Another Bonds Blog - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Another Bonds Blog

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby stepsinsc » Sat Aug 18, 2007 6:56 pm

mweir145 wrote:I've read Game of Shadows, and I still have no problem stating that it took a lot of hard work (PEDs or not) from him to reach his record and become one of the best players of all time.



We're in agreement on that.

mweir145 wrote:I've read Game of Shadows, and I still have no problem stating that it took a lot of hard work (PEDs or not) from him to reach his record and become one of the best players of all time.

Despite those things, you can't sit here and tell me that taking PED's in baseball wasn't an accepted practice among ballplayers for many years (and likely still is). The fact that amphetamines and steroids have been illegal for years was of no concern to anybody, there were no penalties. For all intents and purposes, there might as well have not been a law agaisnt them.

And baseball didn't care. If they did, they would have actually tried to do something instead of sending out a worthless memo to the major league teams that meant absolutely nothing to everyone. In fact, it has been widely reported that baseball basically encouraged the players to do what they had to do. And then we come back to Bonds, and him looking at what baseball players were doing all around him. And again I say I don't think I would have been able to resist that temptation either.


The very last thing I said in my first post:
stepsinsc wrote:So all these players, and the establishment, are enemies of baseball fans, or at least me.


I agree that baseball as a whole is to blame. But that doesn't mean we can't denounce those who took advantage of the lax attitudes towards the drugs. But this wasn't some fringe player who was running the risk of being out of baseball and not being able to feed his family or having to figure out how that communications degree was going to land him a job. I respect your honesty if you're serious when you say you couldn't resist that temptation, but I would more significantly more doubts about the character of an individual who cheats when he already has every advantage at his disposal, than I do for someone who is cheating merely to keep their head above water.
stepsinsc
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 153
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby RocketsDWM » Sat Aug 18, 2007 7:09 pm

I still dont agree with the statement that "because everyone did it, it makes it right to use PED's". All those who took them and those who allowed this to happen are to blame. And Bonds would fall under that group.
Image
RocketsDWM
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar

Posts: 5243
(Past Year: 55)
Joined: 9 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby Tavish » Sat Aug 18, 2007 7:18 pm

stepsinsc wrote:
Tavish wrote:
stepsinsc wrote:The biggest of which is that Aaron admitted to using them in 1968, but they were not made illegal until 1970.

Just as clarification, they were made illegal in 1959. At least illegal in the same sense as anabolic steroids are in that they are illegal to use without a prescription.


This is coming from online sources only, so take it for what it's worth. But Only amphetamine inhalers were banned in 1959. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphetamine. But amphetamines themselves weren't banned until 1970. http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/ampheta ... meline.php.


I'll look into finding some information, but I'm fairly certain that amphetamines were illegal without a prescription well before the the CSA in 1970. Its really neither here nor there since its not a major part of your argument, but others may find it useful.
Image

Bury me a Royal.
Tavish
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterWeb Supporter
Posts: 11070
(Past Year: 25)
Joined: 3 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby sportsaddict » Sun Aug 19, 2007 12:43 am

Wow, I've been hearing on the Cafe for months that Aaron admitted to using amphetamines in his auto biography, and I assumed that he admitted to using them throughout his career. But his autobiography says he experimented with them one season? I can't believe that's actually been used as an excuse to try to compare Bonds and Aaron.

Anyway, I actually don't blame Bonds for using whatever he did to become the best. I don't know if "blame" is the right word, but more like I can understand why he did what he did. Not saying that it's right, but I at least understand.

That being said, the reason why people are upset is because Bonds is breaking a record that he maybe would not have broken if he did not use performance enhancing drugs. That's what makes a case for Aaron still being the "true" career HR record holder. Because by using performance enhancing drugs, Bonds has an added benefit over Aaron, even if everyone else was taking them while Bonds was playing. And I don't even want to hear the greenies argument, because that seems like a desperate attempt to vilify Aaron just to defend Bonds, especially because he said he simply experimented with them one time.
"Oh, that Lankford and McGee, the trio of 'em. They're a one-man wrecking crew."

-Mike Shannon
sportsaddict
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1961
Joined: 2 Aug 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The good old Midwest

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby Tavish » Mon Aug 20, 2007 12:06 pm

sportsaddict wrote:That being said, the reason why people are upset is because Bonds is breaking a record that he maybe would not have broken if he did not use performance enhancing drugs. That's what makes a case for Aaron still being the "true" career HR record holder. Because by using performance enhancing drugs, Bonds has an added benefit over Aaron, even if everyone else was taking them while Bonds was playing. And I don't even want to hear the greenies argument, because that seems like a desperate attempt to vilify Aaron just to defend Bonds, especially because he said he simply experimented with them one time.


