The only thing the Yanks have going for them is that they’re the only team to post a .500 record on the road.

Bonds.

Agreed.  Bonds.  Now.

Will the Yankees win 47 more games for a possible playoff spot?  Going 47-20 over their final 67 games is really asking a lot.

I think 93 wins is more realistic.  Difficult for sure, but realistic.  We still have some hope that Damon will be back shortly; maybe not next week but by Aug 1.  Also there is hope that Jeter, Cano, and even Melky will improve (if only a little).  And I think there can be incremental upgrades elsewhere (starting pitching, bench).

The next two weeks I think, will be key though.  13 games left in July.  3-10 they’re really out of contention, and may be sellers.  10-3 they’re right in it, and will be buyers.  7-6?  Boy, I’d *almost* rather they go 3-10.

Don, can you do your thing with “Bonds”?

<strike>Barry Bonds.</strike> 

I’m not Don, but I hope it suffices.

The game last night made me think that the “ghosts” at The Stadium believe that the 2008 ASG will be the last showcase event held there. Like many great athletes, The Stadium didn’t want to say farewell to the spotlight. Unless something can be done about WOE, I have say I agree.

Thanks, ym.

I’m with you, Mike K. I’d *almost* rather 3-10 to 7-6 also. But there’s probably so much pressure on Cashman not to punt on the season, given that it’s the last for Yankee Stadium v1.2, that he’d probably make some type of move, regardless.

Maybe it’s just me, but I would rather crap out than sign Bonds.  For the past couple of years, this year has been in desperate need of youth.  We saw what happened earlier in the year with Hughes and IPK but for their growing and the team’s, it was needed.  If we go out and get Bonds, there is no guarantee we make the playoffs and even if we do, our fate could be the same as the past couple of years.  What’s wrong with giving our prospects a chance to play, promote from within?  If our farm system is as good as we imagine, our future will be bright but at the cost of one year.

at this point ill even take washed up richie sexson. Platoon him and the big G and let giambi DH a fair bit against lefties. Matsui is a goner and its a shame it seemed like he was ready to showcase the talent he displayed in japan. Damon undoubtedly makes this a better lineup. In the meantime i liked girardi when girardi did the following:

jeter
abreu
arod
giambi
posada
etc..

i always thought arod should be #3 and giambi #4

Maybe it’s just me, but I would rather crap out than sign Bonds.  For the past couple of years, this year has been in desperate need of youth.  We saw what happened earlier in the year with Hughes and IPK but for their growing and the team’s, it was needed.  If we go out and get Bonds, there is no guarantee we make the playoffs and even if we do, our fate could be the same as the past couple of years.  What’s wrong with giving our prospects a chance to play, promote from within?  If our farm system is as good as we imagine, our future will be bright but at the cost of one year.

Thank you.

“If our farm system is as good as we imagine, our future will be bright but at the cost of one year. “

our farm has a bright pitching future but we dont have many promising position players

our farm has a bright pitching future but we dont have many promising position players

Trade some of the excess pitching for position prospects.  That’s a deal I could get behind.

me too

Because of injuries (they are starting Ponson for a reason) trades like that won’t have a chance until the offseason.  Signing Bonds has no cost except upset fans and the hand wringing by the media.

Unless something can be done about WOE, I have say I agree.

Barry Bonds. 

I can understand some fans don’t like him.  But I can not believe the “baggage” is the thing preventing a GM from seriously considering to add his bat.  Not making the playoff, firing a manager, getting desperate and giving up on prospects, or just plain losing come with much more fan/media scrutiny.  Sexson?  Really? 

WC chances lower than playoff chances?

Well, the WC chances couldn’t be higher than the playoff chances, and there’s still an outside shot at the division.

43-24 to make the playoffs, maybe. Sheesh, it’s worse than I thought. I guess we’ll know a lot more very soon. They need to really kick the crap out of Boston and Tampa when they play them. I still think the Twins and A’s will fade.

Yeah, it’s Mike and the Mechanics time.

And that “Are you ready to step up?” chick.

Yes to Sexson
Stop saying Bonds, the potential financial & PR backlash from media/fan disapproval ensures no team signs him this year.

They need to really kick the crap out of Boston and Tampa when they play them. I still think the Twins and A’s will fade.

