Reply With Quote
Bonds' response.....
"Go yourself San Diego!"
it's hard to feel sorry for a guy that brings it upon himself with the way Bonds does..
eh, i dont follow baseball that much anyways...
As much as I can't stand Bonds, more so because of his at ude than his possible steroid use, I was pleased to see my fellow San Diegans take the advice of Ron Burgandy and "stay classy". My parents and brother were at the game and said there were many more cheers than boos. I'm really pleased Bonds homer meant nothing and the Padres swept the Giants.
Bonds' response.....
"Go yourself San Diego!"
it's hard to feel sorry for a guy that brings it upon himself with the way Bonds does..
eh, i dont follow baseball that much anyways...
Last edited by DNS Error; 08-05-2007 at 10:41 PM. Reason: ? marks are gay
Re-read my post, I already pointed them out. Aaron was an incredible model of consistency, but:
Ruth had greater peaks. He hit 60 HRs in a single season (in 154 games). Aaron never hit 50. Babe held two records (career HRs and single season HRs) for 3 decades. Aaron never even challenged one of those records.
Ruth hit more HRs than entire teams.
Ruth hit 714 HRs in roughly only 2/3 of the ABs that Aaron needed to hit 755 (as well as only 80% of the ABs that Bonds has needed).
Now, let me add the disclaimer that I consider Aaron the HR king. But if someone wants to use a compilation of statistics and not a single stat (career HRs), it's not that outlandish or necessarily racist for them to put Ruth at the top. It's debates like these that make baseball great.
to the grand jury. for all the crap that the media gives him (often undeserved), they seem to accept his 'not knowingly using roids' excuse and you'll still hear talking heads say that there is no proof that he used banned substances...for some reason ignoring his own leaked sworn statements.
plus weren't the parks bigger then than when aaron played.
i remember reading someone did a study of the parks and how many pop ups would have been homeruns now. they estimated babe ruth would have had over 1000 homeruns in the parks today... now of course thats not considering the much better overall pitching today.
Why do people always assume if steroids had been around back in the old days, players wouldn't have used them to get an edge, same as they do now?
They cheated as much, if not more, back then...they threw world series, they doctored balls, they conspired to rig batting les. They were racist....they drank, they slept around, they fought, they gambled.
They wanted as much money as they could get back then too.
Now this is not to say I think Bonds should get a free pass or anything...he deserves the derision he is getting...the same as anyone who cheated to break a record deserves...I just get tired of everyone acting like people gold 30 years ago and beyond and had never even heard of cheating or considered it....
The good old days weren't so good...they just didn't have a huge and all pervasive mass media to drag their dirty laundry out world wide instantaneously.
To the guy wondering about Ruth...
Ruth holds a load of pitching records as well...he's got one of the best winning PCT's ever by a pitcher, he won 114 games or something like that....he held the scoreless inning streaks records in the World series...he was undefeated as a pitcher in the world series. That's a whole different aspect of the game that Bonds, Aaron, Mays and Mantle never touched upon...Ted Williams and Ty Cobb either.
As for what Ruth would have done in todays era...he wouldn't have hit 340 for his career...but I'd say his power would still be close to unmatched...
500 feet is 500 feet in any era...and if anything, all the guys with 95+mph fast balls make it easier to hit the balls further now...
And you don't have to hit the ball 490 feet every time you want to hit a home run nowdays...
He might have hit more than 60 homers in todays era.
Ruth would have still had one of a kind power, he was a freak then, he'd be a freak now, freaks are like that...Nolan Ryan was still pitching no hitters and k'ing them up like a freak after the pitching era was over...Freaks are freaks.
Ruth? He hit undeniably hit the ball far, and he did it often. He grew up in a menial existence, he built his power by chopping wood...and young Ruth was not a fat man but a guy that supposedly had a physique chiseled from granite(check out photos of him with the Red Sox for proof of this)
60 homers? Yes...more probably, and probably more than 714...But doing it while batting 340 for a career? No way....the outfieders are just too quick now....that's why you don't see guys hitting 400 anymore...
or doing stuff like hitting 35 triples in a season...
Last edited by whottt; 08-06-2007 at 05:20 AM.
The only other thing I'd criticize Bonds for...this dude plays the race card every chance he gets...yet he's the biggest silver spoon richboy spoiled brat child of privlege to ever step foot on the baseball diamond...he didn't grow up some povertry stricken opressed minority...he grew up with a Dad that was a world famous ball player who made good money and spoiled his son rotten...he always went to good schools, he got to spend his summers in dugouts hanging out with major league baseball players...and he got star treatment every where he went.
He's a spoiled brat fratboy...even the way he talks...he talks like a snobbish boor. Yet any time he gets criticized he almost instaneously pulls the race card...
That's what I don't like about him.
Hey Barry...pull the race card on Hank Aaron you spoiled brat.
On the diamond...he's a HOF'er whether he ever did steroids or not...I don't agree with FWDT's take that Barry is the best player of his generation though, Pre Steroids he was a 30 30, maybe even 40-40, or possibly even a 50-40, type guy that was a prett good fielder(although severely over-rated defensively), he was basically Ron Gant with a better eye at the plate, his PCT's are over inflated(and this he is over-rated) because he took so many damn walks...
