. . . as a special assistant to Jim Hendry. God knows he could use the help.
Maddux will help with instruction for major-leaguers and minor-leaguers during spring training, and he will scout throughout the season.
Maddux will be at Hendry's disposal to evaluate minor-league affiliates and to provide input on trades or potential free-agent signings.
So basically, Greg goes to Mesa with the team and Jim can call him on the golf course for the rest of the year.
35 Comments
JulieDiCaro said:
I know everyonem is going to roll their eyes and say they don't care, but here it is anyway:
"McGwire said in a statement sent to The Associated Press on Monday that he used steroids on and off for nearly a decade.
"I wish I had never touched steroids," McGwire said in a statement. "It was foolish and it was a mistake. I truly apologize. Looking back, I wish I had never played during the steroid era."
McGwire also used human growth hormone, a person close to McGwire said, speaking on condition of anonymity because McGwire didn't include that detail in his statement.
McGwire's decision to admit using steroids was prompted by his decision to become hitting coach of the St. Louis Cardinals, his final big league team. Tony La Russa, McGwire's manager in Oakland and St. Louis, has been among McGwire's biggest supporters and thinks returning to the field can restore the former slugger's reputation."
Bullshit. He's saying it because he wants to be in the HOF.
gravedigger said:
OK, even if that is his reason: so?
AndCounting said:
It's about time. I'm glad he did this, regardless of motivation. Motivation is overrated anyway. I just think it sets the wheel of information and debate back in motion. So many people have dismissed the steroid era as if the story is complete and done with. But I hate ill-informed opinions, and that's pretty much all any of us have. The more guys start telling what really happened (or at least filling in a few blanks) the better we can all understand the situation then and where we stand now.
Just wish he'd dish more about the HGH. Is he staying mum on that because he introduced a current Cardinal or two to the HGH scene? Hmmm.
Max Power said:
See, I find motivation to be very informative -- maybe the most significant of all types of information that can be collected. Knowing why something happened helps prevent it from happening again, much more than how it happened. Motivation tells you everything, even the stuff you wish you didn't know.
My point here, thus, is two-fold:
(1) Ballplayers have been cheating since the inception of the game. Example: as Mr. Bouton outlined in Ball Four, MLB's expansion to the west made greenies and the like necessary (and ubiquitous), so I am not so naive as to believe that the Steroid Era was the first time anyone has ever attempted to use illegal substances or processes; and
(2) admitting you did something wrong does not change the fact that you did indeed do something wrong. We often confuse confession with a sort of absolution, and that is inaccurate. We all screw up, and I hold McGwire to no higher standards than I hold myself, but his bullshit statements like that he was "not in a position to do that five years ago in [his] congressional testimony" to make the EXACT SAME DISCLOSURE demonstrate that McGwire is either: (1) just a shade less than self-aware; or (2) a gentleman whose pants are, in fact, on fire.
Setting aside things such as why Congress (outside of the COMPLETELY BULLSHIT anti-trust provision for MLB) cares anything about a child's game -- particularly in a time of war -- McGwire had the forum to make this disclosure, and an inability to act like a responsible adult is not an excuse for the failure to do so. To paraphrase Dave Barry, we all have to take our turn as the grown-ups.
I will, though, give McGwire the fact that he had the common courtesy to dodge the question in front of Congress, rather than lie (like the Viagra-taking, finger-wagger Rafael "I had no idea she was your wife, Ryno" Palmeiro), but that is all I will give him. Omission is just as much of a type of deception as is outright lying. Bonds might have lied, but McGwire (and others) also could have told the truth at any time. It all counts, even if he decides to tell the truth at a later (much, much later) date.
In sum, I agree that it is good that McGwire came clean, and that it was not an easy thing for him to do (or even one that he was required to do). That said, his multiple prior -- and intentional, lest that be forgotten -- obfuscations (albeit transparent ones) have consequences, and I am not letting him off the hook or commending him (quoting "Quiz Show") "for simply, at long last, telling the truth." He may be a better man than Barry Bonds, but that phrase is the epitome of damning with faint praise.
(This entire comment is written with the knowledge that this is a child's game about which we speak.)
JulieDiCaro said:
I get frustrated with the fact that "steroids weren't against the rules" seems to trump the fact that possessing this stuff without a valid prescription was ILLEGAL IN AMERICA during the same time.
flyball said:
but if someone could prove that all the steroids they took were done while in a jurisdiction that allowed them then would that be ok?
AndCounting said:
Since 1971, those two thins have been one in the same.
From http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1151761/index.htm :
Baseball's first written drug policy was issued by commissioner Bowie Kuhn at the start of the '71 season. The policy did not explicitly address anabolic steroids, but it did say that baseball personnel must "comply with federal and state drug laws." Federal law at the time mandated that an appropriate prescription be obtained for the use of anabolic steroids.
In 1991, the rules were changed to address steroids specifically, but they've been against the rules (because they were against the law) for almost 40 years.
But I think it's incumbent on competitive organizations to police the use of performance enhancers. If you break the law, your punishment should be legal, not . . . statistical. But if you break the rules of competition, it's up to the sport's governing bodies to deal with that.
