Steff Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 If they can't back this up they are in some serious s***... http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/base...ex.html?cnn=yes NEW YORK (SI.com) -- Beginning in 1998 with injections in his buttocks of Winstrol, a powerful steroid, Barry Bonds took a wide array of performance-enhancing drugs over at least five seasons in a massive doping regimen that grew more sophisticated as the years went on, according to Game of Shadows, a book written by two San Francisco Chronicle reporters at the forefront of reporting on the BALCO steroid distribution scandal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 Sure looks like they have a lot of stuff to back it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 this is the issue im getting tomorrow? Nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 Heres the real question. Who was the last homerun champion not on performance enhancing drugs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted March 7, 2006 Author Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 12:58 PM) Sure looks like they have a lot of stuff to back it up. I've been reading on this as it developed. They have a lot of testimony that's for sure. But a smoking gun....? If they have one, Bonds is going away for perjury also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted March 7, 2006 Author Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 01:05 PM) Heres the real question. Who was the last homerun champion not on performance enhancing drugs? Aaron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 11:06 AM) Aaron. Ruth. Hot dogs and Beer = performance hindering drugs, not performance enhancing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 01:08 PM) Ruth. Hot dogs and Beer = performance hindering drugs, not performance enhancing. Back then many drugs were given out like candy at drugstores. You could grab some cocaine at some pharms. Edited March 7, 2006 by RockRaines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 Awwww (need to change my pants)...I really hope they have solid proof. Man, that would be great. I've been waiting for this for a long time. And to answer who the HR champion is, it is Aaron for a career and Maris for a season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 01:13 PM) Awwww (need to change my pants)...I really hope they have solid proof. Man, that would be great. I've been waiting for this for a long time. And to answer who the HR champion is, it is Aaron for a career and Maris for a season. Isnt it possible that Maris used some performance enhancing drugs? The guy was injury prone, died early of cancer, and never really approached that HR total again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 02:34 PM) Isnt it possible that Maris used some performance enhancing drugs? The guy was injury prone, died early of cancer, and never really approached that HR total again. It sure is. I have actually heard that Mantle may have used some form of them, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbeFroman Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 He'll get in the hall of fame... even with the roids. I'm not sure I would vote for him. I just hope when he gets in, he's not a first ballot HOFer. With this, he doesn't deserve it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 12:58 PM) Sure looks like they have a lot of stuff to back it up. Wow, that's really extensive. More than simply, "Conti testified he delivered steroids to Bonds." I'll have to pick up an issue of this myself. Now begins the attack against the two San Francisco reporters. They must have an agenda, or were treated poorly during the encounters with Bonds, is what we'll hear. Should be an interesting week ahead of us. Too bad this will take away attention from Kirby Puckett. Edited March 7, 2006 by Flash Tizzle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iWiN4PreP Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 Dam nice. I hope bonds is caught. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 Well as always you have to preface this stuff with, Bonds is a public figure, therefore for him to be successful on any suit he would need to show actual malice, ie that they actually knew what they were printing to in fact be false. Secondly, there always should be serious questions of why these reporters have more information than a grand jury? Probably will make some money off of this, but as for any perjury charges etc, unlikely. Same as the Gretzky case, prosecutors dont want to touch this type of stuff unless it is 150% chance of conviction. You take Bonds to the mat and lose, you may have ruined your career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted March 7, 2006 Author Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 02:43 PM) Well as always you have to preface this stuff with, Bonds is a public figure, therefore for him to be successful on any suit he would need to show actual malice, ie that they actually knew what they were printing to in fact be false. Secondly, there always should be serious questions of why these reporters have more information than a grand jury? Probably will make some money off of this, but as for any perjury charges etc, unlikely. Same as the Gretzky case, prosecutors dont want to touch this type of stuff unless it is 150% chance of conviction. You take Bonds to the mat and lose, you may have ruined your career. He swore under oath, without immunity from perjury, that he did not use. If they have proof he used.. he perjured himself, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 12:54 PM) He swore under oath, without immunity from perjury, that he did not use. If they have proof he used.. he perjured himself, no? According to the San Fran Chronicle leaks...no he did not swear that. He swore that he used but did so unwillingly...that Anderson never told him it was steroids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted March 7, 2006 Author Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 03:02 PM) According to the San Fran Chronicle leaks...no he did not swear that. He swore that he used but did so unwillingly...that Anderson never told him it was steroids. Ahhhhh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 This narrative is based on more than a thousand pages of documents and interviews with more than 200 people, many of whom we spoke to repeatedly. In our