One or the Other: Barry Bonds vs Pete Rose

[clintl]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

So he stopped using it in 2003?

Ok.

He has been tested. He hasn't tested positive as far as we know. So the assumption should be that he stopped.

[clintl]

I'm really shocked that the vote is this close - that this many people cannot see how much worse gambling is for integrity of the sport than steroid use.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by clintl

I'm really shocked that the vote is this close - that this many people cannot see how much worse gambling is for integrity of the sport than steroid use.

the poll question never mentions anything about integrity, Bonds cheated ON the field, Rose didn't.

Who has less integrity in that scenerio?

[clintl]

Anyone who thinks Pete Rose didn't cheat on the field is in denial. And he cheated in a way that is far more harmful to the integrity of the game.

It's debatable whether Bonds actually cheated at all, even if he did use, since baseball did not have a rule (or, at the very least, did not have an enforceable rule with consequences) at the time he is believed to have used. And, as was pointed out, the substance he was accused of using at the time was not specifically illegal until 2003.

Even if Bonds did cheat, the kind of cheating he did helped his team win, just like the kind of cheating Gaylord Perry did helped his teams win. The kind of cheating Pete Rose did may have hurt his team's performance.

[molson]

Originally Posted by clintl

He has been tested. He hasn't tested positive as far as we know. So the assumption should be that he stopped.

Baseball's steroid program still isn't nearly comprehensive enough to give anyone the benefit of the doubt. It's very easy to beat when you can afford cutting edge nutritionists. (Note the only people that have been caught have been fringe players)

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by clintl

Anyone who thinks Pete Rose didn't cheat on the field is in denial. And he cheated in a way that is far more harmful to the integrity of the game.

It's debatable whether Bonds actually cheated at all, even if he did use, since baseball did not have a rule (or, at the very least, did not have an enforceable rule with consequences) at the time he is believed to have used. And, as was pointed out, the substance he was accused of using at the time was not specifically illegal until 2003.

Even if Bonds did cheat, the kind of cheating he did helped his team win, just like the kind of cheating Gaylord Perry did helped his teams win. The kind of cheating Pete Rose did may have hurt his team's performance.

are you a Giants fan, per chance?

[clintl]

I am, but I feel the same way about all the other players who used steroids before 2003. Baseball did not have anything you could really call a rule, so I don't consider them cheaters. They were doing what athletes always do in any sport - exploiting loopholes wherever possible. Before 2003 - not cheaters. After 2003 - cheaters.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Lathum

are you a Giants fan, per chance?

I'm not a Giants fan or a Bonds fan and I agree with basically what he says(although I do laugh at 'its debatable whether he cheated at all'). I'm very surprised at the results of this poll. There are countless cheaters in the hall of fame that we never question, from people running from 1st to 3rd and skipping 2nd altogether in the early days of the game when there was just one umpire... amphetamines from the 50s on, right? hall of fame pitchers doctoring the ball, this is just the latest, hi tech form of cheating. You're going to have to keep a *lot* of people out if you want to keep everyone out that cheated.

However, gambling on baseball damages the core integrity of the sport. Look at the current NBA scandal? That's some really, really serious shit. When you introduce gambling into the game you no longer have confidence that people are actually doing their best to compete and win, the integrity of the sport is ruined. Steroids has ruined the reputation of baseball in many people's opinions, but gambling harms a sport much, much more.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by molson

Baseball's steroid program still isn't nearly comprehensive enough to give anyone the benefit of the doubt. It's very easy to beat when you can afford cutting edge nutritionists. (Note the only people that have been caught have been fringe players)

Rafael Palmeiro.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by clintl

Even if Bonds did cheat, the kind of cheating he did helped his team win.

This is an absolutely terrible argument.

[MrBug708]

I honestly think Bonds loves all of this talk. I dont think anyone doubts he's a HOF player and just like Rose, it's sad that someone would do something like this when they already were a world class player.

Imagine if someone like Junior, whose about at the age where Barry's head and shoe size increased, were to go on the same "routine" that Barry did? Would there be any doubt on who the greatest player ever would be? At least since Bonds?

[clintl]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

This is an absolutely terrible argument.

Compared to what Rose did, it's not.

Look, baseball lore is filled with examples of cheating. Besides the spitballers, you've got stories about teams putting spies in the center field bleachers to steal signs and relay them to the hitter. You've got teams turning the infield around first base into a bog in the 60s to keep Maury Wills from stealing. You've got Ty Cobb intentionally trying to injure opposing players with his spikes.

