How can you fairly evaluate PED players?


captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
Let's assume that guys like Clemens, Bonds, ARod, McGwire, Palmeiro, etc., were using PEDs.  Safe assumption though I guess in Clemens' case, for example, it hasn't been proven beyond doubt.  
How can we really fairly evaluate just how good these guys were?  Clearly they were all exceptional baseball players.  But how much of it can be attributed to PEDs?  How can we possibly know?  This is what's so frustrating about the "steroid era".  We assume Bonds started using after the 1998 season.  Before then, he was still incredible.  Afterwards, he became inhuman, putting up numbers the game just had never seen before.  So how good was Barry Bonds, really?
How good was/is Alex Rodriguez, really?
How good was Roger Clemens, really?
How can we even begin to really assess these players?  We can't just look at the raw numbers, because if they did PEDs, then their numbers reflect that, and without them, they wouldn't be as good.  But was everyone else using too?  Who knows?  If so, how does THAT impact our assessment?  


Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2004
Orlando, FL
Is it just steroids, or can we expand this study to evaluate how greenies affected the performance of guys in the 60s, 70s, and 80s?