756*

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian

<<A-Rod has averaged only (lol) 46 HRs/year for his career, so it's highly unlikely he'll have 51 later in his career.>>

The exact same thing could have been said of Barry when he was 30 years old. I would be highly unlikely for his production to increase later in his career, but that's exactly what happened.


When Barry was 30, he had hit 40+ homers only once in a season (1993 with 46 homers) and no more than 34 in any other season.

After he was 30, he hit 40+ homers in seven seasons with a high of 73.

Barry's most productive steak was ages 35-39. The only other members of the 500 home run club who's career HR/AB ratio doesn't level off after age 30 is Palmerio, Sosa and McGwire.


As for likelihood, Bill James' favorite toy can estimate the likelihood of achieving a future milestone. According to the favorite toy, Aaron had a 3% chance of hitting 755 at age 30 and Bonds had a 0% chance of hitting 755 at age 30. How could Bonds be at 0%? No one could have expected his most productive years would be at age 35-39 and that those years would be so dramatically better than anything he had previously done.

The following post will detail ARod's current percetanges at hitting 800, 900 and 1,000 home runs.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian

Who'll pass Bonds? Chances are, it's A-Rod
By Rob Neyer
ESPN.com
OK. He's done it. So who's next?


When Hank Aaron retired in 1976 with 755 home runs, the No. 2 home-run hitter among active players was Willie McCovey, with 465 homers ... and McCovey was nearly 40 years old. So Aaron's record looked safe for quite some time, and it was; it would be another 26 years before another player (Barry Bonds, of course) would reach 600 home runs, let alone 755.

Babe Ruth's record lasted roughly 40 years, and Aaron's roughly 30 years ... but what about Bonds' record? How long will it last? To even begin to answer that question, we have to answer two others:

1. How many homers will Bonds hit before he quits?

and

2. Which current players have established a chance to surpass Bonds' theoretical record?

CAREER ASSESSMENTS
How many home runs will A-Rod hit? What about Albert Pujols, or Ryan Howard, or Adam Dunn? What are the odds of ANY major league player catching Barry Bonds, once he's through hitting home runs? Try the Bill James' Career Assessments tool, formerly known as the Favorite Toy, and see for yourself.

I've seen only one career projection for Bonds. The Bill James Handbook 2007 lists projected career totals for all players, and the projection for Bonds is 884 home runs.

Yeah, that seems like a lot. My guess is that the method doesn't really know how to handle a 43-year-old superstar who doesn't seem to be slowing down much. I just have a hard time imagining that once Bonds breaks the record, he has another 130 homers left in him -- though, of course, he's surprised us before. And I'm sure he'd love to top Sadaharu Oh's Japanese mark of 868.

Let's be a bit more conservative, though. Let's assume that Bonds plays for a couple of more seasons after this one, but has some problems staying healthy and finishes his career with 800 home runs on the nose. That's a truly round number, and perhaps Bonds will choose to finish with a flourish.

So who among our current stars might hit 801 home runs? To answer that question, we turn to James' "Career Assessments" method. This used to be known as the "Favorite Toy," a name I prefer and will continue to use. Essentially, the method determines how many full years of established production a player has left (based on his age), measures that production (based on the previous three seasons), and arrives at the probability that the player will reach a particular number. It might be 4,000 hits (entering this season, Derek Jeter had a 6-percent chance) or 1,000 stolen bases (12-percent chance for Carl Crawford) or 801 home runs.

I have made a slight adjustment in the formula, to account for the possibility that historical aging patterns no longer apply. Essentially, I merely added another half-season to the expected number of remaining seasons in the player's career. I've made this adjustment because Bill James, when he devised the method some years ago, had no reason to believe that a 43-year-old hitter would someday lead the majors in OPS, or that a 45-year-old power pitcher would someday earn roughly $1 million per start. Yet those things are happening, right now. It seems to me that the old rules do not apply. Or that, at the very least, we might make one small allowance to account for the distinct possibility.

With all that in mind, the (adjusted) Favorite Toy identifies six active players with an established chance of hitting 801 home runs.


