PDA

View Full Version : Bonds hits #756



CTA513
08-07-2007, 11:54 PM
I clicked on the Giants game on MLB Gameday and saw that Bonds just hit #756 off Mike Bacsik

penantboundreds
08-07-2007, 11:54 PM
Ugh

guttle11
08-07-2007, 11:55 PM
And Earth hasn't exploded...yet.

oneupper
08-07-2007, 11:57 PM
Yo no comprendo.

penantboundreds
08-07-2007, 11:58 PM
i wish he would have retired like bernie mac did in mr 3000....so we could be done with this fool

HumnHilghtFreel
08-08-2007, 12:02 AM
I've actually changed my thinking quite a bit lately. I never thought I'd say it, but I don't mind it happening and I'm happy that I got to witness a part of baseball history. Barry Bonds is singled out because of this record, but he was and is the product of an era in baseball history.

Congrats Barry.

CTA513
08-08-2007, 12:03 AM
I just watched the replay of it on ESPN2 and people went crazy and started pushing and jumping on top of people to try and get the ball.

RedLegSuperStar
08-08-2007, 12:04 AM
756*

Cedric
08-08-2007, 12:05 AM
Fake record for a fake man.

smith288
08-08-2007, 12:11 AM
It was a good moment strictly from a baseball fan. From a personal view, its a * record and Hank Aaron is still the legit king in my book. Man i wish it was Griffey tonight, not Bonds.

redsfan30
08-08-2007, 12:13 AM
Like him or not, what a great moment for the city of San Francisco.

sonny
08-08-2007, 12:15 AM
Go A-rod.

StillFunkyB
08-08-2007, 12:15 AM
I am happy it's done, and over now.

It still requires talent to hit that many homeruns. That doesn't mean that I think it doesn't matter if he cheated or not, but you still have to be pretty darn good to hit that many.

SteelSD
08-08-2007, 12:28 AM
Congratulations to Barry Bonds. This is an historic day for Major League Baseball and it's just too bad that more folks don't appreciate what Bonds has done.

fearofpopvol1
08-08-2007, 12:31 AM
Anyone watch the Giants telecast? It makes me sick seeing the video they aired on the big screen where Hank Aaron congratulated Bonds and bascially endorsed the record. Hank is a classy guy though so I guess I'm not surprised. It just sucks that he had been so outspoken about not being happy about the situation and has all of a sudden changed his tune. As a result, I think the record will undoubtebly be more embraced. :(

TOBTTReds
08-08-2007, 12:35 AM
Anyone watch the Giants telecast? It makes me sick seeing the video they aired on the big screen where Hank Aaron congratulated Bonds and bascially endorsed the record. Hank is a classy guy though so I guess I'm not surprised. It just sucks that he had been so outspoken about not being happy about the situation and has all of a sudden changed his tune. As a result, I think the record will undoubtebly be more embraced. :(

With yah. but I thought it was decent of him to do that. Wonder what Bud is doing tonight?

savafan
08-08-2007, 12:36 AM
I didn't know how I would react when it happened, but when it did, I cried. Not because of anything having to do with steroids, but at the moment that it happened, it was a beautiful moment, and sadly there are some who can't see that and will refuse to appreciate it.

pedro
08-08-2007, 12:39 AM
Congratulations to Barry Bonds. This is an historic day for Major League Baseball and it's just too bad that more folks don't appreciate what Bonds has done.

I agree with that. Steroids *may" have helped keep Barry Bonds healthy but the didn't keep him from swinging at bad pitches.

ramp101
08-08-2007, 12:39 AM
what a beautiful man Barry is

bravo, I hope he hits 800 or more

WVPacman
08-08-2007, 12:41 AM
Like him or not, what a great moment for the city of San Francisco.


They would be booing just like the rest of us are if he was'nt playing for the Giants.

WVPacman
08-08-2007, 12:43 AM
Fake record for a fake man.


Exactly!!!!:clap:

savafan
08-08-2007, 12:43 AM
They would be booing just like the rest of us are if he was'nt playing for the Giants.

We wouldn't be booing if he was playing for the Reds. See how we embrace Peter Edward Rose...

fearofpopvol1
08-08-2007, 12:48 AM
We wouldn't be booing if he was playing for the Reds. See how we embrace Peter Edward Rose...

While I see the logic, I don't agree. Pete was not suspected of taking performance enhancing drugs that likely impacted the most sacred record in baseball. Pete definitely broke the rules and he's paying for it as he should. It's a different scenario.

Aronchis
08-08-2007, 12:50 AM
Bonds is pretty ignoreable. More of a media attraction than anything. Gained up 70hr's off the steroids. He is negated.

Johnny Footstool
08-08-2007, 12:50 AM
Meh.

I really appreciated Barry Bonds right up until it became 99% certain that he did steroids. Since then, I don't hold him or his accomplishments in any regard. He's become persona non grata to me. It's like I'm playing an MLB video game and the Giants' left fielder is Jon Dowd, or Reggie Stocker, or some other non-entity.

WVPacman
08-08-2007, 12:53 AM
We wouldn't be booing if he was playing for the Reds. See how we embrace Peter Edward Rose...

Nope I would still be booing b/c everybody knows he is guilty of cheating.Now pete rose did'nt get in trouble for gamling until his career was over and when he did he was a manager.

Cyclone792
08-08-2007, 12:54 AM
Congrats to Barry Bonds. He is quite simply the greatest player I've ever seen. I've also seen him hit quite a few homers in person, including during the 2001 seasons.

It's interesting that not only did Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez have some of the best seats in the house for tonight's historic moment, but they both can now say they each hit a home run in the game that Barry Bonds broke the all-time home run record.

Cedric
08-08-2007, 12:54 AM
Meh.

I really appreciated Barry Bonds right up until it became 99% certain that he did steroids. Since then, I don't hold him or his accomplishments in any regard. He's become persona non grata to me. It's like I'm playing an MLB video game and the Giants' left fielder is Jon Dowd, or Reggie Stocker, or some other non-entity.

That's how I feel. I don't really care if others agree with me. I'm not on a mission to spread Bonds hate. I just feel that steroids have a huge impact on the longevity and the production of a player. I don't think it's really hard to argue that.

WVPacman
08-08-2007, 12:55 AM
While I see the logic, I don't agree. Pete was not suspected of taking performance enhancing drugs that likely impacted the most sacred record in baseball. Pete definitely broke the rules and he's paying for it as he should. It's a different scenario.

yep I agree!!

pedro
08-08-2007, 12:56 AM
If I felt Bonds was the only one taking them then I might feel differently. But he wasn't and I don't.

VR
08-08-2007, 12:56 AM
Meh.

I really appreciated Barry Bonds right up until it became 99% certain that he did steroids. Since then, I don't hold him or his accomplishments in any regard. He's become persona non grata to me. It's like I'm playing an MLB video game and the Giants' left fielder is Jon Dowd, or Reggie Stocker, or some other non-entity.

Bingo. Wesley from Tecmo baseball for old-schoolers.

mbgrayson
08-08-2007, 01:01 AM
I didn't know how I would react when it happened, but when it did, I cried. Not because of anything having to do with steroids, but at the moment that it happened, it was a beautiful moment, and sadly there are some who can't see that and will refuse to appreciate it.

I almost teared up myself. I am happy for Bonds, and his family. It was baseball history, for better or worse.

Although from reading 'Game of Shadows' I am fairly convinced he used hi-tech steroids('the clear'), he was not alone. That doesn't make it right. Bonds still has an incredible amount of skill and baseball talent. At age 43, while now being tested like all players, Bonds now has 22 home runs and a 1.061 OPS, while never testing positive or being suspended.

For years(86-99), he played clean. In those years, he had 12 seasons with over 24 home runs, and routinely batted over .300.

His one year over 50 HRs, 2001, he set the record at 73. Probably steroid assisted....

Bonds CAREER line is now .298/.444/.607 for an OPS of 1.051 with 756 HRs, 8 gold gloves, NL MVP in '90, '92, '93, '01, '02, '03, and '04(7 times!).

He faced different game factors than Ruth or Aaron. Less racism than Aaron, but also had to deal with steroid assisted pitchers, and true 'closers'. Pitchers now routinely get to watch videos of hitters to find weaknesses, (and vice versa). Now there is inter-league play, DHs (which Bonds has avoided), body armor, and multi-million dollar contracts, which lead many to retire early and enjoy their wealth. Bonds kept playing, despite immense public animosity.

Barry, even though I don't particularly like you, this Buds for you! Congrats!
:beerme:

oneupper
08-08-2007, 01:02 AM
It has been amply debated on this Board if Barry Bonds would have been HOF material without the steroids. And it is debatable.

However, there is NO WAY that he breaks this record without the steroids. That makes it tainted forever.

