Rick Reilly's take on Bonds and #756 in latest SI

[BrewCrewForever]

Anyone else see and read this article from the current SI? Hank is on the cover circa 1964, great article on him as well. But the Reilly article in the back is quite good about what we should do as Barry hits #756.

[Invader3K]

I didn't see that one yet. What was the gist of his opinion?

[BrewCrewForever]

Very anti-Bonds. I didn't know he was so anti-Bonds, basically calls him out as a cheater. Im not sure if there is a link to the article online at si.com or not.

[sbrylski]

I think steriod use has been very widespread throughout the last decade or so. Therefore, while Bonds has been a cheater, so have most of his peers. In 20 years, I think we will look back on the record and say, "Yeah, but he did it on steriods during the steriod era."

 

This record he's about to set simply has to be considered in its proper context, just like any other record. What's better, Ruth hitting 60 homers in 154 games, or Maris hitting 61 in 162? Is a .350 career batting average in the 20's equal to a .350 career batting average in the 80's? Yet these numbers go on the same list, side by side.

 

I'm not sure I look at Bond's HR record any differently. It simply has to be put into context, looking at just the number "756" doesn't tell the whole story. People feel very strongly about it now because its happening now, but I'll bet when we look back on it in the future, it'll be more or less just another record, nearly the same as any other.

[Invader3K]

This one is older from 2001, but I remember reading it, and his opinion of Barry wasn't too high even then:

 

sportsillustrated.cnn.com...of_reilly/

[endaround]

Reilley was the guy who uncritically repeated what one of the most disliked guys in baseball, Jeff Kent, had to say about Bonds. So yeah, he is in the forefront of the media who actively dislikes Bonds and has for years. It has nothing to do with steroids in his case.