When Jose Bautista hit his 50th home run on Thursday -- and then followed it up with two more on Friday night -- he accomplished something very few individuals in Major League history before him have. In fact, he became just the 26th player to belt 50 home runs in a single season.
(For context, you can count Hank Aaron, Ted Williams and Frank Robinson among the group that has never had 50 round-trippers in a year.)
Ever since it became apparent that Bautista might have a chance to a) break the Blue Jays club record and b) hit 50, we've been subject to rampant speculation about what substances aided his power surge.
It comes with the post-steroid-era-territory they argued.
It's just the nature of the game -- thanks to McGwire and Sosa and Bonds and A-Rod and Canseco -- they said.
And while I can understand the concept -- fool me once, shame on me; fool me twice, shame on baseball -- I'm not sure that I entirely agree.
Sure, the question must be asked -- it would be the chemically-enhanced elephant in the room if it wasn't -- but where is the line that determines what requires ongoing steroid investigation and what does not?
If a player was to have a spike in other statistical categories would we pay attention the same way?
My assertion is no, we wouldn't.
Take Brian Roberts of the Baltimore Orioles for example. In 2007 he stole 50 bases, and while he has always been a threat on the base paths -- his season totals in years where he has played a full schedule are 23, 29, 27, 36, 50, 40, 30 -- that 50 steal season was far and away his best year, having been caught only seven times.
Roberts, of course, admitted to steroid use later that year -- though he claims it was a one-time deal in 2003.
Not convinced? Okay, how about 2009 AL Cy Young winner Zack Grienke? Last year he struck out 242 batters; his highest previous total was 183. His ERA of 2.16 last year was also more than a run and a half less than his career average of 3.78.
It's not to say that this offers concrete evidence of Grienke's guilt -- certainly I'm not even trying to speculate about his possible use of PEDs -- but rather to point the example of the strikeout -- a pitcher's equivalent to the home run -- and ask why it doesn't receive the same scrutiny?
And maybe it all goes back to McGwire, Sosa and the home run chase of 1998. After the player strike wiped out the 1994 World Series it was a key event in re-igniting the passion of many fans.
Some, however, have never come back and the trust level among those that did has been significantly crippled.
It's not that I feel bad for Bautista -- his performance this season will certainly produce a nice financial windfall at some point -- but rather that I feel bad for fans of the game.
When the days of fans being awed and inspired by the performance of a spectacular athlete without feeling the need to question the origin, it's them that loses out.
No comments:
Post a Comment