Master Index of Archived Threads


Bonds Steroid Use In New Book

MFS62 Mar 07 2006 11:35 AM

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/baseball/mlb/03/06/news.excerpt/index.html?cnn=yes Later

Zvon Mar 07 2006 06:15 PM

No surprises here. I certainly dont wish this on him, but I wouldnt be surprised if as he gets older all this stuff comes back and bites him on the ass, healthwise.

seawolf17 Mar 07 2006 06:18 PM

Yawn. Mike Francesa was actually right; this is a non-story. It's nothing we don't already "know," and unless Bonds and the Giants show up to Shea this summer and only 15,000 people come out to the games, this doesn't matter. He's still going to sell tickets, even if it's because he's a freakshow who people want to boo.

Edgy DC Mar 07 2006 07:15 PM

Maybe I should be writing stuff down, but I didn't know it was already established that he was injecting. All I recall is reports of him taking 'roids through rubbing creams, giving him the out that he thought it was muscle ointment. It's a lot harder to plead ignorance when getting needled with regularity by a non-physician.

metirish Mar 07 2006 08:04 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 07 2006 08:09 PM

Yeah this book seems to be very detailed, like the guys themselves were injecting him, to be honest though I don't care, he's still one of the best players I ever saw and I hope to see him at Shea this season. Does anyone really think he started doing steroids because he was jealous of the attention McGwire was getting, seems a bit flimsy to me.

Edgy DC Mar 07 2006 08:08 PM

Does the why matter that much? It's not like his accusers have to go far to find a motive.

Nymr83 Mar 07 2006 08:38 PM

$ hey, look, I found a motive!

Frayed Knot Mar 07 2006 09:11 PM

Assuming this book is filled with as many details as implied, what it's going to do is make it real tough for any remaining Barry-apologists out there to claim that it was really just a case a hard work and vitamins, or that there's no proof so the rest of us should all keep quiet. I suppose that details of the length & depth of his use could also take a few H-o-F votes away -- although most will still probably justify a yea vote by figuring that he was a slam-dunk even before becoming a pharmacology student. What I would like to see is any record-breaking HRs he gets this year get met by a whole lotta silence ... or worse!, even though that'll only likely happen if/when he's on the road. I suspect San-Fran-Fans will still treat him as the hometown hero.

Zvon Mar 07 2006 09:32 PM

seawolf17 wrote: Yawn. Mike Francesa was actually right; this is a non-story. It's nothing we don't already "know," ...... It is a yawn, and no surprise to me, but this is actually a huge story and its going to have a huge impact. And SI knows it. Thats why they put all that stuff, the story, the excerpts, the quotes, the pics, the documentation,etc., all at once. Its certainly gonna make it hard for Barry to just simply go about as its business as usual. He will have to talk about this situation. This wont be brushed under the carpet as he persues the big all time HR records.

Nymr83 Mar 07 2006 09:57 PM

]Assuming this book is filled with as many details as implied, what it's going to do is make it real tough for any remaining Barry-apologists out there to claim that it was really just a case a hard work and vitamins, or that there's no proof so the rest of us should all keep quiet. i believe their (the apologists) current excuse is "it wasn't illegal in baseball," nevermind that it was illegal in the united states. there is no rule in the book against stabbing the 1bman with a knife to steal second either but i'm reasonaby sure you can't do it.

Frayed Knot Mar 07 2006 10:13 PM

Steroids have been prohibited in baseball for some time now (early '90s I believe or maybe earlier) so that one's not gonna fly. The only thing that's new in the last few years is the permission to pre-emptively test for them and a sense of urgency to even try. I bet ESPN is real ashamed now of their association with Barry and this reality show they've got him doing. Well, they would be if they actually had any sense of shame.

metirish Mar 07 2006 10:21 PM

Frayed Knot, I doubt ESPN has any shame left, I imagine they were happy as a pig in shit when this story broke.

Gwreck Mar 07 2006 11:27 PM

Made the front page of the website, along with scathing pieces by Gene Wojciechowski and Buster Olney.

silverdsl Mar 08 2006 08:07 AM

I don't think this is a non-story by any means. The writers of this book spent two years doing a considerable amount of investigative work and they have amassed a large amount of evidence and statements from witnesses that depicts the specifics of Bonds' steroid use plus that there were those who knew exactly what he was doing. While nothing that is being alleged in the book is a surprise as it was pretty obvious that in spite of his denials Bonds was using performance enhancers, I think this book could have huge ramifications in terms of forcing MLB to take their heads out of the sand in terms of Bonds. That's not to say that they can punish him for something he did in the past but I don't think they can continue on their merry way trying to sweep the performance enhancers issue as it relates to Bonds under the carpet.

KC Mar 08 2006 08:19 AM

I'm probably over-simplifying this - but if a book contains detailed allegations and reports that this happened and that happened and Bond's disagrees with the allegations why doesn't he just sue the asspants off the authors for slander and try to put a stop to it once and for all. My guess is that he doesn't have a case is why.

Edgy DC Mar 08 2006 08:27 AM

Not to push for one outcome or another at this time, but why can't they punish him for something he did in the past? He did it while it was illegal and against the rules of baseball. <pedant>Technically, all punishments MLB hands out are for transgressions done in the past.</pedant>

Rotblatt Mar 08 2006 08:45 AM

Can't the US charge him with perjury? He was granted immunization in exchange for testifying, but I don't think that includes perjury, and it seems pretty clear that he lied in his testimony. I agree with Sliver--this is a big deal, not for the allegations, but for the incredible detail with which the book skewers him. I mean, they have his doping schedule, the dosage amounts, etc. for what, 3 years? That's just crazy. MLB HAS to do something, starting with pressuring Bonds to retire. If Bonds is obstinate, then pressure the Giants to bench him. Maybe Selig can work out a deal--if Bonds retires now, he won't get banned from baseball while Selig is in power.

metirish Mar 08 2006 08:49 AM

If you ban Bonds and/or strip away all his numbers then every player that is found to have taken steroids should be treated the same way, Selig I think will tread lightly here and not deal with this until he has to.

