Numbers don’t lie: Steroid testing changing the game, By: Scott Miller
March 27, 2006
The cold, hard numbers have been tabulated. And in what surely is the game's least surprising development since Angels owner Arte Moreno was applauded by fans for lowering concession beer prices, home runs are running for cover now that steroid testing is a regular part of the game.
Last season, the first with a relatively tough steroids policy in place, major leaguers swatted fewer homers than in any summer since 1997.
The decline was not dramatic. And a slight change in one season still could turn out to be as much aberration as trend.
But as the Chicago White Sox's Mark Buehrle prepares to throw the first pitch of the 2006 season Sunday evening against Cleveland, there's no doubt the game you are watching on the field is changing.
Maybe, for now, the change is as much psychological as physical. But several industry veterans say they noticed subtle changes last summer, and they expect it to continue now that an even stricter steroid policy is in place for '06.
"I see guys stealing bases more, guys using the hit-and-run more," says Yankees third-base coach Larry Bowa, who has been in the game as a player, coach or manager nearly every season since 1970. "Working at ESPN last year and watching as many games as I watched, managers, you can see it, a change in their style.
"It's easy to sit and wait for the three-run homer, but you might be waiting a long time now."
Says Atlanta ace John Smoltz: "I think the psychology of the game is going to change. Psychology affects different people in different ways.
"If you take something away and now somebody feels he can or can't do something ... there are so many nervous superstitions in this game, things people do. A lot of it is psychological."
The 5,017 combined home runs hit in the majors in 2005, according to the Elias Sports Bureau, were the fewest since 1997, when the total was 4,640.
On a per-game basis, last season's average of 2.06 was the lowest in eight years; an average of 2.05 per game were hit in 1997. It was down from the 2.25-per-game average in 2004.
Chicks might still dig the long ball, but if this trend continues, they'd better start digging the hit-and-run and double steal, too.
"I do believe the testing has been effective," Houston manager Phil Garner says.
Of course, one season is an awfully small sample, and as baseball continues to emerge from the Steroid Era, it's disingenuous to draw any definitive conclusions yet.
Part of the explanation for home runs having dipped 8½ percent on a per-game basis in '05 from '04 is attributable to the prolonged absences of veteran sluggers Barry Bonds and Jim Thome, each of whom spent a significant portion of 2005 on the disabled list.
Because he played in only 14 games last season, Bonds finished with only five home runs. In each of the previous two seasons, he belted 45.
Thome, meanwhile, produced only seven home runs in 59 games last summer. In the previous four seasons, working backward from 2004, he walloped 42, 47, 52 and 49.
There were other notable declines as well, from Adrian Beltre's 19 in Seattle (down from 48 while playing in Los Angeles in '04) to Carlos Beltran's 16 for the New York Mets (down from 38 the preceding season).
On the other hand, Atlanta's Andruw Jones slugged 50 in '05, up from 29 in '04, Houston's Morgan Ensberg jumped to 35 from 10 and Jason Giambi leaped to 30 from 12.
It also is tricky to draw too many definitive conclusions because current steroid testing is not foolproof. Though penalties are even harsher this season -- a first-time offender will be suspended for 50 games (as opposed to 10 days in '05), a second-time offender will receive a 100-game suspension and it's a lifetime ban for third-time offenders -- some substances, such as human growth hormone, still cannot be detected through a urine test. And baseball does not do blood tests.
Still, it's logical to believe the power dip last summer is more than just sheer coincidence. And based on the harsher penalties in place for '06, it's also logical to believe last summer's numbers portend a trend.
"You might have isolated instances where you see a guy hit 45 or 50 home runs, but you're not going to see it that often," Bowa says. "When you do, you're going to have to look at the ballparks, like Philadelphia and Cincinnati. Those are small ballparks."
The look of the game not only is changing with smaller numbers in the home run columns.
"Judging on some of the physiques I've seen, it looks like maybe more pitchers were (doing steroids) than I thought," Garner says. "I'm cautious here because I don't want people to think I think a lot of players were doing it.