This stuff has always been part of the game, and is very, very different from what Rose did.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by clintl

Compared to what Rose did, it's not.

Look, baseball lore is filled with examples of cheating. Besides the spitballers, you've got stories about teams putting spies in the center field bleachers to steal signs and relay them to the hitter. You've got teams turning the infield around first base into a bog in the 60s to keep Maury Wills from stealing. You've got Ty Cobb intentionally trying to injure opposing players with his spikes.

This stuff has always been part of the game, and is very, very different from what Rose did.

Just because baseball's hall of fame has always had pitiful standards is no reason to advocate maintaining them.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by clintl

Compared to what Rose did, it's not.

Look, baseball lore is filled with examples of cheating. Besides the spitballers, you've got stories about teams putting spies in the center field bleachers to steal signs and relay them to the hitter. You've got teams turning the infield around first base into a bog in the 60s to keep Maury Wills from stealing. You've got Ty Cobb intentionally trying to injure opposing players with his spikes.

This stuff has always been part of the game, and is very, very different from what Rose and Bonds did.

Fixed

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I see argument here that Sosa was also juiced. I have never heard actual allegations that he was also, other than that he must have been to keep up with McGwire. I thought Sammy got his HR's the old fashioned way... a corked bat.

[molson]

Originally Posted by clintl

Rafael Palmeiro.

OK, one idiot that was using something that's been available for at least 3 decades.

It still seems incredibly naive to use negative drugs tests to support someone's innocence when that person has admitted taking masking agents that would make the substances he was taking undetectable under the current MLB tests.

But I'd still put him in the HOF over Rose.

[clintl]

It's worse to make allegations that have no evidence to back them up. There's absolutely no evidence Bonds has taken steroids since the MLB adopted its testing policy. Players have been tested. Some have been caught. HR totals are down. There's more evidence is that it is working than there is that it's not.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Axxon

That's gone now and not because of a change in the way the game is played but because of a cheater. If steroid use is ever effectively banned from the league you'll see numbers drop back into a more normal range and you'll know that no records are going to be broken and not because of a "gee whiz" story, but of a lousy cheater. That's kinda sad. If course, this isn't exactly threatening the integrity of the game I'll admit but to me, since the numbers are my primary interest, from that viewpoint, I've lost a lot more interest but since I am not a MLB customer it's no loss to them that I'm even less of one now.

I don't see the enthusiasm for records gone at all because it is percieved that a "cheater" got them. It wasn't when Aaron was using amphetamines to break Babe Ruth's record. I'm a numbers guy as well, total sabermetic stat-head, but I haven't lost interest in the numbers or the game because, well, this sort of thing has been going on for quite a while (and I'm still not sure how people can say what Bonds has been doing is totally unlike pitchers throwing spitballs or scuffing balls after it was against the rules... is it because it is a chemical instead of actually altering the baseball?).

Besides, in 10 years or so, A-Rod will break Bonds' record. If he's "clean" (whatever that means these days), you think that it'll bring back interest in the numbers?

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I don't see the enthusiasm for records gone at all because it is percieved that a "cheater" got them. It wasn't when Aaron was using amphetamines to break Babe Ruth's record. I'm a numbers guy as well, total sabermetic stat-head, but I haven't lost interest in the numbers or the game because, well, this sort of thing has been going on for quite a while (and I'm still not sure how people can say what Bonds has been doing is totally unlike pitchers throwing spitballs or scuffing balls after it was against the rules... is it because it is a chemical instead of actually altering the baseball?).

Besides, in 10 years or so, A-Rod will break Bonds' record. If he's "clean" (whatever that means these days), you think that it'll bring back interest in the numbers?

It's not that it's chemical it's because the level of boost totally puts the statistics out of whack. It's safe to assume that Barry got at least 100 HR's out of his cheating and I don't know if corked bats or scuffing a baseball makes that much of a difference.

The 100 is admittedly a WAG but it's based on the fact that players drop off when his power started so if he's juicing, even if he has a remarkable staying power, he's at least that many down.

I just feel that the level of cheating advantage that steroids gives ( east german swimming team? ) distorts the records enough that to me they become nigh meaningless. Maybe I just don't know enough about amphetamines but I don't believe they caused massive inflation in the cheaters numbers that caused records that surpassed anything that human beings had ever been able to achieve before. I dunno, that to me pretty much how I feel about steroids.

It's one thing if Messala bumps Ben Hur with his chariot and you lose a wheel that's kinda bad but if he's driving a corvette and just blows by him, well, that cheating is really, really hard to accept.

