Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

aaron foresees bonds breaking hr record

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    runningshoes
    Saw Yaz launch one in '78

  • runningshoes
    replied
    Originally posted by west coast orange and black
    the adaptation that appeared over the weekend, by the way, makes the reader believe that only one question was asked of bonds by the grand jury members themselves.
    i know for a fact that that was not the case.
    No one ever accused editors of being smart.

    Leave a comment:

  • runningshoes
    Saw Yaz launch one in '78

  • runningshoes
    replied
    The only reason I can think of is because the sources don't want to be named..ala Deepthroat.

    Leave a comment:

  • west coast orange and black
    Registered User

  • west coast orange and black
    replied
    yes, the claim is indeed that they have the evidence to back their allegations.
    it is just that the federal grand jury transcripts are sealed, so it is impossible to corroborate the text from the book.

    also, much of the documents from the offices and homes of balco people can not be categorically identified absent unreasonable doubt.

    do i think the reporters are making this stuff up? no.

    but i do know that the entire story would be a much representation of the entire truth.

    *excerpted* and *incomplete* transcripts. why?
    *unnamed sources* of key passages. why?

    the adaptation that appeared over the weekend, by the way, makes the reader believe that only one question was asked of bonds by the grand jury members themselves.
    i know for a fact that that was not the case.

    Leave a comment:

  • runningshoes
    Saw Yaz launch one in '78

  • runningshoes
    replied
    But now they're saying they have the evidence to back the allegations up.

    We'll just have to wait and see but I'm not expecting the evidence to be fabricated or unprovable.

    Do you think the reporters are making this stuff up?

    Leave a comment:

  • west coast orange and black
    Registered User

  • west coast orange and black
    replied
    I can't conceive of all this testimony being incorrect. I'm sure there are aspects of it that are erroneous and even wrong, but on the whole, I think it's correct.
    agreed.

    I can't imagine SI going with this story without seeing first hand evidence.
    si reprinted excerpts.
    then, over the weekend, the sf chronicle ran an adaption from the book. huh?

    give us the story - the truth as best can be done - and let us decide.
    it's just that, after years of work, very few key quotes from named sources. after years of work, very little new news.

    Leave a comment:

  • runningshoes
    Saw Yaz launch one in '78

  • runningshoes
    replied
    I agree in principle, but again, as was the whole argument months ago; it's like holding something in front of my face and trying to tell me it's not there.

    I can't conceive of all this testimony being incorrect. I'm sure there are aspects of it that are erroneous and even wrong, but on the whole, I think it's correct.

    I can't imagine SI going with this story without seeing first hand evidence.

    Bonds is no slouch. I'm sure he can afford to sue the asses of the publishers if he could prove they are just going on a wing and a prayer.

    Leave a comment:

  • west coast orange and black
    Registered User

  • west coast orange and black
    replied
    agreed.

    i happen to think that to become more than just "enlightened", more than just a cursory amount of knowledge is needed. in the case of bonds and steroids, he has not admitted to using, he has not been named under oath by first-hand witnesses and he has not tested positive.

    the strengths of the detailed report (the dark shadows book) are up-'til-now uncorroborated grand jury transcripts and unnamed sources. surely there can be a n appreciation for those, especially players, who either need more information to step from "bonds is innocent" or are sitting on the fence.

    Leave a comment:

  • runningshoes
    Saw Yaz launch one in '78

  • runningshoes
    replied
    Originally posted by west coast orange and black
    "a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing."
    It can also be an enlightening thing.

    I guess it all depends on how you look at it.

    Leave a comment:

  • west coast orange and black
    Registered User

  • west coast orange and black
    replied
    "a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing."

    Leave a comment:

  • runningshoes
    Saw Yaz launch one in '78

  • runningshoes
    replied
    Originally posted by cavalier1968
    No emotions now......hes a steeeeroid junkie!
    I was thinking more along lones of sociopath.

    not learning from experience
    no sense of responsibility
    inability to form meaningful relationships
    inability to control impulses
    lack of moral sense
    chronically antisocial behavior
    emotional immaturity
    lack of guilt
    self-centeredness

    Sound like anyone you know?

    Leave a comment:

  • cavalier1968
    Go Tribe!

  • cavalier1968
    replied
    Originally posted by RobertHConner
    1) I notice, and not for the first time on thise site, that the strange power surge among the 1973 Braves was completely ignored. I guess they only count as blinders if Bonds is involved.

    2) People keep saying that nobody gets stronger at the tail end of their playing days.
    Ted Williams had his best AB/HR ratio (100 game minimum) of his career at age 41...1960-29 HR-10.7 AB/HR...4.1 above career avg.
    Hank Aaron had his best at age 39...1973-40 HR-9.8 AB/HR...6.6 better than career average
    Carlton Fisk had best ratio (76 games) at age 40...1988-19 HR-13.3 AB/HR... 10 full AB above career average
    Johnny Mize: best ratio at age 37 (90 games)...1950-25 HR-11.0...6.9 better than career avg.
    Paul Molitor: best ratio at age 36...1993-22 HR-28.9...17.4 above career avg.
    Cal Ripken: top AB/HR ratio at age 38 (86 games...1999-18 HR-18.4...8.4 above career ratio
    Darrell Evans: topped out at age 40...1985-40 HR-12.6...9.1 above career avg (is it a coincidence that his other 40 HR season came when he was with Aaron & Davey Johnson in '73, the year a 39-year old Hammer hit 'em out at a greater rate than at any other point in his career?)

    that last bit doesn't do anything to exonerate Bonds, I'm not interested in doing that-he could very well be guilty, but it points out the stupidity of claiming that the players from the 60's & 70's weren't up to anything in the chemical enhancement field. To state, as pure fact, that Bonds cheated is wrong. That would be an opinion-something I have absolutely no problem with. To state as fact that Aaron was forthright in his pursuit of Ruth is also wrong. He may have done it honestly, but the 1971 & 1973 power surges, especially the team surge in '73, coupled with the claims of Tom House (who is not trying to sell a book about the subject and did not name names) make it laughable that Bonds should receive absolute condemnation, while the shadows of doubt concerning the 70's are completely ignored. Conversely, it would be wrong to state beyond the shadow of a doubt that Bonds didn't do anything. We can only suspect & opine. Bud Selig said that no records should be erased (I don't agree with Goofy too terribly often, but I do on this subject--you have to be awfully sure before you eradicate a man's career). One of his reasons for this was that it would open the door to a long dark hallway that should remain closed. Look, he was a personal friend of Aaron's. I can't say specifically what he is referring to, but that sounded rather cryptic and knowing to me. Aaron has a teammate who says performance enhancers ran rampant at that time. With the exception Andy Van Slyke (who admits that he doesn't know it to be an irrefutable fact), I haven't heard any of Bonds' former teammates accuse him of much more than being a pain in the butt (even that's been refuted by guys like Todd Benzinger). I digress.

    I'd like to hear some response to the 1973 Braves, Tom House, Pete Rose (behavior/late career physique) questions and/or charges. Either acknowledge the hypocrisy or open the damn door all the way, once & for all. Ted Williams could very well have been treated for steroids in Korea when he was laid up for a month and a half. Mantle actually told friends that steroids were responsible for his bulking up while in the hospital during a prolonged stay as a teenager. If he thought that steroids had healed him & made him stronger, what would have stopped him from taking them years later as a player?

