Top 10 All-Time Home Run Hitters Options

[impala454]

1. Barry Bonds*
2. Hank Aaron
3. Babe Ruth
4. Willie Mays
5. Sammy Sosa*
6. Ken Griffey
7. Frank Robinson
8. Mark McGwire*
9. Harmon Killebrew
10.Rafael Palmeiro*
















*CHEATERS

[schwab]

eh...i fail to see how he cheated since whatever he did was not against the rules when he did it

but whatever

[impala454]

uh it was illegal?

[Dogmeat]

c;mon now yall. his penis was so big he had to take roids to shrink it up so he could get laid, not see the ball better and hit the ball better.

[James]

uh it was illegal?

Still doesn't make it against the rules of baseball.

[impala454]

So how about they call carry knives on the field and stab each other? it's not against the rules of baseball. God your arguing for the sake of arguing today is f'n stupid.

[James]

Except fighting is against the rules. Your lack of logic everyday is fucking annoying.

[moebary]

I'm almost positive that somewhere in baseball's huge rulebook is something that says illegal activities are against the rules.

[Oasis]

I'm almost positive that somewhere in baseball's huge rulebook is something that says illegal activities are against the rules.

No, it doesn't. There was no law in baseball against taking steroids until 2003 or so. No fines or suspensions from the MLB, but you could be prosecuted in federal court. There are a ton of things that are legal in baseball but illegal in everyday society, and vice versa. You can take a baseball and throw it 95 miles an hour at a player's groin and you won't be arrested. If you tried that in public you'd go to jail for assault. Same principle

[Oasis]

This was posted by my friend on another board a few months back.

I remember so vividly the day that Cal Ripken broke Gehrig's streak.

My oldest son was an infant, asleep in my lap. I turned on the TV and watched the event unfold, and watched Ripken do his thing, give his speech when the game became "official," and I even welled up a little. I remembered the commercial where the dad was showing various things to his little baby, and grabbed a baseball and whispered reverently to the baby "...and THIS...is a BASEBALL."

So I propped the little guy up and showed him the TV and said "This is history, what we're seeing here. We're sitting here together watching something we'll never see again."

He was sound asleep, but the moment wasn't lost on me.

Never mind that my opinion of Ripken at that point was not very high. I always felt that Ripken was never the superstar everyone made him out to be; his top achievement was the mere act of being really lucky for a long time, taking advantage of modern medicine, and not getting the debilitating disease that Gehrig had. I felt he was unbelievably egotistical, insisting on making management decisions, traveling alone without his teammates, and even being so bold as to take pitch-calling duties away from his catcher and calling them from home plate.

I did not like Cal Ripken.

But none of that took anything away from the fact that he was breaking an unbreakable record. In the era of 162-game seasons, coast-to-coast travel, hyper-competitiveness, weight training, and baseball at light speed, Cal Ripken had played every game, every day, and played HARD. It was huge.

I felt similarly watching Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa embracing after McGwire broke the record. Even then, there was no question in my mind that McGwire was juiced up on steroids. He had gone from being a muscular but skinny kid to being a bloated behemoth with bad tendons and ligaments all over his body, barely even human anymore. But when the line drive shot into the left field stands, it didn't matter - he was TODAY'S player, playing TODAY'S game with TODAY'S rules and TODAY'S advantages (and disadvantages), and he managed to shatter a record that had stood for years and years.

Baseball, as a game, is rarely different from what it was in the 1890s. Sure, there have been some subtle changes, and over history there have been trends that have changed the style of play slightly, but essentially, it's the same game. What's evolved more dramatically than the game itself have been the things AROUND it. Society, for example, evolved to the point where dark-skinned people were permitted to play. Medicine evolved to the point where you could take a dead-armed pitcher, remove a tendon from his leg and put it into his arm so he could pitch another 10 years. I mean, would Tommy John be an "on the bubble" HOFer if he pitched in 1908? Of course not - he would have blown his arm out, and we'd talk about him the way we talk about Smoky Joe Wood today.

