Isn't the prevailing assumption now that, despite what apparently happened in the past, that Barry Bonds is now clean - and if so, does that not reinforce that what he has been doing so far this season is legitimately incredible?

I see no reason for such an assumption. There are apparently plenty of undetectable PEDs, so there doesn't appear to be much risk of getting caught.

"Since they can't detect, go ahead and inject"

If there are plenty of undetectable PED's I think most ballplayers must know what they are. If that is true doesn't it stand to reason that at least several are using them? How then do we evaluate anyone?

I'm just tired of Bonds. Sort of like Rose.

If they had any sense of humility over the gifts they were/are fortunate to have, instead of the same sort of smugness, maybe I'd care, but I don't. I found the stuff on Brian Traxler much more interesting.

Still the 'roids don't get you to see the ball.

I think it's naive to assume that players are no longer using banned PEDs. In addition to the subset of undetectable substances, it's nothing close to a guarantee that a player will get caught if he's using the stuff they can detect, and even if he does, there's a whole littany of excuses (e.g. doctor prescribed it, I don't speak your language, etc.).

3. 2nd that, I just don't care anymore. Some humility and sense of history from him (perceived or otherwise) would be nice. I simply just don't like him, nothing more or less.

Actually, I thought I read that steroids does improve the eyesite.

I didn't know Christina Kahrl was transexual. Interesting. I took a few classes on the subject in college ("The Politics of Passing" most notably) and I feel very strongly about it. I occasionally see "passing" transsexuals on the subway and I want to give them gesture of solidarity, but I figure that not being noticed (for that anyway) is what they really want so I just go back to my newspaper.

The big misunderstanding, I think, is the difference between drag, transsexuals and cross dressers. Drag is usually just gay pageantry, either camp or glam, but always fabulous. Cross dressers are mostly straight guys who like to wear a dress, nothing wrong with it, but usually a lot less fabulous. transsexual is something else altogether.

I don't think there was ever any question of Bonds being a great hitter or not. Even if he is clean now and still doing well, it doesn't hide the fact that he juiced. Without the juice would he have hit 40+, 50+, 60+ or 70+ HRs?? We will never know. The only thing Bonds is proving to me by being clean and still hitting home runs (though probably not in quantities of recent years) is that he is a great hitter, but I already knew that. Therefore, he's still on the hook. vr, Xei

7
Have you seen the, um, guy that works at Francesca's...?

Jon,

I am inclined to agree with you on this one. Barry's homer last night was incredible, and the one I saw last year in person against Billingsey was a monster. When Barry hits a homer, he hits a homer...none of this barely over the wall stuff. I guess I have made my peace with him breaking the record because I am hoping/expecting Arod or Pujols to beat it if they stay healthy. I will be at the game tonight, and I can only hope no Giants fans are next to me (since I hate having beer thrown in my direction). I would love to see a day where we support our team with great cheering, rather than chanting, "Barry sucks, Barry sucks", especially when Gonzo is at the plate and it has nothing to do with what is happening at the game.

Oh well, I can only hope.

9 - It is PC to indentify transsexuals by their preferred gender. It seems like it is easier for a woman to pass than vice versa, but after I read "Stone Butch Blues" I wasn't so sure. It is a really tough thing to have to go through. I wish Mike/Christine all the best.

I think that Bonds is and should be off the hook for steroids in regards to baseball. It was not illegal in baseball when all this happened.

I personally know some borderline major leaguers who took steroids to make the show. It goes far beyond Barry Bonds.

But, it does not excuse Barry for playing on the Giants, lying to the grand jury, being a complete jerk to the media and fans. That's why I don't like Barry Bonds. It has nothing to do with PED's.

Well that was certainly a different sort of morning read of the Times sports section. I was going to comment on a different part... anyone else notice that the last two days have featured stories about Bonds and A-Rod which both basically said, "we don't know anything about the guy or the story and that's the story". Don't they have to try a little harder than that? At least page 2 had a revelation.