    Hank Aaron made a little wish early in 1974 that is 48 HR away from to pass exactly as he wished it would...Henry Aaron, Spring Training 1974: "Believe me, I'll be pulling for him. And I hope they give him as much hell as they have me.". Aaron still 1 HR shy of Ruth had been asked about the possibility of his upcoming record someday falling. I think Bonds will have the record by the end of this season, early May '07 at the latest. If he doesn't, he doesn't. If he does it I believe he will have earned it. I don't see an overwhelming movement to remove Perry, Ford or Drysdale from the HOF. Where's the indignation about Norm Cash's career season in which he admits to having cheated (cork). Don't tell me personality doesn't play a large part in who is held responsible and who we look the other way for.

    One last thing, O.J. Simpson & a double murder is a wildly inappropriate analogy. Murder & spousal abuse...cheating at baseball...hmmmmm:noidea
    25 steeroids a day will work wonders....he earned it!

    Cav

    Leave a comment:

  • cavalier1968
    Go Tribe!

  • cavalier1968
    replied
    Originally posted by west coast orange and black
    so, bonds is the master of the universe, and has it all worked out.
    it is time, then, to put "if you do not like the system then change the system" into works.

    the thing about sosa and pitchers and "other players" getting a free pass -- is this a call for action against these additional players? the ones who have been mighty vocal about bonds have not expressed the same outrage about players known to have used banned substances. this is possibly emotion overshadowing actual fact. or maybe it is simply that they have a disdain for bonds and the banned substance story is a convenient outlet.

    whichever, johnny roulette has got it correct: hypocrisy.

    i communicate with many people about the bonds/banned substances issue and have yet to come across anyone pretending that he does not see what is right in front of him. actually, most of them know more about the situation than most because they are willing to look at things factually rather than with emotion steering the way.
    No emotions now......hes a steeeeroid junkie!

    CAv

    Leave a comment:

  • JoeFriday
    Prospect

  • JoeFriday
    replied
    OH and BTW i agree with you completely on the Subject of the current players being subjected to unfair scrutiny. I thinkt that you have to give most players the benifit of a doubt until the evidence either becomes overwhelming or specificly damning, or there is infact a admission of some kind. Thats why I find Tom House's statements so confounding and unreliable. Not only did he admit to something without any provocation or need but he then recants his assertation that anyone else did steroids but himself. BTW I have seen pictures of Tom House and nowhere does he ever look like he is the 230 lbs he claimed to achieve. He says that Steroids never helped his fastball but he peddles a video in which McGwire and Giambi's trainer are advertised to share their "workouts" and add 25% more power to your swing. It also claims that it will ad 5 mph to your Fastball. It all centers on addding strenght to your upperbody back arms abs etc.. but steroids don't help? The Hypocracy of it is just to much to ignore

    Leave a comment:

  • JoeFriday
    Prospect

  • JoeFriday
    replied
    Originally posted by RobertHConner
    I fully agree and appreciate that alcohol could and probably does explain much of what ailed Mantle. Having been a rather excessive drinker myself, I don't know that it would explain the chronic tendon and muscle issues. Drunks tend not to suffer that sort of injury as often has people who don't drink. The running joke is that drunks are made of rubber. Would alcohol abuse explain the leg troubles? I'm not an expert on that subject, just very expeienced in that particular field.
    LOL Robert I'm glad to see your a fellow Alcohol expert. Honestly The most I heard about Booze causeing athletes problems was when my college rugby coach had a sports medicine expert explain to us some thing about Beer after games hurting recouperative processes. We were either drunk or hung over so we didn't pay much attention. But I assume that the constant state of dehydration and what not would have left Mantle in a state that would have been far more susceptable to injury. We might have to put in some long nights of "research" to verify those theories however.

    Leave a comment:

  • RobertHConner
    aka Johnny Roulette

  • RobertHConner
    replied
    I fully agree and appreciate that alcohol could and probably does explain much of what ailed Mantle. Having been a rather excessive drinker myself, I don't know that it would explain the chronic tendon and muscle issues. Drunks tend not to suffer that sort of injury as often has people who don't drink. The running joke is that drunks are made of rubber. Would alcohol abuse explain the leg troubles? I'm not an expert on that subject, just very expeienced in that particular field.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X