Who's on your HoF ballot?

[Say Hey Kid]

Bonds never hit more than 34 homers until he cheated.

 

[robert terwilliger]

hawkman, you think he started taking drugs as soon as he got to san francisco?

or do you think it likely that one of the best players in baseball entered his prime the second he left pittsburgh. seriously, from 90-92, he should have had three straight mvp's (terry pendleton winning in 91 is one of the most egregious "f*** you" votes in baseball history) and went for a three season average slash of .301/.424/.566 with a 177 ops+ and 102 more walks than strikeouts.

he went to san francisco as basically the same player, more intentional walks but hitting for more power...he was 40/40 in 1996 and 5th in mvp (lmao) seriously, his prime (27-31) slash was .312/.448/.628 with a 190 ops+ and nearly 250 more walks than strikeouts. he's unarguably one of the very best players to ever play this game and that includes the days where legends were beating up on guys nicknamed "duffer" and "red"

it just doesn't add up, especially when theories have suggested that mlb was messing with the baseballs again around this time in an effort to get fans back.

 

[Big Poppa Puck]

Still love how the steroid guys get vilified and all their stats invalidated but the guys from the 50-80s get glorified. Amphetamines are "PEDs" too. And those guys had greenies in a bowl in the clubhouse like they were m&m's.

Like RT said the balls were as juiced as the players. And people forget that most of the Mitchell Report featured scrubs. You only ever here the Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, etc narrative. I wonder how much worse Bobby Estalella's (.216/.315/.440 and 48 HR) numbers would have looked without help!

Do I think Bonds hits 73 HRs without steroids? IDK, probably not? But I can't prove it one way or another. But if it was possible to quantify it, I'd guess it probably didn't add more than a handful to his totals . The guy was just a legendary player.

Bigger muscles don't necessarily equal more HR.