southsideirish71 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 Star Tribune Dont know if this has been posted. If it has merge it or delete it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 I think this is the first thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 Interesting to see a pitcher suspended, and really the first decent player to get busted. Out of curiousity, do the Twins get to replace him on the roster, or do they go with 24 players for 10 days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KWs OK for Me Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 That is the first player of any merit to be suspended. Sanchez isn't a bad player but Rincon is fairly well known as one of the best set-up men in the league. I hope that Minny blows 3 leads during this time And that is reason #321 why I hate Minnesota and anything that comes out of the state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shagar69 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 wow, juan rincon. like SS2k5 said this guy is actually a contributing ML player, and pretty damn good one. Even more reason to beat those f***in cheatin ass Twinkies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 Whoa...wtf? He's damn good.... A good player suspended? I would've never guessed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxrd5 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 wow..Juan Rincon That has to be the biggest name suspended since the policy has been put in place... I would imagine they have to play with 24, but I could be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted May 2, 2005 Author Share Posted May 2, 2005 I think they called up Scott Baker. Thank god Santana switched pee cups with Rincon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 that would imply that the roster spot can be filled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSF Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 UH-OH! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted May 2, 2005 Author Share Posted May 2, 2005 Their bullpen is now definately weaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxrd5 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ May 2, 2005 -> 10:44 AM) Their bullpen is now definately weaker. Apparently in more ways than one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldmember Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 See...now this is exactly why we need 50 day suspensions for positive tests - let's see if this guy can really perform without the junk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 There is a thread on the Pale Hose Talk board too. I am going to leave them both up for now, as I am sure many people will try reposting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 Here's my question: Let's say you injected steroids last week. This week you get tested and fail and are suspended for ten days. Upon your return, about three weeks after using, you get tested again within 2 weeks or so. Wouldn't you still test positive from the initial usage? Do they give you a free pass since you say it's fromt he first time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ May 2, 2005 -> 10:06 AM) Here's my question: Let's say you injected steroids last week. This week you get tested and fail and are suspended for ten days. Upon your return, about three weeks after using, you get tested again within 2 weeks or so. Wouldn't you still test positive from the initial usage? Do they give you a free pass since you say it's fromt he first time? Again..another reason why we need 50 game suspensions. Everyone reading this thread should do anything they can to support that proposal by Selig. I'd say that the odds of a person being tested 2 weeks after a suspension are basically nil, given that they're only tested like 2 or 3 times a year at most. But aside from that, as far as I read the rules, if the player did test positive twice, I'd expect him to receive the 2nd suspension level - I don't think there's any sort of free pass in there, assuming that they did remove the Commissioner's free pass that was discussed before Congress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 I believe once you test positive you are on accelrated testing but I'm not sure when that kicks in and there is a chance I'm thinking of football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 Wow, this is shocking. It'll be interesting to see what else comes about in this. Like anyone, I just hope the Sox don't get any players suspended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 (edited) Pitchers use the roids for the recovery factor..... Edited May 2, 2005 by EvilJester99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ May 2, 2005 -> 10:12 AM) I believe once you test positive you are on accelrated testing but I'm not sure when that kicks in and there is a chance I'm thinking of football You are correct that you're thinking of football - in that game, if a person tests positive, he's gone for 1/4 of the season, and then is subject to something like 10+ random tests per year for the rest of his career. While there may be some reason to not trust that the NFL is not telling us the whole story on their testing program (check out this Bayless piece), at least on paper it works very well Edited May 2, 2005 by Balta1701 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 lol you know what's gonna happen. He'll get 10 games and next year Selig's 50 game proposal will be passed, then someone on the White Sox will get suspended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Controlled Chaos Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 He will be releasing a statement any time now with the standard response of "I bought it at the store, I didn't know it was bad" and that's it. 10 days go by and he will be back pitching again. I think it's bulls*** that the 'real' punishment is suppose to be their reputation. That's bulls***...GM's don't care about reps...If the dude can get saves someone will pay him. If the guy hits home runs...someone will pay him. I want consequences such as Seligs new proposal. That could be in effect for the next couple years to get things cleaned up. Then by 2007 it should be caught once you're out an entire season, caught twice you are done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonkeyKongerko Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 Wow I'm shocked. A relief pitcher and a damn good one felt he needed to gain the performance edge. The biggest name suspended to date by far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Middle Buffalo Posted May 2, 2005 Share Posted May 2, 2005 Just saw this statement by Rincon, "I thought it was flaxseed oil." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts