Bonds bombshell: Book details slugger's steroid use

[Cyclone792]

It's all kind of moot really, because things happened when they did in the circumstances under which they did. Every single record does and unfortunately they just can't evolve in the same way the sport itself does. As long as we want record books to celebrate the achievements of the sport's great players -- and it's a noble thing to do, I think -- the allowances for the changes in time and the acceptance of the way things were in the past just have to be made. I do agree that sometimes the Hall of Fame and the record books and things of that nature are taken too far in being used as a basis for comparison, when I think they should stand as more of simply a celebration of accomplishment under the circumstances in which they took place.

What you say above is my point. The sport evolved, or the players in the sport evolved before the sport outlawed whatever disgrace the players participated in.

But one thing you say is "If it wasn't against baseball rules, they took it." And that's the problem in this situation as I see it. Steroids ARE against the rules in today's game. Bang, that paritcular extenuating circumstance is shot down. We can examine why steroids weren't illegal many decades ago, whether they existed, if so how strong they were...it doesn't matter. We can't change the fact that they weren't illegal and we can't know how a change in this rule might have affected the players or the game. But Barry Bonds knew they were illegal and he knew how they affected the game. I don't see this as another argument of steroids vs. gambling. They're both against the rules in the game as it stands today and anyone who breaks those rules under our current system should be punished for it.

The key is they are against the rules today. I believe it's been pointed out by someone else, but if not ... were they against the rules at the time Bonds used them?

That is the key right there. Barry Bonds could have used all the steroids he wanted in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 etc ... but if the game didn't outlaw them, then how did he do anything wrong? He did not break any rule within the game, which is why the game will not do anything to punish him even if everything in the book is proven to be absolutely true (the lone exception is if that proof includes information that he fixed the steroid tests).

This is where the whole illegal argument comes into play, and I understand that.

Assume you're walking down the street and I throw a 99mph fastball at your head with the intent to injure you. Chances are, I'm getting arrested, prosecuted, you name it. If I'm on the mound and do that, do I get prosecuted? Very doubtful. I might not even get thrown out of the game (so in effect, I could throw at your head with an intent to injure you again!) It's the same way in hockey; on the ice I can skate up to you and essentially assault you, but if I did the same thing on a street sidewalk then I'm likely to be charged with assault.

The sport will police itself, and in some cases that extends beyond the reach of the law policing some illegal activities that occur on the field of play. The most important aspect of this is it's the job of law enforcement officials to police illegal steroid use in society, not the law of baseball officials. Baseball officials are only responsible for policing their own laws within the game itself.

[Cyclone792]

Put me in the category of questioning Bonds' HOF legitimacy. The cause and effect of his steroid use beginning in the late 199os is just too great. The other issues you bring up are totally different issues and must be considered on their own merits. As for Bonds' merits, it will be interesting come time for HOF voting time how many feel like you do and how many feel like I do.

Well, that all begs several questions:

1) Do you believe Cap Anson should be in the Hall of Fame?
2) Do you believe Kenesaw Mountain Landis should be in the Hall of Fame?
3) Do you believe Ty Cobb should be in the Hall of Fame?
4) Do you believe Charles Comiskey should be in the Hall of Fame?

I can list several more, but you probably get the point.

[westofyou]

The cause and effect of his steroid use beginning in the late 199os is just too great.

According to the SI article it began in 1998, Barry was the best player in the game before that.

[Cyclone792]

According to the SI article it began in 1998, Barry was the best player in the game before that.

Yep, his 1993 season is one of the greatest single seasons of all-time, but few people will recognize it as such.

In 80 years after everyone posting and viewing this thread is gone, people will be comparing Barry Bonds to Ted Williams as an offensive machine. Both players will be in the Hall of Fame, and people will be comparing the greatness of Bonds to the greatness of Williams. Nobody will care about steroids.

Joe Jackson and Pete Rose, on the other hand, will still be in the same place that they're in right now.

[westofyou]

Yep, his 1993 season is one of the greatest single seasons of all-time, but few people will recognize it as such.

Man oh man, that was a great season of baseball, I was front row until the end... too bad the Giants lost that year.

[Cedric]

Yep, his 1993 season is one of the greatest single seasons of all-time, but few people will recognize it as such.

In 80 years after everyone posting and viewing this thread is gone, people will be comparing Barry Bonds to Ted Williams as an offensive machine. Both players will be in the Hall of Fame, and people will be comparing the greatness of Bonds to the greatness of Williams. Nobody will care about steroids.

Joe Jackson and Pete Rose, on the other hand, will still be in the same place that they're in right now.

Poor Barry. Who cares about baseball at this point? If you are that willing to put your life at risk and ruin your family you aren't much of a human anyway. I'm sick and tired of the Barry apologists.

So because other people cheated in the past we are supposed to all be ok with Barry Bonds? Explain what you want us to do?

[Dom Heffner]

According to the SI article it began in 1998, Barry was the best player in the game before that.

Yes, and because of steroids, he remained the best player in the game- and even better than before- for longer than he should have.

Anamoly my tail.

[red-in-la]

That's been my point for years, literally. For the past 40-50 years, players have been taking whatever they could to gain an edge, be it HGH or something else. If it wasn't against baseball's rules, they took/did it. And sometimes if it was against baseball's rules, they still did it (see Ford, Whitey and Perry, Gaylord).

And before that? It was an all-white league.

People put all these records into a sacred land, but still fail to see the conditions during which they were accomplished. Babe Ruth hit 714 home runs ... and not one of them came against a black pitcher. There is no asterik next to Ruth's name, and there won't be one next to Bonds' name, regardless of whether he took anything or not.

Gaylord Perry cheated, wrote a book about it and laughed about it. He's in the Hall of Fame. If Barry Bonds took steroids, then he can stand in line right next to Gaylord Perry. The writers put Perry in, and they'll also put Bonds in. This isn't Pete Rose and betting on the game, which is significantly worse than anything Bonds, Giambi, McGwire, etc. have done.

If this book is accurate, and unless I misread what has been put up here. Bonds lied to a grand jury AND he used illegal prescriptions. Both are FEDERAL offenses. Am I wrong about what he supposedly did?

If he did these two things, not only should he not be in the Hall, he should be banned....just like that other guy they got on tax evasion....pete somebody....

[KronoRed]

I wonder why 1998, I don't see a performance drop around that time.

Wonder what made him do it.

[Cedric]

Cyclone- You are really in total denial if you think Barry Bonds legacy is in tow. I think this arguement is almost personal for you. You took a stand for Bonds awhile ago and you aren't going to back down. No matter how absurd the stand is.

[Redsfaithful]

It's also true, according to a study done by WEEI radio in Boston, that if we allowed for the conditions of his time, such as season length, field size, and pitching stats, Ruth would have had something like 1140 homers in the current system.

Babe Ruth would have been a thoroughly average player if he were playing today. Pitchers didn't throw as hard, they didn't throw so many different pitches, and pitchers weren't well coached or conditioned in Ruth's time.

Barry Bonds would have hit a ridiculous number of home runs hitting against the pitchers Ruth hit against.

Cyclone, excellent post.

Why do we draw the limits where we draw them? Why is Creatine ok but Winstrol isn't? They're both performance enhancers.

Why aren't greenies as despised as steroids? They absolutely did have game changing effects on players. Pete Rose popped them like they were candy. Surely he wouldn't have had the same energy level without them.

What Bonds did was wrong. But it's going to be tough to choke down the outrage coming from all directions in the coming weeks, because its hypocritical, and because some of it is so clearly racially tinged.

[Cyclone792]

If this book is accurate, and unless I misread what has been put up here. Bonds lied to a grand jury AND he used illegal prescriptions. Both are FEDERAL offenses. Am I wrong about what he supposedly did?

If he did these two things, not only should he not be in the Hall, he should be banned....just like that other guy they got on tax evasion....pete somebody....

Pete Rose is banned for betting on baseball, not tax evasion. He went to prison for tax evasion, not betting on baseball.

If Bonds lied to a grand jury and used illegal prescriptions, then it's the job of law enforcement to penalize him, not baseball's job. People are calling for him to be banned for baseball, but those offenses are crimes to society, not crimes against baseball.

Baseball only polices itself, not society.

[Cedric]

Babe Ruth would have been a thoroughly average player if he were playing today. Pitchers didn't throw as hard, they didn't throw so many different pitches, and pitchers weren't well coached or conditioned in Ruth's time.

Barry Bonds would have hit a ridiculous number of home runs hitting against the pitchers Ruth hit against.

Cyclone, excellent post.

Why do we draw the limits where we draw them? Why is Creatine ok but Winstrol isn't? They're both performance enhancers.

Why aren't greenies as despised as steroids? They absolutely did have game changing effects on players. Pete Rose popped them like they were candy. Surely he wouldn't have had the same energy level without them.

What Bonds did was wrong. But it's going to be tough to choke down the outrage coming from all directions in the coming weeks, because its hypocritical, and because some of it is so clearly racially tinged.

Yeah, people sure let McGwire off easy. Don't just throw out the race card when you have no idea what you are talking about. MANY people dislike Bonds and want his records gone for valid reasons. It's pretty arrogant and judgemental of you to call people racist.

[Redsland]

I wonder why 1998, I don't see a performance drop around that time.

Wonder what made him do it.

The article blames it on Bonds' jealousy over the McGwire/Sosa thing. Bonds hit 47 that year, to very little acclaim.

[MWM]

I have no problem at all using rational judgment in determining that certain levels of cheating are greater than others. I don't buy the argument that because other levels of cheating exist, then we have to measure them equally.

Honestly, I couldn't care less if Bonds' makes the hall of fame or if is career stats remain intact along with his records. My only concern is in the lagacy of his accomplishments and how they rack and stack up against his peers. Barry was one of the allt-timegreats prior to 1999 and should be recognized as such. But when having conversations about the all-time greats, THAT'S the Barry that should be considered without the accomplishements of 2001-2004.

But I'd at least like to see his defenders at least admit that the massive increase in his numbers in those years are the result of doping and not super human ability (above what he shoed throughout the 90s).