I'm down with this. Anybody but balloon head.Sadaharu Oh
With or without a needle in his ass?The guy who hit the most balls over the fence while playing major league baseball games.
Doesn't matter. The standard is how many went over the fence.With or without a needle in his ass?The guy who hit the most balls over the fence while playing major league baseball games.
What about inside-the-park HRs?Doesn't matter. The standard is how many went over the fence.With or without a needle in his ass?The guy who hit the most balls over the fence while playing major league baseball games.
The handful a year count, also. Of course, these probably do not come from guys who would be in a home run king discussion and is simplemeinded distraction. Just to lay out the position and go to bed. The assumption that some legalist take (see Costas) is that because we "know" that Bonds cheated, we also know that he never hit home runs against players who were equally cheating (dubious at best). Further, we "know" that Maris, Babe, Aaron hit ALL legal (both baseball AND American law) home runs against other players who were not cheating (same standard), not becaus it has been investigated, but simply because players in that era did not cheat. Both assume unproven (not unlikely) truths. Because I can't w/o real certainty (versus assumptions) prove either (the guilt of bonds versus the innocence of prior eras) the only standard for me to use is the performeance...i.e. how many home runs did the individual player hit.What about inside-the-park HRs?Doesn't matter. The standard is how many went over the fence.With or without a needle in his ass?The guy who hit the most balls over the fence while playing major league baseball games.
The handful a year count, also. Of course, these probably do not come from guys who would be in a home run king discussion and is simplemeinded distraction. Just to lay out the position and go to bed. The assumption that some legalist take (see Costas) is that because we "know" that Bonds cheated, we also know that he never hit home runs against players who were equally cheating (dubious at best). Further, we "know" that Maris, Babe, Aaron hit ALL legal (both baseball AND American law) home runs against other players who were not cheating (same standard), not becaus it has been investigated, but simply because players in that era did not cheat. Both assume unproven (not unlikely) truths. Because I can't w/o real certainty (versus assumptions) prove either (the guilt of bonds versus the innocence of prior eras) the only standard for me to use is the performeance...i.e. how many home runs did the individual player hit.What about inside-the-park HRs?Doesn't matter. The standard is how many went over the fence.With or without a needle in his ass?The guy who hit the most balls over the fence while playing major league baseball games.
I can understand not voting for Bonds, but curious to know why you would vote Ruth over Aaron?Babe Ruth
Ruth was hitting more home runs than numerous whole teams when he got started.I can understand not voting for Bonds, but curious to know why you would vote Ruth over Aaron?Babe Ruth
When graded on the curve, Ruth was #1.Ruth was hitting more home runs than numerous whole teams when he got started.I can understand not voting for Bonds, but curious to know why you would vote Ruth over Aaron?Babe Ruth
The correct answer then is Roger Connor.Aaron used amphetamines.
Ruth corked his bat.
Any answer other than Bonds is ridiculous.
pre-1893 baseball rules are interestingThe correct answer then is Roger Connor.Aaron used amphetamines.
Ruth corked his bat.
Any answer other than Bonds is ridiculous.
Yeah, those deadball era guys were all saints.The correct answer then is Roger Connor.Aaron used amphetamines.
Ruth corked his bat.
Any answer other than Bonds is ridiculous.
Tied for 6th in career GIDPsJim Rice did it the right way
Especially that whole "white guys only" rule.pre-1893 baseball rules are interestingThe correct answer then is Roger Connor.Aaron used amphetamines.
Ruth corked his bat.
Any answer other than Bonds is ridiculous.
In 1920, Babe Ruth hit 54 home runs. That was more than any other team in the AL, and more than any team in the NL except the Phillies who hit 64.14.6% of all home runs hit in the AL and 8.6% of the all home runs hit in MLB in 1920 were hit by Ruth.Who hit the most total HRs in all of baseball history isn't really that fascinating to me. Stuff like this is.When graded on the curve, Ruth was #1.Ruth was hitting more home runs than numerous whole teams when he got started.I can understand not voting for Bonds, but curious to know why you would vote Ruth over Aaron?Babe Ruth
I'm not a Bonds fanboy. In fact, I actively rooted against him. But he hit those homeruns. Just like Clemens won 354 games. And Reggie Bush gained over 2200 yds from scrimmage and won the Heisman. Memphis and UMass made the Final 4 under Calipari. These things happened. i.e., I'm not the one living in a virtual reality.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
There's a big difference between Bonds/Clemens and Bush/Camby/Rose.I'm not a Bonds fanboy. In fact, I actively rooted against him. But he hit those homeruns. Just like Clemens won 354 games. And Reggie Bush gained over 2200 yds from scrimmage and won the Heisman. Memphis and UMass made the Final 4 under Calipari. These things happened. i.e., I'm not the one living in a virtual reality.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
