Murray Chass- No Record, No Foul: There's No Need to Salute Bonds

[Every home run Mr. Bonds has hit since 1999 is covered in the sort of slime that only a cocktail of anabolic steroids, HGH, insulin and masking agents can produce. The discussions surrounding Mr. Bonds' pursuit of Hank Aaron's career home run mark wouldn't be taking place at all if the Giant slugger (pun intended) had not been ingesting illegal drugs for the last seven years.

The homerun totals of Barry Bonds are bogus...as are the totals of Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Rafael Palmeiro. One of the differences between Bonds and McGwire and Sosa is the staggering amount of evidence regarding his use of illegal performance-enhancing drugs available to anyone who wants to see it. I defy anyone who reads "Game of Shadows" to come to any other conclusion but that Mr. Bonds has been systematically cheating on a grand scale for the last seven years.

Despite his well-documented cretinous behavior I did not count myself among the "Bonds-haters" during his "lean" years...however, my opinion of him and his achievements has been irrevocably altered during the last several months as the evidnce against him has mounted. The respect that I once held for McGwire, Sosa and to a lesser extent, Palmeiro has completely dissipated. Those three are frauds...Palmeiro's finger-wagging denials not withstanding. Hank Aaron and Roger Maris continue to hold the only legitimate claims to the home run crowns. Any talk of celebrating anything about Barry Bonds and his mounting home run totals is absurd. - JTF]

The New York Times
Published: May 9, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/

IF people want to criticize Commissioner Bud Selig, they can find legitimate reasons. They can criticize him for letting the winner of the inconsequential All-Star Game determine home-field advantage for the championship-deciding World Series. They can criticize him for letting Arte Moreno call his team, the Angels, by a geographically incorrect name.

But don't criticize him for saying Major League Baseball will not salute Barry Bonds for his 715th home run.

Bonds, the most controversial star of his and maybe any other generation, is one home run away from Babe Ruth's career total of 714 after sitting out the Giants' game last night against Houston in San Francisco.

Selig recently said that Major League Baseball would not honor Bonds when he hit No. 715 and passed Ruth. Some people criticized him for his stance, but the criticism had no basis in legitimacy. Why should baseball salute Bonds for becoming No. 2?

Baseball didn't honor Bonds when he passed Willie Mays; Sammy Sosa when he passed Frank Robinson; Mark McGwire when he eclipsed Harmon Killebrew; Rafael Palmeiro when he moved ahead of Reggie Jackson.

Just a month ago, Ken Griffey Jr. broke a tie with Mickey Mantle when he hit the 537th home run of his career, but Selig didn't rush to salute him. For good reason. Griffey didn't break any record, just as Palmeiro, McGwire, Sosa and Bonds didn't break records when they surpassed their celebrated predecessors.

They moved up on the career home run list; that's all they did. And when Bonds hits his 715th, he will also move up on the career list.

Bonds, however, is already first on the list of home runs hit by players who maybe/probably/very likely/most likely used chemical aids. Bonds can repeatedly and vehemently deny using them, but few believe him or even begrudgingly give him the benefit of doubt. A few say there's no evidence because he has never tested positive for steroid use. A few say he's innocent until proved guilty.

Some prosecutors, however, could make a pretty strong case against Bonds with circumstantial evidence. Moving up meteorically on the career home run list, for example.

Bonds broke a tie with Lou Gehrig for 17th place on the career list with his last home run of the 2000 season, his 49th, a career high at the time. His place and his total (494) were impressive enough and worthy of election to the Hall of Fame if he had played no more and had hit no more home runs. In retrospect, that would have been a wonderful idea.

But at an age, 36 going on 37 halfway through the 2001 season, when hitters are battling a downward power spiral, Bonds flourished. He set the single-season record of 73 and leapfrogged 10 players on the homer list, skyrocketing to seventh.

In the next three seasons, he hit 46, 45 and 45 home runs, climbing to fourth in 2002, then, having fallen two short in 2003, to third in 2004 with a career total of 703. Knee problems requiring three operations prevented Bonds from surpassing Ruth last season.

Starting with the season in which he turned 37 and continuing through age 40, Bonds hit 209 home runs. For the corresponding seasons in their careers, Henry Aaron hit 141 home runs, Ruth 103 and Willie Mays 82. Bonds may be a terrific hitter, maybe the best in history if you want to make that argument, but can he be that much better than Aaron, Ruth and Mays? Anyone care to speculate on what they could have done if they had been chemically aided?

Bonds has raised the specter of race, as in white officials, the white news media and white fans not wanting him to pass Ruth. A black player, however, has already passed Ruth.

Aaron, in fact, suffered far worse racial abuse when he was chasing Ruth than Bonds has. If Bonds thinks his mail is bad, he should ask Aaron to see some of his. That doesn't justify or excuse any abuse aimed at Bonds. It's all shameful and disgusting. But in his desire to have people feel sorry for him, Bonds likes to portray himself as unique, and it's just another misguided facet of his personality.

What Bonds will not do when he passes Ruth is break a record. That seems obvious, but people seem to think otherwise. They keep referring to Ruth's mark, as in Associated Press reports that said: "But as Barry Bonds closes in on Babe Ruth's mark ..." and "Standing on the brink of Babe Ruth's home run mark ..." and the ESPN announcer who said, "As Bonds closes in on Ruth's mark. ..."

Ruth doesn't have a mark. The word mark is used as a synonym for record. Ruth doesn't have a record. He lost his record for most home runs in a career when Aaron hit No. 715 in 1974.

Bonds's 715th home run will not be historic, as some people are certain to say or write, because he will make no history with it. It has nothing to do with steroids.

It's putting Bonds's feat in perspective. When McGwire hit 70 home runs in 1998, he did not break Ruth's record of 60. Roger Maris did that in 1961, and McGwire broke Maris's record.

When Bonds hit 73 home runs in 2001, he broke McGwire's record, not Maris's, not Ruth's.

If and when Bonds hits his 756th home run, it will be historic, and it will break a record. At that point, Selig will reluctantly acknowledge Bonds as baseball's new home run leader, reluctantly because he doesn't want to honor a steroids-set record.