Mitchell report will have little effect

There's a lot of hype surrounding the Mitchell report on performance-enhancing drugs in baseball, a report that was commissioned by Bud Selig. This week, baseball's leadership and its constituency will get some answers, name some names and try to put the steroids chapter behind them. According to the New York Times, roughly 50 names, and maybe more, will be on the list of players linked to performance-enhancing drugs. Many are linked to former New York Mets clubhouse attendant Kirk Radomski, who pleaded guilty to steroids distribution earlier this year and cooperated with Mitchell.

Baseball wants closure. That's probably not what they'll get.

The problems with the report are many. The biggest is that George Mitchell isn't totally impartial; he's on the Red Sox board of directors. He's close to Selig. I'd be surprised if he placed the most blame on the baseball establishment for turning a blind eye toward the problem for years and years.

How much discipline will be involved? If there's evidence that a player took steroids before they were made illegal in 2004, can baseball even suspend them?

Will the home run record be wiped out, or put in a separate chapter of the record book under the steroids era? That's very unlikely.

"I did not intend this [investigation] to be punitive," Selig said, according to the Washington Post. So it's going to be up to baseball fans to determine just what the report means. Some will throw their hands up and be angry. Others won't care whatsoever. And there will never be a consensus.