Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

[BAMJ6]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

You forget to mention that the person whose record he is about to break is black. How about the fact that no one wants to see a cheater break the record? I would say that is a much greater factor.

You also forgot to mention, like Mac and Sosa, Ruth and Aaron were much more "endearing" to fans than Bonds ever was.

[Sandman42]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

You also forgot to mention, like Mac and Sosa, Ruth and Aaron were much more "endearing" to fans than Bonds ever was.

Yes, because Ruth and Aaron didn't cheat. No one jumped on McGwire and Sosa at the time because they didn't know if either of them were on steroids at the time. After it got revealed that they both used steroids fans didn't respect them as much.

[Chip Douglass]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

You also forgot to mention, like Mac and Sosa, Ruth and Aaron were much more "endearing" to fans than Bonds ever was.

Bonds brought that upon himself because he is a complete *** to the media.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

Steroids increase muscle mass, which increases strength, which also increases bat speed, all of the following factors on home runs.

The problem is, he already had all of that, and still had great stats each year.

And, Bonds may be an *** to the media, but can you blame him? I'd be a jerk to the media too, if they did to me what they do to everyone else.

Bill Parcells and Bob Knight are *******s to the media as well, but I don't hear half of the crap I hear about Bonds' relationship with the media regarding those guys.

[Scottdau]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

That's because people didn't know Sosa and McGwire were on roids in 98. Do you see the media love either one of them now? McGwire might miss out on the HOF because he took steroids.

Give me a break, people knew, but didn't care. Also, Baseball knew too! but it was bringing in money. That being said the reason people care now is they hate Bonds, period. Hank took uppers like most players in his generation. Now that is not Steroid, but it is a helper! lol I think A Rod and Albert have a good chance, but Albert might come across the same problem as Bonds. Albert got freaking huge over the Summer. lol I am sure he is clean.

[SportsTop]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

It doesn't matter. The guy still consistently hit over 35 homers a season.

People act like he was Ronnie Belliard, then all of a sudden turned into a home run machine. The guy has ALWAYS been an amazing hitter. It could also be that the reason his numbers "went up" was because pitching started to suck. Also, the move from Candlestick to Pac Bell could have had an impact as well. Right field in Candlestick was 328 and right field in Pac Bell is 309. Bonds' HR numbers "spiked" in 2000, the first year they went to the new ball-park. I don't want to sound like I'm making excuses, but these reasons are just as valid as "steroid" use being the reason for increased power totals, because it has never been proven that it has a DIRECT effect. Call me naive, call me what you will, but I won't buy it until it's proven.

Besides, don't people know that most of the players who have been caught for performance-enhancers have been pitchers? Steroids are used as a recovery aid first.

As long as someone shows me PHYSICAL proof that steroids make it easier to hit a home run, I won't diminish his hitting 740 home runs (so far).

PacBell Ballpark had the lowest left-handed batter HR and average factor in 2001 (the year Bonds set the record) so that kind of blows your Candlestick to PacBell theory out of the water. I like how you like to give dimensions, but fail to say that PacBell has a 25 foot wall in right field.

Read Game of Shadows and tell me you think he didn't do steroids.

You want prooof?

Bonds - 73
McGwire - 70
Sosa - 66

The three highest season HR totals are owned by players that are linked (directly or otherwise) to using steroids. You do the math.

[Scottdau]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

PacBell Ballpark had the lowest left-handed batter HR and average factor in 2001 (the year Bonds set the record) so that kind of blows your Candlestick to PacBell theory out of the water. I like how you like to give dimensions, but fail to say that PacBell has a 25 foot wall in right field.

Read Game of Shadows and tell me you think he didn't do steroids.

You want prooof?

Bonds - 73
McGwire - 70
Sosa - 66

The three highest season HR totals are owned by players that are linked (directly or otherwise) to using steroids. You do the math.

Yeah that is intersesting, and one thing ATT&T is brutal for left hand batters, so you are right about that.

[wang_chi7]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

It doesn't matter. The guy still consistently hit over 35 homers a season.

People act like he was Ronnie Belliard, then all of a sudden turned into a home run machine. The guy has ALWAYS been an amazing hitter. It could also be that the reason his numbers "went up" was because pitching started to suck. Also, the move from Candlestick to Pac Bell could have had an impact as well. Right field in Candlestick was 328 and right field in Pac Bell is 309. Bonds' HR numbers "spiked" in 2000, the first year they went to the new ball-park. I don't want to sound like I'm making excuses, but these reasons are just as valid as "steroid" use being the reason for increased power totals, because it has never been proven that it has a DIRECT effect. Call me naive, call me what you will, but I won't buy it until it's proven.

Besides, don't people know that most of the players who have been caught for performance-enhancers have been pitchers? Steroids are used as a recovery aid first.

As long as someone shows me PHYSICAL proof that steroids make it easier to hit a home run, I won't diminish his hitting 740 home runs (so far).

