For those who think the steroid users should be excluded from the Hall (1 Viewer)

[Yankee23Fan]

Sorry, but I'm not interested in the business of baseball. I'm interested in the sport of baseball. Bonds cheated at that sport and flaunted baseball's inability to prove it or to penalize him for it. You don't go to the hall of fame for successfully hiding behind the union. You go for what you do on the field. And what Bonds did on the field was cheat.

What Bonds did on the field was play within the rules of the game and achieve amazing results.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Bonds in, McGwire out.Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.

He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.

Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.

Oh, stop it.

Show me the rule he broke.

 

[AnonymousBob]

I think we agree that baseball failed to stop players from using steroids.

Agreed.

I think we disagree on whether players who used steroids while this happened were cheating.

Again, agreed. I don't see what rule he broke. Baseball was being run by ostriches with their heads in the sand and ignored the steroid issue but I fail to see how you can break a rule that doesn't exist.

You look at it and say, they were circumventing the rules, it's no different from a spitball. I look at it and say, the difference is that steroid users cheated in a way that couldn't physically be detected, and they cheated on every single play of every single game that they had steroids in their body, which is thousands of times worse than a guy who throws a single spitball.

So cheating isn't cheating? Okay, what is your acceptable level of cheating you will allow? Pitchers who used spitballs would cheat on every single pitch they threw. When you consider their only job was to throw pitches...how is that any better or worse than taking steroids? They made themselves better at what they were supposed to do. Bonds is supposed to do more than throw pitches but it's the same general concept. How about Brian Roberts? He's been wearing yellow-tinted contacts the past couple seasons. His stats have gone up as well. Is that cheating? He claims it helps see the ball better.

I think we agree that "what you lack in quality posts..." was funny. Thanks for the sig.

You're welcome.

 

[bostonfred]

How do you make a mockery of rules that didn't exist?

The rule did exist. It was clearly states that players cannot use illegal drugs, and that the punishment could be anything up to and including banning from the game.

Further, even if a player like, say Rapheal Palmiero, was found guilty in a test and suspended appropriately and then came back, why does he need to be punished further?

Palmiero cheated when there was testing in place. We do not know if he cheated before testing was in place. He was punished according to the rules. Bonds cheated when there was no testing in place. We know he cheated before testing took place. We know he was taking performance enhancing drugs that were designed to be untestable. And we know that he got away with it for years because he was hiding it.

It was against the rules to scuff the ball when the Niekro's pitched. Did they lose anything to history? It a violation of the rules of baseball to put pine tar on your bat past a certain point. Does George Brett lose his stature to history and get taken out of any Hall of Fame discussion?

Brett got caught cheating during one at-bat. He got ejected for the rest of the day. Bonds got caught cheating for roughly 1000-2500 at-bats. His punishment should be significantly greater.

 

[bostonfred]

Bonds in, McGwire out.

Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.

He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.

Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.

Oh, stop it.

Show me the rule he broke.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/for...=1991&num=1"Major League players or personnel involved in the possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game".

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Brett got caught cheating during one at-bat. He got ejected for the rest of the day. Bonds got caught cheating for roughly 1000-2500 at-bats. His punishment should be significantly greater.

Brett got ejected for 3 innings. If you want to say that Bonds cheated for roughly 300 games, which are 9 innings apiece, then suspend him for the 100 games he deserves. Hey, look at that, the new policy allows for that. If he violates it punish him.Then what? We've already proven that the baseball writers and the HOF voters and everyone who hates Bonds and you have determined that you can accept a certain level of cheater in the game and in the Hall.Who draws the line? How much cheating is too much? And when does the cheating have to occur? If they do i early in their career, get punished and learn a lesson, can a then HoF career warrant entry - or is the original sin a deal breaker? Why is fair to some cheaters to allow other cheaters in?Further, did Bods really damage the game? We know of at least 1, sub par non important to the history of the game pitcher took them. Jason Grimsley. He took steriods. Why should the hitters then suffer at the hands of pitchers who jack up and throw past them to the point where the pitchers are stars and the hitters all look like a collective Andy Stankovich? If Grimsley took them, and we allow you to assume everything about Bonds (and other players) that is assumed, can we not assume that alot - and I mean a lot - of the pitchers Bonds faced were jacked as well? If the pitchers were jacked, and the center fielders who could clear the fence to pull homers back in were jacked, then why in that grouping is the hitter the only one that we focus on as a rule breaker and someone that needs to be an example? To me, people that attack Barry Bonds suffer from misplaced hypocrisy. Which is funny.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Bonds in, McGwire out.

Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.

He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.

Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.

Oh, stop it.

Show me the rule he broke.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/for...=1991&num=1"Major League players or personnel involved in the possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game".

And how did the commissioner punish him?

 

[redman]

Bonds in, McGwire out.Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.

He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.

Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Bonds in, McGwire out.Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.

He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.

Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.

I'm not a huge fan of criminal defense attorneys and would never practice as one, but now I'm starting to understand why they are important. It's a good thing people like some in this thread aren't given total control of the legal process.

 

[bostonfred]

Brett got caught cheating during one at-bat. He got ejected for the rest of the day. Bonds got caught cheating for roughly 1000-2500 at-bats. His punishment should be significantly greater.

Brett got ejected for 3 innings. If you want to say that Bonds cheated for roughly 300 games, which are 9 innings apiece, then suspend him for the 100 games he deserves. Hey, look at that, the new policy allows for that. If he violates it punish him.Then what? We've already proven that the baseball writers and the HOF voters and everyone who hates Bonds and you have determined that you can accept a certain level of cheater in the game and in the Hall.Who draws the line? How much cheating is too much? And when does the cheating have to occur? If they do i early in their career, get punished and learn a lesson, can a then HoF career warrant entry - or is the original sin a deal breaker? Why is fair to some cheaters to allow other cheaters in?Further, did Bods really damage the game? We know of at least 1, sub par non important to the history of the game pitcher took them. Jason Grimsley. He took steriods. Why should the hitters then suffer at the hands of pitchers who jack up and throw past them to the point where the pitchers are stars and the hitters all look like a collective Andy Stankovich? If Grimsley took them, and we allow you to assume everything about Bonds (and other players) that is assumed, can we not assume that alot - and I mean a lot - of the pitchers Bonds faced were jacked as well? If the pitchers were jacked, and the center fielders who could clear the fence to pull homers back in were jacked, then why in that grouping is the hitter the only one that we focus on as a rule breaker and someone that needs to be an example? To me, people that attack Barry Bonds suffer from misplaced hypocrisy. Which is funny.

I do not hold every player in Major League Baseball to the same standard that I hold Bonds. Players who were caught cheating once there was a testing policy know the penalty and will face the consequences. Players who were caught cheating before there was a testing policy, but when the rules stated that he could be expelled from baseball, should face the consequences of the rules as they stood at the time. Brett's statistics were not negated for three innings. They were negated for the entire portion of the game from the moment it was determined that he was cheating to the conclusion. Bonds had illegal, performance enhancing substances (I'll refer to them as steroids for the sake of brevity for the rest of this post) in his body during the entire time he was on steroids. Every game during which he was on steroids would be negated from his game. Bonds (and others') unique form of cheating is different from using pine tar, scuffing a ball, corking a bat, or throwing a spitball because 1) unlike single events of cheating, we know that a steroid user was cheating at every single at-bat, pitch, baserunning play, or defensive play, during the time period they used, and 2) steroid users used the lack of a testing policy to make it impossible to detect their cheating. Those are two significant differences between the events discussed.In fact, I would argue that the kind of "cheating" that we're talking about does not resemble the use of pine tar as much as it resembles gambling on games. Both carry a penalty that includes expulsion from the game. Both are equally damaging to baseball's reputation. Both are virtually undetectable, but can have enormous effects on the outcome of not just games but entire seasons and, in Bonds' case, some of the biggest records in the game. And when someone is caught doing it, both should have more significant punishment as a deterrent to future abuses. When Pete Rose gets in to the Hall of Fame, maybe I'll buy Barry Bonds getting in to the Hall, after he's waited just as long as Rose had to. Until then, the disgrace of him being inducted would only be outshadowed by the disgrace he has brought on baseball.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Brett got caught cheating during one at-bat. He got ejected for the rest of the day. Bonds got caught cheating for roughly 1000-2500 at-bats. His punishment should be significantly greater.

