Barry Bonds hits #714

[HedleyLamarr]

I've yet to read the book either. However, if these writers aren't divulging their sources, why should I take second-hand information as undeniable truth? If these writers have nothing to hide, what's stopping them from telling us the names of who they interviewed and what all they know? Seems kind of fishy to me that they wouldn't give names as to who told them.

Then I take it you thought Nixon had no connection to the Watergate break-in up until a year ago or so when "Deep Throat" was revealed. After all, that story was broke and reported by using unnamed sources. Unnamed sources are used all the time in reporting and usually for legitimate reasons. I don't see how this would be any different.

Considering the fact a grand jury is investigating Bonds for perjury I would be willing to bet the book is pretty accurate.

Also your reasons for why Bonds is having so much access don't answer the question of why he is having career years at the age most ballplayers (notably his father) start to break down physically. Yes your reasons would give a small spike to the overall numbers which would mean one or two, 50 home run guys per year in the 90's and 2000 compared to the zero 50 home run guys in the 80's. And those guys most likely would be in there prime around 27-30 not over 35 years old.

The difference between Nixon-Watergate and Bonds-steroids is that there was definitive proof that Nixon was not only behind Watergate, but also tried his best to obstruct the FBI from doing their investigation. There weren't "unnamed sources" divulging information. Big difference.

Also your reasons for why Bonds is having so much access don't answer the question of why he is having career years at the age most ballplayers (notably his father) start to break down physically. Yes your reasons would give a small spike to the overall numbers which would mean one or two, 50 home run guys per year in the 90's and 2000 compared to the zero 50 home run guys in the 80's. And those guys most likely would be in there prime around 27-30 not over 35 years old.

Players have better training methods, perhaps? Players take care of their bodies in today's game. Back then, you'd go out and have a steak and a beer after each game. Nolan Ryan had some success while pitching into his 40's. The same for Roger Clemens. Chris Chelios is still one of the better defensemen in the NHL, and he's in his 40's. Julio Franco is 47 (at least), and he's one of the most fittest players in the game. Some athletes have bodies that don't break down until their mid-40's, even later. Hell, it can be argued that today's players are too finely tuned....

Barry has hit for 40+ HR's for 8 seasons: 1993 (46), 1996 (42), 1997 (40), 2000 (49), 2001 (73), 2002 (46), 2003 (45), and 2004 (45). In two other seasons, the strike season of 1994 and the year he was injured (1999), he would have easily passed 40 HR's. Take away the 73 HR season, and he still has 7 seasons of hitting 40+ HR's in a season and 6 other seasons where he hit 30-39 HR's. Going by these stats alone, it is perfectly clear that strength was never an issue with Barry.

People forget that Barry used to steal a lot of bases and collected a handful of Gold Gloves. Barry hasn't always been about hitting homeruns.

Like I said before, the media is looking for a huge name in sports to be caught using steroids, and they've targeted Bonds because he is closing in on the all-time HR record. The media could care less if some utility infielder or some long-relief pitcher tests positive, they want the biggest fish in the sea.

[FiddySicks]

Like I said before, the media is looking for a huge name in sports to be caught using steroids, and they've targeted Bonds because he is closing in on the all-time HR record. The media could care less if some utility infielder or some long-relief pitcher tests positive, they want the biggest fish in the sea.

You hit the nail right on the... Hedley.

[NJTank]

But Barry brought this on himself with his nasty disposition towards everyone

[jkrdevil]

Also your reasons for why Bonds is having so much access don't answer the question of why he is having career years at the age most ballplayers (notably his father) start to break down physically. Yes your reasons would give a small spike to the overall numbers which would mean one or two, 50 home run guys per year in the 90's and 2000 compared to the zero 50 home run guys in the 80's. And those guys most likely would be in there prime around 27-30 not over 35 years old.

Players have better training methods, perhaps? Players take care of their bodies in today's game. Back then, you'd go out and have a steak and a beer after each game. Nolan Ryan had some success while pitching into his 40's. The same for Roger Clemens. Chris Chelios is still one of the better defensemen in the NHL, and he's in his 40's. Julio Franco is 47 (at least), and he's one of the most fittest players in the game. Some athletes have bodies that don't break down until their mid-40's, even later. Hell, it can be argued that today's players are too finely tuned....

Barry has hit for 40+ HR's for 8 seasons: 1993 (46), 1996 (42), 1997 (40), 2000 (49), 2001 (73), 2002 (46), 2003 (45), and 2004 (45). In two other seasons, the strike season of 1994 and the year he was injured (1999), he would have easily passed 40 HR's. Take away the 73 HR season, and he still has 7 seasons of hitting 40+ HR's in a season and 6 other seasons where he hit 30-39 HR's. Going by these stats alone, it is perfectly clear that strength was never an issue with Barry.

People forget that Barry used to steal a lot of bases and collected a handful of Gold Gloves. Barry hasn't always been about hitting homeruns.

Like I said before, the media is looking for a huge name in sports to be caught using steroids, and they've targeted Bonds because he is closing in on the all-time HR record. The media could care less if some utility infielder or some long-relief pitcher tests positive, they want the biggest fish in the sea.

Yes players have better training methods. That means that they might be able to play a few years longer. However it wouldn't mean they would have career highs in their late 30's. If looking at a career like a graph it would still make an arc with the end of the career having a bit long slope. It wouldn't spike back up at the end of the career.

I never said Bonds wasn't a good player prior to taking steroids. He was a Hall of Famer and one of the best all of round playes in the game. He was never a 50 Home Run guy though. He was a 40-40 guys. However those guys weren't getting the attention anymore and juicers like McGwire were. So Bonds turned to Steroids.

Yes the media would like to see a big name player caught. A big name player helps bring attention to the issue which helps get the problem out. That said Bonds isn't being targetted. If Bonds did want all this around he shouldn't had a personal trainer that was a known juicer and who plead guilty to steroid distribution. Bonds should not have doen endorsements for a company who was found to giving top athletes steroids for their endorsements of the company.

How would you explain those things like his personal trainer pleading guilty on steroid charges, Bonds endorsing BALCO, and Bonds sudden weight gain all in muscle in 1 offseason (The 98-99 Offseason)? One can not do that no matter how much one lifts without steroids. The media didn't make those things up and they didn't come from unnamed sources.

[IceCap]

Like I said before, the media is looking for a huge name in sports to be caught using steroids, and they've targeted Bonds because he is closing in on the all-time HR record. The media could care less if some utility infielder or some long-relief pitcher tests positive, they want the biggest fish in the sea.

The media does want a big name to be busted for steroide use, but Bonds made it that much easier for them by ACTUALLY BEING GUILTY.

[The_Admiral]

[Yes players have better training methods. That means that they might be able to play a few years longer. However it wouldn't mean they would have career highs in their late 30's. If looking at a career like a graph it would still make an arc with the end of the career having a bit long slope. It wouldn't spike back up at the end of the career.

I think I'll do this in Excel and see how it looks. HRs, average, RBIs, few other metrics, let's see what we get.

[Roger Clemente]

Over/Under on the number of posts in this thread before Barry hits 715: I'll say 103.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.