reporting on the BALCO story for the San Francisco Chronicle, we obtained transcripts of the secret grand jury testimony of Barry Bonds and seven other prominent professional athletes. We also reviewed confidential memorandums detailing federal agents' interviews with other athletes and trainers who had direct knowledge of BALCO. Sealed material we reviewed also included unredacted versions of affidavits filed by the BALCO investigators; e-mail between BALCO owner Victor Conte and several athletes and coaches regarding the use and distribution of drugs; a list of evidence seized from the BALCO storage locker; and a document prepared to brief participants in the raid on BALCO. So the question is, do you believe all that....or Barry? Ladies and gentlemen, we have the smoking gun. Enjoy baseball hell Barry, you have earned it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted March 7, 2006 Author Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 03:07 PM) So the question is, do you believe all that....or Barry? Ladies and gentlemen, we have the smoking gun. Enjoy baseball hell Barry, you have earned it. Baseball hell.. a bit dramatic, no? He was the best player of this generation pre-steriods. Assuming he started steriods in 1998, as per the "proof", he still would have 3 MVP's, 8 Gold Gloves, 7 All Star games, 7 silver sluggers, and 411 homers. Yeah he probably used the 'roids BUT many other players used as well. Crystal clear Bonds is being singled out for 2 reasons. 1) He's approaching Ruth and Aaron. Ruth more importantly because he is so much bigger than the game. Remember when Aaron broke Ruth's record? and 2) It's Bond's attitude towards the fans and even more importantly the media. They are vultures waiting to pick at his carcass. If he was nicer - ala Mark back when he was using and everyone knew about it but didn't say s*** - this would be a non issue. Can't deny that. My dad and I were talking a few weeks ago about back in '93 when the Phillies won the NL pennant, many players just happened to have career years. Lenny Dykstra was nothing but a platoon outfielder with the Mets in the late 80's. And then he turned into the Incredible Hulk. Darren Daulton was a terrible catcher before he had an incredible 4-5 year run. The list goes on Incaviglia, Hollins, "Wild Thing" Williams, etc. All of these guys had career years just by chance, I don't think so. Bonds will still make the HOF. First ballot I'll bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 (edited) I always thought that Griffey was the best player of the 90's, with Thomas being the best overall hitter for most of it. Bonds was definitely one of the best, but he wasn't quite as dominant as those two for most of the decade. He didn't become an unstoppable force until 2000 and didn't really start dominating until about 96 (outside of 1993). Griffey hit with better power and drove in more runs, and was a better fielder. Frank was Ted Williams great for 5 years straight and pretty good for the 2 years before that before injuries took their toll. Plus Bonds was an established player in 1990 while Frank was a rookie and Griffey was in his second year, so I'd be more likely to give those two the benefit of the doubt. He may have had 3 MVP's, but I don't think he would have had all of those if he had to compete with Frank and Griffey, plus Gonzalez put up a couple of monster years. Anyways, he's still a HOF'er, and quite possibly a first ballot guy even with the steroids. He was very good even before he supposedly started juicing. Edited March 7, 2006 by ZoomSlowik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 this is shocking news. i'm stunned to say the least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 happy day. hopefully he winds up behind bars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 QUOTE(Steff @ Mar 7, 2006 -> 03:19 PM) Baseball hell.. a bit dramatic, no? He was the best player of this generation pre-steriods. Assuming he started steriods in 1998, as per the "proof", he still would have 3 MVP's, 8 Gold Gloves, 7 All Star games, 7 silver sluggers, and 411 homers. Yeah he probably used the 'roids BUT many other players used as well. Crystal clear Bonds is being singled out for 2 reasons. 1) He's approaching Ruth and Aaron. Ruth more importantly because he is so much bigger than the game. Remember when Aaron broke Ruth's record? and 2) It's Bond's attitude towards the fans and even more importantly the media. They are vultures waiting to pick at his carcass. If he was nicer - ala Mark back when he was using and everyone knew about it but didn't say s*** - this would be a non issue. Can't deny that. My dad and I were talking a few weeks ago about back in '93 when the Phillies won the NL pennant, many players just happened to have career years. Lenny Dykstra was nothing but a platoon outfielder with the Mets in the late 80's. And then he turned into the Incredible Hulk. Darren Daulton was a terrible catcher before he had an incredible 4-5 year run. The list goes on Incaviglia, Hollins, "Wild Thing" Williams, etc. All of these guys had career years just by chance, I don't think so. Bonds will still make the HOF. First ballot I'll bet. This sounds like a response noted Bonds apologist Michael Wilbon would say on PTI. You're limiting the scope of his steroid use, and its possible implications, by suggesting others did as well. Every baseball player referenced within the last paragraph aren't fit to stand within Bonds' shadow. How can you assert anything is "crystal clear" with determing explanations of why Bonds is singled out? Those reasons you listed (Ruth/Media) certaintly contribute to his exclusion, but he brought scrutiny upon himself. HE associated with employees of a company manufacturing chemical inhancements. HE testified in court to unknowingly spreading steroid cream over his shoulders. I'll agree Bonds will likely be a HOF. His numbers, as you've indicated, were tremendous before 1998--when his physical stature ballooned. Where I disagree with you is I don't believe he'll be voted in first ballot. Journalists, former players, etc. casting a vote for Bonds can't possibly ignore all implications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longshot7 Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 Who cares? I have no problem with performance-enhancing drugs. Especially since they weren't against mlb rules at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.