Bonds' Amazing Start

[B-Man]

I have been pretty sure since 2001 that he takes steroids, and nothing has changed my opinion.

That being said, his performance so far this year is ridiculous, even by his standards. He's hit a home run 8 games in a row (which ties the record--he goes for the record tonight), and in 14 games is batting .517 with 9 home runs, 19 RBIs, 18 walks and has a ridiculous .673 OBP and 1.378 slugging percentage, for an off-the-charts OPS of 2.051. (the only players who have been over 1.25 for a season are Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and Bonds; the record is about 1.38).

Before the season, he was projected to pass Babe Ruth next spring, and people were debating whether he would play long enough (2+ more years?) to pass Aaron. Well, the way he is going, he is on pace to pass both of them THIS YEAR! (he's on pace for 104 home runs) Obviously he's not going to continue at the same pace he is going, but I would not be shocked to see him end up with over 200 walks and possibly 80 home runs if he stays healthy.

As much as I hate everything he stands for, I am in awe of the numbers he is putting up.

But then again, it makes me wonder what kind of numbers Teddy Ballgame would have put up if he had taken steroids...

[WEASEL45]

i know he was small but how do you know he didnt take steroids

[whiskeytown]

rumor has it, (from what I heard visiting my mom in Cali) that Barry Bonds MAY transfer to an American League team where he can still bat (as the designated hitter for the pitcher) but not be stuck in the outfield running around past his prime

if that happens, I can guarantee he'll pass Hank Aaron - he could get another 5 yrs. out of his career from that...

RB

[J.R.]

He has only hit a homer in 7 consecutive games- he goes for 8 tonight.

But then again, it makes me wonder what kind of numbers Teddy Ballgame would have put up if he had taken steroids...

Or perhaps not given 3 prime years of his career to his country.

[B-Man]

Search this forum using the words "Barry Bonds"--there have been several threads discussing this issue, including one within the last couple of months.

[WEASEL45]

i was talking about williams

[B-Man]

If you think Ted Williams took steroids, stop reading this forum right now. You aren't ready for this forum, and you deserve to lose.

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
If you think Ted Williams took steroids, stop reading this forum right now. You aren't ready for this forum, and you deserve to lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL...I wonder what percent of readers will get the reference.

[andyfox]

More than three. He also served in Korea.

But he was playing against much weaker competition: no blacks, very few latinos.

Bonds will be considered the second best player ever (behind Ruth) by the time his career is over.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Bonds will be considered the second best player ever (behind Ruth) by the time his career is over

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't even consider him better than Mayes, and I don't know how you can. Mayes is the best every I think. Bonds is in the top 5 all time, and I say that because his defense and speed have gotten much worse with age. he can still hit like a mutha, but his days of 40/40 seasons are gone. Willie was and still is the man. The only player who may come close is A-Rod, love him or hate him, he has the potential to be the next willie.

[ThaSaltCracka]

B-Man, I don't want to argue the issue over again with you, but I would agree with you, you can't think you can say something like Williams took steroids and not be able to back it up with something.

[Sincere]

[ QUOTE ]
Search this forum using the words "Barry Bonds"--there have been several threads discussing this issue, including one within the last couple of months.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats just lame! Nobody on this forum knows for sure that Bonds did or didnt take steroids. So there could be a million posts on that subject and none of them would have any credibility other than opinion.

[Boris]

I know that you're dead set in you opinion that Bonds is a steroid user. I don't agree but anyways we've argued this to death. Interesting that one of the FBI agents assingned to his case had a stroke trying to imitate Bonds' workout regimen.

What is your opinion of Roger Clemens? Any chance he is on steroids? I would think so.

[IrishHand]

(1) Bonds is/was on steroids. Anyone who thinks differently probably thinks OJ is innocent too. When all the facts point towards an obvious conclusion, that's almost certainly the correct conclusion.

(2) Bonds will not be considered the 2nd best player ever for that reason. Once the Balco investigation/prosecution is completed and Bonds' guilt is more publicly demonstrated, it'll be all over for any divine legacy he might have wanted to establish as a baseball player.

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
Bonds will be considered the second best player ever (behind Ruth) by the time his career is over.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you mean by people who will ignore/discount/forget about the steroid controversy (i.e. most people), then I agree.

However, if you consider that his Ruthian numbers the last few years are the result of steroids, and that, were it not for steroids, he probably would have put up numbers in line with what he did through the 1990s, then I think he falls somewhere in the top 10.

