Thursday, July 19, 2007

A home run dumbass

Wow. Check this one out from a Sandeep Mehta of Naperville:

Bonds innocent until proven guilty

Can we all stop complaining about Barry Bonds? I know there's a strong chance that he took some kind of performance-enhancing drugs and maybe he did do it on purpose, but does it really deserve the type of vilification that Bonds has received? The fact of the matter is Bonds is an exception baseball player. He hit at least 30 home runs in every season between 1992 and 2004; since his rookie season he's never struck out over 100 times in any season; he's accumulated over 500 stolen bases; and he's batting almost .300 for his career. These are not numbers that can be accumulated by an average player on steroids. In addition, during the current season Bonds has received more walks than any other player in the league, evidence that pitchers still don't want to pitch to him even at the age of 43. And with all testing procedures in place and no suspicion of steroid use this year, Bonds still ranks among the top 25 in the majors with 17 homeruns.So before we all stand up and boo the man without mercy let’s consider what he has accomplished and whether the supposed crime fit the punishment.


With all those impressive years behind him, does he really deserve to be treated like a criminal every time he takes the field just because he is SUSPECTED of steroid use? There is no way of knowing if Bonds did purposely take steroids or how much they might have helped his numbers. Also, there are many others under suspicion of steroid use and none of them have come close to matching the numbers that Bonds has put up. With or without steroids, Bonds has been a tier above the rest in his abilities as a baseball player. Steroids did not create the numbers Bonds has put up. In my humble opinion instead of boos, this man deserves many more cheers and standing ovations.

Wow, that is staggering, on so many levels. I will let most of it stand on its own because of its obvious ridiculousness, but let's just note:

1) Bonds was a Hall of Famer before he started doing this. We know that. That compounds the tragedy and the farce of this.
2) He isn't SUSPECTED of using steroids. We KNOW he
did.
3) MLB and its testing is WAY behind the dopers.
4) On the #s, you think it was natural to go from 37 home runs in 1998 (when we had the Great Juicer Race) to 73 in 2001?
5) Besides that, he's just a miserable person.

Sandeep, look at his rookie card and him now, and

2 comments:

jimbow8 said...

These are not numbers that can be accumulated by an average player on steroids.

Those are also, arguably, not the numbers of an ABOVE average player NOT on steroids.

From the other side of town said...

Gawd, I have the same “before and after” comparison, but my size is due to carbs, calories, and an insatiable lust for that wonderful elixir, beer. But to be fair, look at the rookie cards of sluggers and when they hit their 500th home run, even Hank Aaron was a thin wisp that grew into a man.

Seriously, Bonds has been made the media poster boy for steroids. Why? Because he’s not an easy interview, because he’s petulant and self-centered (gee, aren’t they all to some extent), and because while having been before a Grand Jury the information was leaked and since the justice department can’t get a conviction it’s easier to get a conviction in the court of public opinion.

We can look at his stats and the suggestion of something improper isn’t a stretch. This holds true which much of the game of baseball over the past 25 years. Many of the same people who point “juicer” are people who, 10 years ago, dismissed the notion that steroids can improve the ability to hit a home run or throw a strike (several local radio personalities would fit into this category). These are the same people (and entities) who now vilify Bonds as if the issue of steroids begins and ends with him.

He hasn’t been caught or tested positive, at age 43 he’s still playing (and feared) when others’ bodies have deceived them.

Because of what’s happened over the past 25 years the home-run record doesn’t mean as much to me. For those that still hold the record sacred arguments can be made about the various eras of the game, and the “hows” and “whys” of its’ attainment. Its about entertainment and from the days of the first games being played, questionable or unsavory aspects of the way the game has been played have existed from the first time somebody sat down to watch.