If this were the NCAA or the Olympics, they'd have no problem stripping titles, records, and championships away from people. But in baseball, the statute of limitations on cheating is usually, what, the next pitch? Within the same day of the game for a protest? I don't know. Baseball seems to have always taken a soft approach to cheating. If you get away with it, it didn't happen. If we catch you, you get a tsk tsk.
gravedigger said:
Ohhhh, very interesting!
gravedigger said:
Yeah but it wasn't against the rules.
AndCounting said:
But arriving at a person's motivations is often impossible. Why is he telling the truth? Who knows? He probably doesn't even know.
But I do know this: Congress is no place for truth-telling.
Max Power said:
Totally agree. That said, if determining a person's motivation for a given action were actually impossible, our law enforcement personnel would be out of a job (except the guys with the radar out on the highways). Like I say, determination of a person's motivation for an untoward action (often followed by someone confronting that person with the fact that said motivation is known) is the only way to stop that untoward action. Even good and smart people act like complete dipshits sometimes, without any regard for the innocents around them (the term "innocents" being a very charitable, and likely inaccurate, description of the St. Louis Cardinals in the late 1990s). Had LaRussa -- recognizing both the motivation and the signals of McGwire's pattern of omission and deception -- confronted McGwire with the fact that his actions were commonly, perhaps none of this would have happened. That, of course, does not absolve McGwire from being a cheating, lying sack of shit. Just sayin'.
Deductive reasoning ain't perfect, but it's sure pretty good. I can't tell you what McGwire was thinking, but I'll bet my guess is pretty damned close.
JulieDiCaro said:
Latest podcast with Alex Quigley is up and available for downloading. http://tinyurl.com/ykfzlxr
gravedigger said:
This is pretty cool, a sweet deal for Maddux.
AndCounting said:
Hey . . . Jim took my suggestion! The hiring of Super Nanny can't be far behind.
HackWilson09 said:
Let's usher in the Maddux/Sandberg era! Goodbye, Jim! Goodbye, Lou!
Carl Heartscubs Gierhan said:
Doug Dascenzo for bat boy!
Edelweiss said:
What the Cubs need is a shorter batboy, one who is shorter than Fontenot. If he gets a growth spurt before the season is over, he should be replaced.
Doc said:
What a day...what a day.
JulieDiCaro said:
Seriously. I've been on the phone ALL DAY. ARG.
LostinFla said:
Nice day for Maddux. For the Cubs, too little and about 18 years too late. Paging Jose Guzman...
Doc said:
You know...I can't wait until opening day in St. Louis when they give McGuire a stand ovation. Stupid fans!
Would Cub fans do that to Sammy Sosa?
LostinFla said:
More interesting question is whether this will finally bring Sosa out of the closet of denial or will the only performing enhancing drug he ever cop to be that new face cream of his?
But I neither hate Sosa (or McGwire). Baseball played the ostrich on this for so long and they needed the summer of 98, puffed up or not.
millertime said:
He took Flintstones Vitamins, and that's it!
Perkins said:
They should. Sosa did more for the Cubs and baseball than pretty much anyone who played on the Cubs since Ernie Banks. But the point is moot, since it would require the team to welcome him back. As yet, the Cubs have made no indication that they'd like to do so.
It's really a shame, since they seem willing to retire the number of a player who meant much less to the organization.
cubsforever said:
Why didn't I think of this before - silly me --- the Cubs need a second baseman and someone to hit in the #2 spot in the lineup and another starting pitcher especially with Lilly out for a while --- AND THEY ALREADY HAVE BOTH - can anyone name a better second baseman than Ryne Sandburg - or a better pitcher than Greg Maddux? How could all of us be so blind?
millertime said:
I can!
Chase Utley (129 OPS+ to Ryne's 114).
Pedro Martinez.
cubsforever said:
and this follows on the heels of Dawson making the HOF!!!!
cubsforever said:
and it is too bad Lee Smith didn't get more votes ----- too.
JulieDiCaro said:
Mark McGwire seems to want a chance to redeem himself. Maybe the Cubs can sign him to play LF?
cubby23(eric) said:
No, that be like the Cubs throwing George Bell, Kal Daniels, or even Glen Allen Hill out there, oh wait...
cubsforever said:
well we all know he can't field any worse than what is already there - and probably would not have that little hop - but since everyone is voting now for the best Cub nine - Billy Williams is still coaching hitting - so let's bring him back - and Mark Grace wants to be a Cub manager - so that takes care of 1B - and everyday we can play two games - so old number 14 is at short - so that just leaves 3 positions - CF (unless you count Byrd since he was just signed - behind the plate - and of course I am assuming that Mr. Santo is at 3B since he is in the booth for all of the home games. Is Jody Davis in the cubs system?.
cubsforever said:
I know this is silliness - but when you really stop and think about all of the truly good/great players that have worn the Cub uniform - and everyone that I have mentioned appears (since I don't really know them) to be a great guy - hard working - clearly some talent - but good guys to have on the club - this makes all of the difference in the world --- character - that is what it is all about -----
cubsforever said:
and if Davis is not - another name truly linked to the Cubs is Joe Dirardi - since I live out here in CT - I get tons of stuff about him with the Yankees - and he is always a gentleman.
cubsforever said:
Girardi
gravedigger said:
Bacardi
Leave a Comment?
What your comment will look like:
said: