THOME Hit #600

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • otismalibu
    Senior Member
    • Nov 2005
    • 1650

    #16
    Re: THOME Hit #600

    But with Bonds, he chooses a shaved head with the Giants and the cap size increases......go figure.
    Totally unrelated to the debate...

    IMO, a larger lid is a must with a shaved head. Except for those first few hours when your dome is stubble-free, gotta bump it up for comfort. Think velcro
    Greg
    DrJStuff.com

    Comment

    • Number13
      Senior Member
      • Jul 2011
      • 248

      #17
      Re: THOME Hit #600

      Originally posted by frikativ54
      I never said that Thome used. I just don't think that we should declare a player to be clean just because he hasn't been caught. We should take everybody from that era's numbers with a grain of salt, because steroids were rampant back then. I'm not accusing anybody of anything, nor should I.
      Once again, is there anything on Thome where he should be "caught." Is the MLB gonna investigate every single player, especially one that puts up big power numbers? So because some players juiced we are suppossed to second guess players like Thome and wonder if his numbers are enhanced by anything? And I don't mean to single out Thome, this could be other players as well. Unless there is evidence out there or admission I don't see why we should second guess players.

      And if in the future we find out that Thome did, so what. Does that really change our perception of someone that much. I'm not a Thome fan, but I don't think every fan of his will discredit him if he used.

      Kinda in the same realm. What about all the great pitchers who used spit, dirt, grease, nail files, etc. that put up great numbers during their careers. Are we to say that we should look at their strikeout numbers and ERAs with a grain of salt too? We can smear them too if we wanted, but we don't. That was the game back then. They too were trying to gain an advantage just like players using steroids now. Am I saying that any of it is right, NO, but don't think that there wasn't a time throughtout the history of baseball where no one try to do something or use something to gain an advantage.

      So if you want to take it all the way back, all baseball numbers from the 19th Century on need to be taken with a grain of salt. Not my belief, but just sayin'.

      Numbers are numbers. I am not a person that tries to compare players over different generations. The game has been evolving since day one. I'm starting to ramble and go off topic, so I'm gonna stop.

      Comment

      Working...