Edgy DC Mar 08 2006 08:55 AM

irish seemingly has a rooting interest here. Yeah, of course any player that the league has the same amount of poop on should get the same sentence. How many is that, though? Of course MLB will tread lightly, as the discredit of a league's top player is a discredit of the league itself. But not because there's this much documented evidence available on countless other players. My guess, is that he'll get a first-time offender's sentence, as if he failed a random test.

metirish Mar 08 2006 09:34 AM

Well I don't really have a rooting interest , I just don't dislike Bonds, IMO he's the most compelling athlete in sports when he's at the plate, at least he used to be anyway, lets say this season Bonds has another monster one, over 40 homers, 50 if they pitch to him, then what?, I assume he's not taking anything now and that he's been tested.

Edgy DC Mar 08 2006 10:20 AM

I don't dislike him either. But being compelling should have nothing to do with it. ]...lets say this season Bonds has another monster one, over 40 homers, 50 if they pitch to him, then what?, I assume he's not taking anything now and that he's been tested. This sounds like a rooting interest also. Obviously, showing that you don't really need more money isn't, in itself, a defense for fraudulently getting some. And showing that you don't really need more athletic ability isn't, in itself, a defense for fraudulently getting some.

metirish Mar 08 2006 11:51 AM

Well I suppose in a way I am rooting for Bonds to have a great season, he was a great player before he allegedly started using steroids, I would like to see him catch Ruth and Aaron because it's a once in a generation thing.

Nymr83 Mar 08 2006 12:28 PM

i'd rather see Aaron keep the record for many reasons: Steroids and the adversity Aaron faced being the big two. i dislike Bonds as i'm sure you all know, but i'd be almost as upset if McGwire or Sosa (guys i liked) were about to break the record.

Frayed Knot Mar 08 2006 01:04 PM

]but why can't they punish him for something he did in the past? He did it while it was illegal and against the rules of baseball Is MLB prepared to tackle the legal morass of trying to punish Bonds based solely on the words of outsiders (the authors)? You know Barry's just going to deny that everything they claim is accurate and so long as he continues to pass baseball's mandated testing procedure then I'm not sure there's a lot they can do.

Edgy DC Mar 08 2006 01:20 PM

I doubt it. Obviously a lot more evidence would have to be in hand than the copy of the book. My admittedly pedantic point is that these charges can't be dismissed because "it's something he did in the past." They certainly can be dismissed if MLB doesn't have enough on him.

MFS62 Mar 08 2006 01:25 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: Is MLB prepared to tackle the legal morass of trying to punish Bonds based solely on the words of outsiders (the authors)? Its not the "word" of the authors. Their book is based on evidence and testimony presented in various courts of law, and accepted by those courts. The authors can make it public if challenged as to veracity. I'm certain the Law Department of the publishing company looked into this before the book was scheduled for release, lest they risk lawsuits. Later

Nymr83 Mar 08 2006 01:31 PM

what the HOF/MLB ultimately does about induction/stats/astericks is another matter but i don't think MLB will do anything suspension-wise unless someone fails a test now, the testing procedure is in place and it seems to be the only way to earn yourself a drug suspension, for better or worse.

metirish Mar 08 2006 01:33 PM

I didn't know Barry admitted to all that, I thought he admitted to 'cream & flak seed oil' but didn't know what it was.

Frayed Knot Mar 08 2006 01:47 PM

="MFS62"]Its not the "word" of the authors. Their book is based on evidence and testimony presented in various courts of law, and accepted by those courts. The authors can make it public if challenged as to veracity. I'm certain the Law Department of the publishing company looked into this before the book was scheduled for release, lest they risk lawsuits. That's fine. None of this means that MLB shouldn't believe what the book says, only that it's tough to legally use it as "proof". MLB and the Player's Assoc took a shit-load of time crafting a policy which states how & when a player will be tested, what he will be tested for, and what the specific punsihments will be for a positive test. For Selig and his boys to turn around and try to say; 'yeah, you passed all those hurdles with flying colors but we're going to make up a penalty for you anyway' would be more than a little tough to pull off, particularly against the PA who they tend to beat in court about once every 4th decade.

Edgy DC Mar 08 2006 02:07 PM

Yeah, I imagine if the book leads to the proof of anything, he'd have to punished under the light-handed standards of the year in which the transgressions they can stick hiim with took place.

HappyRecap Mar 08 2006 02:10 PM

The real joke was not having Bonds testify before that ridiculous committee where they were going to clean up baseball. These politicians have done such a wonderful job of getting drugs off of the streets so of course they are qualified to put a plan in place to get steroids out of baseball. Would have been great if Bonds had testified and someone had the maracas to ask him "...so you hit about 410 homers in 12 years but then about 295 in the next 6 or so, beginning at age 33....wassup with that?" I really hope there is some asterisk put next to his name.

seawolf17 Mar 08 2006 02:10 PM

I dislike Bonds as much as the next guy, but I still don't think anything comes of this. "Proof" or not, did he break any MLB rules? Not at the time, he didn't. I'd say that until there's a positive test, there won't be any backlash. Not to say his records aren't tainted; but what I'm saying is that we already "knew" they were tainted, even though we didn't have any proof. What will be interesting will be how MLB handles #715, should he get that far. It would probably be best for him to just take his bat and ball and Paula Abdul wig and go home and be with his family.

