Right now Howard has 50+ home runs this season. Given all of the steroids that McGuire, Sosa, and Bonds obviously injested to get their record numbers should Howard be considered the real home run king if he manages to hit 62 or more?
I personally don't know since MLB still isn't testing for HGH. So we still have no proof that Howard isn't on HGH.
And there's actually no proof that Bonds, Sosa, or McGwire were on it. Everything points to it, definitely, but there's no cold hard proof. Testimonies and books aren't proof. You just let the past lie in the past, and move forward.
With all the pitchers that are testing positive for steroids - do you scrutinize every pitching record?
Maybe no physical proof, but I've personally seen enough cir stantial evidence to convict. If it smells, looks, and sounds like a duck you can pretty much conclude it's a duck even if you can't touch it.
I think we should just consider it a great homerun season. You can't strip Bonds, McGwire and Sosa of their numbers unless you plan to go through the rest of the list and remove the Giambis, Caminitis and Palmieros, along with anyone else you suspect (with or without proof) of having taken steroids. Too much grey area, and too much time spent trying to purify what are, in the grand scheme of things, essentially meaningless numbers. I think we as baseball fans just need to be less obsessed with numbers, especially power numbers. As long as Bonds never wins the WS, he can have the Home Run le.
I agree that there shouldn't be any "official" change to the record books, but my question is would you personally consider him the single season home run king?? Bonds may have the official record on the books, but if the fans don't recognize it then it loses a lot of its meaning.
I'm with Spurminator on this. You can't strip anyone of their records or whitewash the books of steroids. Such a process would either depend on ironclad proof or pure speculation. If you strip people or records based on ironclad proof (like a Palmeiro who actually did test positive) then you are only punishing those who were stupid enough to get caught. If you strip people based on speculation like a McGwire- you open Pandora's Box.
Either way it would be highly subjective and worse than the existing alternative, which is to leave things be. Lesser of two evils, in a way.
Bonds, Mac, and Sosa hit homers off of juiced up pitchers. With no proof and no punishment, this is a ridiculous debate.
Well if the numbers don't enter into it, I'd probably consider Babe Ruth the home run king, since he was hitting more homeruns than some entire teams at the time.I agree that there shouldn't be any "official" change to the record books, but my question is would you personally consider him the single season home run king??
What are the official duties of this Home Run King? Where can I get an application?
Perceptually, Maris` record still holds meaning due to the futile debate over whether they(Sosa, Bonds, McGwire) did, or did not take "performance enhancing drugs". If Howard gets to 62 I think it will be legitimate, but unfortunately
there will always be doubts because of what happened.
The definition of a homerun is a ball that clears the outfield fence in the air between the foul poles. Bonds did that 73 times. Whether you, or anyone else, want to acknowledge it or not is irrelevant. He is credited with 73 homeruns.
Steroids and performance enhancing drugs were around in the 70s. Hank Aaron played in the 70s. Do we know that he never used any sort of performance enhancing drugs?
As someone mentioned, if you try to do anything to the past, you open pandora's box. If you try to put an asterisk on anything, or strip anything - you had better make sure you check everything. If you're not willing to do that, don't do it to anyone.
Legitimate argument - very nice point. I know you can't take anything away from Bonds on the record, but the whole thing has disgusted me to the point of not really giving a about MLB anymore. I was never a big fan to begin with, but now I follow the Rangers and pretty much no one else. This story did intrigue me though.
You can't throw allegations at people with legitamacy without some evidence. Ryan Howard can flat out rake and has been hitting with power throughout his Minor League and brief Major League career. If Ryan had been in the Texas Rangers (AL) farm system, he would likely have been called up as a DH a couple of years ago.
He hit 46 HRs in the minors 2 seasons ago (2004).
It doesn't hurt Ryan's numbers at home playing in that new "band-box" of a ballpark, however, when he gets into one it doesn't matter much about outfield dimensions.
He's a pretty natural young talent, until proven otherwise.
I'm not questioning Howard, I am questioning MLB's completely stupid decision NOT to test for HGH. I'm sure Howard is as clean as anyone else is now, but until they test for HGH you can't assume he's clean just as you can't assume Bonds is dirty. As for the pandora's box - I hate to say it but that thing has been blown completely wide open for a while now.
No, it's not. Although you've described the most common - by far - situation.
I mean, really, the obsession with HR numbers is the real root of the problem. Given that, over the history of Major League Baseball, there have been variables such as fence distances, mound height, games per season, air density (Coors Field) and pitching/hitting "eras," why do we spend so much time comparing numbers?
It's almost like celebrating an NFL coach for overtaking a college FB coach in career wins. It doesn't really make sense. And even if it did, in the whole scheme of things, it's irrelevant.
giambi was tested 2 season ago and it was negative
To put it in a little differnet light- to me the obsessions with HR numbers is like if the NBA kept track of slam dunks and would have an all-time slam dunk leader. It still counts for 2pts like a jumper or layup. A HR could mean extra RBI's if you brought someone in from 1st. But it is still 1 more RBI, like any other at the end of the day.
Performance enhancers will always be around & not all that use will be caught.
They are though being watching more closely than before & the penalties, thank heavens, are much stiffer.
Roger Maris hit 61 HRs in '61.
Ryan Howard, should be the 1st man to hit at least 61HRs in the post steroid era IF PHI plays 162 games.
thats true but its alot harder to do..and the nba does have an slam dunk leader his name is vince carter
Another question then: Who should be the NL MVP - Howard or Pujols?
But without seeing it...you can't be fully accurate and in this situation I feel you have to be 100% right. I agree with you, I think McGwire and Bonds were and are juiced. I also believe that their lack of wanting to prove themselves clean is a dead giveaway. I would think, and this is just what I would do, if you were truly innocent...you would do anything and everything to prove that innocence. My question is with the new steroid policy in baseball...why haven't we seen Bonds' test results? Baseball could get a huge shot in the arm (pun intended!) by saying "look, our soon to be Home Run King is clean!"Maybe no physical proof, but I've personally seen enough cir stantial evidence to convict. If it smells, looks, and sounds like a duck you can pretty much conclude it's a duck even if you can't touch it.
just my .02
oh and Howard for MVP, although I am a big fan of Pujols.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
