Apparently Logic and Steroids Don't Mix

As consultants, we rely on data rather than intuition to make recommendations to our clients. For others who have pointed this out look Here, Here, and Here.

As a baseball fan, while the world is relying on the innuendo in the Mitchell report, and their own intuition about who "must" have juiced, I prefer to take a look at the data to see what we know, not what everyone thinks.

After 2 years, and nearly $2MM, the esteemed Senator Mitchell has emerged from his closet- or wherever he has spent the last 2 years trying to find his subpoena power- with a report containing no new information, some information recycled from the FBI, but not considered credible enough to prosecute, some unsubstantiated hearsay, and a partridge in a pear tree.

So lets review some things we do know as fact.

There has never been a demonstrated causational link between enhanced performance at baseball and Performance Enhancing Drugs (PEDs), so called as a class due to the assertion that they enhance performance.

There is significant evidence that they enhance performance in sports like Track & Field or Cycling, where endurance and cardiovascular condition are more important than quick surges of power like bat speed.

In baseball, however, large amounts of muscle mass have traditionally been frowned upon as counter-productive. When Carlton Fisk became the first player to begin a weight training regimen in 1978, the Boston Red Sox attempted to discourage him, on theory that additional muscle mass would slow his bat speed through the strike zone, a key element of power hitting.

What we do know that PED accomplishes, is to speed recovery time from injury. Anecdotally, this should give a much greater advantage to pitchers than to hitters. The act of hurling a projectile at speeds that can exceed 100 MPH as many as 125 time every fifth night, is in essence a controlled repetitive injury to the arm, shoulder, back and legs.

This should, in theory, clear Barry Bonds, the subject of one of the most damning pieces of hearsay in the report.

The owner of the San Francisco Giants, Peter Angelos, testified to the Mitchell Commission that Barry had told him that he had never knowingly taken PED, that in fact the PED he had taken had been taken in the form of a cream, applied in the public view in the locker room, at a time when reporters were present (presumably meant to bolster his claim to be unaware of the substance of this cream), and that with the exception of this one incident had never even unknowingly taken PED.

Peter Angelos was the only person to testify before the Mitchell Commission who implicated anyone without being under the threat of federal prosecution. He also called back 2 days later with his lawyers to recant testimony that he believed to be "inaccurate in light of his recollection of events." Ironic that Peter Angelos was so wary of implicating his prize player, he made his allegations seem that much more sinister, when there is no evidence that Barry was assisted by his alleged PED use.

CORRECTION: Huge brain freeze here folks. Peter Angelos owns the
Orioles. Peter Magowan, the actual subject of the previous
two paragraphs, owns the Giants. Hat tip to Abraham
Friedenberg for the correction.

Which brings us to the "big catch" of the Mitchell Report, Roger Clemens. Clemens, who recently won his 350th game in an era when analysts openly question if anyone will ever reach 300 again, was accused of using PED by a trainer name McNamee of having used HGH and a steroid named Winstrol. Federal prosecutors, who already had McNamee on drug trafficking charges related to the BALCO investigation, offered him leniency in exchange for his testimony against big names. He offered this testimony against Roger Clemens with no corroborating evidence other than some personal checks written to him.

I doubt that MLB players are writing personal checks for their PED.

Ultimately, in an attempt at a PR ploy to be seen as taking a hard line against steroids, baseball- namely commissioner Selig, brought the issue to the forefront, ruined reputations based on hearsay, and espoused the Mitchell Report's "no evidence, no problem" approach to prosecuting PED. Paraphrasing Senator Mitchell, since there is no reliable test for HGH, the absence of a positive drug test does not equal innocence. This is the legal equivalent of saying that since there was no DNA left on victim, the Defendant is guilty.

What is perhaps most maddening is the rush to accuse in the media. Clemens is guilty because the Mitchell Report says he is, because McNamee says he is, but no evidence does.

Normally clear headed reporters like ESPN's Gene Wojciechowski have convicted Clemens based on the fact that other people accused by McNamee have admitted using PED. True. Partially. Also irrelevant.

He also scoffs at Clemens' claim that he was never given a chance to respond to the Mitchell report, because Senator Mitchell claims that all implicated players were given the chance to respond.

Fernando Vina, a retired player, and currently a baseball analyst for Wojciechowski's own ESPN network is one of the players to be implicated by McNamee. To be sure, Vina has no reason to lie. He is a retired marginal player with no contracts or Hall of Fame candidacy to protect.

Based on the allegations in the Mitchell report, Vina admitted to using HGH in 2003. He strenuously denied using Steroids, as accused in the report, and he stated that he never had the opportunity to appear before the Mitchell Commission to respond to allegations.

In other words, Vina discredited McNamee, and bolstered Clemens' claim that he was not given the opportunity to respond. Wojcichowski wrote about how Vina's admission proves Clemens' guilt. Huh? Gene, do me a favor and read a bit of the worldwide leader's coverage before you start typing next time.

The inconvenient truth is that PED were not against MLB rules for most of the period covered by the Mitchell Report. They were illegal for that entire period. The Mitchell Report, inept at proving PED use baseball, articulately proved that prosecution of PED in baseball belongs with the DEA, and not with powerless baseball commissions. And that the media should be looking for the facts, not the story that sells.

