TheSmokingGun for Barry Bonds....
Allen
Posts: 7,165 ✭✭✭
Allen
Posts: 7,165 ✭✭✭
Allen
Posts: 7,165 ✭✭✭
Comments
One thing is for sure, I think Jeremy Giambi missed a few doses
Did Bonds take steroids? If you are completely convinced either way, you have put no critical thought into it. But either way, it doesn't bother me. No tube of cream ever hit a home run.
2005 Origins Old Judge Brown #/20 and Black 1/1s, 2000 Ultimate Victory Gold #/25
2004 UD Legends Bake McBride autos & parallels, and 1974 Topps #601 PSA 9
Rare Grady Sizemore parallels, printing plates, autographs
Nothing on ebay
I agree on Bonds (even if I want to believe he is a guilty as sin), but Rose was caught with his hand in the proverbial till. There was a helluva lot more than circumstantial evidence and hearsay to ban Rose for life. It took 15 years but even that lying douchebag himself finally told the truth (albeit in a misguided attempt to sell books).
The truth about Bonds will out itself, and I will wait patiently for the real eveidence to emerge.
There are motivations apparent on both sides for getting big names involved.
Bonds' name was found in a folder at his trainer's home detailing steroid distributions. If BALCO is, as you suggest, getting Bonds' name involved for their own purposes then they did so by planting that folder in Anderson's files in anticipation of a search warrant being served. Possible? Sure, in the same sense that it's possible that Mario Mendoza will come out of retirement and bat .400 next year, but reasonable? Explain how planting an additional piece of damning evidence evidence against yourself is more helpful than destroying the evidence that is already there. Bottom line, there is no way BALCO had access to Anderson's files or there would have been no files for the Feds to find.
No tube of cream ever hit a home run.
Well, OK, that's true in a very literal sense. But a man with a tube of cream can sure hit a lot more home runs than he could without it. Ken Caminiti has been the most visible proof of this, although Bonds will soon take that title as well.
If you are completely convinced either way, you have put no critical thought into it.
If you mean would I bet the lives of my family on it, then no, I am not completely convinced. But, if you mean if I had the opportunity would I bet huge sums of money on it, then yes, I am convinced. At this point, the parallels to the OJ trial are pretty strong. If you want to believe that Bonds didn't take steroids or that OJ didn't kill his ex-wife, then you are left with only one alternative. You must believe that there is a vast and growing conspiracy involving hundreds of people - none of whom has any compelling reason to lie, and all of whom face serious financial and criminal consequences if they are found to be lying.
As for the leaks, I agree that that kind of thing is always wrong and hopefully there will be consequences if there were any laws broken. But the existence of leaks says nothing about the merits of the case.
considering all that you all seem to
think is "common knowledge" about
Bonds supposedly doing steroids,
that MLB coaches and managers would
voluntarily get together to award Bonds
this Silver Slugger or any other award...
Silver Slugger selections are based on a combination
of offensive statistics, as well as general impressions
of a player's overall offensive value. Major League Baseball
coaches and managers voted for a player at each position
in the National and American League. Managers and coaches
were not allowed to vote for a player on their own team.
Here is the whole story for those
who are interested in what the Pros
think about Bonds...
Bonds Wins 12th Silver Slugger Award
Bonds is a similar case where you have these parties of dubious credibility making somewhat vague statements. Or at least, that's what you have if you believe everything that is being continuously leaked to the papers. There is no physical evidence, like pills or creams or whatever it is being found in Bonds's house or locker or anything like that. No drug test failures that we know of. The people who look at the changes in Bonds's physique over the last 15 years and can't believe hard work alone did that are the same kind of people say Britney Spears got breast implants just because her boobs grew.
Dallasactuary - By critical thought I mean if you look at the words being attributed to people, and who those people are, and what there motivations might be for making such statements. Incorrect, or even misleading testimony does happen, especially for prosecutorial witnesses where the defense is to prove a negative. It is impossible for Bonds to prove that he never took a steroid. There is no test for the absence of steroids, especially cute when one of the products he supposedly took is something that masks the presence of steroids.
Bonds has never denied being a customer of Balco, and he's been with his trainer for years, so the presence of his name in their files is not a mystery. The papers about steroid distribution are only "apparent" according to the article, so what that means is anyone's guess. It's doubtful that there is something like,"July 30, personally injected Barry Bonds with 10CC of anabolic steroids." This is Pete Rose's betting slips all over again, where a little piece of paper with "Atl 7, Phi 6" written on it by Tommy Gioiosa is considered rock-solid evidence. Nor is a conspiracy of "hundreds" of people necessary, as the smokinggun article points out. Conte would only give "the cream" and "the clear" directly to the customer. That limits exposure both ways. The rest is hearsay. And since Conte is the one who looks to be under indictment, statements against Bonds could be seen, at least by cynical people, to be a way for him to make his position seem more important and thus give him a little leverage in any legal negotiations that might go on.
