If you have a voice in baseball that anyone wants to hear, you've had something to say about steroids in the last five years. Now that I have such a huge voice, and throngs of loyal followers, it's my time to take the stage and get in on the publicity train. There's a few ways to go about it, and in the press and with players, we have all seen many of them. You can say records should be erased. You can say players are cheaters and frauds. You get your name on ESPN or get a book deal if you really say something harsh and controversial. Now, I'm not going to say records should be struck. I'm not going to say I personally feel cheated by the players I look up to, both as role models and as the guys higher up on the "corporate ladder," and I'm not going to say they are harming the integrity or image of the game. I'll refrain, not because I'm afraid to do so (although I am), but largely because I haven't fully made up my mind yet. I still have questions.

My opinion is just that, an opinion like any other. I want to share it here because it is a unique perspective in that it dichotomously comes from equal parts player and fan, statistical junkie with a vested interest, undrafted nobody, and "prospect" (the easy-miss variety). From this perspective, I present you the thoughts and questions fueling the debate currently going on in my head...

Do I like steroids?

No, not at all. I would go so far as to say I hate them. When I dropped my arm-slot in 2005, I knew I wanted to vie for a major league relief role. Realistically, each of the 30 clubs has about four right-handed relief pitchers. For four seasons now, I've been striving to be one of 120 players in the world coming out of a Major League bullpen, and if any of those spots has been occupied by steroid users, they have interfered with my dream. My one-in-a-million shot may have gotten tilted even more against me. I have overcome long odds so far and am still in the game, but I still have a ways to go. I'm sure I have outlasted some PED users already. I may unknowingly have to do so again to get my big break. My success functions in the margin of the odds of at-bats and pitches. My long-term career and livelihood depends on the odds of me being one of the best 120 pitchers in the world on any given summer night. As hard as I work to decrease the odds of batters being successful against me, I'd hate for a competitor to be able to do something as simple as take a pill or injection and decrease my odds of pitching in the big leagues.

Why is everyone so against steroids, though other ways of enhancing performance are admired?

Years ago, players got fined if the organization discovered they lifted weights. It was presumed that baseball was a sport for loose, limber players and that lifting weights only made you tight and inflexible. The times have obviously changed now; undoubtedly, getting stronger by lifting weights makes you a better baseball player. But what if the weight lifters were considered cheaters and performance enhancers? I'm sure some players lifted weights while others weren't allowed to. The playing field has been skewed here, too -- are the lifters not enhancing their performance? "But it's not a drug," you may say, "there is a difference." Well, yes, but how much? There are many supplements approved by Major League Baseball through a rigorous NSF certification process. They are drugs, but have had some magic wand passed over them making them legal and safe to use. Greenies were rampant in clubhouses for years because they were deemed legal. As of last year they have crossed the line into the "banned substance" category. If the line between legal and illegal performance enhancement is so defined and certain, how can an the same substance reside on one side for years and wake up one day at the doorstep of cheating, shame, and fraud?

Is a guy with the best diet in the majors cheating? If he eats healthier than anyone else, he is enhancing his performance through diet. But instead of being on the cover of Sports Illustrated with a title accusing him of cheating and tarnishing the game, he is likely down the magazine aisle, in a fitness magazine lauding his nutritional prowess.

My eating habits are incredibly healthy. I try to combine the right types of foods at the right times of the day, in an effort to get my body to produce the most lean muscle while reducing fat and at the same time repair muscles that have been broken down during physical exercise. I actively try to do that through the chemical components of the food I eat. Am I cheating? No. Am I trying to enhance my performance? Yes. Why are proteins, amino acids, and L-glutamate legal and honorable methods of enhancing performance, yet Primobolan and Andro (to name the ones fresh on everyone's mind) are dishonorable and cheating? Granted, the latter method may work exceptionally better than mine, but are we then condemning solely on the premise of efficacy?

The spitball was banned from the game in the '20s. Was this because it was so effective? You could say it was banned because it was altering the playing field and giving one player an advantage over the other. For me, functional training in the weight room, in addition to yoga and Pilates, alter my body to give me an advantage over other players in terms of my stability and balance. This allows me to throw strikes from a crazy arm angle. Am I going to be banned because I'm effective? If not, could I be forced to throw overhand to keep me from altering the playing field?

If there are hundreds of methods for improving your performance, why are a select few illegal?

If steroids did nothing to help your performance, would they be such a big issue? Seriously, think about it...would they? You can say yes because kids look up to big leaguers and it's unhealthy for kids to emulate steroid use. But do we hold press conferences and sell magazines by revealing another player who chewed tobacco? Chewing tobacco is a horrible example for kids and I wish this on no one, but I assume there are numerous cases of cancer related to chewing tobacco in America. Chewing tobacco is rampant in baseball, so you can't claim a purely moral reasoning. So what is it exactly that makes steroids illegal? It's a fine line -- a line that, ideologically, I struggle to distinctly define.

I strongly wish I could more certainly justify my gut feeling telling me to condemn steroid use. I have arguments to help in this justification. Steroids are chemically engineered, they are a detriment to your health, and it's unfair to impose a choice between long-term health risks to "keep up" or stay clean and perhaps get overlooked. They are valid points, but I still have too many questions and the debate rolls on up there in my 7 ³/₈" head (it's been that size ever since I've worn a fitted hat, by the way).

Again, I'm not saying I like steroids. I don't like them. I don't like the fact that people may use them to get an advantage on me, or the idea that I'm trying to break in to the majors at the end of the steroid era. Well, here's hoping we're nearing the end...

(More to come soon, but it's probably time you get back to work)