I don't like Barry for most of the reasons listed above but sometimes wonder how I would feel about him if he had been a Dodger for the past 10 years and we had won 2 or 3 WS during that time.

14 - I am confidant that I would love him more than I hate him now. Context and perspective is everything. It has become increasingly clear that Michael Jordon is not the nicest person in the world, but I doubt anyone in Chicago (and I live in Chicago, so I am confronted with this all the time) cares. If he was a Dodger than most of us would defend him to the end.

Liking Barry Bonds is a separate question. I don't "like" him.

I agree with KBL, though. I could totally lose the "Barry sucks" chants, if for no other reason than they're so old and tired and he clearly doesn't care.

12. I remember having this discussion before. Not illegal in baseball, but illegal in the US. Which takes precedence?
vr, Xei

I just hope that Bonds gets his homers this year, doesn't get to the playoffs, retires, and goes away for good. Then blah, blah, blah about the Hall and the asterisks and let's move on.

He changes the game in so many ways when he plays, but he overshadows the entire sport with an attitude that makes me grunt in disgust when he smashes a ball and waddles up the line to first. His strut, his smarky smile, his body language, it just makes me disregard him as a human being. I had no sympathy when I watched him cry a river on his short lived "Bonds on Bonds" PR show.

I respect what he can do with a bat and how dominant he's been in the middle of a line-up for two decades, but I am ready for him to be in the past already and we can all stop debating this man. He's more of a whiner than a winner. And that is what he'll be seen as in history.

Just my opinion.

So if liking him is out of the equation, the question is really just, is he a great basbeall player? The answer I think is clearly and with no doubt, yes.

16 I agree, too. I don't like Bonds, I wish he had more humility, but he's still an incredible hitter. I don't think steroids make someone an incredible hitter, or there would have been a lot of Barry Bonds out there for a few years. And the chant is as boring as "Yo mama" or some other child's comeback - not that I'd expect much cleverness from the bleachers, but really. If people really want to chant something anti-Bonds, we could hold a contest to come up with the most clever thing to shout at him.

I will say that I told my GiantsFanCoworker that we literally live in the only city in the US that will be excited in a positive way when Bonds breaks Aaron's record, the only city that cares or loves him. (Sigh, just my luck.) But despite that, I still don't hate him.

(I will say Bond's decided lack of hustle the last couple of years - I know he's old and creaky and all - is pretty hard to watch. Even Giants columnists here comment on how he runs, or jogs, up the first base line.

14,15

It is hard to cheer for jerks. I wanted to see Milton Bradley do well when he was a Dodger, but I didn't mind seeing him go at all.

As a Clipper fan, I didn't want Iverson or Artest. I like winning, but not at all costs.

19,
Great player. Not likeable. The most dominant player of his era, steroids or not. But a classic jerk.

14. Excellent point. We've been privileged to watch the greatest hitter and all-around player of our lifetimes (for those of use not old enough to remember Mays, at least), and we find 1000 reasons to hate him and diminish the experience.

But...at least one of those reasons is the understandable one that he plays for the Giants, our enemies. We can be forgiven for that.

At least we're not Yankee fans. They get to see the new "greatest player ever," A-Rod, play for the home team, and they still find a way to hate him. Save a career-ending injury or just frustration at how he's treated (Barry has a thicker skin - I'll give him that), A-Rod should retire as the best hitter and (therefore) best Yankee of all time. But he'll never get a fair shake in New York.

I wonder if this has ever happened before - that a sports star is admired and respected more by fans outside his hometown than within. And not because New Yorkers "know the real A-Rod." They have nothing on him off the field. By all accounts, he's an upstanding citizen. Ingrates.

I really don't like him as a person at this point, but the saddest thing is that he might have been the best ever even if he didn't juice. I think that 1998, when McGuire hit 70 pushed him over the edge. He had a better year than Sosa in 1998 because Sosa's OBP skills were thoroughly mediocre. Then again, juice or no, he put up the four best years ever so maybe that is enough for him.

Im glad that Barry is a Giant. The last five years of the rivalry wouldn't have been the same without him.

I also think, subjectively, that Barry's approach at the plate is the best I will ever see. A-Rod might break his HR record but Bonds' discipline, body control, and the adjustments he makes at the plate are as close to perfect as you're gonna get.

I also think that he gets singled out, not because of the steriods, but because of his incredibly weird personality. From what I've seen, like the Bonds on Bonds show, dude is borderline Michael Jackson crazy.

A-Rod's closing in on 500 career homers and he's only 32.

How many home runs does he have left to hit?
900 or so?

12 I think that Bonds is and should be off the hook for steroids in regards to baseball. It was not illegal in baseball when all this happened.

It may not have been illegal by the baseball rule book, but everyone knows that doping is cheating when it comes to athletics, plain and simple. It's been that way for more than 30 years. If that wasn't the case, why didn't Bonds or McGwire or the rest of them simply admit they were juicing at the time?

Giving tacit approval to past steroid use by shrugging one's shoulders and saying "it wasn't against the rules at the time" is a total cop-out. This is why I couldn't care less if he's clean now. Barry could've been remembered as one of the greatest players of all time. But his legacy is tainted forever now, and that's exactly what he deserves. He doesn't have anything except his own lack of character to blame for it.

As far as Jon's reasoning that Bonds should be in the HOF, only #1 is valid: He had reached the threshold for HOF status before the steroid use started. The other reasons are not. #2 is simply a specious technicality, #3 is irrelevant, and (IMO) #4 is bogus. I think there's plenty of evidence to prove that using steroids aids one's baseball ability.

18 I hope Bonds breaks the HR record this year then stays on to break the hit record for next season, thus continuing the stagnation of the Giants franchise for another year. Perhaps Sabean will respond to another year of Barry by going EVEN OLDER next season. Julio Franco! David Wells! Maybe they can grab Biggio for a one year contract since Durham is closer to 35 than 40.

I hope the Giants stagnate more tonight than they have for the past few days...

27 - My #2 is more than a specious technicality. I hear the arguments that players should have known it was wrong, but to ignore baseball players and owners turning a blind eye to the usage is to ignore a hugely relevant part of the story.

I really have no problem with Bonds at all. I couldn't care less that he's surly. That's his teammates' and reporters' problem, not mine. Given what little we know to be true about him and PEDs (which, despite everyone's confidence that beliefs equal facts isn't very much), I see no reason to discount his accomplishments on the field. And I couldn't possibly care less about the off-the-field stuff he's been pilloried for (which is all personal stuff).

It's actually too bad that Bonds set the single-season HR record (well, until A-Rod hits 90 this season) and will set the career record this summer (or maybe Spring). Like Aaron, he'll be remembered primarily for his HRs, but both were so much more than just HR hitters.

There is no hitter in baseball that I'd rather watch. Of course, I'd prefer it if his team were to lose despite his exploits.

27- I think you have pretty strict standard for our sports stars. Who's your favorite player of the last 20 years? Will you stop being a fan if you learn that they were taking non-banned stimulants to enhance their performance? If so, prepare for real disappointment.

I think the thing that bothers me the most is how so many Giants' fans categorically deny Bonds ever used PEDs. I could understand their denial if the Giants had won a championship during Bonds' tenure. But they haven't. The only thing that is tainted by Bonds is Bonds himself. I don't see any reason to defend him. Seems to me Giants fans have nothing to lose by admitting the obvious.

My brother lives in St. Louis and I think he said they treat Barry with complete silence when he comes to the plate. I think this would get into his head more than feeding off of the LA chants for how much he sucks. Of course, complete silence could get into the pitcher's head as well.

It is worth noting that in 1999, Barry Bonds was one of the most unappreciated superstars in baseball history. It seems insane, but when I think back to the late 90s, it was Ken Griffey, A-Rod, and others who were called "The Best Player in Baseball" -- Bonds' name was almost an afterthought. Even Bill James thought that Craig Biggio was a better player at that point. Then Bonds went on his tear and everything changed.

I always appreciated watching Bonds play baseball. Even if I assume he did everything he's accused of doing, my reaction is something like, "Here's what a great ballplayer can do with on the steroid boost." It does not in any way disqualify him from the HOF in my book. Certainly, I can't bring myself to boo him.

I could also do without the Barry Sucks chant, as well as the homophobic chants that we get in the left field loge by the foul pole when the Giants are in town.

28 - He would definitely be in his own league with 3,000 (hits), 750+ (home runs), 500 (steals), 2,000 (RsBI), 2,000 (runs), 600 (doubles) and he is closing in on getting his career batting average above .300 which would give him a nice .300/.440/.610 line. He needs 141 hits to get to 3,000, but has to stay above .310-.315 to break .300.

25 I believe that if Barry were not a Giant, Sabean would have constructed his teams in a very different manner.

One thing (I think) we know for sure about the influence of PEDs on player performance: they help you recover from (and presumably avoid) injuries, which keeps you on the field more often. Even if it were true (which I don't think it is) that PEDs don't help your stats per se, the fact that they keep you in the lineup does, assuming of course that you're still playing well enough to pad the stats.

37 It also makes you wonder how much say the ownership has in constructing the team. I think its safe to assume that the plan for this season was to focus strictly on Barry breaking the record and the All Star game. I cant see how adding a bunch of old guys screams out 'World Series' to anyone in their right minds.

38- I think it is widely believed that the injuries that kept Bonds out of the lineup for much of 1999 were caused by the quick run up in muscle due to Steroids. So potentially that knife could cut both ways.

16 If it is not about liking him what do you mean by "Let Bonds Off The Hook"?

According to Dan Heisman of SABR, Alex Rodriguez already has the most homers of any player who is 31. If he hits 56 homers this year, he will also be ahead of the pace for batters who are 32 and 33.

41 - It's about whether or not his accomplishments should be dismissed.

I have actually been thinking about this the past couple days -- what if it comes out, somehow, that Barry Bonds actually has been clean all these years? Or at the very least, that he did nothing that most other players didn't also do? Would we, 25 years from now, look back on this period as having "missed out" in some sense on the greatest player in baseball history? I wonder what it would have been like to see Babe Ruth play, or to be older when Hank Aaron was great, but here we have had Barry Bonds during my prime baseball watching years and I have mostly derided him as a cheater, rather than acknowledging his greatness.

I'm starting to come around as recognizing how great Barry Bonds is, regardless of any allegations.

44 Fortunately, Barry has already admitted to "accidentally" taking PEDs, so it shouldn't be an issue.

I could totally lose the "Barry sucks" chants, if for no other reason than they're so old and tired and he clearly doesn't care

I agree the chant is "old and tired" but are there very many professional athletes (especially star athletes) who "care" when they are being booed by opposing fans? I think that is part of the job description of being a great player, being able to block out negativity (whether it be from fans at the game, or the media).

The "Beat LA" chant is much the same as "Barry Sucks" in regards to its old and tired nature, but I hope there aren't any Dodgers who actually are bothered by it.

I have actually been thinking about this the past couple days -- what if it comes out, somehow, that Barry Bonds actually has been clean all these years? Or at the very least, that he did nothing that most other players didn't also do?

1. I'm not sure the first part is possible. Yes, it's possible that he didn't use PEDs, but how would it be possible for this to "come out"? I mean, isn't that what he and his defenders have been saying all along? How could they possibly "prove" such a thing?

2. I think it's safe to say that Bonds did what many other players did, in the sense of using PEDs.

Also didn't Josh over at ItD try to encourage fans to encourage fans to come up with a new anti-Giants and anti-Bonds chant last year?

43 You are correct in that we can't dismiss him because we don't like him. If we did that we would have to dismiss Ty Cobb for starters and lots more HOFers after him.

Bonds is hard to evaluate. If he winds up with 800 HR's should he have had 500 or 600 or even 800? We don't have enough information to know what the number would have been without PED's.

If all we ever know is what we know now I am going to let the record speak for itself and recognize him for the great hitter he is.

Having said that, when the debate of who the greatest hitter of all time is I won't put him on top.

If all that is both naive and inconsistent, so be it.

46 - If it's old and tired, and doesn't really bother anyone, truly then, what's the point?

48 - That doesn't sound like Josh at all. If anything, he probably encouraged fans to come up with a new pro-Dodger chant to replace the anti chants.

And another thing: even if it were true that Bonds no longer uses, I reject the notion that his current performance is now completely independent from his prior use. For one thing, he undoubtedly draws some percentage of his walks largely as a result of the reputation he built during the period over which most reasonable folks believe he used.

I do not single Bonds out for derision because he takes steroids. I have immense dislike for him because he is the face of my most hated team, a team I would desperately like to see fail.

That being said, although I disagree strongly with Jon on reasons 1 and 4, I agree completely with reasons 2 and 3. He is a product of the atmosphere that MLB tolerated and, some might say, promoted. He is a Hall of Famer, the best OF in the past twenty years and is having a fantastic start to the year.

Also, is "some might say" the same thing as "is it just me"?

I believe that it has been established that with proper training steroids and HGH will improve strength, speed, reaction times, and even eye sight. All of these improvements can benefit both pitchers and hitters. I also believe that the technology for testing banned substances tends to lag behind the technology used by those who develop such banned substances (the type of steroids that Bonds allegedly used were unknown and untested by even the Olympics until quite recently, and to date MLB does not test for HGH). Therefore, I would be hesitant to conclude that baseball players are now all of a sudden clean a mere 2+ years after finally admitting to a problem that had been swept under the rug for some 10 to 20 years. MLB wants nothing more than for this problem to disappear, catching star players does not accomplish this.

With regards to Bonds position in baseball I fail to see what the issue is here as generally players need to be compared to the era that they competed in. Many good players in the 90's put up numbers that would made them great players in the 50's, yet we don't judge them to be great. Bonds happened to compete in the steroid era and was/is by far the best in his era.

Also, is "some might say" the same thing as "is it just me"?

That rule is apparently no longer applicable.

Simplitic summary of how the commenters stand on "letting Barry off the hook"

6, clearly say yes, let him off the hook.
2 other seem to be saying yes

3 say no
1 other seems to be saying no

3 don't care

So, it's about 2 to 1 in favor of letting Bonds off the hook. I guess I'm mildly surprised.

----------------------------

I saw Barry his a homer at Pac Bell Park last year ... hardest hit ball I've ever seen. It is amazing to watch him bat. He's so quick, and his batting eye is probably the best ever.

His stats in his late 30's are so out of line with everything we know about how ballplayers age that I find it hard to imagine he wasn't using PEDs. It's not as if there isn't plenty of other circumstantial evidence as well.

Is it the prevailing assumption that Bonds is clean now? I guess I wasn't aware of this, which doesn't make it not so. Frankly, I don't understand how we can say confidently if he is or isn't cheating at this point. I can't assume an answer either way. Another player I'd give the benefit of the doubt in this situation, but since Barry pretty clearly did cheat at one time, the most I can say is I won't presume he's cheating, rather than presume he's not cheating.

I guess I fall into the "don't care" camp more than any other. Barry belongs in the HOF for sure, though. I think McGwire does too.

to date MLB does not test for HGH

Which of the following best describes reality:

1. No tests for HGH currently exist
2. Tests for HGH currently exist, but they're not considered "reliable enough"
3. Reliable tests for HGH currently exist, but MLB chooses not to use them

46 I personally love the Barry Sucks chants, especially when we're not even playing the Giants (or he's not even in the game). They're hilarious.

I agree that it's like the Beat LA chants, a little tired. But if we're going to get rid of tired things, let's outlaw the wave (especially during a rally, for pete's sake).