Nutrition has evolved as well. And weight training, which was once taboo in baseball, is now normal. Players take advantage of technology, biology, and whatever else they have at their disposal to get better. Does the fact that John McGraw didn't have a huge coaching staff make Jim Leyland any less of a great manager? Does the fact that Ty Cobb didn't have access to stacks of videotape make Rickey Henderson any less of a great base stealer? Does the fact that the 1954 Indians didn't have a team of advance scouts make the 1986 Mets any less of a great team?

I don't think so.

So yes, Barry Bonds injected his body with anything he could think of to make his muscles bigger. But he still had to step into the box and hit the ball 755 times. And he had to do it against pitchers who were equally doped up. And he had other things making it tough for him that Aaron and Ruth did not have. Babe Ruth never had guys like Bruce Sutter or Trevor Hoffman waiting to shut him down in the late innings. He didn't have to deal with relief specialists designed to come in and get one batter out. He didn't have to finish a game in Texas at 2AM eastern time, fly to Los Angeles and play an afternoon game the next day. He didn't have to have his joints take a pounding on artificial turf. He didn't have split-fingered fastballs, nose-to-toes curveballs, or nasty sliders. He didn't have 24-hour news and sports networks following him around, reporting on his every transgression. He didn't have twice as many teams in the league - and twice as many pitchers to get to know.

None of that makes Babe Ruth any less of a player, and in my mind, it makes Barry Bonds and his approaching record just as legitimate as Ripken, McGwire, Aaron, Gehrig, and Ruth.

I don't know how I'm going to articulate my position on this any better than above paragraphs. The game hasn't changed, but everything around it has. And because of that, I think today's playing field is just as level as it's always been. Almost every record in baseball will eventually be broken by somebody, whether they have a likeable personality or not.

So I'll watch Bonds blast #756 with my son, who is now 11 years old and better able to understand what he's seeing. And when the next guy breaks Bonds' record, we'll sit and talk about the day we watched Bonds break it, and we'll reminisce, and we'll talk about all the great baseball history that's happened between now and then, and how many great players we've seen. And of course I'll have to yammer at him about the great home run hitters from my childhood - guys like Reggie Jackson and Mike Schmidt - and the guys who came before them, like Killebrew and Robinson and Mays and Ruth and Gehrig.

Baseball will never change, and I can't WAIT for Bonds to break the record.

[impala454]

Except fighting is against the rules. Your lack of logic everyday is fucking annoying.

where does it say that fighting is against the rules? funny, i see bench clearing brawls where the game continues. you're a lousy devil's advocate.

steroids have been illegal since 1990. they're illegal whether you take them inside or outside the ballpark. no, it was not in the baseball rulebook at the time. the writers of the rulebook probably didn't think they'd have to put in a copy of state & federal law as 'baseball rules'.

and to you losers who think this was ok: if it was so ok and within the rules and honorable practice, how come these assholes won't come clean about it?

[blaarg]

This was posted by my friend on another board a few months back.

I remember so vividly the day that Cal Ripken broke Gehrig's streak...

Am I the only one who thinks that Cal Ripken's record is nowhere near the importance of the all-time home run/hits/RBIs. I just think that playing in a whole bunch of consecutive games wasn't that big a deal, idk...

[Oasis]

Am I the only one who thinks that Cal Ripken's record is nowhere near the importance of the all-time home run/hits/RBIs. I just think that playing in a whole bunch of consecutive games wasn't that big a deal, idk...

I am in full agreement. I've been saying for years he was actually detrimental to his team and selfish because you cannot play every game without a day off and be at 100% effectiveness.

[Oasis]

and to you losers who think this was ok: if it was so ok and within the rules and honorable practice, how come these assholes won't come clean about it?

They won't come clean about it because if they did, the HOF voters aren't voting them in. I don't blame them.

