Official Barry Bonds Countdown Thread

[THAY3R]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Steroids only help players relative to those who are not taking steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this is evidence that the record is tainted, because Aaron didn't take steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then Aaron's record is tainted.

DUCY?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Steroids only help players relative to those who are not taking steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this is evidence that the record is tainted, because Aaron didn't take steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, that is clearly not what I meant. Relative to players they are facing, i.e. pitchers and other hitters. So, this years batting title or HR title might not be legit, if only 10% of the league juices, but if most of them juice, its a wash.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, Bond's peak years of production, 2000 - 2004, came when he was 35 to 39 years old. Hitting this many home runs so late in one's career is unprecedented:


[/ QUOTE ]

Hank Aaron hit more homeruns in the 5 year period from age 35-39 than he did in the 5 year period from ages 25-29 or 30-34.

Known, proven, or otherwise admitted users of steroids (ie, Canseco, Caminiti, etc) have shown a sharp drop off at these ages.

If anything, the stats show Bonds is a whole lot more like Aaron than being similar to known steroid users.

Also, hitting a lot of homeruns as you get older is not against MLB rules, nor does it constitute a violation of the MLB steroid policy.


[ QUOTE ]
maybe it was sheer skill and luck
but given the huge amount of circumstantial evidence that he used one would assume steroids played a factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bonds 1986-1999 used ash bats.
Bonds 2000-present used custom made, maple "SAM" bats.

What factor does this account for, if any?

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume some..just like taking roids, lifting weights, etc had a factor. I'd weigh steroids and getting bigger/stronger/recovery time as > than change in wood.

Raf/Canseco/Mark M/Bonds/etc are all tainted and thus their accomplishments should also be. They are the poster boys for the steroid/juice era. They shouldn't be vilified to the point of someone like Pacman/Vick/Rose/ etc but they brought most of the heat upon themselves and in Bonds case made it worse by being such a self absorbed ass.

[/ QUOTE ]

You think that because you think steroids helps hitters and you don't even consider the possibility that it might HURT hitters, and they need to take steroids just to keep pace.

But thats cool, its all made up anyway, no way to determine how much these factors influence the numbers (nor the hundreds of other factors that have changed since Ruth or Aaron's day) so we usually just go by the actual numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes.
hence the word tainted not discredited or asterick'd
though i think only an idiot would argue that steroids don't help a baseball player hit more homeruns given the explosion of hr hitters during the steroid era.

red-i think your an idiot because you want everything to be an absolute 100% provable fact in order to take it into consideration..which is nice if your living in never never land but in the real world things are never that cut and dry.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, only a moron would think that the birth of Brad Pitt has nothing to do with the economy in China. Ummm...check out the dates for yourself, man.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess than the majority of players who doubled if not tripled their HR production simply ran really hot all at the same time during a era when steroid use was widespread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you want me to FYP in about twenty other things that have changed during this "steroid era" or can you just recognize how silly your argument is, notice the genius of my Brad Pitt counterargument, and move on?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Steroids only help players relative to those who are not taking steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this is evidence that the record is tainted, because Aaron didn't take steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then Aaron's record is tainted.

DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, weight lifting does not help Bonds compared to Ruth unless he is the only one lifting. Ditto steroids.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Steroids only help players relative to those who are not taking steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this is evidence that the record is tainted, because Aaron didn't take steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then Aaron's record is tainted.

DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I don't.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Redbean and others have discounted any evidence that isn't absolute proof of Bonds' steroid use, which is similarly retarded. That is my whole point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I respectfully disagree. I have only discounted your repeated assertions as fact of things that are untrue...(ie. Bonds admission during grand jury testimony.)

I do not discount the circumstantial evidence presented, and readily acknowledge that pieces of circumstantial evidence exists that may lead many to the opinion that Bonds used steroids.

My entire point is, however, that that opinion is just that...opinion and not a fact.

I do not tread into matters of opinion, I deal only in fact.

