Interesting poll.......

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

on ESPN front page right now........

If Ryan Howard hits 62 home runs this year, who would you consider as single season HR champion?

a) Howard (62 in 2006)
b) Bonds (73 in 2001)
c) McGwire (70 in 1998)
d) Sosa (66 in 1998)

Any opinions here..........I see their point but I don't know how you can discount anyone unless they're PROVEN guilty (as in b,c,d) and the jury's out on Howard, so I say Bonds (as much as I dislike him.....)

0ver 51% of America is saying Ryan Howard.......
96K votes.........

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Bonds with 73. Despite the fact that he cheated, they are not going to take it out of the record book so we might as well accept it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Ruth at 60. He did it in 154 games.

People said it was a million dollar wound. But the government must keep that money, cause I ain't never seen a penny of it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brett

Well,

B. C and D were on steroids at the time, plus 1 was using a corkd bat on top of that. Howard may also be on them, who knows ??

If Bonds was never actually caught using them, god knows how many others are or were using them.... pretty pathetic that all of the greatest records will all be broken by steroid users one day...

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I saw that poll too. Absolutely stupid. The asumption that Howard is clean if mighty big leap. Looking at Ryan Howard and claims that he is clean, the first person that came to mind is Tony Mandrich. When he came out of college, he claimed to be clean and everyone bought it. After his career imploded, we all fought out that he was just another juicer. So count me in the crowd that is skeptical that Howard is clean.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

The HR record would have eventually fallen, with or without steroids. The parks are smaller with friendlier fences, just as in Ruth's day, pitching is watered down and the training is far superior.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt E

Maris' 61 homer mark is the rightful record to break.

Sosa, Bonds and McGwire fraudulently took us all for a ride.

"It is not what you do, It is what people think you do or have done in this case".

Congrats to Ryan Howard if he breaks the record.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

As with card prices, 'all-time great' polls are unreliable when taken at the height of the excitement. For example, you don't take a poll as to who is the greatest quarterback ever the day after Joe Montana throws the winning touchdown in the Superbowl. The person who just won the award or just set the record will always receive an in the heat of the moment bounce that evaporates before long.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

He really was the best ever...and this from an ex-Rams fan. Football sucks, BTW. I proudly haven't sat through more than a quarter of an NFL game in years.

One look at Ryan Howard and you can be certain that if he is taking steroids, he needs another supplier. I favor him just because he's a fat bastard like me. A slugger should look like he hoists a few, not like he spends his time in the gym.

Of course Bonds has the record but no one really cares, he's still a jerk and there will be little joy outside SF when he ekes his way to 756.

[Archive]

Posted By: DJ

It's amazing how little baseball records mean anymore, outside of the hype to 56 when their at 30. They aren't celebrating Bonds' achievements (the baseball community is ashamed of him I guess) and I wonder how much excitement would be around Howard if he was around 68. I personally don't care about these sluggers and I will always believe that Maris is the prince and Aaron is the king, no matter what the records say.

DJ

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

It's very interesting why so many people assume that Howard is clean. How can anyone make that assumption when HGH is not even tested yet?

[Archive]

Posted By: John S

All innocent until proven guilty. I could really care less. I still like to attend the occasional game, but today's MLB is truly boring and watered down, even more so than when my Bucs won their last championship in '79. For me its been all downhill since then.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

It appears that Bonds has turned his back on retiring as a .300 hitter, in his pursuit of Aaron. Will he have to surrender his .600 slugger stature as well, I wonder.

But to me the action is between the Rocket and the Big Unit. Johnson is 20 games shy of being a 300 winner and Clemens is just a few shy of 350. While both are significant milestones, these old timers are just 50Ks apart in their lifetime marks. Since Clemens' ERA is among his best ever, I conclude that he doesn't have to toss in the towel just yet. And with the strong support Randy gets, his winning record is assured, eventho he is approaching surrendering 5 earned runs per game. This is turning out to be one interesting matchup.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

I'll take Greg Maddux. No Roids, great fielder(Gold Glove city)and a great teammate. Anybody ever here anybody bitch about Maddox? Nope. 330 and still going. 200+ innings every year, and for a 3-4 year period, virtually a lock.

Old schoolllllll Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

A side effect of the steroid era is that Maris' record has been passed so many times and so many players were hitting 50+ home runs, that hitting over 60 is no longer a big deal. When leadoff hitters start hitting 50 home runs (Brady Anderson), 50 home runs tends not to inspire the awe that it did in 1951 or even 1991. This is amplifed by fans who don't know which, if any, of the modern records should be considered legitimate. Many fans will say that even if one or two totals in the poll are legitimate, it's not possible to know which one or two they are. That's a formula for apathy.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Obviously Bonds!!

And Bonds did it in a tougher ball park with far far less ABs! Period!

And last time I checked, 73 is a high number than 70, 66, 62, 61, or even 60!