I see very little problem with ballplayers taking steroids. I believe in a level playing field, but the playing field is so skewed that ballplayers taking steroids to gain a competitive advantage is way blown out of proportion. Steroids is merely one way to gain an advantage over the competition. It is not the end-all advantage that people make it out to be. Every player has a different weight training program. I assure you the stars have much better trainers that they can afford to pay $100k a year for compared to the journeymen making $400k a year. That's a huge competitive advantage. West coast teams always have a competitive advantage over East coast teams because of the 3 hour time difference. Most West coast games start at 10:15 EST, meaning players aren't usually getting back to their hotels until 2 or 3 in the morning. If they have a day game at 1:05 the next day, they're at a huge disadvantage because they aren't used to the time change. There's another example. Unlike other sports, every baseball stadium is built differently. Should we discount David Ortiz's 52 homers because he plays in the left-handed-hitter-friendly Fenway? That's a huge advantage over someone like Hunter Pence who plays in a pitcher's park. I could go on for hours but you get the point. Steroids are only ONE form of a competitive advantage. Baseball is interesting because unlike other sports, there are so many variables to take in to account. Steroids is merely one variable. And coming from someone who took steroids while playing baseball in high school, I can assure you the advantage you gain is a lot lower than the ignorant public makes it out to be. Remember....steroids were invented to help people. So yeah, if the playing field were truly level - salary cap, every player having the same training regimen and taking the same supplements, all parks the same dimensions, etc - I'd be against steroids. At this point I don't give a shit because their effect on the game is entirely overblown.

However, people who say steroids have hurt the game of baseball are idiots.
Have the players been hurt? Nope, increased production leads to larger salaries.
Have the owners been hurt? Hell no. More power brings more fans into the park and sells more merchandise.
Have the fans been hurt? Not at all. Fans love love the longball. You'll get the baseball purist assholes who enjoy 1-0 pitcher's duels, but 95% of the fans want to see offense.

It pisses me off to no end when these lethargic old school dinosaurs say Bonds disrespected the game of baseball and it's purity by taking steroids. Reality check - this is a game whose history is filled with drunks, cheaters, racists, murderers, gamblers, mob ties, womanizers, violence, etc, in a league who didn't allow black people to participate until 1947. Stop living in Fantasy Land. Ty Cobb, a player so revered by baseball historians, was a fucking racist who slid spikes first into 2nd in an attempt to injure the shortstop. Babe Ruth was a drunk and a womanizer. Doc Ellis pitched on LSD. George Steinbrenner had direct mob ties in the 70's. Yeah, baseball was a Utopia of purity before steroids ruined everything. Horseshit.

[impala454]

but it's not a level playing field. steroids do have an adverse affect and they are illegal. maybe this is hard for you to understand, but perhaps there's a few players out there who don't want to use illegal drugs to better themselves.

[James]

where does it say that fighting is against the rules? funny, i see bench clearing brawls where the game continues. you're a lousy devil's advocate.

steroids have been illegal since 1990. they're illegal whether you take them inside or outside the ballpark. no, it was not in the baseball rulebook at the time. the writers of the rulebook probably didn't think they'd have to put in a copy of state & federal law as 'baseball rules'.

and to you losers who think this was ok: if it was so ok and within the rules and honorable practice, how come these assholes won't come clean about it?

Yet ejections happen when there is a bench clearing brawl...not just a bench clearing. There are fines that are handed down after the fact, too.

Why don't they come clean? Duh, using steroids is against the law. They can go to jail for it.

Go back to arguing about technology. At least you're good at that.

[impala454]

Yet ejections happen when there is a bench clearing brawl...not just a bench clearing. There are fines that are handed down after the fact, too.

Why don't they come clean? Duh, using steroids is against the law. They can go to jail for it.

Go back to arguing about technology. At least you're good at that.

you can't go to jail for admitting doing something in the past. and they sure as hell dont ever fine or eject every player on the field involved in the fight.

go back to sucking barry bond's cock. at least you're good at that.

[James]

Yes you can. It's called a confession. Not every player on the field involved in the fight is an instigator or actively swinging; some are trying to pull their teammates off or just standing alongside out of comradarie (sp?).

I don't recall ever saying I liked Barry Bonds. Please, point out where I said that. Hell, point out where I even implied it.

