Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187
No it's not, the intent for taking steroids was that it would make you bigger and stronger. The intent for taking greenies was that it would make you more alert and able to perform for double headers or in the dog days of August. Tom Verducci said it best when he said the comparison between greenies and steroids is the difference between "performance enablers" and "performance enhancers." Greenies didn't enhance an athlete's performance the way that steroids did.
If we are talking about the NFL, OK. But baseball is a game of timing and endurance, not pure strength.
Greenies allowed players to play more games and rack up stats. It's also no coincidence that stolen base numbers were so high during that era.
Regardless - the intent is the same and that's all that really matters. Players were taking illegal substances to gain a competitive advantage, whether it's greenies or steroids.
Originally Posted by sox1970
I'm all for some forgiveness for the sake of the Hall itself, but when it comes to the former benchmarks that automatically get you in the Hall, I wouldn't pay attention to that. A guy's career WAR from the steroid era is meaningless to me.
Agreed. Home runs have been devalued; 500 is no longer a lock even for a clean player.