Randy Levine: U do roids Robby

[soxhop411]

http://nymag.com/news/sports/alex-rodriguez-emails-2014-1/?mid=nymag_press
 
 
UH….

 

 
http://nomaas.org/2013/12/wtf-levine-robby-needs-some-steroids-fast/
 
 

 
 
However, this has to the most bizarre exchange of the bunch:
 
 
July 30, 2012
Rodriguez is out with an injury, having fractured his hand five days earlier when hit by a pitch. Levine makes a reference to performance-enhancing drugs that he later refers to as a “bad joke.”

Levine: How r u feeing since u left Robby [Cano] under 200, he needs some steroids fast!

August 21, 2012
With A-Rod still out, Levine again makes a possibly comic drug reference.
Levine: Hey, what’s up with Robby. This guy must not be using the liquid.

 


 

 

[AbbyNoho]

A-Rod should be banned and the Yankees should be forced to have his contract count against the salary cap. It couldn't be more obvious that they knew, and encouraged, his cheating until he was no longer worth the contract and then tried to use it to get out of paying.
 
They're just as responsible as A-Rod for this mess and they should not be rewarded. 

 

[Lars The Wanderer]

Gold. Absolute gold.

 

[YouLookAdopted]

"The liquid" comment is as obvious a reference to PED use as I can imagine.

 

[glennhoffmania]

Wait, these emails aren't satire? Does Levine really write emails like a 13 year-old girl?

 
This is what I was going to say.  The president of the Yankees types "u" and "r" and shit like that?  

 

[Average Reds]

The most impressive part of this entire shitshow is that the more we learn, the more sympathetic A-Rod becomes.
 
Kind of funny that none of this changes our judgement of who A-Rod is.

 

[SawxSince67]

Wait, these emails aren't satire? Does Levine really write emails like a 13 year-old girl?

Additionally, Slappy's replies read like the output of a random cliche generator.

"This is no time for blame or excuses. Is time for me to be a leader and rally the troops. I feel if I perform at a high level, put a chip on my shoulder and lead the way, then my mates will follow my lead. Is not how you start, but how you finish."

That's probably the kind of tripe Levine may want to read.

 

[koufax32]

Wait, these emails aren't satire? Does Levine really write emails like a 13 year-old girl?

Oh they're real and they're spectacular.

 

[Murderer's Crow]

Additionally, Slappy's replies read like the output of a random cliche generator.

"This is no time for blame or excuses. Is time for me to be a leader and rally the troops. I feel if I perform at a high level, put a chip on my shoulder and lead the way, then my mates will follow my lead. Is not how you start, but how you finish."

That's probably the kind of tripe Levine may want to read.


It sounds like Arod was just saying what he thought they wanted to hear.

I hate Levine more than anyone but I wonder if there's a chance he was just baiting Arod into talking about steroids.

 

[glennhoffmania]

If those emails are legit they both come off as idiots and apparently they don't understand that everything you put in an email is never really erased forever.  So even if one or both of them were only joking they're still idiots.

 

[snowmanny]

If these are real then MLB should come down hard on Levine. Management suggesting that a player should take steroids under any circumstance -joking,whatever- should be a suspendable offense.

It seems likely to me that a lot of the players who used steroids did so after subtle or not so subtle suggestions from management. One obvious way to make that suggestion is to go to another player with access to steroids and basically say "can you hook Robby up?"

 

[Foulkey Reese]

I'm going to be that guy and complain that this should be split out into it's own thread for maximum visibility. 

 

[ivanvamp]

Those emails are…….unbelievable.  As in, they have to be made up, right?  How does the PRESIDENT OF THE NEW YORK YANKEES send emails like a teenager?  And how does he openly talk about steroids like that?  They can't be legit.

 

[terrisus]

A-Rod should be banned and the Yankees should be forced to have his contract count against the salary cap. It couldn't be more obvious that they knew, and encouraged, his cheating until he was no longer worth the contract and then tried to use it to get out of paying.
 
