Per ESPN: Braun Tests Positive, May Face 50 Game Suspension… (Part 3, Appeal underway)

[dhoffman19]

here is the audio

 

http://www.thebig1070.com...dmurphy.xml&mid=21752135

Here is the one that talks about the two other players whose numbers were also "higher than normal" and "a little out of whack"

Summarizing the different clips from Dan Patrick we get this

- 2 other guys had odd results

- not medical

- not a masking agent

- not a PED

- The appeal seems focused on the testing process

- Source is part of the case - who knows if that means he is part of Braun's team or no

 

 

 

Ok, thanks. It's all very weird. I'm still not optimistic that he'll get it overturned, but it's something. Somehow I don't think we'll ever get the full story of what really happened, however this turns out.

 

[thebruce44]

I'm probably in the minority but Braun not being suspended would be great but to me it is even more important that he clears his name. I have kids who look up to him and he is going to be the face of the franchise for years to come. I'd gladly take some rational excuse that makes it seem like he didn't use PEDs along with a suspension rather than all evidence pointing towards him using.

I'd love to see Braun's name cleared, but at the same time I don't put athletes on pedestals. My hero growing up was Paul Molitor, a flawed man for sure. I don't think kids can't look up to someone who is still human and makes a mistake. Not saying anything about Braun one way or another, just my two cents on the general way kids and even adults look at athletes.

[Invader3K]

I've been busy with work today and haven't had a chance to chime in on this. I will say that I've been optimistic that Braun will somehow be exonerated in this. Call it naive fanboy optimism, but this whole thing has sounded very bizarre from the start. I have felt for quite a while that somehow Braun will get off on a technicality of some sort, whether a mishandled test or something else.

 

What I don't understand from the Patrick info is this: If it isn't a masking agent, or a PED, or something taken for a medical reason, what could it possibly be?

 

I agree with dhoffman19 that we may never get the full story on this. If earlier rumors were true (though that doesn't jive with Dan Patrick's tidbits), this whole thing might just get swept under the rug by MLB and everyone else involved.

[bigredrobbo]

My thinking is that MLB has too much at stake NOT to find Braun guilty, so I'm not getting my hopes up in any way.

[patrickgpe]

My thinking is that MLB has too much at stake NOT to find Braun guilty, so I'm not getting my hopes up in any way.

MLB has nothing on the line. ESPN does. Braun being out for 50 games is not good for business. If further allows people to think that the game has not been cleaned up and it takes one of their young superstars out of the game for 2 months.

[Invader3K]

I agree with patrickgpe. If anything, Braun being found "innocent" would allow MLB to reiterate that their entire process, including the appeals, is unbiased and works.

[pretendastronaut]

I agree with patrickgpe. If anything, Braun being found "innocent" would allow MLB to reiterate that their entire process, including the appeals, is unbiased and works.

 

With some great PR spin, I suppose that can work. But, it depends on the details of the case, because it sure looks like Braun's team is challenging a flaw of the system, which removes credibility from the system.

 

And by that same token, Braun getting suspended for 50 games doesn't mean the game hasn't been cleaned up, they very easily could use Braun as an outlier who got caught by their system.

[dhoffman19]

What I don't understand from the Patrick info is this: If it isn't a masking agent, or a PED, or something taken for a medical reason, what could it possibly be?

 

Same here. We've been hearing so many tidbits that seem inconsistent with each other. Like, if it was something resulting from a medical condition, then how did he test positive for "artificial" testosterone? How do you get artifical T in your system without having taken a PED? And isn't artificial T a PED all by itself?

 

And why was the I Luv You not listed in Ludwig's records? And if it was, did he know about it? And if he didn't, who did? And ... where the hell was I?

 

[RockCoCougars]

Until Braun is found innocent of the charges, I'm just going to assume that any of these 'leaks' are spin. If the two other players thing is true, to me that puts up even more red flags.