[clintl]

So what you then in take your best guess - I think this guy took steroids. What would his career look like if he hadn't taken them.

With Bonds, he's maybe 600-650 HRs, and 3000 hits (because he wouldn't have been walked as much, he'd probably have that many more hits by now). Certainly, he'd be a first ballot HOFer.

I think it's pretty well established that corked bats don't help. It's also pretty well established that scuffing and foreign substances affect the aerodynamics of the baseball enough to cause extra movement and make it harder to hit, and thus, they do work.

Amphetamines certainly helped players perform when they were tired - so at the very least, they played more and were able to put up more counting stats.

[Danny]

I agree with most of what clintl says and I am a Dodgers fan and certainly not a fan of Barry Bonds.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by clintl

It's worse to make allegations that have no evidence to back them up.

Originally Posted by clintl

Anyone who thinks Pete Rose didn't cheat on the field is in denial.

Even Dowd has said that he never thought Pete was betting on baseball during his playing days. Rose deserves to be in the hall for his playing career, without question.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by clintl

Bonds. Steroid use is comparable to throwing spitballs, and we have several suspected spitballers in the HOF (Perry, Sutton, and I think Whitey Ford, to name three right off the top of my head). It's a minor infraction compared to gambling on the game.

ROFLMFAO

Comparable to spit balls? You're funny!!!!

[EagleFan]

Since Hall of Fame is on the field numbers and it's opne or the other this should be a no brainer for Rose as his problems occured after he was done playing.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

ROFLMFAO

Comparable to spit balls? You're funny!!!!

Why? I agree with him. What would Perry's numbers be like if he never threw a spitball? Far less, I'm positive. Enough that he wouldn't be a Hall of Fame pitcher.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

ROFLMFAO

Comparable to spit balls? You're funny!!!!

He's also right.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Even Dowd has said that he never thought Pete was betting on baseball during his playing days. Rose deserves to be in the hall for his playing career, without question.

In my opinion, it's worse that he did it as a manager. A manager has ways of influencing the outcome of a game that players don't.

Look, I was for reinstating Rose and putting in the Hall if he made a contrite, genuinely remorseful confession. His confession, when he finally made it, was anything but contrite and remorseful. It was arrogant, and it confirmed that that he didn't get it.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Axxon

It's not that it's chemical it's because the level of boost totally puts the statistics out of whack. It's safe to assume that Barry got at least 100 HR's out of his cheating and I don't know if corked bats or scuffing a baseball makes that much of a difference.

The 100 is admittedly a WAG but it's based on the fact that players drop off when his power started so if he's juicing, even if he has a remarkable staying power, he's at least that many down.

I just feel that the level of cheating advantage that steroids gives ( east german swimming team? ) distorts the records enough that to me they become nigh meaningless. Maybe I just don't know enough about amphetamines but I don't believe they caused massive inflation in the cheaters numbers that caused records that surpassed anything that human beings had ever been able to achieve before. I dunno, that to me pretty much how I feel about steroids.

It's one thing if Messala bumps Ben Hur with his chariot and you lose a wheel that's kinda bad but if he's driving a corvette and just blows by him, well, that cheating is really, really hard to accept.

I think you're putting too much of the stats increase on steroids. Yes, they do boost stat levels by quite a bit, but we'll honestly never know how much. The steroid era happened to coincide with shrinking ballparks, a shrinking strike zone (which probably had a bigger impact than steroids), and increased knowledge of health, nutrition, and excercise.

[molson]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Since Hall of Fame is on the field numbers and it's opne or the other this should be a no brainer for Rose as his problems occured after he was done playing.

Unlike other Hall of Fames, I'm pretty sure that the Baseball HOF's criteria specifically instructs voters to consider "character" (though I couldn't find that criteria in a quick internet search)

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I think you're putting too much of the stats increase on steroids. Yes, they do boost stat levels by quite a bit, but we'll honestly never know how much. The steroid era happened to coincide with shrinking ballparks, a shrinking strike zone (which probably had a bigger impact than steroids), and increased knowledge of health, nutrition, and excercise.

I'll agree that this is possibly so but I look at other sports, like the east german womens swim team and the outrageous records they were setting.

Also, it would seem that someone has studied the rise in home runs and knows what the league average is and just how much higher the home run rate has changed for the juicers than the league average.

