It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Baseball: Bonds and Steroids, Definative proof?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Just watching Sportscenter at the moment and they are talking about a newly published book with very descriptive information of Bonds talking about the steroid use over a 5 year span starting in 1998.

It explained that his record setting year he was taking something like 2 different injections daily.

They had a writer from the Globe and Mail being interviewed who was in on the report, and his understanding of the situation is that its pretty legitimate and Bonds best bet would be to hang them up immediately.

Now obviosly Bonds is not going to fess up to anything, but if this is legitimate.. Should he walk away?

Personally whether its direct proof or not, too much of a grey area over his head. I want to see Ruth and Aaron stay where they are in the record books.




posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 03:35 PM
link   
You think Ruth and Aaron got their numbers CLEAN? Or many other greats for that matter? Ruth, Ford, Perry, Mays, Aaron, Stragell, Rose all did non ethical things.

www.sports-central.org...

Read #15





danagonistes.blogspot.com...

Read Better late then never




www.ergogenics.org...

Go to middle on Mays/Stargell.




www.pantstalk.com...

Read #3






www.goldenpalaceevents.com...



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Sorry, Chissler, I did not see this post before I just now created one of my own on this topic. Predictably, it's L O N G.

But I'm with you. However, I have to tell you that about 1/3 of all people in prisons are what they call "sociopaths"--people born devoid of any compassion for the rights, feelings and well-being of others. I've been a criminal appeals lawyer for nearly two decades, and I've dealt with a LOT of such people. And although my opinion on this subject is wholly unqualified--I'm a lawyer, not a shrink--I think Bonds is a sociopath. Witness, e.g., his going to court during the 1994 lockout to try and get his child support payments reduced.

So, I think Bonds is one of those people who is peculiarly invulnerable to the emotions of embarrassment and shame. As such, I expect him to go right on, UNLESS they can detect all his various cheating devices and he'll play like cr@p without them, thus doing to his legacy what Palmeiro did to his. I think THAT is the only thing which will make Bonds quit.

Let me think up an analogy.... OK, I have one.

Suppose that the all-time record for home runs was Mel Ott's 511. And suppose several other players retired only 20 or so HR's behind him. I think Ott's record should have an asterisk next to it, because he hit (this is the truth) 323 HR's at home and only 188 HR's on the road.

And this was no fluke. His career long home park, The Polo Grounds, was shaped like a horse shoe, with home plate in the loop and deepest CF in the opening (except they put a clubhouse there, with a "483 feet" sign on it, advising hitters they were not going to hit HR's out there. It was also something like 445 to one power alley and 455 to the other.

But down the lines??? It was 279 down the left field line, and about 315 feet to straightaway left, where Bobby Thomson hit his famous HR. And it was 257 down the RF line and 294 to straightaway right, where the pull-hitting lefty Ott hit. Also, the upper-deck hung out something like 20 feet more, making the real distances shorter still!

Now, this is just my opinion, but I think that if the all-time HR leader had played his whole career in that park (or the Phillies old Baker Bowl), and had a preposterous home-away imbalance like 323-188, there should be an * by his "record."

But even THAT would be an honestly set record, which is light years better than what we're dealing with here. Bonds' astronomical HR/AB ratios, his slugging averages which no player other than Ruth could touch, his SEASONS which no player other than Ruth could touch... if those were provably done by taking drugs that turned him into the Godzilla we've seen....

Well, at best, I'd put an * by any of his "records." I'd probably just erase his name out of the books for any records set in those years.

But I would still put him in the Hall of Fame, because the article says he was clean until after the 1998 season. Look at his stats through that point, including 3 legit MVP Awards which should have been 4 in a row. You're looking at the stats of a first-round Hall of Famer. Hate him all you like (I do), but he was a legitimate Hall of Famer before he joined his fellow frauds Palmeiro, McGwire and Sosa.

B.H.N.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 04:07 PM
link   
And the above argument, which is tiresome beyond words at this point, makes no sense. Once using a corked bat is no parallel at all to what Bonds has done. Neither is using pep pills. ("Hey, you shoplifted a bunch of candy; I embezzled $500,000; we're both criminals!")

As for Perry, I've said repeatedly, in here and in real life, that his election was the Hall of Fame's single most disgraceful moment. I just hope it stays that way, after Palmeiro, McGwire, Sosa, etc., become eligible. Like it or not, Bonds belongs in, and either in his first year, or, perhaps to make a point, in his second. But on his LEGITIMATE numbers, he's a clear first-year Hall member. And I'm pretty much an MLB stats expert, so I'm not just blowing gas.

Also, we're talking about cheating to HELP one's team, NOT about laying down to HURT one's team, a la Joe Jackson and apparently Cobb, Speaker and a hell of a lot of other Dead Ball greats. Unlike throwing games, I don't think this kind of cheating is, per se, an automatic ban from the Hall. It IS if you've got nothing left once the cheating is subtracted. But take away Bonds' cheating and you've still got a clear Hall of Famer. In fact, I'll be so gauche as to say this:

Bonds is as hated as Kirby Puckett was beloved in his playing days. But if you take Bonds' first 12 years (the length of Puckett's career), and compare him to Puckett's career, it is a NO CONTEST. I'll leave it to Hootie to lay out all the stats, but the two biggies in my book, on-base and slugging, aren't even close, and neither is the new state-of-the-art stat, Runs Created.

And yes, Kirby was a very good CF for his size, but Bonds was the greatest defensive LF of all time, except perhaps for some ancient player who played somewhere like Griffith Stadium, where LF was as huge as CF and required a huge throwing arm (see, e.g., Goose Goslin).

B.H.N.



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 02:36 AM
link   
www.hbo.com...

The effect of greenies cannot be overlooked. They are more rampant then steroids, more dangerous, and will effect the game just as much, if not more, then the removal of steroids.



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 02:19 PM
link   
And you are the President, Vice President, Treasurer, CEO and sole member of the club which believes that.

As I've said before, from a Criminal Law and medical perspective, that's another matter, though, again, I doubt Ken Caminiti's widow and kids would agree with you and me there, either.




top topics
 
0

log in

join