Official Barry Bonds Countdown Thread

[tuq]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was just trying to comment on the sidepoint that it is also evidence that all the guys on that team are whiny bitches who don't care about winning and are probably playing for the wrong reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmmm. I'm gonna go ahead and believe my friends and the stories I've heard - knowing that they're stand-up guys and the farthest thing from whiners - instead of going with this wild conjecture you're offering.

[/ QUOTE ]

Voting a guy off the team for being a jerk= whiny bitches, IMO. I'm not offering wild conjecture, I'm offering a definition of a phrase. You can choose to reject that definition if you want, but I'm not trying to pretend I know your friends better than you. You described their behavior, that behavior is the very definition of being whiny bitches IMO. No conjecture.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think we can both agree that it's super weird. The difference of opinion we're having is that you're assigning the guilt on the 'whiny bitches' and I'm seeing Bonds as being the problem.

Seriously, something like this is unheard of. This is a powerhouse D-I program with a loaded roster and a chance to win it all, and yet there's mutiny. I'm sure they weren't proud of themselves - why would these guys do something like that if Bonds wasn't an insufferable prick? Your response will be 'because they're whiny bitches'. I think that's a dumb, poorly thought out thing to say, so we will agree to disagree.

Also,

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

He admitted taking a substance that he thought was flaxseed oil but was actually steroids.


[/ QUOTE ]

Correction: A substance the authors BELIEVED to be steroids based on their interpretation of circumstantial evidence. Key distinction.

[ QUOTE ]
even though no one has ever disputed that it was in fact steroids. Not even Bonds.


[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't you say at one time you are studying or have studied law?

You do realize that the defense does not get to present evidence at grand jury to refute the prosecutions evidence?

[ QUOTE ]

Also, steroids were banned from MLB by commissioner Fay Vincent in 1991, though there was no testing until recently. So using steroids has been against the rules and therefore cheating since 1991.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correction: "illegal drugs, including illegal steroids."

Call it semantics, but lawfully prescribed steroids, not to mention HGH which is not a steroid, were not against the rules of the game.

And considering that Bonds has not been allowed to present his side yet....who knows what sort of surprises you're in for.... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Redbean, please assert and/or present compelling evidence that Bonds has never used ILLEGAL steroids.

[not holding breath]

Edit: never mind, you're just going to ctrl+v the crap about never testing positive, and act like that is concrete proof, while continuing to nitpick all the opposing evidence. Whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

So far in this thread you've asked people to PROVE Bonds DIDN'T take steroids and to prove that steroids DONT help people hit home runs. Are you half or fully retarded? Can you not see how those are very, very stupid things to request?

[tuq]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think Barry's probably a dick, but the whole thing is unfairly overblown. I don't think it'll matter in 20 years though, because we'll either have gotten over it or will have crowned one (or two!) new home run kings. We'll just accept the era and steroids for what they are, still consider Hank Aaron to be the 2nd (or 3rd) best RF ever, and probably consider either Bonds or Ruth as the best player ever, whichever floats your boat.

[/ QUOTE ]

This got lost in the shuffle, but IMO, it's the best post in this whole thread.

[/ QUOTE ]
That was in response to me. And I did see it and didn't respond cuz he's right, as Jack often is about these things.

[Vyse]

Seriously. The burden of proof is on you, Drew! If you're going to claim he has used steroids, knowingly or unknowingly, you have to prove it! You can't say, "Well, you guys better prove he didn't! If you don't have any evidence that he hasn't, or if you don't believe he hasn't, then I win by default."

Um, no. You lose.

(Jesus christ 2p2 keeps failing.)

[THAY3R]

Drew,

Please prove to us that you've never raped little children.

1-2-3 go.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
The grand jury is still empaneled, you know. There could still be an indictment.


[/ QUOTE ]

Cindy Crawford is still alive. There is still a chance I could fuck her, too.

Based on past experience, however, I'd say both examples are increasingly unlikely.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

He admitted taking a substance that he thought was flaxseed oil but was actually steroids.


[/ QUOTE ]

Correction: A substance the authors BELIEVED to be steroids based on their interpretation of circumstantial evidence. Key distinction.

[ QUOTE ]
even though no one has ever disputed that it was in fact steroids. Not even Bonds.


[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't you say at one time you are studying or have studied law?

You do realize that the defense does not get to present evidence at grand jury to refute the prosecutions evidence?

[ QUOTE ]

Also, steroids were banned from MLB by commissioner Fay Vincent in 1991, though there was no testing until recently. So using steroids has been against the rules and therefore cheating since 1991.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correction: "illegal drugs, including illegal steroids."

Call it semantics, but lawfully prescribed steroids, not to mention HGH which is not a steroid, were not against the rules of the game.

And considering that Bonds has not been allowed to present his side yet....who knows what sort of surprises you're in for.... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Redbean, please assert and/or present compelling evidence that Bonds has never used ILLEGAL steroids.

[not holding breath]

Edit: never mind, you're just going to ctrl+v the crap about never testing positive, and act like that is concrete proof, while continuing to nitpick all the opposing evidence. Whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

So far in this thread you've asked people to PROVE Bonds DIDN'T take steroids and to prove that steroids DONT help people hit home runs. Are you half or fully retarded? Can you not see how those are very, very stupid things to request?

[/ 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.

