Bench, Carter differ on Bonds homer chase [Forum Archive]

Quote:

Updated: 12:27 p.m. ET July 16, 2007
function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,((''.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true ));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('633202000565100000');

STATELINE, Nev. - A pair of Hall of Fame catchers who hit their share of home runs have different takes on Barry Bonds’ pursuit of Hank Aaron’s all-time record.
Johnny Bench and Gary Carter said Bonds’ chase for 755 is good for baseball, but they part ways when it comes to the role steroids may have played in his success.
“Barry’s going to break the record, and it’s phenomenal,” said Bench, who hit 389 home runs in his career with the Cincinnati Reds to rank 48th on the career list.

“To think he can walk over 200 times a year and do the things he does. And he was a Gold Glove outfielder. He didn’t do that by taking (steroids). He was just a great athlete,” he said.
Carter, an 11-time All-Star who hit 324 homers, said Bonds has had “a great career,” but questions if he could have gotten so big without performance-enhancing drugs.
“I saw him when he first broke in. He was a scrawny, skinny, 185-pound guy that had great talent. And then he turned himself into a freakin’ power hitter with, what, 245, 250 pounds, and his head got twice the size. So, you know, you figure it out,” he said.
“I know he likes to go to the gym. We all like to go to the gym. You just don’t get that big,” he said.

“They still haven’t found him guilty of anything,” Bench said.
“Have there been guys who are probably guilty? Probably so. And your wife has probably had a face lift or (breast implants) or a tummy tuck. We’re all trying to do performance enhancement every day. Tiger Woods got lasik surgery. Is that performance enhancing?”
“If I could take HGH, I would in a heartbeat because I want to live longer,” said Bench, who turns 60 in December and has a 15-month-old son. “I want to be as good as I can possibly be.”

Bench admits that steroids give a player an advantage on the field.
“Of course it’s an advantage. And the bats are an advantage and they moved the ballpark fences in. These guys are strong. And hell, I hit 45 home runs that one year and I felt like I could have hit 60, but now the guys are so much stronger,” he said.
Bench, who played in 14 All-Star games, said it’s difficult to compare today’s players to those of the past because so many things have changed.
“We’re second-class citizens now, our era. Our records are bygone,” he said.
“They’re making $15 million or $20 million a year. I made $11,000 my first year. I was rookie of the year and made $20,000, was MVP and made $40,000, was MVP again and made $80,000. So I’m only like $19,920,000
behind.
“There are guys out there who make two All-Star games and they’ve got their own planes flying back East. I’m trying to drive to Reno to get the 6:45 a.m. Delta so I can change planes and go to Orlando,” he said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IainDaniel

I voted no, clearly Bonds was a phenomenal player before steriod use. But I do understand the reasoning for considering the Asterick.

Take a look at his stats pre 2000 and post 2000 quite a remarable difference

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/st...188&statType=1

Pre 2000 Avg HR per Season 32
Post 200 Avg HR per Season 52

Pre OB% 407
Post OB% 535

Pre Slug% 561
Post Slug% 611

Pre Bat avg .288
Post Bat avg .341

Obviously Bonds has quite a remarkable improvement to his preformance since 2000, in which it would seem quite obvious Steriods have enhanced his natural abilities. Let alone the Fact that he should be on the down side of his career not the upswing at the age of 40.

It is foolish to think that steriods have not helped him get the single season record, nor more than likely the Career HR record. No doubt he has amazing Hand-eye coordination, why else would he be in the major leagues? Hitting a ball is a matter of hundreths of second for reaction time. Increased strenght allows one to get the back through the hitting area at a quicker rate, giving Bonds an opportunity to make better contact with the ball.

However, I voted no, because there are always going to be circumstances that could have impacted ones performance. He is a great athlete and nothing could take away from that, steroids or no steroids.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IainDaniel

Bonds already had an exceptional eye at the plate. Howvever the increased bat speed will make a huge difference. Now instead of not being able to get the bat around fast enough to fight off the inside pitch, Bonds can can get the meat of the bat around to make solid contact.

All those Deep fly balls now become Homruns from the increased BAt speed. Strike outs where he couldn't get the bat around now have the possibilty of being hits. There are so many scenarios of improvements to situations from improved bat speed, I could go on and on.

No one is arguing that he doesn't have a great eye at the plate and there is no doubt that steroids don't enhance that, but they are allowing him to take better advantage of his abilites.