Do you think Barry Bonds will go into the hall of fame?

I think he eventually will get in, but it might take several years of ballots to do it. Memories will prove to be short, and the more time there is between his retirement and the ballot, his odds will improve. The charge of illegal steroid usage will prevent him from getting in in the first couple of years post-retirement.

Should Bonds be in the Hall of Fame? Tom FitzGerald, Chronicle Staff WriterFriday, March 10, 2006He may have hit some 300 home runs with the help of performance-enhancing drugs. And his exploits since 1998 may carry an asterisk big enough to require a wheelbarrow.

Even though Barry Bonds is still a Hall of Famer in the eyes of many voters, he may have trouble getting the ballot support he needs, at least during the first year he's eligible. If this is the final year for the Giants slugger, he would become eligible for the Hall on the December 2011 ballot. An informal Chronicle survey of voters found several who say they'll vote for him for enshrinement in Cooperstown, N.Y., despite the latest blast of evidence against him, this time in book form."I'd definitely vote yes,'' said Doug Krikorian of the Long Beach Press-Telegram.

"To tell you the truth, I'm not that outraged by the whole steroids scenario. There's been cheating in baseball forever.''"If I had a gun to my head to vote today, I'd say yes,'' said John Henderson of the Tampa Tribune. "The body of work was there, but it's a tough call with him.

The debate that many voters will have is whether the things he did off the field outweigh what he did on it.It's an interesting ethical question. I'd hold my nose, but I'd say yeah. "Hal Bodley of USA Today said he wouldn't vote for Bonds."I haven't seen the documentation of the book, but judging from what I've heard, I would say no today.

I don't think anybody who taints the game, especially a home run hitter, should be considered. ''"I'm not going to vote for any of the current sluggers or pitchers on the first ballot,'' said Ken Rosenthal of FoxSports.com."It's my way of protesting the use of steroids. Beyond the first ballot, I just don't know.

I hope we'll become better informed."A candidate must be named on at least 75 percent of the ballots by the roughly 520 members of the Baseball Writers' Association of America. That's not easy to get, especially not in a player's first year of eligibility. And Bonds, like other steroids suspects, brings a hangar full of ethical baggage. From 1999 on, Bonds' statistics are in question because of the drug use documented in the soon-to-be-released book "Game of Shadows" by Chronicle reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams.

The book, an excerpt of which appears in this week's Sports Illustrated, says Bonds started using a wide variety of steroids, human growth hormones and other drugs following the 1998 season. The authors depict Bonds as being angry and envious over the exploits of Mark McGwire, whom he recognized as "a juicer. ''The steroid issue will be addressed by Hall of Fame voters on the 2007 ballot.

How voters treat McGwire, who will appear on the ballot for the first time, will give an early indication how Bonds will fare when it's his turn. McGwire probably damaged his chances, at least of being a first-ballot selection, when he repeatedly danced around questions about steroid use during a congressional hearing in 2005. "It's not an issue for us right now, but beginning next year we will be dealing with it,'' Jack O'Connell, secretary-treasurer of the BBWAA, said this week."As someone who has been counting ballots for 13 years, I can say our people don't like drug users.

Dave Parker is getting next to no support, and Keith Hernandez is already off the ballot. "Parker and Hernandez were among the players who admitted in a Pittsburgh drug trial in the 1980s that they used cocaine (they were granted immunity in exchange for their testimony). Unlike the cocaine scandal, though, the steroid era profoundly changed the nature of the game, mainly with a torrent of home runs.

Major League Baseball did not prohibit performance-enhancing drugs until after the 2002 season. So voters will have to establish their own ethical litmus test when it comes to evaluating Bonds, McGwire, Sammy Sosa and other players from baseball's steroids era. Voters are given only a vague guideline: "Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

''As Dave van Dyck of the Chicago Tribune puts it, "There's the character issue. If we believe he cheated, we cannot vote for him.''Van Dyck, who thinks Bonds "did try to skirt the rules,'' said he would not vote for him if he had to vote today but said he might change his mind in the future. The book's details about Bonds' alleged drug use may convince many previously undecided fans that Bonds lied when he told a grand jury the only steroids he took were those he used without knowing what they were.