56 I could be wrong here, but it's three with a "but". I think the only test for HGH is a blood test, and the CBA forbids blood tests.

In response to reason #3

given how widespread that substance use was among both hitters and pitchers, he shouldn't be singled out

I'm not sure he's being singled out. McGwire missed the HOF on his first ballot and Palmeiro is likely going to get a similar snub.

Where I see a possible double-standard is that Sosa might be playing himself right back into the HOF just by proving he can play (even if not at an elite level) during the testing era. Bonds has put up better numbers than Sosa at an older age since testing was implemented.

I've personally thought it was wrong to lump Sosa into the steroids mess simply because of his numbers and somewhat suspect body changes. However, almost everyone else implicated was either singled out (McGwire), failed a test (Palmeiro), or had grand jury testimony leaked (Giambi and Bonds). While Sosa has been caught cheating in the past with a corked bat, it seems to great of a leap to automatically assume he did steroids.

51 - "For one thing, he undoubtedly draws some percentage of his walks largely as a result of the reputation he built during the period over which most reasonable folks believe he used."

I disagree with that. The moment pitchers and managers sensed he was vulnerable, they started going after him. And it's not as if his reputation was ever completely dependent on his usage.

50

Yeah, thinking back, I do think it was a pro-Dodger chant that Josh was calling for

"Also, is "some might say" the same thing as "is it just me"?"

No, it's kinda the opposite.

56 Quote from a 2006 USA Today article:

Yes, there is a blood test for HGH. But because antibodies necessary for the process are in such short supply, virtually no HGH testing is conducted. In addition, the test only detects HGH right after injection so it's impractical for in-competition testing. As a result, there never has been an HGH positive.

57 - How are they hilarious?

It's true, the Beat LA chants up here in SF are incredibly tiresome and can never be considered clever in any way. I hate hearing it. That said, I guess I was just hoping we could rise above that level with our chants, whether anti-Giants or anti-Bonds, you know, come up with something clever. Instead, we're basically just as boring.

60 ---

I thought pitchers and managers took way too long to sense he was vulnerable last year. Though to be fair as a fan it took me a long time to shake my Barry-fear last year. Looks like I may have to learn it again this year.

Is there any expectation that HGH testing will improve, or are we stuck with what's currently available?

Given the current testing status, a blanket assumption that players are not using HGH seems unreasonable.

62 It's also a popular choice of phrase at FoxNews for when they don't have any actual evidence or quote to back something up factually. Some have said this, anyway.

- I don't like Bonds because of his personality. I never really had any issue with guys like Jason Schmidt, Omar Visquel, Ray Durham or JT Snow. I think Michael Tucker is a punk, but that's 'cause of the Weaver-Tucker-Gagne scuffle.

- I don't think we should let Bonds off the hook just because "everyone else was doing it". Illegal substances are still illegal, if not explicitly against the rules of the game. If we could be comprehensive in admonishing or prosecuting all players who use or used PEDs, that would be fine by me. Singling Bonds out is troublesome but practical -- it is called setting an example.

- It is hard to know if Bonds today, if clean, would be anywhere near what he is had he not ever used PEDs. If PEDs help you return from injuries, if PEDs help you build muscle... we just can't know that he'd be so good while normalizing the past six years.

I'm just suspicious that he's playing at a higher level now than before the PEDs, and that to do so is so many standard deviations beyond a) where he was before and b) where any normal 42 year old would be. Given that, there is no letting him off the hook.

30 My #2 is more than a specious technicality. I hear the arguments that players should have known it was wrong, but to ignore baseball players and owners turning a blind eye to the usage is to ignore a hugely relevant part of the story.

It's a relevant part of the story, absolutely. But it no way should be used as justification, either for what he did, or for putting him in the HOF.

32 I think you have pretty strict standard for our sports stars. Who's your favorite player of the last 20 years? Will you stop being a fan if you learn that they were taking non-banned stimulants to enhance their performance? If so, prepare for real disappointment.

Like Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa? The summer of '98 wa