Jay McGwire, the estranged brother of Mark McGwire, is claiming in a new book proposal that he introduced and injected the former baseball star with steroids.

In the proposal, first reported Wednesday on Deadspin.com, Jay McGwire alleges that Mark used Deca-Durabolin and that he introduced Mark to performance-enhancing drugs in 1994.

Jay McGwire writes in his proposal that his brother “began to use, but in low dosages so he wouldn’t lift his way out of baseball. Deca-Durabolin helped with his joint problems and recovery, while growth hormone helped his strength, making him leaner in the process. I became the first person to inject him, like most first-timers he couldn’t plunge in the needle himself. Later a girlfriend injected him.”

Jose Canseco, in a book he wrote in 2005, claims he and McGwire, former Oakland A’s teammates, used performance-enhancing drugs as far back as 1988. Jay McGwire disputes that in the book proposal.

The McGwire brothers reportedly haven’t spoken to each other for years.

Jay McGwire claims in the proposal that Mark McGwire used androstenedione in 1998 to allow Mark “to avoid all the potential adverse side effects that could occur from using anabolic steroids, such as water retention, hair loss, and liver, heart, or kidney stress. In addition, he wouldn’t have cholesterol problems or testicular atrophy. And there were no problems with the law.”

Jay McGwire, in the proposal, also says he wished his brother would have confessed at the famous congressional hearing, instead of saying he wasn’t going to talk about the past. Jay McGwire also writes that he doesn’t believe missing out on the Hall of Fame will affect his brother.

“Mark is a man I think most would like to forgive because his reason wasn’t nefarious — it was for survival,” he wrote, according to the proposal. “My bringing the truth to surface about Mark is out of love. I want Mark to live in truth to see the light, to come to repentance so he can live in freedom — which is the only way to live.”

Ah, so Jay’s book is “out of love” for his brother Mark…the same brother he’s using to get his 15 minutes of fame and a quick buck, and the one who he hasn’t talked to in years. Got it.

If Jay introduced and injected Mark with steroids, then he should have evidence of doing so. If he doesn’t, then I don’t know why anyone should believe a word this clown says.

Ted Robinson of At Bat thinks that Mark McGwire is getting a raw deal from MLB Hall of Fame voters and brings up a great point about the argument that Big Mac was a one-dimensional player.

More voters are revealing their choices and it’s hard to argue that transparency is bad. I found the comments of a Boston voter puzzling and borderline deceiving. The man in question defended his anti-McGwire stance with the claim that McGwire was “one-dimensional.”

If we accept the premise, then we must ask what exactly is the problem with dominating the most important offensive dimension? McGwire, Barry Bonds and Sammy Sosa were the greatest home run hitters of their era. Bonds won the career battle but McGwire was the pioneer.

McGwire was the first to hit 50 home runs in four consecutive seasons, a mark Bonds reached only once.

One-dimensional? McGwire won a Gold Glove, an award often scoffed at by the Numbers Crowd. Although no one should confuse McGwire with Keith Hernandez, the Gold Glove is voted on by managers and coaches.

Another thought rushes to me when I consider the phrase “one dimensional” when used as an insult, the manner in which the Boston writer intended. (Disclaimer 1: here we will violate, mildly, a personal rule against invoking the comparison argument with any present Hall of Famers. It is never the intent here to denigrate anyone already so honored, however…would that writer call Nolan Ryan “one-dimensional?” Ryan’s resume leads with the career strikeout record, which he smashed and, like McGwire, is a symbol of dominance. (Disclaimer 2: I acknowledge that strikeouts are regarded by many voters as significant, a stance with which I don’t agree).

Strikeouts must be the reason Ryan is in the Hall. It can’t be his 324 wins because his career winning percentage is barely over .500 (.526). Surely, no rational person would conclude that seven regular season no-hitters warrant Hall of Fame inclusion.

It’s hard to argue with that point. Some players (Ryan is one of them) are in the Hall because they excelled at one facet of the game. Ozzie Smith was a career .262-hitter, but he was also one of the greatest defensive shortstops to ever play the game. McGwire was one of the best power hitters to ever play the game.

But the difference between McGwire and those players is that Ryan and Smith never took performance-enhancing substances to excel at their craft. McGwire did and fair or unfair, it’ll likely keep him out of the Hall for a very long time, if not forever. Stats are sacred in baseball and McGwire achieved his stats with help. Hall voters can’t look past that.

In the wake of Cardinals’ first basemen Albert Pujols winning the NL MVP Award despite his team finishing fourth in the NL Central, RealClearSports.com has ranked baseball’s most controversial MVP winners of all-time.

#3 Dennis Eckersley, 1992, AL MVP
Eckersley, the prototype one-inning closer, pitched 80 innings on the year. Frank Thomas, with a .978 OPS, played 1424 innings for the White Sox that season. Did Eckersley contribute more to his team in those 80 innings than Thomas did in nearly 18 times as many? Or Kirby Puckett, league leader in hits and total bases and a Gold Glove centerfielder? Or teammate Mark McGwire, who had 42 homers and 104 RBIs with an OPS of .970 and won a Gold Glove as well? Closers are valuable – just ask Mets fans – but they’re disproportionately rewarded for how little they actually work.

#1 Joe DiMaggio, 1947 AL MVP
While DiMaggio’s victory over Ted Williams in 1941 is defensible, this one is not.

How do you win the league Triple Crown without also being the MVP? Were DiMaggio’s intangible contributions so much greater than Ted’s superior performance in batting, slugging, on-base, hits, doubles, home runs, runs, and RBIs?

Williams finished one single point behind DiMaggio in the voting, and one sportswriter refused even to list Williams on his ten-man ballot (though it was not a Boston sportswriter, as Williams charged in his autobiography My Turn At Bat; the man Williams named did not vote that year). Stranger still, Williams only received three first-place votes (worth 14 points each) out of twenty-four, while DiMaggio received eight, no doubt reflecting New York’s pennant-winning season and Boston’s lackluster one. Strangest of all are the two first-place votes cast for Philadelphia Athletics shortstop Eddie Joost, a good glove man who batted .206 for the season.

Boston fans probably believe that Hank Steinbrenner was in on the 1947 AL MVP scandal considering they think he runs hell itself.

Mark McGwire is at it again. He wants to put the past behind him and he said last night he’ll never discuss steroids again.

Is there any doubt that McGwire took steriods? Does anyone think he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame?

Also, no one wants to give Jose Canseco any credit for exposing these guys. McGwire and Raffy never would have been hauled in front of Congress without Canseco’s book. Sure, he was a snitch for exposing them, but it looks like the truth is on his side.