OK, now that it's over, the pressure is over, the scrutiny about 756 is over, watch Bonds relax and start hitting 'em a little back on his normal pace - as evidenced by hitting #757 last night.
We had a long conversation about Bonds yesterday, and I really think this: if you look at Bonds, he was a quality player, had good power, and won a few MVP awards before his supposed steroid use. He won MVP awards in 1990, 1992, 1993, was the 1994 Outstanding Baseball Player and Male Athlete of the Year for the ESPY's. So him playing high quality baseball is nothing new. I think that what steroids did (or MIGHT have done, let's speculate here) is allow him to CONTINUE to play at the high level he has already established in his career; steroids didn't all of a sudden make Bonds an MVP caliber player. ALSO, let me re-examine Mark McGwire's HR career - from his rookie record of 49 in 1987 until 1996, when he clouted 52 HR's, he never got above 42; as a matter of fact, through injuries and such, he had the following totals: 32, 33, 39, 22, 42, 9, 9, 39 then went for the 52. Sound familiar? Bonds actually had similar totals for those same years: 24, 19, 33, 25, 34, 46, 37, 33, then went for 42 when Mac hit 52. Add 'em up people: Big Mac 225, Barry 251. Truing up Mac's totals by adding projected totals of 34 (average) for those 2 injury years, and you get another 50ish HR's. So Mac 275, Barry 251. An average of a measely THREE HR's a year. BAM, Mac goes for 52 then 70. So why do we vilify Barry and not Mac? Look in the mirror and answer that question...
Also, we started talking about "warning-track shots" becoming HR's, but Tilam brought up a good point of the Stadiums today. Shorter in many cases, especially down the right field lines - what was a 330 warning track 10 years ago is now a 320 warning track today. 10 feet less maybe combined with 5 feet more carry? Home run. And what is the difference between anyone hitting the ball 315 feet versus 330 feet? Perhaps a millimeter on the barrel of the bat? At most? Look at the physics people, there are factors WAY more impacting here than steroids, in my HUMBLE opinion. Look at the polo grounds - less than 300 at the poles (both of them) yet like 450+ down the center - shaped like a frikkin tear drop? How many long homeruns went to center field to completely die as a long out or underachieve as a double or extra base hit? Too much to consider...I challenge anyone to give me specific empirical proof that steroids MADE Bonds a HR hitter.
Do I think he did 'em? Yeah, I think he did.
Do I think they helped? Yeah, I think they did.
Do I think they made him the HR king? No, I'm not so sure anymore. I think they would have allowed him to continue to perform at a high level, but he didn't wake up one day and become an MVP and HR hitter, sorry folks.
Do I think there are other factors to consider that mitigate this? Yeah, I do. The physics of round ball hitting round bat, lesser quality pitching (which we really haven't mentioned), ballpark dimensions, and a few others.
Bottom Line...I find myself cutting Barry a little more slack. Tilam brings up some fantastic points about asterisks in his prior post, I think they are extremely valid to consider. Barry still needs to clean up his lousy anti-media attitude, but with the comments made by Butthead Selig this past week, how can he NOT be defensive.
No comments:
Post a Comment