Rotblatt Mar 08 2006 02:23 PM

I agree with the consensus on the legality aspect of this, but in practical terms, baseball needs Bonds out of the picture. He's a symbol of how disfunctional MLB was regarding steroids, and everything he does from now on will just bring even more negative attention to baseball, particularly since he's about to break some monumental records. Frankly, I think they should find a way to get Giambi out of the picture as well, but that's clearly not going to happen and for some reason, people no longer care that he used steroids. Anyway, I think they need to cut some kind of deal with Bonds to get him to bow gracefully (or whatever the Bondsian equivalent is) out of baseball.

metirish Mar 08 2006 02:28 PM

Hold it a second here, Bonds and his freakish steroid taking HR hitters helped bring baseball back to where it is right now, never as popular according to Selig, gonna break attendence records again this year he says, yeah lets dump all the players suspected of taking steroids in the past, what a lame league it would make for.

Willets Point Mar 08 2006 02:31 PM

Sounds like scapegoating to me. I don't think a witch hunt to find and remove all 'roids users from 1995-2005 and expunge their records will do much good. I'm of the opinion that performance-enhancing drug use was the rule rather than the exception the past decade and thus singling out a few prominent players to punish is unfair. I think we have to accept that the stats of the past decade are tainted, but that since drug use was rampant it in a sense created a level playing field for that era (and of course this will be kept in mind when comparing to other eras). The rules in place if followed properly should bring back credibility to the game as well as prevent the uneccessary health risks of performance. As for the past, there's not much that can be done to change that so I say what's done is done. Many of these players are near the end of their careers anyhow and others will see their abilities dwindle now that they have to play honestly.

Frayed Knot Mar 08 2006 02:49 PM

]did he break any MLB rules? Not at the time Well yeah he did. The steroids that are named in this story have been banned in MLB for over a decade now. The only part that's new in the last few years is the agrrement that the league could pro-actively seek out the users. Again, I think the main problem with taking action based on these "new" revelations is that they really amount to only a preponderous of evidence: the ex-girlfriend's rants, trainer Anderson's supplying patterns, etc.; rather than hand-in-the-cookie-jar proof as spelled out in baseball 'Basic Agreement'. btw, anyone else get a kick out of the fact that one of the authors has the mouthful of a name of: Mark Fainaru-Wada when WADA is also the acronym for World Anti-Doping Agency?

Rotblatt Mar 08 2006 03:01 PM

Willets Point wrote: Sounds like scapegoating to me. I don't think a witch hunt to find and remove all 'roids users from 1995-2005 and expunge their records will do much good. I'm of the opinion that performance-enhancing drug use was the rule rather than the exception the past decade and thus singling out a few prominent players to punish is unfair. I think we have to accept that the stats of the past decade are tainted, but that since drug use was rampant it in a sense created a level playing field for that era (and of course this will be kept in mind when comparing to other eras). The rules in place if followed properly should bring back credibility to the game as well as prevent the uneccessary health risks of performance. As for the past, there's not much that can be done to change that so I say what's done is done. Many of these players are near the end of their careers anyhow and others will see their abilities dwindle now that they have to play honestly. Bonds is a special case, not only because he became the most prolific home run hitter since Ruth over the last few years, but because his ass was nailed so completely to the wall. Anyway, I'm not talking about a witch hunt, I'm talking about quietly working something out with Bonds to get him to retire. No (further) public disgrace, just a quiet exit from baseball.

Willets Point Mar 08 2006 03:03 PM

I'm thinking that he's going to quietly exit from baseball soon anyhow so why bother with the pr ugliness of trying to force him out.

Rotblatt Mar 08 2006 03:12 PM

Willets Point wrote: I'm thinking that he's going to quietly exit from baseball soon anyhow so why bother with the pr ugliness of trying to force him out. I would agree, but if he passes Ruth, it's going to spark a huge, public debate over steroids, and in an election year, I wouldn't be surprised to see Congress take an active role in the discussion. That could be bad for baseball. Although maybe people don't care, given Giambi becoming a folk hero to MFY fans.

Willets Point Mar 08 2006 03:14 PM

Well you know, Yankee fans aren't people. :)

metsmarathon Mar 08 2006 03:35 PM

chris russo is an idiot.

Nymr83 Mar 08 2006 06:21 PM

] chris russo is an idiot. yes, but what does that have to do with this thread? i didnt see any mention of russo... ]Frankly, I think they should find a way to get Giambi out of the picture as well, but that's clearly not going to happen and for some reason, people no longer care that he used steroids. Giambi isn't nearing any HR records, if he were we'd be outraged, as it is we don't care as much.

metirish Mar 08 2006 07:12 PM

I think part of what makes me support Bonds is that while he gets hammered by the national media Lance Armstrong is a hero, that sport is known for keeping ahead of the testers, if you think that Bonds took steroids, which I do then you should view Armstrong with great suspision, he has a great story though while Bonds is considered a prick by most.

soupcan Mar 08 2006 07:29 PM

I think its possible that Lance is/was a juicer but you'd really have to have some compelling evidence for me to seriously question him. So far everything I've seen or heard is really circumstantial and presented by people either with a grudge or with something to gain by tearing him down. Barry on the other end is a walking, talking 'Exhibit A'.

