Barry Bonds legacy vs steroid use

QuestGAV · 03-14-2006, 11:11 AM

Assuming that the allegations in Game of Shadows are true and given that 70% of the board members have agreed that no official sanctions are possible against Barry Bonds at this time, how does the steroid issue and the evidence provided in Game of Shadows affect your own personal view of Barry Bonds and his legacy as an MLB player?

jaxmagicman · 03-14-2006, 11:19 AM

I picked other, explain.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2122665

Boozie1580 · 03-14-2006, 11:20 AM

I no longer count Bonds among the top 3 hitters of all time, but he's still a HoFer.

I don't recognize the validity of Bonds' records but he's still an exceptional hitter.

I think Bonds is/was a fantastic hitter and the best of this era, even with the knowledge that he did steroids. However, I don't think it's fair to say that his enhanced numbers in the "steroid era" are valid records over the numbers of Aaron (if he gets there) or Maris.

QuestGAV · 03-14-2006, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

I picked other, explain.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2122665

Okay, I'm not sure how that explains how you feel about proven steroid use affecting Bonds' legacy. Are you saying that the only way it would affect your view is if he tested positive for an MLB steroid test and then he should be subject to those same penalties?

jaxmagicman · 03-14-2006, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuestGAV

Okay, I'm not sure how that explains how you feel about proven steroid use affecting Bonds' legacy. Are you saying that the only way it would affect your view is if he tested positive for an MLB steroid test and then he should be subject to those same penalties?

Yes. If he failed a test, I would think simply that he deserves the same suspension every other player got and that is the extent of the punishment.

abailey3313 · 03-14-2006, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

Yes. If he failed a test, I would think simply that he deserves the same suspension every other player got and that is the extent of the punishment.

I agree. Just because of his stature, he shouldn't be subject to harsher penalties.

Ford Prefect · 03-14-2006, 11:38 AM

I don't recognize the validity of Bonds' records but he's still an exceptional hitter
Bonds would no longer receive a HoF vote from me

i go with these two, he cheats eom

Elendil · 03-14-2006, 11:43 AM

I went with these four:

* Steroids' effect on baseball ability is unproven
* Bonds not one of the top 3 hitters of all time (even if he never took steroids), but he's still an HoFer
* I don't recognize the validity of Bonds' records but he's still an exceptional hitter (I don't recognize their validity because he tried to cheat, even if it didn't work)
* Other (more or less because I think trying to cheat tarnishes Bonds' legacy but I'm not sure whether he would have done much worse without steroids)

canadiancreed · 03-14-2006, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elendil

I went with these four:

* Steroids' effect on baseball ability is unproven
* Bonds not one of the top 3 hitters of all time (even if he never took steroids), but he's still an HoFer
* I don't recognize the validity of Bonds' records but he's still an exceptional hitter (I don't recognize their validity because he tried to cheat, even if it didn't work)
* Other (more or less because I think trying to cheat tarnishes Bonds' legacy but I'm not sure whether he would have done much worse without steroids)

I think without the 'roids he probably would have lost anothr season of the level that he has achieved and not had such a high peak. still a member of the 500 and even possibly 600 HR club, but not as high as he's risen.

Which is funny because he would have probably been remember as one of the top five hitters of all time without the bulk juice. Ironic no?

Sublimity · 03-14-2006, 11:59 AM

I don't know where my answer falls among the poll choices, but I would say if it's proven without a doubt that Bonds did steroids, he's still one of the top players of all time to me although his numbers lose a little of their luster to me. I don't know if it's enough to say that his records are tarnished; if he quit today, I wouldn't say something like "I don't recognize him as being the third-most-home-run-hitting player in history."

I wouldn't make him ineligible for the HoF, but I still consider him one of the top three hitters of all time.

While steroids weren't against MLB rules and I don't think MLB can punish him for them (unless he tests positive under the new guidelines), it does have the effect I mentioned on me.