Unfortunately, I think Bud Selig's strategy of ignoring the steroids problem, rather than fixing it, will ultimately work in Bonds' favor. In time, most people will forget about the steroids. So, when his career is over, he probably will be considered (by most people) to be the second-best player ever.

Just not by me.

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
What is your opinion of Roger Clemens? Any chance he is on steroids? I would think so.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Roger Clemens has had the greatest career of any pitcher since WWII. He might be the best pitcher ever.

Is there a chance he is on steroids? Sure. However, I don't see any evidence Clemens took steroids--none of the reasons that make me (and many others) highly suspicious of Bonds apply to Clemens. So my assumption is that Clemens is clean (though it wouldn't shock me to find out otherwise).

[CCass]

A quick note about his season thus far, not including last nights game (I haven't seen the stats yet). Bonds has hit 9 home runs this season, and has swung and missed 7 times!!!!! He has hit more balls out of the park than he has missed when swinging. Unreal.

As for the steriods/no steriods issue, how does steriods help with hand-eye coordination? I won't argue that steroids might make you stronger/faster, but tell me 1 way that steroids helps you hit a 90MPH fastball? Tell me 1 way that steroids improve your eye sight?

I am no fan of Bonds, but I understand that he may be the greatest player ever, and I am glad that I have been able to see him play.

Also, everybody talks about todays players and steroids, what about the "greenies" in the 70's? Why doesn't that dilute Aaron and Mays' accomplishments?

Ruth didn't play against blacks, why doesn't that dilute his accomplishments?

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
As for the steriods/no steriods issue, how does steriods help wuth hand-eye coordination? I won't argue that steriods might make you stronger/faster, but tell me 1 way that steriods helps you hit a 90MPH fastball? Tell me 1 way that steroids improve your eye sight?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a ridiculous point. NOBODY is saying that the only reason Bonds hits homeruns is because of steroids. Obviously he was a great player even before he started taking steroids (or before the accusations started) in the last few years. He's been a great hitter and the best player in the NL for many years. The steroids just made him a historic slugger; he went from the best hitter in the league to the best hitter ever (over a 3 or 4 year period).

I'm not going to rehash the entire argument, which we have beaten to death in prior threads. But I hate when people create ridiculous false arguments solely for the purpose of refuting them. I've never heard anyone claim that Bonds is only great because of steroids; it's just that the steroids took him to a new level.

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, everybody talks about todays players and steroids, what about the "greenies" in the 70's? Why doesn't that dilute Aaron and Mays' accomplishments?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there any evidence Aaron or Mays took "greenies"? If so, please provide it (as well as evidence that they improve performance in a way comparable to steroids). There is overwhelming evidence which indicates Bonds took/takes steroids.

[ QUOTE ]
Ruth didn't play against blacks, why doesn't that dilute his accomplishments?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course that is something which should be considered, and is considered by most baseball experts. But I don't think Bonds' intentional cheating is comparable to Ruth playing within the rules of the game at that time.

Finally, I do think Bonds' performance this year is astounding, even with the steroids. He's a great, great player, and he is doing it at an age when sluggers usually are well into decline (more evidence he is cheating, by the way). I just wish he was doing it honestly instead of tarnishing his own reputation and putting a blackmark on baseball.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
As for the steriods/no steriods issue, how does steriods help with hand-eye coordination? I won't argue that steroids might make you stronger/faster, but tell me 1 way that steroids helps you hit a 90MPH fastball? Tell me 1 way that steroids improve your eye sight?

[/ QUOTE ]


i'm pretty sure the argument is NOT that steroids improve hand-eye coordination/eyesight, but clearly they give the batter more power.

assume bonds is on steroids. if he had not been, how many of his home runs would have been routine fly ball outs?

[andyfox]

Good point, as usual (in your baseball posts /images/graemlins/wink.gif).

Ty Cobb was long considered the greatest player and got more votes than Ruth in the first Hall of Fames ballotingin 1936. He did worse things than taking steroids, and was accused of cheating after the 1926 season (along with Tris Speaker), causing him to leave the Tigers. Didn't seem to hurt him.

Bud Selig is a disgrace.

[andyfox]

You really think Selig and the other powers that be in baseball are going to let Bonds get tarnished in the Balco investigation? With home runs numbers 700, 714, 715, 755 and 756 looming on the horizon?

Sammy Sosa was caught cheating. It was an accident, a batting practice bat accidentally used in the game. Case closed.

