Barry Bonds, Steroids, and Hypocrisy

Although the San Francisco Chronicle broke the story (probably the law as well, since Grand Jury testimony is supposed to stay confidential), the New York Times has been leading the charge to take down Bonds and Giambi for their alleged violations.

Steroid Revelations Hardly Considered Surprising.

John Hoberman, a University of Texas professor who has written extensively about performance-enhancing drugs, recommends a renunciation of athletes as role models and an emphasis on intramural and club sports, which are devoted to the joys of participation and the improvement of public health.

I couldn't agree more. I find the pursuit of sport immensely satisfying, whether it's pickup basketball, running, cycling or Sunday softball. I love the gradual improvement, running farther, getting leaner, and the camraderie of my friends. On the topic of role models, my own running partners are as good as anyone's I would wager, and I think I can safely say that aside from the clear air of Alaina's California, none of us are ingesting performance enhancing chemicals.

But the level of hypocrisy surrounding this debate, amidst calls to suspend or ban players, is insane. Bonds, Sheffield and Giambi and all other Major League players were gifted with skill and had to develop nearly unfathomable discipline to perform at the elite level of professional sport. The late great Ralph Wiley once said:

There is nothing, absolutely nothing on this green earth that you can eat drink, sniff, inject or rub on yourself that can make you hit 700 home runs in the Show. That product exists only in our collective imagination, and if he did drink the spiked Kool-Aid, so to speak, this would include Bonds.

Because if that were the case, in spite of all the "outrage," bottles of the stuff would be getting knocked back by just about everybody. People who are currently "outraged" would not only use it, they'd have their kids on it.

Amen. He also said:

Why is it when NFL football players are shot up in their ankles and calves and knees and rib cages and shoulders and necks with pain-killers to numb themselves and then go out and sacrifice their damaged limbs so they can perform for us, we have no outrage over that?

Why indeed. I'm sure that the NFL and NBA will also come under pressure to test their players for steroids. What about runners who train at high distances, thinning their blood and improving it's ability to deliver oxygen to muscles? Should we dynamite the mountain passes in Africa where elite marathoners shave those last seconds off of each mile? Why stop at sports? Should those who have used Viagra stop having sex? What about bored surbanites who dropped acid - can we revoke their right to imagination? High Schoolers get prescriptions to calm them into "attention," and don't get me started on the percentage of our produce that is genetically modified or the pesticides and steroids that find their way into our bellies via meat, dairy and fish.

Of course, I'll be sad if it turns out Serena Williams, Lance Armstrong, Rasheed Wallace, Jason Kottke, Mike Piazza or one of my other favorite athletes are guilty of tilting the playing field, but I don't think it's earth shattering, especially in a culture as chemical dependent as ours.

Comments

[Ben]

Is it true that Ralph Wiley is dead?! This is the first I've heard...

While I agree there's nothing that can make you hit 700 home runs, it's not much of a stretch to imagine that Bonds got 40-50 extras out of being juiced. That could be all the difference between breaking Aaron's record and retiring just shy of the Babe. If the most revered record in American sports wasn't at stake, there wouldn't be quite the same outcry. So even though I wouldn't say that I'm outraged, I'm still disappointed. And I hope Aaron's 755 doesn't get relegated to second best by Bonds.

Bonds would have been among the best ever without the steroids. Now his true greatness will always be doubted.

Also, I think the NFL has had a very strict steroid-testing policy since at least the early 90s. The other pro leagues have handled this problem. Only baseball has screwed up so royally.

[Jenny]

And now Marion Jones is under investigation too...

[bill]

"While I agree there's nothing that can make you hit 700 home runs, it's not much of a stretch to imagine that Bonds got 40-50 extras out of being juiced."

Enormous strength gains from anabolic steroids doesn't a home run make? It's skill and abibility to see the ball, hit the ball. But to crush it consistently requires uncanny strength. Something Ruth had drunk off his can.

[Tom]

David Jacobs's comments on steroid use in professional sports is both insulting and boneheaded. I fail to recognize the logic when he writes "...I don't think it's earth shattering, especially in a culture as chemical dependent as ours." What does one point have to do with the other? Where is the logic in trying to make a point about the public's admonishment of illegal performance-enhancing drugs in sports by commenting on the dependence of pain-killers in sports?

Jacobs's lack of understanding about the implications of steroid use in sports is clear. More importantly, his comments are typical of an elitist with no real understanding of sports and the importance of such on our culture.

[William Poire]

Sure, you may argue that steroids didn't help him hit 700 homeruns. But you might want to also begin asking.
Ask: If steroids had nothing to do with his accomplishments, why's he denying the use?
Ask: If he didn't use steroids, would he really have hit 73 homeruns in a year (He never did until he began taking juice)?
Ask: If he doesn't trust his own talent, why should we celebrate his accomplishments?
Ask: Without the roids, would he be left at 600 homeruns?

The proof is in his denial. Even Barry himself knows he couldn't have hit all those homeruns without roids. If he felt differently he (a) wouldn't have taken them (b) wouldn't deny taking them (he wants us to believe that his feats are purely natural).

[Eric Smith]

Athletes begin to decline in their late 30s--look at numbers for Ruth, Williams, Mays, and all the other greats. And yet Bonds had his best year in 2001, when he was 36-37 years old. And his performance had not dropped since then. The only credible explanation for this power surge is steroid use.

Steroid use doesn't improve your eyesight, but it could improve bat speed and strength, both of which would lead to a higher batting average and higher power numbers. Canseco and Caminiti have both credited steroid use for their MVP seasons (in other words, people who have actually taken steroids have stated that it has improved their ability to hit a ball). Without roids, Barry would be, in my view, around 650 homers or fewer today, and probably couldn't be expected to hit more than about 35 homers this year--still remarkable numbers, but not the best of all time.

I so revere the older baseball players and their records that I find it a great shame for the records to be broken by a cheater. It is also important to remember that many youngsters are injured by taking steroids, which they are influenced to do by professionals like Bonds.

[David Jacobs]

Sports columnists and fans are foaming at the mouth like a bunch of rabid dogs fighting over a piece of raw meat.

Eric, you might enjoy David Schoenfield's new column about the "asterisk." He went through all of the great home run seasons and removed the ones that were objectionable for one reason or another. Your all time home run leaders:

Ted Kluszewski, Cincinnati Reds, 1954.
Harmon Killebrew, Minnesota Twins, 1964
Frank Robinson, Baltimore Orioles, 1966

[zagg]

Ya know, everyone likes to point to Bonds 73-HR season as proof of his steroid use. But it's not like he hit 70 HRs year-in and year-out. He did it once. He's never topped 50 otherwise.

I think Bonds' 2001 was one of the great fluke seasons ever. Only normally elite players don't usually have fluke seasons. Bonds' 2001 was an example of an all-time great player having an all-time fluke to create one of the most amazing seasons ever.

[David Jacobs]

I think he just fixed his swing! The irony in all of this is that he's always cared about bat speed, but strength. Taking steroids slows down your muscles. Look at his HR/AB ratio - it's astronomical. There's a change he'll hit 80 this year - they sky is the limit for him, and he's still getting better.

From the little I know, not only is there no proof that steroids help baseball players hit home runs, but in Bonds case taking steroids would probably hamper his ability to hit home runs.

[Zagg]

Well I don't think he'll hit 80. :) He is getting older. He's got to decline eventually!

I also think that when people think "steroids", they automatically think of the dirty stuff from the 80s. But I doubt anybody used that anymore. And where's the line between a legitimate supplement and a steroid? When McGwire was on Andro, it wasn't banned. And what about Creatine?

It's all arbitrary. And as Schoenfeld pointed out, none of this is new. Players in the 60s and 70s were on freakin' speed.

Also, also, nobody ever talks about the pitchers in the steroid equation. It can't just be the batters that are taking everything.

In short, nobody knows nothing and Barry Bonds has had some of the most amazing seasons ever.

[joe blow]

Here's the answer to the asterisk question. Barry Bonds HR record should not have an asterisk. Instead, it should not be in the record book at all. Instead, there should be an asterisk on Hank Aaron's record with the following explanation: Hank Aaron's record stands as the legitimate major league HR record. However, a lying, sniveling juiced up cheat by the name of Barry Bonds did hit more home runs, but nobody regards any hit since 2001 as legitimate.

[Jackyankee]

That unknown "cream" that you used on your arm to speed your rehab, you know Barry, the one that Kimberly Jones, your mistress for nine years says you used ( and you admitted to). Do you think that cream will help your knee heal. Kind of funny but since the knee has knocked you out for a while maybe you can look up the term "karma", you got what you had coming to you. Maybe you and your wife and talk about THAT over coffee while you are explaining your lying ways to her.