I think the biggest problem for me is that we don't know how steroids impacted him or anyone else (but there's still the effect, so that option isn't for me either). We don't know how different things would be if he hadn't taken him (if it's shown that he did -- and knowingly). We don't know how different things would be if nobody took them, or everybody took them, or more or fewer players took them.

I think in the long run I'm not going to view his records any differently. I'll probably look at it the same way I look at Pete Rose: the numbers are there, the issue is separate.

KurtBevacqua · 03-14-2006, 12:16 PM

This option right here,

Quote:

Steroids affect on baseball ability is unknown, no affect

I have an answer for it. It's see Barry Bonds before 1998 and see Barry Bonds after it. I think that gives us a pretty good idea what HGH, steroids, or whatever can do for an already great player.

Erik W. · 03-14-2006, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Steroids were not against MLB rules, no affect on Bonds legacy

The laws of the countries in which MLB plays > baseball's labor agreement and ruleset.

It might not have been against MLB's rules, but it was still illegal. If your company doesn't have a rule against using meth, and someone raises their productivity taking meth, it doesn't mean that it was perfectly fine just because it wasn't against company rules.

Hotblack Desiato · 03-14-2006, 12:33 PM

I don't feel that these choices are sufficiently encompassing. Steroids were not against MLB rules. Steroids' effect on baseball ability is unknown (i.e. not quantifiable). The overwhelming steroid allegations do, however, taint my view of him. I don't think any action should be taken against him because they weren't against the rules, but just because they weren't against the rules doesn't mean he wasn't getting an artificial advantage. If nothing else, it helped his knee heal, the knee that kept him out all last year while MLB was testing for steroids. That cost him an entire season. How much playing time has he added to his career?

I no longer count Bonds among the 3 best hitters ever but he's still a HoFer. I don't recognise the validity of Bonds's records but he's still an exceptional hitter. Those two are the only two available options that accurately describe how I feel about the situation, but I also feel the need to qualify it with the previous two options, minus "no affect (sic)."

His Own Bad Self · 03-14-2006, 02:04 PM

Other: none of it matters. Sports don't matter anymore. They're worthless no matter what some guy did or didn't do.

Elendil · 03-14-2006, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KurtBevacqua

This option right here,
I have an answer for it. It's see Barry Bonds before 1998 and see Barry Bonds after it. I think that gives us a pretty good idea what HGH, steroids, or whatever can do for an already great player.

HGH & steroids do a lot to a player's physique; I'm still not sure that they change performance drastically in baseball, at least when it comes to batting average and eye. Power - maybe. And of course, that's where Bonds' most eye-popping achievements have come. But plenty of other scrubs also did steroids & seem not to have benefitted much.

QuestGAV · 03-14-2006, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azamien

The laws of the countries in which MLB plays > baseball's labor agreement and ruleset.

It might not have been against MLB's rules, but it was still illegal. If your company doesn't have a rule against using meth, and someone raises their productivity taking meth, it doesn't mean that it was perfectly fine just because it wasn't against company rules.

I don't necessarily disagree. This is discussed more in-depth in the big Bonds thread. It does seem like an issue where neither side moves so I'm not really interested in going much further with it personally.

QuestGAV · 03-14-2006, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hotblack Desiato

I no longer count Bonds among the 3 best hitters ever but he's still a HoFer. I don't recognise the validity of Bonds's records but he's still an exceptional hitter. Those two are the only two available options that accurately describe how I feel about the situation, but I also feel the need to qualify it with the previous two options, minus "no affect (sic)."

Those are the two options I chose. I concede that without the qualification the other two statements are true but they do effect (

) my thinking so I couldn't check those off. Choices 1 & 3 explain why I don't feel like official action can be taken against Bonds, but because the steroid issue causes 6 & 7 to be true then 1 & 3 are false.

disposableheros · 03-14-2006, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boozie1580

I no longer count Bonds among the top 3 hitters of all time, but he's still a HoFer.

I don't recognize the validity of Bonds' records but he's still an exceptional hitter.