Brett got ejected for 3 innings. If you want to say that Bonds cheated for roughly 300 games, which are 9 innings apiece, then suspend him for the 100 games he deserves. Hey, look at that, the new policy allows for that. If he violates it punish him.Then what? We've already proven that the baseball writers and the HOF voters and everyone who hates Bonds and you have determined that you can accept a certain level of cheater in the game and in the Hall.Who draws the line? How much cheating is too much? And when does the cheating have to occur? If they do i early in their career, get punished and learn a lesson, can a then HoF career warrant entry - or is the original sin a deal breaker? Why is fair to some cheaters to allow other cheaters in?Further, did Bods really damage the game? We know of at least 1, sub par non important to the history of the game pitcher took them. Jason Grimsley. He took steriods. Why should the hitters then suffer at the hands of pitchers who jack up and throw past them to the point where the pitchers are stars and the hitters all look like a collective Andy Stankovich? If Grimsley took them, and we allow you to assume everything about Bonds (and other players) that is assumed, can we not assume that alot - and I mean a lot - of the pitchers Bonds faced were jacked as well? If the pitchers were jacked, and the center fielders who could clear the fence to pull homers back in were jacked, then why in that grouping is the hitter the only one that we focus on as a rule breaker and someone that needs to be an example? To me, people that attack Barry Bonds suffer from misplaced hypocrisy. Which is funny.

I do not hold every player in Major League Baseball to the same standard that I hold Bonds. Players who were caught cheating once there was a testing policy know the penalty and will face the consequences. Players who were caught cheating before there was a testing policy, but when the rules stated that he could be expelled from baseball, should face the consequences of the rules as they stood at the time. Brett's statistics were not negated for three innings. They were negated for the entire portion of the game from the moment it was determined that he was cheating to the conclusion. Bonds had illegal, performance enhancing substances (I'll refer to them as steroids for the sake of brevity for the rest of this post) in his body during the entire time he was on steroids. Every game during which he was on steroids would be negated from his game. Bonds (and others') unique form of cheating is different from using pine tar, scuffing a ball, corking a bat, or throwing a spitball because 1) unlike single events of cheating, we know that a steroid user was cheating at every single at-bat, pitch, baserunning play, or defensive play, during the time period they used, and 2) steroid users used the lack of a testing policy to make it impossible to detect their cheating. Those are two significant differences between the events discussed.In fact, I would argue that the kind of "cheating" that we're talking about does not resemble the use of pine tar as much as it resembles gambling on games. Both carry a penalty that includes expulsion from the game. Both are equally damaging to baseball's reputation. Both are virtually undetectable, but can have enormous effects on the outcome of not just games but entire seasons and, in Bonds' case, some of the biggest records in the game. And when someone is caught doing it, both should have more significant punishment as a deterrent to future abuses. When Pete Rose gets in to the Hall of Fame, maybe I'll buy Barry Bonds getting in to the Hall, after he's waited just as long as Rose had to. Until then, the disgrace of him being inducted would only be outshadowed by the disgrace he has brought on baseball.

Fair points all.1. Pete Rose should be in the Hall.2. What disgrace to the game? I don't know if you've noticed, but MLB makes a ton of money and attendance is through the roof. Who sees disgrace? See, to me, there will never ever be a better hitter then Babe Ruth. I don't care what numbers Bonds or Aaron or Williams or Mantle hits. The numbers tell part of a story. Not THE story. And while I cherish the history of the game and love baseball like a family member, I also consider the players my gladiators. They do this to entertain me. So, entertain me. I haven't lost anything because Barry Bonds hit a few dozen more home runs taking years off his life. And the game isn't any less entertaining to me because of what the players take or don't take.I guess I have a unique, sick and interesting view of the game and of sports.

 

[TinHat]

If steroids are bad, what about wearing glasses or contact lenses to artificially enhance your eyesight?

 

[bostonfred]

Fair points all.1. Pete Rose should be in the Hall.2. What disgrace to the game? I don't know if you've noticed, but MLB makes a ton of money and attendance is through the roof. Who sees disgrace? See, to me, there will never ever be a better hitter then Babe Ruth. I don't care what numbers Bonds or Aaron or Williams or Mantle hits. The numbers tell part of a story. Not THE story. And while I cherish the history of the game and love baseball like a family member, I also consider the players my gladiators. They do this to entertain me. So, entertain me. I haven't lost anything because Barry Bonds hit a few dozen more home runs taking years off his life. And the game isn't any less entertaining to me because of what the players take or don't take.I guess I have a unique, sick and interesting view of the game and of sports.