6. KEN GRIFFEY JR.: 2 percent





Griffey


Age: 37 | Career HRs: 589 | 2007 HRs: 26 | Profile

Surprising to see him here at all, considering all the injuries, right? But Griffey's done wonders for his projections this season, by staying healthy and regularly hitting the ball over the fence. Before this season, his established chance of hitting 700 homers was roughly 20 percent; today it's nearly 55 percent. Or rather, it will be nearly 55 percent if he stays healthy and productive for the rest of this season.

Projected Total: 705

5. ANDRUW JONES: 6 percent




Jones


Age: 30 | Career HRs: 363 | 2007 HRs: 21 | Profile

Until 2005, Jones was not particularly known for his power. But he hit 26 homers before his 21st birthday, and afterward averaged roughly 35 per season until his breakthrough in '05. His stock is down this season, thanks to that .217 batting average. This probably is just a blip, though; next season he'll hit .260 with 40 homers, and he'll be back on track for the Hall of Fame.

Projected Total: 614




4. RYAN HOWARD: 7 percent




Howard


Age: 27 | Career HRs: 114 | 2007 HRs: 32 | Profile

Obviously, Howard's established himself as one of the top young power hitters in the game. The problem here is that he's not particularly young. He's 10 days younger than Adam Dunn, and two months older than Albert Pujols. Which isn't in itself a handicap. What's a handicap is Howard's late start, as he didn't break into the Phillies' lineup until he was 25, in the middle of 2005. This does have a negative impact on his established level -- because 2005 represents one-sixth of that level -- but even if we give him credit for the 16 homers he hit in the minors that season, his chance of hitting 801 homers moves up only three points, to 10 percent. He just got started too late to keep up with all the big-time power hitters who came up when they were 19 or 20, as so many have.

Projected Total: 509


3. ADAM DUNN: 10 percent





Dunn


Age: 27 | Career HRs: 228 | 2007 HRs: 30 | Profile

Dunn comes out as the No. 3 home-run hitter in the majors, among active players? According to this method, he does. Since Opening Day of 2004, Dunn has hit 156 home runs. Only David Ortiz (161) and Pujols (160) have hit more. So why doesn't Dunn's name come up in Hall of Fame discussions? Because he's a "Three True Outcomes" guy. With Dunn, everything's a homer or a strikeout or a walk, and only one of those (the first one) is appreciated by the cognoscenti. But even if we assume that 500 homers is not a magic number (it's not), and neither is 600 (jury's still out), what about 700? Dunn's established a 24-percent chance of hitting 700 home runs. The key for Dunn always will be his batting average. As long as he can hit .240, he'll have a job. But considering that his career average is just .247, we might reasonably guess there are just too many .220 seasons in Dunn's future.

Projected Total: 578


2. ALBERT PUJOLS: 13 percent





Pujols


Age: 27 | Career HRs: 274 | 2007 HRs: 24 | Profile

Because of his slow start this season, not to mention his non-appearance in the All-Star Game, it's easy to forget that Pujols is the best non-Bonds hitter in the National League. What's really hurting him here is that slow start. We've got him finishing this season with 35 homers, which would be the fewest of his brilliant career. Pujols simply has to re-establish himself as a consistent 40-homers-per-season hitter. Of course, given his history, he might do that in the next few months.

Projected Total: 585

1. ALEX RODRIGUEZ: 46 percent




Rodriguez


Age: 32 | Career HRs: 500 | 2007 HRs: 36 | Profile

The difference between the No. 2 man and the No. 1 says a lot about the No. 1 man. If that doesn't blow you away, there's this: Rodriguez has established a 21-percent chance of hitting 900 home runs -- more than Oh, even -- and a 7-percent chance of hitting 1,000 home runs.

Projected Total: 790

Granted, the (adjusted) Favorite Toy probably gets less reliable the further we get from the conceivable, and it's not easy to conceive a baseball player hitting 1,000 homers. But it's fun to think about, isn't it?

Rob Neyer writes for ESPN Insider and regularly updates his blog for ESPN.com. You can reach him via rob.neyer@dig.com. His most recent book, "Rob Neyer's Big Book of Baseball Blunders," is available everywhere.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Joan I noticed that joker too and that was my first thought, the guy should be arrest. I was also wondering when MLB is going to raise security for events like this. I may have missed it, but I never saw a shot of McCovey Cove, so I'm wondering if they blocked that off and kept all the boats out. I had thought about that too, because of the ball had ended up in the ball, I felt there was a serious chance that someone could end drowning, or be held under water in order to get the ball from them. If I remember right, the guy that got the ball was bloodied a bit adn I am sure others were too. I'm not a fan of suing people, but if someone got seriously hurt in that scrum, I hope they MLB and the Giants for lack of security.

Tony, Mac doesn't belong in the HOF to begin with. The guy is a one trick pony and there are already too many of them in the HOF. Mac was a horrific 1B, legged many a double into singles and if he didn't hit a HR, he pretty much didn't get a hit. Not my idea of a HOFer.

Jason, let's be very clear about this,

1) there is no proof that Bonds cheated. If you ahve proof that has cheated that no one else has, please give it to the federal prosecutors so they can proceed with their case against him.
2) Bud Selig IS to blame for all of this. When Mac was caught with Andro, he could have stepped in a done something, but didn't. He turned a blind eye to it all because it lined his pockets and those of the his owner buddies.
3) But Aaron did make the statement, so who are you to say that he feels otherwise? Are you close personal friends with Mr Aaron?
4)Guess we will just put an end to all athletic competition then because cheating goes on at every level in every sport. It would be nice to live in a sporting world of the Olympic Dream, but it's never gonna happen, not even in the Olympics.

Jeff, Clemens has managed escape most allegation because he conveniently skipped spring training and the earliest part of the season, which just happens to be when most of the random drug testing happens. Plus, his dome has grown almost as much as Barry's. It cracks me up that people will find all sorts of excuses for Clemens, yet people don't find it suspicious that a guy at his age can skip huge chunks of the season and yet keep performing as well or better than most of the pitchers playing today.

Marc your arguments for Ruth are cherry picked. Yes, there were carvenous parts of old ball parks, there were also parks like Sportsmans in St Louis that had ridculously short right field porches. Someone in SABR research how many HRs Ruth hit into that porch in his 60 HR season and how many Jimmy Foxx hit there in his 58 HR season. It was determined that Ruth would have lost 4 HRs if had to hit the ball over the fence that Foxx had to hit his HRs over. It was also determined that Foxx had at least 2 hits go off the fence. These would have been HRs under Ruth's conditions. Ruth didn't have to face pitching specialists and because there were only 8 teams and 4 man rotation, he basically got to see the same 28 pitchers over and over again. How many more HRs would Bonds have hit he only had to different pitchers all season? The supposed watered down pitch staff argument has been disproven many times. I can gaurentee you that the 4th and 5th starts of today are much better than 3rd and 4th starters of Ruth era and most likely better than 2nd starter on many of weaker teams. If Ruth played today and had access to all the drugs that are available, given his personality type, he would have most likely OD'd before his playing career was over. Your claim that Bonds has zero defensive skill to absolutely laughable. Did you ever seen him play early in his career? You want to look at Mark McGwire for the definition of no defensive skills what so ever.



The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Jay, there exists a ton of evidence that Bonds cheated including his own words before the Grand Jury. Again, keep in mind that he is being investigated for perjury (which would require proof of a material lie, not just a lie) not for use of steroids. There exists testimony that he shot himself up with 'roids. That is evidence. There is documentary proof. There is the mountain of circumstantial proof (which is evidence). And again, Greg Anderson is in jail because he refused to testify as to what he knows about Bonds and his steroid use. If Greg knew nothing about Bonds and steroids would he have taken the contempt charge? Or would he have just testified about it? Just because Barry has not tested positive for roids does not mean he has not cheated. As for your take on Clemens, I agree. There does not exist the circumstantial proof against him that exists against Bonds but for some strong reason I just am certain he cheated (and for the same reason I believe that Nolan Ryan did not cheat even though they both threw in the mid 90s while over the age of 40).