It isn't lost on me that two of the guys with the most over-inflated stats ever due to BB, never won a WS...because they'd allow themself to be pitched around and leave the job of actually winning the game to the guys behind them.
While Pete Rose, who was a true master of the bat, won 4...not to mention so many games...and he never left it up to the guy behind him...or just stood by passively and let himself be pitched around, when it was time to win the game.
There are players I'd take over Bonds from his generation...
Griffey Jr was a better fielder and hitter in his peak...Arod is just as good of a basestealer and power hitter, plus he plays the infield(and is the best SS on the NY Roster). I mean Arod was arguably the best defensive SS in the game prior to the move to third...he damn sure had the best arm. Pujols is a freak. Guys like Molitor and Brett were better leaders and compe ors.
If I am building a fantasy team I probably take Barry...but not if my goal is to win a WS. That'd be like chosing Shawn Marion #1 to win an NBA le.
Edit: Rickey Henderson deserves a mention as the greatest of Barry's generation...Rickey at his peak was a force...and if not for the Roid years, Barry's career wouldn't look as good as Rickey's. And Rickey undoubtedly loves the game, media savvy or not, just for the sake of playing it, without fame or fortune...he proved it at the end of his career.
Last edited by whottt; 08-06-2007 at 06:12 AM.
Bonds is the greatest? Bonds isn't even the best player of his generation. Griffey is. Griffey would have been breaking this record, clean, if it wasn't for his injuries. Bonds played LEFT FIELD. Griffey played CENTER FIELD. Big difference there. Hands down, Junior owns Bonds.
If not for injuries, Griffey may have ended up hitting HRs. And Griffey is the superior defender. But nobody KNOWS that he has been clean.
but better? nay...
Griffey has posted 4 seasons in his entire career of 1.000+ OPS (and ZERO since 1996). Bonds has done that 15 times in the past 16 years. Griffey's career high OPS is 1.076 - an excellent mark in 1994. Barry has exceeded that number 8 times.
You sure did use a lot of words to say you love BB inflated stats.
Pete Rose had a ty OPS...yet won more games than any player in history...including 4 WS...including leading the Phillies to the only WS win in their 150 year history.
Griffy Jr was a CF originally, a true GG CF that made spectacular defensive plays, ...and he was a much better power hitter. Much much better....
I agree that we'll never know if Griffey did steroids...and the injuries he went through seem to indicate he might have...at the same time...most of Griffey's major injuries were sustained on defense....true defensive players do usually have their careers cut short to injuries...running into walls and diving around in the outfield destroys your body.
I don't think I've ever seen Barry dive for a ball in the outfield...he had a great arm(but not good enough to beat Sid Bream) and didn't make stupid errors and that's about it.
Junior would run up walls and catch the ball...he made one catch that was 2 or 3 feet over the wall...in CF.
He was a much much better fielder than Bonds...and prior to Bonds roid binge Griffey Jr was the more highly regarded player. If not for 73 and the BB creating fear the number induced....Griffey Jr would get it.
When MLB had their All Century Team, Griffey was on it...Bonds wasn't. Then all of a sudden Barry jacked 30+ more HR in a season than he ever had before.
You know what pisses me off about Bonds more than steroids? The fact that you had to throw it through the eye of a needle to get a called strike on him from 2000-2004.
if you want to discount what bonds did because of the steroids, i'm perfectly fine with that. but nobody can say that griffey has been the superior player if you ignore the steroids aspect. griffey did/does have a better all-around game, but bonds has put up astronomical numbers that nobody in recent history has compared to.
as for Pete Rose having a ty OPS? He posted a greater than 100 OPS+ a whopping 16 times in his career, including 14 years in a row. Now, his OPS doesn't put him amongst baseball's all-time greats, but in my ever so humble opinion, Rose himself is not amongst baseball's all-time greats. A very good player for a very very long time (and a hall of famer if not for the gambling), but also maybe the most overrated player in baseball history.
agreed. he's got that Paul O'Neill thing going where if he doesn't swing, it's not a strike.
WGAF if he cheated?
I'd like to see any of you ers look me in the eye and say you never cheated in your life.
If Bonds gets an * next to his name, then so does Aaron.
Aaron admitted to taking greenies before playing games as far back as 1968
Fine then...he's a cheater with a major record, and that's all he is...he's not some heroic figure to be celebrated by generations to come...he's a self centered brat...with a big ass record.
Fair enough?
Maybe this will cause baseball fans to pay more attention to what actually happens on the field instead of obsessing over numbers as they have for far too long. Maybe now future Craig Biggios won't be overlooked while we fawn over .260 hitters with 50 homeruns.
While I agree somewhat with the tone of your post, there is a difference that greenies were not a banned substance when Aaron played.
The biggest myth in the whole steroid scandal is that they were not against baseball rules. This is 100% false, steroids have been banned in baseball since the early 90s, there was just no testing/enforcement of the policy until recently.
