Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Baseball Season 2006
- Thread starter MacNut
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
aloofman said:Maybe you're just sore about not having a pitching rookie of the year of any age?
Wait, I'm sorry, there was John Montefusco. How could I forget him?
The wounds are open, aloofman, just rub in some more salt.
I actually liked Fernando. Well, as much as a Giant's fan can like a Dodger pitcher. I just never could believe his reported age. He was close to 30 the first day he walk on a ML pitching mound.
As to John "the Count" Montefusco, the best thing about him was his great nickname. If there ever was a poster boy for "Dead Brain Hurlers" it was him. The worst thing about him was how terrible he pitched against the Dodgers. Terrible, just truly terrible.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2358236
Barry Bonds used a vast array of performance-enhancing drugs, including steroids and human growth hormone, for at least five seasons beginning in 1998, according to a book written by two San Francisco Chronicle reporters.
Beginning in 1998 with injections in his buttocks of Winstrol, the same steroid used in the 1988 Olympics by Ben Johnson and last year by Rafael Palmeiro, Bonds' massive doping regimen grew more sophisticated as the years went on, according to "Game of Shadows," a book to be released later this month written by reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams.
Fainaru-Wada and Williams write that "more than a dozen people either had been told directly that he was using banned drugs, had seen him using the drugs with their own eyes, or had been provided with information that made the conclusion he was doping inescapable," according to a book excerpt in this week's Sports Illustrated.
The book, written in narrative style, is said to be based on more than a thousand pages of documents and interviews with more than 200 people.
Barry Bonds used a vast array of performance-enhancing drugs, including steroids and human growth hormone, for at least five seasons beginning in 1998, according to a book written by two San Francisco Chronicle reporters.
Beginning in 1998 with injections in his buttocks of Winstrol, the same steroid used in the 1988 Olympics by Ben Johnson and last year by Rafael Palmeiro, Bonds' massive doping regimen grew more sophisticated as the years went on, according to "Game of Shadows," a book to be released later this month written by reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams.
Fainaru-Wada and Williams write that "more than a dozen people either had been told directly that he was using banned drugs, had seen him using the drugs with their own eyes, or had been provided with information that made the conclusion he was doping inescapable," according to a book excerpt in this week's Sports Illustrated.
The book, written in narrative style, is said to be based on more than a thousand pages of documents and interviews with more than 200 people.
This sort of thing burns me that my favorite game of baseball is being tarnished by not just Bonds but by all the other cheaters, and that goes for Giambi too. Enough is enough and its time the fans of baseball start to show there displeasure and stop routing for these cheaters who are ruining the great game I love.
MacNut said:
I agree 100%. The only thing is that I do not see it out of hand right now. Thats not to say I want something done right away. It does need to be stopped before it gets out of hand. I love the Yankees but it hurts me to know that Giambi could be using performance.
MacNut said:
SI has a book excerpt:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/magazine/03/06/growth0313/1.html
And here is Bonds' reply (pdf).
Are we going to go over this again? Want an interesting discussion? Let's start a thread on drugs in sports - their history and who benefits from their usage. Want to talk about steroids in Baseball? Let's talk about why MLB ignored, no actively promoted through ignoring, the widespread use of performance enhancing drugs of all types. Not just steroids in the 80s and 90s, but amphetamines since the days of Ball Four. Let's talk about the responsibility of not just the players, who are encouraged in every way to sacrifice their health for the team, but also the owners who don't give a damn about how that sacrifice is done. Let's talk about a players union which, while focused on legitimate invasion of privacy issues, missed the ball completely on the health and safety of their members because of the drive for greater and greater salaries for the players.
Do we want to really focus only on Barry Bonds? If we are going to do so then let's deal with all the issues around Bonds. Including a prosecution that was started, not because of a discovery at BALCO, but because some members of law enforcement "knew" he couldn't be doing what he was doing fairly. Anyone else uncomfortable with that as a reason to be investigated? Let's talk about a prosecution that has systematically leaked its "evidence" to the press in order to vindicate themselves without the burden of proving a case in court - which basically is what this new book is. Let's talk about a sports press who has made the "getting of Bonds" a daily news story. Want to talk about our conjecture about whether Barry was or wasn't taking steroids? Fine, but let's deal with it all including every team's list of suspected drug users, ok? Otherwise it is just one team's fans taking potshots at another team's star. Nothing new or interesting there.
I've said all along, Barry may or may not, along with many other players, have taken steroids, but this lynch mob mentality of the media drives me crazy.
Are we going to go over this again? Want an interesting discussion? Let's start a thread on drugs in sports - their history and who benefits from their usage. Want to talk about steroids in Baseball? Let's talk about why MLB ignored, no actively promoted through ignoring, the widespread use of performance enhancing drugs of all types. Not just steroids in the 80s and 90s, but amphetamines since the days of Ball Four. Let's talk about the responsibility of not just the players, who are encouraged in every way to sacrifice their health for the team, but also the owners who don't give a damn about how that sacrifice is done. Let's talk about a players union which, while focused on legitimate invasion of privacy issues, missed the ball completely on the health and safety of their members because of the drive for greater and greater salaries for the players.