I agree that Bonds was already a great hitter, thats what makes me so mad. He would have likely hit 600+ clean and would have stayed a good fielder and baserunner.

Pitching quality is definitely an issue in this era, I won't deny that. But it didn't all of a sudden become bad enough from the 1990's to the 2000's for Bonds to jump up in HR's like that. Actually pitching was probably at its worst from 1993-2000 when the league was adjusting to more teams.

The pitchers using steroids is a great argument that I usually bring up in conversations like this. It is a very valid point and makes the most sense that those guys would be the juicers. I actually predicted hitting stats would get better after the league started testing.

Other people already proved your theory on the park wrong though, so I won't get into it.

I'll stop with one last point though. In Bonds' best HR season he hit one out every 11.71 at bats. In 2000 hit hit one out every 6.52 at bats. There is something up besides bad pitching when he hits it out 80% more often than before.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

I didn't put up that theory to have it valid. I put up that theory to show that BS is BS is BS. Things like that don't matter when you can consistently murder the ball, and Bonds has done it forever, steroids or NOT.

By the way, I never said I don't think he did steroids. Hell, I guarantee he took steroids. My issue is with all you people (and the media, and everyone else) who root for Bonds to fail and not get the record because of steroids. Steroids haven't given him 740. His baseball skill has given him 740. I'm just so sick of people when it comes to this whole issue.

[Husker_OS]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

This thread was intented for discussion on A-Rod possibly breaking Aaron and then Bonds' record, but I guess the title is saying otherwise.


Any actual thoughts on whether A-Rod will be able to do it?

[NYJets]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

It's pretty obvious that steroids have had something to do with it.

No one denies that Bonds was already a hall of fame player before he took them. It's not just the homerun totals. He had an .799+ slugging percentage 3 times. That is ridiculous. Before he supposedly started taking them, his career high slugging was .677. After he started taking them, which according to Game of Shadows was shortly after the 98 season I believe, he beat that 5 times. He was hitting as many, or more homeruns than ever before in his career, despite 50-100 times more than his normal season. He did all this over the age of 35. No one makes that big of a jump at that age. Yes he was a great hitter before, but his numbers after the age of 35 made him arguably the greatest hitter ever.

It could also be that the reason his numbers "went up" was because pitching started to suck. Also, the move from Candlestick to Pac Bell could have had an impact as well. Right field in Candlestick was 328 and right field in Pac Bell is 309. Bonds' HR numbers "spiked" in 2000, the first year they went to the new ball-park.

Neither of those reasons are valid. Pitching sucked before Bonds went nuts. Everyone was hitting homeruns in 97, 98, 99, etc. He didn't hit any more than normal. I'm sure that helped somewhat, but that helped every hitter. It wouldn't explain how he went from one of the best hitters in baseball to by far the best.
And like Squint said, PacBell has a 25 foot wall. And I believe despite the 309 wall that is one of the toughest parks to hit homers in for lefties. It's why even though Mccovey cove is only about 400 feet away I believe, Bonds is pretty much the only hitter to reach it on a regular basis.

[NYJets]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

This thread was intented for discussion on A-Rod possibly breaking Aaron and then Bonds' record, but I guess the title is saying otherwise.


Any actual thoughts on whether A-Rod will be able to do it?

Most likely. He's a great hitter and he never gets hurt. As long as he stays around long enough he should beat Aaron's record by a lot, and probably catch whatever Bonds gets too.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

NY, I already said that those two reasons were "pseudo"-reasons, just like steroids impacting home runs is. I guess I should have put quotes around the word "valid" in my original post talking about ballparks and pitching, to denote the sarcasm.

As far as the original topic goes, I don't know if he'll be able to. God knows how A-Rod, traditionally a fragile figure when it comes to media attention, will be able to handle the pressure of coming close to a record like that.

But hey, if he's healthy and can get past the mental thing, then I don't see why he can't.

[SportsTop]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

NY, I already said that those two reasons were "pseudo"-reasons, just like steroids impacting home runs is. I guess I should have put quotes around the word "valid" in my original post talking about ballparks and pitching, to denote the sarcasm.

As far as the original topic goes, I don't know if he'll be able to. God knows how A-Rod, traditionally a fragile figure when it comes to media attention, will be able to handle the pressure of coming close to a record like that.

But hey, if he's healthy and can get past the mental thing, then I don't see why he can't.

How is it a "pseudo" factor?

You bring up a point that pitchers use steroids as a recovery agent but discount the fact that could also apply to hitters? Position players play every day while starters only play every five days. Who needs to recover quicker (especially as they get older)?

No one is denying that Bonds was a likely Hall of Fame player prior to '99 (when his steroid use is alleged to begin). What is troubling is that the guy has averaged over 40 HRs per season since '99 (that's including him missing nearly all of 2005).

[richierich]

Re: Not sure why the big fuss over Bonds..

Of course A-Rod has a chance to beat it, he didn't/doesn't get intentionally walked as much!! Noone does, not even Pujols.