Top 5 Best Friend Duos

There is little about the Barry Bonds' trial that I actually care about because this started in 2004 and is still going on in 2011. I am just sick and tired of it personally.  Although, something caught my eye today when Bonds' former personal trainer Greg Anderson decided not to testify against Bonds meaning he will be in jail until the perjury trial is over. This makes Anderson, arguably one of the best friends ever.  This means SnoTap needs a list and here is my personal top five.  

1.) Cory Matthews and Shawn Hunter- There have been a lot of TV shows featuring two best friends, but none have been better than this duo in Boy Meets World. Cory and Shawn always found their way into trouble, and never seemed to care about school; a dream we all wished we could have achieved in high school. Shawn never claimed that Cory was whipped by Topanga, just a solid third wheel until he found Angela. If they had to testify against each other, no one would say a word.  

2.) John Beckwith and Jeremy Gray- These two inspired bros all around the world to crash as many weddings as possible. They stick to the rules set for them by Chazz Reinhold, an American legend.  Jeremy is a true wingman after taking multiple big hits, dealing with a nympho, and wearing clothing that would make Spaulding blush, all so his buddy can land the girl. 

3.) Bill and Ted- Any duo that travels through time together deserves consideration on the list. These guys might not look like the sharpest tools in the shed, but if you need a great history project done, Bill/Ted will do the trick. Definitely in the Mount Broushmore

4.) Dean Portman and Fulton Reed- Who can forget the Bash Brothers?!  They say Jose Canseco and Mark McGwire were the original bash bros. I beg to differ. These two enforcers paved the way for being awesome. Reed/Portman jammed out like none other, and wer not afraid to call out Bombay for having Ice Cream with the ice queen. 

5.) Rob Dyrdek and Christopher 'Big Black' Boykins- We can all admit how excited we are to have Big Black return as a regular in our lives starting on April 4th. That date is when Big Black finally joins Fantasy Factory. Rob and Big were the best buddy reality television show, and they always tried to deliver the funniest moments in the weirdest ways.

-Charlie.

The Greatest

Now that Barry Bonds has broken Hank Aaron's home run record the discourse among sportswriters has turned to the question of who is the greatest home run hitter of all time. Is it Bonds because he technically holds the record? Or is it Aaron, due to Bonds' performance coming in the steroid era while Aaron's occured in a pitcher's era? Or is it someone else?

The answer may suprise you...because there is no concrete answer. Determining who is "the greatest" home run hitter of all time depends upon what aspect of home run hitting you view as most important. Is it the raw numbers? Is it consistency? Is it efficiency? Is it regularity? Is it a comparison to the competition? The answer to each of those five questions is different, which is precisely why there is no singular home run king; there are five.

The All Time Champ: Barry Bonds
No matter how certain anyone is that Barry took steroids / the clear / the cream / HGH the fact remains that he has never tested positive for any performance enhancers, and he will never admit to it. Therefore there is never going to be an asterisk affixed to Bonds' record, just like there will be no asterisk affixed to any of the other records set during the steroid era. Though some people would like you to believe that Bonds is the only villain in all of this, there are more players than you can count that have been using HGH, steroids, and greenies over the past two decades. Likewise, throughout baseball history players have scuffed balls, spit on balls, stolen signs, corked bats, and used too much pine tar. Point being, if you took away every single stat ever accumulated by a baseball player accussed of cheating, you wouldn't be left with much of a record book. I'm not saying that it is right; I'm just saying that is the way it has always been, and until there is a complete and itemized overhaul of every single baseball record people need to lay off the asterisk talk. So if the raw numbers are what is most important to you, than Barry's body of work clearly makes him the greatest home run hitter of all time because like it or not his record will be staring back at you everytime you open the record book. Without an asterisk.

The King of Consistency: Hank Aaron
You think Bonds' raw numbers are inflated? OK. Lets say that the most important aspect of home run hitting to you is consistency. If so, Hank Aaron is your pick as the greatest home run hitter of all time. Aaron not only holds the record for most twenty-homer seasons (20), he also did them all in a row. During the peak years of Aaron's career he hit between 24-47 home runs every single year, and his career average per 162 games was 37 home runs. Aaron was a devastatingly efficient home run machine. He never had a 50 homer season, but he never had a single digit one either. If that sounds like the kind of thing you value as great, then feel free to declare Aaron the greatest. There are plenty of people that would agree with you.

