Link

[sarcasm] [/sarcasm]

Haha yea I know it's obvious, but it's beautiful to finally see it in writing

agreed

Just wondering how many people care? Well what I really mean is that even if he did...does that suddenly mean hes not good , he sucks or soemthing? Thats what I assume people think but I dunno...

Na he's obviously a great hitter...Steroids can't inmprove hand-eye-coordination, which it takes alot of to hit a 90mph pitch, but alot of those homers he and McGuire hit would have stayed in the park. There is a huge difference in the amount of homer he hit in the beginning of his career compared to recent seasons.

But to answer your question it makes him a fraud...IMHO

this is really old news.. most people knew about this testimony last year.. he said he didn't know they were steriods..

Well true but , common really to me it seems it only had one big homer season , the one he broke the record the others werent special really as far as home runs go.

quite sad that he didnt know really, I feel sorry for him.

yea thats true, but recent seasons have just been a huge turn around compared to when he was younger. I mean he's hit like 50 homers every season for the past 5 years maybe? I'm not sure if that is accurate or not, but I'm willing to bet it's close.

If you guys actually believe that he "didn't know" he was taking steroids then I have a beautiful piece of land in the everglades to sell you

How do you not notice that rapid gain in weight, strength, and an increase of two sizes in your baseball cap...I mean your head isn't supposed to grow any when your 35 years old

All I can say about that is hes either that good or hes the only one to take advantage of steriods fully haha and no one else has ever been able to.

haha...yea i bet half those dudes are all juiced up. especially olympians.

i'm not completely stupid... i know he knew, but he can say he didn't know until the cows come home and he'll be alright..

haha true...wouldn't be suprised if nothing comes of this (concerning Bonds)

its been known that he has used steroids a long with mark mcguire and ken caminiti.

Hehe...no there isn't. He's NEVER hit very long home runs. Nothing like Mcguire.



Go check out his hr totals for the past 10 years, THEN come back and talk. Here's a hint....your not close.

yes it isnt big deal in the big picture of everything , but its just give all the people who hate bonds or who doesnt want him to be known as the best something to say.

Barry Bonds Stat Page@ cbs.sportsline.com


Heres a hint...Look at the numbers increase not only in HR but in slugging...and he was hovering around 50 homers since 2000. BTW what does hitting long homers have to do with anything?

Your right , but again thats not something I would say is so amazing that he coulnt do , man I think the stuff besides the home runs , like batting avg , walks , make you say whoa... now that I think of it mabye the walks are the reason he doesnt average almost 60 a year.

He hit 46 in 1993 and has been pretty consistant since then.

yup...like i said he's definately a great ball player...but his first 5 years he hit 16,25,24,19, and 33 homers...then the last five years he hits 49, 73,46,45, and 45 homers, at that age you don't just start slamming homers left and right. But I think your definately right though.

You're the one who brought up the long home runs, so I responded

His HR total hasn't increased. He's been steady for the past 10+ years. Also, his slugging percentage is up because his batting average is way up. Walks don't count in slugging percentage, so he's getting many more singles and doubles than ever before. His K/at bat is QUITE a bit lower than when he was younger.



Why not? We've seen what Randy Johnson and Clemens can do at that age. We've seen what Jerry Rice can do at that age.

I didn't say anything about long homers?...but your right that he has been steady for a while, but I would think that is because he hit his physical peak then started using roids to keep up the performance.

On top of that, he testified using, what he didn't know was steroids, only in 2003. Show me how those steroids enhanced his season any. Show me the terrible season he had when he came off the roids, like Giambi had. Despite the steroid talk, the buy is clearly a great player, and it seems the roids didn't help him at all.

steriods in my mind have nothing to do with his performance seriously, or atleast not that much Imo.

yeah it just turned bonds from a really good player into maybe the greatest of all time

This is news? Duh.

But he cheated. Plain and simple. He is tarnished. Whoever breaks Hank Aaron's record will not be Barry Bonds.

He did? What did he do, throw the ball over the fence?

Considering everyone chasing Aaron's record broke at some point (Griffey, McGuire) and Bonds hasn't, and is a good overall hitter and can still run... I doubt he's been very juiced. IMO, we don't pay these guys insane salaries to watch them be mediocre.

lol at his quote

what a suprise that is

I don't care if he took the steriods..he was HOF bound before 2000. He'll still make the HOF, which in my book, is where the legend is made.

because I have never watch him seen him or know who he is.

Last time I checked, steroids are a banned substance. Therefore, he did indeed cheat. Much like using a corked bat or doctoring a baseball.

You are kidding, right? He used steroids. That's cheating. Plain and simple. Performance enhancing drugs. Doesn't come any more simple than that.

"I doubt he's been very juiced" -- What a comment. You might as well say: "I doubt he cheated all the time"

BOOG: I'm glad someone else see's it the way I do too.

So you're going to go back a discredit every player who has ever done it? It's pointless. The drug questionably beneficial, and it puts most every hitter in the last 10 years in question.

Like I said, I don't blame them for taking it. The public expects players to keep getting better, otherwise they lose interest in the game. Bonds, juiced or not, is a great hitter. When he breaks Aaron's record, all the better for him. Maybe they will drop an * next to his name. Who cares. There should be one next to Ruth's as well, noting he got pitched softballs compared to todays game. There should be on next to Aaron's name saying he hit his final homers through a barrage of deaths

Consider the point missed completely.

Fine. Ruth hit softballs. He didn't cheat.

Fine. Aaron hit final homers through a barrage of deaths (whatever the heck that means). He didn't cheat.

Bonds cheated. That can never be debated.

Others do cheat. I don't debate that, and if they get caught, they should be punished as well, and their statistical integrity questioned.

My point was, different eras, different game. If Bonds was like many hitters of his generation, but wasn't approaching a record, no one would care. Notice how Sosa gets off the hook so much easier, even though statistically he's seen the same change as Bonds. You expect these hitters to be better, and then question their methods when they actually are good.

My point in comparing other hitters was that, if you want to compare them, give them equal credit for the homers they hit. Maybe Ruth would only hit 200 in todays game. Maybe Aaron deserves 1,000 for the pressure he was under. But are you going to say Bonds deserves none of the homeruns he hit? Or half? I still say, in todays game, he deserved every one he hit.

The fact ppl consider him a HOF'er after he admitted to using steroids, but the greatest hitter of all time is not a HOF'er cause of something he did, when he wasnt even a player is astounding. He should be forever tainted, and all his records should be noted as such.

If you cheat you cheat, period. Any creditability you have is gone.

yea you guys are right, he has hit a constant amount of homeruns for the past 10 or so years. except, his ab's have gone down for the most part. which means his homeruns per at bat has gone up. lets compare 1993 with 2002. same number of homeruns, 46. HOWEVER his abs 539 in 1993 with 403 in 2002. over a hundred less ab's yet the same amount of homeruns. what does that say there. so when most people are gettin older and weaker, he is getting larger and larger.

Find the average HR/AB rate in 1993 and 2002 for all players. He's not alone.

yea but im sure his ratio is much greater then anyone elses. even look at the year when he hit 45 homeruns and had like 371 ab's. almost a 200 difference from 93
ill make anyone a 20 dollar bet that noone is close to that ratio

Bonds: 9098AB 703 HR 12.9 AB/HR

McGwire: 6187AB 583 HR 10.6 AB/HR

Me too. I wasn't suprised when he started getting enormous. Seriously, look at pictures of him when he played for the Pirates and look at him now. He looks like he hit a super-growth spurt. Theres no way you go through that kind of physical change and not know something is up.

MLB says PEACE.

Bonds: 9098AB 703 HR 12.9 AB/HR

McGwire: 6187AB 583 HR 10.6 AB/HR

ok almost had a point there, BUT, im not talking career ratios. im talking season ratios. of one season to another. meaning, comparing ratio of amount of homeruns lets say 30 with ab's lets say 500. to the same player diff year. 30 homruns to 300 ab's. not career.

Thought this was worth posting again....

Well bonds did cheat but neverthless he still will go down as the greatest...

As far as the walk numbers go who cares your right? Its more about the picthes he gets to hit all are mostly crap therefore the sports center focuses on the walk stat aka crap picthes which do matter.

THey should strip him of his batting Title Now.........