Barry Bonds and The Fans

Off Topic
61

[quote]slimjim wrote:
Scotacus wrote:

Did Aaron have an asterisk beside his career? He played in an era of expanding teams and therefore more mediocre pitching.

If the numbers are any indication, the pitching pool has been way more dilluted during Bonds’ tenure than during Aaron’s. Coupled with the fact that Hank played during a time when racism was fairly rampant, segregation was still a reality during a portion of his career, and you would be hard pressed to say Hank had an easier go of it than Bonds.[/quote]

I was using this to make a different point. Im not saying they should have astericks besides their names, just that nobody questions these guys’ careers or the legitimacy of their stature, when it seems a stronger case could be made to do so than with Bonds. You never hear about segregation having any bearing on the accomplishments of pre-Robinson baseball. Not a peep, which is pretty staggering.

62

Bonds is an asshole? Wow, I didn’t know everyone was so chum chum with the Leftfielder…if YOU had to sit through retarded, one-sided, myopic, redundant questioning from the imbeciles that work in sports reporting, since you were a kid…wouldn’t you too, be a tad jaded?

“Hey Barry, how do you feel?”
“Hey Barry, what were you thinking about when you hit the homer today?”
“Hey Barry, why are you ramming the barrel of the bat up my un-lubricated ass?”

As for the steroids-affecting-performance argument…it’s completely unfounded. Unless he’s been on gear since 1987, this bullshit, cop-out, pollitically motivated witch hunt needs to be put to bed.

Just look at his key hitting stats that have continually increased since his rookie season…

*Avg.
*Obp.
*Ops.
*Slg.

To be fair, the jump from the 2000 and 2001 season was considerable…BUT, let’s actually look at factors that influenced this increase from a distance.

He adjusted his swing…
He has access to the best training, supplementation and food in the world…
He placed less emphasis on fielding and baserunning…
He plays in a league where 80% of the pitchers should still be in the high minors (or baggin’ groceries)…
He plays in a stadium built for him to flick the ball out of (average stadium effect rating in the high 90’s)…
The ball IS harder…
Pitchers pitch defensively towards him, which I rarely hear as a factor while watching games(fuckin’ idiots)…

Could the explanation for his increased success simply be that Bonds is just getting better and the league is weaker and the game is geared towards power hitting? Nah…that wouldn’t be interesting enough for T.V. now would it?

Oh yeah…if roids are THE reason for all of his success, how do you explain his OBP. increases? That’s because you can’t! Shit, the best leadoff guys only DREAM about having the Obp.'s that Bonds accomplishes year after year.

Career in “big three” stats from age 21 up till 2004 (2005 to present are irrelevant since he’s been injured so often)

Year BA. Obp. Slg.
1986 .223 .330 .416
1987 .261 .329 .492
1988 .283 .368 .491
1989 .248 .351 .426
1990 .301 .406 .565 NL MVP/ML P.O.Y.
1991 .292 .410 .514
1992 .311 .456 .624 NL MVP
1993 .336 .458 .677 NL MVP
1994 .312 .426 .647
1995 .294 .431 .577
1996 .308 .461 .615 supposedly starts
1997 .291 .446 .585
1998 .303 .438 .609
1999 .262 .389 .617
2000 .306 .440 .688
2001 .328 .515 .863 NL MVP/ML P.O.Y.
2002 .370 .582 .799 NL MVP/B.A. champ
2003 .341 .529 .749 NL MVP
2004 .362 .609 .812 NL MVP/ML P.O.Y.

Holds the records for base on balls, intentional walks, most MVP’s, most consecutive 30HR seasons (13)…must be the roids.

PLUS…doesn’t anyone else see that he is the ONLY player accused performing THIS well? What did everyone else get shittier doses or does is he taking 2,000 times the dose that they do…it’s fuckin’ ridiculous!

63

[quote]Scotacus wrote:
slimjim wrote:
Scotacus wrote:

Did Aaron have an asterisk beside his career? He played in an era of expanding teams and therefore more mediocre pitching.