Regarding the disgrace, I can't believe a lawyer is using the argument that baseball isn't disgraced betcause hey, they're making enough money as it is. There's a huge dollars and cents and attendance impact to Bonds' steroid use:1. Steroids or not, McGwire (and Sosa) were heroes when they broke the single season record. Bonds' cheating put an end to the goodwill they brought baseball. 2. Bonds "set the record" at a level that will be even harder to break than a record that had already lasted for years. If that record is allowed to stand, it hurts future generations of baseball revenue and attendance because there will not be a serious threat to the home run record for a long, long time. 3. Bonds' assault on the career home run record is getting no play at all in the media. If you look at the media response to previous attempts at the single season record, it seems reasonable to think that he's not bringing in the attendance and endorsements that baseball would enjoy if a non-cheater were to go for the record. I understand that records don't mean as much to you as they do to other people. That's fine. But records, and the chase for a record, do have value to other fans and to major league baseball. Bonds should not be allowed to diminish the value of two of the biggest records in baseball by cheating just because some portion of the fanbase thinks it's OK, and he certainly shouldn't be rewarded for it by putting a statue of his steroid-filled head in with the all time great players in baseball history.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Fair points all.1. Pete Rose should be in the Hall.2. What disgrace to the game? I don't know if you've noticed, but MLB makes a ton of money and attendance is through the roof. Who sees disgrace? See, to me, there will never ever be a better hitter then Babe Ruth. I don't care what numbers Bonds or Aaron or Williams or Mantle hits. The numbers tell part of a story. Not THE story. And while I cherish the history of the game and love baseball like a family member, I also consider the players my gladiators. They do this to entertain me. So, entertain me. I haven't lost anything because Barry Bonds hit a few dozen more home runs taking years off his life. And the game isn't any less entertaining to me because of what the players take or don't take.I guess I have a unique, sick and interesting view of the game and of sports.

Regarding the disgrace, I can't believe a lawyer is using the argument that baseball isn't disgraced betcause hey, they're making enough money as it is. There's a huge dollars and cents and attendance impact to Bonds' steroid use:1. Steroids or not, McGwire (and Sosa) were heroes when they broke the single season record. Bonds' cheating put an end to the goodwill they brought baseball. 2. Bonds "set the record" at a level that will be even harder to break than a record that had already lasted for years. If that record is allowed to stand, it hurts future generations of baseball revenue and attendance because there will not be a serious threat to the home run record for a long, long time. 3. Bonds' assault on the career home run record is getting no play at all in the media. If you look at the media response to previous attempts at the single season record, it seems reasonable to think that he's not bringing in the attendance and endorsements that baseball would enjoy if a non-cheater were to go for the record. I understand that records don't mean as much to you as they do to other people. That's fine. But records, and the chase for a record, do have value to other fans and to major league baseball. Bonds should not be allowed to diminish the value of two of the biggest records in baseball by cheating just because some portion of the fanbase thinks it's OK, and he certainly shouldn't be rewarded for it by putting a statue of his steroid-filled head in with the all time great players in baseball history.

But there is more to the game over time then steriods affecting this crop of hitters.What if they raise the mound again? Have you seen the pitching stats when they did that? IF they do that again, now, and keep the mound higher for say 30 years, no hitter will come close to getting the HR record, whether it's held by Maris, McGuire, Ruth Aaron or Bonds. The rules of the game would make it close to impossible.What if they start building bigger ballparks again? The next generation of hitters may have to hit in parks the size that hitters prior to 1990 had to hit in.What happens if the current and next generation of pitchers is just better then what we see now? What if they change the ball the way they have from the 1930's. And on and on and on and on and on.You cannot take one thing, separate it, and say, "see - this is going to destroy the game." If you make changes anywhere, or allow actions anywhere, in several forms over time, the game will change. If Bonds used steriods since 1998ish on, he did it in the "steriod era." We aren't talking about a hitter who stayed on par with the uberdruggies of the era and had similar numbers. We're talking about a guy who absolutely crushed those numbers. He lapped them. And he did it in a time when the pitchers are just as guilty most likely. Bonds was a great player before this stuff came up. He is the best player of my generation. He deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. And when he hits 756, (1) he will hold a record of numbers that mean, beyond their mathematical representation, nothing, and (2) he still won't be the hitter that Babe Ruth was.As for your extremely stretched argument that a lack of records to achieve will hurt the game, I don't buy it and find it mildly worth rebutting. I'm fine watching baseball for the rest of my life and never again seeing a 50 HR hitter. And if there is a generation of kids out there who watch the game for the stat and nothing more, then the game has already been ruined and nothing Bonds does or doesn't do will change that.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

3. Bonds' assault on the career home run record is getting no play at all in the media. If you look at the media response to previous attempts at the single season record, it seems reasonable to think that he's not bringing in the attendance and endorsements that baseball would enjoy if a non-cheater were to go for the record.

