Barry Bonds home run record

[cr]

Barry only needs 42 homers to beat Hanks record, and he hits on a average of 45 a season. Do you think that Barry will beat it?

[valerie]

Originally Posted by cr

Barry only needs 42 homers to beat Hanks record, and he hits on a average of 45 a season. Do you think that Barry will beat it?

I'm thinkin' maybe not this year, I don't like the way he's been talkin' about
his knee not being quite right yet. 'Course, maybe that'll work itself out
over time/training but if it doesn't... a thing like that can really throw you
off.

Would be nice if he DID, though, I think.

[greydeadhead]

Well.. it depends on how good his BALCO scripts work this year.... bwahahahahahahahahaha

[Tombstone]

Originally Posted by cr

Barry only needs 42 homers to beat Hanks record, and he hits on a average of 45 a season. Do you think that Barry will beat it?

The question is: If he does, will it be talent or steroids?

What is the consensus now? Did he or didn't he?!

[jahamaa]

We make too much of records. You can't compare a feat done in 2004 with something done in the 1970's or the 1950's. Sports technology changes way too much over the years.

Steriods work. Thats why people use them. Years ago I lived in the gym. Saw guys come in, hit the wieghts for a while and then get impatient, get on steriods and in just a few months they would be amoung the biggest guys in the gym.

I think you have to be a little suspect concerning records set by sports figures that use drugs.
Did he or didn't he? don't know but it sure looks bad in my opinion,

[Bothwell]

Surely his record cannot stand ? Was he clean when he did it. I love baseball, we don't see much of it over here. I would be highly suspicious of his records as to whether they were drug assisted.

Has anyone read Jose Canseco's book yet ?

BTW, excuse my ignorance but would Bonds be elected to Hall of fame ? should he or any other player who has been proven to use steroids be allowed in. If he gets in I am going to lobby for my hero Shoeless Joe Jackson, he may have taken the money but he never threw a game and he tried to give it back!!

From a limey MLB fan

[anastrophe]

since it has not been proven (yet) whether or not he used steriods, his record and his nomination to the hall of fame aren't (yet) in question.

Originally Posted by Bothwell

Surely his record cannot stand ? Was he clean when he did it. I love baseball, we don't see much of it over here. I would be highly suspicious of his records as to whether they were drug assisted.

Has anyone read Jose Canseco's book yet ?

BTW, excuse my ignorance but would Bonds be elected to Hall of fame ? should he or any other player who has been proven to use steroids be allowed in. If he gets in I am going to lobby for my hero Shoeless Joe Jackson, he may have taken the money but he never threw a game and he tried to give it back!!

From a limey MLB fan

[jahamaa]

Originally Posted by Bothwell

Surely his record cannot stand ? Was he clean when he did it. I love baseball, we don't see much of it over here. I would be highly suspicious of his records as to whether they were drug assisted.

Has anyone read Jose Canseco's book yet ?

BTW, excuse my ignorance but would Bonds be elected to Hall of fame ? should he or any other player who has been proven to use steroids be allowed in. If he gets in I am going to lobby for my hero Shoeless Joe Jackson, he may have taken the money but he never threw a game and he tried to give it back!!

From a limey MLB fan

Bothwell, I don't know how old you are or how long you have been a baseball fan but I think the power aspect which is enhanced by steriods has ruined the game.
Everything is geared to the long ball. When I was young, back in the stone age,
every kid not only knew who was leading the homerun race but who had the most stolen bases, who had the top batting average, who was turning the most double plays.
Most kids nowadays have no idea who gets a gold glove.
One of the sports channels here in the US did a show on how the game has changed just since the 60's and I was really surprised by some of what I heard.
For instance the average length of a game was 1 and 1/2 hrs compare to the 2 and 1/2 or better today . The winning pitcher threw an average of 75 pitches and pitched 7 or better innings much less than today. ( Strike zone was bigger forcing the batter to swing away).

Sparky Anderson was interviewed and said put the strike zone back where it belongs and you would see more bunts, hit and runs, squeeze plays in other words more action.

Guess I'm showing my age huh?

Will he make it to the Hall? Sure. M-O-N-E-Y

[Bothwell]

I Guess a lot of sports are changed by the mighty $/£ whatever your currency is. I suppose the thinking is that the spectacular long hit is better TV than the more nuanced subtle play therefore it means more advertisers.

Over here it has happened to cricket, I am not going to explain how a game that lasts 5 days can still be a draw but there are subtle things happening all the time, however they have invented oneday and even half day games that are all bish bosh bash so it can fit neatly into the sports schedule.

Of course it may be that I am just a grumpy old fart who thinks everything was better years ago!

[RedSoxFan]

I think that until there is PROOF that Barry did any kind of steroid, then his record should stand. I have followed baseball for all my life and coach it aswell for a local high school. The question is if he used steroids or not? All I can say is that players all of a sudden having a breakout yera like he did in 2001 when he set the record will always be questioned. Especially when this breakout was in his late 30's almost 40's. Steroids have been around for over 100 years. Although they were not easy to get in the US before 1960, if you had money, you could get them easily.

Lets do a comparison: Barry vs. Ruth

In the early 1900, 1921 to be exact, Ruth hit an amazing 59 homeruns. Followed by 60 in 1927. Before he hit this insaen amount, his previous career high wasnt even 35. So basically thats a jump in 24 homeruns in one year.

Barry hit his career high of 49 homeruns in 2000, breaking his old mark of
45(i believe) Then in 2001 he hit his record 73. Hmmm. thats the exact same numder of increase in homeruns. 24.

Now, like I said before in the early 1900's steroids were hard to find in the US but could be atained by the person who wanted them.

Is it safe to question the Babe too? I would never think that the Babe did this kind of activity but the comparison speaks for itself.

What are your thoughts on that?