Why do you consider it a "desperate attempt" to say that players have always looked for any kind of advantage they could, even the great players look for ways to get better. Aaron tried greenies one time and Bonds unknowingly did steroids. Everyone was doing greenies during Aaron's time and Aaron hit the most HRs out of that generation. Everyone was doing steroids during Bonds' time and Bonds hit the most HRs for that generation. There really is no case for anyone but Bonds being the "true" career HR record holder. People can debate to their hearts content about who was the better HR hitter, but the numbers are there in black and white who hit the most, the two things are completely different. Pete Rose has the most hits, he isn't even close to the greatest hitter. Bonds has the most HR, people can judge for themselves where he ranks among the great HR hitters.
Image

Bury me a Royal.
Tavish
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterWeb Supporter
Posts: 11070
(Past Year: 25)
Joined: 3 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby stepsinsc » Mon Aug 20, 2007 4:11 pm

Tavish wrote:
Aaron tried greenies one time and Bonds unknowingly did steroids. Everyone was doing greenies during Aaron's time and Aaron hit the most HRs out of that generation. Everyone was doing steroids during Bonds' time and Bonds hit the most HRs for that generation.


Until you find some confirmation they were banned in 1959 (and you won't find it, because the whole reason greenies were banned was the book "Ball Four," which wasn't released until 1970), then you need to stop with this "Aaron did greenies so it's okay Bonds did steroids" argument. Second, we don't know that EVERYONE did it; wild statements like that, which are nothing more than blanketed conclusory statements without a shred of factual evidence, are nothing more than crutches.

Try basing your opinion on facts available to you, rather than forming alleged facts based on your opinions.
stepsinsc
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 153
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby Tavish » Mon Aug 20, 2007 4:53 pm

stepsinsc wrote:
Tavish wrote:
Aaron tried greenies one time and Bonds unknowingly did steroids. Everyone was doing greenies during Aaron's time and Aaron hit the most HRs out of that generation. Everyone was doing steroids during Bonds' time and Bonds hit the most HRs for that generation.


Until you find some confirmation they were banned in 1959 (and you won't find it, because the whole reason greenies were banned was the book "Ball Four," which wasn't released until 1970), then you need to stop with this "Aaron did greenies so it's okay Bonds did steroids" argument. Second, we don't know that EVERYONE did it; wild statements like that, which are nothing more than blanketed conclusory statements without a shred of factual evidence, are nothing more than crutches.

Try basing your opinion on facts available to you, rather than forming alleged facts based on your opinions.

I do my best to base my opinions on facts. Although I usually try to dig a little deeper for facts than to rely on Wikipedia for all the answers.

The Durham-Humprhey Act of 1951 made it illegal to dispense amphetamines without a prescription.
The 1956 Narcotics Control Act made amphetamines illegal without a prescription.
The Drug Abuse Control Act of 1965 again targeted the manufacture and sale of amphetamines.

When the CSA was passed in 1970 it was used to condense all the various laws into a easier to enforce bill. Many of the drugs it targeted were already illegal without a prescription.

I'm sorry that saying everyone did greenies bothers you. I took you for someone who could understand a simple hyperbole. I don't think every player used greenies just as I don't think every player used/uses steroids or HGH. If you don't believe that greenies were fairly rampant in the game of baseball in the 50s and 60s then I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I tend to believe the many players who claim they and their teammates used the pills quite often. Why do I believe them? Because they don't have much of a reason to lie, they didn't consider them cheating at that time and most of them still don't think of them as cheating.

I don't think you will find me saying I condone Bonds steroid use because Aaron did greenies. I'm saying the same thing that I have been for what seems like forever now, pretty much since the entire steroid controversy began. I don't condone what any of the players do, I just don't really care. Baseball is what it is. It never has been and never will be a playground for choir boys.
Image

Bury me a Royal.
Tavish
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterWeb Supporter
Posts: 11070
(Past Year: 25)
Joined: 3 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby stepsinsc » Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:42 am

Tavish wrote:
stepsinsc wrote:
Tavish wrote:
Aaron tried greenies one time and Bonds unknowingly did steroids. Everyone was doing greenies during Aaron's time and Aaron hit the most HRs out of that generation. Everyone was doing steroids during Bonds' time and Bonds hit the most HRs for that generation.


