Disgusted with Bonds?

[SmootSmack]

If you're not cheating, you're not trying

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

If you're not cheating, you're not trying

I'm out!

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

I guess I didn't realize that baseball had any integrity left to lose.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I guess I didn't realize that baseball had any integrity left to lose.

You may have it SGG.

[FRPLG]

I agree that baseball has no integrity. And I agree that sometimes you have to bite the bullet and make a hard decison in life. But the reality of THIS situation is that it is a business and they cannot simply go and make the RIGHT moral/ethical decision without consideration of what is best for business. To you and many others(including me) just wiping these guys out and never speaking of them again is the right ethical/moral way to go and would be a great way to begin building a foundation of integrity that would strengthen the games appeal. But you would have to PROVE they were guilty and totally wipe out as many as you could fairly. The problem with that is that there are a majority of lesser thinking people out there that would see it is a reason to just give up on baseball once and for all. Many people just float along with their head in the sand to this type of stuff because it is easier and more enjoyable. Presented with the cheating as a these people would most likely give up on baseball because it would be the easy thing to do. I think MLB is rightly concerned that conducting a witch hunt to fairly exercise the game of all cheaters. cheater stats and cheater records would end the game in this conutry as a major sport. It would flush millions upon millions of dollars in equity and value down the drain and potentially lead to real contraction within the sport. In a time when they are facing an gigantic uphill battle with both football and basketball they simply cannot give up that ground. So they choose to implement a real testing policy to get the idiots out and to stop the performance enhancing as much as possible and wait a decade or so to have all this stuff wash away. Sure it leaves tainted stats and records but that is a smaller price to pay than potentially destrooying the game. It is the choice between two evils and they are chooisng the lesser of the two.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I agree that baseball has no integrity. And I agree that sometimes you have to bite the bullet and make a hard decison in life. But the reality of THIS situation is that it is a business and they cannot simply go and make the RIGHT moral/ethical decision without consideration of what is best for business. To you and many others(including me) just wiping these guys out and never speaking of them again is the right ethical/moral way to go and would be a great way to begin building a foundation of integrity that would strengthen the games appeal. But you would have to PROVE they were guilty and totally wipe out as many as you could fairly. The problem with that is that there are a majority of lesser thinking people out there that would see it is a reason to just give up on baseball once and for all. Many people just float along with their head in the sand to this type of stuff because it is easier and more enjoyable. Presented with the cheating as a these people would most likely give up on baseball because it would be the easy thing to do. I think MLB is rightly concerned that conducting a witch hunt to fairly exercise the game of all cheaters. cheater stats and cheater records would end the game in this conutry as a major sport. It would flush millions upon millions of dollars in equity and value down the drain and potentially lead to real contraction within the sport. In a time when they are facing an gigantic uphill battle with both football and basketball they simply cannot give up that ground. So they choose to implement a real testing policy to get the idiots out and to stop the performance enhancing as much as possible and wait a decade or so to have all this stuff wash away. Sure it leaves tainted stats and records but that is a smaller price to pay than potentially destrooying the game. It is the choice between two evils and they are chooisng the lesser of the two.

Well said.

This issue is definitely not black & white, and as always, the devil is in the details.

[Hog1]

There seems to be some distinction between what is fair and right and acceptable in our personal lives and the same things in the business community.
In a nutshell........there is no difference. It is the same.
You do your life, as you do your business. Above the boards, or below. It's right or it's wrong.

[SmootSmack]

First of all, has he been found guilty? Yes, yes I know "all the evidence" says he's guilty. But has a court of law declared him guilty?

Secondly, as I've said, he wouldn't be my first choice to break the record. I would have loved for Griffey to break it personally. For a while it looked like he might. But what I'm saying is don't single him out when the problem goes way beyond him. I mean if you want to, that's fine. Just not how I choose to roll.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

First of all, has he been found guilty? Yes, yes I know "all the evidence" says he's guilty. But has a court of law declared him guilty?

Technically, no. But why would courts care if Bonds took roids to help his baseball JOB? They care about the bigger guns...like the dealers...like his buddy that is rotting in prison right now. Oddly enough, guys have kept quiet to keep bonds out of prison. I wonder how much Bonds pays them?

Secondly, as I've said, he wouldn't be my first choice to break the record. I would have loved for Griffey to break it personally. For a while it looked like he might. But what I'm saying is don't single him out when the problem goes way beyond him. I mean if you want to, that's fine. Just not how I choose to roll.

Griffey is too injury prone...but I would love that too. He has always had such a beautiful swing.
I think A-rod will make a solid run at it. Here's a guy that has 476 homers and is only 31. He's averaging 41.7 homers a season right now since becoming a full time player. He's averaging 45.8 homers a season over the past 6 years and he's well on his way to 50 homers this year. All he has to do is hit his career average for 7 more years (including this year) and he breaks the record. That would put him at 37 years old. If he played 10 more years (including 07), all he has to do is hit an average of 28 homers a season. That would mean he would retire at 41. Not unheard of.
If he can keep his last 6 year average up for another 6 years, he will be only 4 homers shy of 755.
Realistically...A-Rod has a great shot at it. I hope it's not in a yankees uni though!
Griffey has 192 homers to go, and he's already 37. Even if he gets with Bonds, and plays til he is 42, he'll have to hit 39 homers a season to make it. Griffey will be lucky to hit 100 more homers for the rest of his career. I don't think he'll more than 50 or 60 from here.

[SmootSmack]

What do you think of Pete Rose?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What do you think of Pete Rose?

I'm surprised it took 4 pages before his name was brought up.

I think we need to look at Rose as cheater and he's not in, so why allow Bonds to get in when he's even worse of a cheater?
Rose never changed the outcome of a game when he played like Bonds does by juicing, and Rose is banned, but Bonds is glorified????

This could be a long conversation, because I do think he bet on baseball even though he said he didn't. But did he ever manage a game and threw a game for his own financial benefit? I don't think so. Bonds took steroids for his own financial benefit. So comparitively speaking, Rose is an angel compared to Bonds. This also bring up the fact that being a gamblaholic is a disease...but again...could be a VERY long conversation.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What do you think of Pete Rose?

is there a character clause the writers follow when voting? if there is, how is Ty Cobb in? rose belongs in the hall of fame. and the sportswriters should not even have a say. it should be voted on by former players and managers. then stuff like art monk doesn't happen

[Hog1]

D,
Did you hear the int the other day on the Dan Patrick show? Pete stated he bet on the Reds EVERY night. he indicated for an extended period.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Hog1

D,
Did you hear the int the other day on the Dan Patrick show? Pete stated he bet on the Reds EVERY night. he indicated for an extended period.

I haven't heard that, but this is why he is not in the hall. (and he was banned due to speculation of betting on his team...just like Bonds taking roids.)
Baseball should ban bonds barring an investigation.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by jsarno

I haven't heard that, but this is why he is not in the hall. (and he was banned due to speculation of betting on his team...just like Bonds taking roids.)
Baseball should ban bonds barring an investigation.

No Pete was banned for betting on baseball in general and its was always thought that he bet on the Reds. How can baseball ban him on speculation?