Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New book details Barry Bonds' long steroid use
Reuters ^ | Adam Tanner

Posted on 03/07/2006 4:13:52 PM PST by indcons

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A new book about Barry Bonds says he used steroids for at least five seasons, casting new doubts about the baseball superstar's exploits as he seeks to pass Babe Ruth for second place on the all-time home run list.

The book "Game of Shadows", an excerpt of which was on the "Sports Illustrated" Web site on Tuesday, said the San Francisco Giants outfielder took steroids via injections, pills, creams and liquid starting in 1998. His most productive seasons followed while he was in his mid-to-late 30s, most notably in 2001 when he hit a single-season record 73 home runs.

"If it really is true, I'm sorry to hear it because it does cast a shadow," Babe Ruth's last surviving daughter, Julia Ruth Stevens, 88, told Reuters.

"I don't know if daddy were here what he would say," she continued. "He was always on the side of ballplayers."

Asked if it might be appropriate for Bonds to retire before passing her father in the home run record books, she said: "I certainly would not have any objections to that."

(Excerpt) Read more at today.reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: barrybonds; baseball; bonds; bookreview; gameofshadows; steroids
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-128 next last
To: cincinnati65

You said - No one has presented a single piece of evidence other than "He looks big, and plays ball too good for a forty-year old."

You must have not read the article. The guys who gave Bonds the stuff testified to a Federal Grand Jury. They gave amounts, dates, frequency, type, a full laundry list of what Bonds was taking.

Your defense of Bonds is laughable.


101 posted on 03/08/2006 7:05:18 AM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Kokojmudd

Cecil Fielder was pretty good, but unfortunately he was too heavy to really have much longevity. But hitting a ball onto the roof of Tiger Stadium? Wow.

Also Fielder was one of the very small number of players (up until 1993) to have hit 50 home runs in a season. I think there were only 6 or 8. Of course now there's like 30--but still--an impressive stat.


102 posted on 03/08/2006 7:05:44 AM PST by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius
Cecil Fielder was pretty good, but unfortunately he was too heavy to really have much longevity. But hitting a ball onto the roof of Tiger Stadium? Wow.

Cecil was a good one. Didn't need steroids to make him big and strong.
103 posted on 03/08/2006 7:08:21 AM PST by Kokojmudd (Outsource US Senate to Dubai! Put Walmart in charge of all Federal agencies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: cincinnati65

No, I don't deny the use of performance enhancing drugs in MLB.
For the umpteenth time, my point is improved performance (even in later years) alone is not hard evidence that a player is using performance enhancing drugs. The only real case anyone has presented is that "he's big, and he doesn't play like a forty year old."

Nolan Ryan didn't play like a forty year old. Tony Gwinn didn't play like a forty year old. Rickey Henderson didn't play like a forty year old. Superior athletes can often excel in later years. Keep in mind this is STILL the Barry Bonds that won THREE MVP's before anyone even thought of mentioning steroids in the same breath with his name. He is a superior baseball player.

There is no hard evidence that Barry Bonds knowingly used performance enhancing drugs including steroids to increase his performance. It's all conjecture.





When are you gonna clue in? Poster after poster is showing you STATISTAICALLY, that Bonds' performance was WAAAAY out of the norm. The testimony of his suppliers is damning.

All YOU can argue is that Bonds was so dumb he didn't know that he was taking steroids.

You mentioned Nolan Ryan, Tony Gwinn and Ricky Henderson.

Nolan Ryan was a legendary workout guy (as opposed to Bonds). And, he only got better because he finally gained a little control and started using a curve ball. His velocity actually decreased a great deal his last 4-5 years.

Tony Gwinns numbers dropped of substantially in the later parts of his career. He always kept a high batting average, but his extra base hits and power numbers went down.

Ricky Henderson also saw his physical abilities degrade the last years of his career.


104 posted on 03/08/2006 7:19:05 AM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude
Barry is no Jr. Barry's dad's name is Bobby.

Yes, you're right. I was half asleep and transposing Ken Griffey Jr.'s naming over to Barry.

I promise to never post again with less than 4 hours sleep. ;-)

105 posted on 03/08/2006 7:50:42 AM PST by Ghengis (Alexander was a wuss!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: cincinnati65
I assume by Barry Sr. you mean Bobby Bonds, his dad.

Correct. I was half asleep and tried to mix up the Griffeys and the Bonds.

Doh!

106 posted on 03/08/2006 7:52:16 AM PST by Ghengis (Alexander was a wuss!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24
Oh please enlighten me on this statistical evidence you cite that poster after poster has offered, cause I sure haven't seen it.

The only thing anyone has offered is the HR's per At-Bat statistic, which on its surface does appear damning. But have you looked at the dramatic decline in his number of at-bats and the increase in his number of walks over that time period, particularly intentional walks? People are pitching around him all the time, but you can't do that forever. When you do pitch to him, he makes contact, and with the short porch in right, more balls are going to go over the wall.

His most recent stats are skewed because of the lower number of at bats. This indicates that pitchers/managers are scared to pitch to him. How do you think that influences THEIR performance?

107 posted on 03/08/2006 3:40:29 PM PST by cincinnati65 (Go Panthers!.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: cincinnati65
I guess you're choosing to ignore all the sworn testimony, court records, facilitator confessions and Investigative reports that actually name the specific substances he was using them and when he was using them?

When confronted with the book, he didn't scream "racism" - he usual retort -- he simply said he "wasn't going to even look at the book, he didn't need to"...