[B-Man]

Agreed. Selig will do everything he can to sweep the steroids issue under the rug, because it is in his financial best interest to do so.

It may turn out that Selig is forced to deal with it, but he's going to try to bury it if at all possible.

And I completely agree with your other post--Selig is a disgrace.

[IrishHand]

[ QUOTE ]
You really think Selig and the other powers that be in baseball are going to let Bonds get tarnished in the Balco investigation? With home runs numbers 700, 714, 715, 755 and 756 looming on the horizon?

[/ QUOTE ]
It won't be up to Selig and co. Judgement is passed by fans, influenced more by the media than anything else. The moment it's shown that Bonds took steroids (an inevitability, really), huge portions of the fan/media community, I suspect, will want to pull a Ben Johnson on him and discredit everything he did.

[ QUOTE ]
Sammy Sosa was caught cheating. It was an accident, a batting practice bat accidentally used in the game. Case closed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sort of. His legacy is tarnished, although I'd agree not that much. I know that I've personally tagged him with the "cheater" label and view his accomplishments with a jaded eye. I suspect that most fans have accepted the official "accident" explanation, and the media seems content with that as well. Sosa is, after all, a media darling. (Always ready to talk to them, provide interviews, commentary - all with a smile on his face.)

Really, when the Balco 'roid list gets publicized, officially naming Bonds, Giambi, Sheffield, et al, their legacies will surely be severely tarnished. While one can dreamily hope that the media and fan pressure will force the league and MLBPA to adopt infinitely stricted steroid testing and controls, I imagine that will be a long, unnecessarily painful process.

BTW - nothing amuses me more than the already-named Balco clients (or any other athlete under suspiscion) bravely declaring they're ready to take a test on the stop, if only they were allowed. If Damon Stoudamire can do it, so can you. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Edit: Agreed - Selig is a disgrace.

[J.R.]

You really think Selig and the other powers that be in baseball are going to let Bonds get tarnished in the Balco investigation?

They did try by filing a motion to quash the subponea and search warrants for the MLB steriod test results, and before that by not being forthright about if and whose steriod test results still remained. But that didn't stop the feds from entering and confiscating samples from the Quest Diagnostics lab in Las Vegas.

Did MLB already destroy Bonds and others samples? I don't know, but it seems like the feds want to bring perjury charges against those who testified before the Balco grand jury if they lied under oath. And there is not much baseball can do to stop them if the federal government already has the samples other than to try to pull some political strings.

confiscated records (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4704319)

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
Sammy Sosa was caught cheating. It was an accident, a batting practice bat accidentally used in the game. Case closed.

[/ QUOTE ]

According to Pedro, Sosa was persecuted because he was Dominican! /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
According to Pedro, Sosa was persecuted because he was Dominican!

[/ QUOTE ]
I have very little respect for Pedro anyways, he is an idiot.

Why do you guys contantly have to focus on the negatives of Baseball. There are so many things to be excited about with the new season, can we stop talking about the 'roids issue for a little while and sit back and watch the game.

[andyfox]

I don't know. I remember a while back sevearl big name plalyers got caught up in drug allegations. {Perhaps B-Man or someone else will remind me of the facts here.) I believe Keith Hernandez and Dave Parker, who were considered HOF candidates at the time, were involved, among others. And when Hernandez came back, he was given a standing O at Shea Stadium.

And Pete Rose was given the greatest ovations at the all-star game a few years ago. Facts are covered up and people forget or are unwilling to let their heroes have feet of clay.

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
I have very little respect for Pedro anyways, he is an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's a paranoid prima donna, and that statement was ridiculous, but he was the best pitcher I've ever seen in 1999 and 2000 (1997 wasn't too shabby, either). Now, he is probably about 90% as good as he was in 2000, which makes him merely one of the best pitchers in the game.

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you guys contantly have to focus on the negatives of Baseball. There are so many things to be excited about with the new season, can we stop talking about the 'roids issue for a little while and sit back and watch the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, my initial post was really about how amazing Bonds' start has been. I didn't intend for it to evolve into another steroid discussion, but since it has, I can't bury my head in the sand and ignore the blatant cheating that is going on. I think Bonds is amazing, with or without steroids, but I do think it is "with," and that is unfortunate.

[andyfox]

"he was the best pitcher I've ever seen in 1999 and 2000"

I was at a Dodger game in one of those years (I think) and the last Pedro had pitched game (or one fairly recently) he had not allowed the Yankees to hit a ball out of the infield for the last five or six innings. The Sox were playing Atlanta that night and my dad casually mentioned that Pedro was pitching, he probably would have a harder time with the Braves.

