I don't think anyone has ever argued steroids made Bonds good (IMHO he was already a first ballot HOFer). It's pretty well understood that they aid in recovery.

I don't think anyone has ever argued steroids made Bonds good (IMHO he was already a first ballot HOFer). It's pretty well understood that they aid in recovery. Bonds' most transcendent stretch came when most ballplayer's production is falling off or completely disappearing. He put up 47 WAR during his age 37-41 seasons. That's unheard of. Given those seasons coincide with when he was using the cream and the clear, it's fair to call into question some of his counting numbers. Being charitable, let's say he would have put up 23 WAR during those seasons[0]. That would leave him about 140 career WAR and around 660 HRs. That's solid Mays territory. He would still be in the conversation for best ever. Mays certainly is. So it comes down to how you value those steroid seasons. Some folks want to throw it all out. Some folks (HOF voters) want to subtract points. Some folks think it didn't matter. We can never know. Just like we can never know how Ruth would have done in an integrated league. [0] Given what we know about aging curves this is unlikely. But Bonds was a special athlete and it's not totally unheard of for players that age to have really good seasons.