This is faulty on its face. There a billion reasons, many having nothing to do with on the field production, that warrant endorsement deals and love from the fans. Anna Kournakova got endorsement deals and never won a single tournament. The fans in every sports city love a player that is meaningless to the team but has something that they love.Bonds has never been liked in his career because, quite frankly, he's an #######. He doesn't get endorsement deals because he's an #######. It's not because of the steriod debate, although that hasn't helped recently.

 

[bostonfred]

3. Bonds' assault on the career home run record is getting no play at all in the media. If you look at the media response to previous attempts at the single season record, it seems reasonable to think that he's not bringing in the attendance and endorsements that baseball would enjoy if a non-cheater were to go for the record.

This is faulty on its face. There a billion reasons, many having nothing to do with on the field production, that warrant endorsement deals and love from the fans. Anna Kournakova got endorsement deals and never won a single tournament. The fans in every sports city love a player that is meaningless to the team but has something that they love.Bonds has never been liked in his career because, quite frankly, he's an #######. He doesn't get endorsement deals because he's an #######. It's not because of the steriod debate, although that hasn't helped recently.

Maybe Bonds wouldn't have gotten as much media attention as McGwire and Sosa did when they chased the single season record, but it's undeniable that he's getting less attention now because of the steroids than he would have if he had stayed clean.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

3. Bonds' assault on the career home run record is getting no play at all in the media. If you look at the media response to previous attempts at the single season record, it seems reasonable to think that he's not bringing in the attendance and endorsements that baseball would enjoy if a non-cheater were to go for the record.

This is faulty on its face. There a billion reasons, many having nothing to do with on the field production, that warrant endorsement deals and love from the fans. Anna Kournakova got endorsement deals and never won a single tournament. The fans in every sports city love a player that is meaningless to the team but has something that they love.Bonds has never been liked in his career because, quite frankly, he's an #######. He doesn't get endorsement deals because he's an #######. It's not because of the steriod debate, although that hasn't helped recently.

Maybe Bonds wouldn't have gotten as much media attention as McGwire and Sosa did when they chased the single season record, but it's undeniable that he's getting less attention now because of the steroids than he would have if he had stayed clean.

He got his own show on ESPN for awhile...

 

[bostonfred]

3. Bonds' assault on the career home run record is getting no play at all in the media. If you look at the media response to previous attempts at the single season record, it seems reasonable to think that he's not bringing in the attendance and endorsements that baseball would enjoy if a non-cheater were to go for the record.

This is faulty on its face. There a billion reasons, many having nothing to do with on the field production, that warrant endorsement deals and love from the fans. Anna Kournakova got endorsement deals and never won a single tournament. The fans in every sports city love a player that is meaningless to the team but has something that they love.Bonds has never been liked in his career because, quite frankly, he's an #######. He doesn't get endorsement deals because he's an #######. It's not because of the steriod debate, although that hasn't helped recently.

Maybe Bonds wouldn't have gotten as much media attention as McGwire and Sosa did when they chased the single season record, but it's undeniable that he's getting less attention now because of the steroids than he would have if he had stayed clean.

He got his own show on ESPN for awhile...

Ask MLB if they'd rather have had that show and the occasional blurbs when Bonds hits a home run, or the media circus that surrounded McGwire/Sosa.

 

[bostonfred]

Fair points all.1. Pete Rose should be in the Hall.2. What disgrace to the game? I don't know if you've noticed, but MLB makes a ton of money and attendance is through the roof. Who sees disgrace? See, to me, there will never ever be a better hitter then Babe Ruth. I don't care what numbers Bonds or Aaron or Williams or Mantle hits. The numbers tell part of a story. Not THE story. And while I cherish the history of the game and love baseball like a family member, I also consider the players my gladiators. They do this to entertain me. So, entertain me. I haven't lost anything because Barry Bonds hit a few dozen more home runs taking years off his life. And the game isn't any less entertaining to me because of what the players take or don't take.I guess I have a unique, sick and interesting view of the game and of sports.

