Bonds would play for free

[Jehrico]

It's the equivalent of saying well some guys your age have raped little girls so I'm going to call every guy your age a rapist.

 

It's actually nothing like that at all.

 

If Bonds is playing and he gets caught, he should be punished. He got away with what he did, just like thousands of other players got away with breaking the rules over the years.

 

Except for if no one signs him then he wouldn't get away with it.

 

Why, does it somehow magically go back and erase the last few years he played and the money he made and the records he broke?

No, but he may get a chance to ponder those excellent questions in prison sometime in the not-to-distant future. It's too early to say Bonds got away with it, he may end up paying more than anyone since Pete Rose.

[CubbieBum]

It's the equivalent of saying well some guys your age have raped little girls so I'm going to call every guy your age a rapist.

 

It's actually nothing like that at all.

 

If Bonds is playing and he gets caught, he should be punished. He got away with what he did, just like thousands of other players got away with breaking the rules over the years.

 

Except for if no one signs him then he wouldn't get away with it.

 

Why, does it somehow magically go back and erase the last few years he played and the money he made and the records he broke?

No, but he may get a chance to ponder those excellent questions in prison sometime in the not-to-distant future. It's too early to say Bonds got away with it, he may end up paying more than anyone since Pete Rose.

 

I'm pretty sure he will get at the least the punishment Rose got because he will likely never get voted into the hall.

[CubbieBum]

CubbieBum's comparisons are hilarious.

 

They are purposeful extreme scenarios that have a similar situation in very different circumstances. It's true someone who cheats at his job won't be hired in that same job again (stockbrokers are probably a better example than I'm hot for the teacher examples). Plus I spned about 2 seconds thinking or an example.

[CubbieBum]

CubbieBum's comparisons are hilarious.

 

They are purposeful extreme scenarios that have a similar situation in very different circumstances. It's true someone who cheats at his job won't be hired in that same job again (stockbrokers are probably a better example than I'm hot for the teacher examples). Plus I spned about 2 seconds thinking or an example.

[fromthestretch]

To the Bonds issue can you guys seriously not see the difference between supporting someone you believe to be legit and signing/supporting someone who has admitted (according to the leaked testimony) to having cheated in order to obtain two of the most hallowed records in the sport (single-season and career). Bonds hasn't been punished for his cheating ... at least he wouldn't be if a team signed him. His punishment is no team willing to sign him, he has been blacklisted due to his preivous cheating.

 

So do you think teams should release a player that's been caught, or do you fell the punishments put in place by MLB are sufficient?

 

And whoever the guy who brought up how I can know for sure the Spurs haven't cheated ... I can't but I'm not going to say well f-it and assume every team has cheated somewhere. That's not a good way to live life, enveloping everyone in the umbrela of blame because a few decided to ignore every principle in the book. The Spurs (who are my rival) have won multiple championships and have done it with class, hard work, by being one of the first to trust foreign players, and have never had a scandal other than a ref deciding he hates them (particulary Duncan). To be quite honest your non chalant casting of them cheating really pisses me off. It's the equivalent of saying well some guys your age have raped little girls so I'm going to call every guy your age a rapist.

 

Do you truly believe it was only a few that cheated? The number of people that have been caught isn't close to the number of people that actually did it. For the record, I didn't accuse the Spurs of cheating, but to just assume they're squeaky clean is naive. If my statement pisses you off, then you're taking this WAY too seriously. If the Cubs won it all with OR without Bonds and someone accused them of cheating, I wouldn't get pissed off. I'd be too busy enjoying the fact that the Cubs won a World Series. And as others have mentioned, your analogy of rapists is ridiculously off base and not even anything remotely like what we're discussing here. I mean, seriously...you're comparing players who have cheated at a sport to someone who essentially destroys the life of a child?

 

The fact of the matter is that people have been looking for an "illegal" edge in competition throughout the history of sports. Just in baseball alone, pitchers threw spitballs/scuffed balls, hitters doctored their bats, took greenies, injected themselves with steroids and the like. I guess I shouldn't type in past tense since that stuff still goes on, and it will continue to go on. Players will continue to find better ways to cheat. In my opinion, it's hypocritical to admonish Bonds for what he's done when you've certainly (possibly unknowingly) rooted for several athletes who have done the same thing, regardless of whether the team knew about it or not (and in many cases, I would bet money that they knew).

[Tyrant]

1.000 OPS. Pretty much guaranteed. Who gives a damn what he does in the field.

 

I do. He'd cost us a ton of runs in left, which would mitigate a lot of his offense.

 

I know many people are against this idea because of the off-field reasons, but I'm against it because I'm not so sure Bonds is the 1.000 OPS lock that many of you think he is. He's been away from the game for almost a year, he's almost 44 years old and he's probably not in game shape. I think he'd still be able to put up decent numbers -- maybe a ~.900 OPS. But with his awful defense and the other potential headaches, I don't think it's worth it.

[CubbieBum]

To the Bonds issue can you guys seriously not see the difference between supporting someone you believe to be legit and signing/supporting someone who has admitted (according to the leaked testimony) to having cheated in order to obtain two of the most hallowed records in the sport (single-season and career). Bonds hasn't been punished for his cheating ... at least he wouldn't be if a team signed him. His punishment is no team willing to sign him, he has been blacklisted due to his preivous cheating.

 

So do you think teams should release a player that's been caught, or do you fell the punishments put in place by MLB are sufficient?

 

And whoever the guy who brought up how I can know for sure the Spurs haven't cheated ... I can't but I'm not going to say well f-it and assume every team has cheated somewhere. That's not a good way to live life, enveloping everyone in the umbrela of blame because a few decided to ignore every principle in the book. The Spurs (who are my rival) have won multiple championships and have done it with class, hard work, by being one of the first to trust foreign players, and have never had a scandal other than a ref deciding he hates them (particulary Duncan). To be quite honest your non chalant casting of them cheating really pisses me off. It's the equivalent of saying well some guys your age have raped little girls so I'm going to call every guy your age a rapist.

 

Do you truly believe it was only a few that cheated? The number of people that have been caught isn't close to the number of people that actually did it. For the record, I didn't accuse the Spurs of cheating, but to just assume they're squeaky clean is naive. If my statement pisses you off, then you're taking this WAY too seriously. If the Cubs won it all with OR without Bonds and someone accused them of cheating, I wouldn't get pissed off. I'd be too busy enjoying the fact that the Cubs won a World Series. And as others have mentioned, your analogy of rapists is ridiculously off base and not even anything remotely like what we're discussing here. I mean, seriously...you're comparing players who have cheated at a sport to someone who essentially destroys the life of a child?

 

The fact of the matter is that people have been looking for an "illegal" edge in competition throughout the history of sports. Just in baseball alone, pitchers threw spitballs/scuffed balls, hitters doctored their bats, took greenies, injected themselves with steroids and the like. I guess I shouldn't type in past tense since that stuff still goes on, and it will continue to go on. Players will continue to find better ways to cheat. In my opinion, it's hypocritical to admonish Bonds for what he's done when you've certainly (possibly unknowingly) rooted for several athletes who have done the same thing, regardless of whether the team knew about it or not (and in many cases, I would bet money that they knew).

 

 

In the NBA yes. Steroids aren't going to do a whole lot for you in the NBA becasue strength its all too important. Athleticism and shooting are the two most important things.

 

The way you talk it seems you don't think anyone should be punished. When we find out someone has purposefully taken HGH or some other steroid to be good then they should be out. I don't support anyone that I know has done so and Bonds is one of the few we know has. Signing him makes everything he did ok and that is foolish and irresponsible as an organization. And while they are both very wrong there is a difference to me between cheating with a spitball and cheating with steroids. Only one of those are you still using your natural ability. Like I said I condemn both but taking steroids is much worse.

[Derwood]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only thing he's been caught doing is lying to a grand jury, right?

[Lefty]

Even under the best of circumstances he was, by all accounts, a clubhouse cancer.

 

Not true! His teammates liked him except for Jeff Kent. Is that an indictment? I have spent some quality time with a former SF Giants coach and what you say simply isn't true.

[fromthestretch]

In the NBA yes. Steroids aren't going to do a whole lot for you in the NBA becasue strength its all too important. Athleticism and shooting are the two most important things.

 

Steroids aid muscle recovery. It's not all just about adding bulk. To say they wouldn't benefit an NBA player is false.

 

The way you talk it seems you don't think anyone should be punished. When we find out someone has purposefully taken HGH or some other steroid to be good then they should be out. I don't support anyone that I know has done so and Bonds is one of the few we know has. Signing him makes everything he did ok and that is foolish and irresponsible as an organization.

 

Actually, I'm all for punishing those that are caught. I'd much prefer the sport to be clean, but I'm not going to pin the blame on one person when many were doing it. I don't believe any records are tainted nor should they be marked with an asterisk. It's called the steroid era because several people used them, not just Bonds. If you believe the wide-spread theory that he didn't start taking them until after the '98 season, then you can safely assume he hit quite a few homes before then off of pitchers that were on something. There is a reason MLB hasn't officially punished Bonds. Read into that what you will.

[Jehrico]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only thing he's been caught doing is lying to a grand jury, right?

The lie he was supposedly caught in was that he said he didn't knowingly use (one of, I don't recall which) steroids or HGH.

[Derwood]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only thing he's been caught doing is lying to a grand jury, right?

The lie he was supposedly caught in was that he said he didn't knowingly use (one of, I don't recall which) steroids or HGH.

 

right, I know. but the fact is he's never tested positive. it's still an innocent until proven guilty thing.

[Jehrico]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only thing he's been caught doing is lying to a grand jury, right?

The lie he was supposedly caught in was that he said he didn't knowingly use (one of, I don't recall which) steroids or HGH.

 

right, I know. but the fact is he's never tested positive. it's still an innocent until proven guilty thing.

The DA apparently has enough proof that he lied, or he wouldn't be getting indicted. If the DA is right, and he gets proven guilty in a court of law over the claim that he never knowingly used steroids or HGH, then that is worse than a positive test. With a positive test, he can still say he didn't know what he was taking. If he gets found guilty here, that proves he not only did it, but he was 100% aware of what it was he was taking as well. There's still no test for HGH, not testing positive has little bearing in this argument.

[CubbieBum]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only thing he's been caught doing is lying to a grand jury, right?

The lie he was supposedly caught in was that he said he didn't knowingly use (one of, I don't recall which) steroids or HGH.

 

right, I know. but the fact is he's never tested positive. it's still an innocent until proven guilty thing.

 

He said he didn't knowly take them but that would mean he has taken them he just don't know it was them. It's hard to believe someone allowing a needle to go into his butt without finding out what it is first. Especially a egocentric control freak like Bonds.

[CubbieBum]

In the NBA yes. Steroids aren't going to do a whole lot for you in the NBA becasue strength its all too important. Athleticism and shooting are the two most important things.

 

Steroids aid muscle recovery. It's not all just about adding bulk. To say they wouldn't benefit an NBA player is false.

 

The way you talk it seems you don't think anyone should be punished. When we find out someone has purposefully taken HGH or some other steroid to be good then they should be out. I don't support anyone that I know has done so and Bonds is one of the few we know has. Signing him makes everything he did ok and that is foolish and irresponsible as an organization.

 

Actually, I'm all for punishing those that are caught. I'd much prefer the sport to be clean, but I'm not going to pin the blame on one person when many were doing it. I don't believe any records are tainted nor should they be marked with an asterisk. It's called the steroid era because several people used them, not just Bonds. If you believe the wide-spread theory that he didn't start taking them until after the '98 season, then you can safely assume he hit quite a few homes before then off of pitchers that were on something. There is a reason MLB hasn't officially punished Bonds. Read into that what you will.

 

 

Try rereading what I said. I said steroids wouldn't help NBA players as much. That is pretty easy to see. Yes they could be aided in getting back healthy sooner but after tat they are on their own natural ability meanwhile steroids can help baseball, and football guys add bulk and improve bat speed.

 

Bonds has admitted to having taken them just claims he didn't know he was. He has been caught and he should be punished. The only way left is to blacklist him. Any other player who admits or is caught of purposefully using steroids to get ahead (I'm not talking every positive test because many of them are a result of a drug that didn't list an ingrediant that was banned). I have a lot of respect for Jason Giambi because he admitted to it and that takes guts especially in New York but I'm rather surprised he has just been allowed to keep playing. To me its a bit of a double standard by Selig (no surprise there). Rose has admitted his wrong doing why is he still being punished, that's the best example I can come up with. Giambi cheated, and admitted to it, I don't see why no one tried to get him banned which is how MLB has typically treated such situations before.

[FergieJ31]

Even under the best of circumstances he was, by all accounts, a clubhouse cancer.

 

Not true! His teammates liked him except for Jeff Kent. Is that an indictment? I have spent some quality time with a former SF Giants coach and what you say simply isn't true.

 

Yeah that particular statement was totally unnecessary and irrelevant to the rest of my argument, even if it were true. My only assertion is that failing to sign Bonds is simply good business. For a GM to risk alienating a good chunk of the fan base and subjecting the rest of the team to the inevitable media frenzy ... it simply isn't worth what kind of numbers Bonds *might* put up. And expecting anywhere near 1000 OPS really is a stretch, all things considered.

