Views
1840
Comments
245
  • 08/07/2012, 04:13PM ET

Bonds and the Hall... yea or nay?

Marlins Fan (156-78-31) vs BM. (65-17-11)
15
Votes
25
Votes
15
Votes
25
Votes


I'm saying he should be in. Basically this boils down to a debate about how severely known steroids users and/or alleged cheaters should be "punished". Might as well get to the nitty gritty because there's obviously no denying Bonds' numbers and I'm not even gonna waste any time on stats.

Here's my current take. My opinion on this subject evolves all the time but right now I'm tired of the MLB writers' overall self righteousness. These clowns never played an inning in their life yet they sit around on their high horses and pompously inform everyone that certain players have committed ethical violations and must therefore be punished by a virtual timeout, a waiting period of several years where players wont be voted in, or worse, an unspoken blackball or all out ban.

Its ridiculous. There are bad men in the Hall. There's an alleged murderer. All kinds of bad guys. Yet Bonds, statistically speaking probably the best player ever, cant get in because we all assume he was cheating? Sure, he admitted to the flax seed oil and the clear or whatever. Nothing else has been proven.

What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Just asterisk his ****.


I will agree to leave Bonds' stats out of this argument.

It boils down to a moral issue for the voters, and whether or not they are completely prepared to set a controversial precedent like this one.

Bonds does not deserve a HOF nod, and there are several reasons for that.

1. First and foremost, he was a steroid user. He cheated.

2. Steroids increase the ability to heal from injuries. A 162 game season is a long time, and players tend to break down over that long of a season. Who's to say that Bonds numbers would be what they were had he not been using? His numbers more than likely would have dropped off naturally. This is an assumption, but a very valid one.

3. If Bonds gets in, then Sosa, McGwire, Palmeiro, Clemens, etc... would need to be given automatic nods for the HOF. If you let one guy in, they all need to be let in. Like I said up top, it's a very controversial precedent to set.

4. "Just asterisk his ****". Bonds has gone on record saying he would boycott Cooperstown if they put his 73rd HR ball in the HOF with an asterisk. He wants the recognition, but not the consequences that come with it. They can't asterisk the guy.

Keep him out.

GL.


I would say that quite a bit of your argument is based off assumption. Some, as you pointed out, may be valid but punishing Bonds based off a general assumption of "guilt" isn't just the wrong move; its flat out unAmerican. Innocent until PROVEN guilty, and whatnot.

All we know for sure is that Bonds "accidentally" took steroids on a limited number of occasions. Its easy to look at his testimony as flaky; to automatically label him a liar who knowingly juiced and intentionally lied in court to save his own hide. Its very easy to draw that conclusion.

But its certainly not fact. We cant say for certain that Bonds knowingly cheated in an effort to make himself a better baseball player. Which means it would be hasty to punish Bonds, which is in essence what a HoF dis would be.

We just don't have the evidence to keep him out. We have evidence of his greatness as a player and we have circumstantial hearsay regarding his alleged cheating. Its flimsy. Its opinion. People hate Bonds and therefore are quick to strip him of due process, of the benefit of the doubt.

I don't like Bonds either, but he belongs in the Hall unless he's ever PROVEN guilty.

GL, BM.


Actually, Bonds admitted to using the steroids. He claims he "unknowingly" was given the steroids by his doctor, but he still admitted to using them.

http://tinyurl.com/4duomuh

So at that point, it's not "innocent until proven guilty". He's not innocent. He admitted that he wasn't innocent.

Not allowing Bonds into the HOF is not just a punishment for Bonds. It would be a statement made by the HOF saying they aren't going to put up with steroid users in this day and age. If you cheat, you don't get in.

We don't have the evidence to keep him out? Really? Looks to me here that the guy "unknowingly" put on about 50 pounds of pure muscle. Do you think he was just "working out a lot"? I sure as hell don't. Especially after he admitted to having steroids in his system.



He wants to be put into the HOF based on his numbers, which he deserves when you don't look at the fact that he used steroids to obtain those numbers. When the steroids come into play, it casts an absolutely ridiculous amount of asterisks over those numbers.

The HOF doesn't need that on it's books.


True, he admitted to being "not innocent", since he says he unknowingly took steroids. Completely different than admitting guilt. And again, besides what Bonds has admitted to, everything else is merely hearsay.

Anyway, there's no doubt he gained bulk and mass late in his career. There's also no doubt that he found a whole lot of power late in his career.

There's also no doubt that we cannot say for certain what caused those occurances.

I'm just not big on speculation. I'm not big on being the "moral police". Hell, ive done a lot worse things in my life than shoot flaxseed oil into my buff cheeks and I'm in no position to look down my nose at Bonds for ALLEGEDLY using steroids.

Its a slippery slope. If we ban Bonds then we have to ban every ALLEGED cheater. Sounds like the Salem witch trials to me. All it would take is a jilted ex girlfriend to spread a steroids rumor and then a given players' HoF chances are done.

That's a bad system. No punishment unless we know he's guilty... its the only right way to go.

And the argument about "if Bonds gets in then Mac and Sosa get in too" doesn't work. Those guys couldn't hold Bonds' jock.

Good TD, BM.


We can't say for certain what caused his massive weight/muscle gain? Really?

You know he cheated, I know he cheated, hell, the whole world knows he cheated. Bonds is/was the poster boy for steroid use.

You keep using the word "allegedly". This is very naive. As I said before (and posted a link), Bonds ADMITTED to his trainer injecting him with substances that he thought were flaxseed oil. Do you really think Bonds still thought it was flaxseed oil when he gained 50 pounds of muscle and turned into a human bobblehead? Come on.

He IS guilty. Just because his trainer "allegedly" gave him steroids doesn't make him any less innocent. He saw what this so-called flaxseed oil was doing to his body, and he didn't stop it. Therefore, he KNEW what it was and attempted to play dumb when the public found out. Bonds is an absolute tool and a disgrace to the game of baseball.

McGwire and Sosa were not half the baseball player that Bonds was, but they hit an assload of home runs, thus warranting them to be HOFers. But then the steroids come in to the discussion, and they no longer belong in the HOF.

Bonds cheated. He was a cheater. He has no place in the HOF.

Good TD.

Comment #1 has been removed
August 7, 2012  04:17 PM ET

no argument here then ..how bout Pete Rose...I know that td has been here alottttt

August 7, 2012  04:31 PM ET

personal opinion based on stats and him playing the game- yea
will he get in- nay

August 7, 2012  04:35 PM ET

Rose or Bonds or both??

August 7, 2012  04:36 PM ET
QUOTE(#3):

personal opinion based on stats and him playing the game- yeawill he get in- nay

Rose or Bonds or both??

August 7, 2012  04:41 PM ET
QUOTE(#1):

I'll post an argument after work if anybody wants this. I'm gonna pick yea.

I'll take it.

August 7, 2012  05:04 PM ET
QUOTE(#4):

Rose or Bonds or both??

both will end up the same. i feel rose has a more legit case to get in of the 2. with their stats they both should get in. but as we've seen, the baseball voters are a very petty group that take great offense to those that have wronged the game

August 7, 2012  05:08 PM ET
QUOTE(#7):

both will end up the same. i feel rose has a more legit case to get in of the 2. with their stats they both should get in. but as we've seen, the baseball voters are a very petty group that take great offense to those that have wronged the game

Doesn't matter what the voters think, when talking about Rose.

Bonds gets in eventually. It may take many years though.

August 7, 2012  05:22 PM ET
QUOTE(#8):

Doesn't matter what the voters think, when talking about Rose.Bonds gets in eventually. It may take many years though.

on rose- that's what i meant by they took great offense and voted to put him on the excluded list.
on bonds- i think the way he approached the whole steroids witch hunt will haunt his name for forever and will end up being part of his legacy. which is sad for as good of a player as he was.

Comment #10 has been removed
Comment #11 has been removed
Comment #12 has been removed
August 7, 2012  06:56 PM ET
QUOTE(#11):

Sounds good; I'll DC you after work.

Sweet, looking forward to it.

August 7, 2012  07:19 PM ET
QUOTE(#12):

Rose more legitimate than Bonds?

Sounds like a TD.

Disgracing the game by betting on games you are managing vs. making a mockery of the game by turning your body into a cartoon character and demolishing records.


This does sound like a good TD.

Comment #15 has been removed
August 7, 2012  07:38 PM ET
QUOTE(#15):

We coul call it "the lesser of two evils".Sounds like it could be a whole series of TDs, really. Argue who's sins were less offensive instead of arguing who's better all the time.

Off field Bengals vs. off field Lions!

August 7, 2012  10:18 PM ET
QUOTE(#15):

We coul call it "the lesser of two evils".Sounds like it could be a whole series of TDs, really. Argue who's sins were less offensive instead of arguing who's better all the time.

Nice.

August 7, 2012  11:00 PM ET

I like Bonds' chances for the HoF. I think he makes it. Steroids don't give you a higher batting average, just ask Jose Canseco.

August 8, 2012  01:05 AM ET

Right now.....I say know.

Just heard a good analogy: (Golf)

You shoot 31 on the front nine but cheat on the back nine, you're still disqualified for the entire round.

 
August 8, 2012  01:06 AM ET

Know?

*No

"know" would have been deep though.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Leaderboard

  Fan W L T Win %
1 fvkasm2x 193 58 12 75.7%
2 7#bag _ Com 997 338 74 73.4%
3 HOOTZ 33 14 9 67.0%
4 Marlins Fan 156 78 31 64.7%
5 Argos. 184 101 29 63.2%
6 Goodell: Fannation Savior 644 430 71 59.3%
7 J-Business 78 66 19 53.7%
8 Highway... 175 852 64 19.0%

The Si.com Cover Hub Go to the Cover Hub

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Tuukka Rask takes blame for Bruins' Game 1 loss
    Views
    2200
    Comments
    230
  2. 2
    Smush Parker allegedly punches high schooler
    Views
    1732
    Comments
    139
  3. 3
    Joel Quenneville's Midnight Hawk favored to win Illinois Derby
    Views
    424
    Comments
    88
  4. 4
    Quarterback freefalling down draft boards
    Views
    6370
    Comments
    87
  5. 5
    Oklahoma State pays Peyton Manning $105K for speech
    Views
    610
    Comments
    25

Most Active Users

Comments + Blog Posts + Throwdowns

  1. 1
    Robataille
  2. 2
    ~Mother-Marge~
  3. 3
    TxHeat
  4. 4
    buddhaa.luck
  5. 5
    Deep Creek

Blogs