Nymr83 Mar 08 2006 07:30 PM

When Bonds recovers from life-threatening cancer to dominate his sport I'll give him the same respect Lance gets...

metsmarathon Mar 08 2006 08:42 PM

sorry, i was hoping somebody else had had the pleasure of listening to teh mike n mad dog interview of one of the authors of the book. i was trying to lead in to a discussion of what was said, even tho it was basically so ridiculous so as to not warrant any real discsussion, i guess. but i'll give it a try anyways. basically, chris started the following approximate train(wreck) of logic: bonds began taking steroids in 1998 bonds appeared in post season in 2000 bonds performed terribly in post season (and did the authors "run a statistical analysis on" bonds' performance in that postseason! HA!) how, therefore, can you say that steroids made him a better ballplayer? shouldn't tehy have made him a better player in that postseason? also, bonds' 1993 was better than his 2000, so how much did the steroids really help him become a better player in the regular season? also that the authors are putting the book out there to make money, and to his mind, that's a bad thing that severely tarnishes teh authors' credibility (essentially that if all they were out to do was to tell a true story, then presumably they should have simply made the info available to the public for free. i guess they should've just donated all the books straight into public libraries and eaten the cost. or, i dunno, provided all teh information in their columns in the SF chronicle like they did the past two years) ... the brilliant duo also had preceded this interview with a discussion of how steroids are more likely a problem in baseball than football, and that maybe the linemen are doing roids, but the skill positions sure wouldn't. and i guess maybe its conceivable that the recievers could. and i guess in a rare case a basketball player might be tempted to take roids, but had a hard time figuring out why. as if the only reason you would take steroids as an athlete anymore would be to hit a baseball farther. and that, y'know, a quarterback would have no need for a steroid. and almost certainly not a basketball player. which is an essentially ridiculous proposition. any athlete could "benefit" from the use of steroids. otherwise, why would any of them strength train? or even agility train? as if only hitters have muscles. nope - not quarterbacks! not centers or power forwards! nor point guards or running backs! not hockey players or pitchers! not golfers or tennis players! track guys might also use them, but surely not pitchers! it was ludicrous. simply ludicrous. that a 17-game slump or post season jitters could disprove that steroids made bonds a more powerful, and better, hitter, despite the preponderance of evidence from 1998-now. yeah, bonds' '93 was better than his '00, i'll give ya that. but he was also about 29, and he slugged better in '00, with more homers in about 70 fewer at bats. and yeah, at a time when his production should have dropped, at a time when he was using, his production soared. but those 17 at bats call into question the fact that steroids (or, by analogy, strength in general) benefit a hitter. idiot. the rest of teh interview was laughable as well. i hope its online soon. i was priceless. really.

MFS62 Mar 09 2006 05:32 AM

]bonds began taking steroids in 1998 bonds appeared in post season in 2000 bonds performed terribly in post season (and did the authors "run a statistical analysis on" bonds' performance in that postseason! HA!) how, therefore, can you say that steroids made him a better ballplayer? shouldn't tehy have made him a better player in that postseason? Thon, when I heard that "logic" I didn't know whether to laugh, cry, or scream "you stupid bastard" at the radio. I chose the third oprion. Later

Nymr83 Mar 09 2006 05:44 AM

Russo is indeed fairly stupid, I remember once him and the Francessa talking about Delgado being from Puerto Rico and they didn't seem to know jack shit about Puerto Rico thinking it a foreign country along the lines of Cuba or the Dominican Republic, i felt like calling up and giving them a history lesson but whats the point?

Rotblatt Mar 09 2006 08:53 AM

Anyone watch the Daily Show last night? Rob Corddry as senior steroids analyst was hilarious--it was more the timing than anything else, but I'll try to duplicate it here anyway. John: "Rob, how did your interview with Barry Bonds go?" Rob: "Well, John, it was kind of tough." John: "What happened?" Rob [crazy deadpan]: "He tore a phone book in half and tried to fuck a Coke machine" He remained unbelieveably straight-faced for the next 30 seconds of laughter and John doing his usual "What, are you serious?" face. John: "Well, I hope you're alright." Rob: "Sure, John, I'm fine, but the Coke machine--let's just say it only accepts exact change now." They don't have a clip up on Comedy Central but it was a really hilarious bit . . .

metirish Mar 09 2006 08:54 AM

Oh I would love to see that.....

Edgy DC Mar 09 2006 09:03 AM

I recall an actual account of of Coke machine copulation in (I think) an eighties Sports Illustrated expose of steroids in the professional bodybuilding circuit.

KC Mar 09 2006 10:55 AM

HahnSolo Mar 09 2006 11:09 AM

]also that the authors are putting the book out there to make money, and to his mind, that's a bad thing that severely tarnishes teh authors' credibility That's golden, since Russo is the guy who has been humping his forthcoming book on a daily basis on his show.

Benjamin Grimm Mar 09 2006 11:11 AM

Edgy DC wrote: I recall an actual account of of Coke machine copulation in (I think) an eighties Sports Illustrated expose of steroids in the professional bodybuilding circuit. I don't get it. What's the connection between Coke machines and steroids? (Or is the answer not fit for nine-year-olds?)

Rotblatt Mar 09 2006 11:33 AM

That's a good question, Yance. Maybe the boys burn while they're shrinking and the cold is soothing?

Edgy DC Mar 09 2006 11:39 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 09 2006 01:12 PM

Well, the reported side effect was a testes shrunk to the size of cocktail peanuts but an almost constant erection, so the bodybuilders would be lying about the hotel between workouts looking for things to do with their woodies. While the account of the 'roidboy humping the change slot of the coke machine is almost certainly exaggerated or pure myth, it stuck with me and it's funny to read it again. Maybe the writer of the sketch read the same article and it stuck with him or her.

ScarletKnight41 Mar 09 2006 12:28 PM

So that's what they were referring to on The Daily Show last night! Thanks for the explanation Edgy.