Pretty damning statement for a guy with records and reputation to protect, and MLB to defend!

He a damned cheating liar...
I expected as much from Bonds, but it will be more interesting and important how his team and MLB react to this unavoidable crises.


Semper Fi

108 posted on 03/08/2006 3:51:29 PM PST by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: cincinnati65

Perhaps you missed this link from another thread....
It's pretty damning stuff -- looks like a lot of folks in Barry's life has testified or turned against him..

Pretty sad, actually.....

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/magazine/03/06/growth.doc0313/

Semper Fi


109 posted on 03/08/2006 3:58:20 PM PST by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: river rat

I read it....about 30%-40% of the article is sourced with an EX-girlfriend, and we all know what reliable witnesses they can be. And since when do we at Free Republic accept the media's version of anything at face value??? Lord knows, if I lived in their world I would think Hillary is the smartest woman alive and that Brokeback Mountain was the greatest film since Gone with the Wind.


110 posted on 03/08/2006 4:09:47 PM PST by cincinnati65 (Go Panthers!.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: river rat
Sorry, I didn't click through your link. I assumed it was the other SI article I saw posted. That article was the one I referred to being 30-40% from the ex.

As to your article, the only "smoking gun" that I see is the folder with the doping calendars. If that is true, then I would say he probably juiced, though I wonder why such a seemingly strong piece of hard evidence is buried way down in the article. As I've maintained all along, I'm not here to pass judgement on whether or not Bonds juiced. My point throughout this thread is that it is possible to maintain a sustained performance level late in life without resorting to steroid use.

A lot of the rest of the article seemed to be stories (with later recantations) with principals of BALCO, and then the usual media twisting facts to support the story. My favorite one of those was where they pointed out that Conte backed out of an evidentiary hearing where he could have confronted Novitsky about supposedly incorrect statements. What kind of supporting "evidence" is that?

Bonds hasn't yet tested positive for steroids, has never had a drug suspension, and has never admitted that he knowingly used steroids to enhance his performance. The "evidence" in the article is replete with recanted statements, testimony of those arrested, hearsay, and testimony of individuals with questionable motives. Add that to the authors molding the facts to fit their story and I have to wonder how strong a case they've made.

111 posted on 03/08/2006 4:47:29 PM PST by cincinnati65 (Go Panthers!.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: cincinnati65
You obviously didn't read much of the link I sent....

Or, you wish to believe your heart and ignore a mountain of evidence from folks that have already pled guilty to dealing illegal "substances" to "athletes"....Federal Investigators, Drug companies, Barry's personal trainer, team mates, etc, etc.......

Semper Fi
112 posted on 03/08/2006 4:51:32 PM PST by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: river rat

Check post 111. I jumped the gun.


113 posted on 03/08/2006 4:55:28 PM PST by cincinnati65 (Go Panthers!.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: cincinnati65

Whooops, you already realized my link was different...
Sorry about that...

Yep, it does look bad now...
I'd like to think that Barry is smart enough to know the dump is coming, and will do a good deed for MLB and acknowledge the scam and resign...

MLB should remove all records from known cheaters...
He should be shunned by the Hall of Fame, forever.
Perhaps MLB will have to initiate a Baseball Hall of Shame, to cover these jerks and cheaters.

Chances of either happening is less that 50%....

Too bad, really...
I once loved professional baseball. Now I only go to High School, College and the little cookie snatchers who play "T" ball or in the local Pop Warner League.

Semper Fi


114 posted on 03/08/2006 4:58:46 PM PST by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: cincinnati65

Walks don't count as at-bats.

Open your eyes.


115 posted on 03/12/2006 6:19:50 AM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: indcons

Is Tiger Woods guilty of the same?


116 posted on 03/12/2006 6:23:10 AM PST by Squat (Deport the illegals now! Turn Home Depot's into the prisons to hold the illegals!.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZRepublican; Mr. Mojo
Maris. STILL the legitimate HR King.

Shame Bonds got busted soooo close to the record (heh.)

117 posted on 03/12/2006 6:24:42 AM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius; AmishDude; F16Fighter
Moreover, how do you determine what makes one player better than the other when they do different things?

True, but let's confine the discussion to just a Ruth vs. Bonds comparison. They were both outfielders and power hitters, so this isn't exactly an apples and oranges comparison. Let's take a look at their numbers, including Bonds' steroid-helped years.

Batting ave: Ruth .342, Bonds .300
On-base %: Ruth .474, Bonds .442
Slugging %: Ruth .690, Bonds .611
RBIs per 164 games: Ruth 143, Bonds 110
HRs per 164 games: Ruth 46, Bonds 42
Fielding: Ruth has the edge in arm strength, Bonds has the edge in speed. Both could play the field.

Pitching: Ruth was one of the best pitchers of his day, and would've likely made the Hall of Fame had he stayed exclusively at that position.

My vote goes to the Babe.

118 posted on 03/12/2006 7:34:35 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
"My vote goes to the Babe."

Yep. Not even close.

Ruth was whacking more HRs than entire teams were during his day.

119 posted on 03/12/2006 7:42:08 AM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter

I wonder where this leaves Bonds' new "reality" show (which is supposed to follow him from stadium to stadium during his HR climb toward 714 and 755)? Are the editors going to edit out all the boos and "cheater" signs in the crowd?


120 posted on 03/12/2006 7:46:17 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-128 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson