My prediction is ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron 

that five or ten years from now, Roger Maris' 61 home runs will be generally, if not officially (you never know what the MLBPA will say), be considered the all-time single season record, and Barry Bonds' record will be considered as valid as Ben Johnson's 1988 100 meter gold medal.

It's kind of like with buying PRO graded cards: it doesn't matter what it's worth today, it matters what it's worth 10 or 15 years for now.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

WAITAMINUTE--what about McGuire?--that Bonds took steroids. Guess there's very little doubt, is there?

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob L

if Bonds is indicted for perjury regarding the use of THG. There is a report today that the grand jury may indict several players for perjury in regards to the use of THG as well as knowing that Mr. Conte and BALCO were supplying it. Faye Vincent said today that an asterick by Bonds 73 may be necessary.

As far as McGwire is concerned, the use of Andro was not outlawed by baseball at the time and there was still a debate about whether Andro was an anabolic steroid. Since he was using a legal supplement at the time, I think his record would remain unscathed.

Just me 2 cents worth.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

I'm not saying what is right or wrong, I'm just predicting that someday Roger Maris will be the 'new' home run champ.

[Archive]

Posted By: david manns

I also believe Mcgwire's record will stand. Think about the fact that he hit 49 HR's as a rookie with no andro and Bonds never hit more than what, 45 or 48 HR's, in any given year other than the year he hit 73.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

McGwire or Maris, perhaps what is most interesting things is that no one here has argued for Bonds' merits as champion.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

I also think that some athletes will find out that, when it involves the distribution, promotioin and use of illegal substances, federal prosecutors won't particularly care what the players' association, collective bargaining or your high price agent have to say about the matter.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

A possible way to look at is this: Irrelevant to how many home runs were hit by Joe Blow during a World War II season, how many people today would consider it the true Major League record? Simularly, irrelevant to the merits of a particular player, 50 years from now, how many people will consider the home runs from the late 1990s wholey legitimate? My guess is that a large percentage, if not a majority, will take the home run numbers as seriously as those from WWII.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Again, I'm not saying what is right or wrong, just making my prediction ... And I have enough sense to make predictions that can't be proven wrong for another fifty years (You don't have to pay up, if the person died ten years earlier).

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

the problem I have with this whole 'put an asterik by the record' thing is, I don't care how pumped up on steroids you are, you still have to make contact with the ball and hit it out of the park. If it were as simple as taking steroids to become a great HR hitter, than all of us would be in the big leagues.

Did the steroids help him hit a few more HRs than he might normally have? Sure, but he still had to hit the ball. And it's not like he was Dave Kingman at the plate. His BA was 328 the year he hit 73 and followed it up with 370 and 341. Steroids does nothing to help you raise your batting average. That is purely plate disapline and choosing the right pitch to hit.

People can whine and cry and piss and moan about steriods and Bonds supposed use of them, but irregardless of whether he did or not, he has strung together 4 incredible seasons and shows no sign of letting up. If steroids is soley responsible for Bonds ascendency, then why are not a bunch of other players aldo producing numbers like Bonds?

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

...are tempted to take steroids to improve it. Only a fool would think steroids would enhance a performance that didn't already include an excellent eye and an accurate swing.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

It is funny how easy it is to criticise and scrutinize when you have never played the game on a competitive level. Bonds is probably the most disciplined hitter of this era. I really feel that if you have never played in organized baseball beyond college then your comments are not warranted. I takes ALOT more skill to lay off certain pitches than it does to hit a 92 MPH fastball over the fence. Poi9nt being that even without the enhancement he will still be champ. THink about it......it is not like he is hitting balls just getting over. He puts alot of them into the bay for cryiong out loud. You really think they would fall short if he was off of whatever he is taking? I dont think so. It may make a little difference, but not that much. My prediction..........Rose is new commissioner.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

Please excuse my terrible typing skills. The Rose for commissioner comment was a joke. I think he should be inducted right behind Shoeless Joe!