The Juggernaut: Babe Ruth
Although Ruth stands at #3 on the all time home run list his home run feats are perhaps far more legendary than either of the two men in front of him on that list. The stats are well known; Ruth held the all-time home run record for an astounding 53 years. He held the single season mark for 34 years. He lead his league in homers 12 times. In both 1927 and 1920 Ruth hit more home runs than any other AL team. These are feats that likely will never be matched for the rest of history. There is no disputing the fact that Ruth is the most singular home run talent of any given era. Is that what makes a man the greatest home ru hitter of all time? That is for you to decide.

The Deadliest: Mark McGwire
The above metrics still aren't tickling your fancy? How anout this rubric for deciding the greatest; at bats per home run. By that measure Mark McGwire is the greatest home run hitter of all time, and it isn't even close. Just take a look at the top five AB/HR guys of all time:

1. Mark McGwire 10.61
2. Babe Ruth 11.76
3. Barry Bonds 12.93
4. Jim Thome 13.64
5. Ralph Kiner 14.11

McGwire's dominance in this category is tremendous. Big Mac also has three of the top four single seasons in thi category, trailing only Barry Bonds' record setting 2001 season. What this means is that if you had to pick one man to hit a home run in any given at bat, history would say that McGwire would be your man. And it isn't even close.

The Efficiency Expert: Ted Williams
This might be the category you wouldn't think of right off the bat, and it is the one of the most effecient home run hitter in regards to at bats per strikeout. Why this category? The evil twin to every home run is the strikeout, and shouldn't an argument about the greatest hitter of all time also factor in which power hitter was best able to be Dr. Jekyll without turning into Mr. Hyde? In looking at this stat for the hitters in the 500 home run club, one man stands out from the pack; Ted Williams. Williams only struck out once every 10.87 ABs during his career. While that number isn't great for a normal hitter, it is phenomenal for a power hitter. In a way you can view this statistic as showing who was the best natural home run hitter, the player that didn't need to take chances and swing from his heels in order to hit the round-tripper. If that sounds like greatness to you, Teddy Ballgame is your greatest home run hitter.

Bookmark WTB!
Press [Ctrl + D]

Barry Media Bias: Former Teammate Version

So now that Barry has tied the home run record, there are two things that you can expect; 1.) Barry is going to get walked like crazy. Seriously, nobody wants to be "that guy" that gives up 756. Barry walked three straight times after hitting 755, a streak that could continue for quite some time. 2.) The media is going to ramp up the lynch Barry campaign. While the first of those two points will have to wait until Monday, the media throwdown has already begun.

This time the media bias is coming out in this story over at ESPN about former Bonds teammate Brian Johnson.

I didn't know who the heck he was either.

In the article Johnson imparts the following bits of wisdom;

"You can make a fair argument that he may have been cheating," Johnson said. "Based on what has been documented, it's hard to dispute that argument."

"It was kind of a cloak-and-dagger society. Guys that were taking knew of each other and talked about things among themselves," Johnson said. "What I saw was that guys who were taking would never admit it, would never allow anybody to see. But it was pretty obvious to all of us that they were taking. ... Some people sold their soul to the devil and other people didn't."

Oh man, this is big news here! A former teammate seeing Barry huddling up with other steroid users? Saying it is hard to dispute that Barry cheated? This is such a smoking....pile of crap. What the story chooses to brush over is the fact that Johnson was only Bonds' teammate in the 1997 and 1998 seasons. For those not familiar with the Bonds' alleged steroid use timeline, that would be before Barry is alleged to have begun using steroids. Nobody has alleged that Bonds was juicing in '97 or '98...so why is Johnson such a Bonds expert, one worthy of being interviewed on TV and having his comments plastered on the front page of ESPN.com? The answer is that Johnson is not an expert on the situation, and that his interview is being spun against Barry just like the memorabilia story from yesterday.

It also really doesn't bolster ESPN's neutrality when this is on their front page as well:


Bookmark WTB!
Press [Ctrl + D]

Barry Media Bias: Auction Version

Today another Barry Bonds story has hit the wires and as usual the media is trying its hardest to spin the story against Bonds. The story is as thus; Some auction company called Mastro Auctions had a baseball memorabilia auction yesterday. Some of the items that were sold included an autographed Hank Aaron jersey, Aaron's signed rookie contract, an autographed Aaron rookie card, an unautographed Aaron rookie card, and Bond's 70th home run ball from the 2001 season. During the auction the Aaron items each sold for more than the Bonds ball. So as can be expected from the Barry hating media, here is a sample of some of the headlines of the story:

Sportsline: Aaron items outsell Bonds' No. 70 HR ball
ESPN: Aaron memorabilia fetches more than Bonds items

And then here is an excerpt from the AP story:

"The ball was one of only a handful of items that didn't meet its estimated selling price, while all the Aaron memorabilia met or exceeded expectations, Allen said."