Barry Bonds is the smart kid who stole the SAT answers. He probably could have scored a 1450 on his own...but he wanted that perfect 1600.

Danny Serafini
08-08-2007, 01:04 AM
Congratulations to Barry Bonds. This is an historic day for Major League Baseball and it's just too bad that more folks don't appreciate what Bonds has done.

Agreed. You may not like the man, but if you saw him talk about his dad at home plate afterwards you wouldn't help but feel at least a little good for him.

A couple of friends of mine are friends with Brad Hennessey of the Giants (he grew up here in Toledo), I'm anxious to hear what it was like to be there when that homer was hit.

deltachi8
08-08-2007, 01:09 AM
couldn't watch it...nothing to do with steroids, just don't like Barry the man.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 01:23 AM
I am curious why he didn't thank Conte in his little speach after he hit it? He is just as resposible for the record as anyone else Barry thanked, if not more.

KronoRed
08-08-2007, 01:46 AM
Glad it's over.

fearofpopvol1
08-08-2007, 01:52 AM
It has been amply debated on this Board if Barry Bonds would have been HOF material without the steroids. And it is debatable.

However, there is NO WAY that he breaks this record without the steroids. That makes it tainted forever.

Barry Bonds is the smart kid who stole the SAT answers. He probably could have scored a 1450 on his own...but he wanted that perfect 1600.

I do think he would've made the HoF regardless and he would've for sure had the numbers to back it. But I am not at all convinced that he would've broke the home run record without "assistance."

TOBTTReds
08-08-2007, 02:03 AM
I hope no one takes this personally, though some will.

I think the people that think there is nothing wrong with this record are completely ignorant to the scenario. People argue that everyone else was doing steroids in the 90's and early 2000's, and I agree, BUT this is an ALL-TIME record. NOT a 90's record.

I thought it was amazing that a man that played his career in the 50's, 60's, and 70's held the record for most HR's in a career. It is an extremely macho record, yet a guy held it in an era that didn't have all the nutrition ideas and weight lifting techniques that we do now. Everyone says that players now are bigger, stronger, and more skilled than they used to be, but Henry Aaron still held a record that you would think would be owned by a bigger, stronger person. Henry Aaron was not a bulked up monster that Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, and others are. He was such a good hitter, that he would hit his 400 foot HR's when he hit the ball well. Bonds hits his 400 when he misses them.

Barry Bonds isn't even a .300 career hitter, but his averages the last 6 full seasons were .306/.328/.370/.341/.362/.270.

From 1992 to 2000 his OPS ranged from 1080-1135. From 2001 on, his range was 1378-999.

Players don't peak at the age of 37-40, which is what Barry did. He is a freak of science, not nature.

He was a sure fire Hall of Famer in my book up to 2000. But after that, we might as well induct a different Barry Bonds.

I personally think it is sad that many are as blind to this, as we, or most of us were to the McGwire/Sosa race in the 90's.

This was a sad day for me, though I am happy for his family who has probably had to put up very unfair circumstances that Barry, the media, and just pressure in general has put on them.

Eric_Davis
08-08-2007, 03:11 AM
Not everyone took steroids in the 90's. Just those with no integrity did.

Eric_Davis
08-08-2007, 03:13 AM
I find it odd that Brady Anderson, who obviously took steroids in his career, is Cal Ripken's best friend. Maybe it's a ying/yang thing, or maybe Cal Ripken took steroids, too.

savafan
08-08-2007, 04:01 AM
I find it odd that Brady Anderson, who obviously took steroids in his career, is Cal Ripken's best friend. Maybe it's a ying/yang thing, or maybe Cal Ripken took steroids, too.

Or maybe it's possible to be friends with people in spite of their faults and mistakes...

"When you plant lettuce, if it does not grow well, you don't blame the lettuce. You look for reasons it is not doing well. It may need fertilizer, or more water, or less sun. You never blame the lettuce. Yet if we have problems with our friends or family, we blame the other person. But if we know how to take care of them, they will grow well, like the lettuce. Blaming has no positive effect at all, nor does trying to persuade using reason and argument. That is my experience. No blame, no reasoning, no argument, just understanding. If you understand, and you show that you understand, you can love, and the situation will change."
~Thich Nhat Hanh, Vietnamese Zen Master

sonny
08-08-2007, 04:54 AM
We will never know if BB would have broken the record using steriods or not. Like him or not, history was made and we have a new homerun king. I have my personal feelings about Barry as do all of us but, as of right now, he's on top of the list.

If you wish, pray that someone legit to break Barry's record to give the title back to the game and away from a man who, IMO, doesn't deserve such an honor.

Congratulations to Barry. It couldn't of happened to a nicer guy.

mth123
08-08-2007, 05:44 AM
I've actually changed my thinking quite a bit lately. I never thought I'd say it, but I don't mind it happening and I'm happy that I got to witness a part of baseball history. Barry Bonds is singled out because of this record, but he was and is the product of an era in baseball history.

Congrats Barry.

I feel this way too.

As for the Bonds the man comments. Based on reports, Bonds has behaved classlessly over the years in many cases, but I can't really say its worse than cheating on your wife with a stripper. That is on the resume of the guy that most are rooting for to break the record now. I'm sure a lot of players have done a lot of classless things (as do most people) that are not in the paper every day. I believe Babe Ruth lived a lifestyle that was viewed as less than an angel.

As for the "competitive advantage" that Barry enjoyed, I think he benefitted from that advantage without a doubt. But I think players of every era benefit from one advantage or another. Aaron put up his final 22 HRs as a DH in the AL. Maybe his total should have a footnote. Babe Ruth spent a large portion of his career hitting towards a RF fence that was a short 290 or so feet away (and didn't have to face the best non-caucasion pitchers while he was accumulating his record.) Records like this accumulated accross eras really don't hold up as purely comaparable under close scrutiny for lots of reasons. Steroids is just one of many. I personally think that the last 20 years or so is more tainted by the postage stamp size of the strike zone than anything else.

IMO Steroids are a serious health issue and taking them in a competitive environment like sports puts pressure on the competition to take them. So, taking steroids has a health effect beyond the individual choice, much in the way that smoking and second hand smoke creates a health issue beyond the individual who has chosen to smoke. I don't really hold people who smoke in high contempt or consider them immoral, but it is a behavior that I would like to see change for the good of the general population. I feel the same way about steroids. Much like smoking, I don't really see any reason to judge a person's morality based on whether the person takes steroids. I surely haven't seen "Thou Shalt not Use the Cream and the Clear" written anywhere. I don't think those who take steroids are evil and I don't get all the high handed moral judgements that people are making. I would like to see them weeded out for the general good, but I don't consider Bonds or anyone else evil for doing this. Maybe a little greedy and possibly negligent (more likely ignorant) of its effect on others, but not immoral or in any way deserving of such hatred that seems to be so common. I do think that its a rule and a law violation (so is speeding BTW) and punishment for getting caught is fair game and should probably be more severe. That doesn't make it immoral.

Neg me now.

Ltlabner
08-08-2007, 05:59 AM
A lot of other people did it. Other guys are classless too.

Excuses. Nothing but excuses.

He's the one breaking the record. I have the same distain for the 4th out fielder who retired in 1996 after three seasons and 100 hits as I do for Bonds. But that "all the cool kids are doing it" does not excuse the choices he made.

That Arod cheats on his wife is a striper does not mitigate that Bonds has been a classless jerk his entire baseball carear. He gave a nice speech at home plate after hitting it. That's cool. Maybe breaking the record will take the pressure off and be a huge event in his life that prompts soul searching and a personality change. But it doesn't erase the pattern of behavior over the years.

Rose bet on baseball. Pitchers in the hall of fame admit to using tacks and spitballs. Guys in the 60's used greenies to get up. None of that changes that Barry's accomplishment is tainted by the choices he apparently made.

sonny
08-08-2007, 06:17 AM
Unless the stripper enhanced A-rods performance (on the field), it's different for me.

Wheelhouse
08-08-2007, 06:22 AM
Bonds is the ideal representation of the extent of denial in our society. He truly does represent the game and America.

mth123
08-08-2007, 06:34 AM
A lot of other people did it. Other guys are classless too.

Excuses. Nothing but excuses.

He's the one breaking the record. I have the same distain for the 4th out fielder who retired in 1996 after three seasons and 100 hits as I do for Bonds. But that "all the cool kids are doing it" does not excuse the choices he made.

That Arod cheats on his wife is a striper does not mitigate that Bonds has been a classless jerk his entire baseball carear. He gave a nice speech at home plate after hitting it. That's cool. Maybe breaking the record will take the pressure off and be a huge event in his life that prompts soul searching and a personality change. But it doesn't erase the pattern of behavior over the years.