Yes, that’s exactly it.  Beating the Twins and A’s would help them fade as well.  One of the reasons I think 93 wins could make the playoffs, is because they play Minnesota 6 times, and Tampa and Boston 9 each.  In order to get to 93 wins, I would imagine they would need to win a fair amount of those games, which lowers the win totals for those teams.

Sexson? Really?

He’ll probably hit lefties better than anyone on the farm, or Moeller.  So, why not?  He also does *not* prevent the Yankees from adding another player, even Bonds if they wanted to.

<strike>Sexson</strike>.  Bonds.

What’s wrong with giving our prospects a chance to play, promote from within?

what prospects would Bonds be blocking at DH?  Miranda?

there are plenty of reasons to not want Bonds, but i don’t think this is one of them.

Bonds would be signed for 75 games at the major league minimum.  what prospect should be given those ABs?

I’d like to see someone do projections for:

How many runs Bonds, as DH for 75 games, would add,

versus

How many runs Bonds, as clubhouse cancer and all-around villain, and as cause of PR backlash and fan disapproval, not to mention source of bad karma, for 75 games, would subtract.

My guess is that the first number would be way higher than the second.

I don’t think the runs are the issue.  I think that the additional revenue his wins would generate would have to be worth more than the loss of revenue his signing *might* entail.

How many runs Bonds, as DH for 75 games, would add,

How many runs Bonds, as clubhouse cancer and all-around villain, and as cause of PR backlash and fan disapproval, not to mention source of bad karma, for 75 games, would subtract.

Bonds takes the heat off of A-Rod, so Alex goes on to have a monster second half. Meanwhile Bonds, perverse person that he is, actually hits better when harshly scrutinized and goes on also to put up monster numbers. How many extra runs is that worth?

the more i think about it the less i see that is wrong with signing barry. Yes we cannot expect him to put up last years numbers but the man has a great eye and scares the shit out of any pitcher. A-rod and him are good buddies from what i have read.

+
a better lineup that could lose the WOE tag
NY media cream there pants simultaneously
he will cost nothing
baseball fans will hate the yankees again

-
having a known PED user on the squad would devastate our image….if it wasnt for clemens pettitte giambi sheffield etc

i dont see who loses if we sign bonds..yankee fans get a better chance to win, non yankee fans get more reason to hate, media goes nuts, newspaper sales skyrocket

Without Matsui for the season, Damon for a while, Bret Gardner hitting like Woemack, Ponson and Rasner in the rotation until August or September and 10 games left with the Angels, unless Cash pulls off a major steal or two this season is lost.  Of course Bonds would help the team but it aint gonna happen and I don’t know if I want it or not.  The guy is like the biggest jerk in the game.

Without Matsui for the season, Damon for a while, Bret Gardner hitting like Woemack, Ponson and Rasner in the rotation until August or September and 10 games left with the Angels, unless Cash pulls off a major steal or two this season is lost.

I made a similar comment earlier and I think it still stands.  This team is simply not good enough to contend as constructed.

I’m not too worried about the pitching because I think we still has some internal options.  Kennedy, McCutchen, et al.

But the offense isn’t cutting it.  They need an impact bat.  Maybe Melky/Gardner heats up, I don’t know.  I don’t put a lot of blame on Cano, mostly because he’s been stupidly unlucky this season.  His line drive rate is better than it was in 2007 and yet his BABIP is an absurdly unlucky .252 (at least according to NoMaas). 

I would have liked a Bonds signing in April.  But now, what’s the point?  He’s going to need a month to get ready and there’s no guarantee he can fill in and play.

Bonds would be signed for 75 games at the major league minimum

You’re assuming Bonds guarentees the Yankees make it to the ALCS (Yanks have 67 games left)? 

Seriously, Bonds wouldn’t play 67 games, even if they signed him tonight.  I think he would need at least 2 weeks in the minors, probably more like 3.  Batting practice and shagging fly-balls is nice and all, but he needs some time actually seeing real pitches, etc.  So at most he gets 55 games.  So the better question is, how many runs would he add above the player he’s replacing, over 55 games?  And then is that worth it?

We also have to realize that Cashman probably has a better idea of when Bonds will truly be ready than we do.  Maybe he feels Bonds would need 4-5 weeks instead of 2-3, and doesn’t know if the 30 games are worth it.

How would you pro-Bonds folks feel if we were up by six games and Boston brought him in, he had a monster 2nd half, and they pushed us out of the WC?  Frankly, I’d think their season was tainted.  If we don’t make the WC this season while Bonds plays golf, well, we took some gambles and lost and some guys underperformed - but them’s the breaks.

