March 30, 2006

Where's Waldo? err, make that Barry...: I had heard a rumor (but couldn't find a verifying link, so if anyone can help out, I'd appreciate it) that MLB was not going to recognize Bonds' accomplishment until/unless he passed Aaron. Then I ran across this projection of when HR milestones would be reached by various players...

posted by elovrich to baseball at 01:56 AM - 29 comments

Actually, I con't fault MLB for not making a big deal about breaking 715, afterall it ISN"T the record any more, and it is no more a milestone than 720 or 725. But, you would think there would be someting about 750 or 755...

posted by elovrich at 01:58 AM on March 30, 2006

I think what is happening is that they are using the 2005 stats to project the 2006 and 2007 stats. In that case, Bonds would not reach a milestone in 2006 or 2007 because he hit only 5 home runs in 2005. Check Durazo. He just needs 6 home runs to make 100, but they don't project he'll do that untl 2007. That's because in 2005 he only hit 4.

posted by ?! at 06:04 AM on March 30, 2006

Actually, I really don't care whether Bonds does or doesn't break any records. To me, they are all the efforts of a steroid using, no class punk who's only claim to fame is his "only about me" attitude.

posted by Yankeetogo at 07:06 AM on March 30, 2006

The chart only seems to include the even 100's, it doesn't include as 'milestones' passing any particular player. Saw in the paper today that MLB is going to 'investigate' steroid use by Bonds/Sheffield et al. (edit: I see there is a front-page link to that story already)

posted by Amateur at 07:16 AM on March 30, 2006

rumour has it Barry will break Babe's record , but not go after Hank's.

posted by vetteman at 08:24 AM on March 30, 2006

Image hosting by Photobucket

posted by thatweirdguy2 at 08:44 AM on March 30, 2006

Seriousely elovrich, why are you trying to start a Bonds arguement?

posted by tron7 at 10:10 AM on March 30, 2006

yankeetogo you need to get ready to worship bonds, after this year sf will let him go free agent and george will scoop him up. why all the fuss about steroids, bonds has never tested positive and if he was using it was when it was not band in baseball. if your trying to say every bonds home run his whole career was because of steroid use your a fool. if he was using that long hed be a superstar of the wwe or wcw. hes the greatest player in modern baseball history but he is an entertainer not role model parents,teachers, are role models. he just performs and gets paid a lot of money nothing more dont exspect it.

posted by kdrckrules at 10:12 AM on March 30, 2006

I smell blood...

posted by MW12 at 10:14 AM on March 30, 2006

I like the fact "The Filter" profiles Bonds stories so much. What he has done to baseball's most valued records is an historic shame. It really is the sports story of the decade. A phoney drugged up (enhanced) cheater takes down Ruth's and maybe Aaron's records. Well beyond shameful, a national tragedy.

posted by mikemora at 10:30 AM on March 30, 2006

That list left out the fact that Russell Branyan will get his 600th career strike out by the second game he plays in this year. I am so glad he is not an Indian anymore!

posted by jojomfd1 at 10:34 AM on March 30, 2006

I was NOT trying to start an argument (well, not one about steroids use/non-use). But simply wondered why MLB would project milestones, such as 100th HR for someone NEXT YEAR, but not have a projection for someone breaking the HR record, arguably the most beloved in American sports. As for how the projections are made, I do not know the methedology, but would assume it is based on average AB/HR projected against the expected number or AB.

posted by elovrich at 10:54 AM on March 30, 2006

Oh, and as for Durazo getting to 100 this year rather than could be because he is not playing for anyone right now, since Texas released him.

posted by elovrich at 11:09 AM on March 30, 2006

If Pete Rose is banned, Bonds should be double banned

posted by Carle G at 12:08 PM on March 30, 2006

I think they should project when Barry will hit his 800th home run.

posted by fenriq at 12:31 PM on March 30, 2006

for yankeetogo regarding your comment, what about the drunk that used to pitch for the yanks "the babe" this guy prolly played more games under the influence of alcohol and god knows what else but he is an "icon". I played ball for about 15 years and a few times i played a lil hung over and sometimes still drunk and my stats (pitching) were better in those games. I am not saying that alcohol makes you better at baseball, but it did something, i was WAY more relaxed on the mound and it seemed to help me, so why not bash the babe?? what about David Wells pitching a perfect game while hung over?? did they test him for anything??what about Doc Gooden and Darrlystrawberry?? Is MLB gonna look into wheather or not they used cocain while playing?? i doubt it. its the past, leave it there. Quit hating on one of the greatest HITTERS of all time Mr. Barry Bonds :)

posted by tattoojunkie at 01:52 PM on March 30, 2006

Bonds? Who's that? I don't remember any other threads about him? Do I?

posted by commander cody at 02:05 PM on March 30, 2006

Now I wonder why Victor Conte, just released from prison is also publicly saying that the book is a pack of lies and that he never gave steroids to Bonds? And he says he's got proof.

posted by fenriq at 03:03 PM on March 30, 2006

It's not like the projections are explicitly blocking Bonds, more likely that based on last year he doesn't project to pass the Babe with their formula.

posted by billsaysthis at 03:26 PM on March 30, 2006

What idiot puts alcohol in the same category as a federally banned controlled substance? It didn't matter if MLB didn't consider steroids illegal or a banned substance, it was still a federal offense. Bonds never got caught because the Balco steroids were designed to beat the MLB tests.