Rose bet on baseball. Pitchers in the hall of fame admit to using tacks and spitballs. Guys in the 60's used greenies to get up. None of that changes that Barry's accomplishment is tainted by the choices he apparently made.

Not really excusing classless (or immoral, or crappy or whatever word you want to use) behavior. From what little I know from public information I probably wouldn't want many of these guys as pals. I'm just questioning why Bonds is so villified for the things he does while others who do classless (or immoral, or crappy or whatever word you want to use) things are still held in such high regard. Many are already anxiously anticipating A-Rod breaking this record as if its some triumph of good over evil and I just don't see it as such a black and white issue.

If the morality of some of these guys is such an issue, it would make it pretty hard to be a sports fan. Every sport is littered with people of questionable character. Why is it that just Bonds gets all this hatred while others seem to get a pass?


As for the record, I could probably come up with a reason that almost any player's career totals deserve a footnote or an asterisk for one reason or another. Steroids is hardly the only reason that these numbers are really not on a level playing field. My point is getting all upset that steroids destroys the integrity of the record seems like a minor thing to me because I just don't believe that these types of records ever really had much integrity to begin with. Its an accomplishment to be celebrated because there is alot that goes into it, but the anguish over it seems misplaced. I'm more concerned with the general health issue related to steroids than I am the effect it has on career numbers of various athletes.

mth123
08-08-2007, 06:42 AM
Unless the stripper enhanced A-rods performance (on the field), it's different for me.

Two different issues.

Some are saying they don't like Bonds having the record because he's a jerk as a person. That is what I was referring to with the behavior/stripper thing.

The steroids issue is separate and speaks more to the integrity of the numbers. Which, as I posted above, I think never existed to the extent many believe in the first place.

RedsBaron
08-08-2007, 06:49 AM
Babe Ruth spent a large portion of his career hitting towards a LF fence that was a short 290 or so feet away

I assume that you meant to refer to the RF fence at Yankee Stadium, not the LF fence, but the supposed positive effects upon Ruth's HR production by playing in Yankee Stadium have been overstated.
In his career, Ruth hit 347 HRs at home and 367 HRs on the road.
Yankee Stadium opened in 1923. That season Ruth hit 19 HRs at home, 22 on the road. His home and away HR splits through his last great season in 1932 would thereafter be 24/22, 11/14, 23/24, 28/32, 29/25, 21/25, 26/23, 24/22 and 19/22. In the first ten seasons Ruth played his home games in Yankee Stadium, he hit more home runs on the road in 6 of those seasons, with 231 road home runs and 224 home runs in Yankee Stadium.

RedsBaron
08-08-2007, 06:52 AM
I am curious why he didn't thank Conte in his little speach after he hit it? He is just as resposible for the record as anyone else Barry thanked, if not more.

I don't believe that The Creature ever thanked Dr. Frankenstein, either.

mth123
08-08-2007, 06:55 AM
I assume that you meant to refer to the RF fence at Yankee Stadium, not the LF fence, but the supposed positive effects upon Ruth's HR production by playing in Yankee Stadium have been overstated.
In his career, Ruth hit 347 HRs at home and 367 HRs on the road.
Yankee Stadium opened in 1923. That season Ruth hit 19 HRs at home, 22 on the road. His home and away HR splits through his last great season in 1932 would thereafter be 24/22, 11/14, 23/24, 28/32, 29/25, 21/25, 26/23, 24/22 and 19/22. In the first ten seasons Ruth played his home games in Yankee Stadium, he hit more home runs on the road in 6 of those seasons, with 231 road home runs and 224 home runs in Yankee Stadium.

I did mean RF. Thanks. I'm not too bright sometimes. Good point about Ruth on the road. I still wonder how many of his HRs at home would have outs in a more conventional configuration.

BTW, if the HR Record is in some way supposed to be an indication of who the better player is, I don't mean to downgrade Ruth. IMO he is hands down the greatest baseball player of all-time.

Caveat Emperor
08-08-2007, 07:04 AM
I didn't even care enough to watch.

Bonds is what he is -- a petulant child who almost certainly cheated to become the greatest player of his generation. I dislike what I know of him as a person, I dislike what I know of him as a player, and I dislike the fact that he broke this record.

But, having said that, there is obvious talent and you don't just luck your way into 756 home runs, regardless of what you're injecting yourself with. I'm just sorry things didn't go in a different direction.

So, congratulations to Barry Bonds. Wear your crown proudly, King Nothing. Hopefully your kids won't grow up with the same chip on their shoulder about the way the media treated you that you did regarding your own father.

TeamCasey
08-08-2007, 07:49 AM
http://www.scaredmonkeys.com/fun-images/bonds_2Dcheater_small.jpg

15fan
08-08-2007, 08:57 AM
Congratulations to Barry.

He's now all alone at #2 on the all-time HR list.

Only 112 more HRs to go before he ties Sadaharu Oh's (http://www.baseballlibrary.com/ballplayers/player.php?name=Sadaharu_Oh_1940)mark of 868 career HRs.

Good luck, Barry.

princeton
08-08-2007, 09:07 AM
what Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron did was truly remarkable. The first time that I ever saw Aaron, I remember thinking, "no, that's a little guy. seriously, which one is really Hank Aaron?"

jojo
08-08-2007, 09:17 AM
Breaking the actual record itself is mind boggling but to then consider he did it against all of those juiced pitchers makes the accomplishment even more amazing....and probably more meaningful....

Always Red
08-08-2007, 09:28 AM
Breaking the actual record itself is mind boggling but to then consider he did it against all of those juiced pitchers makes the accomplishment even more amazing....and probably more meaningful....

A very good point, jojo.

Bonds's use of steroids did not happen in a vacuum. And just because everyone was doing it does not excuse him, either.

Baseball has a history of cheating, err....I mean "trying to gain an edge" since virtually it's beginning. If Gaylord Perry is in the HoF, what kind of signal does that send to guys who are currently playing the game?

Bonds is easy to hate because he comes across a such a jerk so much of the time. As I've read more and more about him and his chase this summer, I've needed to remind myself that Bonds does not equal OJ Simpson. He has been vilified nearly as much as OJ. Bonds didn't kill anyone. I'm not a fan of Barry Bonds, never have been, and never will be. But he has been selected the "poster child" for all baseball players who have used PEDs. And there have been thousands who did.

And baseball itself turned an eye back in the late 90's, when it was urging on offense, HR's, small ballparks, in an effort to gain back fans after the disaster of 1994. It was in this climate that ballplayers began using substance that gave them more energy, strength, and the ability to rebound more quickly from injury.

I have mixed feelings about the whole thing.

Big Klu
08-08-2007, 09:49 AM
Last week, someone in the media said that whether fans like it or not, history was going to happen, and we would all remember the moment when it happened.

Where was I when Barry Bonds broke Hank Aaron's record? Sleeping. I never thought I would say this, but thank God for West Coast baseball.

BRM
08-08-2007, 09:51 AM
Where was I when Barry Bonds broke Hank Aaron's record? Sleeping. I never thought I would say this, but thank God for West Coast baseball.

I was watching a Disney movie with the kids. I never thought I would care so little about such a great record.

registerthis
08-08-2007, 09:53 AM
Does this mean I can stop reading about him now?

Johnny Footstool
08-08-2007, 10:04 AM
Barry Bonds is the smart kid who stole the SAT answers. He probably could have scored a 1450 on his own...but he wanted that perfect 1600.

Perfect analogy.

George Anderson
08-08-2007, 10:06 AM
I wasn't actually watching the game and didnt know Bonds broke the record till I tuned in to watch "The Bronx is Burning" on ESPN 2. I was more upset that I was missing "The Bronx is Burning" which was being pre empted for the the coverage of Bonds and this so called record.

MWM
08-08-2007, 10:27 AM
I’m really tired of all the lectures about how it’s “sad that some don’t appreciate” what he’s done. That’s a load of BS and please stop telling me how to think. I’m capable of thinking for myself, thank you. My evaluation of Barry Bonds stops after 1999.

He was the best hitter in the game during his career and one of the best ever pre-2000. A no-brainer HOFer before his first injection. I recognize that, but I’m sick to death of the lectures about this accomplishment. It’s not an accomplishment in my book. His increased product is a DIRECT result of chemistry and nothing else. There’s no other possible explanation. And I also know he’s not the only one who did it. I feel the EXACT same about Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro and anyone else whose game benefitted from the juice. There’s no distinction other than they’re not being hailed for their “accomplishments” right now.