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Brian- that's an interesting study but those projections seem too high. Clearly some of those players will get injured and not come close. And A-Rod having a 7% chance of hitting 1000? That means he has to have 500 more left. That's 40 a year for 12 1/2 more years. I say 0%.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

Jeff-

I realize that many people are convicted and jailed in circumstantial evidence cases and typically, the Criminal Defense Bar puts their own "*" after those convictions (e.g. Scott Peterson). I would think that as an accomplished criminal defense attorney, you would be skeptical (and would probably love defending) a case premised on circumstantial evidence only.

Here, we don't even have a case with circumstantial evidence brought forward, which suggests to me that any evidence against Bonds (non-perjury, which is linked to the threshold issue) is not even strong enough to prosecute (in any arena).

[Archive]

Posted By: Ken W.

Jay Behrens,

Why all the non-love for Big Mac? What's THAT all about? He wasn't that God-awful of a 1st baseman when he played for St. Louis. We Cardinal fans had just as much fun chearing for him as you SF guys do for Bonds.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I was a season ticket holder for the A's when he came up and got to watch him butcher the position. Then again, being a Twins fan and seeing Hrbek play first makes most otheres look pretty bad. I also am not a fan of HR hitters. HRs are the most boring and anticlimatic thing in baseball. I'll take a triple or inside the park HR any day. Then there is the fact there are already too many players that only hit HRs in the HOF. It doesn't need anymore when we should be honoring the defensive greats too, like Mazeroski.

jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Dale

Of course the guilt or innocence is important, but so is the opinion. People outside of the bay area (and some inside) have a dim view of Barry. He's earned that with his demeanor, special locker room, leaving a tie 1-1 game in the 7th (I don't mean just sitting down but leaving the dug out). Then of course the shady statements about not knowing what he was taking; I'm sorry but I think most of us expect a professional (hence term) athlete to know what they are taking. The growth, the difference between his actions in his 20's and then in his 30's, and the list just seems to never end. Thank GOD the man wasn't fighting dogs; his issues are with him and the record books and not with others. In this day and age, media, Internet, etc, the public does not need a criminal conviction to have a less then favorable view of an athlete.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ken W.

Totally agree with you on HR's vs. triples and inside-the-parkers!

[Archive]

Posted By: BcD

take steroids and trim cards with their teeth!

BcD

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

757 splash landing tonight!

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

He's on fire.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Dale

Is that what they are calling it now?

j/k.....

[Archive]

Posted By: Tony Andrea

Hey Jay -
You stated -
"Mac doesn't belong in the HOF to begin with. The guy is a one trick pony and there are already too many of them in the HOF. Mac was a horrific 1B, legged many a double into singles and if he didn't hit a HR, he pretty much didn't get a hit. Not my idea of a HOFer".

Just curious on who the other one trick pony players are you are speaking of when you say there are too many of them in the HOF already.

Tony

[Archive]

Posted By: ErikV

Just got home from San Francisco! As would be expected, all the talk was about Barry. I did get a chance to catch a Giants game (When the trip was in the planning stages, it was a toss up between Monday or Tuesday's game. Damn, I was only one game away from witnessing history!) I settled for watching HR 756 from my tv in my hotel room. I, like most others in this forum are baseball purists and cringe at the thought of Barry Bonds now owning the most coveted record in all of sports. Being at the game one day before the record was set, I kinda feel like a pitcher who goes 8 2/3 innings just to lose a perfect game on an 0-2 pitch. I was that close to being there, just to fall a little bit short. The game and the rest of the trip was enjoyable.




Bonds first AB in Monday nites game.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve f

Being at that game would be like going to the senior prom with your sister. A big celebration with an empty finish. Go Arod! (he's no longer Afraud)

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

...proof that Bonds "cheated."

Jay wrote

"let's be very clear about this,

1) there is no proof that Bonds cheated. If you ahve proof that has cheated that no one else has, please give it to the federal prosecutors so they can proceed with their case against him."

Bonds admitted taking "the cream" and the "clear."

