Tim McG

Probably even much lower than that if Hank spoke his true feelings. C'mon. Who knows what he's thinking?

Grandmothers don't play in the MLB. Muscle mass does not generate speed, Boyz....it creates strength. Not the same thing. I'm 52, and I never lift weights, but I can make a racquetball racquet snap with such force in order to get the ball to move 90-100 mph. Sorry, no sale.

Game. Set. Match. Next....

Yes I can, but it will take a Master's Degree in Physiology to explain all of the subtle nuances involved with hitting a baseball. You...? Difference is...I can prove it, you can't.

And how DID you come to your conclusions?? Show me a scientific study that says muscles don't contribute to hitting power, then we can re-examine this. Until then, I'll believe that it does. If there was a universal belief that muscles had no contributing effect to hitting distance, then nobody would care about steroid use by power hitters. Clearly that's not the case in this country, outside of the SF Bay Area. Scientific proof...wha-? Ask any professional golfer or baseball player. G'head, I dare you to. I have. Sports is not a scientific endeavor, big fella. Tell me, Aggie, what "scientific proof" have you offered that Bonds is juicing?

Earlier, your argument was that steroids can't cause increased muscle mass (which in turn increase power, and increase the distance a hit ball travels). Now you seem to be saying "ok I'll admit Bonds was wrong if it can be proven", and putting the bizarre argument about "power not being a contributor to how far a ball is hit" in a secondary mode. You're hedging your bet. As you said, "People just want to believe what they want to believe." It's very clear that includes all of us in this discussion. My argument is and has always been that increased muscle mass does not make you hit HRs. If you were confused as to what I meant, I apologize. But if you scroll back, I am certain you will see that this is my point about the use of steroids. Sure, I believe what I want to believe, but there is a decided difference in how I come to my conclusions about Bonds or anything else for that matter. I expect you to prove it.

I get your point, but thankfully no total weaklings play MLB But I will tell you this: As a golf coach, I have 5'11" skinny teenager on the HS team I help coach who hits 300+ yard drives on a continuous basis. He would be hard pressed to crack a peanut shell. Vision, timing and skill. None of the above...PA announcer here. Been doing this [and football/track] since 1990. Though Lon Simmons is more to my liking as a comparable sounding voice. I try to sound like the deep voiced PA guy the A's had for many years back in the 1980-90s or the PA guy for the Angels during that same time period. It's a great gig...somebody let's me speak through a microphone, play music between innings and nobody tells me to shut-up! Getting paid to watch baseball....sometimes life is good

I fully understand your point, Larsen. The problem I have is not that Bonds shouldnt get an astrisk, it is it needs to be proved first. That's all I'm saying here. The secondary issue is that muscle mass does not make you hit HRs. Vision, timing and skill make that happen. Ask any ballplayer who has hit a HR and they will tell you the very same thing. And I will say this until my dying day. I am around baseball coaches and players all spring long [i announce basball games]...in fact, one of my former students is in the big leagues right now playing OF for the Royals [shane Costa] and not one of them, almost to a man, will tell [except for the hated dodger fans] you a HR is not hit because you're the biggest or strongest guy on the team. Even the former pros I have spoken to say the same exact thing. I believe a man is innocent until proven guilty and a media lynching isn't proof, my friend.

Forget it, Noj. I have said that a thousand times if I've said once. People just want to believe what they want to believe.

Sheldonm, There is only one thing wrong in what you're saying....he is to have allegedly cheated. The media jackals write about as if it were pure fact. It is nothing more than mere speculation. There is no substantiated proof to support that he juiced. None....and that's what pisses me off. Until that solid evidence comes along, I prefer to enjoy the event for what it is: History in the making.

....and you bought it. Hook, line and sinker.

I don't understand...? OK, ask a body builder if he thinks 'roids will make you see the ball better or give you the skill to hit a curveball. I freakin' DARE you to. Any other justification beyond the reality of that simple point is patent bullshit...that or total Bonds envy. The largely white controlled media told you to believe so.

When did I say I didn't have a problem with Clemens? If he's been 'roiding, he's as much of a loser as Bonds is. My comments are about Bonds - if you wish to change the topic to someone else, by all means go ahead. My comments about Bonds still stand. I don't care whether Mantle was a drunk, or whether Ruth was, or anyone else. Alcohol isn't a performance enhancing drug/illegal substance. My problem is with the absurdly over focused media and the minions who support them relative to Barry Bonds.....and only Bonds. Any example I bring to the discussuion beyond that is to make a certain point regarding the lack of balance as to to who or whom is juicing. No more, no less.

Nope. I'm not sure how you arrive at that conclusion. I completely disagree with that. Not sure...? But you are sure that steroids do cause a ballplayer to hit HRs? Uh, 'splain please? I have no idea how anyone can claim ballplyers on 'roids automatically hit HRs. There is no evidence to support it, no justifucatioin to balance it. I stand for hard, quantifiable, qualifiable, REAL evidence, Guys. Hearsay, envy, personality conflicts and hatred do not count. Now how 'bout it?

