Barry Bonds Home Run King
Did Breaking the Record Generate more Questions then Answers?
Now that Barry Bonds is the all-time home run leader for Major League Baseball, no one seems to know if the record should count.
Amid San Fransisco Giants fans, Barry Bonds hit home run number 756 to become the all-time home run leader in Major League Baseball. The home run that broke Hank Aaron's 33 year old record was hit off of Wasington National's lefty pitcher Mike Bacsik. But did Bonds' record breaking home run create more questions then answers? The fact that the ball flew out of the deepest confines of AT&T Park on a 3-2 pitch in a tied game in the bottom of the fifth inning seem to be irrelevant trivial facts. The facts people want to know is should it count? It is almost as if MLB fans and media were waiting for Bonds to break the record before deciding whether it should count or not. After all why waste the time and resources --Bud Selig-- to investigate the legitimacy of a record until the record is held –makes logical sense. So did all of the fans,media, and the MLB powers-that-be want Bonds to break the record just so they could strip it from him or taint it with an asterisk?
Should there be an asterisk?
According to ESPN's Baseball Tonight analyst and former player John Kruk the answer is “no.” Kruk claims if an asterisk is to be placed by the all-time home run record then every record in the “steroid era” should have an asterisk. Or better yet, he continues, set the whole era aside in the record books. These answers seem to be lacking, and will undoubtedly mar any attempts for John Kruk to ever be the commissioner of Major League Baseball. But the truth is, it is a very complicated question. If MLB starts placing asterisks everywhere it seems to ruin the legitimacy of the whole league –past and present.
Who was juicing and who wasn't?
Jose Canseco, Mark McGuire, Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro, and now Barry Bonds all come into mind. But it is seldom ever heard of a pitcher using steroids. If it is, after all, the “steroid era” then surely the players knew the hitters were using performance enhancing drugs, so why would the pitchers play by the rules? Is it not conceivable that 258 of Barry's home runs (2000-2004) came off of juiced up pitchers? But maybe ESPN's Gene Wojciechowski is right, “...you can't celebrate the accomplishments of someone who allegedly used illegal performance enhancers.” What if everyone was using performance enhancing drugs? Did Curt Schilling use steroids? His numbers seem to improve with age and he peaked at about the same time as Bonds -- 2001-2004. Pitchers are held by a different standard. Pitchers are suppose to get crafty and wise with age. But it still raises some questions. Maybe MLB doesn't care if the player used steroids as long as no records were broken. What about the World Series?
Too many questions, not enough answers
The bottom line is that no one knows what factors played into the “sacred” baseball statistics of the last decade. Erasing the whole era seems to be an extreme gesture, as does placing any asterisks. Robbing the record and “Home Run King” title from Barry Bonds seem to be inappropriate considering even if the allegations of steroid use ring true no one can identify how many pitchers were using the substance as well. MLB –Bud Selig- got into this mess by turning a blind-eye towards steroids. If Selig strips the record from Bonds via the Mitchell investigations it would harness Bonds with the entire repercussions of the steroid era. After all, who else is going to pay the price for MLB's negligence?
Read more about Major League Baseball, and home run leaders from this author.
