Big Papi not convinced Bonds is a product of steroids (good read)

Blitzkrieg

Administrator

Ortiz nailed it in this statement. Exactly what I've been trying to say for years.

""To hit the ball, the guy makes it look easy, but it ain't. I don't know how you can have that swing, consistently. I don't know how steroids can do that," Ortiz told the Boston Herald. "There are supposed to be guys using steroids in the game, and there's nobody close to Barry Bonds. What's that mean? He was using the best [stuff]? Know what I'm saying?"

Here's the whole article. ESPN.com - MLB - Big Papi skeptical steroids helped Bonds in chase

Respect Bonds people. He's the best we've ever seen.

Killswitch

This was indeed an interesting read and I'd give some serious credit to David Ortiz for coming out and giving all this feedback to us fans who aren't able to know half that stuff.

I'd agree with Ortiz here and really don't have any counter agruements.

Dr. Giganto

Sports Moderator

Nobody is saying that you can just be some schmo off the street, take steroids, and then hit 73 home runs. But what steroids can do, is take a guy who for 15 years had 30-40 home run power, and then make him the absolute most dangerous hitter in the game.

In Bonds' first 14 years in the majors he only topped 45 home runds once, then he did it 5 straight years, beginning at age 35. In those first 14 years, his slugging % never topped .677, and then he put up SLG %s of .688, .863, .799, .749, and .812. You mean to tell me he was always this good, and it just took him 15 years to "figure it out"?


I will give you two players side-by-side...tell me who you would rather have:

Player A: .286 BA, .397 OBP, .543 slugging %, 292 home runs, 864 RBI, 340 stolen bases, 103 caught stealings (76.7% success rate), 999 runs scored

Player B: .306 batting average, .387 OBP, .577 slugging %, 464 home runs, 1347 RBIs, 243 stolen bases, 60 caught stealings (80.2% success rate), 1358 runs scored

Player B plays a "premium" defensive position, while player A plays one of the easiest positions on the field.

Player A is Barry Bonds, through A-Rod's current age. Player B is A-Rod.

I'll take A-Rod over non-steroid Barry any day of the week

Simon

Founder/Admin

Jesus. Why does it always take Tom Dogg to give a rational explaination..........

How many times do you think Barry Bonds would hit the warning track in the 90's, that are now homeruns?

The thing is........Barry Bonds would have made the hall of fame without steriods.

David Ortiz was just defending his fellow baseball brother and trying to deflect some of the Curt Schilling remarks towards Bonds.


On a side note, Barry Bonds admitted to a grand jury that he used the cream and the clear numerous times.

Not to mention you have to be either really niave or stupid to think he is clean.

He is not the best we have ever seen. I hate to say it, but that man's name is Alex Rodriguez. (Pujols is better than Bonds too)

Dr. Giganto

Sports Moderator

I also want to clarify that, as DD said, Bonds was a sure-fire hall of famer before 2001. He was one of the 10 best players in baseball in the 1990's. He had an excellent mix of power and speed. He was awesome. There's no doubting that.

Blitzkrieg

Administrator

You guys are leaving out some very important details about what happend in baseball during Bond's career. The ballparks got smaller as he went on and the pitching got a lot worse A) because of expansion and B) just overall.

He's also played in a bad national league for some time. You can't tell me these were factors. I mean christ, Luis Gonzalez hit 57 homers one year. So what do we say about that? Lucky season?

Homers are way way up across the board.

Is it so far fetched to think that Bonds got better with the strikezone over the years as well? I would think the more you play, the more you learn. The easier it is to lay off pitches you would have swung at earlier in your career.

Bonds hardly ever swings at a bad pitch. He's more patient then A-Rod is. A-Rod could have 150+ walks a season as well if he didn't swing at some garbage. He's also not the mentally strong kind of player Bonds is now. Just look how he performs in the playoffs. Bonds used to be the same way, but he's overcome those demons now.

Dr. Giganto

Sports Moderator

All valid points (well, except for the playoffs thing, but that's another argument for another time), but do you REALLY think that being on steroids doesn't have any bearing on baseball talent at all?

The more you use steroids, the stronger you become, and that has two major effects on a baseball player's abilities.