And I also think the pitchers on the juice somehow add credibility to what he’s done is also total BS. The effect steroids have on a pitcher is no where near as direct as that for hitters. They might add a mile or two an hour on their fastball and it helps them recover quicker so their arms are fresher, but it doesn’t fundamentally change what kind of pitcher they are. No amount of steroids can help a player learn how to hti a basbeall squarely on a consistent basis. If you can’t square the bat on the ball and drive it without them, you can’t do it with them. But you take a guy who has one of the best hitting eyes in the history of the game and already drives the ball with regularity, and add significant bat speed, and you’ve got a monster.

That’s what Barry is. For me it’s simple – he would not be anywhere near 755 without injecting illegal substances in his body. He probably would be between 600-650, still a great career, but no way is at 700. And to me, that’s all I need to know. All the other stuff is just noise. He would not have broken the record without them. Period. So what I think is “sad” is that so many want to just pretend it didn’t happen or pretend it made no difference. Believe that if you must, but you all know differently.

westofyou
08-08-2007, 10:29 AM
Where was I when Barry Bonds broke Hank Aaron's record? Sleeping. I never thought I would say this, but thank God for West Coast baseball.

Yes thank god for it... every night I get to watch players more then 1/2 the country has trouble appreciating or comprehending... because it starts so late.

Every baseball fan should spend at least one season in the west side of the country, just so you can learn about the seagulls that hit the CF of San Francisco at 9:30 or watch the jackets come out early in Oakland.

NJReds
08-08-2007, 10:32 AM
Baseball deserves this. They sat back and did nothing as fans filled the stadiums in the mid-late 90s. They celebrated Sosa and McGwire. Nobody cared even though the "s" word was being whispered. How many pitchers used? How many other players used? Nobody knows for sure -- we can only speculate. I can't sit back and hammer Barry and ignore the fact that there is a good chance that many others in the era used performance enhancers as well.

George Anderson
08-08-2007, 10:43 AM
Baseball deserves this. They sat back and did nothing as fans filled the stadiums in the mid-late 90s. They celebrated Sosa and McGwire. Nobody cared even though the "s" word was being whispered. How many pitchers used? How many other players used? Nobody knows for sure -- we can only speculate. I can't sit back and hammer Barry and ignore the fact that there is a good chance that many others in the era used performance enhancers as well.

I was always under the understanding that maybe early on MLB was ignoring steroids being used and then decided to do something about it, but the players union refused to let MLB do anything about the problem.

remdog
08-08-2007, 10:56 AM
Some of my love of baseball died last night. Possibly the most revered record in sport is now 'officially' held be someone that cheated to attain it.

For me, that record no longer exists nor does it hold any interest for me. And, with that, baseball itself holds less interest for me than it did a day ago. :(

Rem

wheels
08-08-2007, 10:57 AM
I’m really tired of all the lectures about how it’s “sad that some don’t appreciate” what he’s done. That’s a load of BS and please stop telling me how to think. I’m capable of thinking for myself, thank you. My evaluation of Barry Bonds stops after 1999.

He was the best hitter in the game during his career and one of the best ever pre-2000. A no-brainer HOFer before his first injection. I recognize that, but I’m sick to death of the lectures about this accomplishment. It’s not an accomplishment in my book. His increased product is a DIRECT result of chemistry and nothing else. There’s no other possible explanation. And I also know he’s not the only one who did it. I feel the EXACT same about Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro and anyone else whose game benefitted from the juice. There’s no distinction other than they’re not being hailed for their “accomplishments” right now.

And I also think the pitchers on the juice somehow add credibility to what he’s done is also total BS. The effect steroids have on a pitcher is no where near as direct as that for hitters. They might add a mile or two an hour on their fastball and it helps them recover quicker so their arms are fresher, but it doesn’t fundamentally change what kind of pitcher they are. No amount of steroids can help a player learn how to hti a basbeall squarely on a consistent basis. If you can’t square the bat on the ball and drive it without them, you can’t do it with them. But you take a guy who has one of the best hitting eyes in the history of the game and already drives the ball with regularity, and add significant bat speed, and you’ve got a monster.

That’s what Barry is. For me it’s simple – he would not be anywhere near 755 without injecting illegal substances in his body. He probably would be between 600-650, still a great career, but no way is at 700. And to me, that’s all I need to know. All the other stuff is just noise. He would not have broken the record without them. Period. So what I think is “sad” is that so many want to just pretend it didn’t happen or pretend it made no difference. Believe that if you must, but you all know differently.

Harumph!

Beautifully stated.

Roy Tucker
08-08-2007, 11:16 AM
Barry broke the record. What's done is done. History will be the judge of the legitimacy of the record.

I have to say, Bonds handled it all well and made it a nice moment.

Color me extremely surprised at Hank Aaron's recorded congratulations. An extremely classy gesture by a fine man. Something he didn't have to do and it will go a long way to helping MLB get through this time with a shred of grace.

jojo
08-08-2007, 11:23 AM
That’s a load of BS and please stop telling me how to think.


Believe that if you must, but you all know differently.

And that sums up the majority of this debate as it's unfolded in the mainstream media.....

:cool:

MWM
08-08-2007, 11:26 AM
Really? So you think he's clean? Becuase that's what I was referring to. Not whether or not someone should laud this accomplishment or not.

jojo
08-08-2007, 11:27 AM
Really? So you think he's clean? Becuase that's what I was referring to. Not whether or not someone should laud this accomplishment or not.

I was pointing out the irony in your outrage.....

MWM
08-08-2007, 11:41 AM
Then you misunderstood. There's a difference between recognizing something did or didn't happen and telling people how they should feel about it. If people want to laud Barry's accomplishments, fine. But I don't think anyone can realistically believe he was clean in doing so.

registerthis
08-08-2007, 11:42 AM
I was pointing out the irony in your outrage.....

Putting aside the "he's never tested positive for steroids" line, whether or not Bonds actually *used* steroids isn't really a debateable point. He hasn't been "clean" since '99 or so. Now, the ramifications of that are up for debate, certainly, but whether or not Bonds actually took performance enhancers isn't.

nate
08-08-2007, 11:52 AM
Putting aside the "he's never tested positive for steroids" line, whether or not Bonds actually *used* steroids isn't really a debateable point. He hasn't been "clean" since '99 or so. Now, the ramifications of that are up for debate, certainly, but whether or not Bonds actually took performance enhancers isn't.

Its such a convoluted story to follow (Bonds taking steroids) but my understanding of it is this:

*he took the "clear" and the "cream"
*when he took it, it wasn't a "banned substance"

Is this correct?

REDJAKE
08-08-2007, 11:53 AM
I am only hopeing that the last homer will get this guy off our site until he retires and then say goodby.Any referance to the guy turns a lot of us off negative or positive comments.GO CINCY!!!!

westofyou
08-08-2007, 11:58 AM
"In Barry Bonds, I see the best hitter I've ever seen and will probably ever see, I pay attention to his at-bats, He has control of his at-bats. He's doing things that you're trying to do."

Scott Rolen

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 11:59 AM
Its such a convoluted story to follow (Bonds taking steroids) but my understanding of it is this:

*he took the "clear" and the "cream"
*when he took it, it wasn't a "banned substance"

Is this correct?

When he first took it, yes, it was not a banned substance by baseball. It was just illegal in the country. And no, this isnt along the same lines of someone getting a DUI or not paying taxes.

As for HGH, you can't test positive for HGH.

savafan
08-08-2007, 12:07 PM
...I'm not sure I understand...

Edit: Oh, you were talking about that guy!

dabvu2498
08-08-2007, 12:07 PM
It was just illegal in the country. And no, this isnt along the same lines of someone getting a DUI or not paying taxes.

Would you say it is along the same lines as an entertainer doing uppers, smoking reefer or dropping acid in order to "enhance" their performance?

TeamCasey
08-08-2007, 12:07 PM
..... it was not a banned substance by baseball. It was just illegal in the country.

This one always cracks me up. Was it therefore not cheating?

I'm not picking on you, doug. This statement comes up often.

It's like saying it's O.K. for a player to ride the back of a purple monkey with flames shooting out of it's arse because it wasn't banned by baseball. :D

jojo
08-08-2007, 12:10 PM
Then you misunderstood. There's a difference between recognizing something did or didn't happen and telling people how they should feel about it. If people want to laud Barry's accomplishments, fine. But I don't think anyone can realistically believes he was clean in doing so.

You started by stating you don't want to be told how to think then finished by telling everyone "what they know" (i.e what they should think and not surprisingly it should be what you think).... it sums up the whole issue...

I in fact don't have any clue how much steroids helped Bonds especially since at the same time he was allegedly using steroids he was also paying more for personal trainers and nutritionists annually than likely 99% of ORG members make in a year.

Did steroids probably help Bonds? I think so. Is it the only thing that contributed to his historic career especially in the 2000's? Probably not. Can anyone say with certainty what exact impact steroids had on Bonds? How can that even reasonably be calculated? Can the impact of steroids on pitcher performance be summarily discounted? Of course not.

