Quote Originally Posted by Roady View Post
No they didn't and for sure Bonds didn't.
Look at the stats again and ask yourself if you would vote either of them in the HOF if they quite before taking roids. Bonds was a 25-30 HR type player with the Pirates before steroids. I have no idea where people get the idea Bonds was so great before his San Fran days and roids. I believe his first full season taking roids was 1993, his first year with the Giants.
No way he was HOF worthy in just 7 good years with the Pirates.
Clemens didn't have the body of work to be a HOFer before his first bought with steroids either. If he started taking them in 1997 as most believe then look at his stats before that. No way a HOF player. A good pitcher for several years but in definite decline until the magic juice.
What is your justification of 1993 for Bonds? Bonds was the reigning NL MVP going into 1993.

The general consensus has been that Bonds started using PEDs in response to Sosa's HR surge and McGwire's 70 HRs in 1998. That would imply that Bonds started using PEDs in 1999 or 2000. Going by that assumption (as opposed to your arbitrary 1993), Bonds was already the only 400/400 player in MLB history after 1998.

Let's say we go with your assumption of 1993. From 1986-1992, Bonds had 176 HR and 251 SB, through his age 27 season. Players typically hit their peak performance years from 27-31. That means Bonds was expected to see a spike in production from 1992-1996, based upon a typical aging curve. Bonds had a 204 OPS+ in 1992 and 206 OPS+ in 1993. From 1986-1999, his career looked pretty normal, so I think it's a reach to believe Bonds started using "steroids" (your word) in 1993.

If not for voters valuing batting average & hits over HR, SB, SLG, OBP, runs & RBI in 1991, Bonds would have won the NL MVP award for four consecutive seasons (1990-1993). I don't see how a player who had a reasonable shot at four consecutive MVP awards would be considered anything but great.