They're just as responsible as A-Rod for this mess and they should not be rewarded. 

 
I've said it before, but, I think that if a player on a team is suspended for steroid use, the forfeited salary should be paid by the team into some sort of Anti-PED fund, so that the team still not only has it count against the cap, but also still has to spend the money.
 
Sure, there are going to be instances where the team has no clue at all. And others where they might have an idea, but think it's worth the risk (such as the emails from Epstein about Gagne before that trade). And others where it's glaringly obvious. But, with, for instance, there seeming to be backlash against the Jhonny Peralta contract, with players saying he shouldn't be rewarded right after coming off a PED suspension - and then obviously this instance with the Yankees loving to get out of some of Rodriguez' contract - if the teams had to worry about both losing a player, and still having to pay the money, maybe they would be a bit more careful themselves.

 

[Doctor G]

Levine is an atty. How could these be actual Emails that some one in his position would actually push send on. The only explanation I have is that he was suspicious of Cano's possible PED use and was hoping ARod would rat out his buddy in his desire to get back in the Yankees' good graces.
No matter what the explanation I bet the Yankees are not eagerly looking forward to a confrontation with Alex and his legal team. 

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Quite frankly those emails remind me of the recently uncovered (thanks to Bernie Carbohydrate's diligent detective work) Zimmer/Yawkee Papers.

 

[EvilEmpire]

... if the teams had to worry about both losing a player, and still having to pay the money, maybe they would be a bit more careful themselves.

So what does being a 'bit more careful' entail? Not signing a player based on suspicion and innuendo?

 

[NJ_Sox_Fan]

If these are real then MLB should come down hard on Levine. Management suggesting that a player should take steroids under any circumstance -joking,whatever- should be a suspendable offense.It seems likely to me that a lot of the players who used steroids did so after subtle or not so subtle suggestions from management. One obvious way to make that suggestion is to go to another player with access to steroids and basically say "can you hook Robby up?"

This. How can any president of a major league team think that joking about steroids with a guy who already has been linked to them is acceptable in any way, shape or form?? Especially in 2012/13 after MLB has tried so hard to clean up the PED use?

 

[terrisus]

So what does being a 'bit more careful' entail? Not signing a player based on suspicion and innuendo?

 
Or admitted past steroid use?
 
Obviously Rodriguez didn't "admit" it until after signing his most recent contract, but, for instance, with Peralta, he accepted a suspension for it, and then went out and signed a nice new contract.
There are plenty of factors that a team needs to consider when signing a contract. With steroids, teams have to consider if there's going to be a drop-off in performance hypothetically assuming a player used before and now isn't. This would add another consideration into thinking about if they might use it in the future, and the ramifications on the team if they do.

 

[Doctor G]

This. How can any president of a major league team think that joking about steroids with a guy who already has been linked to them is acceptable in any way, shape or form?? Especially in 2012/13 after MLB has tried so hard to clean up the PED use?

Especially in 2012 with Cano's pal Melky having been busted.If  this is what Levine considers  humorous he will have a hard time explaining his sense of humor  to a judge and jury, if ARod takes the Yankees to court. There is an implied suggestion by the team president that  he not only knows his stars are using PEDs  but is disappointed that maybe they have stopped in light of Melky's suspension.  

 

[Sampo Gida]

I am more interested in who leaked the emails and why.  Was Cano the target, implying he was juicing now that he is out the door?  Is Levine going to be pushed out?  Just another indirect attack against Arod before the arbitrators ruling?  Seems it would have to be someone in the FO with access to Levines emails.  Can't see how it would help Arod to leak those emails, and it certainly does not help Levine.
 