I think Bonds is/was a fantastic hitter and the best of this era, even with the knowledge that he did steroids. However, I don't think it's fair to say that his enhanced numbers in the "steroid era" are valid records over the numbers of Aaron (if he gets there) or Maris.

"

ctorg · 03-15-2006, 08:05 AM

Basically, I think steroid use tarnishes his reputation greatly, especially if it's proven to any degree, but I think records he sets still stand. And, in time, he will not look quite as bad, I think.

The coming years will bring many questions about performance enhancement. This is just the beginning. Within the lifetimes of some posters here, I think you'll see the ability to enhance the human body - without much or even any real harm - to a degree that this steroid use becomes small in comparison. This is really just the beginning.

ihatenames · 03-19-2006, 07:35 AM

I picked other.

I'm no fan of bonds, but the more i reflected on this, the more i've come to the same conclusion. Baseball players have been cheating since it began. You have guys taking cocaine, amphetamines, and various others. You have guys who corked bats and doctored balls, and other means of cheating. You have stadiums who were once legendary for flashing lights to tell the batter what pick is coming. I could really go on all day about all the cheating. No one ever questions the legacy of the people who benefit from these. The bottom line is if bonds records and legacy is tarnished every player who has benefited from some sort of cheating must be tarnished. I'd be willing to bet that most of the records in the books would have some sort of * next to it.

View Poll Results: How would proven steroid use affect your view of Barry Bonds?
Steroids were not against MLB rules, no affect on Bonds legacy	7	11.29%
Steroids do not improve baseball ability, no affect	1	1.61%
Steroids affect on baseball ability is unknown, no affect	10	16.13%
His opponents were doing them too, no affect	4	6.45%
I never thought Bonds was a top 3 hitter, w/ or w/o steroids	4	6.45%
I never thought Bonds was a HoFer, w/ or w/o steroids	0	0%
I no longer count Bonds among the top 3 hitters of all time, but he's still a HoFer	17	27.42%
I don't recognize the validity of Bonds' records but he's still an exceptional hitter	27	43.55%
Bonds would no longer receive a HoF vote from me	15	24.19%
Other (explain fubes)	8	12.90%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 62. You may not vote on this poll

03-14-2006, 11:11 AM	#1
QuestGAV Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 2,010	Barry Bonds legacy vs steroid use Assuming that the allegations in Game of Shadows are true and given that 70% of the board members have agreed that no official sanctions are possible against Barry Bonds at this time, how does the steroid issue and the evidence provided in Game of Shadows affect your own personal view of Barry Bonds and his legacy as an MLB player?

03-14-2006, 11:19 AM	#2
jaxmagicman Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Retired defloration-maker living in Myrtle Beach, SC Posts: 7,801	I picked other, explain. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2122665 __________________ See ID Major League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of MLB Advanced Media, L.P. Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with the permission of Minor League Baseball. All rights reserved.

03-14-2006, 11:38 AM	#7
Ford Prefect Major Leagues Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Hamburg Posts: 470	I don't recognize the validity of Bonds' records but he's still an exceptional hitter Bonds would no longer receive a HoF vote from me i go with these two, he cheats eom __________________ I would pay 50 Dollars for BM 2006, if everybody does. Lets campain for higher but equal pricing, support a good product

03-14-2006, 11:43 AM	#8
Elendil Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: the dynasty forum Posts: 2,318	I went with these four: * Steroids' effect on baseball ability is unproven * Bonds not one of the top 3 hitters of all time (even if he never took steroids), but he's still an HoFer * I don't recognize the validity of Bonds' records but he's still an exceptional hitter (I don't recognize their validity because he tried to cheat, even if it didn't work) * Other (more or less because I think trying to cheat tarnishes Bonds' legacy but I'm not sure whether he would have done much worse without steroids) __________________ Heaven is kicking back with a double Talisker and a churchwarden stuffed with latakia.

