That was some NCAA title game yesterday, wasn’t it? I’m kidding; I didn’t watch it, either.
I did watch part of the Braves-Dodgers game, though, as part of a photo shoot chronicling my love for sports (that’s not a joke, by the way). Anyway, the broadcast team decided that the twenty-one run game was not interesting enough in and of itself, so talk drifted to the ongoing investigation of steroid use in baseball over the last several years.
Eric Karros, the longtime Los Angeles Dodger of Anaheim turned broadcaster, said he didn’t understand what the investigation was supposed to accomplish. Baseball can't change what already happened, he said, especially now that the game has been cleaned up.
I was a little surprised by this. Karros isn’t remembered as a special player, but his numbers would have looked much better if he hadn’t had to compete with the well-drugged stars of his era. (For six seasons from 1995 to 2000, Karros averaged the quietest 31 homers and 104 RBI ever for a player in such a pitchers’ park.) If he didn’t use steroids, in a lot of ways he suffered from them anyway.
But his response shouldn’t have been unexpected. The cronyism of the players association is a big reason baseball is such a mess today. Despite that, I have to agree with Karros. What’s the point? Just about everyone acknowledges that steroids were in widespread use. What else needs to or can be done?
Does anyone care? A lot of fans don’t. I don’t see why not, but at the same time, steroids weren’t against the rules of baseball until very recently. The players’ union was too power-hungry to look after its members’ health, and the owners were too money-hungry to force a lockout and clean up the game. Now they want an ex post facto investigation to bail them out?
It’s almost amusing how Barry Bonds’ potential career home-run record is being treated. Will Major League Baseball celebrate the accomplishment? Why should anyone care?
First, the career home run record just means you mean more homers in your career than anyone else did. As obvious as that sounds, it’s been elevated to seem like much more than that.
Other sports don’t have this problem. Dan Marino threw more touchdown passes than any quarterback in NFL history, but no one thinks he’s the best passer ever (no one with half a brain, anyway). Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is the NBA’s all-time leading scorer, but many don’t even think he’s the best center in league history.
Put it this way: the current career home run record holder is Hank Aaron. But Hank Aaron’s not the best power hitter ever-he’s not even really close. Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and, yes, Barry Bonds were far more dangerous with a bat in their hands. (In a way, this makes Aaron hitting more home runs than everyone even more impressive.)
Second, though, that begs the questions: what could Aaron have accomplished using steroids? Why should he have to compete with players who have used them? But that question is the whole point: everyone thinks Bonds used steroids, so no one’s going to assume he’s better than Aaron just on the basis of a late-career power surge. (I know I just said Bonds was more dangerous at the plate. He was. But no one thinks it’s because of natural ability.)
Third: why is baseball’s record book so hallowed anyway? Cheating’s always been a part of the game. And while statistics may seem easily comparable over the years, they’re really not.
But yes, I’d hate to see baseball’s record book tainted. Yep, it’s in pristine condition. The all-time leader in batting average, Ty Cobb, was, by all accounts, ten times the jerk Bonds dreams of being. The all-time leader in hits gambled on the sport when he was still involved with it. Oh, and how many black pitchers did Babe Ruth face again?
Fourth, we’ll all remember the record, but we won’t care about the celebration for more than a few days. Can you imagine talking to co-workers about it someday? “Yeah, Bud looked like an idiot handing him that plaque last night, but it showed some real guts for Pepsi not to show up?” Yeah, not only that, I think I’ll buy some Pepsi products to reward their courage.
The bottom line, at this point, is that it’s up to the fans. If they don’t want to remember Bonds as a great player, they don’t have to.
Pete Rose was a versatile, tough, and great player, now seemingly alone in baseball purgatory. It obviously tears him up. After he retires, Bonds, Hall of Fame or not, will join him. Isn’t that punishment enough?
I did watch part of the Braves-Dodgers game, though, as part of a photo shoot chronicling my love for sports (that’s not a joke, by the way). Anyway, the broadcast team decided that the twenty-one run game was not interesting enough in and of itself, so talk drifted to the ongoing investigation of steroid use in baseball over the last several years.
Eric Karros, the longtime Los Angeles Dodger of Anaheim turned broadcaster, said he didn’t understand what the investigation was supposed to accomplish. Baseball can't change what already happened, he said, especially now that the game has been cleaned up.
I was a little surprised by this. Karros isn’t remembered as a special player, but his numbers would have looked much better if he hadn’t had to compete with the well-drugged stars of his era. (For six seasons from 1995 to 2000, Karros averaged the quietest 31 homers and 104 RBI ever for a player in such a pitchers’ park.) If he didn’t use steroids, in a lot of ways he suffered from them anyway.
But his response shouldn’t have been unexpected. The cronyism of the players association is a big reason baseball is such a mess today. Despite that, I have to agree with Karros. What’s the point? Just about everyone acknowledges that steroids were in widespread use. What else needs to or can be done?
Does anyone care? A lot of fans don’t. I don’t see why not, but at the same time, steroids weren’t against the rules of baseball until very recently. The players’ union was too power-hungry to look after its members’ health, and the owners were too money-hungry to force a lockout and clean up the game. Now they want an ex post facto investigation to bail them out?
It’s almost amusing how Barry Bonds’ potential career home-run record is being treated. Will Major League Baseball celebrate the accomplishment? Why should anyone care?