Until you find some confirmation they were banned in 1959 (and you won't find it, because the whole reason greenies were banned was the book "Ball Four," which wasn't released until 1970), then you need to stop with this "Aaron did greenies so it's okay Bonds did steroids" argument. Second, we don't know that EVERYONE did it; wild statements like that, which are nothing more than blanketed conclusory statements without a shred of factual evidence, are nothing more than crutches.

Try basing your opinion on facts available to you, rather than forming alleged facts based on your opinions.

I do my best to base my opinions on facts. Although I usually try to dig a little deeper for facts than to rely on Wikipedia for all the answers.

The Durham-Humprhey Act of 1951 made it illegal to dispense amphetamines without a prescription.
The 1956 Narcotics Control Act made amphetamines illegal without a prescription.
The Drug Abuse Control Act of 1965 again targeted the manufacture and sale of amphetamines.

When the CSA was passed in 1970 it was used to condense all the various laws into a easier to enforce bill. Many of the drugs it targeted were already illegal without a prescription.

I'm sorry that saying everyone did greenies bothers you. I took you for someone who could understand a simple hyperbole. I don't think every player used greenies just as I don't think every player used/uses steroids or HGH. If you don't believe that greenies were fairly rampant in the game of baseball in the 50s and 60s then I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I tend to believe the many players who claim they and their teammates used the pills quite often. Why do I believe them? Because they don't have much of a reason to lie, they didn't consider them cheating at that time and most of them still don't think of them as cheating.

I don't think you will find me saying I condone Bonds steroid use because Aaron did greenies. I'm saying the same thing that I have been for what seems like forever now, pretty much since the entire steroid controversy began. I don't condone what any of the players do, I just don't really care. Baseball is what it is. It never has been and never will be a playground for choir boys.


I really don't disagree with a lot of your views. First, it wasn't the statement that everyone used greenies that bothered me (I wasn't referring to it at all); it's the statement that everyone uses steroids. You can perhaps understand my response given that the "everyone else did steroids" mantra has been the rallying war-cry of Bonds' supporters over the past few years. While you may intend it as hyperbole, most seemingly do not.

I don't expect choir boys. But I am perfectly comfortable drawing a distinction between steroids and greenies. As you said, it seems most players don't consider greenies cheating. But I'm guessing most players would see steroids in a different light...? And I don't expect any records overturned. I do, however, want fans to see Bonds as a cheat - perhaps unlike greenies, there ARE steroid-free players who have tried to earn it the old-fashioned way: natural talent and/or hard work. I want him out of the game ASAP (preferably due to a federal indictment), so that ARod or whoever else can hurry up and take the record.

And thanks for posting the names of some of the Acts you're referring to - sorry for any skepticism. I quickly skimmed through the text of the 1951 and 1965 Acts, and it seems the '65 one was the one that finally nailed down amphetamines, albeit with a lot of verbosity. You can understand my wanting something more to support when they were banned since most sports articles written on greenies attributes the ban to the '70 Act.
stepsinsc
College Coach
College Coach

User avatar

Posts: 153
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby gatorgreenwell » Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:53 am

There is something important that gets lost in this whole Bonds episode. This did not start out as a witch hunt to 'get' Barry Bonds. Bonds had the misfortune/bad luck/stupidity of choosing to get his performance enhancers from a lab that was catering to track athletes (Tim Montgomery, Marion Jones, et al.). A track coach sent an anonymous sample to the feds and the feds raided the place. There, along with the names of many track athletes, they found Barry's name and Barry's calendar of what to take and when. Bonds wasn't the initial target of all of this. He was exposed by the bust and then he made his situation worse by giving grand jury testimony which does not jibe with the evidence collected by the feds.
gatorgreenwell
College Coach
College Coach


Posts: 270
Joined: 25 Feb 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Another Bonds Blog

Postby Art Vandelay » Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:41 pm

What it started out as has no bearing on what it's become. It sickens me to think of how many tax dollars, goverment resources, and man hours have been spent in the pursuit of (essentially) taking Bonds down. A federal indictment is not a hard thing to come by. Look at Michael Vick, for example, he went from nothing to suspected to indicted to pleaded guilty in what? 45 days? The fact that they can't indict Bonds yet, despite all of the money and time spent looking for evidence on him leads me to believe that the evidence is not out there. They need to give up on Bonds and focus on the true criminals: those who leaked Grand Jury testimony, and those who exploited that testimony for financial gain.
Image
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5265
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact