Ryan Braun: No MVP If Guilty

ryan-braun-brewers-04969.jpg
I haven't said anything about the Ryan Braun performance-enhancing drug controversy because I don't want to rush to judgment. I'll do my rushing after all analysis, arguments, and counterarguments are in.

Meanwhile, there's another issue to consider. Yesterday, ESPN.com's Jayson Stark argued that if Braun is proven to have used banned substances, he should still be allowed to keep his 2011 National League Most Valuable Player award.

Stark's argument is the most comprehensive I've seen so far, and since he's wrong in nearly every particular, I'm going to jump in on this one. "If we're going hold a new 2011 NL MVP election," he writes, "how can we not do a re-vote on that 2003 MVP award that A-Rod won -- considering that he's admitted he used steroids on the way to winning it?" Okay, this point is central to much of what has been written so far about the Braun debate, so it needs to be answered.

In 2003 there was nothing in the basic agreement between the players union and the owners regarding what substances could or couldn't be used. That's what the anonymous tests near the end of the 2003 seasons were for -- to determine whether or not there were enough players using PEDS to warrant regulations being added to the BA. So nothing from 2003 or before is relevant to Braun's case.

"So," Stark continues, "Suppose we hold a new 2011 MVP election and then find out -- even 10 years from now -- that whomever we elect, whether it's Matt Kemp or Lance Berkman or any other guy who seems squeaky clean now, has some sort of taint of his own. Do we then vote again?"

This is a very simple matter, so let's not complicate it. There is a specified period during and after the season -- I don't know what it is because I don't have a copy of the BA at hand -- that states the time limits in which players may be penalized for the use of PEDs. A positive test either falls under that limitation or it doesn't. If Braun's drug use is upheld by the arbitrator, he should be stripped of the MVP award, and it automatically should go to the second place finisher, Matt Kemp. If Kemp is found to have used drugs during the specified period, then it should go to third-place Lance ... No, on second thought, he sucked when he was with the Yankees, so we should award him anyway. Dammit, if Berkman was going to use PEDs, why didn't he use them when he was in New York?

Back to Stark. "Here's another point we can't ignore. According to ESPN's report, Braun's positive test came during the postseason, so there is no proof -- zero -- that he was using any banned substance during the regular season on the way to winning this award." This is also totally irrelevant. First, it isn't just a question of taking a pill or sticking a needle in your ass and getting immediate results. PEDs take a while to build up. Stated another way: why would Braun just be taking PEDs in September? So he could feel better in November?

Stark is correct, there is no evidence that Braun was using a banned substance during the regular season, but that's not the issue. One might just as well argue that there was no proof -- zero -- that whatever Braun took -- if he did -- affected his play in any way. The issue is whether or not he violated the Basic Agreement between his own union and Major League Baseball, and that's for the arbitrator to decide.

To say anything more about Braun before the arbitrator's decision is counterproductive, but there shouldn't be any ambiguity about what his punishment should be if he's guilty.

Go to Runnin' Scared for all our latest news coverage.


Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
3 comments
Agerecontra82
Agerecontra82

Brilliant.  A-Rod used steroids when it wasn't in writing not to do so, so clearly he deserves to keep his trophy, idiots.Besides, it was perfectly legal to use them, which is why he candidly told everybody he was doing them during the season, and thanked the pharmaceutical company for the PEDs that helped him win the MVP, and admitted in interviews years later what he did, and they didn't help him anyways, because that's why athletes use drugs, to make the game more challenging by ingesting chemicals that don't affect their performance...Character is what you do when no one is looking.  If true, Braun appears to have as much as A-Rod.  Let them both keep their trophies; they’re about as valuable as Rosie Ruiz’s Boston Marathon wreath.

Allenbarra
Allenbarra

And why does it show a lack of character for someon eto use something that isn't illegal?Rodriguez didn't violate any laws, rules or agreements. Braun did.  If he's' guilty.

Agerecontra82
Agerecontra82

Character isn't solely based on what one does as it relates to legal v illegal.  Remember, A-Rod didn't plead the 5th or answer with "I've always adhered to the leagues' policy on banned substances" when asked about this topic.   He said he "never" used PEDs.  He seemed aware of the stigma that would be attached to his name and accomplishments were it to come out that he was doping during the regular season.  Why else would he lie when asked about it?  Gaylord Perry candidly admitted to his gamesmanship, but I doubt Rodriguez will ever title a book, 'Me And The Needle.'

Now Trending

New York Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...