03-14-2006, 11:20 AM	#3
Boozie1580 All Star Starter Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: MD Posts: 1,255	I no longer count Bonds among the top 3 hitters of all time, but he's still a HoFer. I don't recognize the validity of Bonds' records but he's still an exceptional hitter. I think Bonds is/was a fantastic hitter and the best of this era, even with the knowledge that he did steroids. However, I don't think it's fair to say that his enhanced numbers in the "steroid era" are valid records over the numbers of Aaron (if he gets there) or Maris.

03-14-2006, 11:59 AM	#10
Sublimity Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: This thread. Posts: 3,199	I don't know where my answer falls among the poll choices, but I would say if it's proven without a doubt that Bonds did steroids, he's still one of the top players of all time to me although his numbers lose a little of their luster to me. I don't know if it's enough to say that his records are tarnished; if he quit today, I wouldn't say something like "I don't recognize him as being the third-most-home-run-hitting player in history." I wouldn't make him ineligible for the HoF, but I still consider him one of the top three hitters of all time. While steroids weren't against MLB rules and I don't think MLB can punish him for them (unless he tests positive under the new guidelines), it does have the effect I mentioned on me. I think the biggest problem for me is that we don't know how steroids impacted him or anyone else (but there's still the effect, so that option isn't for me either). We don't know how different things would be if he hadn't taken him (if it's shown that he did -- and knowingly). We don't know how different things would be if nobody took them, or everybody took them, or more or fewer players took them. I think in the long run I'm not going to view his records any differently. I'll probably look at it the same way I look at Pete Rose: the numbers are there, the issue is separate. __________________ mrs ria: I hereby dub Sublimity the Glorious Upholder of the 5B3. Current leading vote-getter in the Worst Poster in OT History poll.

03-14-2006, 12:33 PM	#13
Hotblack Desiato Major Leagues Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 323	I don't feel that these choices are sufficiently encompassing. Steroids were not against MLB rules. Steroids' effect on baseball ability is unknown (i.e. not quantifiable). The overwhelming steroid allegations do, however, taint my view of him. I don't think any action should be taken against him because they weren't against the rules, but just because they weren't against the rules doesn't mean he wasn't getting an artificial advantage. If nothing else, it helped his knee heal, the knee that kept him out all last year while MLB was testing for steroids. That cost him an entire season. How much playing time has he added to his career? I no longer count Bonds among the 3 best hitters ever but he's still a HoFer. I don't recognise the validity of Bonds's records but he's still an exceptional hitter. Those two are the only two available options that accurately describe how I feel about the situation, but I also feel the need to qualify it with the previous two options, minus "no affect (sic)."

03-14-2006, 02:04 PM	#14
His Own Bad Self All Star Starter Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,221	Other: none of it matters. Sports don't matter anymore. They're worthless no matter what some guy did or didn't do.

03-15-2006, 08:05 AM	#19
ctorg Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Queens, NY Posts: 9,848	Basically, I think steroid use tarnishes his reputation greatly, especially if it's proven to any degree, but I think records he sets still stand. And, in time, he will not look quite as bad, I think. The coming years will bring many questions about performance enhancement. This is just the beginning. Within the lifetimes of some posters here, I think you'll see the ability to enhance the human body - without much or even any real harm - to a degree that this steroid use becomes small in comparison. This is really just the beginning. __________________ My music "When the trees blow back and forth, that's what makes the wind." - Steven Wright Fjord emena pancreas thorax fornicate marmalade morpheme proteolysis smaxa cabana offal srue vitriol grope hallelujah lentils

03-19-2006, 07:35 AM	#20
ihatenames Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Rockford Posts: 2,534	I picked other. I'm no fan of bonds, but the more i reflected on this, the more i've come to the same conclusion. Baseball players have been cheating since it began. You have guys taking cocaine, amphetamines, and various others. You have guys who corked bats and doctored balls, and other means of cheating. You have stadiums who were once legendary for flashing lights to tell the batter what pick is coming. I could really go on all day about all the cheating. No one ever questions the legacy of the people who benefit from these. The bottom line is if bonds records and legacy is tarnished every player who has benefited from some sort of cheating must be tarnished. I'd be willing to bet that most of the records in the books would have some sort of * next to it. __________________ New Album coming soon!