Official Barry Bonds Thread

[bkrich83]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

Then we just have to disagree to disagree. But every scout have different opinions, but I will say this Bonds got the job done in left field and if he wasn't that good than how did he win all those gold gloves!


Bk, did you ever play pro sports, I played a little college and have some friend still playing today in football and baseball, well infact mostly retire now that I think about, damn I getting old!

I had a cup of coffee in a few arena football and CFL camps, but never stuck. Never was in the right place at the right time, nor was I really athletic enough to advance beyond college.

[BGarrett7]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

Center field you need to have a cannon, accuracy doesnt really matter! lol

And with this incredible post, I head off for the night.

Man, some of you people...

[Scottdau]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

I had a cup of coffee in a few arena football and CFL camps, but never stuck. Never was in the right place at the right time, nor was I really athletic enough to advance beyond college.

There is a lot of politics behind it too, I was better than Chris Singleton going up and in high school not saying he is great lol, yet he got all the attention, I am mean I had my share of scouts, but never work out lol

[Scottdau]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

And with this incredible post, I head off for the night.

Man, some of you people...

\\



I am joking gesh

[Blzer]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

There is a lot of politics behind it too, I was better than Chris Singleton going up and in high school not saying he is great lol, yet he got all the attention, I am mean I had my share of scouts, but never work out lol

And a man that I know of my the name of Ray McDonald played with Bonds in high school. He was a senior at the same time, too. Bonds led the league in home runs and RBI's. He was second in batting average.


Guess who led the league?

[bkrich83]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

There is a lot of politics behind it too, I was better than Chris Singleton going up and in high school not saying he is great lol, yet he got all the attention, I am mean I had my share of scouts, but never work out lol

That actually is quite true. But in my case, I simply didn't have the skills to go beyond college. I got by on preparation, fundamentals and guile, at some point you have to have talent, and I went as far as my talent could take me.

[Misfit]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

Well, sure. But, the same can be said about the wishbone defense played against Bonds. How can you find a hole in there? How does he still hit .362 in a season with that? Granted, he can bunt (Ortiz did that last year), but that's just not asking a realistic favor. If he has a 60% chance of getting on-base anyway (and a very good chance of either getting further than first base, or sending a runner further than one bag), then asking him to bunt is probably not plausible.


There is nothing that I think Pujols is bad at that you guys are saying. I hope that you guys understand that I'm not trying to give him any negative connotations. He is the best player in the MLB. But Barry Bonds doesn't play in the MLB. He plays in some other league (I guess of extraordinary gentlemen?), and he is the only one in it. Maybe Pujols will be later in his career... but at this point and time, I will safely say that I do not believe his is close to being there, yet.

Bringing up the shift against Bonds is more a complimant to Pujols than it is Bonds. There is no defense to put on Pujols other than straight-away because he can hit the ball everywhere, be it on the ground and in the air. Bonds hit .360 in 03 with less than 400 at bats, but he slugged over .800. With that kind of slugging percentage, its unlikely he was hitting the ball on the ground much for the shift to have much of an impact on his performance.

And you can't compare an average of .360 in <400 at-bats with a .330 average with >500 at bats. In a simplified example, player X could go 13 for 30 for a .333 batting average while player Y could go 4 for 10 for a .400 batting average. Is player Y the better hitter because his average was higher than player X's? While yes he could be, the sample size is too small and the results too close together to form a real answer. And some may even find it more impressive that player X could maintain a .333 average while putting the ball in play vs the .400 average from player Y who put the ball in play far fewer times.

As for your last comment that Bonds is above this league, the easy rebuttle is that Bonds got that way with steroids. Before steroids he was a good player, but his pre-steroid numbers wouldn't make him better than Pujols. Hitters don't get that much better when their late 30's hit. The 2003 Bonds was largely a product of the steroids he put into his system. As far as best players who obtained their abilities dishonorably goes, he has no eqaul. When one starts to talk about who the best pure (as in, no roids) baseball player of all-time goes they won't be talking about Bonds.

[Scottdau]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

That actually is quite true. But in my case, I simply didn't have the skills to go beyond college. I got by on preparation, fundamentals and guile, at some point you have to have talent, and I went as far as my talent could take me.

Boy that is the truth, I just didn't have the drive, I could hit like crazy, but the heart wasn't there. But I don't think I would have done good in college. I just did't have the heart, I was the opposite of you lol. I had talent lol, just no effort!

[Scottdau]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

Bringing up the shift against Bonds is more a complimant to Pujols than it is Bonds. There is no defense to put on Pujols other than straight-away because he can hit the ball everywhere, be it on the ground and in the air. Bonds hit .360 in 03 with less than 400 at bats, but he slugged over .800. With that kind of slugging percentage, its unlikely he was hitting the ball on the ground much for the shift to have much of an impact on his performance.

And you can't compare an average of .360 in <400 at-bats with a .330 average with >500 at bats. In a simplified example, player X could go 13 for 30 for a .333 batting average while player Y could go 4 for 10 for a .400 batting average. Is player Y the better hitter because his average was higher than player X's? While yes he could be, the sample size is too small and the results too close together to form a real answer. And some may even find it more impressive that player X could maintain a .333 average while putting the ball in play vs the .400 average from player Y who put the ball in play far fewer times.

As for your last comment that Bonds is above this league, the easy rebuttle is that Bonds got that way with steroids. Before steroids he was a good player, but his pre-steroid numbers wouldn't make him better than Pujols. Hitters don't get that much better when their late 30's hit. The 2003 Bonds was largely a product of the steroids he put into his system. As far as best players who obtained their abilities dishonorably goes, he has no eqaul. When one starts to talk about who the best pure (as in, no roids) baseball player of all-time goes they won't be talking about Bonds.

true, but in the same time it show you just how good Bonds is, because he can pull any pitch! He knows his strength and knows how to pull any pitch he gets or just let them go for balls!

The other statement is true, if he ever gets convicted of steroids. Right now it is hear say and even what he told the grand jury was he took them unknowing, who knows it could be true or not! If he took them then all the evidences will come out, you can't hide that kind of stuff forever!

[bkrich83]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

true, but in the same time it show you just how good Bonds is, because he can pull any pitch! He knows his strength and knows how to pull any pitch he gets or just let them go for balls!

The other statement is true, if he ever gets convicted of steroids. Right now it is hear say and even what he told the grand jury was he took them unknowing, who knows it could be true or not! If he took them then all the evidences will come out, you can't hide that kind of stuff forever!

I find it extremely difficult to believe he took steroids unknowingly. These guys are extremely well versed on what they are putting in to their bodies, it's just not feasible.

[keRplunK]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

But Barry Bonds doesn't play in the MLB. He plays in some other league (I guess of extraordinary gentlemen?), and he is the only one in it. Maybe Pujols will be later in his career....

He never would have gotten to the point that he did without the help of steriods.

Pujols could get there in a month if he started using steriods.

[Scottdau]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

I find it extremely difficult to believe he took steroids unknowingly. These guys are extremely well versed on what they are putting in to their bodies, it's just not feasible.

I agree with that, but in the same time if you just your trainer who knows. But I can see it both ways. I am not saying he didn't know, but until the find out for sure, I am cool. And it has nothing to with being a Bonds fan. I would be that way with anyone. I just want sure proof before I say that! Plus I know I am the only one, but steroids are not a big issue to me, if they want to to take them so be it. If they think it makes them better go for it. That is just how I feel! I have had a lot of friends take them, and they are actually healthy lol

[Misfit]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

true, but in the same time it show you just how good Bonds is, because he can pull any pitch! He knows his strength and knows how to pull any pitch he gets or just let them go for balls!

The other statement is true, if he ever gets convicted of steroids. Right now it is hear say and even what he told the grand jury was he took them unknowing, who knows it could be true or not! If he took them then all the evidences will come out, you can't hide that kind of stuff forever!

I'm not going to tell you what to think, but I will say you are an extreme optimist (or just an extremely loyal fan) to think Bonds was not juiced. I've always been pretty neutral with Bonds and did not want to believe he was on steroids (I defended him up until the Grand Jury testimony was leaked) but at this point I can't ignore the evidence. I don't take any pleasure in it either, I find it dissapointing that I was dooped into thinking I was perhaps watching the greatest player ever, but having someone like Pujols in the game definitly takes that sting away.

[bkrich83]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

I agree with that, but in the same time if you just your trainer who knows. But I can see it both ways. I am not saying he didn't know, but until the find out for sure, I am cool. And it has nothing to with being a Bonds fan. I would be that way with anyone. I just want sure proof before I say that! Plus I know I am the only one, but steroids are not a big issue to me, if they want to to take them so be it. If they think it makes them better go for it. That is just how I feel! I have had a lot of friends take them, and they are actually healthy lol

Your friends are what 16 17 or 18.

I can pretty much assure you, I've been around Steroids and illeagal suppliments more than you, and the long term effects are not good.

Again, having been around athletes like this most of my life, I have yet to run across one that didn't know exactly what they were administering.

[Scottdau]

Re: ESPN and Bonds

I'm not going to tell you what to think, but I will say you are an extreme optimist (or just an extremely loyal fan) to think Bonds was not juiced. I've always been pretty neutral with Bonds and did not want to believe he was on steroids (I defended him up until the Grand Jury testimony was leaked) but at this point I can't ignore the evidence. I don't take any pleasure in it either, I find it dissapointing that I was dooped into thinking I was perhaps watching the greatest player ever, but having someone like Pujols in the game definitly takes that sting away.

I hear what you are saying, but I just know. That is just how I feel. Unless he tested positive that is just how I feel. But I understand what are you saying and agree with it to a point!