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]

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.

Just When You Think You Know A Guy

Remember Elijah Dukes? You know, the crazy wife threatening guy who was the star of sports headlines for two weeks at the end of May. It seems that we are not yet done with Dukes. Yesterday in divorce hearings, Dukes' wife dropped a number of big time accussations; drinking to the point of passing out, smoking marijuana, and the big one, using steroids:

NiShea Dukes, testifying in divorce proceedings, accused her baseball-player husband of smoking marijuana daily and using steroids.

Although steroids use remained in question at the end of the 2 1/2 -hour hearing Monday morning, Devil Rays outfielder Elijah Dukes did admit under oath that he smokes marijuana.

Judge Kevin Carey ordered Dukes to take random drug tests for marijuana.

Dukes denied the steroid use at the hearing, and his wife admitted that she had never actually seen him use steroids. The judge did however, order Dukes to go to a drug counselor who would decide if it is neccessary for Dukes to be tested for steroids.

Now if that drug counselor needs any help in determining whether or not there is at least a reasonable suspicion that Dukes may be a steroid user, I would direct them to this story from the spring of 2006, which talks about Dukes sudden physical transformation, which subsequently coincided with a marked improvement in performance. Back in May I had the following analysis of that article, one which I believe holds even more weight in light of the recent accussations by Dukes' wife;

Now not to pile on, but in reading the Saint Petersburg Times article it also seems a bit fishy that Dukes showed up to the 2006 camp with 11 lbs more muscle than the year before, and started tearing up camp as a non-roster invitee. I mean, I'm not sayin what I'm sayin, I'm just sayin. Maybe Dukes and Jason Giambi have a similar training regime...

You Might Also Like: Charlie Villanueva Is China's Worst Nightmare

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.