by The Loveable Losers » Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:11 am
NolascoForGod wrote:There is still no proof Bonds used steroids his entire career so you can't judge him...plus you don't know if hank aaron cheated or not so shut up
I'm a big supporter of Bonds but there definitely is proof (so to speak) that he used steroids and even knowledge of when he started (right after McGwire and Sosa went on their home run binge). It's in the leaked grand jury testimony. We know that Bonds admitted to using the cream and the clear and that he says he thought it was flaxseed oil and something for joint pain if I remember correctly.
So Bonds is one of the few players that we can say with pretty much 100% certainty did indeed use steroids. That doesn't change my opinion of Bonds as a great hitter and a hall of fame candidate one iota though. His numbers up to that point were worthy of the hall, many other players were on steroids (probably including a lot of the pitchers that Bonds faced) and most importantly the league did nothing about any of it. It's MLB's fault that any of this is an issue so if you want to hate someone (and I can't believe I'm borrowing this phrase) don't hate the player, hate the game.
So while I agree with your sentiment, NolascoForGod, we do know that Bonds used steroids and we know when he used them. What we also know is that Bonds was practically a shoe-in for the hall BEFORE he started on the steroids, that without the steroids he was one of the best players in the game and that he certainly wasn't the only player using steroids at the time.
no i'm saying he didn't use steroids his entire career, the earliest he coud of started using the stuff was 97-98, but that was when he already had close to 500 homeruns anyway
NolascoForGod wrote:no i'm saying he didn't use steroids his entire career, the earliest he coud of started using the stuff was 97-98, but that was when he already had close to 500 homeruns anyway
Exactly. I think it was '99 that he started using the cream and the clear according to the grand jury testimony. He knew he was a much better player than McGwire and Sosa and wanted to prove it to everyone.
Last edited by The Loveable Losers on Fri Oct 13, 2006 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
NolascoForGod wrote:There is still no proof Bonds used steroids his entire career so you can't judge him...plus you don't know if hank aaron cheated or not so shut up
Touchy, are we?
No reasonable person thinks he's used since his rookie year. And he is/was one of the greatest of all time during his run in the 90s, no doubt.
But, there is a lot of smoke starting in the late 90s, enough to have a majority of people believe he did. His use doesn't taint his accomplishments upto the lat 90s, but does taint, in many people's opinions his accomplishments since then - including potentially the HR record.
I will be curious whether teams will pitch to Bonds next year, though, as he gets closer - especially if we're dealing with players/managers who would hate the thought of Bonds holding the record.
And it is funny to me that ARod may be considered a hero of sorts if Bonds takes the record and ARod continues his pace. To think people might start cheering for ARod simply to make the record more "legitimate" when he is lambasted right now.
Dawgpound 1613
Major League Manager
Posts: 2095
Joined: 7 Oct 2004
Bases this season: 0
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: \Lo*ca"tion\, n. 1. The act or process of locating. 2. Situation; place; locality.
by The Loveable Losers » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:18 am
JTWood wrote:You think the Cubs would be interested?
I don't think Bonds would want to play in Chicago. He wants to stay on the West Coast and I've got the feeling he's going to be inflexible on that count.
JTWood wrote:You think the Cubs would be interested?
I don't think Bonds would want to play in Chicago. He wants to stay on the West Coast and I've got the feeling he's going to be inflexible on that count.
West Coast, AL so he can DH, team that just lost their top slugger to free agency... Mr. Bonds, say hello to the Oakland A's!
JTWood wrote:You think the Cubs would be interested?
I don't think Bonds would want to play in Chicago. He wants to stay on the West Coast and I've got the feeling he's going to be inflexible on that count.
West Coast, AL so he can DH, team that just lost their top slugger to free agency... Mr. Bonds, say hello to the Oakland A's!
So what you're saying is that the Cubs might not be interested?
JTWood wrote:You think the Cubs would be interested?
I don't think Bonds would want to play in Chicago. He wants to stay on the West Coast and I've got the feeling he's going to be inflexible on that count.
West Coast, AL so he can DH, team that just lost their top slugger to free agency... Mr. Bonds, say hello to the Oakland A's!
So what you're saying is that the Cubs might not be interested?
I'll need proof before I believe that.
Oh, I'm sure a lot of teams will be interested, including the Cubs, but I agree with Lovable Losers that it's much more likely that a West Coast team gets him, 'cause that's where he wants to play. Any other team would have to seriously overpay to land ol' surly Barry.
IMO, if he leaves SF, Oakland is the frontrunner to reel him in...