Zvon Mar 09 2006 03:03 PM

Rotblatt wrote: Anyone watch the Daily Show last night? Rob Corddry as senior steroids analyst was hilarious--it was more the timing than anything else, but I'll try to duplicate it here anyway. John: "Rob, how did your interview with Barry Bonds go?" Rob: "Well, John, it was kind of tough." John: "What happened?" Rob [crazy deadpan]: "He tore a phone book in half and tried to fuck a Coke machine" He remained unbelieveably straight-faced for the next 30 seconds of laughter and John doing his usual "What, are you serious?" face. John: "Well, I hope you're alright." Rob: "Sure, John, I'm fine, but the Coke machine--let's just say it only accepts exact change now." They don't have a clip up on Comedy Central but it was a really hilarious bit . . . That was a classic bit.:):) Rob Corddry is the master of the fake news report these days since Colbert got his own gig.

Zvon Mar 09 2006 03:24 PM

Rotblatt wrote: Anyway, I think they need to cut some kind of deal with Bonds to get him to bow gracefully (or whatever the Bondsian equivalent is) out of baseball. [rant] Bonds wont step down. It would be nice if he realized the jig was up, but he wont. He became obsessed. Obsessed with HRs, fame, Mac and his uncle Willies records, himself, and ultimately enhancement drugs. Nothing was gonna stand in his way. Not his age, not the rules, and certainly not the truth. The sad thing is he could have had a nice little Hall Of Fame career just going with his God given talents. Everything he has accomplished since he started pumping this shit into his system is now tainted. I have no answer as to how baseball should handle this. They cannot and will not erase records. An simple asterisk is not enough. The players union has made sure to protect players who THEY KNOW were using in the past by the wording of their agreement with MLB. Baseball has looked the other way for a long time. The San Francisco Giants managment knew what was going on and condoned it. But still there must be a distinction between Mr Bonds accomplishments and those of players that did not cheat and did not lie. For the good of everything that I hold sacred about this game, he must be held accountable for his indescretions. He does not deserve to stand tall with the likes of Willie Mays, Babe Ruth, and Hank Aaron. As far as the record books go..........? I dunno. What can be done? What if as this new century progresses physical enhancement drugs are created that are more acceptable to society? Safer to use. There are already many acceptable things available to todays athletes that were not to those of the past that aid them physically. It seems every day a new drug is being created that enhances the quality of life. This is certainly a possibility that may end up separating and closing the book on baseball records of the 20th century, truly the golden age of baseball. [/end rant]

Johnny Dickshot Mar 09 2006 03:33 PM

Records have to stand. In the future, they'll look at what happened between say, 1990 and 2002 and know they came during the "questionable training methods era" and move on.

Bret Sabermetric Mar 09 2006 03:47 PM

So when little Dickshot asks you "Dad, who's the greatest slugger of all time? Was it Bonds or Aaron? Or Ruth? Maybe McGwire?" you'll go "Let me tell you about questionable training methods, son. Sit down, we'll be here for a while..."

Bret Sabermetric Mar 09 2006 03:49 PM

Of course, by that time, maybe the answer will be "I think Milledge has them all lapped, son."

Rotblatt Mar 09 2006 07:12 PM

Breaking news from [url=http://www.theonion.com/content/node/46188&rss=1]the Onion[/url]. ]Barry Bonds Took Steroids, Reports Everyone Who Has Ever Watched Baseball March 9, 2006 | Onion Sports SAN FRANCISCO—With the publication of a book detailing steroid use by San Francisco Giants superstar Barry Bonds, two San Francisco Chronicle reporters have corroborated the claims of Bonds' steroid abuse made by every single person who has watched or even loosely followed the game of baseball over the past five years. In Game Of Shadows, an excerpt of which appeared in Sports Illustrated Wednesday, authors Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams claim that more than a dozen people close to Bonds had either been directly informed that Bonds was using banned substances or had in fact seen him taking the drugs with their own eyes. In addition to those witnesses, nearly 250 million other individuals nationwide had instantly realized that Bonds was using banned substances after observing his transformation from lanky speedster to hulking behemoth with their own eyes. According to hundreds of thousands of reports coming out of every city in the U.S., Bonds' steroid use has been widely reported and well-documented for years, with sports columnists, bloggers, people attending baseball games, memorabilia collectors, major ballpark popcorn and peanut vendors, groundskeepers, roommates, significant others, fathers-in-law, next-door neighbors, fellow fitness club members, bartenders, mailmen, coworkers, teachers, doormen, parking-lot attendants, fellow elevator passengers, Home Depot clerks, servicemen and women serving in Iraq, former baseball players, Congressmen, second-tier stand-up comics, Sports Illustrated's Rick Reilly, and random passersby all having stated at some point in the last five years that Bonds was obviously taking some sort of performance-enhancing drugs. Many of those eyewitnesses came forward following Wednesday's revelation with their own accounts of Bonds' seven-year history of steroid use. "I originally heard that Barry Bonds was on steroids during a Giants game in 2001, when my buddy Phil, who was on the couch next to me, said, 'Dude, that Barry Bonds guy is definitely on steroids,'" said Chicago resident Mitch Oliveras. "After 10 seconds of careful observation, and performing a brief comparison of Bonds' present neck width with that on Phil's old 1986 Bonds rookie card, I was convinced." "I can see how some people might be shocked about Bonds' doping, but this has been an open secret for years among the people in my industry," said air-conditioner repairman Mike Damus. "I'm sure it's an even more widely known fact in baseball." "Everyone in our front office has known about Bonds since the 2001 season," said San Francisco-area accounts-receivable secretary Mindy Harris of McCullers and Associates, Ltd. "People in our ninth-floor office, too, and all seven branch offices. None of us were sure exactly which kind of steroids he was on, but we were pretty sure it was the kind that causes you to gain 30 pounds of muscle in one offseason, get injured more easily, become slow-footed, shave your head to conceal your thinning hair, lash out at the media and fans, engage in violent and abrupt mood swings, grow taut tree-trunk-like neck muscles, expand your hatband by six inches, and hit 73 home runs in a single season." "Come to think of it, we're all fairly certain he's on all of them," Harris added. "My 6-year-old son and I bonded over our mutual agreement that Bonds was obviously juicing up," San Francisco-area construction worker Tom Frankel said. "I hope that, one day, little Davey will have kids of his own, and that they will be able to easily glean the knowledge that Bonds was a cheater just by looking at the remarkable shift in his year-by-year statistics on his Hall of Fame plaque." In light of the most recent accusations, which echo what any idiot with a pair of eyes and even the most fundamental knowledge of how the human body works has made in recent years, MLB Commissioner Bud Selig issued a statement Wednesday to address the issue. "It is unfair to judge Mr. Bonds based solely on the fact that everyone says he has taken some sort of performance-enhancing drug for the past five years," Selig said. "I myself think Bonds has been taking steroids—I'm not blind, after all—but nothing, even an admission by Bonds himself, can conclusively prove that he took steroids, as he has not tested positively in an MLB-sanctioned drug test. Unless that is somehow made to happen, we must all accept his recent unfathomable accomplishments as one of the truly exciting and continuing storylines of this great sport." When reached for comment, Bonds insisted that he "[doesn't] have time to deal with all these charges." "I'm not going to respond to these 228 million allegations," Bonds said. "I don't care what every last person in the entire world thinks. As long as my fans believe me, that's the most important thing."