Do we want to really focus only on Barry Bonds? If we are going to do so then let's deal with all the issues around Bonds. Including a prosecution that was started, not because of a discovery at BALCO, but because some members of law enforcement "knew" he couldn't be doing what he was doing fairly. Anyone else uncomfortable with that as a reason to be investigated? Let's talk about a prosecution that has systematically leaked its "evidence" to the press in order to vindicate themselves without the burden of proving a case in court - which basically is what this new book is. Let's talk about a sports press who has made the "getting of Bonds" a daily news story. Want to talk about our conjecture about whether Barry was or wasn't taking steroids? Fine, but let's deal with it all including every team's list of suspected drug users, ok? Otherwise it is just one team's fans taking potshots at another team's star. Nothing new or interesting there.
I've said all along, Barry may or may not, along with many other players, have taken steroids, but this lynch mob mentality of the media drives me crazy.
Sayhey said:
I don't think anyone is saying that juicing wasn't an epidemic in the '90s. We all know it was, and as someone in the other thread on this subject said, it's to the everlasting shame of baseball fans everywhere that we salivated over the performance of what we all knew were artificially enchanced players in those dark and difficult seasons after the strike. It didn't redeem baseball, it hurt the game. I also place a lot of blame on Bud Selig.
Bonds just happens to be the highest of high of high-profile players to be implicated in by the doping scandal, and essentially the last one still in the game. He's not being lynched any more than any other juiced player has been or should have been.
I suspect that the publication of this book is going to be an important moment in baseball. A turning point, I sincerely hope. Yes, Barry Bonds is going to get clipped in one way or another. But this baseball fan doesn't much care about what happens to Bonds. I care more about the reputation of the game, which is in desperate need of being cleaned up. The future of the game depends more on that, than it does on Barry Bonds.
Barry Bonds only cares for himself and not the game or anyone else around him, All he wants is his money be it from the Giants or from endorsements. Should Bonds leave the game now yes, will he, no, he is to much of a prima donna to eat his pride and fess up. Will the game be better off without Barry Bonds, Maybe not in the short term but the longer he stays around the deeper it will hurt Major League Baseball's image. This isn't a personal attack on Mr Bonds but an attack on a cheater who has continually lied about using and someone who will continue to lie in the future. He will take the O.J. defense no matter how much evidence is against him.
IJ Reilly said:
If that were the case then sports writers would have been calling for the immediate banning of everyone who has ever tested positive (which doesn't include Barry) and everyone who has ever admitted to use of steroids (again which doesn't include Barry.) Yet I don't see ESPN assigning reporters to sit outside the NY Yankees locker room and asking Giambi and Sheffield how they can dare walk onto the field. I don't see story after story about the fourteen players who tested positive last year and are still in the game. I don't see page after page speculating about whether Gagne or Manny or any other star who's name has been associated by rumor with steroids should stay in the game. Let's be real, Barry has hated and has been hated by the Press his whole career and they're salivating over this story because of it. That's the sports equivalent to a lynch mob.
MacNut, you keep saying these things about how Barry only cares about himself, but where are your sources? Anyone who has watched him can tell you how much he cares about winning a Series title. Anyone who has been around the game can tell you that he isn't just about his own stats. Is he arrogant? Yes, but he is a member of a very large club in that regard. I'll be more impressed with your concern for baseball when I see you campaigning to ban Sheffield and Giambi.
Oh, and it is "prima donna" - meaning the arrogant behavior of the first lady of an opera company, not "pre-Madonna" - meaning the time before Madonna released her first cd.
aloofman, I see you are posting over at McCovey Chronicles. Great site, but you're venturing into dangerous territory for a Dodger fan.
Sayhey said:
I'm not sure how to respond to this beyond repeating my earlier statement. Bonds attracts attention to himself like no other player in baseball, for reasons I trust we both know and understand. Also, need I remind you, the Congressional hearings weren't exactly a picnic for the players who appeared. I don't recall anyone claiming that anyone one of them was "lynched."
Possibly the magnitude of this scandal impresses me more than it does you. I'm not sure. But I do know that this is a much bigger story than any one player, even Barry Bonds. If the evidence (as opposed to speculation) against any player becomes as strong as it appears to be against Bonds, then they should take a fall too. For the good of the game.
Sayhey said:
I think it's really because he's approaching Aaron's record, which is one of the most hallowed in sports. Baseball fans still love Aaron and most of them don't like Bonds. The steroids gives them extra reasons to dislike him. As someone on McCovey Chronicles noted, no one cares if Marvin Benard's homer totals are inflated.
The surest sign that the book doesn't have much new stuff is that no one's mind seems to have changed. The people that hated Bonds still hate him. His defenders are still defending him. The book seems to be extra details about previously publicized stuff. Doesn't mean it's untrue, just that it doesn't seem to be convincing his supporters to abandon him.
As for MC, I think it's really a win-win situation for me. If a Dodger fan is treated with some respect there for asking an intelligent question, then that's nice sportsmanship. If I'm attacked for showing my face, then they're the dirty dogs I always knew they were!
