OT: What To Think of Barry Bonds Now?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by JasonC23

REALLY? NO SHIT?

I don't think anyone's attacking Chubby for having the opinion that Bonds has for sure done steroids. What we are attacking is his follow-up attitude of, "I don't see how anyone can think he hasn't done steroids." We're pointing out that since there is no concrete proof that he has in fact done steroids, that it's plausible that someone could think he hasn't. Why is this so hard to understand?

Exactly. I have no problem with someone having the opinion that Bonds has been/is still juiced. The problem I have is someone saying that it's obvious that he has been/is still juiced and how can you possibly think otherwise? Well, as I've pointed out there are legitimate explanations to counter all the circumstantial evidence we've seen. I have no problem if you don't believe them, but don't go calling me an idiot for not yet being convinced of Bonds' guilt.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Vince

If this ends up in court is the hinge of this argument. It's not in court now. So basically, the allegations against Bonds are by people that have a motive to put them there. So far, the only 'evidence' is circumstantial...which would indicate to me that the people making claims based upon something that hasn't been proven probably have an axe to grind.

So what is my motive then? What is my axe to grind with Bonds?

[Huckleberry]

Where did anyone call anyone an idiot? If it happened, I'd like to know, because that is definitely ridiculous in this case.

I don't even remember anyone questioning the possibility that someone could think he hasn't done steroids.

[Vince]

I don't know...do you dislike him?

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Exactly. I have no problem with someone having the opinion that Bonds has been/is still juiced. The problem I have is someone saying that it's obvious that he has been/is still juiced and how can you possibly think otherwise? Well, as I've pointed out there are legitimate explanations to counter all the circumstantial evidence we've seen. I have no problem if you don't believe them, but don't go calling me an idiot for not yet being convinced of Bonds' guilt.

Quote me this post.

And I'm the master of reading into people's posts? (yes I know you didn't say that dawgfan)

[Bad-example]

Originally Posted by Chubby

So what is my motive then?

Your love of trolling?

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Vince

I don't know...do you dislike him?

Heh, as I've said I don't hate him. I don't like him either. I don't really have an opinion on him much like 99% of the players on teams I don't follow. I think he's an amazing baseball player but this "stuff" calls into question his accomplishments to me. I'd like the truth to come out instead of all the cloak and daggar garabage with the courts and MLB.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Bad-example

Your love of trolling?

Yeah that's it nice troll yourself. Way to stay on topic.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chubby

Quote me this post.

And I'm the master of reading into people's posts? (yes I know you didn't say that dawgfan)

No you didn't and I'm sorry if my post implied that. Neither does this post, at least explicitly, but it's the main thing I was responding to:

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I just think it's funny how the supporters are taking it all the way to the end. As the curcumstantial stuff mounts and the hole gets smaller they are prepared to ride this one out. It's very possible there will never be enough proof to chisel it in stone but at some point you have to believe in common sense.

This post doesn't say those who aren't convinced Bonds is guilty are idiots, but it does imply that they aren't capable of using common sense. That is the kind of attitude I'm referring to.

[Chubby]

Basically this boils down to some people having a higher standard or proof than others in order to make a personal judgement on this matter. No?

[Vince]

See, that's a good post there. I agree with that 100%.

EDIT - It seems that I mixed you and rkmsuf up at some point...sorry Chubby. The post that dawgfan quoted was the one that got me on my Barry Bonds high-horse.

[Bad-example]

Sorry Chubby...I was just using the circumstantial evidence of your history of trolling to accuse you of doing it here.

How does it feel?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chubby

Basically this boils down to some people having a higher standard or proof than others in order to make a personal judgement on this matter. No?

Yes, and to a lesser extent how willing people are to respect an opposing viewpoint.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Vince

See, that's a good post there. I agree with that 100%. It's just the manner in which you present your opinion that Bonds has done steroids, I believe, which causes people to get 'upset.'

Well and the fact that some people (not saying you, in general) will take the opposite side of my argument "just because".

To me, I can't not take the circumstantial evidence into consideration when forming a personal opinion. As I've said, if this were a court of law then yes it'd be different but for us here it's not.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Yes, and to a lesser extent how willing people are to respect an opposing viewpoint.

I agree with this but I think certain dynamics of the board come into play as well. I'm hesitant to discuss it tho.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

No you didn't and I'm sorry if my post implied that. Neither does this post, at least explicitly, but it's the main thing I was responding to:



This post doesn't say those who aren't convinced Bonds is guilty are idiots, but it does imply that they aren't capable of using common sense. That is the kind of attitude I'm referring to.