Now for some perspective that is sorely missing from both the headlines of this story and the story itself.


Point 1. We are talking about home run ball #70, not the record #73. Why should #70 really be expected to break the bank in an auction? Because it is a round number? I concede that the ball didn't meet the expected price, but who the heck appraised it? Expected auction prices are not an exact science by any means.

Point 2. The comparison of a Bonds item to Aaron items is inherently unfair. The price of sports memorabilia is highly dependent upon time and historical context. So is it really that suprising that fifty year old pieces of rare Aaron memorabilia outsold a not terribly historically signifigant Bonds home run ball that is less than a decade old? Of course not.

Point 3. It is not like these were the only items for sale at the auction. The press merely chose to ignore the other items, focus on the Bonds-Aaron angle, and make a binary Good/Bad comparison. What a joke. Anyone who believes the press isn't biased against Bonds after reading a story like this needs a lobotomy.

Also, the assertation by the auction house spokesman that the steroid scandal will forever hamper Bonds memorabilia...please. The 10th best selling piece of baseball memorabilia of all time is Shoeless Joe Jackson's "Black Betsy" bat. I guess the whole gambling scandal really had a lasting effect there.

Examining The "Evidence"

Last night ESPN aired a town hall meeting to discuss the Barry Bonds scandal. After watching it I came away with two clear conclusions; 1.) St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Bryan Burwell is pretentious and thinks he is a lot smarter than he is, which is why he was booed numerous times by the crowd, and 2.) the mantra that kept being repeated against Bonds always came back to "look at these pictures, he is so much bigger now" and "how can he be so good at his age"? These two points seem to be the thrust of the Bonds steroids argument. In spite of all of the second hand allegations, there is still no person that has ever said that they saw Bonds taking steroids, and Bonds has never tested positive. So in the absence of any concrete proof, those who are certain that Bonds used steroids always come back to the two common sense arguments based on Bonds' physical change and elite performance at an advanced age.

For arguments sake, lets take a look at the these two arguments on the Bonds side, and then compare those same two arguments to another aging baseball hero; Roger Clemens.

Barry's Change:
Every single time that you hear an argument about Barry Bonds, someone flashes up a picture similar to this;



You really can't argue that Bonds has undergone quite a transformation since his rookie season with the Pirates. He went from being a lithe and skinny speedster to being a hulking slugger. The visuals speak for themselves in this regard. But don't men generally gain muscle mass as they age? Wouldn't being on a pro baseball team and having access to their weight training facilities as well as having the money to buy your own trainers also contribute to a much larger physique?

Barry's Performance:
So how on earth was Barry able to go from a really good home run hitter throughout his career to breaking the single season record at the age of 36 and then continuing to have 40 home run seasons into his 40's? Is there any precedent for such a run? The following year at age 37 Bonds hit 46 home runs, which stands as the second highest mark for a player that age. So who holds the record for age 37? Hank Aaron, with 47 homers. So how come Bonds performing at an elite level at an advanced age is an indictment against him, while Hank Aaron's performance at the end of his career is lauded as a measure of his consistency?

So now that we have looked at these two arguments as they pertain to Bonds, now lets turn our gaze to Clemens:

Roger's Change:
Do you remember what Roger Clemens looked like when he first entered the majors? Now, do you remember what he looked like with the Astros? In case you don't, here is a refresher;



You know what? Clemens got bigger as he got older. Imagine that.

Roger's Performance:
So you thought that Barry Bonds' recent performances were unbelievable for his age? Try this one on for size. In 2005 Clemens posted a 1.87 ERA at the age of 42. So how rare was this? It was the lowest ERA by a starting pitcher in their 40's since 1917, when Eddie Plank posted a 1.79 ERA. So how come Clemens can post historically amazing numbers in his 40's without arousing any suspicion, while Bonds hitting 40 homers in his 40's sets off the steroid alarm?

I'm not saying that Roger Clemens used steroids. I'm also not saying that Barry Bonds didn't use steroids. I'm merely pointing out how flimsy some of the common sense "evidence" against Bonds truly is.

Bonds' Ex To Appear In Playboy

Just when you thought that the Barry Bonds situation couldn't get any stranger, the New York Times is reporting that Bonds' ex-girlfriend Kimberly Bell is scheduled to appear in the November issue of Playboy. And just like you might have guessed, it won't just be pictures;

Bell’s agent, David Hans Schmidt, said that in addition to the photographs would be an article detailing her “personal and sexual relationship” with Bonds.

