Printable View
[ QUOTE ]
he needs 52 without roids and he said hes retiring after this year no matter wat...so yea....i doubt it
[/ QUOTE ]
You're assuming that he'll be without steroids AND without HGH as well. Off the Roids? Sure--I'll believe that. He's been tested and came through clean. Not using HGH? Not sure I can buy that.
he didnt say he was retiring after this year, usa today misquoted him.
He said if his legs dont hold up and hes not having fun, he will retire at the end of the year.
He doesnt need 52, he needs 48 I believe.
i think he has 408 but idk
Actually he changed his mind, he said if his body was well enough to play after this year he would. If it wasn't, he wouldn't.
They were all on steroids, Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, Giambi, etc. Its foolish in my eyes to not think so, there comes a point where your body stops growing on its own, at their age, to grow so quickly shows signs of doping. If you have ever seen them in person you would know what I mean, I saw Bonds 10 ft from me in street clothes and he is one if not the biggest person I have ever seen.
They was no rule against steroids, all had the choice to use or not to use.
[ QUOTE ]
first of all the comment about golfers being more active is rediculous. .. Sure the actuall game is not that tough but preparing for the game every single day is a task nonetheless. It is also important to remember that when you get walked in a game it doesnt count as an at bat.
[/ QUOTE ]Are all your statements so fact filled? [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I wanted him to chase Jordan around, remember? And the "walk" arguement is a lil' lame- NONE of the other hitters EVER got walks. And Babe Ruth never struck out either.... [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] As far as at-bats I was talking about the number of times you might have to RUN the bases, so walking would kinda be like me getting a long lunch.
Here is an excerpt from an editorial that I read today, I thought it was interesting.
1. Unfortunately, this time in baseball will be known as the "Steroids Era". MLB and the Players Union are at least as guilty as any individual player for allowing this to happen. It has been the accepted culture of the game, and MOST players of the time - pitchers and hitters - undoubtedly took advantage of it. Oh, and by the way, the fans loved it.
2. Despite such widespread use,. NOT ONE player put up numbers remotely close to the offensive numbers Bonds put up. You need to compare players by the era in which they played; Bonds is simply the best player of his time...by far. And if you think he doesn't belong in the HOF, then nobody does from the "Steroid Era" because we simply don't know who's been a user and who hasn't. Perhaps we should pretend there was no baseball during this period?
3. Since pitchers took steroids as well, how does that factor in the equation? After all, Ruth, Williams and Mays didn't have to face pitchers who took steroids. Perhaps Bonds should get some extra credit for that?
4. As for the claim that Bonds is a cheater, keep in mind that steroids were not banned in baseball until 2003. So neither Bonds nor any other player cheated before that time (yes, they broke laws, but did not cheat under baseball rules). There is NO evidence whatsoever that Bonds used steroids once the game banned them. That is pure conjecture.
5. Bonds is being singled out and crucified for two reasons: 1) He has a prickly personality (i.e he's a jerk), and 2) he holds the single-season record for HRs and will most likely break Aaron's career HR record as well. If he was nicer and not quite so good, he wouldn't be attacked like this. Not really fair.
6. People make too big of a deal of Aaron's record anyway. Comparing career numbers across eras is impossible. Does anybody really think Aaron, with 4000 more at-bats, was a better power hitter than Ruth? Of course not. There are a ton of factors that go into career numbers; Bonds' probable use of steroids is just one more of them. We can argue all we want as to how Bonds' career numbers compare to others, but one point is inarguable: Bonds is a player for the ages who would have been great in any era. Just like Aaron. Just like Ruth.
7. Baseball fans who berate and belittle Bonds are really missing a great show. Love him or hate him, Bonds may be the greatest hitter in history; at a minimum he is the best since Ted Williams and the third best ever behind Williams and Ruth. Enjoy it! We may never see a hitter as great as Bonds again. And steroids alone simply don't explain his brilliance. Give credit where credit is due and recognize such critical factors as his extraordinary hand-eye coordination, beautiful swing, unbelievable discipline to lay off pitches out of the strike zone, profound baseball intelligence, incredible work ethic, etc.
Whether or not you like it or want to accept it...he is going to break both Ruth's and Aaron's records and he will be in the Hall.
Don't forget the "closer" ,I don't think too many of the old guys had to ever face the last inning ace. [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
money says he dont break his records....is it legal to say that?