And as an aside, I simply don't get how some can so easily discount the effect of steroids on pitchers while being so stone cold immovable in their opinion of the impact of steroids on hitters.

To me steroids and pitchers is analogous to the effect of starting versus relieving has on a pitcher's velocity. A move to the pen usually adds 2-4 mph of velocity because pitchers an go all out for short periods versus having to pace themselves. Steroids, by allowing shorter recovery times, might be expected to have a similar effect. A starter could push himself harder and be more consistently effective because of an artificial recovery. Likewise, bullpen arms might be expected to perform at higher levels as well.

Basically, IMHO, this is not an issue that can be framed in absolutes... There is an awful lot of begging the question going on by those who are telling everyone else what *they should know*....

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 12:12 PM
This one always cracks me up. Was it therefore not cheating?

I'm not picking on you, doug. This statement comes up often.

It's like saying it's O.K. for a player to ride the back of a purple monkey with flames shooting out of it's arse because it wasn't banned by baseball. :D

Technically in terms of MLB rules, it was not cheating up until 2003. In my mind, and the mind of many others, it was cheating.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 12:13 PM
Would you say it is along the same lines as an entertainer doing uppers, smoking reefer or dropping acid in order to "enhance" their performance?

No.

Yachtzee
08-08-2007, 12:14 PM
When he first took it, yes, it was not a banned substance by baseball. It was just illegal in the country. And no, this isnt along the same lines of someone getting a DUI or not paying taxes.

As for HGH, you can't test positive for HGH.

Incorrect. It if it had steroids in it, it was "banned." Baseball just couldn't test for it without agreement from the players union. On the other hand, androstenedione, a steroid precursor but not steroids itself, was not banned when McGwire was caught with it in his locker in 1998, but was quickly banned at the end of the season (Whether that was a red flag that McGwire might be taking other substances is a different story).

Q: Why wouldn't they ban steroids when they banned andro?
A: Because they were already banned.

NJReds
08-08-2007, 12:16 PM
I guess we know where the NY media stands...

http://drudgereport.com/nypb.jpg

http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2007/08/08/alg_frontback08_08.jpg

westofyou
08-08-2007, 12:17 PM
Would you say it is along the same lines as an entertainer doing uppers, smoking reefer or dropping acid in order to "enhance" their performance?

Acid enhancing a performance?

In a Dada theater program perhaps.

dabvu2498
08-08-2007, 12:19 PM
Acid enhancing a performance?

In a Dada theater program perhaps.

Thus, my use of "..." in the original quote.

Would 'shrooms be more appropo?

Red Leader
08-08-2007, 12:20 PM
Basically, IMHO, this is not an issue that can be framed in absolutes... There is an awful lot of begging the question going on by those who are telling everyone else what *they should know*....

In a nutshell, this is how I feel as well. Much like religion and politics there are infinite amounts of opinions you can have on a particular situation. No one is right, no one is wrong, it's your own personal opinion on those individual situations.

jojo
08-08-2007, 12:20 PM
Putting aside the "he's never tested positive for steroids" line, whether or not Bonds actually *used* steroids isn't really a debateable point. He hasn't been "clean" since '99 or so. Now, the ramifications of that are up for debate, certainly, but whether or not Bonds actually took performance enhancers isn't.

I've never suggested that Bonds didn't take steroids. I don't have a clue what or how often he took something and I'm not going start assuming.

The problem I and others have with the Bonds debate is very often, it completely lacks context. Just the notion of *clean* itself implies things about accomplishments in the 60's and 70's that shouldn't be assumed.

CrackerJack
08-08-2007, 12:20 PM
Huh?

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 12:25 PM
My whole thing on whether or not steroids were 'not against the rules' is utterly ridiculous to begin with. Why should a company, and thats what baseball is, have to implement a 'rule' that one should have to follow in order to work, when the rule is against the law in the country where the employ works?

oneupper
08-08-2007, 12:30 PM
Technically in terms of MLB rules, it was not cheating up until 2003. In my mind, and the mind of many others, it was cheating.

Just echoing TeamCasey who put it well. We've gone over this before.

Murdering and Kidnapping your opponent are also not specifically banned by baseball.

But if you need a "document", Fay Vincent's 1991 memo (which specifically mentions steriods IIRC) should do it.

Steriods were banned in baseball for as long as they were a "controlled substance", that would be around 1987 IIRC.

The fact that they didn't test for it until 2003 doesn't change that.

Baseball's "rules" are IN ADDITION to the laws of the nation, not "INSTEAD OF".

If something normally illegal is "allowed" in a sport (such as speeding in car racing or physical assault in boxing) it must be specifically APPROVED and most likely regulated.

Neither the government nor MLB ever stated that it was OK to use steriods in baseball.

Big Klu
08-08-2007, 12:31 PM
Yes thank god for it... every night I get to watch players more then 1/2 the country has trouble appreciating or comprehending... because it starts so late.

Every baseball fan should spend at least one season in the west side of the country, just so you can learn about the seagulls that hit the CF of San Francisco at 9:30 or watch the jackets come out early in Oakland.

Don't misunderstand--I know there is good baseball on the West Coast. And when I was younger, I would stay up and watch the late game on ESPN, or TBS or WGN if the Braves or Cubs were on a West Coast swing--just so I could watch more baseball. If the Reds were on the West Coast, it was automatic that I was either watching it or listening to Marty and Joe. I still make a point to watch/listen to the Reds if they are out West, but I don't watch the other games like I once did.

nate
08-08-2007, 12:40 PM
Combining two recent themes on this thread, should Dock Ellis' no-hitter receive an asterisk because it was pitched while on acid?

registerthis
08-08-2007, 12:52 PM
The problem I and others have with the Bonds debate is very often, it completely lacks context. Just the notion of *clean* itself implies things about accomplishments in the 60's and 70's that shouldn't be assumed.

The context is steroids. And I'm making no claims whatsoever about what players in the 60s and 70s did. My only claim is about Bonds.

jojo
08-08-2007, 12:56 PM
The context is steroids. And I'm making no claims whatsoever about what players in the 60s and 70s did. My only claim is about Bonds.

And that in and of itself really means little.

KronoRed
08-08-2007, 01:00 PM
Does this mean I can stop reading about him now?

I sure hope so, I'm almost looking forward to espn going back to Boston/yank garbage 24 hours a day.

GIK
08-08-2007, 01:09 PM
Just wait..."Beyond 756" is coming...

westofyou
08-08-2007, 01:11 PM
Thus, my use of "..." in the original quote.

Would 'shrooms be more appropo?

Yes, if anyone is interested in naked baseball in slow motion.

TeamCasey
08-08-2007, 01:17 PM
Yes, if anyone is interested in naked baseball in slow motion.

That would be wicked cooooooooooooooolllllll.......

Red Leader
08-08-2007, 01:25 PM
That would be wicked cooooooooooooooolllllll.......


Yes, if anyone is interested in naked baseball in slow motion.

It would definitely give a new meaning to the term "two bagger."

:barf:

Chip R
08-08-2007, 01:49 PM
It looked like this happened right before I started home from work last night. My reaction was an eye roll. I realize Bonds has the record now but there's always going to be a stigma by it IMO. I also think it was a huge accomplishment by Bonds. After all, there have been many other players who had the access to what he used and they couldn't hit 750+ HRs. I think Bonds is a helluva player and I wish he hadn't made the choice to use steroids and/or HGH.

Matt700wlw
08-08-2007, 02:21 PM
Congratulations to Barry Bonds for tainting one of the greatest records in pro sports....

The real tribute should be to Hank Aaron for being classy enough to congratulate Barry and his "accomplishment"

Thankfully, it's over and we can all go back to living our lives.



*

westofyou
08-08-2007, 02:21 PM
Bacsik's father, also named Mike Bacsik, pitched for Texas and Minnesota from 1975-80. On Aug. 23, 1976, in a Rangers-Brewers game, the elder Bacsik faced Aaron two months after The Hammer hit his final career home run. Aaron singled off him in two at-bats. Thus, the Bacsiks became the only father and son each to face different hitters with 755 home runs.

"If my dad was gracious enough to give up a home run," Bacsik said, "we both would have given up 756."

Matt700wlw
08-08-2007, 02:23 PM
Combining two recent themes on this thread, should Dock Ellis' no-hitter receive an asterisk because it was pitched while on acid?

Really? Sweet...

:cool:

M2
08-08-2007, 02:30 PM
I never thought I would care so little about such a great record.

I'm in the same boat. My indifference on this one is staggering. All it's done is make me not care about the record.

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 02:35 PM
I'm in the same boat. My indifference on this one is staggering. All it's done is make me not care about the record.