I just have an issue with - no necessarily here - people coming up with any alternative solution to things just to support there is no proof. Yes I'm aware there is no proof but saying that well Bonds took several deliveries, had stuff in his possession but we don't know if he used it is annoying.

I completely see both sides but I can't fathom - again not referring to anyone specific here - someone who can vehemently defend the guy.

[Bad-example]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

Bonds took several deliveries, had stuff in his possession

These are not facts.

[Sharpieman]

Originally Posted by Bad-example

Even some of the Giants' own fans were writing them off in the early part of the season. Sure glad I never lost faith.

Hey I'm guilty. I just hope they continue this success. Go Giants.

As for all this roid talk with Bonds and whether he did or not. Why speculate? All of us DONT know whether he did or not, we just think we do. So once Bonds is actually found guilty of using steroids by the MLB, then we should start saying he's a cheater blah blah blah. But until then, he's innocent.

[Vince]

I don't know if you're misunderstanding this argument or not then...

Personally, i'm not vehemently defending Bonds...I'm defending the idea that there is a chance that he hasn't done Steroids. I think there's quite a difference there.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by Vince

Circumstantial evidence does not equal proof.

I've seen this argument a few times in this thread. I don't understand where it's coming from.

Circumstantial evidence is still evidence. You can build a perfectly valid legal case against someone using nothing but circumstantial evidence. You'd better have a pretty ironclad case if you're going to be successful (which is why prosecutors always prefer a smoking gun), but there's no law that says circumstantial evidence somehow doesn't count.

That's not a comment for or against Barry Bonds. I'm not even convinced that there's enough circumstantial evidence against Bonds to say he's guilty. But you can still have a case where the circumstantial evidence is so overwhelming that it would defy common sense to claim it doesn't prove anything (Marion Jones, anyone?)

[rkmsuf]

[quote=Bad-example]

Originally Posted by rkmsufBonds took several deliveries, had stuff in his possession
[/QUOTE

These are not facts.

Nor did I say they were. it's an example of a potential counter-arguement

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Vince

I don't know if you're misunderstanding this argument or not then...

Personally, i'm not vehemently defending Bonds...I'm defending the idea that there is a chance that he hasn't done Steroids. I think there's quite a difference there.

There's no way to argue that there is no chance he hasn't done Steroids.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Sharpieman

Why speculate?

There won't be many topics on here if we follow this across the board

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Chubby

Why? This is a head in the sand argument. So if Conte stands up there and says he sold illegal steroids to Bonds are you going to come back with "Doesn't make it credible testimony. He might have not used them but still bought them".

At least take some of the evidence and show why you don't think it points to him using like dawgfan did otherwise you give off the appearance of just blindly avoiding the evidence.

I REALLY don't want to get into this again, so let me just say this:

I agree with you about what it suggests. Like before, though, I'm not prepared to take the leap of faith that this means he actually took illegal steroids/supplements until I see something that constitutes actual proof.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I REALLY don't want to get into this again, so let me just say this:

I agree with you about what it suggests. Like before, though, I'm not prepared to take the leap of faith that this means he actually took illegal steroids/supplements until I see something that constitutes actual proof.

Read post #260.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Chubby

Read post #260.

Not really. What it boils down to is that there is no evidence from which anyone can definitively conclude what he did or didn't do. Again, I agree with what it tends to suggest, and what it could lead someone to believe, but that's a far cry from, "Barry Bonds took illegal supplements."

That's a statement none of us can make without further proof.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Not really. What it boils down to is that there is no evidence from which anyone can definitively conclude what he did or didn't do. Again, I agree with what it tends to suggest, and what it could lead someone to believe, but that's a far cry from, "Barry Bonds took illegal supplements."

That's a statement none of us can make without further proof.

I can. Barry Bonds took illegal supplements. That is my belief, you will not change that. Evidence that comes out may.

[clintl]

You can prove guilt with circumstantial evidence if you have enough of it. There's a murder trial going on here in Northern California in which just about all the prosecutors have is circumstantial evidence. The defendant's name is Scott Peterson - you might have heard of him.

So far, all anybody has on Bonds is circumstantial evidence, too, and if there's anything more, the public doesn't have access to it. Of what we do know, I think there's just not enough there to make any firm conclusions one way or the other.

[Buccaneer]

I find it very amusing that there are those that want solid, concrete evidence in order to form an opinion but when it comes to certain politicians, the tiniest shread of circumstantial evidence would be enough to prove guilt. If guilt by association can be applied in some cases, why can it be applied in other cases?

[Driftwood]

here here.

[kingfc22]

Well, back to the field. Another leadoff walk for Bonds leads to another Giants rally. 3-1 lead and a 4-game sweep over the bums is looking good right now.