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...and Kobe probably thinks that unless you've been a millionaire basketball player with access to lots of adoring eager women, your comments aren't warranted.

Wait a minute - no sportwriter has the right to make any comments either. Same for most baseball analysts - damned, by your definition Tim McCarver has the right to have an opinion, but I don't! ...but my brother played minor league ball, so he can have an opinon. Okay, I'm fine with this - I'll just give my opinions to my brother and he can voice them.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

Scott-

I never took issue with basketball and women. I did play organized baseball myself and with and against several major leaguers so I can definitely form an opinion. It doesnt take roids or anything else to hit a ball 450+ feet. Matter of fact I have hit a couple with wood myself and I never even took so much as Weider's weight gainer. Bottom line is that the Bond's issue just gives people that are clueless about what it is really like something to talk about. The game's technology along with many variables including player performance has significantly had an effect on the game, records, etc......As for Kobe I think if he is found guilty he should pay the price. As for Bonds I feel the same. Same with Rose......etc. I am not defending Bonds, Mcgwire or anyone else. I am just stating that taking these suplements did not effect the home runs like everyone thinks. He was a great hitter before and the last 4-5 years maturity and experience has made him perhaps the most disciplined hitter in the game today.

regards,
Jason

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

A common argument I hear is that steroids doesn't matter, because it can't help a player's timing, eye contact, contact etc (which, in part, is incorrect as the added strength alone increases a batter's bat speed and reaction, which increases the batter's amount and quality of contact. This is particularly true where 'catching up' to the high heat or fending of the tough slow splitter is essential to being a high average hitter, much less a power hitter. Even Wade Boggs or Tony Gwynn will tell you that being able to get around on a high fastball is essential, even if you don't hit 8 home runs a year, and not being able to get around is why people are in AA). Beyong that, whenever the argument is raised that steroids doesn't matter and that it can't make a quality player better, my answer is : Why, then, do they take steroids? Is it because they want to enjoy the possible side effects of impotence, hair loss and testicular cancer at the age of 45? Or do they enjoy having injected un-scientifically tested drugs into their veins at 7am by a man who never took a nursing or medical class in his life?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

A simpler way to look at it is that steroids makes a batter able to swing the bat quicker and faster-- this is how the increase home run power is generated. As exemplified by the aluminum bat, power is gained because increased speed not wieght (Despite age old lore, using a heavier bat does not increase your power).

Now, irrelevant to home run totals, would someone reasonably argue that the increased bat speed produced by steroids will not help increase a batter's batting average, whether he is a commoner or a All-Star? And would someone reasnably argue that a high quality 20/20 vision singles hitter like Wade Boggs or Tony Gwynn or Bill Buckner would not have loved to be able to increase their bat speed so as to raise their average?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

Hankron-

I am not arguing that steroids will not at all effect the performance. I think the issue on the thread was that Bond's record would be questionable if he had not enhanced his performance by taking whatever drug he takes. In my opinion I think it wouldnt much if any. Yes it may give him some edge on strength, bat speed, etc., but he was hitting some tape measured shots before. I think we can both agree that Barry Bonds is alot better disciplined hitter than the Bonds of the early 90's.

Jason

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Maris's great year came in the first year of an expansion of the league. Several AAA pitchers were suddenly major leaguers. Mantle got 54 in a partial season. What did Jim Gentile get that year, 47 dingers? It was a power explosion of a year with an extended schedule.

Moving on to McGwire and Bonds, there is one commonality in their great season hitting: incredibly compact, smooth, refined swings. I've (unfortunately) watched BB at Dodgers Stadium over the years and his swing has shortened and smoothed out, just like Big Mac's did. They are both swinging better than they did as youths.

Bonds has also cobbled together some really amazing stats that are indicative of a great hitter: OBP records. He is being Williams-like in his selection and care at the plate. If it isn't in his wheelhouse, he isn't swinging, period.