All its done is make me claim Josh Gibson as my HR king.

registerthis
08-08-2007, 02:40 PM
And that in and of itself really means little.

According to whom? You?

westofyou
08-08-2007, 02:43 PM
All its done is make me claim Josh Gibson as my HR king.

His record is as vague and shadowy as they come.

registerthis
08-08-2007, 02:44 PM
His record is as vague and shadowy as they come.

Indeed. Only 200-or-so of his HRs were documented to have happened in officially sanctioned Negro League games.

Matt700wlw
08-08-2007, 03:00 PM
http://www.1530homer.com/cc-common/mlib/1120/08/1120_1186584090.jpg

dougdirt
08-08-2007, 03:44 PM
His record is as vague and shadowy as they come.

So is Barrys.

KronoRed
08-08-2007, 04:14 PM
I'm in the same boat. My indifference on this one is staggering. All it's done is make me not care about the record.

Same.

jojo
08-08-2007, 04:39 PM
According to whom? You?

And that's the whole point about context isn't it.....

People who want asterisks next to the names of players who played during the steroid era are like people who condemn the ocean because it's full of maneaters but admire yellowstone park because of it's beauty....

M2
08-08-2007, 05:21 PM
People who want asterisks next to the names of players who played during the steroid era are like people who condemn the ocean because it's full of maneaters but admire yellowstone park because of it's beauty....

I'm not for a generational asterisk, but books have been devoted to Barry Bonds' steroid use. I was never a fan of before-and-after-photography arguments or numbers-based arguments, but when you've seen his doping regimen in print it tends to be a compelling piece of evidence.

I'm actually not for an asterisk on Bonds either. MLB let him go this far with it. He did what he did on the field. There's no erasing what happened.

That said, the career home run record didn't really mean anything before Babe Ruth. Then Hank Aaron came along and added to the luster of the record. My guess is the record will get a lot less reverence until someone perceived as legitimate comes along and passes Bonds. For me, and it sounds like a host of others as well, the record is now just a number and not the delineation of greatness it once was. Hopefully A-Rod will change that before another decade passes.

VR
08-08-2007, 05:44 PM
I haven't seen it yet...but a non-baseball co-worker questioned me on it.

He said Barry crossed home plate....to be met by his son. Barry threw his arms up, and his son hugged him. He never acknowledged him, and actually turned around as his son was hugging him, with his arms still up in the air, high fiving people.

Does that sound right?

Matt700wlw
08-08-2007, 05:48 PM
I haven't seen it yet...but a non-baseball co-worker questioned me on it.

He said Barry crossed home plate....to be met by his son. Barry threw his arms up, and his son hugged him. He never acknowledged him, and actually turned around as his son was hugging him, with his arms still up in the air, high fiving people.

Does that sound right?


Let's find out...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3xxYfr9aaE

* Viewer discretion advised *

Phhhl
08-08-2007, 05:50 PM
I'm pleased to report I was sleeping soundly when this happened. I read a little bit about it during a break a work. I wish Aaron hadn't done anything at all.

Ltlabner
08-08-2007, 05:51 PM
No need for an astrix. MLB blew that oportunity by turning a blind eye for so many years.

Pretend ARod breaks the record but has no issues with steroids. He's just a philanderer.

Barry has major issues with roids and happens to be an olympic class jerk.

You really want to claim both records would be tainted in the same way? Please. ARods behavor is tacky and distastefull but has zero effect on his onfield performance. Barrys behavior is tacky and distatesfull and he's introduced the spector of roids into his performance (and possibly the aid of the brace keeping his swing consistant).

M2 summed it up best. I just don't care that he broke the record.

dabvu2498
08-08-2007, 05:52 PM
Pretend ARod breaks the record but has no issues with steroids. He's just a philanderer.


Barry had that going for him as well.

VR
08-08-2007, 05:55 PM
Let's find out...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3xxYfr9aaE

* Viewer discretion advised *


As I was opening it, I was thinking "I'd rather not watch this". Then my company's webservice told me I wasn't going to be watching it.

THAT is what you call good karma.


So what happened?

Matt700wlw
08-08-2007, 05:56 PM
As I was opening it, I was thinking "I'd rather not watch this". Then my company's webservice told me I wasn't going to be watching it.

THAT is what you call good karma.


So what happened?


He didn't hug his son back, kept his hands in the air....

I think he hugged him a little later after the mobbing at home plate stuff, along with his mother, wife, and daughters.

smith288
08-08-2007, 05:57 PM
I haven't seen it yet...but a non-baseball co-worker questioned me on it.

He said Barry crossed home plate....to be met by his son. Barry threw his arms up, and his son hugged him. He never acknowledged him, and actually turned around as his son was hugging him, with his arms still up in the air, high fiving people.

Does that sound right?
I saw that and was baffled. Usually he shows lots of love to his son in those moments but in that moment, he treated him like another batboy or something. Very weird.

pedro
08-08-2007, 06:05 PM
I didn't see this but did they stop the game and show that video of Hank and have a little ceremony? I really don't like that.

Matt700wlw
08-08-2007, 06:11 PM
I didn't see this but did they stop the game and show that video of Hank and have a little ceremony? I really don't like that.

10 minute delay I believe....Hank tribute, and then Bonds spoke to the crowd.

HumnHilghtFreel
08-08-2007, 06:14 PM
I didn't see this but did they stop the game and show that video of Hank and have a little ceremony? I really don't like that.

There really wasn't even much of a crowd left after he hit it.

westofyou
08-08-2007, 06:47 PM
There really wasn't even much of a crowd left after he hit it.

That's because it's damn cold there at night.

westofyou
08-08-2007, 06:49 PM
1 and then Bonds spoke to the crowd.

It was kinda like this too.

I am Ted from San Dimas, and I bring to you a message of love... Oh, you beautiful babes from England, for whom we have traveled through time... will you go with us to the prom in San Dimas? We will have a most triumphant time!

pedro
08-08-2007, 07:21 PM
It was kinda like this too.

I am Ted from San Dimas, and I bring to you a message of love... Oh, you beautiful babes from England, for whom we have traveled through time... will you go with us to the prom in San Dimas? We will have a most triumphant time!

Most Excellent!

RFS62
08-08-2007, 07:53 PM
No asterisk in the record books necessary.

But he's got the Scarlet Letter on his massive melon of a forehead forever in the court of public opinion. His name will never again be invoked without the specter of steroids and cheating coming to mind.

That's his legacy. And it's a much worse punishment than anything an asterisk could ever do to him.

Always Red
08-08-2007, 08:07 PM
Let's find out...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3xxYfr9aaE

* Viewer discretion advised *

Yep, his son hugged him at home plate, and Bonds never even hugged him back. I thought I saw that earlier today, but wasn't sure. Thanks for posting this.

There's a memory for you, my boy. It's all about me!

Wow.

Pete Rose catches a lot of crap, and deservedly so. But compare how he treated his son (@4192), to how Bonds did his son, at the pinnacle moment of their lives. It speaks volumes to me. Flame away...

SandyD
08-08-2007, 08:52 PM
I was asleep. I actually put the game on, and was reading in bed, but I fell asleep. When I woke up, I didn't even look to see who won or anything. Not exactly sure how I found out he hit it.

Mostly, I'm glad it's over.

jojo
08-08-2007, 09:28 PM
Yep, his son hugged him at home plate, and Bonds never even hugged him back. I thought I saw that earlier today, but wasn't sure. Thanks for posting this.

There's a memory for you, my boy. It's all about me!

Wow.

Pete Rose catches a lot of crap, and deservedly so. But compare how he treated his son (@4192), to how Bonds did his son, at the pinnacle moment of their lives. It speaks volumes to me. Flame away...

Oh c'mon...he hugged his kids and wife several times during the ceremony and thanked each one individually in his speech. Abraham Lincoln could've risen from the grave, dressed himself in drag and stood at home plate and I doubt, at that moment, Bonds would've even been aware of it.... To me, Bonds looked a little bit like a deer in the headlights during that trip around the bases.

MWM
08-08-2007, 09:59 PM
I'm in the same boat. My indifference on this one is staggering. All it's done is make me not care about the record.

That's pretty much how I feel about it. The record use to be something special, now it isn't. I don't care either way any more.(until someone tells me how sad that is :evil: ). My first reaction was one of irritation, but that was replaced with indifference rather quickly. I feel much the same about the single season record. The anticipation every year of whether or not someone would get to 61 was pretty cool. Now, it really doesn't matter. Does that take away from my overall enjoyment of the game? Nah. The game lose something by all of this? Maybe, but ultimately, it doesn't really matter that much.


I'm not for a generational asterisk, but books have been devoted to Barry Bonds' steroid use. I was never a fan of before-and-after-photography arguments or numbers-based arguments, but when you've seen his doping regimen in print it tends to be a compelling piece of evidence.