[FBPro]

Roidmeister

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by clintl

...There's a murder trial going on here in Northern California in which just about all the prosecutors have is circumstantial evidence.

And mighty thin circumstantial evidence at that. Circumstantial evidence varies in quality. I am pretty sure that DNA from semen in a rape case is "circumstantial" evidence.

I am not sure what I would need to convince me that Barry is or has been on the "juice". I am not there yet, but there is starting to be enough smoke to believe there might actually be a fire.

[Swaggs]

Three-quarters of the way through the season and Bonds has an OBP of over .600 and a SLG of nearly .800. On pace to walk around 225 times and hit 45 HRs and hitting .350+.

If I saw this type of season in OOTP, I would think the numbers were unrealistic.

[Crapshoot]

its a once in a lifetime kinda thing- for sure.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Three-quarters of the way through the season and Bonds has an OBP of over .600 and a SLG of nearly .800. On pace to walk around 225 times and hit 45 HRs and hitting .350+.

If I saw this type of season in OOTP, I would think the numbers were unrealistic.

Hey! Make a new post damnit!!

I had killed this thread two months ago.

[EagleFan]

Bonds is still an egotistical jerk, no matter what the numbers say.

[EagleFan]

dola: Sorry about ruining that 6 hour old thread kill.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Bonds is still an egotistical jerk, no matter what the numbers say.

as always- brilliant analysis.

[sabotai]

*Mikey from Rocky voice* He's a bum!

(kidding, of course.)

[FBPro]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Bonds is still an egotistical jerk, no matter what the numbers say.

Roid-o-matic, Roidmeister, Roid-a-holic!!!!!

[FBPro]

Originally Posted by Aadik

as always- brilliant analysis.

uh yeah.

[Bad-example]

Originally Posted by FBPro

Roid-o-matic, Roidmeister, Roid-a-holic!!!!!

I love trolling.

Evidently.

[The_herd]

In an upcoming issue of Sports Illustrated.

Severing Bonds
In a universe of limos, personal chefs and performance-enhancers, two stars clashed

Gary Sheffield was testifying before a federal grand jury in San Francisco in 2003 when a prosecutor held up the testoterone-based steroid known as "the cream," supplied by the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative.

"Do you know what this is?" Sheffield was asked.

"Yeah, I do," Sheffield said.

"What did they tell you it was for?"

"My wounds," said Sheffield, who then rolled up his right pants leg to show a surgical scar on the outside of his knee. "It was like a cortisone to heal these wounds. I rubbed it on every night and it helped me."

Sheffield says he was not told that the cream, which he used before and during the 2002 season when he played for the Atlanta Braves, was an illegal steroid. "It was like you could go to a store and find something like that. That's what was in my thoughts," he says. "I put it on my legs and thought nothing of it. I kept it in my locker. The trainer saw my cream."

Sheffield says it shocked him when news broke that "the cream" and "the clear," another balm supplied by BALCO, were designer steroids. "That's why I was mad," he says. "I want everybody to be on an even playing field."

Sheffield was introduced to BALCO by someone he now describes as a former friend: Barry Bonds. Sheffield says he has no knowledge of what, if any, enhancers Bonds may have used, but he did provide SI with a harsh firsthand look at the inner circle of Bonds's trainers. (Bonds, through a spokesperson, declined to address Sheffield's comments, saying only, "I wish nothing but the best for Gary. I want him to win the MVP. He deserves it.")

Sheffield says he and Bonds enjoyed a casual friendship when the Giants leftfielder invited Sheffield to live and train with him in San Francisco for a few weeks before the 2002 season. "He said, 'I got guys here, they can get your urine and blood and prescribe a vitamin specifically for your blood type and what your body needs,'" Sheffield says. "And that's what I did."

Bonds introduced Sheffield to BALCO president Victor Conte as well as to members of Bonds's support team, which included chiropractors, a track coach, a stretching coach and a strength coach, Greg Anderson. He and Conte were two of four men indicted last Feb. 12 on charges of conspiring to distribute performance-enhancing drugs. Sheffield says he did not deal directly with anyone from BALCO after his initial meeting with Conte, but that the company gave vitamins to Anderson, and Anderson gave them to Sheffield. (Anderson's lawyer did not return SI's phone calls.)

"The only thing Greg Anderson does is what Barry tells him to do," Sheffield says. "Barry ran everything. If I'm training and if he sees Greg making me do one curl too many, it's an argument: 'I told you, don't have him do no more than he needs!' So I knew Greg was a puppet. All these guys around [Bonds] were puppets.

"They used to confide in me about how they hated it. I told them, 'You knew what you were getting into. You accept his money. You accept the status when you're around him. But you don't want to deal with the backlash of what comes out of his mouth, and you want to complain to me.'"