[Archive]

Posted By: Randy Trierweiler

Mark McGwire commited 103 errors in 15 full seasons, an average of 6.8 errors per year, hardly a butcher at his positon. He actually won a gold glove as well. He was the 1987 ROY, a 12 time AS, 1999 Lou Gehrig award, Silver Slugger 3x, OB% leader 2x, Slugging% leader 4x, OPS leader 2x, HR leader 4x, and RBI leader 1x. His career stats are surely HOF worthy.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Dale

May have had a talented career but he's the ROID poster child now. If he gets in it should be just like Rose - after he's gone and burried. I think that is a good solution for all of the rule breakers - no all in your lifetime...after you are dead if the career was deserving then consider them.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

David, that is the biggest fallacy out there. Get a hold of the transcript and read what it says word for word. The only thing he admitted to was using a cream and clear substance. The authors of the book and everyone else that hates Bonds twists that to mean what they want it to mean. If he really had admitted to using the illegal substances, he would not be in baseball right now.

Tony, the others are Killebrew and Kiner. 2 pure HR hitters that couldn't do anything else is 2 too many in the HOF. Kiner especially, has no business being in the HOF. He has an even worse case for being a HOFer than McGwire, in my book.

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

"If he really had admitted to using the illegal substances, he would not be in baseball right now."

What are you talking about? There are many players who have failed steroid tests who are still in baseball. Giambi admitted using steroids. Still in baseball.

And the only thing that would make a 35 year old man's feet grow a few sizes, and his head expand like a balloon is Human Growth Hormone. You have proof Bonds used HGH every time you look at him.

Wake up.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Damn, I guess I'm on HGH too then because my feet have gone from a size 12 to 14. Not sure if my head has gotten bigger only because I hate hats, but I do know that the last time I put one on, I had to put the adjustable strap 2 notches to the right of where I used to put it in high school.

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Spaeth

Jay we don't need any proof you have a swelled head.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

"Not sure if my head has gotten bigger only because I hate hats, but I do know that the last time I put one on, I had to put the adjustable strap 2 notches to the right of where I used to put it in high school."

You were in high school when you were 35?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Just because Bonds has not admitted using steroids per se does not mean he has not used steroids. He has already admitted to using substances that are performance enhancing and has claimed he didn't know what he was putting on his body. Yeah, right. At least Giambi had the character to admit that he used steroids. The one thing it is nearly impossible to disagree on is that Bonds lacks character. As Marty Brennaman said this morning, 'we've had the Dead Ball Era and now the Steroid Era.' Long live ARod!

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Spaeth

Jeff what makes you so sure A Rod is clean?

[Archive]

Posted By: David Smith

OK, what about the scientist at BALCO who created the "clear" saying that the Owner (I forget his name right now) when asked about Bonds, saying that he (Bonds) was "on the program"?

The scientist took that as meaning Bonds was using steroids and other PED's because every other person "on the program" was doing that. I don't think this guy has anything to gain from saying it, so why did he?? Plus, I would consider him credible since he worked at BALCO and INVENTED the "clear".

Then there is Greg Anderson. Still in jail, refusing to testify. Why?? I think it is because of what he knows Bonds did. I also think there is a chance it is because of what Bonds is STILL doing.

David

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I'm not arguing that Bonds did or didn't do it. Personally, I think he and about 80-90% of all athletes are using PEDs. The argument is that there is no proof that Bonds did anything. All we have is circumstantial evidence and hear say. Until there is a positive drug test or someone catches him with drugs in his possession, that all we have. No proof.

It's sort of like OJ. We all know he didn't it, but can't prove it.

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

David, it's a point of reference because I don't wear hats. If you'd bother to read medical journals or know something about biology, one the things on our body that keeps growing until we die is our feet.

Also, how do you explain that Bonds' arms haven't gotten bigger since 1992? The guy that makes his elbow armor stated recently that he hasn't had to change anything in the design of the armor because his arm hasn't changed in size since he started making it for him in 1992?

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

First off, a civil jury found OJ liable for the deaths of his wife and Ron Goldman.

Second, if a jury ever got to hear the evidence of Bonds' steroid use he'd be convicted in about two seconds -- assuming that was the charge. The circumstantial evidence and direct evidence (yes, direct evidence) is overwhelming.