I'm actually not for an asterisk on Bonds either. MLB let him go this far with it. He did what he did on the field. There's no erasing what happened.

That said, the career home run record didn't really mean anything before Babe Ruth. Then Hank Aaron came along and added to the luster of the record. My guess is the record will get a lot less reverence until someone perceived as legitimate comes along and passes Bonds. For me, and it sounds like a host of others as well, the record is now just a number and not the delineation of greatness it once was. Hopefully A-Rod will change that before another decade passes.

Well stated here, too. I've never been one to advocate an asterisk or to kick him out of the game. The record is his. The only thing I was ever concerned about was that it's placed in context. The fact that a large percentage of baseball fans just don't care about the record is just fine with me.

redsmetz
08-09-2007, 05:44 AM
I came across this op-ed piece from Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson from today's edition:


Ruthian or Faustian?

By Harold Meyerson
Thursday, August 9, 2007

The home-run king was on a steady regimen of performance-altering illegal substances. No, not Barry Bonds, who whacked No. 756 Tuesday night in San Francisco. I'm talking here about Babe Ruth, whose years of home-run production coincided almost precisely with the years that Prohibition was in effect, during which the liquid portion of his diet consisted chiefly of beer, gin, scotch, rye and bourbon.

So should the Babe's record rate an asterisk, too? Seven hundred fourteen homers, a record possibly affected by a steady diet of what in lesser mortals would have been performance-depressing drugs of incontestable illegality. But for the wear and tear on his stomach lining, and the years he spent pitching rather than playing every day, and the fact that he played when seasons were 154 games, not the 162 they've consisted of since the '60s, he would have hit more.

That, of course, is not the reason a de facto asterisk will cling to Bonds's home-run record. Bonds's prodigious late-career power burst is the product of a bulked-up body and a time when a number of baseball's leading power hitters appeared to transform themselves through the dark magic of steroids.

But Bonds is no mere Mark McGwire, a power hitter turned superpower hitter by the abrupt accumulation of muscle mass. Bonds was plainly the best player in the game even before the bulking began. In his 2001 historical baseball abstract, which evaluated players through the 1999 season, historian-statistician Bill James ranked Bonds the 16th-greatest player ever -- the only active player among the top 25. Bonds, wrote James, was "certainly the most unappreciated superstar of my lifetime" and was by a huge margin the best player of the '90s.

That No. 16 ranking, wrote James, "is based on the assumption that his career ends with the 1999 season."

All this was before Bonds's power burst, before he started putting up seasonal numbers that rivaled Ruth at his best. James assumed that Bonds's career would continue for several years (Bonds was 35 in 1999); he most certainly did not assume that Bonds's greatest years were still ahead of him. On the basis of those calculations -- that Bonds would still have a number of great seasons, but nothing like the astonishing seasons he racked up in the early years of this decade -- James opined that Bonds might well end up "among the five greatest players in the history of the game."

So that, in the judgment of perhaps the most authoritative scholar the game has ever known, was the not-so-grim fate awaiting Bonds in baseball Valhalla. Yet, if we conclude that Bonds did then proceed to bulk up with steroids, it was not a fate that he would settle for. Maybe he bulked up only because he saw lesser players such as McGwire stealing his thunder or because the records he believed he might set would guarantee a still more lucrative future. Or maybe, just maybe, he bulked up because No. 5 wasn't good enough, because he could then have a shot at Ruth's seasonal records or Henry Aaron's lifetime home-run crown. Maybe he wanted to be No. 1, or at least give Ruth a run for his money as the greatest player in the history of the game.

These are not mutually exclusive hypotheses, and the only person who could sort them out for us -- Bonds himself -- is unlikely to do so. But if there's any truth to them, the story of Barry Bonds is less Ruthian than Faustian.

Bonds's tragedy, if that's the word for it, is that he lives on the brink of a Faustian time. The engineering of bodies, whether through drugs or genetics, is well underway, bringing in its train the potential for healthier lives and for ethical dilemmas we can scarcely imagine. Do we really think that 50 years hence, athletes' bodies won't be altered by methods that make today's steroids look primitive? And our ability to predict where science is headed is surely greater than our ability to predict where the laws regulating that science are headed. The only sure bet is that there will be athletes who avail themselves of that science regardless of the law -- just as there are today.

The steroids now in use, of course, not only strengthen bodies but break them down. And using banned substances when his opponents don't gives an athlete an unfair advantage. Bonds's decision to use steroids, if that is the decision he made, was deeply wrong. But Bonds's sins -- the questionable use of science, the raging drive to be No. 1 -- are, we should remember, distinctly sins of our time.

redsmetz
08-09-2007, 05:49 AM
And today's NY Times lead editorial:


Barry Bonds at 756*

Published: August 9, 2007

The natural curve of a baseball slugger’s performance resembles the arc of a high, looping home run — up and up and up and then, inevitably, down and down. The ball can do nothing about gravity, and, ideally, the athlete can do nothing about growing older except to learn, if he hasn’t already, a certain patience and grace.

Tuesday night, Barry Bonds hit a fastball over the right-center field fence in AT&T Park that broke Hank Aaron’s career home run record. Bonds is unquestionably one of the greatest hitters in the history of baseball. This should have been one of those stories of perseverance, achievement and comeback that baseball fans love to retell on drowsy August days, like Alex Rodriguez recovering from a frustrating 2006 season to become the youngest player ever to hit 500 career homers.

But Bonds did not just break Aaron’s record, he defied the law of baseball gravity, and for that there will be always be a question about his achievement. The career arc that Bonds has followed, at least since the end of the ’90s, is no arc at all. It’s a gravity-defying line drive, still rising as it vanishes from sight.

There is no conclusive proof that Bonds’s superhuman crescendo from the age of 35 on, when most players — and especially home run hitters — are falling back from their peak, was chemically induced. There is no shortage, either, of allegations that he took steroids obtained from the notorious Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, known as Balco. Fueled by the spectacle, and deceit, of Mark McGwire’s steroid-aided 70 home runs in 1998, the fear of baseball fans was that Bonds, a man of supreme natural gifts, one of the game’s great all-rounders, had retooled himself physically for the home run, and the home run alone, the least interesting play in baseball.

Well, that home run has now been hit, the one that breaks Aaron’s record with an asterisk. Bonds, who has been the least affable of players, has been affability itself for the past few days. He is protected — or covered up — by the players’ union and organized baseball, which loves the attention as much as Bonds does. You can hear the logic of the game as it is played now in Bonds’s argument that he is fundamentally an entertainer, a claim that is echoed roundly by his fans. To our minds, though, there was nothing wrong with the original Bonds, except perhaps his character. Back then, at least he displayed — without those nagging doubts — the grace of his own gifts, the patience of his own strength.

RedFanAlways1966
08-09-2007, 12:53 PM
Taken from Tom Archdeacon's article in today's Dayton Daily News...

Bonds may have moved past Aaron — whose class and dignity showed again when he offered a video-screen salute immediately after the home run — but he didn't eclipse him.

His home run record lacks magic. It seems diminished, dulled.

Such is the tarnish that comes when people think you've padded your stats with performance-enhancing drugs since 1998. And how could you think otherwise?

• The 43-year-old Bonds hit 292 home runs in his first 10 big league years and in the last 11-plus — contrary to the decline you find in aging ballplayers — he's hit 464. Before 1998 he hit a home run every 16 at bats. Since then he's almost doubled the rate.

• Several probers — especially two San Francisco writers who penned the book "Game of Shadows" — point to his beefy body and big head and claim he took fertility drugs, human growth hormones and steroids, including one for fattening cattle.

• If "Game of Shadows" had it wrong, why hasn't Bonds sued? And if nothing were amiss, why would Bonds' former personal trainer, Greg Anderson, choose to sit in prison — for almost a year now — rather than talk to the feds who think the Giants slugger lied to a grand jury about knowingly using steroids?

• Then there's Patrick Arnold, the chemist who invented the previously undetectable "clear" and "cream" steroids distributed by the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative. Arnold told HBO he believes Bonds took drugs supplied by BALCO.

• And Kimberly Bell, Bonds' longtime mistress and a grand jury witness, told the New York Times she saw Bonds inject steroids.

savafan
08-09-2007, 06:10 PM
Stick with ESPN for every Barry Bonds at bat, as the Giants' slugger closes in on yet another record, now needing just 111 homeruns to surpass Saduhura Oh as the world's all-time home run champion.

jojo
08-09-2007, 06:54 PM
Stick with ESPN for every Barry Bonds at bat, as the Giants' slugger closes in on yet another record, now needing just 111 homeruns to surpass Saduhura Oh as the world's all-time home run champion.