The guy is like the biggest jerk in the game.

That’s what I thought about Clemens when the Yankees traded for him. I still rooted for the Yankees to win on the days he started.

He’s going to need a month to get ready.

I’m not an expert on this, but I can’t imagine it would take him more than 3 or 4 minor league games to be ready to stand in against ML pitching.  Steroids or not, this is one of the best hitters who ever set foot in a batter’s box.

Hell, you could stick him in the Yankees lineup tomorrow and the opposing team would walk him 3 times. 

5 times, if Showalter is the opposing manager.

If we don’t make the WC this season while Bonds plays golf, well, we took some gambles and lost and some guys underperformed - but them’s the breaks.

I certainly don’t think I’m “pro-Bonds”.  But…I think if you could guarentee me right now, that w/ Bonds they make the playoffs, and w/o Bonds they miss the playoffs, I’d say, “sign him”.  However, I don’t think Bonds adds more than a win or two, AT MOST.  I just don’t see him as the catalyst that makes this offense a juggernaught.  And somewhere, you’re going to need to make a defensive trade-off.

If Bonds gets walked all the time, aren’t we back to the original problem, which is that WOE can’t drive runners in?  What’s the point of having him on base if he’ll just stay there?  He might as well bring a pina colada and a comfy chair with him.

i also do not think it is going to take him 4 weeks to get ready. Even if you threw him in there on friday he would be an improvement. I also wouldnt have him play ANY left field…strictly DH. I am not that uncomfortable with the big G at 1st and posada behind the dish.

clearly we dont care about tainted seasons especially if we sign him so what does it matter what boston thinks?

i am not pro bonds it is just an intriguing idea that I cannot find anything wrong with

I’m not an expert on this, but I can’t imagine it would take him more than 3 or 4 minor league games to be ready to stand in against ML pitching.  Steroids or not, this is one of the best hitters who ever set foot in a batter’s box.

One problem is, we don’t know his current level of conditioning.  We can make assumptions, like, “he’s a professional that wants to play!  I’m sure he’s in shape!”.  But we really don’t know.  Problem number 2 is, “stand in against” may mean playing at replacement-level for 2 weeks, which may actually be worse (given defensive trade-offs) than him being in the minors.

YM, I never would expected the “clogging up the basepaths” argument out of you.

The Yankees don’t drive in runners because they make too many outs!

Walks mean not outs.

Barry is very good at not outs.

Frankly, I’d think their season was tainted.

that plus $1.99 will get you a large coffee at Dunkin Donuts.

it’s great for arguing over the internet and all, but it would still be Boston in and us out. 

besides, if that’s the case, i am sure that all 4 of the Yankees most recent titles are “tainted”.  the 2000 title is practically untouchable, 25% of the team was on something.  probably more.

And somewhere, you’re going to need to make a defensive trade-off.

i don’t see why.

our starting DH is probably lost for the season.

that’s where Bonds fits.

i guess the defensive tradeoff is forcing Posada to catch, but you know what?  if Posada can’t catch and Molina is in the lineup for the rest of the season, this team is probably done anyway.

The 1921-23 run was tainted for sure.  Can’t believe the big bad Yankees got that asshole Ruth for just money.

and to be clear, i understand and don’t disagree with most of the non-baseball reasons for not signing Bonds.

i completely understand the Yankees’ reluctance to stay away.

i am just saying that on a baseball-only level, it makes sense.

The biggest issue with signing Bonds, I think, is that he will undoubtedly ignore and probably antagonize Jeter in his role as captain. You can argue whether or not that means anything, but Jeter’s been the guy in the clubhouse for close to a decade and the Yanks probably like it that way. How’s it going to go over when Jeter tells Bonds that this team runs out ground balls to second? I am indifferent towards Bonds, I like Jeter, I don’t think the uneasiness would necessarily be a bad thing and I don’t think Jeter would be against Bonds on the team, but I bet the Yankee front office is very much aware of that and is probably cautious of it. I would guess that, not the steroids or the bad PR, is the big reason the Yankee front office hasn’t even breathed a word about Bonds.