BTW a HR is not all about strength and bulk, its always been about hitting the ball in the zone squarely with exceptional bat speed. Look at Alfonso Soriano for proof.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

GIL

I like your thinking Gil.....while all this hoopla about Bonds, Howard, McGuire,
Sosa, etc.
Roger Clemens and Randy Johnson are just going about their business winning
games for their teams. While at the same time achieving records for themselves.
No drugs, steroids, etc. for these two guys. Not much media hype either.

Johnson will get his 300+ wins and a ticket into the HOF.

Clemens will probably not stop at 350 wins, as he more than likely will want to
surpass Warren Spahn's 363 win record. That will place him 5th All-Time in the
record books. But if he gets that far, then why not even try for 3rd in the record
books. Alexander and Matty, both have 373 wins and are tied for 3rd place.

T-Rex TED

[Archive]

Posted By: David B

Forget about numbers. Comparing baseball statistics over different eras is meaningless. (Even more so in football, by the way). Longer seasons, watered-down lineups, different training, better equipment, dead-ball/live ball, and, of course, those "performance-enhancing drugs". Numbers aside - Ruth, Aaron, Maddox, Spahn, J. Robinson, DiMaggio - lots of great players over the years. You can keep McGwire, Sosa, and Bonds.

[Archive]

Posted By: andy becker

to me, ryan howard looks like he's playing 16" softball. he crushes everything....and i mean crush. regardless of enhancing drugs, his eyesight must be unreal.....

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Ted- I was thinking that Clemens would shoot for 350, but passing Matty and Alexander would be surreal. Considering he is 44, and the Astros score about half a run a game for him, do you think he has 25 wins left in that arm of his? He pitches so many games where the Astros don't score and he should get the win but ends up with a no decision.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

That seems to be a nonsensical question (the original poll, not this post), as Bonds is the undisputed single-season champ with 73. Find me a record book that says otherwise. Perhaps it was broached to inspire debate, in which case, I suppose it has succeeded.

Howard is the flavor of the day. We'll see how many votes he gets this time next year...

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

I think this will be the last year for Clemens. Whether he ends up with 347 or 351 wins really doesn't mean anything at this point. He has an ERA under 2.2 this year and, as Barry said, has a winning record even though he has had no run support. In my mind he is the greatest pitcher I have ever seen, possibly the greatest ever. Why not go out while you are still on top instead of laboring like Maddox and Johnson are doing.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Yes Brian, certainly Maddux is in this equation too. Not many even make it to 330! And he has just a little edge on age.

And it sure would be good to see the Rocket (or Maddux) make a run at 373. But Im with Barry - highly unlikely. I remember Early Wynn struggling to notch his 300th in the early '60s. After several tries he finished up the seasaon ('61 0r '62, or thereabouts) with 299. Then the following season he had a couple of no decisions sandwiched around losses - til he finally made it, then quit. Everyone was pulling for him, but it was a long haul.

The point being: the fat lady does sing. And you can't tell exactly when.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

It's a strange question, as the question is based on 61 home runs ('If Howard hits 62 home runs'), but the 61 home run hitter is not a choice. It's a biased question as the choices offered imply that not all four could have been on steroids-- because, if all four on steroids is considered a possibility, Maris or e) none of the above would be the fifth choice. Whatever your opinion on the issue, ESPN has already told you the answer isn't Maris.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

Maris, until someone hits 62 who isn't a lying, cheating steroid using jerk. Howard would be the new champ if he hits 62.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Come one, we all know the record still belongs to Williamson. He hit HRs when 1/2 the parks didnt even have fences. That 27 he hit in 1884 will always be the record to me. That fatboy Ruth and them live balls ruined baseball forever!


PS The Chicago fences in the early 1880's were 180' down each line and 300' in center. Before 1884 any ball over the fence was a double, after it was a HR. (Ned also held the double record of 49, in....... you guessed it 1883)

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Ted, I wouldn't be betting my collection on Clemens being clean.

Everyone needs to get over this whole, who's clean and who isn't thing. These guys know the risks and are willing to do it, so why not let them? The game is constantly changing and the powers that be in baseball want HRs, so let them juice to their hearts content. Personally, I hate the HR. It's anticlimatic, but they aren't going to change the game back to the way it was in the deadball era, so I go with the flow and say let them juice.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Jay- it's hard to argue that Clemens is the best pitcher of his generation but I saw Seaver in his prime and I might consider him at least as good or even give him a slight edge. And I watched Koufax, but a little toward the end of his career (not that winning 53 games your last two seasons is so shabby).

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Certainly not the steroid crew.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

There is no doubt that Clemens is one of the great pitchers of all time, In their prime years, I'd take MAddux over Clemens, but Clemens has been great for a longer period. For all the hoopala that the HR hitters get, most people don't realize that we've been lucky enough to watch 2 of the greatest pitchers ever to step on the rubber.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.