756

[EddieO's21]

Do you realize the reporters almost went to jail protecting one of their sources? It isn't like they were just out for a quick buck. They did their job and did it well. They shed light on something going on that was clearly wrong. How could you possibly have a problem with that?

I still can't believe those jerks Woodward and Bernstein either!

i mean come on they weren't even polititians!!! What right did they have? Jeeeze it's pathetic, I mean really

[RayFink1e]

They went to jail because they broke the law, period.

Barry had more HR's in a season then K's. Amazing. If he was pitched too, i have no reason not to believe he couldnt of put up 80 HR's in a season.

[rolliefingers]

I hope this doesn't get lost in this thread, but I think Mike Wilbon had the best take on this story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/08/AR2007080802627.html

[geschinger]

I hope this doesn't get lost in this thread, but I think Mike Wilbon had the best take on this story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/08/AR2007080802627.html

Thanks for posting this, I am in agreement that it is the best take on the story that I've seen from anyone in the media.

[beaner]

I hope this doesn't get lost in this thread, but I think Mike Wilbon had the best take on this story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/08/AR2007080802627.html

I was signing on the Hangout just now simply to post this link as well. Wilbon is terrific as always and it sums up so many feelings on this. Please read this everyone who has added their take to these Bonds threads, take a minute out of the day. It speaks to all of what we've been saying these past few days.

[DrungoHazewood]

I hope this doesn't get lost in this thread, but I think Mike Wilbon had the best take on this story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/08/AR2007080802627.html

Good piece. I agree with most all of it, with the exception of his contention that the balls were juiced in the 90s. That's a big assumption considering there's little or no evidence for it, and there are a lot of other reasons behind the homer/offense explosion.

[mweb]

I hope this doesn't get lost in this thread, but I think Mike Wilbon had the best take on this story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/08/AR2007080802627.html

Good article. My only problem is something I've been harping on here, and that's his belief that players in Aaron's era were clean, which simply is not true.

[geschinger]

Good piece. I agree with most all of it, with the exception of his contention that the balls were juiced in the 90s. That's a big assumption considering there's little or no evidence for it, and there are a lot of other reasons behind the homer/offense explosion.

Well we do know especially in the debate about PEDs in previous eras that absence of evidence is not evidence of absense. We've seen that MLB is not beyond messing w/baseballs (Coors field humidor) so it's at least plausible. Although maybe it's been proven that they weren't juiced - has there been any in depth investigation to show one way or the other whether or not the balls were juiced?

[mweb]

Well we do know especially in the debate about PEDs in previous eras that absence of evidence is not evidence of absense. We've seen that MLB is not beyond messing w/baseballs (Coors field humidor) so it's at least plausible. Although maybe it's been proven that they weren't juiced - has there been any in depth investigation to show one way or the other whether or not the balls were juiced?

What do you mean by that first line? There is evidence of PEDs in previous eras.

[geschinger]

What do you mean by that first line? There is evidence of PEDs in previous eras.

I'm referring specifically to steroids. Players have admitted to widespread greenie use who keep quiet on the usage of steroids. But I'm sure there were plenty of players in the 70s and 80s who used steroids to try and get an edge even if there is nothing but anecdotal evidence.

[mweb]

I'm referring specifically to steroids. Players have admitted to widespread greenie use who keep quiet on the usage of steroids. But I'm sure there were plenty of players in the 70s and 80s who used steroids to try and get an edge even if there is nothing but anecdotal evidence.

Did you read the link I posted on the Aaron thread? If not, here's some highlights:

Testimony by Tom House implicates Aaron:

The San Francisco Chronicle, in a May 3rd 2005 article quoted former Major League pitcher Tom House of the Atlanta Braves as saying that steroids were rampant in the game in the late '60s and throughout the '70s.

House, perhaps best known for catching Hank Aaron's 715th home run ball in 1974 in the Atlanta Braves bullpen, said he and several teammates used amphetamines, human growth hormone and 'whatever steroid' they could find in order to keep up with the competition.