First of all I have said that Giambi should be punished but at least he admitted to using after the heat got to be too much for him which is more than I can say for Bonds, The book is still out on Sheff but if the truth comes out then yes he should be punished just as hard. The difference however is that neither Giambi or Sheffeild are close to breaking Babe Ruth's record or attempting to be the all time home run king, that is what sets Bonds so far ahead of the other so called users.Sayhey said:
I can't understand how people in general can support the man who will single handedly ruin the must cherished record in all of sports and not be the least bit upset about it. Baseball deserves to honor its best record with grace and not scandal.
I think Sayhey being an SF fan has a little to do with it.MacNut said:
Like IJ said, Bonds is the most scrutinized because he attracts most of that attention himself.
You're right though Sayhey, steroids/performance-enhancers in baseball doesn't begin and end with Bonds. There are others who deserve just as much ridicule and questioning, if not more... Palmeiro (who actually tested positive), McGwire (admitted andro user), Sosa (circumstantial evidence) just to name the principals. But the fact remains that Bonds is the most high profile, because he's going after one of the highest profile records in baseball. If this were what's-his-name from the Devil Rays who tested positive last year, you're right, he would not be getting the same level of attention by the media/fans as Bonds is now. Not even close.
Meanwhile, in other baseball stories (are there any? yes there are!)... in his first appearance in Spring training yesterday, Eric Gagne retired the side with five (count 'em, five) pitches. And he hasn't even started throwing any breaking stuff yet.
IJ Reilly said:
You mean that 'roid using freak of nature Gagne?
This could be a very fun year in the west, IJ.IJ, I call it a "lynching" because people are getting hysterical in their calls for Bonds to be banned. There are laws on steroid use, on perjury, and there is a procedure to be followed in Baseball's rules if a player is to disciplined. When folks get crazy in their outrage directed at one player and want to go outside the law or outside the rules - that is the equivalent in baseball terms to a "lynching." I admit it is a loaded term, but it fits. You could call it a "witchhunt" instead if you want - Roger Clemens does. The rationale that Barry causes this reaction because he doesn't behave the way people want him to or because he is so talented just doesn't cut it. You know that "equality under the law" stuff.
Macnut, at least you're honest in that you admit this is all about your worry Bonds will break the homerun record. Your remarks make it clear that you're not so much concerned about the use of steroids in the game, but rather the use of steroids to break a record you hold dear. I would take your concerns more seriously if they showed the former instead of the latter. Do you think Barry should be held to a different standard than every other player of his era because he happens to be the best? If not, then the standard for discipline is set out in the rules. So far he hasn't been proven to violate any of them. When he has we can talk some more on this topic.
Oh, and for those who think the bygone days of Maris and Aaron were free of all this crap, please read this article about Mike Schmidt's book and the use of "Greenies." Or just read Ball Four. Let's get real folks.
aloofman, I'm in the uncomfortable place of agreeing with everything a Dodger fan said. Welcome to McCovey Chronicles, btw! And if you get in heated arguments over there just remember I do all the time as well. Crazy statheads!
I just don't hear any of this supposed hysteria. Maybe it's just louder and more shrill up the Bay Area?
This issue has been building for years, and I've said several times, it's way bigger than Barry Bonds. As if anything could be, eh?
The "Commissioner" is supposedly looking the Bonds matter. Not that I've come to expect him to do the right thing in a timely manner, but if a suspension order comes, it will come from there, based on his findings. The law, BTW, has not much of anything to do with it.
I'm planning on having a good time this season. Hoping to get at least one home game against the Giants. I'll know next week when we divide up our season tickets.
This issue has been building for years, and I've said several times, it's way bigger than Barry Bonds. As if anything could be, eh?
The "Commissioner" is supposedly looking the Bonds matter. Not that I've come to expect him to do the right thing in a timely manner, but if a suspension order comes, it will come from there, based on his findings. The law, BTW, has not much of anything to do with it.
I'm planning on having a good time this season. Hoping to get at least one home game against the Giants. I'll know next week when we divide up our season tickets.
IJ Reilly said:
I presume a suspension could only happen on "conduct detrimental to the game"-type grounds? Because there's really no baseball rule that's been broken, however unethical or unsavory one might think it is. (Honestly, my best-case scenario for both the Dodgers and baseball in general: Bonds blows out his knee, retires, and takes his personal drama away a la McGwire.) Not that I think a suspension is really the answer here. There's not really an action you could take against Bonds at this point that would solve anything, either for him or for baseball. The cat's been out of the bag for a couple years now.
I move that we keep all Bonds discussion in the existing Bonds thread and leave this one to the rest of the baseball season.
For example, is anyone else a little embarrassed that the U.S. team might not make it out of the first round of the WBC? Especially after we basically arranged an easy group foru ourselves?
OK, time to resurrect this thread with some real baseball discussion. I'm sorry to do it with something that will make IJ and aloofman happy, but here is an interesting article on rating the performance of teams over the off season. Can't say I like which team is ranked number one, but I can't really disagree with the assessment either.
My beloved Giants come in at number 16.
The Hardball Times
My beloved Giants come in at number 16.