When did I say I didn't have a problem with Clemens? If he's been 'roiding, he's as much of a loser as Bonds is. My comments are about Bonds - if you wish to change the topic to someone else, by all means go ahead. My comments about Bonds still stand. I don't care whether Mantle was a drunk, or whether Ruth was, or anyone else. Alcohol isn't a performance enhancing drug/illegal substance. In Ruth's case it was illegal. OK? Same damn thing Bonds is accused of. So tell me, is cortizone a performance enhancing drug? It kills pain, doesn't it? How about asprin or ibprofren? It stops swelling and makes pain go away. Would allergy meds count? They make it so your eyes don't swell shut and sneezing stops. Ointments, linements, Neosporin, geez...I could go ON. Seems to me, you guys are all wigged out about a drug that builds muscle mass. Nice. Once again for clarity [ready?] muscle mass does not, will not, can not make you hit homeruns. PERIOD. That isn't its purpose. Are we clear on that yet?

Yeah, but he isn't playing for San Francisco....and he's the correct color. I have liked the Giants for years, dating to when I was a child living in California. My son's t-ball team last year was the Giants, and he loves to wear his jersey still, even though he's a "Husker" this year. My dislike of Bonds isn't his color or that he's playing for SF. I'm not sure why you think the fact he plays for the Giants has anything to do with anything. My dislike of Bonds has everything to do with him about to break the most sacred record in baseball, and perhaps all of sports. THE Home Run Record. The Home Run Record is about to be broken by a guy that's cheated to get there. That's the problem I have with Bonds. Quibble that he would have gotten 500 home runs without steroids, and I'd agree with you. Maybe even 600. But he wouldn't have the record in my opinion without his use of steroids. Glad you aren't a racist, Aggie...but I fail to see how you have no problem with Roger Clemens or others like him accused of juicing, but you do have an issue with Bonds. Makes no sense to me. Juice is juice. And if we are going to astrisk Bonds, then we need to do a complete investigation of any ballplayer since steriods were available in the early 1960s. If you're content to damn one, then I say damn them all. Funny you should use the term "mantle." A certain highly touted Mickey Mantle was a falling-down drunkard. But he's in the HOF. Where do you draw the line, then? Which drugs are "OK" to use and which ones are not? Seems to be a fair amount of selective reasoning going on in the sports world of late. I mean...since the Black Babe Ruth in Barry Bonds was unfairly blasted by the headline seeking jackals of the sporting media.

Yeah, but he isn't playing for San Francisco....and he's the correct color. Funny, Sosa no doubt used Steriods, but isn't an asshole....is he booed in the AL? I like the fact Sosa has been doing fairly well this year....Bonds, breaking another black man's record pisses me off. Why? Because Hammering Hank Aaron didn't cheat! Oh yeah, and Bonds is a compete jerk. Really? You mean like Wade Boggs cheated on his wife? Better ask a Chicago fan about that one. Sosa had a very unflattering nickname given him by Cubs fans. Corked bats and steroids and he gets a free pass. [Light brown, you see...kinda like a tan you'd get at the beach ]. Tell me....what proof do you have that Aaron didn't use performance enhancing drugs, eh? No proof must mean he was juicing. Being the BEST = Steroids....my newspaper sports reporter pissed at Bonds and in search of a headline told me so. Let's examine the pseudo evidence the sporting jackals of the yellow journalistic Hearst Corporation used to hang Bonds, shall we? Look how big he was compared to his rookie year. And, damn...those biceps. I'll even bet his hat size is bigger now, too. Maybe he has an ex-wife or ex-girlfriend we can ask about some ironclad hearsay regarding some doping charts that may or may not exist. Fair is fair. Ya think? Babe Ruth was a jackass [and he cheated on his wife], too. Drank illegal booze openly during prohibition. Why isn't there an astrisk next to his name? Guess what? So was/is Bob Gibson, Don Drysdale, Billy Martin, Julian Tavarez, Tommy Lasorda, Jeff Kent, Mike Schmidt, Brooks Robinson [racist], Tom Seaver, Earl Weaver, Eric Gagne, Ricky Henderson, Buddy Bell.... I could go ON, Berigan. Seems we are awfully selective as to which ballplayer is an asshole and who isn't. What is with you guys when it comes to kissing everybody's ass? Atletes are paid top play the game between the lines and not to kiss every baby within the entire continental United States, OK? Certainly it shouldn't be contigent upon sucking up to some wet-behind-the-ears reporter who constantly prods Bonds with question of his marital status. I mean, geez. Can we get a break on this "nice guy" bullshit?

Tim Lincecum's MLB debut so far: First pitch was a strike. Then two balls. A hit. Another ball to the #2 holer...HR. A two run jack to a guy who hasn't hit one out all year. Shades of Foppert. I think I'm gonna be ill....

Yeah, but he isn't playing for San Francisco....and he's the correct color.