So what kind of details might we expect from such an interview? Well, take a peek at this article from the San Francisco Chronicle after Bell testified against Bonds in the BALCO case;

"Kimberly Bell, 35, a graphic artist from San Jose who says she dated Bonds from 1994 to 2003, told the grand jury Thursday that in 2000, the left fielder confided to her that he had begun using steroids, according to two sources familiar with an account of her testimony."

To make things even more interesting, the November issue of Playboy hits newsstands October 1st, right smack in the middle of baseball's playoff drama. So if you are sick of Bonds now, get ready for a whole new round of accusations and controversy just in time to ruin your enjoyment of the playoffs.

If Barry Bonds Was An Animal...

This may well be the craziest looking dog you will ever see in your life. There are plenty of examples of extremely tall dogs or extremely fat dogs, but have you ever seen a dog that looks completely 'roided out? Meet Wendy, a four year old whippet from Canada. The Daily Mail explains exactly why Wendy looks so huge:

She was born with a genetic defect which has left her looking like the Incredible Hulk of Hounds.

While her head, heart, lungs and legs are the size of those of a normal whippet, her gene defect means she is "double muscled".

She weighs 4st4lb - twice as much as she should - and has bulging neck muscles, burly shoulders and haunches like a baboon. And unlike ordinary whippets known for their lithe and narrow frame, this four-year-old pedigree doesn't just have a sixpack stomach, she has a 24-pack."

For reference, here is Wendy next to a normal sized whippet;



So who knows, maybe Barry Bonds really hasn't been taking performance enhancers and just has a strange genetic disorder that doubles his muscle mass over time. But....probably not.

Held Hostage

Hey you.

Yes, YOU.

The one reading this.

I have a little secret for you. You're supposed to hate Barry Bonds. Even more than any of the other accused steroid users that have been in the majors the past few years. More than Sammy Sosa, and even more than Mark McGwire. Bonds is supposed to be epicenter of your moralistic scorn. He has single-handedly ruined baseball, and right now he is pooping on the sacred baseball record books.

Well, at least that is the impression that you would get from watching and reading the media coverage on Barry Bonds the past few years. The media has decided that Barry is a villain, and editors everywhere are just letting unabashed potshots at Barry into stories every single day. A couple of examples. Rob Neyer today wrote this;

I won't bother much with Alex Rodriguez's injury, because apparently nobody's really going to know anything until he gets himself into an MRI machine. Obviously, if he's out for more than a few days, he's probably not going to break Roger Maris' record.

Over at CBSSportsline Scott Miller decided to jump on the bandwagon with this terribly original writing device:

No, the most fascinating development of all -- in either league -- was that San Francisco had to kick its marketing department into high-alert status and paper the house when it came to the resident Hometown Favorite*.

Between the penultimate release of the All-Star voting results and the final count on Sunday, Barry Bonds* made up 119,158 votes on Chicago Cubs outfielder Alfonso Soriano to earn a starting position in what very well could be the final All-Star Game for Bonds* and shove Soriano onto the NL bench.

Just imagine three more asterisks scattered throughout the column and you'll get the idea. The point is, it is both acceptable and downright trendy for the sports media to bash Barry Bonds at every single opportunity. Isn't the main stream media ostensibly supposed to be unbiased and neutral? Shouldn't a neutral media refer to Barry's efforts as a "chase" of the home run record rather than an "assault"? Evidently not, but this week saw something happen that has put a speed bump right in front of the Barry Bonds hate mobile being driven by the media.

The fans told them they were wrong.

Bonds made up a huge margin in the final days of All-Star balloting (119,158 votes behind to be exact) to be named a starter in the Mid-Summer Classic. It is almost comical to see how the media is dealing with this fact. Most are flat out ignoring the story, and the obvious statement that baseball fans don't hate Barry Bonds nearly as much as baseball writers do. Others are trying to explain it away as something else. Check this silly little spin from Miller's column:

Plus, the All-Star Game is being played on Bonds'* personal playground, in the one city in America that remains sympathetic to him.

And yet, until a late surge, he still almost wasn't voted into the game.

So where was all this hate and vitriol last week when Sammy Sosa hit his 600th home run? Why is Jason Giambi, who has actually admitted to using steroids, being painted almost as a sympathetic figure as he heads into his meeting with George Mitchell? The answer is simple. Jason Giambi is a likable human being. Sammy Sosa is a fun loving guy that has always been very cooperative with the media and joked around with them. Barry on the other hand is a recluse. He has never been buddies with the media, and in turn they have turned on him now in viper-like fashion. It really isn't anymore complicated than that. This is middle school style payback. "You stole my brownie, I'm gonna spit on your lunch box".

