eyesight (http://tinyurl.com/2utp39). In fact, it seems that claim is in an unsubstantiated line from Game of Shadows - http://tinyurl.com/3bp9ch.

"The trainer reportedly also provided information about pitcher Andy Pettitte"

reportedly!! So, they hadn't even read the report yet either.

Let's just put all the names in a big, boiling pot and stir!

The report isn't all that interesting or surprising. It's just a connect the dots from a few people who did cooperate. But that was critical to show how a few people could have such a large impact on the rest of the league. And there were a lot more than a couple of trainers out there supplying this stuff.

But I'm inclined to agree with Mitchell that we should stop worrying about who did what and do whatever's reasonable to stop this moving forward.

1) HGH was not on MLB's banned list until 2005; steroid have been since the 1980s (even though no testing was done).

2) HGH, by best searches, was not considered a controlled subtance until 2004, while steroid have been illegal since 1990.

Based on those two facts, what was wrong with taking HGH before 2004/2005?

37 The balance of power in MLB lies with the owners, not the MLBPA.

Best option at this point is to take the lumps and start preparing for the season.

And yeah - I'm counting my blessings there was no mention of Bernie, Jeter, Mo, or Posada.

(Of course this is a baseball-wide problem -- I'm just taking the Yanks as the example most familiar all of us, not to single them out).

Also: I haven't thought about him in years, but in retrospect Glenallen Hill might as well have carried an enormous neon sign reading "STEROIDS" to the plate with him. I once saw him flick his wrists about six inches and send a ball into the black seats...

Ignoring the ties between HGH and steroids (as in, the former nearly requires the latter to be effective), a lot of the recent HGH names came from an anti-aging clinic in Florida. So, why were highly-paid athletes going to see this guy instead of an expert in elbow or knee injuries?

i saw another article or two as well when i read that way back when that seemed to follow that line... i'll poke around and see if i can find it.

Actually, the funniest allegation of all is that about one pound of marijuana was delivered straight to the Marlins clubhouse in a "padlocked duffel bag" in 1998. I guess they needed something to get over the pain of the Fire Sale...

But when steroid use skyrocketed, I'd say the union was running the show. I suppose you can argue that the owners were letting the union get away with it because they were happy with the eye-popping numbers, but those same numbers drove up the pricetag for marginal players like Brady Anderson and Brett Boone.

It's certainly an arguable point, though we're probably given too much credit to both sides.

This is ridiculous. Almost all the guys named were from the trainer in NYC. Yeah, like trainers in Boston and Miami and Chicago and L.A. are totally clean.

It's no wonder the '01 Yanks look like a bunch of criminals. Only their trainer spoke up.

And

Years ago, some asshat on ESPN claimed that if you put Tejada in Jeter's place in 1996, you'd have the same result.

Who's laughing now biatch