Also, I would think teams would hire investigators to keep close tabs on their players as they do any investment and would know who is using what.  Canos offseason workouts with Cervelli in the DR and his bulking up in recent years has probably not gone unnoticed even w/o an investigator.   Point being, if Cano was using, Levine would know. Arod too.  The emails might not have been jokes.  LOL.
 
edit-actually Dr G suggestion of a possible motive for Arod is possible.

 

[EvilEmpire]

 
Or admitted past steroid use?
 
Obviously Rodriguez didn't "admit" it until after signing his most recent contract, but, for instance, with Peralta, he accepted a suspension for it, and then went out and signed a nice new contract.
There are plenty of factors that a team needs to consider when signing a contract. With steroids, teams have to consider if there's going to be a drop-off in performance hypothetically assuming a player used before and now isn't. This would add another consideration into thinking about if they might use it in the future, and the ramifications on the team if they do.

I'd submit that the concerns about performance drop off, increased injury risk, and chance of suspension are already significant enough concerns and risk for a team. Teams sign players to be on the field and help win games. Additional penalties for something they have little control over is excessive.

If MLB really wants PEDs out of the game they should just institute a lifetime ban on the first infraction.

 

[glennhoffmania]

How is paying the contract the team signed an additional penalty?  If a guy tears his labrum the team still pays, loses the player's services, and has little control over the outcome.  But if a guy cheats and gets caught the team should be let off the hook?

 

[EvilEmpire]

How is paying the contract the team signed an additional penalty?  If a guy tears his labrum the team still pays, loses the player's services, and has little control over the outcome.  But if a guy cheats and gets caught the team should be let off the hook?

Because there is a difference between having to pay a player who sustained an injury doing what you want him to do and having to pay a player for an activity that you don't want them doing that takes them off the field. Whether that activity is doing PEDs, snowboarding, riding motorcycles -- whatever.

Do you think a team should be required to pay a player who wrecks his knee snowboarding?

 

[snowmanny]

Because there is a difference between having to pay a player who sustained an injury doing what you want him to do and having to pay a player for an activity that you don't want them doing that takes them off the field. Whether that activity is doing PEDs, snowboarding, riding motorcycles -- whatever.

Do you think a team should be required to pay a player who wrecks his knee snowboarding?

Or playing basketball?  
 
Wait...that's how this mess got started.

 

[glennhoffmania]

Because there is a difference between having to pay a player who sustained an injury doing what you want him to do and having to pay a player for an activity that you don't want them doing that takes them off the field. Whether that activity is doing PEDs, snowboarding, riding motorcycles -- whatever.

Do you think a team should be required to pay a player who wrecks his knee snowboarding?


So you sign a player you know has a history of PED use, he uses again and gets caught, and the team can just shrug its shoulders and claim they had no idea?

Or better yet, the team president emails with his players about steroid use but then feels he shouldn't have to pay a player who uses steroids?

 

[EvilEmpire]

So you sign a player you know has a history of PED use, he uses again and gets caught, and the team can just shrug its shoulders and claim they had no idea?

And? Any player can be a PED risk. Penalties go up for repeat offenders and teams lose their services for even longer. What recourse do teams have to prevent it? And that isn't a flippant question -- what concrete actions can a team take to reduce their risk other than not sign a player who has been caught before or who is suspected of using? It's not like teams can establish their own, independent testing regimes.

I don't see PEDs as being much different than a bunch of other prohibited activities that teams tell players not to do. Just like criminal activity and resulting incarceration or injuries from reckless behavior, PEDs take players off the field.

Edit: If a representative of team ownership or management encourages, directs, or assists a player with PEDs, that rep should be banned from the game for life and the organization should face penalties far beyond being on the hook for the contract.

 

[snowmanny]

EE is correct here.  The player obviously doesn't get paid for violating his contract.  But ghoff has a point in that there perhaps should be some penalty to the team for having a player who has a positive test...of course, having their salary count towards the salary cap even if they are NOT (edit) getting paid would only impact a handful of teams, so that penalty would have to include at least some other element.  And Randy Levine should be suspended for 211 games.

 

[Sampo Gida]

I'd submit that the concerns about performance drop off, increased injury risk, and chance of suspension are already significant enough concerns and risk for a team. Teams sign players to be on the field and help win games. Additional penalties for something they have little control over is excessive.

If MLB really wants PEDs out of the game they should just institute a lifetime ban on the first infraction.

 
A teams major concern today is probably that an enhanced player stops taking PED's once they land the big deal.   How many performance drop offs after a large deal have we seen in recent years?  Agon, Crawford, Pujols, Fielder, etc.  Maybe that was age, injury, or something else, but you can't rule out PED's (or lack thereof).  It seems it is more risky for a player to continue with PED's once he has locked in the big money than before he hits free agency. 
 
How likely is it that the MLBPA agrees to a lifetime ban on the 1st infarction?.  If MLB really want to get PED's out of the game is they should continue to suspend the player without pay, but make the team pay the salary to a fund to pay for the expenses of the testing program as a punitive tax.  Teams will then be careful about who they give out big contracts to.
 
Players will then learn that using PED's will cause teams to shun them like the plague when they become free agents, even after a monster contract year.  Teams and their Dr's would try to guess which players use PED's even without clear evidence.  Players coming to camp with 20 lbs of extra muscle after an offseason, needing a bigger hat size, and other physical signs would all be suspects.
 
An interesting way for players to prove they are clean in the face of such scrutiny would be a independent certification agency which would conduct frequent testing 24/7 on players. Testing would be done in season and offseason on any player who agreed to the terms in order to be certified as clean.   Those players who have a Clean Certificate would pose less risk to teams and be more attractive free agents, which translates into more dollars for them.
 
In other words, use the carrot instead of the stick to clean up the game.  Have to start with some increased penalties for the teams. 

 

[JakeRae]

 
A teams major concern today is probably that an enhanced player stops taking PED's once they land the big deal.   How many performance drop offs after a large deal have we seen in recent years?  Adrian Gonzalez, Crawford, Pujols, Fielder, etc.  Maybe that was age, injury, or something else, but you can't rule out PED's (or lack thereof).  It seems it is more risky for a player to continue with PED's once he has locked in the big money than before he hits free agency. 
 
How likely is it that the MLBPA agrees to a lifetime ban on the 1st infarction?.  If MLB really want to get PED's out of the game is they should continue to suspend the player without pay, but make the team pay the salary to a fund to pay for the expenses of the testing program as a punitive tax.  Teams will then be careful about who they give out big contracts to.
 
Players will then learn that using PED's will cause teams to shun them like the plague when they become free agents, even after a monster contract year.  Teams and their Dr's would try to guess which players use PED's even without clear evidence.  Players coming to camp with 20 lbs of extra muscle after an offseason, needing a bigger hat size, and other physical signs would all be suspects.
 
An interesting way for players to prove they are clean in the face of such scrutiny would be a independent certification agency which would conduct frequent testing 24/7 on players. Testing would be done in season and offseason on any player who agreed to the terms in order to be certified as clean.   Those players who have a Clean Certificate would pose less risk to teams and be more attractive free agents, which translates into more dollars for them.
 
In other words, use the carrot instead of the stick to clean up the game.  Have to start with some increased penalties for the teams. 

 
I don't think you are using this expression correctly.

 

[Sampo Gida]

 
I don't think you are using this expression correctly.

 
Add a Carrot instead of only the stick for the players.

 

[JakeRae]

 
Add a Carrot instead of only the stick for the players.

 
Your proposal adds no benefits for players. Now, if instead of paying money into a fund to support testing teams instead paid salary into a fund for distribution to clean players, that would add a carrot for clean players. It would also, perhaps, create more support from the MLBPA for stricter testing as testing would no longer function as a net-negative for players collectively and would serve to "punish" teams for signing PED users by not letting them off the hook for their salary commitments.