[fromthestretch]

In the NBA yes. Steroids aren't going to do a whole lot for you in the NBA becasue strength its all too important. Athleticism and shooting are the two most important things.

 

Steroids aid muscle recovery. It's not all just about adding bulk. To say they wouldn't benefit an NBA player is false.

 

The way you talk it seems you don't think anyone should be punished. When we find out someone has purposefully taken HGH or some other steroid to be good then they should be out. I don't support anyone that I know has done so and Bonds is one of the few we know has. Signing him makes everything he did ok and that is foolish and irresponsible as an organization.

 

Actually, I'm all for punishing those that are caught. I'd much prefer the sport to be clean, but I'm not going to pin the blame on one person when many were doing it. I don't believe any records are tainted nor should they be marked with an asterisk. It's called the steroid era because several people used them, not just Bonds. If you believe the wide-spread theory that he didn't start taking them until after the '98 season, then you can safely assume he hit quite a few homes before then off of pitchers that were on something. There is a reason MLB hasn't officially punished Bonds. Read into that what you will.

 

 

Try rereading what I said. I said steroids wouldn't help NBA players as much. That is pretty easy to see. Yes they could be aided in getting back healthy sooner but after tat they are on their own natural ability meanwhile steroids can help baseball, and football guys add bulk and improve bat speed.

 

Bonds has admitted to having taken them just claims he didn't know he was. He has been caught and he should be punished. The only way left is to blacklist him. Any other player who admits or is caught of purposefully using steroids to get ahead (I'm not talking every positive test because many of them are a result of a drug that didn't list an ingrediant that was banned). I have a lot of respect for Jason Giambi because he admitted to it and that takes guts especially in New York but I'm rather surprised he has just been allowed to keep playing. To me its a bit of a double standard by Selig (no surprise there). Rose has admitted his wrong doing why is he still being punished, that's the best example I can come up with. Giambi cheated, and admitted to it, I don't see why no one tried to get him banned which is how MLB has typically treated such situations before.

 

I did read what you said. You said steroids wouldn't do a whole lot and implied that steroids only add strength, which isn't the case. My apologies if I misunderstood what you were trying to say, but reading it again, that's the only interpretation I can come up with.

 

As for why Giambi didn't get banned, the punishment for steroids is a suspension, the length of which increases with each offense. And for the record, when he first admitted it, he didn't really come out and say what he was owning up to...just that he was "sorry." As for why Rose is still being punished, the consequences for betting on baseball were posted in every freaking locker room. He knew it would result in a lifetime ban, and that's exactly what happened.

 

Obviously, I'm not going to change your mind here, so be it. I'm just trying to understand why someone would seriously consider withdrawing their support for their favorite team because of one player. No big deal.

[CubbieBum]

In the NBA yes. Steroids aren't going to do a whole lot for you in the NBA becasue strength its all too important. Athleticism and shooting are the two most important things.

 

Steroids aid muscle recovery. It's not all just about adding bulk. To say they wouldn't benefit an NBA player is false.

 

The way you talk it seems you don't think anyone should be punished. When we find out someone has purposefully taken HGH or some other steroid to be good then they should be out. I don't support anyone that I know has done so and Bonds is one of the few we know has. Signing him makes everything he did ok and that is foolish and irresponsible as an organization.

 

Actually, I'm all for punishing those that are caught. I'd much prefer the sport to be clean, but I'm not going to pin the blame on one person when many were doing it. I don't believe any records are tainted nor should they be marked with an asterisk. It's called the steroid era because several people used them, not just Bonds. If you believe the wide-spread theory that he didn't start taking them until after the '98 season, then you can safely assume he hit quite a few homes before then off of pitchers that were on something. There is a reason MLB hasn't officially punished Bonds. Read into that what you will.

 

 

Try rereading what I said. I said steroids wouldn't help NBA players as much. That is pretty easy to see. Yes they could be aided in getting back healthy sooner but after tat they are on their own natural ability meanwhile steroids can help baseball, and football guys add bulk and improve bat speed.