posted by irunfromclones at 05:39 PM on March 30, 2006

What idiot puts alcohol in the same category as a federally banned controlled substance? Section VI. sub-part q., Things I Have Ingested

posted by yerfatma at 07:14 PM on March 30, 2006

irunfromclones: What idiot puts alcohol in the same category as a federally banned controlled substance?
Is he kidding? Wow, this one's a big fat hanging curveball of truth for me to whallop... :) Anyway, here's the straight dope, my friends: 18th amendment to the US Constitution:
  • Prohibited the manufacturing, importing, and exporting of beverage alcohol
  • Ratified Jan 16th, 1919, in effect on Jan 16th 1920.
  • Repealed by the 21st amendment, ratified and in effect on Dec 5, 1933.
Babe Ruth:
  • Career with the New York Yankees- the most productive of his career- lasted from 1920 through 1934 seasons
  • 14 complete seasons of those 15 Yankee years, Babe Ruth was under the influence of a federally banned controlled substance.
The conclusion is thus unavoidable: Babe Ruth played the majority of his tainted career under the influence of a federally banned controlled substance; he repeatedly and brazenly consumed an illegal, federally banned controlled substance in well-documented prodigious quantities during the full seasons of 14 consecutive years of his 15 in New York. Consider further:
1.) During this period of using a federally banned controlled substance, Babe Ruth clubbed 649 total homeruns- 91% of his career total- including setting a new single season HR record 3 separate times in 8 years, and hitting 50+ homeruns an unprecedented 4 times! While using this federally banned controlled substance, Babe Ruth put up power numbers that no one in the game came close to matching. 2.) Of particular note: in 1934, the first season since 1919 in which Babe Ruth did not use a federally banned controlled substance, his performance dropped dramatically: in 1934, his first year of not using a federally banned controlled substance, he hit 35% fewer homeruns than he had in 1933, and an incredibly 46% less than he had in 1932. That, my friends, is an incriminating dropoff. 3.) The nail in the coffin: In 1935, just a little more than a year and a half since he stopped using a federally banned controlled substance, he retired from the game altogether, his once-legendary power completely gone as he could only muster a mere 13% of his career average in homeruns.
A sad, sad story of an athlete who clearly benefitted from the habitual use of a federally banned controlled substance throughout the peak years of his career, setting records left and right that could arguably be claimed as fraudulent, and achieved only when Babe Ruth was under the influence of a federally banned controlled substance. And to think... children looked up to him! Oh, the shame of it all... :(

posted by hincandenza at 10:48 PM on March 30, 2006

On a side note ESPN is doing a 10 part series about Barry on Barry.

posted by Folkways at 11:15 PM on March 30, 2006

Hal, you totally win the prize. As I said the other day. Let's wipe the record book clean of all cheaters and suspected cheaters until we can absolutely prove that they didn't cheat.

posted by fenriq at 02:08 AM on March 31, 2006

Thanks Hal, thats some sobering information.

posted by tron7 at 09:47 AM on March 31, 2006

until we can absolutely prove that they didn't cheat. fenriq, while I am in support of wiping (or at least segregating) the years 1991- 2005 from the record bood, if you can discover a way to prove a negative then I will nevermore post on SpoFi...

posted by elovrich at 09:54 AM on March 31, 2006

elovrich, that's pretty much exactly my point.

posted by fenriq at 02:10 PM on March 31, 2006

The question is, how to wipe the records of only a few players from the books without affecting everyone. For instance, Joe Blow, a pitcher, in the year 2012, is about to become the all-time strikeout leader, but 52 of his strikouts were against Bonds, Sheffield, Giambi (fill-in whatever name you choose). Since all of the aforementioned players records were wiped from the record book, do you count these Ks or not? Or, Speedy Gonzalez, is about to set the all-time runs scored record, but HE hit in front of any of the erased players, who knocked him in with regularity from drug-induced HRs, do you erase these runs? The only way that I can see to do this even-handedly (not to be confused with fairly) is to determine a period of time, I use 1991-2006 because 1991 was the first mention of steroids specifically being banned by a Commisioner and this year will hopefully end this ridiculous era, and not include ANY results from this time period for ANY career records. My apologies beforehand to Jimmy Rollins, and I wish him luck in breaking the consecutive-game hitting streak. Which brings up another question that is sure to get some play here on SpoFi over the next few weeks; Does a consecutive-game run extend over the break between two read it here first....(My thought is yes, it will count)

posted by elovrich at 09:52 PM on March 31, 2006

Forget changing records. It's a Solomon solution. If you want to do anything then decided records are set by era. Let Bonds own the Seroids Era. I like how SABR addressed this issue:

Of course there is no asterisk next to Marisís name, and there wonít be one next to the accomplishments of any of the accused players. This is not to say that many people wonít make mental adjustments to these records and determine to their own satisfaction just how valid they are. However, while everyone is entitled to his own set of opinions, everyone is not entitled to his own set of facts. A record is a record is a record. It is not our role to decide the purity of the conditions under which those records were achieved. We are not moralists. Our role as SABRís Baseball Records Committee is strictly to make the numbers as accurate as we can.

posted by ?! at 03:07 PM on April 02, 2006

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.