Next, do you really believe that strength emphasizing doping is limited to sluggers? How many pitchers are throwing in the upper 90's consistently now? Look at last year's Cy Young winner in LA: he was a pencil necked geek until two years ago when he mysteriously found 30# of muscle and a yard on his fastball. Is he juicing? Doesn't that cancel out the sluggers' juicing?

Finally, you MUST consider the methodology of pitching today as partially responsible for the records we are seeing. It is a hitters' game. We have a low mound, a narrowed strike zone as compared to prior years, and pitchers who are trained not to go inside and upstairs on hitters. Guys like Clemens are exception, when they used to be the rule. Can you seriously imagine Bonds stepping in with body armor and hanging on the plate like he does against Drysdale, Gibson or Sal The Barber? They's put him on his @$$ every time they saw him. Until the pitchers take back the plate in full and the umps recognize that a pitcher has the right to throw inside, you are going to see more and more cheap ship shot HR's.

[Archive]

Posted By: ramram

it gives you the edge. It makes average, good and good, great. If track had a player's union Ben Johnson would own the world record right now.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Regardless of our own differing personal experiences with hitting baseballs with bats, wooden or otherwise, you and I both have an EQUAL right to an opinion on this subject, or any other. You might disagree with me, and that's fine.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

(it's a Consitutional thing)

[Archive]

Posted By: jay berhens

The difference between Ben Johnson and Barry Bonds is that when Ben Johnson took steroids, he knew it was illegal. Just like Andro when Mac set the record, THG was not illegal. Johnson was knowing breaking the rules, Bonds and Mac broke none.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I have to agree with a major part of Jason's argument.

As Jay said, if Bonds didn't do anything that was illegal at the time, the record should stand whether we think it's fair or not.

These guys are doing whatever they can to fine-tune themselves for competition - it means big money, stardom, etc. I can't blame them for this as long as they don't cross the legality line.

...it felt really weird agreeing with Jason and Jay in the same post. I'm going to go clean my fingers.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

Scott-

I stand corrected! THe contitution does allow every citizen right to free speech and opinion.......no matter how valid or invalid it may be. I just think fols should try to put on the shoes possibly before forming a concrete opinion. I was all for ROse making the Hall at first, but after educating myself more on the issue I have changed my mind on some things.

Jason

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

..agreed. I like your use of the word "fols" in the above post - leaving your option open for "fools" or "folks"!

The HOF could be re-structured into three areas:
(1)elite players - currently viewed by some as '1st ballot' players, although a few greats would get left out if that were the requirement for inclusion.
(2)2nd and 3rd tier players like Niekro, Rizzuto, Reese - they get a hard plastic or resin plaque.
(3) 'tainted' players like Rose, Jackson, Cobb, maybe Bonds and Sosa...even Hal Chase.

The above was tongue-in-cheek - another idea would be a greatly down-sized HOF that included ONLY elite players, based only on playing field performance (what a weird idea) Joe Jackson and Pete Rose would make it, but the 2nd/3rd tier guys would be out.

But more seriously - makes you wonder what the HOF originators intended. Do you think they would have let Niekro and Sutton in? Or perhaps they would have gotten a good belly laugh from the idea.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

though most of us (including Bill James) would agree about having a smaller HOF with only the "first tier" HOFers--there's a great divergence of opinion about who the "first tier" consists of!

Whether you believe that Jackson belongs in or not, I think a lot of people wince a little when James says of those who do believe he should be in: "Wanting Jackson in the HOF is being like the housewives who go to the courthouse because they're dying to see the cute murderer."

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...but I don't think his analogy holds up. I see no problem with putting "cute murderers" in a "handsome man" HOF, or a "murderer" HOF, but they certainly wouldn't fit in a "moral humans" HOF.

So back to baseball. What it comes down to - is the baseball HOF for on-field performance, or is morality a consideration?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

Scott-

fols=folks! I apologize for my horrible typing skills. I am really a good speller. I just dont proof my typing. I am spoiled usually because MW when he is on will proof it for me and tell me to make the appropriate edit.

Jason

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

..after he was elected to the HOF. Even if he had been convicted of the crime itself, I doubt they would have REMOVED him. Or?