[brwrsfan]

MLB is in a weird spot, because this should have never been leaked. It can be spun either way though as others have stated:

 

1 - It works as it caught one of our biggest stars

 

2 - It works because the players do have the right to an appeal and in the rare event that a mistake happens, we have protection in place to prevent players from wrongfully being suspended.

[Schlitz001]

Until Braun is found innocent of the charges, I'm just going to assume that any of these 'leaks' are spin. If the two other players thing is true, to me that puts up even more red flags.

I don't understand how anyone can believe any of the information that's coming out at this point. There is SO much conflicting information out there. You can't fully credit or discredit any media outlet including The Journal-Sentinal, ESPN, Dan Patrick, or your uncle's blog. If this debacle has taught me anything it's that the media will pounce on any little piece of gossip and spin it into a story if they think it will increase the number of hits to their website. No matter what the outcome of this appeal, I hope that MLB issues a statement of apology that any information was leaked.

[Raw Biz]

Until Braun is found innocent of the charges, I'm just going to assume that any of these 'leaks' are spin. If the two other players thing is true, to me that puts up even more red flags.

I don't understand how anyone can believe any of the information that's coming out at this point. There is SO much conflicting information out there. You can't fully credit or discredit any media outlet including The Journal-Sentinal, ESPN, Dan Patrick, or your uncle's blog. If this debacle has taught me anything it's that the media will pounce on any little piece of gossip and spin it into a story if they think it will increase the number of hits to their website. No matter what the outcome of this appeal, I hope that MLB issues a statement of apology that any information was leaked.

I agree here. That's why I get upset when people say "there's no way" Braun will win the appeal. The truth is, nobody knows what the facts are except MLB and Braun's team. I'm not even sure if the Brewers do at this point. Just because something has never happened before doesn't mean it won't. And just because someone says they are innocent doesn't mean they are. I think everybody just needs to sit back, relax, and wait until the final decision is made. There's really no point in speculating because we don't have all the facts.

Sure it will suck if Braun is suspended but even if you consider him a 8-9 WAR player, we lose 2.5-3 wins without him. That isn't impossible to overcome and that's assuming Aoki is a replacement player. Realistically, everything isn't as cut-and-dried as that but it's also unrealistic to call the season over if we lose Braun for 50 games.

 

[Outlander]

I admit to not knowing about much of the process before all of this but I find it kind of amazing that a suspension has never been overturned before considering you basically just have to convince one person you are innocent. I had little confidence before the hearing and about 50/50 now.

[miggs721]

You don't hear about the ones that are overturned...so that is why there haven't been any known....This should have never leaked in the first place

[pebadger]

Some speculation:

It is very possible that 2 other Brewers may have had "strange" T/E levels but that subsequent GC-IRMS testing indicated no prohibited substances or evidence of synthetic T. If that is the case, my reading of the Joint Drug Agreement is that an "abnormal" T/E ratio, in and of itself, is not a violation of the Agreement.

Here's what I'm piecing together from what I'm hearing: the entire case against Braun rests only upon the CIR finding of synthetic T. The GC test apparently indicated that Braun had something in his system, but that something is not a problem (not a PED, not a masking agent). If it were, whoever leaked the bigger picture likely would have leaked the specific prohibited substance as identified by the GC result. Instead, we just have evidence of synthetic T, origin unknown. As we know, the origin is irrelevant to the finding, and the lab reported a "positive" on that basis alone (a position I've been espousing here for a while).

That's where the mystery comes in. Nobody, except Braun, really cares about the "Why?" here. How solid is this positive? Was it just barely a positive in terms of the positivity criteria? How many metabolites indicated a positive? Which metabolites? How does what they found in terms of the CIR relate to the substance that has apparently been identified but which is neither a PED nor a masking agent? If these other alleged elevated T/E results do indeed exist, how, if at all, does that fact tie in to the story? If this case is going to take longer than usual to come to a conclusion, I'm guessing that all of these issues were raised by Braun's team and possible explanations offered.