I don't see how anybody can say without a doubt that Biggio was clean. He's a little guy who had some pop. But after Raffy (big-time power in college, arguably the perfect left-handed power stroke, flabby body, swore to congress that he was clean...PERIOD), I don't see how anybody can trust anybody 100% anymore. Now, I'm in no way accusing Biggio, just saying...
actually a better question would be how many people have made millions dollars by cheating and have the greatest achievements of their professional lives based on a lie? i haven't, have you?
don't give me that whole 'if you do 65 in a 55, you have no right to criticize bonds' argument.
Probably one of the best writing that I have seen Buck do.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/s...n.34a679f.html
Buck Harvey: A milestone - When Bonds gets a break
Web Posted: 08/06/2007 05:01 PM CDT
Buck Harvey
San Antonio Express-News
Bud Selig didn't know what to do Saturday night. The baseball rose toward left field, and Selig froze as if he had been, well, injected with something.
Cameras were on him, and he knew that. But Selig didn't clap, he didn't smile, he didn't nod. With an awkward pose, Selig reacted as if Barry Bonds had done something for the first time instead of the 755th.
Selig didn't have a plan, which is fitting. Selig and baseball didn't have one when it came to steroids, either. The sport let this happen, when track and field had a bead on illegal drugs two decades ago, and that's why Bonds isn't the villain so many say he is.
Bonds simply did what baseball players have done for generations. He used an available edge.
Make no mistake. It's almost certain Bonds took a series of enhancements stronger than flaxseed oil, and it's obvious without a lab test that he's been a jerk. Some athletes try to hide the sour side; Bonds sometimes flaunts his.
It's this combination that has made it so easy to turn him into pure evil. He "pierces the soul of baseball," as one sportswriter put it recently, and others use more common words. "Cheat" and "liar" are among them, and they are not inaccurate.
But somewhere in this morality play a few things get lost. One is Bonds the ballplayer. Right or wrong, just or unjust, he is one of the best dozen players in the game's history.
These last few weeks only add to that. He didn't have to endure the raw prejudice that Hank Aaron faced. But to play under these conditions — with Selig, Aaron and so many cool to him — says something about his own mental toughness.
He's the premier player of this era, as tainted as this era may be. And that's why the San Diego crowd got it right Saturday. The fans acknowledged something special had happened.
Should Bonds be one swing from the record? No one thinks that, given the visual and statistical evidence. Still, every era comes with an asterisk.
Few hit homers in the dead-ball era, and no black man hit home runs in the Babe Ruth era. Night games changed the sport, as did greenies used to get up the next day. The slider is a modern invention, as is the middle reliever, set-up man and closer.
Aaron had something else on his side. He played about half of his career in an Atlanta ballpark nicknamed "The Launching Pad." He didn't cause this, but he used the edge nonetheless.
How much? In 1971, Aaron hit the most homers of his career, and 31 came at home and only 16 on the road.
Just as telling was 1973. Then, four National League players hit 40 or more home runs. Three of them were Braves. Aaron, in his final season of high home-run productivity, was only third on his team.
The Atlanta leader was Davey Johnson, a future manager with San Antonio roots. He hit 43 home runs and set a major-league record for second basemen. In his previous eight seasons with another team, Johnson had hit a combined 66.
Bonds, in contrast, plays in a ballpark that works against him. But few point this out because no one wants to give Bonds a break right now.
Bonds absorbs all negativity, and Alex Rodriguez proves that. He's been targeted in the tabloids for everything from infidelity to screaming behind opposing infielders on pop-ups. Yet now, after hitting 500 home runs faster than anyone in history, he gets a pass.
Is it coincidence he's on pace to pass Bonds when it took someone 33 years to catch Aaron? Most just want A-Rod to do it.
A-Rod may be clean, no matter what Jose Canseco suggests, but the era isn't. After all, the pitcher who gave up No. 755 to Bonds was suspended for using performance-enhancing substances while in the minor leagues in 2005.
Yet Bonds is still singled out, as if he's the only one, when he's just the best one. And if he hits 756 tonight, those outside of San Francisco will turn away and not acknowledge his greatness.
Selig, ever unsure, won't try to correct that. It's easier than admitting the truth.
thats something to consider too, as the dimensions were much bigger back then.
I always thought it was due to the fact that you would face about three pitchers a night and you couldn't get a feel for them, but in complete games were obviously much more common back then.
I didn't mean to suggest Biggio couldn't have possibly used performance-enhancing drugs, but his type of game on the field didn't really necessitate unnatural strength. My point is that I think in the last 20 years or so, we've too often measured a player's greatness by his HR numbers.
That's undoubtedly true. Mark McGwire was a fairly mediocre major league hitter, but (for whatever reason) an exceptional power hitter. In his famous 70 HR season, McGwire had a total of 61 singles and more strikeouts than hits. I'm not sure why a batter would be deemed successful if he struck out more frequently than he reached base by hit. For that reason, I've argued with friends that I don't think McGwire ever should have been a first ballot Hall of Famer, regardless of the su ions heaped on him. To me, McGwire is a somewhat more prolific version of Dave Kingman, without the surliness. I don't find either to have been a particularly great player.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