Yeah, there wasn't any enforcement with Bonds/Clemens.There's a big difference between Bonds/Clemens and Bush/Camby/Rose.I'm not a Bonds fanboy. In fact, I actively rooted against him. But he hit those homeruns. Just like Clemens won 354 games. And Reggie Bush gained over 2200 yds from scrimmage and won the Heisman. Memphis and UMass made the Final 4 under Calipari. These things happened. i.e., I'm not the one living in a virtual reality.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
Clearly.There's a big difference between Bonds/Clemens and Bush/Camby/Rose.I'm not a Bonds fanboy. In fact, I actively rooted against him. But he hit those homeruns. Just like Clemens won 354 games. And Reggie Bush gained over 2200 yds from scrimmage and won the Heisman. Memphis and UMass made the Final 4 under Calipari. These things happened. i.e., I'm not the one living in a virtual reality.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
So you're willing to admit that Bonds/Clemens cheated but because the MLB hasn't punished them for it you won't either?Yeah, there wasn't any enforcement with Bonds/Clemens.There's a big difference between Bonds/Clemens and Bush/Camby/Rose.I'm not a Bonds fanboy. In fact, I actively rooted against him. But he hit those homeruns. Just like Clemens won 354 games. And Reggie Bush gained over 2200 yds from scrimmage and won the Heisman. Memphis and UMass made the Final 4 under Calipari. These things happened. i.e., I'm not the one living in a virtual reality.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
Yeah but he was clearly the Sandy Koufax of "peak value" in GIDP.Tied for 6th in career GIDPsJim Rice did it the right way
I'm a baseball fanboy. I hate Bonds. Barry is clearly the homerun leader and my hatred for the guy will not stop me from recognizing a piece of baseball history. I don't have to like a guy to notice their accomplishments.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
I think there is a disconnect here, as I don't think anyone is saying you shouldn't recognize Bonds' accomplishments simply because you don't like the guy. They are suggesting you shouldn't recognize Bonds' career long accomplishments because he took steroids and taking steroids is cheating. The last 2 statements (steroids, cheating) are definitely arguable, moreso the last one, and those who think it should be defined as cheating are voting for Hank, those who don't are voting for Barry.I'm a baseball fanboy. I hate Bonds. Barry is clearly the homerun leader and my hatred for the guy will not stop me from recognizing a piece of baseball history. I don't have to like a guy to notice their accomplishments.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
There's no doubt in my mind Bonds was a big cheater. I still don't see why he shouldn't be considered the home run king.I think there is a disconnect here, as I don't think anyone is saying you shouldn't recognize Bonds' accomplishments simply because you don't like the guy. They are suggesting you shouldn't recognize Bonds' career long accomplishments because he took steroids and taking steroids is cheating. The last 2 statements (steroids, cheating) are definitely arguable, moreso the last one, and those who think it should be defined as cheating are voting for Hank, those who don't are voting for Barry.I'm a baseball fanboy. I hate Bonds. Barry is clearly the homerun leader and my hatred for the guy will not stop me from recognizing a piece of baseball history. I don't have to like a guy to notice their accomplishments.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
1) Im also willing to admit that every pitcher that balks has cheated. Every lineman that holds has cheated. Every player that travels has cheated.2) Even if the MLB were to punish them, they cannot and will not change the record books.3) Who are you or I to punish them?4) What punishment, exactly, could you or I impose upon them?5) How does any of these things change the historical record of how many homeruns were hit?So you're willing to admit that Bonds/Clemens cheated but because the MLB hasn't punished them for it you won't either?Yeah, there wasn't any enforcement with Bonds/Clemens.There's a big difference between Bonds/Clemens and Bush/Camby/Rose.I'm not a Bonds fanboy. In fact, I actively rooted against him. But he hit those homeruns. Just like Clemens won 354 games. And Reggie Bush gained over 2200 yds from scrimmage and won the Heisman. Memphis and UMass made the Final 4 under Calipari. These things happened. i.e., I'm not the one living in a virtual reality.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
Hank cheated too. HTH.I think there is a disconnect here, as I don't think anyone is saying you shouldn't recognize Bonds' accomplishments simply because you don't like the guy. They are suggesting you shouldn't recognize Bonds' career long accomplishments because he took steroids and taking steroids is cheating. The last 2 statements (steroids, cheating) are definitely arguable, moreso the last one, and those who think it should be defined as cheating are voting for Hank, those who don't are voting for Barry.I'm a baseball fanboy. I hate Bonds. Barry is clearly the homerun leader and my hatred for the guy will not stop me from recognizing a piece of baseball history. I don't have to like a guy to notice their accomplishments.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
If only those things were penalized...1) Im also willing to admit that every pitcher that balks has cheated. Every lineman that holds has cheated. Every player that travels has cheated.
They're only penalized when the players are caught.If only those things were penalized...1) Im also willing to admit that every pitcher that balks has cheated. Every lineman that holds has cheated. Every player that travels has cheated.