Regarding the disgrace, I can't believe a lawyer is using the argument that baseball isn't disgraced betcause hey, they're making enough money as it is. There's a huge dollars and cents and attendance impact to Bonds' steroid use:1. Steroids or not, McGwire (and Sosa) were heroes when they broke the single season record. Bonds' cheating put an end to the goodwill they brought baseball. 2. Bonds "set the record" at a level that will be even harder to break than a record that had already lasted for years. If that record is allowed to stand, it hurts future generations of baseball revenue and attendance because there will not be a serious threat to the home run record for a long, long time. 3. Bonds' assault on the career home run record is getting no play at all in the media. If you look at the media response to previous attempts at the single season record, it seems reasonable to think that he's not bringing in the attendance and endorsements that baseball would enjoy if a non-cheater were to go for the record. I understand that records don't mean as much to you as they do to other people. That's fine. But records, and the chase for a record, do have value to other fans and to major league baseball. Bonds should not be allowed to diminish the value of two of the biggest records in baseball by cheating just because some portion of the fanbase thinks it's OK, and he certainly shouldn't be rewarded for it by putting a statue of his steroid-filled head in with the all time great players in baseball history.

But there is more to the game over time then steriods affecting this crop of hitters.What if they raise the mound again? Have you seen the pitching stats when they did that? IF they do that again, now, and keep the mound higher for say 30 years, no hitter will come close to getting the HR record, whether it's held by Maris, McGuire, Ruth Aaron or Bonds. The rules of the game would make it close to impossible.What if they start building bigger ballparks again? The next generation of hitters may have to hit in parks the size that hitters prior to 1990 had to hit in.What happens if the current and next generation of pitchers is just better then what we see now? What if they change the ball the way they have from the 1930's. And on and on and on and on and on.You cannot take one thing, separate it, and say, "see - this is going to destroy the game." If you make changes anywhere, or allow actions anywhere, in several forms over time, the game will change. If Bonds used steriods since 1998ish on, he did it in the "steriod era." We aren't talking about a hitter who stayed on par with the uberdruggies of the era and had similar numbers. We're talking about a guy who absolutely crushed those numbers. He lapped them. And he did it in a time when the pitchers are just as guilty most likely. Bonds was a great player before this stuff came up. He is the best player of my generation. He deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. And when he hits 756, (1) he will hold a record of numbers that mean, beyond their mathematical representation, nothing, and (2) he still won't be the hitter that Babe Ruth was.As for your extremely stretched argument that a lack of records to achieve will hurt the game, I don't buy it and find it mildly worth rebutting. I'm fine watching baseball for the rest of my life and never again seeing a 50 HR hitter. And if there is a generation of kids out there who watch the game for the stat and nothing more, then the game has already been ruined and nothing Bonds does or doesn't do will change that.

I understand what you're saying. And I agree completely with the points you have proven, which is that you are at peace with what Bonds has done, and that records don't mean anything to you. I can't refute either of those. The issue is that 1) records mean something to a lot of people who are not you,2) other great players have not made the Hall of Fame because their individual accomplishments paled in comparison with their offenses, and3) baseball did not change the rules to allow Bonds to use steroids. Bonds did. You're absolutely right that other players from anything from the size of the stadiums to the placement of the mound. The difference is that Bonds individually granted himself the advantages of steroid use. No other player benefitted from that individual decision. I'm not naive. I know that other players have used performance enhancing drugs. But Bonds is known to have done it during the pre-testing era. We don't know if Pujols did. MLB can't do anything to Pujols if he was, in fact, cheating, but they know that Bonds was. And that's why he cannot be given baseball's highest honor.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

3. Bonds' assault on the career home run record is getting no play at all in the media. If you look at the media response to previous attempts at the single season record, it seems reasonable to think that he's not bringing in the attendance and endorsements that baseball would enjoy if a non-cheater were to go for the record.

This is faulty on its face. There a billion reasons, many having nothing to do with on the field production, that warrant endorsement deals and love from the fans. Anna Kournakova got endorsement deals and never won a single tournament. The fans in every sports city love a player that is meaningless to the team but has something that they love.Bonds has never been liked in his career because, quite frankly, he's an #######. He doesn't get endorsement deals because he's an #######. It's not because of the steriod debate, although that hasn't helped recently.

Maybe Bonds wouldn't have gotten as much media attention as McGwire and Sosa did when they chased the single season record, but it's undeniable that he's getting less attention now because of the steroids than he would have if he had stayed clean.