 

Bonds has admitted to having taken them just claims he didn't know he was. He has been caught and he should be punished. The only way left is to blacklist him. Any other player who admits or is caught of purposefully using steroids to get ahead (I'm not talking every positive test because many of them are a result of a drug that didn't list an ingrediant that was banned). I have a lot of respect for Jason Giambi because he admitted to it and that takes guts especially in New York but I'm rather surprised he has just been allowed to keep playing. To me its a bit of a double standard by Selig (no surprise there). Rose has admitted his wrong doing why is he still being punished, that's the best example I can come up with. Giambi cheated, and admitted to it, I don't see why no one tried to get him banned which is how MLB has typically treated such situations before.

 

I did read what you said. You said steroids wouldn't do a whole lot and implied that steroids only add strength, which isn't the case. My apologies if I misunderstood what you were trying to say, but reading it again, that's the only interpretation I can come up with.

 

As for why Giambi didn't get banned, the punishment for steroids is a suspension, the length of which increases with each offense. And for the record, when he first admitted it, he didn't really come out and say what he was owning up to...just that he was "sorry." As for why Rose is still being punished, the consequences for betting on baseball were posted in every freaking locker room. He knew it would result in a lifetime ban, and that's exactly what happened.

 

Obviously, I'm not going to change your mind here, so be it. I'm just trying to understand why someone would seriously consider withdrawing their support for their favorite team because of one player. No big deal.

 

I understand all of that and remember Giambi's farce but it is still hypocritical to me. I'm one for different penalties for different positive tests. If the MLB knows it was something major like what Bonds did then a lifetime ban is fine by me but you can't do that to everyone with a positive test because many are accidents. Right now the current policy isn't going to stop the people who were big time users already. They can use it and likely will go awhile before ever getting tested and most of the time players can get off long enough to not test positive. Once you test positive once say it was an accident and then stop using. I personally think there is a large amount of people still using because so few get tested, they tend to get warning, and the first ban isn't that big of a deal. I'm one for big penalties because if you don't cheat you got nothing to be afraid of. It's why I don't understand why they can't get blood to test for HGH. If you are legit why be against it.

[Sammy Sofa]

I hope there are players are still juicing. The game wouldn't be half as awesome as it is without them.

[biittner77]

Rose has admitted his wrong doing why is he still being punished, that's the best example I can come up with. Giambi cheated, and admitted to it, I don't see why no one tried to get him banned which is how MLB has typically treated such situations before.

 

The big difference is that Rose denied for many many years before finally admitting it. Rose also had already receieved his punishment before confessing. Finally, and most importantly, betting on baseball affects the integrity of the game in that the people involved might try to lose on purpose. Guys that take steroids are trying to help their team win.

[Vanilla Ice]

I just finished reading Love Me, Hate Me by Jeff Pearlman

 

I would definitely stay away from him.

he is one of the biggest jerks in all of baseball

[CubbieBum]

Rose has admitted his wrong doing why is he still being punished, that's the best example I can come up with. Giambi cheated, and admitted to it, I don't see why no one tried to get him banned which is how MLB has typically treated such situations before.

 

The big difference is that Rose denied for many many years before finally admitting it. Rose also had already receieved his punishment before confessing. Finally, and most importantly, betting on baseball affects the integrity of the game in that the people involved might try to lose on purpose. Guys that take steroids are trying to help their team win.

 

Except Rose only bet on his team to win. I don't think you can justify either in any way shape or form. I don't care if what you do helps your team win. Someone has to lose and no one should lose because someone cheated. A user helping his team wins means the other team lost unfairly, although in all likelyhood someone on the other team was using too.

[ELCABALLO45]

If the Red Sox or Yanks signed them, There would not be a condom big enough to cover ESPN's boner

[CubbieBum]

If the Red Sox or Yanks signed them, There would not be a condom big enough to cover ESPN's boner

 

Yeah no golden wrapper will help that one.

[RedIvyCub]

You would have to be stupid to not sign him.

 

1.000 OPS. Pretty much guaranteed. Who gives a damn what he does in the field.

 

Shove him in left. Kosuke to center. Surely Soriano can handle right when he comes back. Until then Edmonds can surely handle right until he comes back. Afterwards plenty of at bats for Jim. Or any other OF if he falters. None of those starters are going to be hurt by a little extra time off.

 

This is the year. You have to go for it and spare no expense. When you can get a legitimate monster for a couple hundred thousand you'd be insane not to.

 

If not us some team better have a GM who isn't that dumb. Who cares what he did in the past. Obviously he'll have to pass a piss test now. If he can, screw it. 100 years people. I'd sign Stalin up if he might give me 30+ homers in a half season and change.

 

Please, put down the kool aid and back away slowly.