1) One major difference between steroid use and the things you listed is that by doing the things you listed you end up getting penalized by referees. Sometimes you don't get caught, but the luck involved there arguably evens out over time. Taking steroids was not punished for a long time there. 2) The have the capacity to change the record books, they likely won't, but that doesn't even matter. One can view the record book to be inaccurate and view someone else to be the true record holder. 3) I'm a person on the internet, that gives me the right to have an opinion on every single issue known to mankind. I can't speak for you obviously.4)The punishment of slandering his name across the interwebs, but a more severe punishment that I can impose is that I have the capacity to personally not view him as the legitimate record holder of being the HR king, no more no less. Again, I can't and won't speak for you here. 5) Unless the people who have the power to change the record books do that based on the retrospective knowledge that he cheated to the extent that it allowed him to achieve otherworldy numbers over multiple seasons that he otherwise would not have been able to achieve, then obviously the record books will remain unchanged.As for Hank Aaron cheating, sure it likely happened, but I view short term amphetamine use different from long term steroid use. I think it's safe to say Hank didn't use amphetamines long term, simply because using them long term wouldn't have allowed him to be so successful athletically, as symptoms like blurred vision, dizziness, and anorexia among other things that occur with frequent use of amphetamines. Not the statistical numbers of Hank's never show any striking outliers that suggest severe beneficial cheating. Bonds' numbers on the other hand...1) Im also willing to admit that every pitcher that balks has cheated. Every lineman that holds has cheated. Every player that travels has cheated.2) Even if the MLB were to punish them, they cannot and will not change the record books.3) Who are you or I to punish them?4) What punishment, exactly, could you or I impose upon them?5) How does any of these things change the historical record of how many homeruns were hit?So you're willing to admit that Bonds/Clemens cheated but because the MLB hasn't punished them for it you won't either?Yeah, there wasn't any enforcement with Bonds/Clemens.There's a big difference between Bonds/Clemens and Bush/Camby/Rose.I'm not a Bonds fanboy. In fact, I actively rooted against him. But he hit those homeruns. Just like Clemens won 354 games. And Reggie Bush gained over 2200 yds from scrimmage and won the Heisman. Memphis and UMass made the Final 4 under Calipari. These things happened. i.e., I'm not the one living in a virtual reality.Hank Aaron.@ all the Bonds fanboys here. Go back to your video games.
Ah rationalizations.1) Breaking a rule thats not enforced is somehow worse than breaking a rule that is enforced? 2) They can change the official MLB record books, but you may have noticed that the MLB is hardly the only source of historical baseball information out there. And any change in the MLB record books would be nonsensicle. Are you going to readjust pitchers' ERAs, players' runs scored? Or just the ones you don't also suspect of steroid use? How about win/loss records? Each action you take to 'correct' the record books would make them worthless as a historical account of what happened. Sure, one can choose to believe a fairy tale and view Hank Aaron as the record holder, but that doesn't mean we should indulge you.3) Your opinion is one thing. Having the ability to punish someone is something else. To my knowledge you hold no power over Bonds or MLB. Wishing something to be true does not actually give you power or authority.4) Slander is false, you'd either need to believe Bonds is the homerun champ or that he didn't take steroids for your stance to be slanderous. I fail to see how deluding yourself is a punishment to anyone but yourself.5) Again, MLB could only change their books. Not the box scores and rotosheet and fangraphs and baseball-reference. Bonds hit those homeruns and history will reflect that whether or not you or MLB wish to acknowledge that fact.So, you discount Hank's cheating because it was less effective? And short term use, really? Greenie use was at epidemic levels over the heart of his entire playing career. Also, there have been steroid allegations leveled at Hank on the Congressional Record along with his sustained performance well past the age when most players dramatically decline. Its so odd how people view most forms of cheating wildly differently from steroids. Gaylord Perry is celebrated for using a spit ball. Niekro getting caught scuffing the ball is an aw-shucks thing. The Giants stealing signs to win the pennant is just part of the game. Using amphetamines is only getting a little extra pep in your step (unless you're Jessie Spano) But somehow those that use steroids need to burn in hell.1) One major difference between steroid use and the things you listed is that by doing the things you listed you end up getting penalized by referees. Sometimes you don't get caught, but the luck involved there arguably evens out over time. Taking steroids was not punished for a long time there. 2) The have the capacity to change the record books, they likely won't, but that doesn't even matter. One can view the record book to be inaccurate and view someone else to be the true record holder. 3) I'm a person on the internet, that gives me the right to have an opinion on every single issue known to mankind. I can't speak for you obviously.4)The punishment of slandering his name across the interwebs, but a more severe punishment that I can impose is that I have the capacity to personally not view him as the legitimate record holder of being the HR king, no more no less. Again, I can't and won't speak for you here. 5) Unless the people who have the power to change the record books do that based on the retrospective knowledge that he cheated to the extent that it allowed him to achieve otherworldy numbers over multiple seasons that he otherwise would not have been able to achieve, then obviously the record books will remain unchanged.As for Hank Aaron cheating, sure it likely happened, but I view short term amphetamine use different from long term steroid use. I think it's safe to say Hank didn't use amphetamines long term, simply because using them long term wouldn't have allowed him to be so successful athletically, as symptoms like blurred vision, dizziness, and anorexia among other things that occur with frequent use of amphetamines. Not the statistical numbers of Hank's never show any striking outliers that suggest severe beneficial cheating. Bonds' numbers on the other hand...