I think I would feel roughly the same about the whole steroid issue.  I would, however, absolutely hate Barry if he had been a Dodger instead.

Good question. I'm not sure how I would feel and it's really hard for me to speculate without ever seeing Bonds in Dodger blue. I just don't know.

I'm pretty simple with Bonds, he's on my team, so I'll root for him. I think most sports fans work this way.

I'd like to think that regardless whatever team Barry was on, I'd be able to see that the media has made him an easy target for public criticism and hate. Sure, he's not the nicest guy in the world, I'm sure but I think he's gotten a bad wrap from the media.

I can respect Dodger players. I hate that Saito is a Dodger, for instance. If he was on any other team I'd be one of his biggest fans.

There are plenty of players I hate but I have to respect. Clemens is one of them. He's undoubtedly one of the best pitchers of his generation and probably a Hall of Famer one day. I hate him for reasons that many people hate Bonds for, whether or not they want to admit it. Clemens is an asshole, straight up. I suspect that he did or is using PEDs. I'm not going after him with my flaming pitchfork, nor am I hunting anyone else whom I may suspect used or is using.

It will always bother me that Bonds is singled out, and only in part because I'm a Giants fan. I find it extremely unfair to brand one person as the fall guy for the whole problem when it's clear there are others who are part of the problem as well.

Part of me sort of doesn't care about the PED issue because there's the strong possibility that nearly everyone in the sport is/was using. If everyone in the sport had access to it, is it cheating? Is it cheating if there's no rule prohibiting the use of PEDs?

I strongly object to punishing a player for using PEDs before MLB had concrete rules against it. I know MLBPA is making it very hard to fix the "problem." I don't blame Selig for this one. He really can't do a hell of a lot with this problem. I hate him for other reasons which don't belong in this conversation, other than him displaying an award-winning passive aggressive attitude about the PED issue. That's just a personal dislike of passive aggressive people.

I'd realize that steroids wasn't just a Dodger issue, and try and keep some perspective.

I'd also make fun of Bonds just about every...single...day. Photoshops, Photoshops, Photoshops! It'd be fun.

We'd All Have a Merry Home Run Chase

this is what we'd hear from the media

• LA Fans are such tools. They have their heads in the sand about the whole steroid issue. They blindly worship Bonds, a known cheater.
  
• Frank H. McCourt Jr and the whole Dodger ownership is addicted to Bonds because they think no one would come to the games except to watch Bonds.
  
• What did Tommy know and when did he know it?
  
• The team is distracted by the Bonds chase
  
• Bonds said he got the supplement from Olmaedo Seinz's locker
  
• How could Bonds be in the same organization that had Jackie Robinson.
  
• "Pedro Gomez from Vero Beach"
  
• Jeff Pearlman would write: "The Los Angeles Dodgers, led by Barry "I Am Soooooo Much Better Than You, It's Not Even Funny" Bonds are heading to the World Series, and the St. Louis Cardinals are going home to a cold, tundra-like winter by the Arch. There is no God."
  
• Hollywood has always had it's villains
  
• The Los Angeles Roidgers
  

I think Bonds as a Dodger makes a lot of sense. Dodger fans wouldn't miss a single Bonds moment since they both leave games after the 7th inning.

I don't even want to think about that.

If you really want to try to separate rationality from rationalization, wouldn't a better thought experiment be "what if Barry were a Cleveland Indian, or a Cincinnati Red"? That is, something as close to neutral as possible for Giants fans. Or, what if he had stayed in Pittsburgh for his whole career?

Granted, as fans we are likely to give every benefit of the doubt to Giants players, and no leeway whatsoever to Dodger players. But it isn't only Dodger fans vilifying Bonds; that would be understandable.

In all honesty, I've gotta admit that if Barry was a Dodger, I would absolutely loathe the way he stands and watches his home runs before starting into his trot.

I often wonder how the media would cover things differently if, say, Barry had played 15 years for the Yankees or Red Sox. Would he be vilified as much? Would his supportive home fans in the Bronx or Fenway be mocked by ESPN and Sports Illustrated as mindless sheep?

Yes, I'd feel exactly the same way I do now.

I have no idea. I'd like to think that as an intelligent, rational human being, I would still have maintained an intelligent, rational perspective on the whole thing.

On th eother hand, Jeff Kent would probably still be a Giant and I'd be talking about how cool Jeff Kent is, which would seriously bring into question both my intelligence and my rationale.

I guess it's a crap shoot!

I'd certainly hate Barry Bonds. I would sincerely hope that I wouldn't be blinded by the circus lights because he's not on my team, but I don't know if I can guarantee it. 91%. I'll give you 91%.

But only because I'm not a complete tool.

Well, let's see, how do I feel about Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa now?  How did I feel about them in 1998?  I remember distinctly looking at McGwire and Canseco's bodies in the late '80s and thinking they weren't human.  In 1998 I read the story about the andro, and I got a sinking feeling in my stomach.  But nonetheless, I greatly enjoyed watching those two chase each other and Roger Maris.

I have a heavy heavy distrust of the sports media.  If those guys tell me that a Barry Bonds or a Gary Sheffield is a tremendous jackass, I often tend to believe the opposite.  I remember the sports media telling me what a great guy Kirby Puckett was -- oops.  And Steve Garvey, Pete Rose, etc.

So, I don't believe I'm puffing myself up by saying that I'd still like and respect him.  I'd just root for his Dodgers to lose 162 games a year.

Hell, I'm already rooting for A-Rod to beat Barry's record, because that will be a ton of fun to watch!  And I don't even like that bluelipped phony (though he's finally starting to act less calculated this season).

One reason why I love Barry so much as a player is that I've watched him on a pretty much daily basis (save Aug 1995 - June 1997) since 1993. He's done it for my team. You can't invest that much time in a player and not have some strong feelings toward him.

In the Dodger scenario, I'm still a Giant fan and there is probably no Giants player who's been on the team for that long who has done as much to help the Giants win as he has. I'd probably hate Bonds as someone who has helped the Dodgers win more than any other player in history, most all of it at the expense of my team, so there would be a lot of antipathy. But I wouldn't have watched him play everyday.

Bonds is to me like Ripken is to Orioles fans or Gwynn is to Padre fans. Now, I like both those guys but I didn't exactly follow their careers that closely other than through a national media filter or watching them the Giants or A's. I do think that Ripken's consecutive game streak is tainted by the fact that he voluntarily went on strike a couple of times (something I loathe), but that's neither here nor there and I acknowledge his streak as the record.

Finally, you can't separate the anti-Bonds media message that gets transmitted on TV/Radio/Print/Internet every day for the past 20+ years. Really, the anti-Bonds media tagline has been pounded into peoples' heads for so long, it's not surprising that people hate the guy so damn much. And make no mistake, it all stems from the fact that Bonds is ornery, especially to the media, who try to destroy public figures who don't play their game.

I heard Pedro Gomez on the KNBR this morning talking to the morning douchebags. He basically said that it isn't the media's fault that Bonds has the personality he does. That may be true to a point, but it fails to take into account that Bonds's view of the media was formed very early in his life by his father's experience with the media, who were very tough on him for not being the next Willie Mays, an expectation that they themselves created.

That also doesn't take into account that the media has taken a very adversarial role in modern times. They can be very vindictive if they don't get cooperation from the players. Bonds doesn't cooperate when he doesn't want to and has pissed off a lot of reporters who in turn bash Barry, which in turn makes him less media-friendly and the cycle begets itself. Bonds's personality is very much formed by his relationship to the media.

The bottom line is that watching Bonds play everyday and rooting for him for such a long time makes me somewhat immune to the anti-Barry media marketing campaign. I hear it, but I don't change my opinions on it and am very skeptical of it, because what they often describe isn't what I've seen, which is a bunch of homers and wins.

If Barry were a Dodger all these years, I wouldn't have that immunity and probably would hate his guts. It's all speculation, of course, but if that were the case I can only hope that I'd still appreciate what he's accomplished in this game for what it is: something special.

Any fan with Giants DNA would hate the guy and boo him every at bat. I have been to games both in LA and SF. The hate that emanates from SF towards the Dodgers far far exceeds the hate that emanates from LA towards Giants. The T-shirts Giant fans wear, "F#ck the Dodgers", probably would be modified towards hate to Bonds.