If the numbers are any indication, the pitching pool has been way more dilluted during Bonds’ tenure than during Aaron’s. Coupled with the fact that Hank played during a time when racism was fairly rampant, segregation was still a reality during a portion of his career, and you would be hard pressed to say Hank had an easier go of it than Bonds.

I was using this to make a different point. Im not saying they should have astericks besides their names, just that nobody questions these guys’ careers or the legitimacy of their stature, when it seems a stronger case could be made to do so than with Bonds. You never hear about segregation having any bearing on the accomplishments of pre-Robinson baseball. Not a peep, which is pretty staggering.[/quote]

Well said. If you got into the Hall of Fame during a period where every one of your team-mates and opponents were all hand picked to be all of one specific race, there should be an asterisk by your name.

I would start there before I started with potential/unproven anabolic hormone users.

64

[quote]Professor X wrote:
KJ Bridgewater wrote:
I just dislike Bonds.

Which should be irrelevant. How many people who “hate Bonds” have had a conversation with the man? You all have had dinner with him? You hang out with him and play Madden?

I would hope someone’s ability to make it to the Hall of Fame isn’t based on how many people think you are a great guy in your personal life. I have a feeling there are tons of pure ass holes who know how to work the media and most here would truly dislike them if they knew them personally.

But hey, since they know when to smile for the camera and when to sign autographs, everyone is in love with them.[/quote]

Good point. A lot of people say Canseco’s a jerk. I met the man at Gold’s Gym. Granted, the conversation I had with him was only a minute long, but he seemed like a nice guy.

65

I gave up on baseball back when those over paid pansy asses when on strike in the 90’s.

I think it would be funny if they intentionally walked Bonds…for the rest of his career.

It has been done before. Former Braves player Bob Horner went to play in Japan back in the 80’s. He was close to breaking the seasonal Japanese Home Run record…so they walked him until the end of the season.

66

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Scotacus wrote:
slimjim wrote:
Scotacus wrote:

Did Aaron have an asterisk beside his career? He played in an era of expanding teams and therefore more mediocre pitching.

If the numbers are any indication, the pitching pool has been way more dilluted during Bonds’ tenure than during Aaron’s. Coupled with the fact that Hank played during a time when racism was fairly rampant, segregation was still a reality during a portion of his career, and you would be hard pressed to say Hank had an easier go of it than Bonds.

I was using this to make a different point. Im not saying they should have astericks besides their names, just that nobody questions these guys’ careers or the legitimacy of their stature, when it seems a stronger case could be made to do so than with Bonds. You never hear about segregation having any bearing on the accomplishments of pre-Robinson baseball. Not a peep, which is pretty staggering.

Well said. If you got into the Hall of Fame during a period where every one of your team-mates and opponents were all hand picked to be all of one specific race, there should be an asterisk by your name.

I would start there before I started with potential/unproven anabolic hormone users.[/quote]

This is one reason why I hate baseball anymore. Bonds is getting crap because of suspicion of taking steroids. And they cry about the integrity of the game. What would the records be if Josh Gibson could play or Satchell Paige and the rest of the Negro leagues.

I remember how people called for an asterisk with Aaron’s name because of more at bats.

It’s all crap. Baseball has to get over itself. It’s not on any higher plane than any other sport in terms of maturity. If they want to put an asterisk behind some guy’s name who never has tested positive, they need to wipe out all the stats from that era. I’m sure bonds played against pitchers on steroids, or other players in the filed.

67

[quote]rainjack wrote:
…
Maybe Clemens is juicing - but it can only be for recovery - there is no steroid on the planet than can improve technique. Pitching is 99% mechanics.

[/quote]

I agree it is all about recovery.

I’ll bet a higher percentage of pitchers juice than hitters.

68

[quote]rainjack wrote:
on edge wrote:
I believe Clemens juices. A few years ago he was barely hanging on. He was about he 3rd man in the Yankees rotation after El Duque and one or two others. Then suddenly, in his 40’s, he’s back to Cy Young form. Seems suspicious to me.