I've asked for evidence, not proof, and my request is based on the fact that it's so patently obvious that Bonds DID take steroids and that steroids DO help home run hitters.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm still hoping I can get someone to respond from the "This record is steroid-enhanced" camp to clarify that statement a bit. It is one of those comments that seems logical and rational if you only think about it for like ten seconds, but is actually incredibly stupid and incorrect when you think about it for eleven or more. I hear it a lot with regards to modern equipment and weight training, and it is just as stupid there.

This record was not steroid-enhanced. It might be tainted, because thats a subjective, public opinion type deal, but it wasn't enhanced.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand what you are saying.

Steroids absolutely enhance the effectiveness of the home run hitter. Are you seriously disputing THAT?

And please, don't trot out the strawman "Steroids don't help you connect with the baseball," because no one's ever claimed that they do. They just make the ball go farther and faster when you connect.

Also, weight training and superior nutrition are not against the rules, which is how sentient beings distinguish between them and steroids on the culpability scale.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't get the point. The only way you can make the argument that this record is steroid-enhanced is if you somehow believe ONLY Barry, or at least Barry and a very small minority of other players, are on steroids. This is obviously ridiculous, and is just as silly as claiming Bonds never juiced.

The point of the weight lifting comparison is that people also foolishly list weight-training and workout regimens as an added benefit that todays player has. What they forget is that this added benefit helps ALL players, hitters, pitchers, everyone, so it isn't an individual benefit. Barry may have been aided by steroids, but so were most of the pitchers he faced. Why do they help him more than hurt him?

The record is small-park-enhanced, its nature-of-todays-game-enhanced, its small-modern-strikezone-enhanced, but it is NOT steroid-enhanced. Its neutral with regards to steroids.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that steroids have helped a lot of hitters hit a lot more home runs, and not just Barry. They just helped him become the HR king.

And this is by far the greatest offensive era in baseball history, an era which corresponds almost exactly with the rise of steroid use in MLB, which I believe is pretty strong evidence that steroids help the hitters far more than the pitchers.

Somebody else also claimed that pitchers are helped even more than hitters, but I think that's pretty ridiculous given the sky-high ERAs and home run totals we've seen over the past 15 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you've spent very much time thinking about all the reasons why this post is very wrong. The offensive boom in baseball has coincided with a whole lot more than just the steroid era, and it is entirely unreasonable to think steroids had a much greater effect than any of the other stuff. The game has been slowly tweaked over the last 20 or so years SPECIFICALLY TO INCREASE OFFENSE. It has been extremely successful. Steroids only help players relative to those who are not taking steroids. It is possible, I suppose, that if everyone were to take steroids, it would help some players more than others, but I've never seen any evidence of this, so it is something YOU will have to demonstrate, not simply assert as fact.

Again, this is one of those things that SEEMS logical when you first say it. But then you think about it and realize there is no reason steroids should help rather than hurt hitters. It makes them stronger, fine. It makes pitchers stronger. Is this a wash? No idea, maybe Bonds would have hit 85 HRs in a season if every pitcher he faced wasn't a juicer. Thats the point.

You can call him a cheater, you can say whatever you want, but it is absolutely lazy and irrational to claim that this record is steroid enhanced.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

He admitted taking a substance that he thought was flaxseed oil but was actually steroids.


[/ QUOTE ]

Correction: A substance the authors BELIEVED to be steroids based on their interpretation of circumstantial evidence. Key distinction.

[ QUOTE ]
even though no one has ever disputed that it was in fact steroids. Not even Bonds.


[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't you say at one time you are studying or have studied law?

You do realize that the defense does not get to present evidence at grand jury to refute the prosecutions evidence?

[ QUOTE ]

Also, steroids were banned from MLB by commissioner Fay Vincent in 1991, though there was no testing until recently. So using steroids has been against the rules and therefore cheating since 1991.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correction: "illegal drugs, including illegal steroids."

Call it semantics, but lawfully prescribed steroids, not to mention HGH which is not a steroid, were not against the rules of the game.

And considering that Bonds has not been allowed to present his side yet....who knows what sort of surprises you're in for.... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Redbean, please assert and/or present compelling evidence that Bonds has never used ILLEGAL steroids.

[not holding breath]

Edit: never mind, you're just going to ctrl+v the crap about never testing positive, and act like that is concrete proof, while continuing to nitpick all the opposing evidence. Whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

So far in this thread you've asked people to PROVE Bonds DIDN'T take steroids and to prove that steroids DONT help people hit home runs. Are you half or fully retarded? Can you not see how those are very, very stupid things to request?

[/ 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.

I've asked for evidence, not proof, and my request is based on the fact that it's so patently obvious that Bonds DID take steroids and that steroids DO help home run hitters.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no such thing as evidence that Bonds did not take steroids.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]
Bonds top 3 of all-time without steroids would be an interesting argument to see from both sides. I'd be interested to see the reasoning behind it

[/ QUOTE ]

Bonds from 1990 to 1999 (pre-"steroids") had one of the best decades in the history of MLB. No, he didn't light up the HR records, but in terms of productivity and consistency, that 10 year run is easily top 10 of all-time. Possibly top 5, though top 3 is stretching it.

Players who definitely had a better 10-year stretch then Bonds 1990-1999:

Ruth
Gehrig
Cobb

Players who arguably had a better 10 year run:
Dimaggio
Williams (only if both Williams and Dimaggio are given a pass for missing three years because of WW2).
Mantle (higher peak, but not as steady as Bonds)

And really, that's about it. There are some GREAT players who never had the 10 year stretch that Bonds had, including Musial and Mays.

And that's completely ignoring 2001-04, a run that even Babe Ruth never had.