no...drugs had a LOT to do with that. same goes for led zeppellin, syd barrett, metallica, pink floyd, the who.....i could go on and on naming a bunch of great bands. they all, at one point, did drugs and look what it did, it enhanced our lives.
the comparison of the use of drugs in the MLB is irrelevant to the use of drugs in the music industry. they are two totally different things. the music industry evolves EVERY generation. baseball doesnt. same rules, regulations, song during the 7th inning stretch...blah blah blah
one of reasons (IMHO) why mlb fans are iffy about bonds is because of the fact that he used steroids to get to the 700 club. the 2 other players were able to get 700 HRs without using steroids. can barry not do it? did he have to use steroids just so he can get 700 HRs?
also, when bonds was in the league when the rule came out against steroids. then actually admitted to using it. he was inarguably a hall of famer but the reason people are iffy is because steroids causes you to do a sport a lot better than other players in the league. is that fair? bonds did the roids just to be the best - for vanity reasons. there are kids in the minors who would do it just so they can get in the pros. there are older athletes who might be doing it just so they can last longer in the league. i wouldnt be surprised if randy johnson came out one day and say "hey, the reason i can still pitch on a messed up back is because of the roids". barry bonds took steroids for the opposite reason. he did it so he can look good and get more money and MVP awards.
bonds might've revolutionized baseball by having the record for stolen bases, hrs, walks, and maybe a bunch of other crazy stuff but again, he admitted to using steroids just so he can advance.
im not proof reading this so sorry if it looks kooky