“That’s what I thought about Clemens”

Someone remind me, was the Clemens signing a big net positive?  Ok, I recall him stomping on Seattle in the post season, but also getting stomped.  And a couple of excellent seasons but a couple of meh too.  But Wells did ok in Toronto, as did Lloyd.  How many wins was he worth, taking the trade and salary into account?  (I guess market availability comes in too.)

i guess the defensive tradeoff is forcing Posada to catch, but you know what?  if Posada can’t catch and Molina is in the lineup for the rest of the season, this team is probably done anyway.

Probably true, but the trade-off still has to be recognized.  Barry had a VORP around 55 last year, in about 3/4ths of a season.  So he’s what, maybe 20 runs more than Molina offensively over 1/3rd of the season?  And you figure for that third that Molina is maybe 10 runs (hopefully less) better than Posada defensively?  So that’s one win.

Alternatively, to keep Posada DH’ing, you could put Bonds in left; which if Damon’s healthy also means he has to move to CF.  I’d hazarad that we lose 20 runs in defense there, making it a wash (Bonds over Melky).

Again, I just can’t see Bonds worth more than a win or two over what they have now.  If we - more importantly Cashman - thinks that win or two is the difference between playoffs or not, then great!  Go get him!  If not…?

The biggest issue with signing Bonds, I think, is that he will undoubtedly ignore and probably antagonize Jeter in his role as captain.

I can’t tell if you are joking or not.

Ok, I recall him stomping on Seattle in the post season, but also getting stomped.

The key is post season.  Get in it first and worry about the net positiveness afterwards.

CP,
  Why do you think Jeter gives a shit about any of that? Anyway, until he starts hitting his weight, who cares?

rilkefan, in case this was not obvious, the Clemens example was to suggest that most baseball fans will root for their team to win regardless of the jerkiness of its players.

I rooted for child rapist Luis Palonia!

Clemens was the enemy because he was a Red Sox and I didn’t like how he was always knocking down Yankees but I never had the conviction that he was an asshole as a human being the way I do about Bonds.  Clemens recent evasions about his juicing and possible underage sexing have however caused me to retroactively downgrade him to the asshole category.

“Can’t believe the big bad Yankees got that asshole Ruth for just money.”

Ehh, if the other owner is an idiot, then whatever.  And Ruth wasn’t a detriment to the game the way Bonds has been, was he?  Ditto Giambi, etc.  The records of the era are a bit dubious, but the overall playing field was probably equitable for the 2000 Yankees.  If Brosius was doping, then, well, too bad, but it’s not a historically interesting fact - Mo would be different.  And yes, I’d feel better about that era if David Wells hadn’t been traded for Clemens.

“it’s great for arguing over the internet and all”

Well, good then.

“but it would still be Boston in and us out.”

Just a tautology.

[43]Come on, that’s really a concern? Jeter is smart enough to not try to “captian” Bonds. Barry is Barry, he’s like 50. He’s hit more HR than anyone in the history of the sport, he’s not running out grounders for anyone, not even Jeter, and Jeter knows that. If they brought Bonds on board, it wouldn’t be to leg out infield hits for pete’s sake. It would be because their anemic offense needs all the juice it can get.

Someone remind me, was the Clemens signing a big net positive?

i’d say it was.

he gave the Yankees about 1000 innings of 115 ERA+ in 5 years.  that’s extremely valuable. 

in the postseason, the threw 100 IP with a 3.24 ERA. 

and really, his finest moment was kindof denied when Mariano threw that bunt into CF in the 2001 WS.

if Mariano converts that save, Clemens is the 2001 WS MVP with 3 rings in 3 seasons in NY.

  And Ruth wasn’t a detriment to the game the way Bonds has been, was he?  Ditto Giambi, etc.  The records of the era are a bit dubious, but the overall playing field was probably equitable for the 2000 Yankees.

what makes you think the playing field wasn’t equitable for Bonds?

why are we singling him out?

i count about 9 documented juicers on the 2000 Yankees.

it seems strange to brush that aside while seemingly holding Bonds to a different standard.

Barry. Bonds.

YM, I never would expected the “clogging up the basepaths” argument out of you.

Barry is very good at not outs.

Sorry, Kermit. 

I guess it’s just that intuitively it seems like even when Yanks get people on base, they strand them there.  It’s not the basepaths-clogging argument per se, because I don’t think that Bonds clogging the bases will somehow prevent Yankees from scoring runs (which is the essence of base-clogging hate, right?  That slow runners clog up the bases without doing much of anything else?). 

