@trashtalker
It's interesting that many of the arguments extended in defense of players like Giambi aren't also applied to BB. (btw, I misquoted Giambino's #s, he's actually hiting .109 ;) ) BB has also proven himself as a
clean athlete since MLB testing has began in 03. In '04 he hit 45 HR, 101 RBI, and batted .362 ...fucking 362!! He continues, well into his 40s, to slug with the best of em, leading the majors in OPS last year. Steroids have been banned since 91, but testing began in '03, and was only a suspendable offence since '05. Giambi admitted to using steroids during 2003 as well as the 2 seasons prior, only after Selig threatend him with discipline if he didn't come forward. If MLB was hiding a positive test of BB since 03, you'd have to think the feds, trying their damndest to find dirt on BB, would have uncovered it the same way they dug up the alleged positive test in 2000.
Regarding HGH, it's supposed to be the "fountain of youth" drug, and as well as speeding up recovery time for injuries, it does prevent the loss of muscle mass that comes naturally with aging.
Also interesting is that unlike Giambi, Sosa, Pudge, etc. BB hasn't appeared to lose any of his bulk since regular testing or suspensions have been instituted. If anything, he's gotten bigger. He also doesn't appear to be breaking down, despite his advanced playing age, as one would expect with prolonged use of roids.
On a potential collusion suit, I honestly dunno if that's a viable option, I'm not a lawyer. In all likelihood it's an empty threat from the PA, but it's Fehr who floated the idea in the first place:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3300362
During the off-season the PA was worried about a somewhat similar situation with A-rod:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3101262
In any sport, a lot of the impetus behind some of the free agent signings is the fear that one of your division rivals might sign a certain player if you don't, and it will come back to haunt to you. GMs have lost jobs over this in the past. Just as "price setting" between GMs of certain free agents is against the CBA, a similar scenario could arise if some GMs are getting togethor and offering each other assurances that they won't pursue BB. All the teams involved benefit because they avoid the risk associated with signing him. But the risk should be an inherent part of the free agent market. What makes BB's situation exceptional is that while there is a risk, the possible reward is much higher than it is the most other free agents.
Whether he's a bad teammate and will poison a clubhouse, you have to go on his track record. Other than Jeff Kent(who's also had problems with Milton Bradley and others), i don't see anyone else unhappy with BB. They just spoke to Jeremy Accardo, the Jays' setup guy, who was BB's teammate in SF, and he said he was good to him, which also backs up Barry Zito's estimation of him. It's mostly the pasty clubhouse reporter parasites that haven't touched a bat since little league who BB won't talk to that have an axe to grind. Talk to the former players-turned-broadcasters and they show respect.
A lot of other Jays they talked to said he would be welcome...