Ya but after adjusting for park and league, Saduhura really only had 7 HRs....

savafan
08-09-2007, 07:21 PM
Ya but after adjusting for park and league, Saduhura really only had 7 HRs....

What about the number of walk off shots (really hate that term btw) that Ruth hit with runners on base, that back in his day, according to the rules of the game, were only counted as singles?

vaticanplum
08-09-2007, 08:03 PM
Just echoing TeamCasey who put it well. We've gone over this before.

Murdering and Kidnapping your opponent are also not specifically banned by baseball.

But if you need a "document", Fay Vincent's 1991 memo (which specifically mentions steriods IIRC) should do it.

Steriods were banned in baseball for as long as they were a "controlled substance", that would be around 1987 IIRC.

The fact that they didn't test for it until 2003 doesn't change that.

Baseball's "rules" are IN ADDITION to the laws of the nation, not "INSTEAD OF".

If something normally illegal is "allowed" in a sport (such as speeding in car racing or physical assault in boxing) it must be specifically APPROVED and most likely regulated.

Neither the government nor MLB ever stated that it was OK to use steriods in baseball.

I think the issue is that if you kill your wife, the country can deal with it and throw you in jail, but baseball has no recourse in keeping you out of the Hall of Fame. That seems a lot less related to baseball than steroids, but unless that distinction is clearly made, it gets muddy. Say a player killed his teammate instead of the wife. Does that keep him out of the Hall of Fame? And in this case, of course, rules or not, since Bonds never tested positive during his baseball career, MLB's recourse is shadowier than the government's, which has and had more specific rules about it. And MLB has no one to blame for that but themselves.

Me, I'm pretty bored by the whole thing. I've gotten riled up over it at times, but the villification of Barry has gotten insane to me. Which doesn't at all mean I think his record is legit (I don't). I'm with Always Red, I guess. And my mixed feelings and indifference are compounded by the fact that I never get the fuss over records, awards, halls of fame anyway. It means more to me if Adam Dunn has a single walk-off homer when I'm in attendance than if he ultimately hits 800. Records take a long time, but baseball is played day by day. Day by day is where the sport happens; it doesn't happen in Cooperstown.

Ltlabner
08-09-2007, 08:08 PM
Reading over at BP I noticed that the idea of "we don't really know what effect steroids have on player performance" was being floated by several editorlists.

What utter rubbish.

If this stuff didn't really have an effect, why did they keep taking it? Why did they keep finding new ways to inject/injest different cocktails of chemicals? Why did they remain in the shadows and sneak around to do it?

Another line of tripe is that "well, Barry just has good pitch recognition and roids don't help with that". That may be true. But I don't see many people arguing against the idea that roids help maintain bat speed so that a man in his 40's can still get around on a MLB fastball when normal early 40's men are nursing sore backs and noticing they can't exercise as hard as they once did.

vaticanplum
08-09-2007, 08:12 PM
Reading over at BP I noticed that the idea of "we don't really know what effect steroids have on player performance" was being floated by several editorlists.

What utter rubbish.

If this stuff didn't really have an effect, why did they keep taking it? Why did they keep finding new ways to inject/injest different cocktails of chemicals? Why did they remain in the shadows and sneak around to do it?

Again, I think this the argument of quantitativeness. We KNOW that steroids have an effect, we may even have flat evidence against Bonds, which the government may well end up using against him. but we have no idea how many of Barry Bonds's home runs can be "directly attributed" to them.

Which is why the organization has backed itself into a corner. You can't take action without quantitative facts, not with the mentality we've gained from our wonderful (and I don't mean that sarcastically) justice system. and quantitative facts are exactly the things MLB didn't bother to get, because it didn't suit them at the time.

Ltlabner
08-09-2007, 08:15 PM
Again, I think this the argument of quantitativeness. We KNOW that steroids have an effect, we may even have flat evidence against Bonds, which the government may well end up using against him. but we have no idea how many of Barry Bonds's home runs can be "directly attributed" to them.

Which is why the organization has backed itself into a corner. You can't take action without quantitative facts, not with the mentality we've gained from our wonderful (and I don't mean that sarcastically) justice system. and quantitative facts are exactly the things MLB didn't bother to get, because it didn't suit them at the time.

Ah yes. However MLB is not a court of law. It's a corporation (I believe) or at least a private orginization. They can set the standards where they wish (assuming the union signs off on it).

So that you can't say homer #745 was clean and #106 was dirty doesn't really mean much.

I'm not arguing MLB should put an astrics on the record, and agree 100% that they've mostly shot themselves in the foot. But that we don't have incontrovertable proof that roids allow you to hit 10% more homers doesn't change the fact MLB can move to say roids are not allowed and fans can't doubt the veriasty of Bonds' acomplishment.

vaticanplum
08-09-2007, 08:20 PM
Ah yes. However MLB is not a court of law. It's a corporation (I believe) or at least a private orginization. They can set the standards where they wish (assuming the union signs off on it).

That's true, and they very well might. But the lack of backbone they've shown toward this issue in the past gives me no faith that they'd make their standards retroactive to players like Bonds. And in fact, no matter how I feel about Bonds and the fact that I think this is NOT a true record, I'd find it incredibly hypocritical if they did. When the money was rolling in, they ignored it. When the public gets outraged, they follow? You can pick integrity or material gain, but you need to be consistent about it. In this case, I'd say it's almost too late to have both.

Ltlabner
08-09-2007, 08:25 PM
That's true, and they very well might. But the lack of backbone they've shown toward this issue in the past gives me no faith that they'd make their standards retroactive to players like Bonds. And in fact, no matter how I feel about Bonds and the fact that I think this is NOT a true record, I'd find it incredibly hypocritical if they did. When the money was rolling in, they ignored it. When the public gets outraged, they follow? You can pick integrity or material gain, but you need to be consistent about it. In this case, I'd say it's almost too late to have both.

It would be massivley hypocitical if MLB went after past players with an attitude of moral outrage. Most definatley. They reaped the rewards of the resurgance of the long-ball and it's pretty obvious they likely knew of the growing issue and ignored it.

However, if MLB approaches it as "we were part of the problem, we screwed up and we are righting a wrong" then I'd have no issue at all with them going after retired players. To not do so is like the parent who is afraid to talk to their kids about abusive drinking and drug use because they hit the skull bong in high school.

That MLB screwed up roids in the 90's doesn't preclude them from dealing with the matter in the 00's.

MWM
08-09-2007, 08:31 PM
Who cares if we don't know "exactly how much" it affects performance. I'd Barry Bonds' stat line is proof that it has a significant impact on some players.

vaticanplum
08-09-2007, 08:58 PM
Who cares if we don't know "exactly how much" it affects performance. I'd Barry Bonds' stat line is proof that it has a significant impact on some players.

But that's just my point -- it's proof enough for us. MLB, to take the record away from him, may well need something more substantive. The home run record was always a question of a number alone; there were no caveats surrounding it. In order for MLB to change the record, it likely needs quantifiable, provable caveats.

We don't NEED to care about quantifiable evidence, because we're the court of opinion and the evidence is abundantly clear even if it's not presented in numerical form. And the court of public opinion will be, I believe, the one which ultimately judges and remembers Bonds in the loudest and most significant matter. But MLB has to judge on a different standard. They have a rulebook. They have to write things down. They have to face the Players' Union. A hundred other things that we have the luxury of not considering.

jojo
08-09-2007, 09:09 PM
What about the number of walk off shots (really hate that term btw) that Ruth hit with runners on base, that back in his day, according to the rules of the game, were only counted as singles?

How many could that have been? My lazy, not looking it up guess is 15 at the most?????

GAC
08-09-2007, 09:11 PM
Ah yes. However MLB is not a court of law. It's a corporation (I believe) or at least a private orginization. They can set the standards where they wish (assuming the union signs off on it).

But they are, in a sense, a "court of law" in that they enact rules (laws) and codes of conduct for their employees, who when found to have violated any of them, are disciplined accordingly. They have that right to do so. If not, then why is Rose banned? Because he violated a stated rule.

That's the ambiguous question surrounding steroids. When did it become such a rule, plain and simple, where they can hold players accountable?

It seems to be pretty straight forward when it comes to such events as the Tour de France. But with baseball, it seems the heirarchy is avoiding the situation and "hoping" the government investigation/probes will some how sort it out.

As far as I'm concerned, MLB knew this was going on for years. But since it was helping the game, they looked the other way until it became more high profile and publicized, and when they could no longer avoid it. Now it's a problem?

savafan
08-09-2007, 09:18 PM
How many could that have been? My lazy, not looking it up guess is 15 at the most?????

No idea, but the fact still remains that the rules were different then.

MWM
08-09-2007, 09:19 PM
I don't want MLB to take any records away.