[Sean]

the reason barry is continuing to do well into his older age is due to modern conditioning and strength training. mays, ruth, and aaron never had that, which is why their bodies broke down sooner than bonds' has. get all the info before you throw out a steroid claim on the best hitter of all time.

[David Jacobs]

Bob Smizik: In sharp contrast to Bonds, Clemens avoids scrutiny.

Great article.

[Patrick Powell]

Bonds? On Steroids? Yes he is…or was. Regardless of which side you're on, its unfortunate for everyone involved, top to bottom, including the fans. Bonds and the rest are simply products of the business that "owned" them. Shame on them? Perhaps, but if they're to be shamed, then shame on EVERYONE who's ever considered artificial enhancement of any kind during their respective careers. I personally do not care for Bonds as a man (major understatement!), and I care even less for other Hall of Famers (Ty Cobb, for one).
A post on another blog recently questioned: "Is money more important?". Undoubtedly it is, and it has been for many, many decades. In fact, the rabid pursuit of money has led to what we have in baseball today. Major League Baseball, agents, the union and owners have all had several opportunities to keep the sport reasonably fair with regard to spiraling salaries, but NONE could resist the potential riches. As a result, athletes chose to further enhance themselves in hopes of landing their best contract, or at least being able to play longer, and many heads knowingly turned the other way while enjoying these athletes' enhanced performances. Quite significant, when you consider there was once a time when MLB players had to work regular jobs in the off season to provide for themselves and their families.
The authors of this latest "novel" (frankly, if the information was garnered illegally, it is, at a minimum, suspicious), Bud Selig (and at least two of his predecessors), MLB managers, players, sportswriters, Hall of Fame voters, and yes even fans…ALL have their share in the blame for fanning the financial fire to some degree. Because of this, Bonds is now a scapegoat, and probably deserves it. I do, however, find hipocrisy in the way journalists have deemed themselves judge and jury during the steroid era. Most of these sportswriters wildly applauded the 1998 home run race…yet they never suspected steroid use? If they did, why did they choose to glamorize the Maris chase, instead of publicizing their suspicions of cheating? I believe most baseball fans are smart enough to know that cheating has flourished in this sport since the early days. I've known it since I was old enough to play (since the late 60's). Yes, I've even cheated myself, although not by ingesting anything. I've tagged up and left 3rd base BEFORE a fly ball was actually caught. I've pretended to catch a fly ball when it almost imperceptibly bounced first. Cheating is cheating, right?
In this day and age, we've become harsh, particularly with how we perceive and publicly judge those who have attained certain levels of skill or fame. It’s widely accepted to fault these types, rather than acknowledging their talents as being above the norm. Its much easier and seemingly more entertaining to dismantle them for various reasons. Jerry Springer and the O.J. Simpson frenzy were major contributors to this societal anomaly, in my opinion. That's why "the great ones" of the golden age of baseball remain unscathed. Cobb mercilessly beat an armless man in the stands; Ted Williams spit on fans during pre-game; Ruth abused himself as well as women; Mantle was addicted to alcohol and pain killers (enhancers in my book). They're all Hall of Famers.
You see, perhaps it’s a cynical point of view, but I'm only slightly disturbed by the steroids issue, primarily because I've suspected it for years, long before the well-quoted, now infamous 1998 season. Yes, I consider it cheating, even though baseball's "rules" haven't addressed steroids until just recently (hmmm…wonder who's to blame for that?). Unfortunately, the adage, "if you're not cheating, you're not trying" is prevalent in ALL sports. The responsibility falls on us as fans and parents to acknowledge these cheaters to our children and, yes, even to ourselves. That certainly doesn't justify the scheduling of public lynchings, which is exactly how I perceive this new "book". And just as certainly it doesn't require asterisks next to statistical records, which we all know were meant to be broken. Most likely, 30 years from now, when a player approaches the single season home run record (which WILL happen again, perhaps even sooner) people will know when and even how that record was set to begin with. There's no need for an asterisk.
My family and I will continue to attend MLB games because we see baseball as a reflection of life, warts and all. Tarnished?-Yes. Fair?-Not always. Ugly?-It can be…like life sometimes. The flow of the game, the subtleties, the split second decisions to be made, a sparkling double-play…quite enjoyable…also like life sometimes.

So, I consider the question again, "Is money more important?"…not sure, but it may very well be the sole reason behind this entire mess. Time will prove that steroids will not be blamed for ruining baseball. Money, on the other hand…?