Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by treblah, Mar 7, 2006.
* - Loves the 'roids
Who cares if he did or if he didnt?
STEROIDS do NOT help you hit the ball, he consistantly hits the ball. They may help him get stronger, but who cares? Makes the game more exciting if you ask me.
You can't just magically take steroids and be able to hit home runs. He has a LOT of skill, and one of the best swings in baseball, ever.
Every major league player can hit the ball, or they wouldn't be in the major leagues. The difference is converting put-outs into dingers.
Not taking sides on the Bonds business, but we did see a huge and unprecedented increase in home run output from a number of players that just happened to coincide the peak period of doping. But maybe it was just a coincidence!
Strength won't help his accuracy...but it does help him hit harder, and if he's going for home run records, every little bit counts, and that extra power could turn a good shot into the outfield into a home run.
Sports should be competition on equal footing....not weighted towards people who can sneak steroids on the side without getting caught.
actually, taking steroids do improve the eyesight, at least according to the article I read on CNNSI about the Bonds book and expose. So I think it could help you be a better hitter too. Bonds was already a fabulous hitter, though. The pictures of the changes in his body over time are kind of scary too.
I've always thought each sport should be split into 2 streams - one that allows drug use, and another that doesn't. That way everyone on the 'roids can compete fairly and the others will also be able to compete at the "natural" level. The only difference will be the numerous health issues faced by the steroid users down the track.
Yeah, we can watch their testicles grow or shrink, depending on their original gender.
Not only do 'roids turn outs in to home runs, as others have said, but it's simply incorrect to say 'roids don't help you hit the ball.
First, they do improve your eyesight (at least HGH does). And second, they build muscle, including a lot of fast twitch muscle. That means they help you get the bat around faster which translates in to strikes becoming hits and in to being able to wait longer before swinging.
Plenty of people seem to care. The game does not need apologists willing to overlook reliance by players on substances that provide any competitive edge over those who abide by the rules. Yes, Barry has skills ... but, unfortunately, he has tainted himself in ways that will be remembered for as long as anything he did on the playing field.
Exactly. Well, except the accuracy bit.......
Yes, the ones he took improve his eyesight, so of course they help him hit home runs. He was a more accurate hitter, and not only was his eyesight better, but so was his reaction time, swing speed, and power.
Bonds is a punk but I think that MCGwire/Sosa are getting off easy. They are just as guilty.
Steroids do help because they allow a person to work out harder (get bigger/more POWERFUL) and recover quicker. The extra bulk and of fast twitch muscles allows Bonds to generate more bat speed which helps him hit the ball farther.
I think that if Baseball truly wants to clean up the sport (which they don't), then they would go to an Olympic style punishment. Test everyone at least once or twice a year. Then 2 year ban (with no pay) for a first offense and a lifetime ban for a second offense.
IMO that is the only way that baseball can begin to clean up the sport.
They also need to add Aphetamines to the list of banned substances.
Steroids may not help your hand/eye coordination. But, it wil make a regular fly ball a home run. They obviously helped Bonds, he posted that 73 out of nowhere...
I still want him to break the record though. It is not that I like him, but i love the drama.
is that what they taught you at football practice? noiiiiiiiiiiiiice brah!
Bonds is on the juice? And in other news, the sky is blue, water is wet and fire is hot.
Anyone who says steroids dont make a difference is an idiot. The very fact that these atheletes are falling all over themselves trying to shoot up is proof enough that steroids improve your game. Otherwise they wouldnt be doing it. And as for Bonds, the man went from hitting 30-ish homers a year to blasting 70 out of the park and getting twice as many hits almost overnight. And lets not forget that he made all this improvement in his game at an age when his physical abilities should actually be getting worse.
Without the juice Bonds is nothing more than a better than average player.
How's the view with your head in the sand?
Who cares? People who actually care about the game, and not the insane power numbers that juiced players put up. I would rather see a tension filled, well pitched game than a pinball-like home run derby.
Anyone who knows anything about steroids knows about their benefits to an athlete. If there was no benefit, why would they take them?
Don't be a fool and think that Bonds hit all those homers with his God-given talents. Yes, he has a nice swing and is a good hitter - not great - but steroids turned a lot of liners into scorching liners, and a lot of deep fly balls into homers. If you take out the "fear factor" of his homer-happy years and adjust his ABs to include some of those walks he never would have received if not juiced, he is a career .285 hitter who hits about 30 dingers a year. Not great, but merely above average.
Yes, he is talented, but you don't go from averaging 33 homers a year to a one-year breakout of 73 without more than a little chemical enhancement.
Yesterday i was watching WBC Usa v mexico, and i started to ponder why bonds all the sudden got huge in muscle mass .. i saw Junior @ bat during the WBC game and i realized that JR. increase his mass ever slowing by working out/good diet etc ..
Then the pic of Bonds as a woman in the baseball season thread and i started to think body growth hormones drugs etc .. Finally i was watching a show called the man who had the exploding arms on here
they could be a size of baby peas by now
They're called "performance enhancing drugs" for a reason, jeez.
Actually he was quite a bit above average by 1998, probably a sure Hall of Famer even then. Maybe that's the most disturbing part of it, that an already great player felt he had to cheat and risk his health to stay on top of other 'roiders.
Many people are talking about how his records should be erased, but I don't see how that's possible. How many homers would he have hit without steroids? He had 400+ by his early 30s, so it's quite reasonable to expect he would have gotten to 500 by now instead of 700. There's no way to know which homers were because of the juice and which weren't. Putting asterisks on his stats is almost as bad, since (shamefully) steroids weren't against the rules at the time. Should we then tag the totals of others that are suspected of using?
No, I think the most likely solution is that all the numbers stay, and anyone who's more than a casual fan knows the context in which they were accumulated.
Good points aloofman... some thoughts of my own (some overlap):
Yep, Bonds was a lock as a Hall of Famer before the 'roids. No telling now what his numbers would have been like but I would guess that he would have compared very favorably to someone like Willie Mays. To have been mentioned alongside a legend like Mays... Bonds would have been a legend too.
When it comes to records, I'm with you... you can't really asterisk an entire era or start selectively erasing records. That was never done with the so called "dead-ball" era either... Pete Rose's individual records still stand as well. My feeling is that Bonds' will too.
However, if baseball (ie. Hall voters, Selig) would grow a complete set... they would ban cheaters like Bonds from the Hall of Fame, like they did Rose and Shoeless Joe. Shoeless Joe, is a fitting example in my opinion because from what I've read he was never proven to have been a part of the fixing scandal, whereas his teammates were. If Shoeless can be kept out of the Hall for guilt by association, so can (and should) Bonds.
Fortunately for Bonds, I don't think that will happen... unfortunately for Bonds, he'll go into the Hall not being mentioned in the same breath as Mays and Williams, but more so with names like Cobb and that pitcher who has admitted repeatedly of throwing spit-balls (can't for the life of me remember his name, though) throughout his career.
He was more than a good hitter. He could run, field, and throw - a true five tool player. I am not saying that he was garbage before the juice. In context, his average and power numbers were better than average. What separated him from other players was the other 3 tools and the intensity that he brought to every at bat in every game.
Yes, he was a HOF caliber player than, and honestly he still is. The big argument now on sports radio is whether a cheater should be allowed into the Hall. Problem is, while what he did is against the laws of the land, it was not specifically against the rules of the game. It is a small distinction, but no one is clamoring to eject Gaylord Perry from the hall for doctoring baseballs and revelling in it - which is against the rules of the game.
I think it is terribly sad that a talent like Bonds was corrupted by jealousy over the attention that McGwire and Sosa were getting. He rightfully thought he was a better player and if they could do what they were doing with less talent, imagine what he could do if he took steroids also.
I was never a big Bonds fan, but he was - and still is - a first ballot Hall of Famer. He is a cheater and corrupted the "integrity of the game" by skirting the ideals of baseball and breaking the law of the US, but he still belongs in the Hall.
EDIT - stonyc, were were posting at the same time. Not trying to steal your points.
No, the record books can't be changed. But the real verdict of baseball will be known five years after Bonds retires, the first time his name comes up for the Hall of Fame. I expect he'll join with Pete Rose -- a player with the statistics to make it to Cooperstown, but also a cloud over his head preventing him from being inducted.
Love or hate Barry Bonds, this books looks to be an important document of a period when MLB tried to avert its eyes from the epidemic of doping. To the everlasting shame of the Commissioner's office, nothing was done. If anybody deserves to have his head handed to him over this scandal, it's Bud Selig. He should have gone a long time ago.
there is not such thing as equal footing when genetics comes into play. it is a fact that some people are more muscular than others. it is a fact that some people have much better hand-eye coordination than others. that's one of the reasons why i don't care about all these accusations of steroids, blood-doping, etc.
I disagree on Shoeless Joe. It's been shown that he was something of a country bumpkin who played well enough in the Series to doubt that he was deliberately throwing it. But he knew of the offer to throw the Series and didn't stop it or notify anyone that it was happening. He was complicit in the scandal and deserves to be banned.
Back to Bonds: maybe the worst part of this is still to come. Assuming that his performance doesn't decline drastically, he stays healthy, and doesn't fail a steroid test, it's very possible that he'll challenge Aaron's record of 756 home runs. Let's consider what that will mean. He'll be roundly booed in every road game, and maybe by some at home too. The majority of the public will be rooting against him. Roger Maris had his detractors when he challenged Ruth's single-season record, with some saying his record didn't really count, or that they belonged in two different categories. But he was still cheered when he broke the record. Bonds might be booed when he does. Some crazy fan might he even try to stop him personally. This would be a spectacle unlike anything we've really seen.
With this possibility looming, baseball executives must be hoping that Bonds has a career-ending injury as soon as possible. Knowing Bonds as we do, it seems very unlikely that he would retire to spare the game the embarrassment. He'd probably prefer to rub it in. Baseball seems to have no recourse to kick him out of baseball except by some edict from Selig, which is doubtful. The next year or two could be the worst PR baseball has seen in a long, long time.
The argument can certainly be made that since he had the stats to be in the Hall before going on the juice, and he didn't break any baseball rules, that he should go in the Hall anyway.
But as a practical matter there is a big obstacle to that. The Hall of Fame voting isn't decided by baseball fans with critical thinking skills. It's decided by voters that are mostly baseball writers. They've made Hall of Fame choices in the past that were based more on emotion than reason (Phil Rizzuto, for example) and they'll do it again. Right now the majority of baseball writers seem to be firmly against Bonds going into the Hall. Even McGwire and Sosa are questionable right now with much less evidence against them. It's hard to say how steroids will affect Hall choices in the future, but right now writers seem to be holding it against the major suspects. That would be enough to keep Bonds out of the Hall even if he's eligible.
I agree that he should still be the the HOF, but I don't get a ballot. Bonds has not helped his cause by being a generally surly pain in the *** to those very sportswriters for years. Now I am sure that a great number of them feel like it is payback time.
If Bonds never took steroids and ended up with 550 homers and a few MVPs, the writers would not have been able to keep him out. Now they have their justification with the steroids and I would be willing to bet that they will keep him out - or at least keep him waiting. If they do, wait for Bonds to crank up the racism rhetoric again.