First off, you hit the ball harder, so fly balls to the warning track become home runs, lazy fly balls become line drives, gound balls that infielders would normally reach get through the infield more quickly, etc.

Secondly, you can swing the bat faster, so you can sit back and wait on a pitch longer than you normally would be able to. So, Barry was able to take his patience at the plate (which was already awesome), and it became even BETTER, since he has more time to recognize where the pitch is going.

And to clarify, I'm not saying A-Rod would have better swing selection, but I'm just saying that Bonds was able to make this talent of his even better, to the point where it reached a freakish, unnatural level.

Blitzkrieg

Administrator

I completely understand what you're saying and where you're coming from. Everything you've brought up is valid. I'm just going along with Papi on this one as we the public still don't really know how much steroids might have played a factor. It's fair to say they played some part in this, but I read the article on Page 2 on espn.com. They factored in steroids with Bonds as much as they could without being unfair to himand they still had him winding up at well over 600 home runs. The man is in awesome shape. He could play another 2 or 3 years most likely.

So I guess the point I'm trying to make is that with or without steroids I still believe Bonds would have made a run at Hank's record and this is coming from a huge (but fair) Braves fan.

Still, it's very unfair also how Bonds is treated.

You're a Yankees fan Tom. Does it bother you that Giambi hit two home runs off of Pedro in game 7 of the 2003 ALCS WHILE he was juiced up?

And does it bother you now that the Yanks have signed Clemens back to a rediculous contract at 45-years old and he's STILL a top line pitcher?

Deep down we have to believe Clemens was or is on something. He's unatural. A power pitcher of all people and a guy who was sliding in Boston years ago, went on to win what..3 or 4 more Cy Young Awards?

Also, we brought up the HGH issue. With the way baseball is right now, how do we know Pujols, A-Rod, all these guys aren't on this? We don't know.

So in my book, when Bonds breaks this record there shouldn't be an asterisk.

And one more thing. Bonds is actually the MVP of the national league so far this season. Look at his numbers. He's 42 and has not tested postive for steroids and is still doing this.. To me, you could say he's on HGH, but I still think the shit he's doing is very impressive.

Dr. Giganto

Sports Moderator

Well, it does bother me a little, especially Clemens. However, there is no "smoking gun" so to say, as far as Clemens is concerned. He's never been linked to a laboratory that provided steroids to pro athletes, and he never showed up on a customer list for a steroid supplier. Bonds was.

As for Giambi, he is not exactly my favorite. My hope is that he is 100% clean now, but there will always be this little bit of me that kinda doesn't like him. However, he at least "apologized", although in a roundabout way. Very few players who've either been caught or had evidence against them have manned up and said they screwed up, but Giambi was one of them, so I at least give him some props for that.

It also doesn't help that Barry bonds is considered one of the biggest jerks in the game. We have a natural tendency to be more forgiving toward "nice guys".

And, assuming Bonds is clean now, what he is doing this year is quite impressive. I will give credit where it is due.

Because there is no reliable test for HGH, I guess we'll never know for sure if guys are on it this season (a test may be developed in the future, of course). But, I guess you can't just assume everyone is dirty. Now that there's at least some testing, let's just think that people's performances this year are legitimate, in which case, I give Bonds all the respect in the world.

Also, I realize this is some he-said, she-said type stuff, but this guy I work with has a cousin in the Cardinals minor league system, and he says he knows Pujols has used steroids in the past. In fact, he said the only big-name player on that team that he knows is clean is Scott Rolen. Take that for what you will...

Blitzkrieg

Administrator

Well that's the problem we are faced with in this era of baseball. We don't know what's legit or how much of what these players do is based on natural ability. I mean, we can never truly compare these players to the athletes of the 50's who didn't have all the specialized gyms to work out in as these players do.

There are two reasons why I'm so pro Bonds.

1. Because I feel bad how he takes the whole wrap on everything to do with this steroid era when you know probably at least half the players in baseball at the time of his incredible run were using something they shouldn't have been using. Something illegal.

2. Because I know he's an incredible athlete that I grew up loving and respecting as a kid when the Giants/Pirates were huge rivals of Atlanta and I know he was one of the best players of that era no questions asked. What he's able to do, get maybe one pitch to hit a night and hit it out of the ballpark is something that I don't think anyone could do...steroids or not.