Bonds had a ridiculous OBP with the Giants because the rest of that team stank and the opposing team could walk him all the time with minimal repercussions.  I guess if you bat ARod in front of him, Alex might get better pitches to hit because you wouldn’t want to walk him to put runners on in front of Bonds…Then again, hasn’t the whole “protection in lineup” thing been largely debunked? 

I dunno…The bottom line is that Bonds might be an upgrade, but I’m not sure that the size of that upgrade trumps the size of the circus that he brings with him. 

All you VORPies may now feel free to make fun of my Joe Morgan-esque ramblings

It’s humorous how everyone specultes on what will happen in a clubhouse that we know to be organized a certain way even though we have never been in it. Jeter wants to win.  ARod wants to win.  Mo and Moose want to win.  If you help the team win, and don’t act like a total ass then I’m sure you are more than welcome.  See Sir Sidney, Sheffield, etc. I’m sure Cashman wouldn’t bring Bonds in unless Bonds wantedto be here and not act like an ass.

Also, doesn’t it annoy you the way Bonds is roundly hated for doing something 75% of the league was probably also doing?  Go Bonds!

<strike>Agreed. Bonds. Now.</strike> There, fixed that.

Also, doesn’t it annoy you the way Bonds is roundly hated for doing something 75% of the league was probably also doing?  Go Bonds!

yes, but Bonds had the nerve to be a much player than everyone else BEFORE he started juicing.  that put him in a position to break records. 

that is morally much worse than a fringe player using steroids to just become an average major leaguer. 

after all, those guys have kids to feed.

“i count about 9 documented juicers on the 2000 Yankees”

You’re counting e.g. Pettitte?  You’re ignoring that my argument includes Clemens?  You’ve no interest in the state of the playing field at the time?  You’re seriously arguing that it would be the same if Mo was on steroids or Chad Curtis?

and of course, i don’t like steroids and i want them out of the game.  i don’t like what Bonds has done, and in a perfect world, i don’t really want to have to root for him.

but there is a massive double-standard here when 17,000 people are wearing fake moustaches to get Giambi into the All-Star game while Bonds has basically been blackballed.

<i>Why do you think Jeter gives a shit about any of that?<i>

I don’t. I think the front office does because front offices in the MLB tend to give a shit about that pretty often.

<i>Jeter is smart enough to not try to “captian” Bonds. Barry is Barry, he’s like 50. He’s hit more HR than anyone in the history of the sport, he’s not running out grounders for anyone, not even Jeter, and Jeter knows that. If they brought Bonds on board, it wouldn’t be to leg out infield hits for pete’s sake. It would be because their anemic offense needs all the juice it can get.<i>

Sure. And I bet that’s part of the problem from the front office perspective. Most front offices value the team aspect of the game, they do not like it when a player comes in and sets his own rules, separating him from the rest of the clubhouse. It would be particularly unusual in the Yankee clubhouse. The PR isn’t a reason not to sign him, it’s probably a plus for the Steinbrenner’s. Neither is the question of whether he can play. And I doubt the Yanks are in on the “conspiracy”. I’m left with one real possibility, they don’t want to sign Bonds, no one wants to sign Bonds, because of the clubhouse effects he has. I would guess enough people (Front office, coaches, players) will resent the three lockers, the lazy boy and the attitude and that is what is keeping him from getting signed. We hear and read execs go on and on about chemistry and character, why is it surprising that one of the worst teammates out there (not pretend worst, like Bradley or Rickey) can’t find a job?

This, btw, does not reflect my feelings about Bonds, but after watching everyone else argue about Bonds here and on BBTF, this is the only situation that seems plausible to me.

You’re counting e.g. Pettitte?

yes.  why wouldn’t i?

You’ve no interest in the state of the playing field at the time?

of course i do.  but i’d love to hear why you think that excuses the 2000 Yankees and not Bonds.

“If they brought Bonds on board, it wouldn’t be to leg out infield hits for pete’s sake. It would be because their anemic offense needs all the juice it can get.”

Well, I hope we wouldn’t be getting Bonds just to help hook up the other players with his steroid connections but I guess if it helps WOE ... 

If I understand correctly Bonds broke laws to hide his doping, on top of engaging in assorted stuff that’s legal but I wouldn’t want the Yankees to endorse; he was a detriment to the game off the field aside from that; he reportedly did it for racial reasons; he hasn’t taken responsibility like Giambi has; he hasn’t cooperated with the authorities the way Giambi has; he wrote the record books, which Giambi didn’t.  There’s only a double standard if you ignore almost all the data.