It really seems dumb of James to equate Jackson with a murderer, though. That's what makes me cringe. If he's so horrified (even with Jackson's clumsey attempts to give back the money he'd been given for the fix and at the same time not play too badly around the Blacksox sellout), O.K, no HOF. But that hardly makes him the equivalent of a murderer, and he remains one of the greatest players of all time.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Concerning the legality. For some though not all steroid and related substances, they are illegal until legalized and not the other way around (legal until someone finds out and say they're banned). For the wide range of drug types under their jurisdiction, the substances are not legal until the FDA approves it.

In other words, I beleive it is an iffy off the cuff argument to say that some of these steroids were neccesarilly legal to because MLB hadn't banned them. In fact, the International Olympic Committee said that TGH was illegal from invention under its drug rules even though they didn't even know about it until much later.

It is also worthy to note that MLB's and union agreements cannot and does not trump federal law as it relates to drugs and such substances. The way a MLB agreement or contract is written cannot make illegal practices or substances legal. That the Union does not allow drug testing for or mention of substace A (whether's cocaine or non-FDA approved drug), cannot be interpreted that it is okay or legal for a player to use it. In fact, if it was interpreted that baseball agreements were intentionally promoting the use of illegal substances or practices (such as accounting to avoid taxes), baseball and its executives might find itself under federal prosecution or Congressional restructuring.

[Archive]

Posted By: steve

Great thread... My two cents...

1. Barry Bonds - great player - obvious first ballot Hall of Famer. Of course steroids has enhanced his performance and statistics. As to how much is anybody's guess.
2. Roger Maris - one of my favorite players and one of the classiest baseball players of all time. But he only had one great year and a few good years. Not nearly as good a player as Barry Bonds. No asterisk should be placed next to Bond's records. No asterisk should have ever been placed next to Roger's record.
3. Are we forgetting the Babe? - of course not! Who knows how many homers Ruth would hit in today's game but absolutely no question it would be more than Barry Bonds.
4. Regarding Rose and player's lifestyles... I personally do not care what players do off the field as far as analysing their credentials for the Hall of Fame. As long as it doesn't affect the integrity of the game. But Rose with his gambling did tamper with the integrity of the game and should never be allowed in the Hall of Fame. Never! Other lifestyle problems such as Cobb's and others, should not be considered in Hall of Fame elections.

[Archive]

Posted By: TBob

It was widely known in that era and even partially admitted by Cobb that he stabbed a man to death in cold blood in an alley prior to his admittance in to the Hall of Fame. So the baseball HOF has their own murderer inducted.

[Archive]

Posted By: slacks

Attacked by three men ouside his hotel, Cobb fought back and kept on fighting. He and chased one of the into an alley. The attacker didn't survive. Cobb played the next day.

That's self-defense. And Cobb had enough enemies that if it wasn't, he would have been prosecuted.

Fighting with Ty Cobb=bad judgment

[Archive]

Posted By: steve

Slacks is 100% right about Ty Cobb who in my opinion is the 2nd greatest player of all time behind Ruth. Much tougher to figure out 3rd best with Williams, DiMaggio, Mays, Schmidt, Bench, Bonds or about 10 others.

Tbob - I understand your point about Cobb and it is a valid point. But to clarify my point on Rose...he damaged the integrity of the game "between the white lines." That is all that should really matter for "not" considering Hall of Fame election. Of course that is how it always has been. Despite Cobb's problems, as well as problems of dozens of other players, it did not affect the integrity of the games played in between the white lines. Joe Jackson is a tougher call for me as to whether or not he should be in the Hall of Fame because of the differing information written about his involvement in the black sox scandal.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob L

THG is illegal. It couldn't be detected earlier, however it is an anabolic steroid and therefore is illegal.

[Archive]

Posted By: slacks

<<it is an anabolic steroid and therefore is illegal.>>

Rob: That's just not true. THG, or tetrahydrogestrinone is indeed an anabolic steroid, but anabolic steroids are NOT illegal if they are prescribed by a doctor for a known medical condition. Doctors who are willing to do this are not hard to find.