And yet...

Somehow Barry was still able to be voted into the All-Star game by the fans. How could this be? I mean, isn't he hiking a leg all over the sanctity of the game? Yeah, him, Pete Rose, and Shoeless Joe all are. Those dirty scoundrels. They are the BAD GUYS that the Hall of Fame voters (read: baseball writers) have decided to martyr for the rest of eternity for their variety of sins. Forget that unabashed racists like Ty Cobb and Cap Anson are in the Hall. Or that notorious ball doctoring (read: cheating) pitchers Whitey Ford and Gaylord Perry are in there as well. Bonds and company just are plain old meanies. Booooo!!! I'm gonna spit on their lunch boxes.

Yet somehow baseball fans see beyond all of the media bias. Why? Simply put, baseball fans are a lot smarter than they are given credit for by the media. Perhaps they voted Barry in because, well, he deserved it. And perhaps they recognize that coming out of the Steroid Era in baseball it is utterly foolish to cherry pick a player here and there and label them as the bad guys in this mess, even if it would make them feel better about themselves and satisfy some deep-seated moral fairness complex. Maybe fans just plain get it, that there is no fixing the past and that dumping on a few players isn't going to make the stink of the steroid era go away. That the only way to go forward is to appreciate what is left, because once you start putting asterisks on one record in all fairness you would likely have to strip the majority of records set in the past two decades. As for evidence? Well, there is a lot of circumstantial stuff, a lot of dodged questions, and a lot of freakish photo comparisons. Nothing has been proven though, and as dramatic a change as Bonds and Sosa's bodies have undergone during their careers a similar look at Roger Clemens' physique would be likewise damning if guilt is what you are looking for. (I'm not accusing Clemens, just making a point) There is some hard evidence in all of this though. Barry's selection to the All Star team by the fans shows that he isn't necessarily the hated figure that the media wants him to be, and the media's continued assault on Bonds proves that they are out to get him no matter what. Because he is a bad guy. I'm gonna spit on his lunch box

Barry Bonds Doesn't Play Well With Others

In Barry Bonds continues his pursuit of the career home run record, it appears that he has another record in mind as well: lowest career public relations batting average. Bonds is already one of the most loathed figures in sports, yet somehow he keeps finding ways to lower the public perception of himself. Case in point: A recent report saying that the Hall of Fame is afraid Bonds is not going to give them anything to commemorate home run 756. Now why do they think that? Well...

"'I'm not worried about the Hall,' the San Francisco slugger said during a recent homer drought. 'I take care of me.'"

What is even more interesting though, is what Barry has been doing with his memorabilia instead of donating it to the Hall. I think people could actually be sympathetic to Bonds on this issue, if he was keeping his bats and other keepsakes as family heirlooms, proudly displayed in the Bonds family abode, resting in a place of prominence for his friends to see, glorified and...

"Bonds is careful with personal items related to his home run pursuit. He makes certain that hats, jerseys and other things he wears are authenticated, and he keeps them in a warehouse.

He marks them, he said, 'so people don't steal my stuff.' By his count, he's already able to take care of his next three-plus generations."

So Barry the Businessman is stockpiling basbeball history in some rank warehouse, waiting to unleash it on auction houses the next time money gets tight around the Bonds family house. So why is Barry doing this? Is he this greedy? Nope, I don't believe that for a second, Bonds has more than enough money already to last his family three generations or whatnot.

In my opinion there is one reason and one reason alone that Barry is stockpiling the Fort Knox of Bonds schwag: He doesn't think he is going to get into the Hall of Fame, and he isn't happy about it. To be honest, why on earth should he give them his stuff? Five years after he retires he is going to be rejected by their uppity press cabal, told that no matter what he does or no matter what has actually been proven, he is not worthy to be honored with a plaque in their honored Hall. Do you think Mark McGwire would have given items to the Hall if he knew he was going to be turned down by them? Of course not. That is like giving your boss a Christmas present when he has already told you that you are being fired on New Years.

Say what you will about Bonds, but there is no denying that he is a smart person. And in his mind, his warehouse full of items could even be operating as some sort of dowry for his admittance into the Hall, only delivered upon his enshrinement. And if Bonds is rejected? Well, better get your eBay fingers ready guys, because it'll be time for a firesale.