Bonds was an extremely disliked person well before 2000. There’s so much more here than just him being the most infamous cheater in American sports history.

In fact, Bonds dissed the Yankees and Gs way back in 1990 or thereabout.

As for Giambi, he took an oath, told the truth, when no other players would. That counts big time in my book, and I was opposed to bringing him here in the first place.

“yes.  why wouldn’t i?”

Because it’s risible?  A handful of injections of something that has no value as a PED, taken while injured?

Whatever.

A handful of injections of something that has no value as a PED, taken while injured?

and please explain why i should believe his use was limited to this after he lied several times about his use before finally admitting it?

Someone remind me, was the Clemens signing a big net positive?

Yup answered this just from the perspective of what Clemens did, but I think the question you are asking is more, based on the players traded for him, was the trade worth it?  I didn’t take salaries into account, but basically looking at Wells through 2001 (since he signed with the Yankees after that), Clemens through 2003, Lloyd through 2003 (his last year), and Bush through 2002 (his last year other than 8PA for the 2004 Yankees).  I used VORP:

Clemens: 209.5
Wells:  108.3
Lloyd:  24.1
Bush:    8.3

So I have Clemens ahead by 68.8 runs, or about 7 wins over 5 years.  That’s not counting playoffs of course (where he generally did quite well), salary comparisons (or arguing how much extra revenue they may have gotten from Clemens), or the fact they got that production out of 1 player freeing up 2 roster spots.  I think it is a definite net positive for the trade.

he wrote the record books, which Giambi didn’t.

also, please explain why this matters? 

Giambi won an MVP while cheating.

Bonds won several.

i don’t really see the difference.

do the Yankees give back the 2003 ALCS to Boston b/c Giambi hit 2 HRs in Game 7??

i can’t even believe i am arguing this.  i don’t even like Bonds.  but the double standard is just so glaringly obvious to me that i can’t ignore it.

and please explain why i should believe his use was limited to this after he lied several times about his use before finally admitting it?

I have difficulty believing Pettitte would throw his dad under the bus just because he was under oath, but then lie about other stuff while under oath.  I suppose it could have been a master plan to give himself some credability so we could believe the other lies, but…

... but the double standard based on ignoring most of the data ...

I happen to like Bonds.  But assuming I didn’t like him. 

Winning, getting into the playoffs, not playing scrubs, not losing prospects on narrow term horizon trades, no more WOE > Bonds baggage.

I don’t take winning for granted, especially coming out of the 80s and early 90s.  As constituted, a 9% chance of making the playoffs, two teams ahead of us in the WC, I’d take a shot at going for it.  Position player wise, the window is fast closing.

i can’t even believe i am arguing this.  i don’t even like Bonds.  but the double standard is just so glaringly obvious to me that i can’t ignore it.

I suppose if Giambi weren’t already on the team, I wouldn’t want to add him.  Not so much, “because he’s a cheater”, but I would be concerned about the media-circus, etc.  Giambi’s kind of been accepted as a Yankee already, and has gone through the media-problems here, so it doesn’t even come up.

Bonds of course, would be what Giambi went through a few years ago, and then some.  I’m certainly leery of going through that again.  I don’t think that makes what Giambi did *better* than what Bonds did (though, Bonds perjured himself).  And again, if you can guarentee Bonds gets the Yanks into the playoffs OK.  But, if the choice for 2009 is signing Giambi or signing Bonds, I’d go with Giambi.

I have difficulty believing Pettitte would throw his dad under the bus just because he was under oath, but then lie about other stuff while under oath

if i recall, Pettitte’s testimony was said to be full of contradictions and not very helpful. 

i am a big Pettitte fan.  i don’t really care all that much about what he did.

but it just feels like we are bending over backwards to make cheating excusable for some players, but not others. 

and i am sure i have been guilty of this at times as well.  i am a full-fledged Yankee homer with a ton of bias. 

i am also not a Bonds fan.  at all.

my entire argument is simply that i don’t see how signing Bonds would be some moral outrage when all of us have been cheering heartily for players who cheated for well over a decade.

why draw the line NOW?

if the answer is that it’s b/c he is a pompous jerk, fine.  but if the answer is “b/c he took steroids”, that just doesn’t feel right.

YMMV.

... but the double standard based on ignoring most of the data ...

you mean “data” like this: “he reportedly did it for racial reasons”?

that’s not really “data”.

