Proof that players in the 60’s were taking performance enhancing drugs. So take that Tim McCarver!!
I am not really sure how this missed the attention of The Mitchell Commission, hordes of baseball analysts and announcers, writers and those interested in the game, but my in depth perusal of statistics from the 1960’s indicates clear and convincing evidence that the pitchers from the 60’s were juicing on performance enhancing drugs.
The evidence is so crystal clear; its obviousness is probably why it was so easily missed. Lets do our in-depth analysis by looking at batting averages in the 1960s as compared to the 1950s.
In the AL the average league leader in the 1960s batted a lusty .324. Aside from Norm Cash in 1961 there wasn’t even one AL batter that hit over .333. In the 1950s it was a very different story. In the 1950s the average league leader in the AL hit .347. This is a huge .023 drop from the 1950s to the 1960s.
This result is no fluke. In the NL during the 1950s the average league leader in BA hit .345. Steroid use wasn’t as rampant by pitchers in the 1960s, though still its effects are obvious by the drop in the average league leaders batting average was .006, to .339.
I could go on, however, there is no need. It is painfully clear that something was going on. While one could be tempted to whitewash the truth by point to pitcher’s mounds, ballparks, overall quality of players, the integration of a new population into the game, and other illusory factors, there is simply only one conclusion to be drawn; PED use was rampant among pitchers in the 1960s. This continues today in a new form as mostly pitchers were snagged by the new testing.
It is sad to say that baseball has hidden this truth for so long. No doubt it was buoyed by baseball’s ability to turn the other way; with expansion into new major markets baseball likely encouraged PED use. During those days, nothing drew fans to the park like a good old-fashioned pitcher’s duel. And so baseball obligingly looked the other way, as its most cherished pitching records were irrevocably tarnished, likely forever.
You and I can help. There is only one solution to this spider web of deceit. It is high time that baseball puts as asterisk next to the records of those who pitched in the 1960s. Since these players so skillfully evaded the truth, abetted by the baseball industry, it is up to us to right these wrongs. So I propose that we essentially ignore any pitching record that was set in the 1960s. It is only by a wholesale effort to paint with a broad brush that we can eradicate this sordid era in baseball history.
So let’s take up the challenge. Only those fans of true drive and persistence can rectify this wrong. It is so damaging to the history of the game and it’s place in the collective consciousness of the American family that it simply must be done. We are no Don Quixotes, we are the vanguard of new fans that are dedicated to cleaning up the sport as only the fans can. If the industry will not take appropriate steps it is up to us. Please sign my tag book if you support this noble cause, and together we can change history.
And the next time you hear an announcer say, as did Tim McCarver in the All-Star Game when talking about the home run increase, that “did this just happen? I think it is clear the answer is no,” you can hold your head up high and say that you did something about it; you did something to clean up what is a sad period in the history of this once proud game. Finally, we can have closure. Won’t you support me in this crusade?? I can only hope.
articleId=’11649′;
4 responses so far ↓
1 Mark // Jul 17, 2007 at 9:55 pm
Beautifully written…it’s just too bad that I don’t think most people will read it with the irony it deserves.
And I second you on the bashing of Tim McCarver; no other announcer makes me want to hit the mute button on the TV as much as he during a telecast. I also enjoyed Tim’s dazzling remarks on David Ortiz’s quadriceps during the All-Star Game.
(Paraphrasing)
“Most people at home are probably wondering how a leg muscle can affect a player’s swing. Well, it does.”
I couldn’t have put it better myself, Tim.
-Newey, http://www.baseballgeeks.com
2 Anonymous // Jul 22, 2007 at 7:36 am
just look at sandy Koufax-from 1961-1963 his ERA drops from 3.52 to 2.54 to 1.88-an obvious case of steriod enhancement.
3 G.G. // Jul 25, 2007 at 3:48 am
I am confused, while these numbers are indeed telling and PERHAPS are the basis for a thorough investigation, where is your proof that pitchers during this era were using PED?
“Proof” cannot be explained alone by numbers, just as numbers alone are not history. I see no evidence here, just a thread of cause for investigation. What you have is a hypothesis and by calling it proof you are doing nothing but trying to rewrite history.
Based on your “proof” one could assert that hitters were seeing things while dosing on LSD, that the Russians were doping and training Major League pitchers, or that Martians were impairing the vision of bat wielding position players.
There should be no asterisks alongside any of baseball’s statistics, that is all they are, statistics, however hallowed some of them may be. Part of the reason this game is so wonderful is because it is played by men, with all of their virtues and flaws, and has been played for tens of decades. It is played by the very men who happen to be both a product and reflection of their times. We have years of numbers, statistics, names, and stories to not only tell a history of a game, but to tell us about the history of our country itself.
If you have proof, provide the evidence, not just the numbers. I am sure there are scores who would love to read this account of one of baseball’s glossy eyed era’s. Hell, you would make a fortune and at least shut up some of these people who think Barry Bonds is the only person to ever enhance his body with drugs.
4 John P. // Nov 11, 2008 at 3:58 pm
I won’t comment on whether 1960s era pitchers used performance enhancing drugs; statistics from 1962 to 1968 would suggest if they were, the hitters certainly weren’t.
There are two other significant factors in pitcher performance - the size of the batter’s strike zone, and the height of pitching mounds. Both were increased following the 1961 season. The former expands and contracts every so often - most recently, it’s been increased due to high offensive production.
As a former baseball player (high school, college and coaching) I can tell you that the second factor, a higher mound, is a bigger deteriment to hitters. It causes them to change the angle of their swing - something that’s quite difficult after years of repitition swinging at a lower angle. Some mounds, such as Dodger Stadium, had mounds that resembled small mountains. Imagine facing a 6′6″ Don Drsydale looming more than 7′ over you, let alone Koufax who was the most dominant pitcher in my lifetime.
The strike zone was made smaller and the mounds lowered for the 1969 season; check the statistics for that season, particularly vs the 1968 season where pitchers performed at a level equal to the “Dead Ball ERA” - pre-1920. As someone who went through that dismal season, it made for some very boring baseball. Example: the All Star Game - 15 innings, final score 1-0!
Leave a Comment