How many of you feel bonds would still have been a great ball player if steroids weren't involved?? You think he'd still have the same amout of home runs??
2007-04-30 07:03:33 · 5 answers · asked by Call~It~A~Day~Son 2 in Sports ➔ Baseball
I a not sure he would have the same number of home runs, but he was highly talented and would have been considered a great player without the assistance of steroids. Too bad he soiled his reputation.
Chow!!
2007-04-30 07:44:02 · answer #1 · answered by No one 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He is still a great ball player today. I recently read an article by a sports writer saying that Bonds was a great hitter because of his eyes. He sees the ball pretty well and he was able to tell the difference between pitches that will be balls and pitches that will be strikes.
Bonds has NOT tested positive for steroids, so i dont know why you added "if steroids weren't involved??" I think he would have the same amout of home runs because he is a great hitter. Alex Sanchez, a former outfielder for the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, has tested positive for steroids and he didnt increase his home run stats.
2007-04-30 15:25:58 · answer #2 · answered by lildude211us 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
1990-92-93 National League Most Valuable Player Award winner (and should have won in '91; finished second). That's the sort of peak that a great player has.
Bonds then went and had a second, better peak. But his greatness was already established.
2007-04-30 14:52:38 · answer #3 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
How do you know steroids WERE involved?
Yes, he'd have the same amount. because even if he was on steroids, if you take everyone's steroids, than he hits just as many, because all those pitchers would not have theirs.
2007-04-30 14:25:09 · answer #4 · answered by pincollector 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Had he not taken HGH - no way would he be close with the home run count. He would never hit more than 45 a year, and as he got older, those numbers would decline quickly.
2007-04-30 14:08:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