[impala454]

Yes you can. It's called a confession.

you can't be arrested from a confession about doing steroids 10 years ago.

Not every player on the field involved in the fight is an instigator or actively swinging; some are trying to pull their teammates off or just standing alongside out of comradarie (sp?).

they don't boot everyone because they need people on the field to continue the game.

I don't recall ever saying I liked Barry Bonds. Please, point out where I said that. Hell, point out where I even implied it.

coulda fooled me. you said steriods aren't against the rules of baseball, which is actually completely wrong anyways. if you're defending steroids you're defending barry.

[Oasis]

but it's not a level playing field.

That's what I said, you moron. It isn't a level playing field with steroids or without steroids. Do you not read what people say, or do you have some sort of problem with comprehension?

steroids do have an adverse affect and they are illegal.

THEY WERE NOT ILLEGAL UP UNTIL 2003 IN BASEBALL. There was no drug testing, nor was there any punishment for taking them. That is fact. Only you could manage to argue with facts.

Federal law has nothing to do with the rules of baseball.

[impala454]

That's what I said, you moron. It isn't a level playing field with steroids or without steroids. Do you not read what people say, or do you have some sort of problem with comprehension?

if it didn't take you 45 lines of text to get your point across maybe i'd read your whole post do you have some sort of problem with writing composition?

THEY WERE NOT ILLEGAL UP UNTIL 2003 IN BASEBALL. There was no drug testing, nor was there any punishment for taking them. That is fact. Only you could manage to argue with facts.

Federal law has nothing to do with the rules of baseball.

So it's ok to break federal law as long as you play baseball? "Oh officer, you can't arrest me, I'm a baseball player".

[Oasis]

I'm saying it was NOT A PUNISHABLE OFFENSE. I'm not arguing morality or federal law here.

Both the MLB and the Player's union turned a blind eye to steroids and indirectly promoted their use because it was beneficial to them. MLBPA did not want steroid testing. Selig didn't care because steroids were helping his bottom line. Only when Congress came in and threatened to go after the Player's Union with antitrust legislation did they start to care.

[impala454]

I know why they looked the other way, but IMO it still taints the records.

[Epic]

honestly,

there were plenty of ways for Ruth to cheat, and Mays, and i once read somewhere that germans used steroids in some ways as early as WW1.

i think that bonds deserves to have the record, no asterisk or anything



because we haven't proven anything. everone says that its "obvious" but i don't convict because espn and other news sources have underpaid analysts who never really played the game saying that bonds definitively used steroids



and you can say that its obvious, but personally, i know i've got a fraction of the evidence and he hasn't been convicted so I'm going with innocent until proven guilty

[impala454]

i think that bonds deserves to have the record, no asterisk or anything
because we haven't proven anything. everone says that its "obvious" but i don't convict because espn and other news sources have underpaid analysts who never really played the game saying that bonds definitively used steroids
and you can say that its obvious, but personally, i know i've got a fraction of the evidence and he hasn't been convicted so I'm going with innocent until proven guilty

bonds admitted to using the stuff, just claimed "he didn't know what it was" which is horseshit. that statement carries about as much weight as sammy sosa saying he "accidentally grabbed the wrong bat".

[jwttu]

i just think bonds is an ass, he never seems happy

[impala454]

yeah that little tantrum he threw after being 0-30 or whatever was hilarious. like a little child "waaaah I don't fucking deserve to wear this fucking uniform blah blah".

[impala454]

LOLOLOL bond's 756 ball gets an asterisk printed on it before going to the baseball hall of fame... effin awesome
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?i...e=ESPNHeadlines

[cmac]

and they're still happy to be receiving it. strange.
i personally hold the innocent until guilty stance, and have no negative opinion of bonds, but whatever.

[THECHICKEN]

Yeah, how dare he do something in the past that wasn't against the rules of baseball.

[impala454]

oh boo hoo ya buncha crybabies. if they didnt think it was wrong they wouldn't have hidden it.

