Wilson A2000

I said it was rare. There is no evidence that Hank did PED's other than trying them once, despite the fluctuations and his home runs staying on a level plane. Why do you think Aaron's numbers were so great toward the end of his career?

Look at his baseball reference profile. His stat progression matches the career arc of a steroid user exactly. There is no corroborating evidence that he did PED's other than the one time he said he did. So they were legal for most of his career and Aaron still says he didn't do them. If steroids were legal in the US and legal in baseball right now, I would have no problem. That is why I'm not up in arms about the old time baseball players who used them. Amphetamines weren't banned by the federal government until 1970 (illegal in baseball in 1971 I believe) and anabolic steroids weren't illegal until 1990 from what the net says. Aaron's home run totals fluctuated throughout his career. "From nearly every sports-writing quarter and even Aaron himself, we have heard that the primary reason for Aaron's mark of 755 is because of his yearly home run consistency. However, statistically speaking, a stronger case can be made that Aaron was an INCONSISTENT home run hitter. From '56-'58, he went from 26 to 44 to 30 home runs; from '63 to '64 he dropped from 44 to 24; and from '68 to '69 he went from 29 to 44. A look at the world's most valuable sports website– Baseball-Reference.com will show that Aaron's yearly home run totals jumped or declined by at least 12 home runs on EIGHT separate occasions despite a remarkably consistent number of year-to-year at bat totals. In contrast, neither Bonds, Ruth, nor Mays exceeded five yearly 12-HR fluctuations." http://www.cosellout.com/2007/08/22/behind-the-myths-part-755-hank-aaron-bonds-with-barry/

Hank Aaron used [expletive] PEDs. Regularly. Where is your evidence for this? Because he played in a time period (for the most part) where greenies were legal and they were given away in the clubhouse? Anyway, amphetamines weren't even made illegal until 1970 without a prescription.

I laughed too as I was posting it

Every day I wish Arians was head coach. I hope to be proved wrong.

Yeah, I hear his pseudo-intellectual mumbo jumbo and just picture a clubhouse full of dude completely tuning him out. Maybe one of the reasons he's never had a head coaching job in the NFL before? We know he has the offensive mind, but what the heck was that press conference today.

Science. If Sosa never took steroids how many homers do you think he would have ended up with?

We have the physical evidence on Bonds, not Aaron. I give people the benefit of the doubt. Same for Pujols. You have no "physical evidence" because nobody was looking and testing, yet you've had people in the game talk about how PED usage goes back decades. Of course. But has anyone accused Aaron and seen him take them? No, so I give him the benefit. We know ARod took them. I'm not keeping anyone out of the HOF with no evidence, steroid era or not. Then why are you arguing against a bunch of guys who have no evidence? Evidence can go beyond testing. The evidence for Bonds using them was the way his body evolved right after he got jealous at the home run derby. When Sosa came to camp in the late 90's his teammates saw his evolution. I don't think Aaron's body evolved like Sosa's or Bonds's. And no one has accused Aaron of anything that I'm aware of. He said he tried greenies once.

So you don't have a problem with "cheating" as long as the "cheating" doesn't help too much. No, I said both were wrong and I would hold Aaron and Bonds to the same standard. But greenies and modern steroids have far different effects.

That's why they call it the Human No Growth Hormone. Whatever Bonds, Sosa, and ARod were on worked.

Steroids. Bonds was on a cocktail. HGH, horse roids, masking agent.

At work on my phone no time to look everything up

Double post

But I do think the performance greenies got you is nowhere near the benefits BALCO and Biogenesis gave. Worlds apart.

No I said they were wrong too now that I know they were ILLEGAL

Um yeah that's what roids do. Sometimes. Horse steroids do. What year did Bonds's head get big. That was the year I thought he started. Maybe before 2002.

It got big because people don't think roids do much, not much more than greenies and they won't admit that this designer steroid era has dirtied the game.

Um yeah that's what roids do. People noticed it. Everyone saw Bonds in 2002. He was a different person. Do you think Sosa was on roids in 1998?

So you shouldn't doubt any performance prior to 2002. I don't. He had HOF numbers/trajectory pre. 2002. So you have no issue with Sosa's numbers pre-2002. No Sammy had the physical evidence that he was on roids before. He got huge before 1998.

So you shouldn't doubt any performance prior to 2002. I don't. He had HOF numbers/trajectory pre. 2002.

But you are saying PED's got him there so if he's clean he's not there because you said PED's did all the work or a good majority of it. Exactly. But Trans I thought said he didn't have the numbers to get in not even caring he is dirty. Did I misunderstand him?

We have the physical evidence on Bonds, not Aaron. I give people the benefit of the doubt. Same for Pujols. You have no "physical evidence" because nobody was looking and testing, yet you've had people in the game talk about how PED usage goes back decades. Of course. But has anyone accused Aaron and seen him take them? No, so I give him the benefit. We know ARod took them. I'm not keeping anyone out of the HOF with no evidence, steroid era or not. You've had people on the same team as him who admitted to using them: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2005-05-03-steroids-house_x.htm You have him having a bizarre, late career power surge, plus two teammates also having outlier power surge seasons when they played with him: http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/2007/02/hammerin_hank_a.html Basically it wouldn't be a surprise at all to find out he used them. But nobody is going to come out and accuse him of it because even if they were right there there's absolutely no proof. They'd be instantly made a villain and would have no argument but their word. If Aaron said he did it, I would be as consistent as I would with Bonds and Sosa. I'm not letting someone's word alone decide something this big.

We have the physical evidence on Bonds, not Aaron. I give people the benefit of the doubt. Same for Pujols. You have no "physical evidence" because nobody was looking and testing, yet you've had people in the game talk about how PED usage goes back decades. Of course. But has anyone accused Aaron and seen him take them? No, so I give him the benefit. We know ARod took them. I'm not keeping anyone out of the HOF with no evidence, steroid era or not. What about the evidence in the numbers of having a later career power surge? No, gotta be physical evidence. What Aaron did is very rare. What Bonds did was cheating.

Similar Batters to Sosa Jim Thome (862) Mike Schmidt (858) * Reggie Jackson (841) * Ken Griffey (830) Harmon Killebrew (822) * Eddie Mathews (822) * Mickey Mantle (821) * Willie Stargell (820) * Gary Sheffield (814) Willie McCovey (807) * * - Signifies Hall of Famer He's a clear HOFer if clean

Your claim is that taking PEDs made him a "once in a generation player". Statistically he's not a HOF player, and he sure isn't in the HOF as we speak despite being eligible. And without PEDs that argument gets a lot worse, as you mention. So how is it that PEDs made Sosa into a generational talent, when his numbers don't justify it, and when popular perception(HOF) doesn't put him on that plane either? Or is it that being a generational talent isn't subject to the obvious consideration of context that you're using when determining his HOF-worthiness? Nope, because one stat, 600+ homers, is getting him in the HOF if clean. That's all that matters for voters.