Statistics, Performance Enhancing Drugs, and Major League Baseball.

Thank you, iamadragon, for starting this debate. "1. A PED's positive effect on baseball playing skills is unknown and likely minimal." If the effects really were minimal, then players wouldn't be using them. Furthermore, the effects are known [1]: "Reports indicate that use of anabolic steroids produces increases in lean muscle mass, strength, and ability to train longer and harder." An increase in strength and muscle mass helps in just about any sport, and training longer and harder gives a definite boost. "1a. Many of the players using PEDs were actually bottom-of-the-ladder MLB players and minor leaguers." There's a simple answer here. The poor players decided that they would use PEDs to give themselves an advantage. Plus, the side effects of steroids may lead people to stop using them, which would lead to a decrease in performance, which would put them out of the major leagues. "If PEDs gave a huge benefit to those who used them, why did so many who used them end up being bad MLB players anyway?" 1. They were bad, which made them use PEDs. 2. They eventually quit, and therefore could not stay in the MLB. "1b. The physical gain from steroids, most notably increased muscle mass, is vastly overstated in its importance to playing baseball well." Increased muscle mass helps increase the strength of the core-abs, which would immediately lead to better performance in baseball. Obviously, a pitcher would want to stay away from steroids, but a batter would use them. "2. The increased power numbers in the Steroid Era can be attributed to many other factors." Yes, but they can also be attributed to steroids. The PF thing is interesting, but it does not account for any increase at all in pitching strength. "3. Due to the most likely very high numbers of players who were using PEDs during the Steroid Era, any advantage gained by a player was usually cancelled out by an advantage gained by an opposing player." Great. Let's just let everybody use steroids. That way, we can have every single MLB player suffer the side effects of steroids [2], which many players would rather not do. "'..[steroids] they are dangerous drugs, and when used inappropriately, they can cause a host of severe, long-lasting, and often irreversible negative health consequences. These drugs can stunt the height of growing adolescents, masculinize women, and alter sex characteristics of men. Anabolic steroids can lead to premature heart attacks, strokes, liver tumors, kidney failure and serious psychiatric problems. In addition, because steroids are often injected, users risk contracting or transmitting HIV or hepatitis..'" According to a source that seems to be biased towards PRO [3], there is always a risk of side effects with PEDs. Why not avoid having to take such a risk? Plus, most players don't use steroids. This puts them at a disadvantage against the steroid-abusing players. Should we reward those who break the rules? "Conclusion: Steroids in baseball were not a significant enough factor in statistical evidence to influence decisions on which players were the best or worst." 1. When the players started to take steroids, they did so because they believed that it would give them greater statistics, more victories, and an overall higher salary in baseball. (Given) 2. These players believed that steroids in baseball were a significant enough factor in statistical evidence to influence decisions on which players were the best or worst. (Re-wording of 1) A. First, let's look at the path in which we do nothing about it, and the PEDs do nothing. 3a. These players were wrong in their beliefs. 4a. Life continues, as normal. THE FINAL RESULT: The PED users are wasting their money. B. Now, if we crack down on them by declaring their statistics to be invalid, and the PEDs do nothing. 3b. These players were wrong in their beliefs. 4b. Nobody ever realizes that the PEDs do nothing. THE FINAL RESULT: The PED users are wasting their money, and getting punished for something that they believe to be true. C. If we let them slide and the PEDs actually do something... 3c. These players were right in their beliefs. 4c. They have an advantage over every player that chooses to abide by the rules. THE FINAL RESULT: The PED users are making more money, and becoming more famous, illegally. D. This is if we crack down on them, and they're guilty. 3d. These players were right in their beliefs. 4d. The players have incentive not to use PEDs. THE FINAL RESULT: The PED users have their statistics thrown out for illegal actions that falsified their actions, making the statistics fairer. So, basically, they think that the PEDs have a significant effect on their stats. Well, let's give them the benefit of the doubt. Let's punish them for what they believe to be true. They took that risk when they took the PEDs. It's really only fair. "Finally, regardless of the magnitude of a PED's benefit on player performance, any benefit was cancelled or balanced by someone else's benefit. Because most players were using PEDs, their statistics, when compared to each other's, are unchanged. The widespread use of PEDs created a level playing field for MLB players." This means that anybody who didn't use PEDs ends up looking worse. Do you really think that it's fair to reward the criminals, and make the people who played by the rules look like wimps? A "level playing field" in which the cheaters always win isn't a level playing field at all. 1. http://www.drugfree.org... 2. http://en.wikipedia.org... 3. http://steroids-and-baseball.com... 4. http://www.steroid.com...