[umphrey]

You don't hear about the ones that are overturned...so that is why there haven't been any known....This should have never leaked in the first place

 

 

Jimmy Rollins actually said rather cryptically that he knew of cases of failed drug tests that were overturned and never went public

[JohnBriggs12]

I think we have to be careful. The word "appeal" is misleading and gets thrown around too much. No determination has been made on a suspension and hence there is nothing to "appeal" or overturn. What Braun's hearing essentially is equivalent to is a defense case being presented in a trial. The test and it's results are essentially the prosecution case. The panel that decides his fate is essentially the jury. If they rule in Braun's favor, he won the case (as opposed to an appeal) and he's not guilty of violating the drug policy. Case closed. If they rule against Braun, he gets suspended (he's not been suspended to this point) and (unlike courts) there is no avenue to appeal.

[brwrsfan]

anyone listen today? Just curious if Dan Patrick said anything about it this morning.

[adambr2]

If Braun is acquitted, he should write an article about how Buster Olney should give back his Associated Press journalism award.

[pebadger]

If Braun is acquitted, he should write an article about how Buster Olney should give back his Associated Press journalism award.

This.

Did you see how they subtly changed the title of that piece after it was published? First it was "Braun should give back award." Tweaked, it was "Braun should OFFER to give back award". Of course the article itself, accusatory and convinced of intentional cheating as it was, didn't really change.

[dhoffman19]

Slight clarification by DP today:

 

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/137973623.html

 

DP says Braun may be found "not guilty" as opposed to "innocent." I suppose if the attack is on the testing process itself and raises enough questions about its legitimacy to overturn the suspension, then that's probably a better description.

 

I don't think Haudricourt's guess at the disinction makes sense. Even if Braun took something unknowingly, he'd still be guilty.

[Raw Biz]

I think we have to be careful. The word "appeal" is misleading and gets thrown around too much. No determination has been made on a suspension and hence there is nothing to "appeal" or overturn. What Braun's hearing essentially is equivalent to is a defense case being presented in a trial. The test and it's results are essentially the prosecution case. The panel that decides his fate is essentially the jury. If they rule in Braun's favor, he won the case (as opposed to an appeal) and he's not guilty of violating the drug policy. Case closed. If they rule against Braun, he gets suspended (he's not been suspended to this point) and (unlike courts) there is no avenue to appeal.

You've said this many times. Haudricourt has repeatedly said "appeal" is his articles. Other media people have done so as well. It is basically an appeal. When Braun tested positive, he had a choice whether or not to appeal. If he just accepted the decision, a suspension would have been handed down. But he chose to appeal that decision. Just because there hasn't been an official suspension handed down doesn't mean there isn't an appeal. What it basically boils down to is semantics.

[Crew2323]

Slight clarification by DP today:

 

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/137973623.html

 

DP says Braun may be found "not guilty" as opposed to "innocent." I suppose if the attack is on the testing process itself and raises enough questions about its legitimacy to overturn the suspension, then that's probably a better description.

 

I don't think Haudricourt's guess at the disinction makes sense. Even if Braun took something unknowingly, he'd still be guilty.

I guess I can see why you'd use "not guilty" over "innocent." I suppose "innocent" would imply that he never tested positive in the first place, which isn't true. I suppose "not guilty" implies that he tested positive but wasn't found to have done it intentionally or for a competitive advantage.

 

In the end it seems like splitting hairs, or a distinction without a difference.

[adambr2]

With the burden of proof on Braun for something like this, I really don't see a difference between "not guilty" and "innocent".

 

In court I get it, a guy can be "not guilty" but not necessarily innocent. He might just be "not guilty" for the simple absence of the proof of guilt.

 

But in Braun's case he had to establish that proof, not MLB.

[Patrick425]

"Innocent" or "Not Guilty", seems to me the only way he gets "exonerated" is to either A) prove the tests were faulty or B) prove that there was no possible way that he could have known that he took the substance that caused a positive test (i.e. someone slipped him a "mickey")