A one-hit, 17-strikeout shutout.

[B-Man]

His numbers from those seasons, considering that hitters were dominating the leagues, are unbelievable.

Remember this:

[ QUOTE ]
The highlight of the season was a 3-1 complete-game victory over the Yankees on August 10. Facing the defending (and eventual) world champs, Martinez allowed only one hit and struck out 17. After the game, some observers called it the best game ever pitched at Yankee Stadium.

[/ QUOTE ]

His performance in the All-Star game at Fenway (when the All-Century team was introduced) was electric. He struck out 5 of the 6 batters he faced; I don't think I've ever seen a pitcher have better stuff than he had that night.

[andyfox]

OK, my memory is obviously hazy. But you get the point, on which we agree.

[B-Man]

Absolutely. My memory isn't perfect, either (though thankfully, I can usually remember on sixth street that someone folded a queen on third street /images/graemlins/smirk.gif), or I would have helped you out with the Dave Parker/Keith Hernandez story. (I vaguely remember something involving drugs, but no details)

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
He's a paranoid prima donna, and that statement was ridiculous, but he was the best pitcher I've ever seen in 1999 and 2000 (1997 wasn't too shabby, either). Now, he is probably about 90% as good as he was in 2000, which makes him merely one of the best pitchers in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]
He is also a vicious head hunter. I agree that he is still an awesome pitcher, but I have little respect for his attitude or his sportsmanship. He argueably had one of the best seasons ever as a pitcher, no one is denying his talent.

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, my initial post was really about how amazing Bonds' start has been. I didn't intend for it to evolve into another steroid discussion,

[/ QUOTE ]
I know you didn't start the debate into the steroids issue. I remember that absurd debates you and I had, so I don't feel like rehashing that. I hope that the steroid controversy dies down during the season, so people can sit back and enjoy the other 95% of players who aren't taking them, and thats all I was trying to say.

[daryn]

yes, in 1999 and 2000 pedro was untouchable. you would watch him pitch and say, "that guy there is the best pitcher in the history of the game".

sad that you can't say that still, but he is still a great pitcher.

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
He is also a vicious head hunter.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. There's no question that he intentionally throws at batters (just like Roger Clemens and many of the other great power pitchers), but that doesn't make him a head hunter. When he hits a batter, he usually hits him in the back or the side, or sometimes in the hand, not in the head. If he really wanted to hit batters in the head, we certainly would have had another Tony Conigliaro situation by now.

I actually think there is very little difference between Clemens and Pedro when it comes to intimidating batters and brushing them back. They both have outstanding control, and they both hit a ton of batters... I remember Clemens beaned Mike Piazza; I don't remember Pedro hitting anyone in the head (though its quite possible it has happened at some point or another in his career).

[ThaSaltCracka]

I am at the present to lazy to look it up, but I do believe Pdero has beaned more batters in the past couple seasons that anyone else.

BTW, I think Clemens is a headhunter as well. (as a clarification, I used the term headhunter to simply say he throws at a lot of people, not neccesarily their head.)

But I also think those guys are headhunters for different reason. Yeah they throw inside at a lot of players and thats fine, you have to establish the inside prt of the strike zone to be successful, but those two guys have had the luxury of pitching in the AL for the past couple of years, so they never had to step in. Now that Clemens is in the NL, I think he will get thrown at.

[M2d]

I don't remember the details, but I remember watching a game Pedro threw when he was at Montreal. He had a no hitter (maybe a perfect game?) going through five or six and he went after someone. His excuse after the game was that he lost control there. Yeah right. he was carving the whole way, then he happened to lose it once and it ended up on some guy's dome.
That incident gave me new respect for him as a pitcher and a new wariness about him as a person.

[B-Man]

I vauely remember that; the batter charged the mound.

I really don't believe he would intentionally throw at someone when he had a perfect game going. Throw inside, yes. But at the batter, I doubt it.

[B-Man]

Ok, well, when you use words and phrases like "head hunter" and "beaned," that implies throwing at someone's head (or actually hitting him in the head).

If you mean hitting a batter anywhere, then yes, Pedro intentionally throws at batters, as does Clemens, as have a lot of pitchers. Those two are always in the league leaders for hit batsmen.

As for Pedro, he previously pitched in the NL (won a Cy Young at Montreal), and he pitched inside there, too. In fact, that was where his reputation for throwing at batters started. He's always pitched inside, regardless of what league he is in.