Soon after Sheffield arrived in San Francisco, the friendship between him and Bonds began to sour. Bonds insisted that Sheffield stay at his house and not rent a car. He insisted that Sheffield not pay for anything, though Sheffield did bring his personal chef. "[It was], 'It's my way or no way,'" Sheffield says. "I'm not a child. I make $11 million. I can buy what I want."

To thank Bonds for inviting him into his home, Sheffield arranged for the two of them to see a boxing match in Miami on Feb. 2, 2002. "I was going to pay for the plane, the flight, pay for the limo service, the hotel," Sheffield says. "He gets my mail. He looks in my mail and sees he can get better seats, so he gets better seats. He can get a better flight, so he gets a better flight. He can get a better limo service. And he can get a better hotel. So basically my plan, in trying to do something in return, he wound up doing it. And [that sort of behavior] just escalated."

Another time, Sheffield arranged for a limo and tickets for him and Bonds to see the Sacramento Kings host the Los Angeles Lakers. "He complained the whole drive," Sheffield says. "'Man, I could have drove. We would have gotten there a lot faster.' The whole time. And I'm saying to myself, Never again. Never again."

Sheffield says the breaking point occurred one morning when Bonds departed for their morning workout without him, leaving Sheffield to scramble for transportation to the gym. When Sheffield eventually showed up, he found Bonds laughing at him with someone he later learned was a writer for Men's Journal. "He sold me out to the media," Sheffield says.

Though Sheffield says he was under doctor's orders not to run because of his knee, he did so anyway because Bonds and his trainers wanted him to. "Now all of a sudden my knee was hurting," Sheffield says. "He said something to me [about being late]. I did not respond, because if I did respond at that particular moment, I would have knocked him out. That's how I was feeling. [But] I said [to myself], No, I'm just going to walk away, and when I say walk away I mean walk away."

Sheffield flew home to Florida with his chef. The chef told him, "Gary, I want to confess something. [Bonds] made an offer to hire me: He'll get me a car, give me a place to stay and pay off my student loan."

Shortly after they returned, Sheffield says he and his chef parted ways. Sheffield says about a month later Bonds called him to inquire about why the chef was no longer working for Sheffield but made no mention of a related development: Bonds had hired him.

"That's the kind of person I found out I was dealing with," Sheffield says. "To me, I don't want friends like that. I never will have friends like that."

Soon Sheffield received a call from one of Bonds's team. According to Sheffield, Bonds had initially insisted that Sheffield not pay for anything, but now he was told to settle his tab with BALCO and others. Bonds also told Sheffield that BALCO would no longer supply him with vitamins.

"I called BALCO. 'Do I owe you anything?'" Sheffield says. "'Well, you have a bill. ...' I told my wife, 'You write the check.' That's how I got linked to BALCO."

Sheffield hit .307 in 2002 after training with Bonds, but with 25 home runs and 84 RBIs, it was a down year for him. "I had my worst year ever," he says. "I gave him too much credit. When you listen to another person on an everyday basis drill into you numbers, numbers, numbers, and you've never been that way, it doesn't work. I don't play for numbers. When I played to try to get numbers, I didn't get them."

Adds Sheffield, "I never wished anything bad on [Bonds]. I want him to achieve what he wants to achieve, but what I want more is that his life gets right. That he can have compassion for other people. And that's what I want the most."

Issue date: October 11, 2004

[Buccaneer]

I did not realize Bonds was such a control freak with others. With himself, yes, but I thought he just alienates everyone around him. I predict there will be many books written about Bonds over the next 40 years, most probably saying that he and Cobb were the most flawed great baseball players of all time.

[Fouts]

I'm sure Barry isn't the only control freak out there.

I agree on the books, but Rose is much more flawed than Bonds.

[Swaggs]

I think this is going to make for a curious article. Sheffield is a grown man and well-established, and it sounds like he was under Bonds' control, which is just really strange.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Fouts

I'm sure Barry isn't the only control freak out there.

I agree on the books, but Rose is much more flawed than Bonds.

I disagree about Rose. I put him in the same class as another obsessive gambler - Roger Hornsby. It is of my opinion that Cobb and now Bonds endangered themselves, but others as well.

[Fonzie]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I think this is going to make for a curious article. Sheffield is a grown man and well-established, and it sounds like he was under Bonds' control, which is just really strange.

For a few weeks, at least. Sounds to me like Sheffield bolted pretty quickly once Bonds got too controlling.

[Young Drachma]

So here's a question. Are people here just wanting Bonds to come out as a steroid user so they can feel better about him breaking McGwire and soon-to-be Ruth's record? Or is it just that they hate all cheaters and want them exposed and their records expunged?