He got his own show on ESPN for awhile...

Ask MLB if they'd rather have had that show and the occasional blurbs when Bonds hits a home run, or the media circus that surrounded McGwire/Sosa.

I don't know about you, but I've seen every HR Barry Bonds has hit, at least twice, since 2000. I've also seen at least 200 of his walks, if not more, and every time I've seen him hit one into the stands in San Francisco, there are a couple thousand people trying to catch it.Again, what has baseball lost?The McGuire chase hasn't happened since Maris. It was a big deal not just because of the record but because of the length of time. Bonds broke the record three years later, and the media followed every bit as much, but it just didn't have the same juice. And there were a lot of reasons. Alot of emotion was just reccently spent. Bonds is a jerk and not lovable while McGuire had flirted with it for a few years and was likeable.You act like no one is paying attention to Barry Bonds. EVERYONE is paying attention. For different reasons. Meanwhile, baseball set attendance records just last year.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

1) records mean something to a lot of people who are not you,

I know. And if they mean more then the game, then the game is already ruined so why is Bonds the target?2) other great players have not made the Hall of Fame because their individual accomplishments paled in comparison with their offenses, and

Rose should be in the Hall and it's stupid that the entirety of baseball is fighting Bart Giamatti's battle after his death because he was such a nice guy.

3) baseball did not change the rules to allow Bonds to use steroids. Bonds did.

Bonds didn't write any of the rules, in any form.

You're absolutely right that other players from anything from the size of the stadiums to the placement of the mound. The difference is that Bonds individually granted himself the advantages of steroid use. No other player benefitted from that individual decision.

Ok, he had an advantage. Over whom? Pitchers? Which pitchers? All? Only the ones who didn't use themselves? The ones that did use as well? Maybe he only broke even against the pitchers that were using?

I'm not naive. I know that other players have used performance enhancing drugs. But Bonds is known to have done it during the pre-testing era. We don't know if Pujols did. MLB can't do anything to Pujols if he was, in fact, cheating, but they know that Bonds was. And that's why he cannot be given baseball's highest honor.

I know.

Here's my problem. We "know" that Bonds used because a significantly important law was broken and his rights were violated in obtaining that knowledge. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that we "know" he did it because his grand jury testimony was leaked shouldn't mean anything. We are setting a bad precedent in our society with stuff like that, and all this over a statistic in a game that is solely meant to entertain us. It's rather scary the lengths at which rights are violated and laws are broken to make sure that Hank Aaron maintains some integrity in a game.

 

[dparker713]

Bonds in, McGwire out.

Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.

He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.

Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.

Oh, stop it.

Show me the rule he broke.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/for...=1991&num=1"Major League players or personnel involved in the possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game".

That memo was completely unenforceable. Its akin to Congress passing a law banning everyone in Europe from buying porn in China. Entirely meaningless.Frankly, you're imposing your moral viewpoint onto players that have historically eshewed morality whenever personal glory was on the line. Yet you overlook the gloating admissions of Perry and the well known crimes of Ty Cobb, because they don't offend your personal morality.

 

[bostonfred]

Bonds in, McGwire out.

Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.

He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.

Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.

Oh, stop it.

Show me the rule he broke.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/for...=1991&num=1"Major League players or personnel involved in the possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game".

That memo was completely unenforceable. Its akin to Congress passing a law banning everyone in Europe from buying porn in China. Entirely meaningless.Frankly, you're imposing your moral viewpoint onto players that have historically eshewed morality whenever personal glory was on the line. Yet you overlook the gloating admissions of Perry and the well known crimes of Ty Cobb, because they don't offend your personal morality.

I was totally going to disagree with you until you played the "Frankly" card. How am I supposed to compete with that?

 

[thecatch]

Bonds in, McGwire out.

Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.

He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.

Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.

Oh, stop it.

Show me the rule he broke.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/for...=1991&num=1"Major League players or personnel involved in the possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game".

That memo was completely unenforceable. Its akin to Congress passing a law banning everyone in Europe from buying porn in China. Entirely meaningless.Frankly, you're imposing your moral viewpoint onto players that have historically eshewed morality whenever personal glory was on the line. Yet you overlook the gloating admissions of Perry and the well known crimes of Ty Cobb, because they don't offend your personal morality.

The moral hypocrisy in this debate is sickening. Sports Guy had a good article on this last week.