Just the facts, man.

I'm like the black Joe Friday.

[CharlieDontSurf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, Bond's peak years of production, 2000 - 2004, came when he was 35 to 39 years old. Hitting this many home runs so late in one's career is unprecedented:


[/ QUOTE ]

Hank Aaron hit more homeruns in the 5 year period from age 35-39 than he did in the 5 year period from ages 25-29 or 30-34.

Known, proven, or otherwise admitted users of steroids (ie, Canseco, Caminiti, etc) have shown a sharp drop off at these ages.

If anything, the stats show Bonds is a whole lot more like Aaron than being similar to known steroid users.

Also, hitting a lot of homeruns as you get older is not against MLB rules, nor does it constitute a violation of the MLB steroid policy.


[ QUOTE ]
maybe it was sheer skill and luck
but given the huge amount of circumstantial evidence that he used one would assume steroids played a factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bonds 1986-1999 used ash bats.
Bonds 2000-present used custom made, maple "SAM" bats.

What factor does this account for, if any?

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume some..just like taking roids, lifting weights, etc had a factor. I'd weigh steroids and getting bigger/stronger/recovery time as > than change in wood.

Raf/Canseco/Mark M/Bonds/etc are all tainted and thus their accomplishments should also be. They are the poster boys for the steroid/juice era. They shouldn't be vilified to the point of someone like Pacman/Vick/Rose/ etc but they brought most of the heat upon themselves and in Bonds case made it worse by being such a self absorbed ass.

[/ QUOTE ]

You think that because you think steroids helps hitters and you don't even consider the possibility that it might HURT hitters, and they need to take steroids just to keep pace.

But thats cool, its all made up anyway, no way to determine how much these factors influence the numbers (nor the hundreds of other factors that have changed since Ruth or Aaron's day) so we usually just go by the actual numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes.
hence the word tainted not discredited or asterick'd
though i think only an idiot would argue that steroids don't help a baseball player hit more homeruns given the explosion of hr hitters during the steroid era.

red-i think your an idiot because you want everything to be an absolute 100% provable fact in order to take it into consideration..which is nice if your living in never never land but in the real world things are never that cut and dry.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, only a moron would think that the birth of Brad Pitt has nothing to do with the economy in China. Ummm...check out the dates for yourself, man.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess than the majority of players who doubled if not tripled their HR production simply ran really hot all at the same time during a era when steroid use was widespread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you want me to FYP in about twenty other things that have changed during this "steroid era" or can you just recognize how silly your argument is, notice the genius of my Brad Pitt counterargument, and move on?

[/ QUOTE ]

Plenty of things have changed but what is the era called
The steroid era..and who are mentioned when this area is discussed...Raf/Bonds/Mark M/sosa/Brady S/Canseco etc

and is this era viewed as a positive or negative?

So its obvious why Bonds and all the other player and their achievements during this era are tainted right? Maybe Bonds didn't even do steroids and it was in fact Arod who was the biggest user..but Bonds achievments are still tainted regardless.

[B00T]

The last 2 pages of this thread is a perfect list of Who's Now to add to your ignore lists.

[BigSoonerFan]

Congratulations Barry. Now please go away.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Redbean and others have discounted any evidence that isn't absolute proof of Bonds' steroid use, which is similarly retarded. That is my whole point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I respectfully disagree. I have only discounted your repeated assertions as fact of things that are untrue...(ie. Bonds admission during grand jury testimony.)

I do not discount the circumstantial evidence presented, and readily acknowledge that pieces of circumstantial evidence exists that may lead many to the opinion that Bonds used steroids.

My entire point is, however, that that opinion is just that...opinion and not a fact.

I do not tread into matters of opinion, I deal only in fact.

Just the facts, man.

I'm like the black Joe Friday.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except for the "facts" you get wrong, like (for example) saying that HGH is not illegal. It is illegal unless prescribed by a doctor, and therefore, non-prescription HGH has been banned from baseball since 1991.