He does not, however, throw at batters' heads.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
He does not, however, throw at batters' heads.

[/ QUOTE ]
and the one that hit Karim Garcia wasn't anywhere near his head, right?

[ QUOTE ]
If you mean hitting a batter anywhere, then yes, Pedro intentionally throws at batters, as does Clemens, as have a lot of pitchers.

[/ QUOTE ]
A lot of pitchers do, yes thats right, but they don't throw up and in as much as those two do. Those two use the bean ball tactic excessively and they exploit it. But, then again Bob Gibson did too, I don't know what my point is /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[IrishHand]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, well, when you use words and phrases like "head hunter" and "beaned," that implies throwing at someone's head (or actually hitting him in the head).

[/ QUOTE ]
Umm...I've been a baseball fan for a long, long time. Getting "beaned" at the plate means you were hit by pitch, nothing more. Also, while I understand the ambivalence of the term "head-hunter" since it includes the word head, I suspect that most baseball people understand that it means a pitcher who throws at people in the general sense, not any particular location. Of course, that term is mostly used by sissy batters or mindless reporters. Any top pitcher throws inside with regularity. With the amount that hitters crowd the plate in this era, they deserve to get plunked a lot more. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Just some clarifications...

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
and the one that hit Karim Garcia wasn't anywhere near his head, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't remember him hitting Garcia in the head with a pitch. Is my memory faulty or are you equating a pitch "near" a batter's head with a pitcvh that strikes him in the head?


[ QUOTE ]
Those two use the bean ball tactic excessively and they exploit it. But, then again Bob Gibson did too, I don't know what my point is

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I object to your use of "bean ball." Pedro does not excessively throw at batters' heads; I would argue that he never throws at batters' heads, though he does throw up and in, and does intentionally throw at other body parts of batters.

I have seen Clemens intentionally throw at a batter's head (Piazza). But he's been playing for 20 years, and I don't think he's hit very many guys in the head. I think he's probably in the same category as Pedro, Gibson, Drysdale and others--a mean bastard, a great pitcher, but would not intentionally try to put someone in the hospital (or worse).

Throwing inside is part of the game.

[B-Man]

OK, I've always thought of getting "beaned" as getting hit in the head, and I take the term "head hunter" quite literally.

But my point was not to get into a debate about terminology. I think there is a big difference between throwing at someone's head and throwing at his midsection. Clearly, the former is a lot more dangerous than the latter.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't remember him hitting Garcia in the head with a pitch. Is my memory faulty or are you equating a pitch "near" a batter's head with a pitcvh that strikes him in the head?

[/ QUOTE ]
I said near his head. The reason why he probably wasn't hit in the head is because he moved his body. Listen, just because someone wasn't hit in the head, does not mean that the pitcher wasn't trying to hit him there.

[ QUOTE ]
Again, I object to your use of "bean ball."

[/ QUOTE ]
Why? Thats what its called, do you object to the term stolen base? its a fuckin baseball term.

[ QUOTE ]
I have seen Clemens intentionally throw at a batter's head (Piazza). But he's been playing for 20 years, and I don't think he's hit very many guys in the head.

[/ QUOTE ]
Again, just because he hasn't hit that many people in the head doesn't mean he hasn't tried either. The mere idea that if you get in close to the plate on either one of these guys and you think you might get thrown at torwards your head, is pretty frightening. Have you ever been hit by a baseball? it hurts hella bad, especially in the ribs or back shoulder, imagine if you were hit in the face or head. Thats why they do it, to put serious fear in the hitter. I think its kind of cheap personally to use the bean ball in that regard.

[ QUOTE ]
Throwing inside is part of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]
Really? No [censored] Sherlock, and intentionally beaning people is part of the game, but throwing at their head(or the fricken general direction of their) head should not be part of the game. Brush them back if you need to, bean them if you feel they are grandstanding you, but don't try to hurt someone, because that is what you are doing if you throw at their head.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Thank IrishHand
[ QUOTE ]
Also, while I understand the ambivalence of the term "head-hunter" since it includes the word head, I suspect that most baseball people understand that it means a pitcher who throws at people in the general sense, not any particular location.

[/ QUOTE ]
Most people understand this simple concept, but sometimes someone needs clarification.

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
I said near his head. The reason why he probably wasn't hit in the head is because he moved his body. Listen, just because someone wasn't hit in the head, does not mean that the pitcher wasn't trying to hit him there.