"Jose Canseco said, what, 80 percent? (Actually, the number Canseco suggested in 2002 was that 85 percent of players were on steroids.) I don't agree with that. But if you tell me that 10 percent of players were doing it, I think that might be too low.
"There have been some changes in bodies. I think it cuts both ways. If a pitcher isn't throwing as good, using performance-enhancing drugs tends to help pitchers, too."
Tougher steroid rules are not the only thing that will send changes rippling through the game this summer. A much more subtle note -- but possibly with a greater impact -- is that, for the first time, baseball has banned amphetamines, too.
A staple in the game's culture for generations, amphetamines -- or "greenies" -- have been used for a quick energy boost before games. This spring, it has not been uncommon to hear players joking nervously, wondering how some of their peers are ever going to make it through July and August without them.
"Every time the subject comes up, guys look at each other like, "Oh my God, how am I going to do it?' San
Francisco shortstop Omar Vizquel says. "It's ridiculous. I can tell they think it will affect them, that July will come and they're not going to have the energy. But it's all bull.
"Steroids are different, I guess they give you plenty of energy and keep you fresh. Amphetamines, I don' t think they do that."
Vizquel says he tried amphetamines during his rookie season.
"They didn't do much," he says. "I thought they would give me energy, make me happy, my eyes would get bigger and I'd see the ball better. It didn't really do anything for me. It's all mental. You can't let a little pill control your body."
But some players do, and as Smoltz and Vizquel say, that's where the psychology comes in. Vizquel likens it to "spraying oil on the bottom of your shoes." He's seen some players spray Pam cooking oil on the bottom of their spikes because they think it will prevent dirt clods from sticking to the cleats.
The end result is supposed to be that the shoes will be lighter and the player will be faster. Doesn't work, Vizquel says.
But if the mind thinks it works ... that's why now might be an excellent time to buy stock in the raft of natural supplements you see on the shelves of your local supermarket and are visible in the clubhouse of your local major league team. Power Bars, Red Bull, Monster Energy Drink ... in the middle of the Oakland clubhouse this spring was a stock of Jelly Belly Energy Beans. These days, they're even taking jelly beans to a new level.
It's all partly geared toward replacing what has been taken away.
"Amphetamines, I don't think that will be as big as steroids," Bowa says. "Steroids make you stronger. Amphetamines don't make you hit the ball any further. Steroids do."
Says Garner: "You have to have talent to hit. But clearly, that's why they call it 'performance-enhancing drugs.' Because it does enhance your performance."
For those who think they can beat the system, the risk is greater than ever in 2006. Rafael Palmeiro was forever shamed when he tested positive last summer, and then it was only a 10-day suspension. Now it is nearly a third of the season -- and that's just to start.
"I think the court of public opinion will be very nasty," Garner says. "If it comes out that somebody's tested positive, guys are going to get grilled and tainted ...
"There is going to be some nastiness about this, plain and simple. But I think we're on the right track now. People aren't turning their heads and shuffling it under the carpet."
The White Sox and Cleveland Indians is a fitting opener, really, in these drug-test-induced, slimming times. Chicago won the World Series last season with a team built around pitching and defense. Moving ahead of the homer-reduction curve, the Sox intentionally allowed some sluggers to leave before the '05 season -- they traded Carlos Lee to Milwaukee and bade farewell to free agent Magglio Ordonez.
The moves resulted in their first World Series title in 88 years, and now everybody wants to emulate the White Sox. Pitching, defense and balance are priorities. Each run means more today than it has in nearly a decade -- something else undoubtedly resulting from the decrease in homers.
There was an average of 9.18 runs per game last summer -- the lowest, according to Elias, since 1992, when teams combined to average 8.2.
"Adding credibility to the guys who haven't done (steroids), it makes those guys more righteous," Smoltz says. "You never want to be falsely accused.
"I'd never want to be put in a situation where people say, 'Oh, it's gotta be the steroids,' where hard work doesn't seem to be enough anymore."