Johnny Dickshot Mar 09 2006 09:02 PM

Bret Sabermetric wrote: So when little Dickshot asks you "Dad, who's the greatest slugger of all time? Was it Bonds or Aaron? Or Ruth? Maybe McGwire?" you'll go "Let me tell you about questionable training methods, son. Sit down, we'll be here for a while..." I'm saying we'd look at it like the dead-ball era or the pre-intregration years, or whatever era with a wideranging effect and a fairly defined beginning and ending.

Edgy DC Mar 23 2006 12:04 PM

Not highly publicized, but this book also impilicates Gary Sheffield as taking injections of testosterone and human growth hormone as a Brave in 2002.

silverdsl Mar 23 2006 03:27 PM

I think what the book says about Sheffield is getting some attention - it's on the back pages of both Newsday and the Daily News today (don't know about the Post). But it seems as if fans don't care as much about what Sheffield did as opposed to Bonds.

Edgy DC Mar 23 2006 03:40 PM

Yeah, well, I got the publicity ball rolling with my post at 2:00. Sure, now it's everywhere. At 1:55 it was a guarded secret.

KC Mar 23 2006 03:49 PM

The Bonds' camp is going to sue the book dudes ... this should be fun for like years. Hey, ooops, never mind ... I thought I saw a white Bronco.

cleonjones11 Mar 23 2006 10:01 PM

Is the white Bronco John Elway?

Edgy DC Apr 18 2006 03:06 PM

Are other columnists calling ESPN out like this guy?

MFS62 Apr 18 2006 03:29 PM

Edgy DC wrote: Are other columnists calling ESPN out like this guy? I thought I saw something similar on either Yahoo or AOL sports. If I can find the link I'll post it. Later

Frayed Knot Apr 18 2006 09:45 PM

ESPN in general - and not just a few commentators specifically - are def carrying the water for Bonds. It's not just the show and their almost knee-jerk reaction of cross-promoting everything connected with the ESPN/ABC/Disney world, but they think all of us are still hanging on every HR he hits as they break into SportsCenter, other games, and certainly BB2N in order to bring us **Live Coverage** of Barry's current AB. I do believe it was someone however at ESPN that suggested that the series be re-named [u:d74aa88ef4]Bonds on Bond[/u:d74aa88ef4] if these perjury charges go through.

mlbaseballtalk Apr 19 2006 07:27 AM

silverdsl wrote: I think what the book says about Sheffield is getting some attention - it's on the back pages of both Newsday and the Daily News today (don't know about the Post). But it seems as if fans don't care as much about what Sheffield did as opposed to Bonds. Everyone uses the conveinent excuse that Sheffield (and by extention Giambi and to a lesser degree all the other highly publicized rumored juicers like Piazza, Bagwell, Gonzalez, Dysktra, Anderson or those already admitted like Caminiti) isn't chasing down hallowed records like McGwire and Sosa did, and what Bonds is doing, or chasing down distinctive marks like Palmerio

Elster88 Apr 19 2006 07:42 AM

When did Piazza become "highly publicized rumored". I must have missed those publications.

mlbaseballtalk Apr 19 2006 07:53 AM

Elster88 wrote: When did Piazza become "highly publicized rumored". I must have missed those publications. Okay, maybe thats from him always being lumped in when sports talk hosts, callers, and irresponsible columnists start running down names of people they suspect of doing something due to change in apperances. In other words, he's on virtually every list And he did do a press confrence saying he wasn't on steriods, which was so close to his "I'm NOT GAY" press confrence that people thought it was funny that Piazza would call two press confrences to say absoultly nothing.

Elster88 Apr 19 2006 07:55 AM

]And he did do a press confrence saying he wasn't on steriods I must have been under a rock when this happened.