Bonds is a case where what he's done is not only unusual but unheard of for someone his age. Possible? Sure, but unlikely unaided by steroids because as everyone else keeps saying, the pitchers are juicing too so using that logic, how is it conceivable that he could have done something that no one else has done and done it naturally while those around him juiced? Puzzling.

This issue ( did he or didn't he ) isn't the issue with me though because if we don't get some proof that he cheated there's no way in hell he doesn't belong in the HOF, next to Pete Rose, who should already be there.

For those who say cheating is no biggie though , I guess we ought to give Rosie Ruiz her medal back. I mean all she did was cheat and that's no biggie.

I do want to amend my stand though. I really do thing Bonds belongs in the hall of fame, behind Rose so I stand by my vote, for the impressive career he achieved legitimately but the HR record, that's another issue which I don't like. Still, I can't see that distaste as a disqualifier for the HOF but it should NOT say HR champion on his plaque no matter how many tainted dingers he hits.

If baseball has travelled so far afield from putting an asterisk on a record that was achieved legitimately under the rules of the day to now legitimatizing a cheater and his tainted record (if proven), well, I don't really need to rethink my dislike for baseball as it's been played since '94.

[molson]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Even Dowd has said that he never thought Pete was betting on baseball during his playing days. Rose deserves to be in the hall for his playing career, without question.

Dowd said that he had no evidence that Rose ever bet against the Reds. We also know that Rose accepted a VOLUNTARY ban from baseball in exchange for the investigation stopping, and that no formal finding would be made. I personally think he bet against the Reds, but that's just my opinion.

And of course, even if he only bet to win, he's essentially betting against them every time he manages a game that he doesn't have any money on.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by molson

And of course, even if he only bet to win, he's essentially betting against them every time he manages that he doesn't have any money on.

huh?

[molson]

Originally Posted by Lathum

huh?

If you have $10,000 on the Reds winning tomorrow night, but you're not betting on tonight's game, you're managerial decisions tonight will reflect that (holding back your best relievers, using tonight as the night to rest your big bat, etc.)

(It might have just been my poor typing and grammar skills - I edited my post to try to make it clearer)

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Lathum

huh?

It's basically what I said earlier in the thread. If he's maximizing his team's ability to win in an individual game that he's betting on, then he's acting against his team's interest in other games. He can overuse relievers, bring back an injured guy too soon, switch to a 4 man rotation to get that ace pitcher going a game earlier. His decisions will still be influenced by his betting patterns, which is exactly what baseball wants to avoid.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Axxon

Bonds is a case where what he's done is not only unusual but unheard of for someone his age. Possible? Sure, but unlikely unaided by steroids because as everyone else keeps saying, the pitchers are juicing too so using that logic, how is it conceivable that he could have done something that no one else has done and done it naturally while those around him juiced? Puzzling.

You know, we can say the same thing for Roger Clemens. How many pitchers have been this good, this old? Satchel Paige? (don't say Nolan Ryan, he wasn't close to the pitcher Clemens has been since they both hit 40)

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by clintl

In my opinion, it's worse that he did it as a manager. A manager has ways of influencing the outcome of a game that players don't.

Look, I was for reinstating Rose and putting in the Hall if he made a contrite, genuinely remorseful confession. His confession, when he finally made it, was anything but contrite and remorseful. It was arrogant, and it confirmed that that he didn't get it.

As opposed to the continuing lack of a confession/admission from Bonds.
Rose should be in. Bonds is debatable, because you honestly don't know what he would have done if he never was on the juice.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

As opposed to the continuing lack of a confession/admission from Bonds.
Rose should be in. Bonds is debatable, because you honestly don't know what he would have done if he never was on the juice.

I disagree with this. He had 411 HR's through 1998, when it's been rumored that he started juicing. Dude was going to the hall no matter what, and that's why I dislike him so much. I have a bit more sympathy for a guy who is struggling for that last roster spot and feels he needs to juice to keep up with the his competition, who are also juicing. However, Bonds didn't need to do that. If he never took steroids, he still would have gone down as one of the greatest players in baseball history.

As for Rose, he should not be in. He knew the rules. He knew how serious those rules were. He broke them and has acted like a complete jerk ever since. If he had shown true remorse, then I think people would be more lenient. Similarly, if Barry Bonds hadn't acted like a prick for his whole career, I think people would be more inclined to believe his story.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Similarly, if Barry Bonds hadn't acted like a prick for his whole career, I think people would be more inclined to believe his story.

I would agree with that.

[cartman]

If he started on The Clear when he was with the Pirates, he could have thrown out Sid Bream at the plate.