[/ QUOTE ]

And just because a pitch ends up near a batter's head, doesn't mean the pitcher meant to hit him in the head.

I think if Pedro wanted to hit someone in the head, he could. The fact that it hasn't happened (to my recollection; I'm not saying it has never happened during his career, though I don't remember any specific instances) also says something.

Pedro throws inside, and sometimes intentionally hits batters. He does not intentionally hit anyone in the head. There is a big difference.

[ QUOTE ]
Really? No [censored] Sherlock, and intentionally beaning people is part of the game, but throwing at their head(or the fricken general direction of their) head should not be part of the game. Brush them back if you need to, bean them if you feel they are grandstanding you, but don't try to hurt someone, because that is what you are doing if you throw at their head.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please provide evidence that Pedro intentionally threw at someone's head, or intentionally tried to injure another player. Good luck.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Please provide evidence that Pedro intentionally threw at someone's head, or intentionally tried to injure another player. Good luck.

[/ QUOTE ]
Some basically your asking me to look somewhere in which Pedro actually said "I threw at his head", please, you are a idiot, no pitcher that I know of has ever said they intentionally thrown at someones head, and its unlikely any will ever.

[ QUOTE ]
And just because a pitch ends up near a batter's head, doesn't mean the pitcher meant to hit him in the head.

I think if Pedro wanted to hit someone in the head, he could. The fact that it hasn't happened (to my recollection; I'm not saying it has never happened during his career, though I don't remember any specific instances) also says something.

Pedro throws inside, and sometimes intentionally hits batters. He does not intentionally hit anyone in the head. There is a big difference.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is another absurd argument we are having because we can go back and forth arguing about where he intended to throw it and where it went. I am done arguing this point because I think both of us are to stubborn to give in.
The last thing I am saying about this is, Pedro intentionally throws at batters, and thats it.

[M2d]

what was that poker saying about not being able to put a player on a hand when you can't even put him on a thought?
I think that either a)pedro missed a little too inside
or b) he didn't really care about the perfecto, and wanted to serve that guy his head.

I can't take him off of b, since he's always seemed like such a fierce competitor.

[M2d]

Not to get in between you two when you have such a nice thing going /images/graemlins/wink.gif, but it's really hard to actually hit someone on the head. small target that's really mobile attached to a larger mobile body.
if you really, truly want to knock some guy's dome, throw behind his neck or upper shoulders (instinct moves you back and down).

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
I am done arguing this point because I think both of us are to stubborn to give in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, at least one of us is. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Riddle me this--you believe there is no proof that Bonds took/takes steroids, and all the evidence to the contrary can easily be explained away, yet you are convinced Pedro intentionally throws at batters' heads (despite virtually no evidence to support that claim)? Seems a bit inconsistent to me.

[ QUOTE ]
The last thing I am saying about this is, Pedro intentionally throws at batters, and thats it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree; he just doesn't throw at their heads, he throws at their bodies, and there is a big difference, whether you choose to admit it or not.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Riddle me this--you believe there is no proof that Bonds took/takes steroids, and all the evidence to the contrary can easily be explained away, yet you are convinced Pedro intentionally throws at batters' heads (despite virtually no evidence to support that claim)? Seems a bit inconsistent to me.

[/ QUOTE ]
I am not talking about Bonds, so don't try to bait me. As for Pedro, you are asking me to find evidence pertaining to a mans action, however his intentions have never been stated publicly by him whether he was or wasn't trying to do something.

[ QUOTE ]
(despite virtually no evidence to support that claim)?

[/ QUOTE ]
You have no solid evidence refuting it either, you simply say " well I can't recall anyone being hit in the head bu him." Thats not the point, as I said earlier he doesn't have to hit someone there, he simply may be making an attempt to hit someone there.
Another poster just stated its hard to hit someone in the head so maybe thats why he hasn't hit someone there.

[ QUOTE ]
I agree; he just doesn't throw at their heads, he throws at their bodies, and there is a big difference, whether you choose to admit it or not.

[/ QUOTE ]
Is the head attached to the body? I wonder how many times he has hit someone in the shoulder or upper back. Look in the mirror B-Man and see how close your shoulder is to your head. Again, He does throw in the general area of batters heads, and if you can't admit that, thats fine.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Riddle me this--you believe there is no proof that Bonds took/takes steroids,

[/ QUOTE ]
Your putting words in my mouth. I said there is definitely a chance he took them, but I also said there is a chance he hasn't. Riddle all you want....