Taken altogether, even a cynical and skeptical person would have to say that with massive muscle gain, involvement with a company that is widely believed to be in the steroid business, a trainer who admits to giving steroids to other people, you've got some smoldering if not sparks. Tough to stay clean if you live in the dirt, but what I'm saying is that no one's proven anything yet, and if you think they have, then you are too easily convinced.
But finally, why I'm not bothered if Bonds makes steroid omelettes for breakfast, and what I mean when I talk about a tube of cream not hitting home runs, consider that there are quite a few hugely muscled guys in baseball, and not all of them can hit home runs. And many skinny guys can. Look at Gabe Kapler. When he came up, he was literally a Mr. Universe body-builder type, and is still quite a specimen (check out his '98 Bowman card). He's played his career in the most powered-up era in history in Texas, Colorado, Detroit (old stadium), and Boston, four parks which are not exactly pitcher's parks, and he's got a total of 61 homers in 2198 at-bats, and the first 32 of those came in his first 885 ABs. Slightly better than what Gabe Kaplan might do. The difference between Mark McGwire and Mark McLemore wasn't just a couple dozen pounds of muscle. Eyes, timing, pitch recognition, and coordination of arms, shoulders, wrists, hips, legs, and head are larger parts of the equation than how big your muscles are.
Here's something else to think about: If Bonds, or other players, were juiced up, wouldn't we be seeing 500-foot home runs every week? On any given pitch, with the right velocity and location, coupled with the right swing, the formula is there for a monumental shot. But we're not seeing that. Almost 50 years after Mantle came close, no one has yet hit the ball out of Yankee Stadium. Bonds is the only one who can hit into McCovey Cove. Why no legendary taters?
2005 Origins Old Judge Brown #/20 and Black 1/1s, 2000 Ultimate Victory Gold #/25
2004 UD Legends Bake McBride autos & parallels, and 1974 Topps #601 PSA 9
Rare Grady Sizemore parallels, printing plates, autographs
Nothing on ebay
Excellent post. I think where you and I are not seeing eye-to-eye boils down to two things:
1. The files the agents found detailing "apparent" steroid distribution. I am assuming that the facts laid out in their memo are correct - the alternative is that they (and "hundreds of people") are part of a conspiracy. The trainer's files probably did contain codes rather than explict "I gave steroids to Bonds at 2:00 PM" entries; but they contained codes that the agents recognized immediately. In other words, finding incomprehensible codes and postulating later that they are related to steroids is one thing, finding codes which you previously had connected to steroid distribution is another, and it appears that it is the latter that happened in the Bonds file.
2. BALCO representatives have said that they gave steroids to Bonds. You say that this may be to make them look more "important" but I can not see how it could possibly not make them look more guilty. I completely agree that a defendant could get some leverage by cooperating on part of a case, but I don't understand how it makes sense to EXPAND the government's case against oneself by throwing out the name of someone you didn't give steroids to for that purpose. In my extensive criminal law experience, running the gamut from Mannix to NYPD Blue, a defendant will confess to a made-up lesser crime to throw the cops off the trail of a larger crime (that makes sense); he does not make up an additional related offense that makes the case against himself even stronger (that doesn't make sense).
Could I be wrong? Of course, and there is no way I would convict Barry Bonds of a criminal offense if I was on his hypothetical jury based on what I know. I'm not saying that the evidence is THAT strong. But that is a red herring; this isn't a criminal case against Bonds and there is no reason to apply the standards of a criminal court here. We're not talking about whether Bonds should be deprived of his life or his liberty. But, as I said, if given the opportunity to bet vast sums of money that Bonds was given steroids by BALCO, I would. Wouldn't you?
Regarding the other post about the Silver Slugger Award, I guess the answer is, some of the player's don't think he took steroids and some of them do but don't care. What that proves one way or the other about his possible steroid use escapes me entirely.
An interesting book on steroids in sports is "Faust's Gold," which chronicles the East German Olympic juggernaut of the 70s and 80s. Although many swimmers and track athletes were juiced to the gills with steroids (and looked like it!), virtually all passed drug tests. When the Wall came down, it was revealed that nearly all athletes who looked like they were on steroids, were on steroids.
Does Sammy's head look bigger?
Put a picture of Roger Clemens in 1986 next to a picture of Roger Clemens in 2004. His head is bigger. His everything is bigger.
Look at pictures of Willie McCovey, Willie Stargell, or pictures of me in our early 20's and then mid-30's. Its the same.
Ill wait to condemn when there is actual proof. Then Ill be first in line. But the guy is the greatest ball player of his time, easily.
<< <i> I believe bat speed is just slightly important when hitting a baseball >>
Have you ever played baseball? Bat speed is very important. One thing about steroids is that you are stronger and able to hit with more force and speed, but that also helps to create a more compact swing (for which Bonds is famous). Bonds was a very good player before he found his "magic juice" and that was when he became the "Greatest Ever" I think it is like that episode of SouthPark "Using steroids is alot like pretending to be retarted to win the special olympics"
Save on ebay with Big Crumbs
I don't think you should be high when playing baseball.