On May 25, 1935, an aged and degenerating Babe Ruth — whose batting average waltzed with .180 that year — played the final game of his career. The game was held at Forbes Field in Pittsburgh, a park notorious for its parsimoniousness in surrendering home runs. Ruth hit three home runs that day, the third of which — number 714 — traveled an estimated 600 feet. The ball sailed completely out of the ballpark, becoming the first ball that the cavernous Forbes could not hold.
Today's megalomaniacal media would never have allowed Ruth's farewell to be anything less than the greatest feat in the history of baseball. This media — ESPN, Sports Illustrated, etc. — feeds off the grandiose and extravagant, and it fosters a constant need to trumpet present events as legendary acts worthy of historical remembrance. America's media in 1935 was far more humble, both in size and volume, and so Ruth's final act unjustly remains unknown to many of the game's fans today.
So as Barry Bonds stands uniquely close to 714 and 755, surely we all know of the media storm that is coming. If he plays in 2005, Bonds should pass Ruth on the career home run list, and would likely pass Hank Aaron the following year to become the all-time home run leader, baseball's Hope Diamond of records. The word "if" should be underscored in the previous sentence, since Bonds has hinted at what many would view as a premature retirement from the sport. Either outcome — Bonds Breaks Record or Bonds Stunningly Retires — would result in more spilled ink than most wars. But like Ruth's uncanny performance in 1935, Bonds' actions over the next two seasons deserve American attention.
Discussing Bonds, an admitted steroid user, yields countless questions. Did Bonds knowingly use those steroids, or did he really trust his trainer so unconditionally as to ingest or apply anything given to him? How much of Bonds' career was affected by steroids? Is Bonds the greatest hitter of all-time? Should Bonds be occluded from Cooperstown because of his admitted use of steroids? And is Bonds' truculence with the media caused by antagonizing reporters, as Bonds would have us believe, or is the fault his own?
Answers to those questions will vary, but that is the nature of discussing Barry Bonds. Statistical arguments can be made that Bonds is the greatest hitter the game has ever seen. Then again, has there been a less likeable superstar in the last 20 years in baseball, or any sport for that matter?
As much as we would like it to be so, there is no black and white with Barry Bonds. His chase for 755 is nothing like Hank Aaron's quest to surpass Babe Ruth. Aaron was respected by the media and universally liked by all who knew him. The racist-driven threats he endured only endeared him to baseball's audience, as there was general support for his feat. And other than the fact that he needed more games than Babe Ruth to reach 714 home runs, there was absolutely no talk of Aaron's credibility in breaking the record.
Not so for Bonds. We know he used steroids, but we cannot know how much the steroids assisted him in hitting home runs. Some do not care, and only note that Bonds forfeited his right to break records and join the Hall of Fame the day he broke baseball's rules against performance-enhancing drugs. Meanwhile, Bonds is despised by many media members for his icy treatment of the corps who cover his every move. San Francisco fans loves Barry, but only because he is their star. The rest of baseball's fans are confused and forced to decide between the surly words of Bonds himself and the rebuttals of jaded sportswriters.
Recent actions do not provide clarity. Inexplicably, Congress subpoenaed several prominent baseball players to Washington to testify about their knowledge and connection to steroids, but excluded Bonds. The explanation: we did not want to create a media circus. Right.
Then, Bonds brings up the early retirement talk. Why would Bonds decide to retire now, so close to the record he desires? He placed the blame on the media, claiming they have finally broken him and his family. Really? The cynics in the crowd just shifted uncomfortably.
Bonds, and all he possesses — the superhuman strength, incomparable talent, and prickly persona — reside in a very gray area of the nation's sports consciousness. He is not universally disliked, but he surely is not viewed as baseball's version of a hero. In the past, he inspired awe in all who saw him play, but even that is not the case anymore since his testimony to the grand jury has been leaked. Bonds is now just sweepingly fascinating. He commands our attention, but we just are not sure how to feel about him.
That's why, if he does not retire, Bonds' career will spawn one more question:
What is the sound of a sold-out crowd — full of cynics and fans, sportswriters, and children — when Bonds' 756th is launched?
April 8, 2005
chris payne:
he did not leave me cofused he has one of the greatest swings in the majors there is no way that he knew that the stuff he was useing was a steriod. the only reason he is still playin is to win a world serise ring with a team that wants him to play for them.
April 8, 2005
Bruce Hallman:
You wrote: “…Bonds forfeited his right to break records and join the Hall of Fame the day he broke baseball’s rules.”
Which rules? It seems clear that if MLB rules were broken, Bond’s would have been sanctioned by the MLB already, and he has not.
All this angst is misdirected. We should be angry at MLB for having lax rules, not the players for following the lax rules.