"I pretty much popped everything cold turkey', House said. "We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses. That was the '60s when nobody knew. The good thing is, we know now. There's a lot more research and understanding."

"I actually think that the game is cleaner today than when I was playing,'' says former major league pitcher Tom House, who pitched in the 1970s and was later Nolan Ryan's pitching coach. House says that he used steroids because "In my case, I was doing everything I could just to survive, but the steroid use ended up backfiring on him....Every generation of players -- the '20s, '30s, '40s on up -- everybody was looking for a way to get the most out of their bodies, and they took whatever they possibly could. It was almost expected. .

Testimony from Representative Henry Waxman

In 1973, the year I first ran for Congress, the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce concluded a year-long investigation that found--and I quote--"drug use exists...in all sports and levels of competition...In some instances, the danger of improper drug use--primarily amphetamines and anabolic steroids--can only be described as alarming". Bowie Kuhn, and the powers that be at the time, quietly squashed the entire tawdry episode and with good reason: it would cast suspicions on an African-American slugger who was challenging one of baseball's most cherished records: The career record for home runs

[geschinger]

Did you read the link I posted on the Aaron thread? If not, here's some highlights:

Testimony by Tom House implicates Aaron:

The San Francisco Chronicle, in a May 3rd 2005 article quoted former Major League pitcher Tom House of the Atlanta Braves as saying that steroids were rampant in the game in the late '60s and throughout the '70s.

If it's true that Hank was a user then Maybe Tom House should come out publically and take some heat off of Bonds and say unequivocally that Palmeiro, Bonds, McGwire etc... aren't doing anything differently than Hank Aaron did. Hank has been outspoken against steroid usage - if he's a hypocrite guys like House or Waxman or whomever might know should have the courage to expose him. If he wasn't a user they shouldn't try to taint him by association.

[mweb]

If it's true that Hank was a user then Maybe Tom House should come out publically and take some heat off of Bonds and say unequivocally that Palmeiro, Bonds, McGwire etc... aren't doing anything differently than Hank Aaron did. Hank has been outspoken against steroid usage - if he's a hypocrite guys like House or Waxman or whomever might know should have the courage to expose him. If he wasn't a user they shouldn't try to taint him by association.

I don't think he's trying to taint him by association, just being honest without throwing anyone other than himself under the bus. He didn't mention Aaron as far as I know. Most people don't like to rat out their teammates like Jose Canseco did, so I don't think House should do that.

But I think this shows that steroids have been around for longer than most think. And that, along with the statistical analysis of Aaron, certainly makes one wonder about him.

[geschinger]

I don't think he's trying to taint him by association, just being honest without throwing anyone other than himself under the bus. He didn't mention Aaron as far as I know. Most people don't like to rat out their teammates like Jose Canseco did, so I don't think House should do that.

But I think this shows that steroids have been around for longer than most think. And that, along with the statistical analysis of Aaron, certainly makes one wonder about him.

Now that I read it closer, I see that it was Waxman that did the hint/hint routine w/o mentioning Aaron's name specifically. Although with what House said, by not naming names he putting the shadow of doubt over all his teammates. There is no reason to name names just to name 'em, but if Hank was indeed a user and is being a hypocrite in his reactions to Bonds then I don't see why he shouldn't speak up.

[mweb]

Now that I read it closer, I see that it was Waxman that did the hint/hint routine w/o mentioning Aaron's name specifically. Although with what House said, by not naming names he putting the shadow of doubt over all his teammates. There is no reason to name names just to name 'em, but if Hank was indeed a user and is being a hypocrite in his reactions to Bonds then I don't see why he shouldn't speak up.

Yeah, House is putting a shadow of doubt over all his teammates, but really, he's putting a shadow of doubt over all of baseball in that era.

I wouldn't have a problem if he named Aaron or anyone else specifically, but I'm not advocating it either. It would be certainly good for my side of this debate though.