Edgy DC Apr 19 2006 07:56 AM

Although I've certainly had my suspicions about Piazza, I haven't seen him lumped in on supsect lists.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 19 2006 07:56 AM

I don't recall any such press conference either.

mlbaseballtalk Apr 19 2006 08:06 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: I don't recall any such press conference either. Hmmm, I thought it was considered a press conference. It was a press gathering though and Piazza flat out said he didn't do steriods and people were joking after words that Piazza was doing alot of talking about doing nothing in recent weeks

Elster88 Apr 19 2006 08:21 AM

Are you making this up?

mlbaseballtalk Apr 19 2006 08:27 AM

Elster88 wrote: Are you making this up? Making what up? In the summer of 02 he first had to answer the "Are you gay" nonsense thanks to the Post, then a few weeks later some poll came out about the amount of players on juice and he had to answer the "Are you on roids questions" it truely was a situation where Piazza had to answer questions by saying he wasn't doing anything. The first one was definatly a press conference, I remember a talk radio joke aimed at Piazza that people generally call press conferences when they "announce" something, not when they say they aren't something (see Farve, Brett)

Frayed Knot Apr 19 2006 09:50 AM

Well, Piazza talked to "press gatherings" virtually every day; otherwise known as groups of reporters gathered around his locker, as they did on a regular basis for all of the "name" players and a number of the lesser ones as well. If we want to label that "a press conference" than Mike held one almost daily on almost any subject you want to name. Even the 'I'm Not Gay' "announcement" was more an answer to a hanging question while a group of scribes and mikes were around than it was a formal press set-up.

Willets Point May 01 2006 07:57 AM

Roid Race: McGwire v. Bonds.

Willets Point May 10 2006 12:49 PM

I love it when The Nation covers sports. Good for some laughs at least.

Edgy DC May 10 2006 01:07 PM

Wow, Babe Ruth was of questionable character and played in a segregated era! Who knew?

Willets Point May 10 2006 01:18 PM

He even repeated the pinstripes were made to look Ruth look slimmer myth.

metsmarathon May 10 2006 02:05 PM

of course, while the talent pool was thinned by the exclusion of blacks and the lack of inclusion of latin americans, it was also greatly condensed by the paucity of teams in the leagues at the time. does it even itself out? i dunno, but it does restore some of the comparative balance. if modern hitters are getting fat off the soft middle relief underbelly, then the opposite was true pre-expansion.

Edgy DC May 10 2006 02:06 PM

]does it even itself out? Not really.

Elster88 Jun 07 2006 07:06 AM

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2473485]Jason Grimsley admitted to steriod use[/url] I'm not sure why this is a big deal today. Apparently, Grimsley failed a drug test in 2003, so this isn't new (unless that was before they were publicizing the results of the testing?). On the radio this morning (pinch of salt) they made it seem like Grimsley was going to name names. He apparently has ties to BALCO. Here's the article: ________________________________ Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher Jason Grimsley told federal investigators he used illegal performance-enhancing drugs, according to court documents unsealed late Tuesday. Thirteen agents searched Grimsley's house in Scottsdale, Ariz., for six hours Tuesday, according to Internal Revenue Service agent Mark Lessler, who would not say what they found. In seeking a judge's permission for the search, investigators who cracked the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative steroid scandal said Grimsley initially cooperated in the probe. He withdrew his assistance in April, but not before he allegedly made "extensive statements" about illegal drug use, "for the purpose of performance enhancement," according to the court documents. IRS agent Jeff Novitsky told the federal judge that investigators wanted to search the right-hander's house for "any and all records showing contact or relationship with any and all amateur or professional athletes, athletic coaches or athletic trainers" regarding illicit drug use and purchases. According to Novitsky, Grimsley told him the names of other players he believed were using, but the names of those players were blacked out of the court records. "I have no comment about that and no idea about that," Grimsley told The Arizona Republic on Tuesday, hours before the Diamondbacks played the Philadelphia Phillies. After Arizona's 10-1 loss, manager Bob Melvin said news of the investigation might have affected the team. Grimsley spent the game in the bullpen and warmed up at one point. "Certainly, it locks you up for a little bit, but down the road we'll be fine," Melvin said. "We haven't convicted this guy. This is an ongoing investigation. I just think that the effect on us today, as we heard about one of our teammates, it certainly had an effect on us. Nothing's been proven. He hasn't been proven guilty of anything. It's just, there's allegations." Diamondbacks managing general partner Ken Kendrick issued a statement saying, "We were first informed of this situation late this afternoon. This is a federal investigation, and as long as it is active and ongoing, we are prohibited from making any further comments." Grimsley began his big league career with Philadelphia in 1989 and has pitched for Cleveland, California, the New York Yankees, Kansas City, Baltimore and Arizona. He has a career record of 42-58 with a 4.77 ERA. According to court documents, Grimsley failed a league drug test in 2003. Authorities said when he was cooperating, he admitted to using human growth hormone, amphetamines and steroids. He added that amphetamine use was prevalent in pro baseball, and that it was placed in coffee in clubhouses -- marked "leaded" or "unleaded" to indicate which pots contained the drugs -- Novitsky wrote. The Republic reported that Latino players were cited by Grimsley in the court documents as a major source of amphetamines, as were major leaguers on California teams who could easily travel to Mexico to buy the drugs. The newspaper reported that the affidavit, which was filed in U.S. District Court in Phoenix, said that Grimsley took delivery of two kits containing human growth hormone at his home on April 19. Word of the Grimsley investigation comes nearly two months after an Illinois-based scientist prominent in the field of sports nutritional supplements pleaded guilty to supplying the BALCO lab with the performance-enhancing drug known as "the clear." Patrick Arnold pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute steroids to BALCO, a steroid ring that San Francisco investigators broke up two years ago. Those same authorities are targeting Grimsley. Arnold is scheduled to be sentenced in August and most likely will face three months in jail and three months of home detention. A federal grand jury in San Francisco is also investigating whether San Francisco Giants outfielder Barry Bonds lied under oath about using "the clear." A separate federal grand jury is probing who leaked Bonds' testimony from the BALCO investigation to the San Francisco Chronicle. So far, the BALCO probe has netted guilty pleas from Arnold, BALCO president Victor Conte, Bonds' trainer Greg Anderson, BALCO vice president James Valente and track coach Remi Korchemny.

silverdsl Jun 07 2006 08:45 AM

Not a big deal? Based on what I've heard I think the Grimsley investigation could potentially have huge consequences depending on where it goes. First, I was under the impression, and I could be wrong, that this is completely separate from Balco, that Grimsley was getting performance enhancers from an entirely different source. Also, it was said on the radio that there is the possiblity that Grimsley wasn't just a client, buying HGH and steroids, he was also actively distributing performance enhancers to other players. In addition, Grimsley has played with a lot of teams, including the Yankees, so there could be a lot of interesting names that come up if he actually does fully name names. And it brings the whole issue of HGH into the forefront - Grimsley said that once MLB started testing for steroids he simply switched to HGH, which they don't test for. Countless other players likely did the same and MLB shouldn't have their heads in the sand about that.