As for ARod, I have no reason to think he's juiced: his size has not changed, he has not gotten stronger as he's gotten older in a bizarre fashion a la Bonds and his name has never been linked to steroids (other than in a vague manner by Canseco).

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Dale

I have no link to this but hasn't AROD repeatedly said - test me anytime when it comes to ROIDS? I thought he had been on the record a few times saying he hasn't done it and welcomes being tested whenever the league wants?

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

They can test for steroids all they want. You are only going to catch the stupid. The smart are using HGH and whatever is the latest and greatest in undetectable PEDs.

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I will be very interested to see the HOF vote on Bonds. McGwire got only 22%. Despite this, I think the career HR record puts Bonds in a different class than McGwire. But think of this. If Bonds sticks around for two more seasons, with very few more home runs, A-Rod could pass Bonds before Bonds is eligible for the HOF. If Bonds is no longer the record holder when his first HOF vote comes up, what happens? Is he just another McGwire?

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

Bonds surpassed McGwire as a superstar years ago. McGwire was a one-tool player. He hit HR's and that's about it. It's irrelevant whether he was on steroids or not, since he wouldn't have made the HOF anyway. Bonds has been one of the game's best (if not THE best) five-tool players in the history of the game- even before these now-annoying, accusations of steroids.

I, for one, am getting tired of the BS. If a jury would really convict Bonds in two seconds, where's that jury? Where are the charges? It looks to me like there isn't a prosecutor out there who wants to lose their job over a malicious prosecution.

Now go back to reading about UFO's and keep looking for Elvis hanging out in Argentina somewhere. Better yet, start a campaign to out all of the MLB and NFL players who have tested positive for steroids AFTER they were specifically banned. What's the obsession with Bonds? It's getting old.

And as stated, I was at the game and the finish was awesome. Since I don't have a sister, I don't know what going to the prom with one would be like. Maybe if you were there, you would feel differently. Hard to really feel anything watching an event like that on TV.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Smith

Cobby,

Tired of the BS, why?? Because you are scared it is true??

Blind loyalty is what gets people into trouble. Even when they see the truth, they don't want to believe it and usually what happens is they are too far down the path when they decide to do something, like change course and admit they were wrong or try to get out of the situation.

The Grand Jury reconvenes in September and once Bonds is indicted for tax evasion and perjury, I expect YOU to be the first one on this board to admit you were wrong about him.

I am on here and I have said he has cheated. If I am wrong, nothing is going to happen. Bonds is still going to be a free man. He is still going to be worth millions. He is still going to have the season and career Home Run records and he is going to go into the Hall Of Fame.

However, look what YOU have to lose if you are wrong. The Giants organization will have a black eye. The team accomplishments during Bonds time with them will be tainted. Your HERO will have been torn down. He will be fined and will possibly go to jail, thus ending his baseball career. If he isn't put on Baseball's Restricted List like Joe Jackson and Pete Rose then his being voted into the HOF will be a LONG time coming.

On the Gaylord Perry issue of cheating. He has admitted throwing the Spit Ball. Did this help him?? Yes, on occasion. But I seriously doubt he used it EVERY PITCH. Bonds using steroids and other PED's has helped him EVERY STEP ON THE BASEBALL FIELD!!! Bonds can't just turn it on and then turn it off. It is there with him constantly. This is in contrast to Perry who could decide when he wanted to use the Spitter. Do I condone what Perry did? NO!!! But at least what he did wasn't a constant.

Oh yeah, I also find it funny that Gaylord Perry was a San Francisco Giant and that fine human being and role model named Bobby Bonds was also.

On a side note, Dusty Baker should NOT have a job on Baseball Tonight where he can give his opinion on the steroids issue. He was the Manager for the poster boy so his opinion is a conflict of interest. Steve Phillips shouldn't be on the show either since the long time Clubhouse guy of the Mets was arrested for dealing in PED's. An employee during the time that Phillips was GM.

David

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Just read a great article about why it's hypocritical for fans to be upset about players using PEDs to try and be a better player and helping the team win, yet not having problem with players like Ruth and others who used illegal drugs that hurt their performance and their team's chances of winning.