[ISiddiqui]

Which is an interesting counterfactual. What if Bonds was more like Griffey (the Seattle years)... what would the reaction be to all of this?

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Which is an interesting counterfactual. What if Bonds was more like Griffey (the Seattle years)... what would the reaction be to all of this?

Well, he'd be a lot more popular, and this poll would be a landslide.

[Bad-example]

Surprising poll results. While there is certainly room for debate on the Bonds issue, promoting Rose for the HoF is IMO indefensible. The guy knew the punishment. No way any player banned from the game for life can be feted and allowed to enter the Hall. I just can't see it.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I disagree with this. He had 411 HR's through 1998, when it's been rumored that he started juicing. Dude was going to the hall no matter what, and that's why I dislike him so much. I have a bit more sympathy for a guy who is struggling for that last roster spot and feels he needs to juice to keep up with the his competition, who are also juicing. However, Bonds didn't need to do that. If he never took steroids, he still would have gone down as one of the greatest players in baseball history.

One of the best arguments for disliking Bonds that I've seen. Bonds like the best sports athletes of all time is ultra-competitive. In the end the person Bonds cheated the most his himself, and its something he should have realized if/when he started using. Most likely he saw the chase for 61, saw two guys that appeared to have gotten bigger with the aide of substances, and waned to compete with the best HR hitters of the day on those same terms. He let his ego get the better of him, which wouldn't be a surprise to anyone obviously.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Why? I agree with him. What would Perry's numbers be like if he never threw a spitball? Far less, I'm positive. Enough that he wouldn't be a Hall of Fame pitcher.

Throwing a spit ball increases one's stamina? It allows them to continue to play at a level in which they would not naturally be able to play at for a longer period of time? It quickens their recovery and helpsto avoid the late season fatigue that most players begin to hit at some point? It can help heighten a player's senses and improve vision to 20/10? It is something undetectable on the field (player's aren't injecting themselves right there on the field)? It takes years off of the player's life?


Yeah, I can see just how comparable the two are...

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Throwing a spit ball increases one's stamina? It allows them to continue to play at a level in which they would not naturally be able to play at for a longer period of time? It quickens their recovery and helpsto avoid the late season fatigue that most players begin to hit at some point? It can help heighten a player's senses and improve vision to 20/10? It is something undetectable on the field (player's aren't injecting themselves right there on the field)? It takes years off of the player's life?


Yeah, I can see just how comparable the two are...

Throwing a spit ball DOESN'T increase performance?! Give me a break. It seems a cute little distinction so that one form of cheating gets pooh-poohed, while another is grounds for a lynching?

Speaking of which, what about players who get eye surgery to increase their vision to 20/10? Isn't that a performance enhancing alteration to one's body? Or should everyone have to get surgery in order to be able to compete at the same level?

[stevew]

Talking about baseball is so much more fun than actually watching baseball. I'll be happy when he breaks the record, and I never have to pretend to care about watching this useless Giants team again.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

You know, we can say the same thing for Roger Clemens. How many pitchers have been this good, this old? Satchel Paige? (don't say Nolan Ryan, he wasn't close to the pitcher Clemens has been since they both hit 40)

Very true. Personally, I'd take Paige over Clemens but he is my favorite pitcher ever so it's not a tough decision.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Throwing a spit ball DOESN'T increase performance?! Give me a break. It seems a cute little distinction so that one form of cheating gets pooh-poohed, while another is grounds for a lynching?

Wait a minute now, this makes no sense. So, are you saying that you don't believe in degrees of punishment to fit the crime? Manslaughter should be punished exactly the same as first degree murder, because to me clearly a spitball is to steroids like manslaughter is to murder.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Throwing a spit ball DOESN'T increase performance?! Give me a break. It seems a cute little distinction so that one form of cheating gets pooh-poohed, while another is grounds for a lynching?

Speaking of which, what about players who get eye surgery to increase their vision to 20/10? Isn't that a performance enhancing alteration to one's body? Or should everyone have to get surgery in order to be able to compete at the same level?

You're the one who agreed that steroids and spit balls were comparable. I guess now that you see the silliness of that arguement you need to switch to talking about eye surgery?

[Karlifornia]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

You're the one who agreed that steroids and spit balls were comparable. I guess now that you see the silliness of that arguement you need to switch to talking about eye surgery?

Barry Bonds never booed Santa Claus, so he's better than any Eagle fan could ever be. Who boos Santa Claus, besides dirty commies?