Elster88 Jun 07 2006 08:46 AM

My apologies. I didn't know all that. From what I'd read/skimmed and heard, I only thought the potential new reprecussions would be if Grimsley "named names", and that the rest was a mostly a rehash of old news. As a seperate legal question, does it matter if Grimsley testifies that someone else does/did steroids? Isn't that a he said/he said type of deal?

silverdsl Jun 07 2006 08:55 AM

Found this Daily News article that has slightly more information: [url=http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/story/424493p-358155c.html]http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/story/424493p-358155c.html[/url]. Grimsley was apparently getting his stuff from a doctor in Fla and an equipment salesman. He claims that other players got performance enhancers from a doctor in Colorado. I'm also wondering about the he said/he said aspect of things, but I'd guess that they can at least investigate the people that Grimsley has named.

Frayed Knot Jun 07 2006 01:56 PM

D'Backs release Grimsley

Edgy DC Jun 07 2006 02:09 PM

WowBobWow! Those 'Backs sure know how to cut ties, don't they? It all still strikes me as "Major League Baseball and its teams, in defense of the sanctity of competitive fairness, and out of concern for the health of our athletes and the young fans that look up to them, will deal with the abuse of illegal performance-enhancing drugs in the strictest possible manner, with deference to the current usefulness of the player in question and the financial commitment involved."

OlerudOwned Jun 07 2006 02:45 PM

http://www.onestopbaseball.com/showarticle.asp?ArticleID=2339 ]General Manager Josh Byrnes told a Chase Field news conference that Grimsley had requested his unconditional release in meetings with team officials Tuesday and Wednesday. "We accepted his request," Brynes said. Byrnes would not discuss if Grimsley would be paid the remainder of his roughly $800,000 salary. Diamondbacks pitcher Terry Mulholland said Grimsley addressed his teammates after Tuesday's loss to the Philadelphia Phillies. "He expressed to us that he had too much respect for us to allow this to bring us down," Mulholland said. "He's that kind of guy." Also, a [url=http://www.azcentral.com/pdfs/060706grimsley.pdf]PDF of the affidavit[/url] that has a whole lot of blacked out names. How long they stay blacked out will remain to be seen.

seawolf17 Jun 08 2006 08:25 AM

Outside The Lines, [url=http://www.progressiveboink.com/dugout/archive/jon49.html]Dugout[/url] style. ]STEROIDS_BobLey_STEROIDS: You have fans? Really? A journeyman middle reliever? GrimFandango: well yeah I mean STEROIDS_BobLey_STEROIDS: Hahaha, I bet they call themselves "Grimsleyheads". What's a Grimsleyhead, just a guy wearing a baseball cap? Do they high-five every time you earn a "hold"? If I send a self-addressed stamped envelope can I sign up to be one of the Grimsley Gang? GrimFandango: Well anyway, I know that a lot of these guys who use these sorts of drugs have to put up with a lot of scrutiny, and STEROIDS_BobLey_STEROIDS: Yeah, yeah, but you see, those guys are actually good. That's why they're scrutinized. You're the guy who comes in during the bottom of the 7th, squeezes the rosin bag, throws four balls outside and in the dirt, and then walks to the dugout.

Johnny Dickshot Jun 08 2006 08:28 AM

LOL

Johnny Dickshot Jun 08 2006 08:50 AM

Fascinating document. Sounds as if Grimsley may have buttfucked himself by backing out his cooperation agreement, and the release at HIS request speaks volumes about violating Omerta. Strap in, this is gonna get dicey.

metirish Jun 08 2006 08:53 AM

I want names and I want them now, step forward Mr. Sheffield, has Grimsley signed a book deal yet?

SteveJRogers Jun 08 2006 09:59 AM

You can't handle the NAMES! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, OO? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for the Mets and you curse Sheffield. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that performance enhancement addition in this game, while tragic, probably saved this game. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saved the game...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent playing a game and entertaining the public. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very entertainment I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a bat and glove and stand a position. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to! The Fans: Did you take HGH? Bonds: (quietly) I did the job you sent me to do. The Fans: Did you order the code red? Bonds: You're goddamn right I did!!

MFS62 Jun 08 2006 10:47 AM

Thank you Mr. Nicholson, or is it Mr. Rogers? Nah, Mr. Rogers never used language like that. LOL! Nice parody of a great scene for what I feel was a very underrated movie. Now, I have to go and arrest Barry Bonds. Tell him I said "Hello". I will Later

Elster88 Jun 08 2006 10:50 AM

I can't remember who did it, but during the WBC I was complaining about Pedro's toe and someone did a hilarious A Few Good Men parody. And I can't find it. Was it seawolf?

soupcan Jun 08 2006 11:04 AM

]GrimFandango: Hey, uh, you know what? When I played with the Yankees we all did steroids. Roger Clemens would inject a 3-liter syringe into his neck and breast-feed the rest of us. You know what? I believe that.