Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens...do they get put in the HOF?

[rawex5]

Originally Posted by RyGuy45

Sosa is never getting in.

Still, his stat lines are still just great reading material

1998 -- 66 HR, 158 RBI, 134 R, .308 BA, .647 SLG
1999 -- 62 HR, 141 RBI, 114 R, .288 BA, .635 SLG
2000 -- 50 HR, 138 RBI, 106 R, .320 BA, .634 SLG
2001 -- 64 HR, 160 RBI, 146 R, .328 BA, .737 SLG

Crazy.

  

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Your inability to follow my points is far more of a reflection of your own intelligence (or lack there of) then my own, I like to think things through rather than just regurgitate common knowledge no matter how illogical or stupid it is.

1. If steroids are some magic elixir, that instantly translates into positive and consistent benefits on the field, why is that the one season examples that every one gives (Luis, Brady Anderson) Immediate goes back to regular power numbers for the rest of their careers, Luis hits 57 one year and went back to sub 30 like he always was. Brady hit 50 one year, then never hit over 20 again, he never even had over .500 slugging again.

So what do you think they just stopped and only did one year? No way, millions of a dollars are on the, they likely kept using them, clearly what ever benefit they gained  was fleeting and unsubstantial.

I simply submit that the act of hitting a HR is not simple as more muscles + swing = more HR's, and that taking steroids are not nearly as beneficial as people would like to believe and I also don't believe that what ever benefit you would get from steroids are derivable without a level of sophistication and training that most baseball players are ignorant to.





I suggest people read this essay, it's long but it's very detailed, and it leads you to question how great steroids are for hitting a baseball.

As I remarked above, there are at least five other studies--all listed and linked on the longer page--all based on sophisticated analysis of real data, andeach using a different approach, that each reach the same basic conclusion: there is no visible effect attributable to steroids. In the most mathematically dense and rigorouspaper, its author, Professor Arthur DeVany, spares no words:
There is no evidence that steroid use has altered home-run hitting and those who argue otherwise are profoundly ignorant of the statistics of home runs, the physics of baseball, and of the physiological effects of steroids.


http://steroids-and-baseball.com/




I belove ultimately a specific type of player, with a specific type of swing and approach at the plate, who uses them in a very specific way can derive some power befits from roids, but not ALL players, in fact I believe the amount that would is very very small and not nearly as sizable as the amount that would derive benefits from amphetamines.

 

[Air273]

only way they make it in is we found out a HOFer has been a steroid user 

barry has to be a lock. someone drop some knowledge if I'm wrong but was it ever proven that barry did steroids or is it speculation

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]there is so much evidence , one he admitted to unknowing using steroids, two his childhood friend/trainer anderson is guilty of dealing steroids, three anderson rather than testify against bonds pleaded the 5th thus spending months in jail.......bonds was a HOFer but wasnt happy when he saw what sosa/mcgiwre did, all the attention he knew they were on steroids and wanted to extend his career and cash in.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]bonds went from never hitting 50 to hitting 73 and would have hit 60 4 times if not for walks......its not normal for a player to have his best seasons 35-40......one of his sickest stats no one talks about is one season he had almost 200 more walks than SOs....

[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/font]

i think if Vlad used steroids he would have hit 80......i know thats crazy but look at like this his hand-eye was just as good as bonds if not better......no dont look at walk stats.....that doesnt prove hand-eye.....vlad every season lead the majors in  his prime in making contact per at bat and putting the ball in play...his reach was crazy and has hit many HRs out of the strike zone....dude on steroids would have been scary......and yes i'm aware of the chance that he might have been on steroids but i doubt it......

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/font]

 

[airmaxpenny1]

So please explain the rise of home runs in the steroid era to me than and the subsequent fall off afterwards?

 

[dajoka004]

I love Barry. I hate Clemens. They are both deserving of the Hall. Barry was arguably the all-time greatest position player before steroids. Clemens the all-time greatest pitcher. In an era that was unbelievably tainted with PEDs, they dominated the competition. I'll speak more on Barry because I like him more, but I've never ever seen anyone dominate a sport the way he did from 2001 to 2004. His OBP was 0.609 in 2004. He had 120 intentional walks that year. And he still hit 45 HRs. Absolutely incredible. Steroids or not. Six zero nine man. Best OBP ever. God I would love to see him play again.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by airmaxpenny1

So please explain the rise of home runs in the steroid era to me than and the subsequent fall off afterwards?

1. baseball has been contually jouicng the balls, For example, a 2000examination at the University of Rhode Island, on which a team of six professors spent five months, found that ball cores from 1995 and 2000 balls bounced an average of 33 percenthigher than their 1989, 1970, and 1963 counterparts.

[h6][size=-1]  The True Power Trends:[/size][/h6][table][tr][td][table][tr][td]

[/td] [/tr][tr][td]
[/td] [/tr][/table][/td] [/tr][/table]
The point of noting the discontinuities is that they are extrinsic factors--that is, they are completely unrelated to player performance. Batters hitting the same as ever showed more power after each discontinuity not because those batters magically became more powerful over that winter but because they were hitting a "springier" baseball that would travel materially farther for a given force applied by a batter.

So, if we want to see what player power results look like, we need to "splice out" the spurious jumps from ball juicing, so that we are dealing with the actual trends inplayer power rather than external effects from changes in the ball. We don't have to squint at the graph and make estimates: we can just re-draw the graph with the effects of theartificial jumps removed. That very graph appears on the left, with notes on how it was made. (If the "splicing" concept perchance still confuses you, there is a page here that demonstrates the concept in detail.)\\

Remember, nothing is alleged to--or can have--happened to all of MLB over some one or two seasons: the claim is that PEDs were being used at a slowly but steadily increasing rate (andthus "distorting records") from very roughly 1980 through the present. Were that so, or anything like it, we would expect to see a clear long-term uptrend during this period. Butwe don't: we see a nearly flat line that, if anything, slopes slightly down. The "boost" just isn't there. But that doesn't seem to stop anyone from talking aboutit.

----

all im saying is that the link between steroids and hitting baseballs harder is not as simple as you think.
people way under estimate amphetamines and way way waaaaay overrated roids. I don't believe you can take anything to make anyone HOF'er who wouldn't be without them.

 

[airmaxpenny1]

So you believe that Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds fairly broke the home run record?
And if they don't give you an advantage, then why did players take them in the first place?

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by airmaxpenny1

So you believe that Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds fairly broke the home run record?
And if they don't give you an advantage, then why did players take them in the first place?

l.  I don't know the real question, is it any more or less fair than Aaron used pep pills.

2. Like I said for a certain type of hitter and a certain type of  swing, who uses it in a very specific and sophisticated manor  yes my guess is it may have some benefits. but for 90% of them, I honestly think they wasted there money.

also has anyone noticed that pitchers are just flat out better now, they are bigger and they throw harder look at the velocities compared to 2002 to 2010-2011

http://www.fangraphs.com/...p;season1=2002&ind=0
http://www.fangraphs.com/...p;season1=2010&ind=0

no guy in the top 30 is under 95 for avg velocity and almot everyone is over 6-3, the decline in HR's probably has more to do with that.