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I don't think anyone is supporting Bonds blindly. I have no illusions that he and 90%+ of athletes use PEDs. What I and many others are tired of is the blind hatred that you and most Bonds haters have. The position and reasoning of most Bonds haters is hypocritical at best. Give your statement, I expect you to be the first to come here and apologize if Bonds isn't convicted of anything and declare your support for him. But I won't hold my breath.

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

i find it ironic (or moronic) that a lot of people here detest bonds but glorify joe jackson. if you played on a team at any level,would you rather find out your best player was using drugs to attempt to better himself/your team or throwing games so he could make some extra money?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Dennis, I agree with that. I think the difference is that none of us were around when Jackson was caught cheating and all we know about him are movies and books that glorify him and his fall to some degree. As for Bonds, I think the 'obsession' about him is two-fold: a) unlike Palmiero and McGwire, he has the two greatest records in sports history; and b) he is a miserable human being. Had Palmiero hit 756 HRs the 'obsession' would be the same. True baseball fans don't want the two hallowed numbers -- 755 and 61 -- to be trifled with in a despicable manner and, in this case, they were.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

Jay & Dennis- Couldn't agree more. Jeff- I appreciate your explanation as to the "obsession." I think most have not thought it through that far.

David- "The Grand Jury reconvenes in September and once Bonds is indicted for tax evasion and perjury, I expect YOU to be the first one on this board to admit you were wrong about him." I'm not holding my breath. Until then, I'm not going to allow people's jealousy and hatred for Bonds ruin the experience.

"You" all claim to love the game of baseball. Yet, I'm bewildered by the lack of respect for the home run record and due process in general. As of today, the record stands, without an "*" or any other qualification. Nobody on this Board, or in the media, has the right to qualify the record. It is what it is. If you don't respect Bonds, sobeit. If you think he's the only "cheater" in sports, you're entitled to your OPINION (as opposed to recitation of any facts). But I don't see where they/you get off on being the judge and jury when the real judge and jury and MLB have not acted and may never.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Cobby, one of the 'wonderful' things about baseball history is that the court system, while usually having the final say on guilt or innocence, is not as determinative as the court of public opinion in baseball. Sad to say, whatever happens to Bonds with the sitting grand jury will not impact how he is perceived historically, which will always be as a cheater. As for jealousy or hatred, keep in mind that tons of people wanted Aaron to fail in his chase due to race issues solely. I can't imagine any baseball fans are jealous of Bonds anymore than they'd be jealous of ARod for his big contract or even the financial status of a utility infielder. The race card can't be played with Bonds due to Aaron being African American; it's simply that the two records Bonds holds are so hallowed that the popular perception is that they should not be held by a cheater -- even if many others cheated too. It also doesn't help Bonds that ARod and Junior are not thought to have juiced. And Cobby, did you ever think that your defense of Bonds has a lot to due with your geographic location and support for the local team? Why do you think people outside of the San Fran area are almost universally against him? Can't be all jealousy. When Aaron hit 715 I was a Dodgers fan and Al Downing, a Dodger, threw the pitch. I was thrilled for Aaron when he hit it. Aaron and his courage brought people together; Bonds and his cheating and lack of character have also brought people together -- against him.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I agree Bonds was a better overall player than McGwire (though I'm not sure I'd describe him as one of the best five tool players even before steroids). But to say McGwire wouldn't have made the HOF if it wasn't for the cloud hanging over him is just wrong. The guy hit 70 HRs in one season and over 580 lifetime. And he was probably the most popular player in baseball before all of the controversy hit. I think he was a very easy first ballot HOFer.

Also, steroids or no steroids, I don't think a jury will ever convict Bonds of anything, except possibly lying to the grand jury. He is "charged" with violating baseball's rules. I don't know what crime he is accused of. I guess using prescription steroids could possibly be a crime if he didn't have a prescription from the team physician or some other doctor. But that's hardly the kind of thing a prosecutor spends much time on.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Dale

...thinks Vick is guilty?
....thinks Vick would still be "damaged goods" if found innocent?

Well I do care about dogs far more then what Barry does to his body, but the point of it is most people don't care if Vick gets convicted and likewise a lot of people don't care if Bonds is convicted. He still treats others in ways you wouldn't want to be treated, he still denies what appears obvious (to most of us), and even without a conviction he's a schmuk.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Vick is a good case in point as to how little evidence there seems to be against Bonds. It didn't take the govt long to build a case against Vick. If proving Bonds was a slamdunk like so many seem to think, then why hasn't the govt moved forward with the speed they have against Vick?

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Jay, again I'll tell you that the case against Bonds is not a charge of using steroids, it is a case of perjury which is very difficult to prove in a federal courtroom. And one of the reasons Vick was indicted so quickly is due to the number of witnesses who cooperated with the government. In Bonds's case, Greg Anderson decided to defy an offer of immunity and break the law by refusing to answer questions under oath -- and go to jail instead. That sort of thing usually happens in the rarest of circumstances, such as an organized crime underling refusing to obey a Grand Jury subpoena or a journalist refusing to divulge a source. Incredibly, it has also happened with Bonds. Also, I think the feds have decided to wait until after the season to act because otherwise it would look as if they had some sort of improper motivation to indict prior to the breaking of Aaron's record. I expect Bonds to be indicted for at least tax evasion. How will Bonds explain the deposit of large amounts of cash into his girlfriend's bank account in order for her to buy a house?

PS--Mark Sweeney was traded yesterday so Bonds can feel free to again blame him for his positive drug test last year. Go Barry!

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Jeff,

I also expect Barry to be indicted for tax evasion, however, it is unlikely they will pursue perjury. Barry has stated that he thought what he was taking was flaxseed oil, yes, I know that's far-fetched but without Greg Anderson's testimony how are they going to prove differently?

Anderson is now in a no-win situation. He has told everybody that he will not squeal on his pal Barry. At this point it's better that he just serves out his time, instead of giving in. If he gave in, it would be difficult for him to retain legitimacy with his customers and continue his work in the future.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

It's typical of the government to not bring an indictment on charges they think they may lose at trial -- which is, of course, weak in my mind. God forbid they may only have a 90 percent chance of winning instead of 99%. Greg Anderson's testimony is hardly necessary to indict Bonds for perjury but, again, the govt is terrified to bring a case they may lose, thus holding out for more evidence. All I would want is for Bonds to be treated the same as any other individual who testified before a grand jury or possibly evaded taxes. It sounds as if they have Bonds dead to rights on the tax evasion issue which is easily proven. Why they haven't pulled the trigger makes no sense other than how they, the feds, want to be perceived as not interfering with his chase to 756. Weak, again in my mind, because it treats Bonds differently than John Q. Public.

As for Anderson, he has no sentence -- he is imprisoned indefinitely for contempt. In order to be released from prison on contempt charges, the inmate needs to essentially prove that the continued detention of him will clearly not cause him to change his mind to testify. Usually that happens after 18 months in prison. He hasn't been in that long yet. Of course, if the grand jury's term ends, that would also end the need for Anderson -- but the feds keep renewing which suggests that they plan on indicting Bonds at some point. The statute of limitations on bringing a case against him still has years to go.

Finally, the Greg Anderson issue really does point to the fact that Bonds is wildly guilty of, at the very least, using steroids. Why would a guy who knows nothing about Bonds' use of steroids refuse to answer grand jury questions and instead go to prison? If Bonds was clean as so many of his apologists would have you believe, than why won't Anderson answer the simple questions before him? It's clear to anyone who can view this issue honestly that Anderson is unable to answer these questions honestly in a way that could clear Bonds (sorry for the pun).

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

My guess on the reason for the delay on indicting for tax evasion, is it's possible that Barry's attorney may be trying to make a deal with the IRS. After the fiasco with the reporters and the attorney that leaked Grand Jury testimony, I'm sure that Barry's attorney won't be discussing any potential settlement negotiations with the media.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Peter, considering Rains' statements to the press about how he's 'kicked the government's ass in public and private' I'm pretty certain the feds will not be negotiating with him on any issue in the near future other than the timing of Bonds' surrender after his indictment.