First, the career home run record just means you mean more homers in your career than anyone else did. As obvious as that sounds, it’s been elevated to seem like much more than that.
Other sports don’t have this problem. Dan Marino threw more touchdown passes than any quarterback in NFL history, but no one thinks he’s the best passer ever (no one with half a brain, anyway). Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is the NBA’s all-time leading scorer, but many don’t even think he’s the best center in league history.
Put it this way: the current career home run record holder is Hank Aaron. But Hank Aaron’s not the best power hitter ever-he’s not even really close. Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and, yes, Barry Bonds were far more dangerous with a bat in their hands. (In a way, this makes Aaron hitting more home runs than everyone even more impressive.)
Second, though, that begs the questions: what could Aaron have accomplished using steroids? Why should he have to compete with players who have used them? But that question is the whole point: everyone thinks Bonds used steroids, so no one’s going to assume he’s better than Aaron just on the basis of a late-career power surge. (I know I just said Bonds was more dangerous at the plate. He was. But no one thinks it’s because of natural ability.)
Third: why is baseball’s record book so hallowed anyway? Cheating’s always been a part of the game. And while statistics may seem easily comparable over the years, they’re really not.
But yes, I’d hate to see baseball’s record book tainted. Yep, it’s in pristine condition. The all-time leader in batting average, Ty Cobb, was, by all accounts, ten times the jerk Bonds dreams of being. The all-time leader in hits gambled on the sport when he was still involved with it. Oh, and how many black pitchers did Babe Ruth face again?
Fourth, we’ll all remember the record, but we won’t care about the celebration for more than a few days. Can you imagine talking to co-workers about it someday? “Yeah, Bud looked like an idiot handing him that plaque last night, but it showed some real guts for Pepsi not to show up?” Yeah, not only that, I think I’ll buy some Pepsi products to reward their courage.
The bottom line, at this point, is that it’s up to the fans. If they don’t want to remember Bonds as a great player, they don’t have to.
Pete Rose was a versatile, tough, and great player, now seemingly alone in baseball purgatory. It obviously tears him up. After he retires, Bonds, Hall of Fame or not, will join him. Isn’t that punishment enough?
Comments
At this point, it's just a PR war (or it should be, I don't think MLB should touch the records) and the owners are basically asking the fans to come to the rescue by humiliating Bonds. And they're more than willing to.
Besides, steroid rumors have followed Bonds in loud fashion for years, so what exactly did he get away with? McGwire and Sosa, on the other hand...
statistically speaking, hitting in baseball is one of the hardest things to do in all of sports. just from a raw percentage point, not to many people can fail 70% of the time and still be celebrated (unless you are gwb, zing!).
the home run represents this majestic, exciting, picturesque event every time it happens. it's as american as apple pie, or gambling.
the home run record is really one of the premier, if not THE premier sports records. i'm not saying its more important than rushing yards, assists, goals, or touchdowns, but as far as raw name recognition and iconography goes... the home run reigns supreme.
this might explain why people are so fascinated by it.
it also helps that aaron had to overcome death threats during the end of the civil rights movement to surpass ruth's record.
i think baseball spans deeper into our nation's historical identity, with war-time baseball and what not. it was the sport that broke color barries, dealt with issues of pacifism and war. brought classes together, etc.
it may not be in the limelight now, but it was back then. it has the foundation which makes the record significant.
this is just an amalgam of thoughts, sorry i didn't assemble them in a cogent 5 paragraph essay.
but you gore brothers are smart enough to piece them together.
do you think i have got anything there? to explain our fetish for the home run record? the historicity of baseball as it is attached to our nation's identity?
You do make several good points about home runs. I think the sport's cultural significance is a bit overblown, but all of that builds on itself so the home run record is probably the most important mark in American sports.
But your point about Aaron is sort of my point, too. Hank went through a lot worse-perhaps not really that worse, but it was much less self-inflicted. When Bonds holds the record, everyone can pretend to ignore it, sort of like how whenever Maris' record was brought up, everyone mentioned (and the record book even said) that he had eight more games to do it. Precisely because the home run record is so valued, even future generations will know the story of how Barry got there, so no one has to be impressed by it.
But I'd rather have a guy who broke rules that weren't even rules than someone who gambled. But Rose is so annoying to me that I'd almost rather have him in the Hall, because then he basically has to go away, right?
we have murderers, rapists, wife beaters, substance abusers... all in the hall
and there's no room for a jerk who gambled on the game?
it's bull s***
why? umm, 4,256 reasons why...
As for Rose, I guess "why?" was a stupid question. He was clearly a good enough player. I think gambling is different from the rest of those crimes (who are these specific murderers and rapists by the way?) in that it affects the actual game, and the Hall of Fame has to do with sports excellence more than dignity of character...of course, I'm sure you've heard all these arguments before.
I understand the statistical contention behind saying hitting a baseball is the hardest thing to do in sports-shooting 40% on threes is much more common than a .400 average-but I don't think that argument makes it so. I mean, high-jumpers have an even lower success rate clearing 20 feet than hitters do at getting singles, you know? For a less sarcastic example, Petr Prucha of the Rangers has the highest shooting percentage among NHL players with more than five attempts this year-and he's scored on just 24.4% of his shots.