He has always been a *pompous jerk*.

Here Here, yup!

We want Bar-ry! clap clap, clapclapclap

Remember when the yankees brough back straw? I didn’t care about his demons, and I don’t care about Barry’s. Everyone loved Straw in the end, too, and he had some huge hits when Buckshowalter wasn’t blackballing him.

Yeah, Giambi was a very good player before he started juicing, too. The guy was a top prospect in the game. Heck, Clemens had already won multiple Cy Youngs before he began juicing. Pettitte was a great pitcher before he took drugs.

These are all important players - these are not scrubs juicing to make their way on to the team.

And the Yankees played them all and I know I cheered for them like crazy.

So if what they did is not considered as bad as what Bonds did, then yeah, I think it’s a double standard, as well.

But yeah, Giambi does deserve credit for being, like, the one player to actually help with the investigations.

Pompus Jerk is and always has been code for uppity black man.

Just like how Josh Hamilton simply ceasing to do illegal drugs is “heroic.”

Oops, I didn’t mean to put a simply in there. My apologies, as it is obviously quite difficult to quit doing drugs.

Still, like FJM said the other day, it somehow has become more heroic to take heroin, stop taking heroin and lose the Home Run Derby than to not take heroin, continue not taking heroin and win the Home Run Derby.

Weakly Journalist can’t help feel guilty. The poor down trodden black man in America. Except this is 2008 not c.1948. Tired, worn out crap.
Fool.

The Yankees would not be SF letting their whole roster turn to shite but keeping bonds till he was ancient. It’d be a flier, at league minimum, and while it would suck watching him celebrate a WS at least we’d have a better chance of getting there.

Much better. For those of you that want Sexson, why did Seattle, the first 1mil/loss team ever(!!!) decide to cut him at a net loss of 10 mil. HE SUCKS. I don’t care about his splites because we should be able to better with a roster spot. Even Duncan.

Milton and Sexson are just senseless distractions and could never make a real improvement. Our bullpen rules, bruney comes back at the end of august and there’s still melancon, britton, and guys we haven’t seen what they could do yet.

I dunno, Jeter will improve. There’s still games left to be played. Let’s not give up even though they look useless too often. They might remember how to score any day now.

“And I doubt the Yanks are in on the “conspiracy””

there is definitely a conspiracy. If there wasnt he would be signed.

“I have difficulty believing Pettitte would throw his dad under the bus just because he was under oath, but then lie about other stuff while under oath”

“if i recall, Pettitte’s testimony was said to be full of contradictions and not very helpful”

I don’t know about any contradictions discovered afterwards but I watched the hearings and the Senators went out of their way at the time to say the opposite—that Pettite’s testimony to the Senate was credible and unnnecessarily forthcoming.  Even Clemens didn’t challenge Pettie’s truthfulness; he just said that Pettite must have misunderstood what he (Clemens) had been talking about.

Everyone loved Straw in the end, too, and he had some huge hits when Buckshowalter wasn’t blackballing him.

I thought that was Torre.

Remember when the yankees brough back straw? I didn’t care about his demons, and I don’t care about Barry’s.

And Gooden, Steve Howe, etc.  I do care about demons, but baseball, assuming the player can play and contribute to wins, is made for second chances.

I don’t care about his splites because we should be able to better with a roster spot. Even Duncan.

Which Duncan do you speak of?  Shelly Duncan who I believe is out for the year with a shoulder injury?  Eric Duncan may still turn into a useful ML player (though likely not a star, and probably not even a regular).  But I don’t think hitting LH pitching will ever be one of his strong points, and certainly isn’t now.  Who else is currently in the system that we think could do better than a .750 OPS against LH?  That’s kind of been the minimum for Sexson throughout his career…

I don’t know about any contradictions discovered afterwards but I watched the hearings and the Senators went out of their way at the time to say the opposite—that Pettite’s testimony to the Senate was credible and unnnecessarily forthcoming. 

you may be right.  i did a quick search on ESPN and found this:

Sources told Quinn that Pettitte was not a good witness when he appeared before congressional lawyers during a sworn deposition on Monday. Pettitte often contradicted himself, the sources said, so the committee agreed to his request not to appear Wednesday.

Lawyers familiar with the hearings would not say if Pettitte implicated Clemens as a steroids user in his testimony. However, they said that Pettitte’s testimony didn’t fully jibe with Clemens’ versions of events.