But to some Hall of Fame voters, the book will be irrelevant in their deliberations because of his achievements before he allegedly started using drugs."I would cast my vote for Bonds the moment he is eligible, no matter what evidence is uncovered," Bob Nightengale of USA Today Sports Weekly said. "People forget this guy was a Hall of Fame player when he was a skinny kid for the Pittsburgh Pirates. He was the greatest player in the 1990s, and you can argue that he is the greatest player in baseball history.""Even if he had suffered a career-ending injury after '98, he was still a first-ballot Hall of Famer,'' Mike Klis of the Denver Post said.

"This book substantiates what people suspected about him, (but) he broke no baseball laws. ''Hal McCoy of the Dayton Daily News was firmly opposed."He used an unfair advantage to get the numbers that he set,'' he said. In a column, McCoy was more strident: "The Hall of Fame?

Bonds is scheduled to do a reality show on ESPN, but here's reality for you, Barry.To me you never existed in the pantheon of baseball, you never hit more than 700 home runs, you never hit 73 home runs. "Chicago Tribune columnist Rick Morrissey wondered in print if the book would be enough for voters to draw a line in the sand against Bonds. "Or do they need blood tests and a confession?''Morrissey said he'll have a vote by 2012, "and Bonds won't be getting it.

He and the others dirtied a game. They turned baseball into a fraud, made it pro wrestling.''Bill Plaschke of the Los Angeles Times thinks the book "probably cost Bonds a place in the Hall of Fame. '' He told The Chronicle, "I would not vote for Barry Bonds, just as I will not vote for Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa.

In my mind, Bonds cheated the opponents, the fans and, worst of all, the game."Yea or nay? Voting members of the Baseball Writers' Association of America were asked whether they would vote for Barry Bonds for the Hall of Fame if they had to decide today. Yes -- Bob Nightengale, USA Today Sports Weekly; Phil Rogers, Chicago Tribune; Mike Klis, Denver Post; John Henderson, Tampa Tribune; Doug Krikorian, Long Beach Press-Telegram; Bob Elliott, Toronto Sun; Tracy Ringolsby, Rocky Mountain News; Dan McGrath, Chicago Tribune.No -- Hal Bodley, USA Today; Dave van Dyck, Chicago Tribune; Ken Rosenthal, FoxSports.com; Hal McCoy, Dayton Daily News; Larry Stone, Seattle Times; Bill Plaschke, Los Angeles Times; Bob Klapisch, ESPN.com Sources: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2006/03/10/SPGA3HM05L1.DTL .

Yes, definitely. He is one of the greatest players that has ever played baseball .

Andre Dawson finally made into the Baseball Hall of Fame on 1/6/2010! " "looking for a book on baseball hall of fame 1980-2007" "Who is Barry Bonds?

How much is a 1987 #320 Barry Bonds baseball card worth.

After all the outcry about Barry Bonds, the baseball public seems less outraged about the Roger Clemens' issue.

Andre Dawson finally made into the Baseball Hall of Fame on 1/6/2010!

Looking for a book on baseball hall of fame 1980-2007.

Similar questions: Barry Bonds elected Hall Fame.

Yes s name will forever be referenced in baseball lore. No, I'm not a Giants fan (quite the opposite). I also think that Pete Rose should be in the HOF..

Absolutely Regardless of how he did it, he is one of the top 5 hitters of all time. He was already going to the hall of fame prior to his power surge in 2000. So even if you discount the years he was allegedly juicing, he still has hall of fame numbers.

Everyone should just relax and just watch one of the greatest hitters of all time finish his career. I, for one, do not really care if he was juicing. It has never been proven and never will be.

Baseball did not ban it. He was operating in the rules of the game (maybe not the law). Did it help him if he did?Absolutely.

We do know he is hitting like a monster into his 40s. That is not natural.Is it because he is an athletic freak of nature or juice? That we will never know.

Sources: Let Barry Be!.

No... I used to think that he should. However, I don't believe that anyone who uses steroids, cheats, etc should be elected into something that means so much to so many. It is also my opinion that Bonds' record, as well as McGuire and all of the others that have broken records due to steroid use, should not count.

Thus, those who have successfully created or broken records, such as Roger Maris, would still have standing records. I don't believe that cheaters should be rewarded. What is this teaching our children?

I have a two-year-old who I am teaching manners, not to cheat, etc. I will continue to do so. So many children (and adults) look up to sports figures, actors, etc.By allowing the "famous" to get away with things (cheating, DUIs, stealing, etc), we are teaching our children that it is fine to do something ... if you're famous. Sources: My opinion .

1 No. Cheaters shouldn't be elected to the Hall of Fame.

No. Cheaters shouldn't be elected to the Hall of Fame.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.