[Epic]

it really seems that everyone who is upset with bonds are the cry babies chuck. seriously, they are the ones making a fuss.

he hasnt' been convicted of anything or found to have broken any rules, so he's cool in my book. He was also damn good at hitting the balls too, that's skill/talent and hard work.

[impala454]

so if he was convicted of using steroids, was it still talent/skill and hard work?

[Epic]

part of it will always be that.

steroids, if he used them, probably helped him get some over the wall, but even still, he was a great hitter.

did you give up on the crybaby statement?

[impala454]

no way. its sad to me that some people can't put two and two together... huge head + abnormal amount of HRs late in his career/age. his comments like "well i didn't know what that stuff was". his fits of rage at reporters all the time. it taints the game just like it does everywhere else (tour de france anybody?)

[Epic]

i just think its funny that people will make a complaint, then get buttsore when someone offers a rebuttal.

not that you were all that buttsore, just as a general principle.

and honestly, some people will always have an unfair advantage. if he did do something that may be ethically amibiguous (i say this because people obviously disagree), but didn't violate any policies or rules, why are we pissed at him for finding loopholes?

[Oasis]

The entire thing is a farce.

And you know, the Homerun Record was put up as high as possible even though it probably didn't even deserve it.

Ok so the Bonds record is tainted because he used what was available in his era to succeed...just as every player has in the past. Each and every era evolves (or devolves) and eras should be judged alone.

It's impossible to compare what Babe Ruth did to what Alex Rodriguez did simply because of era. The main problem with baseball is that the statistics don't change...and frankly that is the only constant.

Calling the homerun record tainted is a farce, just as this marking of the ball. Perhaps Marc Ecko could have purchased a Ty Cobb jersey and screen-printed "PRICK", would the hall accept that?

How about a Mickey Mantle jersey with "ALCOHOLIC" written on it?

Cap Anson bat with "RACIST"?

These same people who believe that the Bonds ball should have an asterisk are the same people who believed that Roger Maris' 1961 season total should have an asterisk.

When will the fans of this game understand the differences between eras?

As far as I am concerned, if the Bonds ball gets an asterisk...every single piece of memorabilia from 1992 to 2005 should be marked with an equally placed asterisk.

Just as every piece of memorablia before 1947 should be displayed with a Klansman's hat, every piece from the 80's with a mound of coke, 60's and 70's should have bottles of green pills for speed.

Oh yeah, let's mark it all up.

[impala454]

ok but being racist or doing coke doesn't help you hit home runs.

but yeah will you're right on the newer guys, except i'd say maybe a little smaller year range... maybe about 94-01. it's just my opinion though. some of you see it as taking advantage of a loophole... steroids were illegal at the time, so while yes, there wasn't a baseball rule against it, I still see it as the players using illegal drugs to improve their performance. maybe some don't have a problem with it, but again imo I think it has no place in professional sports. especially for the example it sets. hopefully we're done with it now that they've cracked down on it some.

[cmac]

regardless of if he used steroids or not, he still had to put the bat on a 100mph fast ball. no easy feat. and steroids don't help eyesight. bonds also has incredible bat speed. i'm not sold that steroids helps that either. it probably helped him muscle some over, but i agree with the adapting argument too.
anyone seen the argument that all that armor he wears on his front arm gave him an advantage too? like robot arms.

[moebary]

the armor just makes him a pussy

[impala454]

your batting average will go up when you hit balls out of the ballpark that normally would have been fly outs.

and pitchers don't throw 100mph. there's barely a small handful that can, and they're closers. and even those pitchers don't reach triple digits all that often. your average starting pitcher is going to be throwing high 80s, low 90s at best.

it's hilarious to me when people argue that he took them but they didn't help all that much, that he was so skilled as a hitter... players don't suddenly become skilled at age 37, after already playing the game professionally for over a decade.

[cmac]

hitting an 80mph ball is no easy feat either.
and bonds was skilled early in his career.
his first several years he was more known as a stealing bases guy, but he could bang out 30 home runs with the pirates too.
he also only had one absurd season in 2001 where he had the 73. the rest has been pretty consistent.

[impala454]

hitting an 80mph ball is no easy feat either.

ok? nobody is saying it is easy. his lifetime average around .290 says he's a pretty good hitter.

and bonds was skilled early in his career.
his first several years he was more known as a stealing bases guy, but he could bang out 30 home runs with the pirates too.

right, and that's pretty reasonable isn't it?

he also only had one absurd season in 2001 where he had the 73. the rest has been pretty consistent.

it wasn't consistent at all. it wasn't just one absurd season. for the first ten years of his career, he barely hit more than 40 homers. and in the last 10, short of him being injured in 05, and the steroid crackdowns in the last couple years, he only hit less than 40 twice (and with far fewer ABs because he was walked so much). it's not consistent with anything, except the other players who's names come up as juicers for that time period too.

are you arguing that you don't think he did steroids or that you don't think the steroids got him home runs?

bob costas on MSNBC talking about it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbHQue2q7p8
he was on conan o'brien the other night and said the same stuff...

[cmac]

in the 80s and early 90s it wasn't popular to be bulked up (by weight lifting) in baseball. it was argued that it slowed players down. maybe bonds just starting pumping the iron around 95.
bonds has only hit over 50 once. the 2001 season.
arod has hit over 50 this season and no one has brought up steroids with him.
what's to say barry just isn't/wasn't a good hitter?

i don't know or care if bonds did steroids or not.
if he did, i'm sure it helped. but only to muscle 5 or so more over the wall that otherwise would've been caught in play.
he's still a good and consistent hitter.

[impala454]

in the 80s and early 90s it wasn't popular to be bulked up (by weight lifting) in baseball. it was argued that it slowed players down. maybe bonds just starting pumping the iron around 95.

but pumping iron alone doesn't increase your hat size by a whole inch. or your shoe size by two whole sizes.

bonds has only hit over 50 once. the 2001 season.

but he hit 40+ eight times. when he was 29, 32, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, and 40 years old. you also have to look at his ABs as well. he had nearly 100 fewer ABs in the three following seasons after he hit 73 (because nobody wanted to pitch to him).

arod has hit over 50 this season and no one has brought up steroids with him.

because he's consistently hit a lot of home runs for most of his career. out of twelve real seasons he's hit 40+ homers in 8 of them. and the other counts were 23, 36, 36. also because his head isn't the size of a basketball (not physically anyhow heheh).

what's to say barry just isn't/wasn't a good hitter?

I think he's a great hitter. But the 'roids are what pushed him over the top and bought him his 'record'. My guess is (and the stats would agree) if he'd have never done them, he'd probably have ended up with about a .280 avg, continued to hit 30-35 home runs per season, and probably ended up with 650+ homers anyways, which is an awesome career.

if he did, i'm sure it helped. but only to muscle 5 or so more over the wall that otherwise would've been caught in play.

It was a lot more than 5 or so more. He didn't average 40 homers a game early in his career. for the first 15 years of his career he averaged 31 homers per year. then starting at age 36, in 2000-2004, he goes for 49, 73, 46, 45, 45? that's an astronomical difference no matter what age you are, and he did it as an old man.

he's still a good and consistent hitter.

sure, just not a legitimate record holder imho.

[cmac]

i meant 5 or so a season.
and like i said i don't care if he took them or not. he still has to see a ball, recognize it as a strike, the type of pitch (rather it's curving in out or down), and put the bat on it. none of which steroids help him do.
i think that if players wanna be great hitters they should spent more time working those techniques rather than purchasing and hiding doing steroids. i just don't think they impact the game of baseball as they would a sport like football.
and arod is a douche.

[Oasis]

ok but being racist or doing coke doesn't help you hit home runs.

UGH

I'm not talking about hitting home runs, I'm talking about gaining a competitve advantage over the competition. Or, in Bonds' case, history.

Racism helped a lot of ballplayers establish a lot of records that will never be broken. Do you honestly think Rogers Hornsby would have hit .424 if he had to face Satchel Paige, Bob Gibson, or Pedro Martinez? Hell, one step further, if he had to face specialized middle relief pitchers? Of course not.