There was an interesting article in a recent Outside magazine by a recreational cyclist who tried various performance enhancing drugs, including anabolic steroids. He wrote the article under his real name and described in detail which drugs have him the biggest boost in performance and what the effects were. He did not reveal the doctor's name, however it was clear that he was not hard to find if you have the money for the treatment and the prescriptions.

Keep in mind that athletic organizations can have their own rules, but breaking them is not the same as breaking a criminal law.

[Archive]

Posted By: TBob

Attacked by three men ouside his hotel, Cobb fought back and kept on fighting. He and chased one of the into an alley. The attacker didn't survive. Cobb played the next day.

That's self-defense.>

Cobb killed a Black man in a vicious attack. Most historians believe the "attacker and two other" story to be apocryphal. Cobb's attitude toward African Americans is well known to all.
Second of all, even if your story were true, that is NOT self-defense. If an individual has the opportunity to retreat and withdraw but chooses not to do so, he loses any affirmative defense of self defense. By chasing the man and pursuing him, the self defense protection goes out the window. If someone came in to your business and hit you with his fist, then jumped in the elevator and fled and you pursued him, knocked him down and stabbed him to death, that is not self defense.

[Archive]

Posted By: slacks

Just because people describe themselves as “historians” doesn’t make them correct. Testimony on these events is far from conclusive, and it’s not going to get any clearer as time goes by. Only the people who were there that night know what happened, and all the self-appointed experts aren’t going to change that.

Even if we succumb to the popular view that Cobb’s opinion of blacks was so different from the enlightened views we enjoy now (seeing as we have eliminated our racial troubles), it doesn’t mean that he murdered them in his spare time.

Self-defense is a gray area of the law, and not as neatly encapsulated as your example suggests. Courts have been especially inconsistent in the application of self-defense defenses.

I’ve long since given up defending Cobb to those who choose to subscribe to the popular view of him. He was a complex, troubled man who did not fit as neatly in a box as many who characterize him would have us belive.

However, my point still stands: if the authorities had a murder case against him, they would have pursued it, you can be sure of that.

If you want to call someone who was never tried, where the facts were never presented in a court of law with testing of evidence and witnesses, a murderer, that’s your business. But don’t come on here and act like it’s a fact.

[Archive]

Posted By: steve

I believe that Cobb was an equal opportunity hater, white or black. His views about race were prevailing views back then and as you know, blacks were not even allowed to play MLB until long after Cobb retired. Cobb said some nice things about Jackie Robinson and admired his toughness - that doesn't sound like a racist to me. Just like it is difficult if not impossible to accurately compare players of different eras, it is unfair to put labels on people from different eras based on today's standards. Revered people such as Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin made comments about blacks which would not, and rightly so, be tolerated today. But that doesn't detract from their greatness. All three would admit today that their views were wrong and would change them. I believe Cobb would be changed also if living today. He is one of my favorite players and always will be despite his faults, and some of those faults are based on heresay and speculation, not on concrete evidence.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

[Archive]

Posted By: slacks

You rule, JV

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

Sorry, the Cobb is trimmed. I thought about trying to put them right in the poem page, but I don't have the know-how.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob L

Actually meant to say that anabolic steroids are not legal in sports. Slacks is right that steroids can be prescribed. My bad!

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

This is to all you so called experts on baseball lmao, sorry to disappoint Barry Bonds is not only one of the greatest to ever play the game, and more than likely will become the all-time homerun hitter. what kind of batting averages did maris have? Nothing even close to bonds,just wonder what would have happened if they pitched to him. Im not taking anything away from maris, he was a decent player, but no where near Bonds.Oh yeah who hit in front of and behind Maris? You can put an asterisk by his name by all means this doesnt take away from his achievements. One more thing how many mvps does maris have? I rest my case for all you lawyers in here.

[Archive]

Posted By: steve

Julie - Outstanding!!!

PS: I wish I owned those two cards!