Now that's funny, Brother Noj.

Looks like the Yankees are making some rather odd choices of late. In the cellar: Blame Joe Torre. A-Rod is hitting again: Congratulate Steinbrenner. No bullpen help: Blame Torre. Dump Randy Johnson then p/u Clemens in May: Congratulate Steinbrenner. Clemons goes on the DL or can't get past the 6th: Blame Joe Torre. I'm starting to see a pattern here.....

Good point. It's tougher on us long suffering Giants fans, I suppose....been pulling for my guys since the early 60s.

Here's an LA Times article worth reading, I think: Jackie Robinson can't sub for Barry Bonds Baseball stands to lose its remaining black fans if it downplays Bonds' stellar achievements. By Zev Chafets April 14, 2007 LA Times April 15, by decree of Major League Baseball, will be Jackie Robinson Day. On Sunday, a player on each big league team will be designated to wear Robinson's uniform number, 42. The Dodgers, Robinson's club in its Brooklyn incarnation, intend to go one better; every player will wear the hallowed number. Jackie Robinson Day is an exercise in racial public relations. Baseball desperately wants to repair its connection to the black community, whose younger generation seems to regard the national pastime as only slightly more relevant than curling. How did this happen? In the bad old days of segregation, Negro League stars such as Satchel Paige and Cool Papa Bell were cultural icons, and young black athletes gravitated to the game. Robinson was followed by a starburst of great players. Willie Mays, Roy Campanella, Larry Doby, Hank Aaron, Ernie Banks, Don Newcombe, Monte Irvin, Frank Robinson, Willie McCovey — these were men who fell in love with baseball when it was still forbidden. That love was unrequited, even after baseball grudgingly integrated. No one knew this better than Robinson. He watched as great franchises such as the Red Sox, Tigers and Yankees resisted integration for a decade or more. He saw black players forced to repress their athletic creativity and cultural identity in order to conform to the conservative norms of baseball. And he keenly felt his own exclusion from the game after his playing days were done. Sick with diabetes, Robinson was honored by Major League Baseball at the 1972 World Series. He was under-whelmed. "I'd like to live to see a black manager," he said with bitter irony. Nine days later, he was dead. Thirty-five years later, there are just two U.S.-born black managers and one general manager in Major League Baseball. Football and basketball are the African American sports now. You see it in the stands, where the number of black fans at baseball games sometimes doesn't reach triple digits. You see it on the field too; most of today's great black players come from Latin America. The most luminous exception is Barry Bonds, who will be wearing 42 for the San Francisco Giants on Sunday, instead of his customary 25. Bonds is easily the greatest player of his era. He is a seven-time MVP. He holds the record for most home runs in a season. Now he is closing in on the all-time home run title, which Hank Aaron took from Babe Ruth in 1973. Bonds is a cantankerous figure (he has that in common with Jackie Robinson) and widely hated by sportswriters and fans. Baseball purists despise him for allegedly having used steroids. This, they claim, profanes baseball's holy of holies, its statistical integrity. How can you compare records if they are compiled under unequal conditions? This is, in a word, nonsense. Ruth broke into baseball when a dozen homers led the league. Then the grandees of the game decided to soup up the ball — a form of artificial enhancement at least as intrusive as steroids — and presto, the Babe (and, in his wake, others) hit 50 a season out of the park. Despite this great break with the past, baseball venerated Ruth. When Hank Aaron, a black man, broke his record in 1973, Commissioner Bowie Kuhn didn't bother coming to the game. The snub left Aaron embittered. He (and millions of his fellow African Americans) correctly saw it as another example of baseball's Negro Problem. Now it is Bonds' turn. He'll probably pass Aaron this season, a feat that will be greeted — outside of San Francisco — with near universal resentment and animosity by white fans and writers (the press boxes of baseball are even more monochromatic than the stands). Commissioner Bud Selig says that a new home run mark will be treated as a routine event, just another record being broken. He might not bother to attend. Baseball's few remaining black fans will see the double standard. What's so bad about what Bonds is accused of, they will ask? He used drugs? See Jim Bouton's great baseball diary "Ball Four," on the rampant use of amphetamines in the Golden Age of Mickey Mantle. Bonds broke the law by allegedly taking illegal substances? The Babe himself openly boozed his way through Prohibition. Bonds broke baseball's rules? If that were a major crime, spit-baller Gaylord Perry wouldn't be in the great hall at Cooperstown. Whether Selig and the writers and the fans like it or not, Bonds is the black Babe Ruth. If they demonize him, put a disqualifying asterisk next to his records and ban him from the Hall of Fame, a thousand Jackie Robinson Days won't bring back the missing millions of African American fans. It's fine to venerate No. 42, but Robinson is a page in the history books. It's what happens to No. 25 that will determine the next chapter in the star-crossed relationship between blacks and baseball.

It is what I have been saying all along. Nice post, Matthew.

That's what scares me about this move. And I'd love to have Joe Nathan back in an SF uniform....oh well.