Remember when the yankees brough back straw? I didn’t care about his demons, and I don’t care about Barry’s.

And Gooden, Steve Howe, etc.  I do care about demons, but baseball, assuming the player can play and contribute to wins, is made for second chances.

The 1996 championship team not only had Gooden and Straw—they had Tim “I slide head-first because my cocaine is in my back pocket” Raines.

I find it really strange how the coke guys got a pass and the PED guys are so maligned.

I find it really strange how the coke guys got a pass and the PED guys are so maligned.

i find it really strange how Paul Molitor is never mentioned as a “coke guy” and skated into the Hall, while Raines is considered a “coke guy” and might not get in.

oh wait, no i don’t.

i find it really strange how Paul Molitor is never mentioned as a “coke guy” and skated into the Hall, while Raines is considered a “coke guy” and might not get in.

Wow, just did the quick google—had never even heard of the Molitor cocaine connection.

Anyway, there’s probably a good reason. Like Molitor did coke the right way, whereas the aforementioned black players disrespected the coke by showing up dealers, wearing their hats backwards, etc.

Sure Don, racism doesn’t exist anymore because there aren’t anymore lynchings and there’s no more slavery.

i find it really strange how Paul Molitor is never mentioned as a “coke guy” and skated into the Hall, while Raines is considered a “coke guy” and might not get in.

Anyway, there’s probably a good reason. Like Molitor did coke the right way, whereas the aforementioned black players disrespected the coke by showing up dealers, wearing their hats backwards, etc.

Dang people, didn’t you hear, this is 2008 not c.1948!

Bonds in Yankee Stadium… this has to happen! I’m not concern-trolling here; I just think it’s been a boring season so far. Can you imagine? Sports Center would be cutting out for Bonds’ bases-empty at-bats against Baltimore. Also, the whole ‘roids thing… people tend to make poster boys when they themselves have something to hide. Bonds is a convenient distraction from the culpability of Selig and the owners. Let him play.

Not for the Sox, though if we needed him I’d be for it.

I’ve actually studied and written about this. Americans seem to forgive crimes and sins as long as they aren’t brought onto the field.

What I mean is- Pete Rose’s gambling is reviled because it affected his team. Joe DiMaggio being an abusive spouse is OK because it didn’t taint the game. Barry Bonds juicing helped his team win, while Hamilton’s drug use didn’t.

And yeah, there’s definitely a racial double standard.

Not trying to stick up for anyone or anything, just my observations.

“you mean “data” like this: “he reportedly did it for racial reasons”?

that’s not really “data””

You’re arguing from ignorance here.  Or you’ve read the book and don’t want to argue the reporting.  You’re happy quoting anonymous sources that might well be Clemens’s lawyers to make a case against Pettitte that entirely ignores the vast differences in the cases at hand - a case that doesn’t even touch my argument.

I drive 75 on the highway sometimes when the limit is 70.  But I do it with the traffic that’s going 75 or 80, in the far left lane, and I do it sober.  I’m breaking the law, but I’m not the half-drunk cutting across multiple lanes so he can slip through a hole and go 90 or 95.  Maybe that guy’s a superlative driver and is not going to get into an accident, and he’s certainly going to get home to watch a Red Sox game before I get home to my family (driving at 80 because my kid’s sick), but I still get to make an informed moral judgement about him.  If I were a Patriots fan I’d feel their recent victories were besmirched, even though the taping was technically legal.  So I get to have mixed feelings about Clemens and what he did for us and I get to not want Bonds on the team more than I would have (additionally) disliked the Giambi signing if I had known he was on steroids.

You get to have a different stance on morals.  You don’t get to pretend there aren’t significant differences in the cases.

Shutting up now.

What I mean is- Pete Rose’s gambling is reviled because it affected his team. Joe DiMaggio being an abusive spouse is OK because it didn’t taint the game. Barry Bonds juicing helped his team win, while Hamilton’s drug use didn’t.

Yeah, but your “on the field” theory is debunked by the beloved and respected Whitey’s ball doctoring.

And yeah, there’s definitely a racial double standard.

Oh yeah. That covers it. It’s cool when Whitey does it.

Hey, has anyone actually ever read the testimony Raines supposedly gave where he said he kept crack vials in his pockets during games?

Not saying it isn’t true, but I’ve never seen an actual quote, and it’s the sort of really damaging stuff that I’d really like to see a good source on.