Spock, Spokeo, and Networking (Again)

I've talked a lot about Facebook and LinkedIn as networking tools lately. They've both been busy.

Linked in has launched a new beta page, and announced plans for a developer network, ala Facebook and Google's open social. Of course, unlike Facebook, LinkedIn is used exclusively for business networking, so they are only including approved aps, and it's safe to say there will be no werewolvesor zombies on the LinkedIn app. network.

Facebook has stumbled a few time recently. First were the well document miscues with the Beacon program, and now they have been aggressively shutting down people's accounts.

And while all of this has been taking place, I've gotten invited to 2 new networks this week.

The person who invited me to Spokeo, described it as "like spying on your friends- it's lots of fun, but you feel a little dirty afterwards." Spokeo combines a bloglines-like feed reader, with a twitter "following" policy, as opposed a confirmed friends policy like Facebook. Throw in some search tools that will collect email addresses from gmail, hotmail, Yahoo, twitter, LinkedIn, and many more, and present an aggregated feed of any social networking traffic performed by accounts registered to those addresses, similar to Plaxo Pulse, but without the permissions.

Within seconds I knew who had purchased something a little naughty at Amazon, found anonymous blogs for friends who probably preferred to remain anonymous, and started listening to a music collection an ex-girlfriend had dedicated to me on Pandora. You'll be happy to know that it was sappy love-song material, not angry chick-rock.

Spokeo has 2 places to improve.

The first is just an ease of use idea that I noticed fairly quickly after signing up. I happen to know that johndo@yahoo.com and john.do@bigcompany.com are the same person, thought there is no way for spokeo to know that. The system should have some easy to use sorting tools to facilitate that, but it doesn't, so I have to go through a list of a few hundred names for every profile I want to condense.

The second problem is that you have to go to Spokeo to see the feed. Either spokeo is going to have to give me a complete, rich feed reader ala Bloglines, and get me to switch because I can have their content in one place, or they need to make a custom RSS feed for my friends, and allow me to download it into the feed reader of my choice- unlikely because I can't see any revenue model except for ads, and that depends on page views, and RSS doesn't increase page views. Just my $0.02.

*Note: After I wrote this I made the same suggestion to Spokeo support. I got prompt and detailed answers as to their intention ti implement, and the reasons for the delay. I was VERY impressed with that.

Spock seems like a mix of Zoominfo, Wikipedia, and LinkedIn.

The site does a great job gathering meta-data. In fact, by the time I logged on to answer my initial invitation, The site had correctly identified my current company and title, assigned me 16 accurate tags, and created a google news feed about me that accurately pared articles about me out from the other 2 Noah Roths who have results on the first page of that Google search.

From there it allows you to customize your own profile, and also allows wiki style updating of other profiles. Add mutually approved friend connections, and a value ranking system, and you have the making of a pretty compelling business networking offering.

Which brings me back to a point I've discussed before. I really like Spock, but it's going to take a lot more than that for me to ask my entire network to sign up to another social network, customize another profile, and re-invite all of their friends.

If Spock were an Open ID project, I'd be networking there like crazy.

*Note: Since writing this, I've decided on my spock strategy- for now... I'll be accepting invitations from real connections who invite me, but I'm just not ready to invite my entire network to a new platform yet. I'm going to have to believe that it reaches the survival tipping point before I do that.

You Get What You Ask For

I put my son in "time-out" this weekend for hitting. When his 2 minuted were up, I asked him what he wanted to say, and on cue, he parroted a not-particularly-heartfelt "I'm sorry."

So I asked, "Why?"

"Because I want to come out of time out. "

This was an honest correct answer to the question I'd asked, but I'd intended to ask the question "For what are you sorry?"

I guess in parenting, in recruiting, even in life, the questions we ask are as key to getting the relevant information, as the opportunity itself.

News from the War Front

Two of my candidates had pretty unique experiences this week, and the ways that they handled them had a significant impact on the continued candidacy of each.

Candidate number 1, went for an onsite interview with a client in the Rocky Mountains. Through a screwup in HR he was encouraged to get a room at the apartment complex where they house long-term visiting employees, as opposed to a traditional hotel for overnight guests. Well the concierge promised him a cab that never showed up, he began hiking the 1/2 mile down the side of the highway, in wet slushy snow, carrying his garment bag and trying desperately to make it in time for his interview. he ultimately hitched a ride up to the building with the Sheriff, who happened to be driving by, and made it in time for his interview.

Candidate number 2, was scheduled to go for an onsite interview, which he canceled the day before due to a "Leak" in his apartment. In addition to projecting a lack of commitment to the opportunity, he gave them time to reconsider his application in a more negative light- at which point they discovered some embellishment on his resume, and disqualified him from contention.

Candidate number 2 had a problem with his embellished resume prior to his demonstrated lack of respect, but he was caught specifically because of it. Candidate number 1 had demonstrated his commitment to the opportunity, and was considered to have overcome adversity just by being there.

The moral of the story- act like you really want the job.

Links, Links, Links

I've discovered a blogging web tool that I love for posting links, called "Tumblr." If you look to your right, you'll see a new link to Hawkes Peers tumblr feed.

And that will signal the demise of the roundup. Instead of posting new links in a weekly roundup, I'll post them throughout the week as I see them. Have a click. I'd love feedback on the new format.

-----

This link was just too good to bury in tumblr.