And yes, coke gives you a huge competitive advantage. Darryl Strawberry had a huge competitive advantage over Ray Knight (assuming there was at least one player on the '86 Mets team who didn't use blow) because of cocaine. Imagine a day-night doubleheader in NY, followed by a cross country trip for a 1 pm (10 am NY time) game against the Dodgers. Would you rather face Fernando Valenzuela and his 100 MPH fastball on 4 hours sleep or coked up and completely functional and alert?

It's funny how no one talks about the competitive advantage Babe Ruth had. He demolished the all time home run record (714 to Roger Connor's 137 or something). Why? Because he was the best hitter after the dead ball era. How is completely changing the makeup of the baseball not a huge competitive advantage?

I'm not defending steroids nor what Bonds did. Just saying that I can't fault him for using something to gain an advantage, when the practice has been going on for 125+ years.

The only thing constant throughout baseball history is statistics. Everything else - the game, the players, etc - evolves.

[Oasis]

it's hilarious to me when people argue that he took them but they didn't help all that much, that he was so skilled as a hitter... players don't suddenly become skilled at age 37, after already playing the game professionally for over a decade.

Bonds was a first ballot Hall Of Famer long before steroid accusations. Think up a better argument, please.

[impala454]

Racism helped a lot of ballplayers establish a lot of records that will never be broken. Do you honestly think Rogers Hornsby would have hit .424 if he had to face Satchel Paige, Bob Gibson, or Pedro Martinez? Hell, one step further, if he had to face specialized middle relief pitchers? Of course not.

But Hornsby faced the same pitchers everyone else did at the time... how come everybody else didn't hit .424? And look at A-Rod, he'll easily beat Bond's record if he has a healthy career. I can't stand the guy but at least his record will be legit.

And yes, coke gives you a huge competitive advantage. Darryl Strawberry had a huge competitive advantage over Ray Knight (assuming there was at least one player on the '86 Mets team who didn't use blow) because of cocaine. Imagine a day-night doubleheader in NY, followed by a cross country trip for a 1 pm (10 am NY time) game against the Dodgers. Would you rather face Fernando Valenzuela and his 100 MPH fastball on 4 hours sleep or coked up and completely functional and alert?

That's just baseball. All players have to go through it. Lack of sleep is not a valid excuse to do coke. Darryl Strawberry was just as in the wrong as Bonds is.

It's funny how no one talks about the competitive advantage Babe Ruth had. He demolished the all time home run record (714 to Roger Connor's 137 or something). Why? Because he was the best hitter after the dead ball era. How is completely changing the makeup of the baseball not a huge competitive advantage?

How is this an advantage when every hitter that walked up to the plate got the same ball??

I'm not defending steroids nor what Bonds did. Just saying that I can't fault him for using something to gain an advantage, when the practice has been going on for 125+ years.

I guess we should just leave it at this. I do fault him. The man took illegal drugs to give himself an edge in his sport. You guys think that's ok, I don't.

Bonds was a first ballot Hall Of Famer long before steroid accusations. Think up a better argument, please.

Please take what I'm saying in context. I was responding to cmac, who was claiming it's more Bond's skill getting the ball out of the park than the 'roids. I didn't say he wasn't a great player or a skilled hitter. He had a high .290s average for most of his career, stole a lot of bases, hit a lot of homers (even before the 'roids). IMHO he would have been a hall of famer easily without the 'roids. He wouldn't have broke the all time HR record, but he'd have still hit 600+ at least.

[Oasis]

I'm mainly talking about competitive advantages from one generation to another. Babe Ruth was the best home run hitter of his generation, by far. As was Aaron in the '60's, as was Bonds in the '90's-'00's. All of them had competitive advantages/disadvantages in their era. Some legal, some not so legal; Some legal in baseball when they were illegal in society, some illegal in baseball when they were legal in society.

[impala454]

ah.. well yeah no doubt old records would get shattered if certain pro atheletes from today could go back in time and play in the old days. but the baseball 'roids case recently is advantages over their current, fellow atheletes, which aint cool imho.