I don’t see how that makes any difference. Are you saying that he can’t be natural because he improved his game?

Ryan went through the same phase. Do you think the Ryan express juiced because he came back to his form after a rocky spot?

Maybe Clemens is juicing - but it can only be for recovery - there is no steroid on the planet than can improve technique. Pitching is 99% mechanics.

[/quote]

I’m saying it’s suspicious.

Ryan was never better in his 40’s than he was in his 30’s. Baring brief periods of injury.

I agree it’s for recovery. Pitching is not 99% mechanics. It’s mostly genetics.

69

[quote]spurlock wrote:

PLUS…doesn’t anyone else see that he is the ONLY player accused performing THIS well?

[/quote]

He was already the games best player, ever. So, of course, he’s going to be the best player on roids.

BTW I thought it’s generally believed he started in 2001. I’ve never heard as early as '96.

70

[quote]on edge wrote:
rainjack wrote:
on edge wrote:
I believe Clemens juices. A few years ago he was barely hanging on. He was about he 3rd man in the Yankees rotation after El Duque and one or two others. Then suddenly, in his 40’s, he’s back to Cy Young form. Seems suspicious to me.

I don’t see how that makes any difference. Are you saying that he can’t be natural because he improved his game?

Ryan went through the same phase. Do you think the Ryan express juiced because he came back to his form after a rocky spot?

Maybe Clemens is juicing - but it can only be for recovery - there is no steroid on the planet than can improve technique. Pitching is 99% mechanics.

I’m saying it’s suspicious.

Ryan was never better in his 40’s than he was in his 30’s. Baring brief periods of injury.

I agree it’s for recovery. Pitching is not 99% mechanics. It’s mostly genetics.[/quote]

Clemens is only 42.

If he was a knuckleballer, would you have a different opinion of him?

The genetics/mechanics debate is not a winnable argument from either side.

71

[quote]on edge wrote:

Ryan was never better in his 40’s than he was in his 30’s. Baring brief periods of injury.

I agree it’s for recovery. Pitching is not 99% mechanics. It’s mostly genetics.[/quote]

FYI - Ryan threw his 7th no hitter at the age of 43 - a year older than Clemens is now, and you accuse Clemens of being in Cy Young form? Name a season in the last 3 years that he was as good as you claim.

72

[quote]spurlock wrote:
Bonds is an asshole? Wow, I didn’t know everyone was so chum chum with the Leftfielder…if YOU had to sit through retarded, one-sided, myopic, redundant questioning from the imbeciles that work in sports reporting, since you were a kid…wouldn’t you too, be a tad jaded?

“Hey Barry, how do you feel?”
“Hey Barry, what were you thinking about when you hit the homer today?”
“Hey Barry, why are you ramming the barrel of the bat up my un-lubricated ass?”

As for the steroids-affecting-performance argument…it’s completely unfounded. Unless he’s been on gear since 1987, this bullshit, cop-out, pollitically motivated witch hunt needs to be put to bed.

Just look at his key hitting stats that have continually increased since his rookie season…

*Avg.
*Obp.
*Ops.
*Slg.

To be fair, the jump from the 2000 and 2001 season was considerable…BUT, let’s actually look at factors that influenced this increase from a distance.

He adjusted his swing…
He has access to the best training, supplementation and food in the world…
He placed less emphasis on fielding and baserunning…
He plays in a league where 80% of the pitchers should still be in the high minors (or baggin’ groceries)…
He plays in a stadium built for him to flick the ball out of (average stadium effect rating in the high 90’s)…
The ball IS harder…
Pitchers pitch defensively towards him, which I rarely hear as a factor while watching games(fuckin’ idiots)…

Could the explanation for his increased success simply be that Bonds is just getting better and the league is weaker and the game is geared towards power hitting? Nah…that wouldn’t be interesting enough for T.V. now would it?

Oh yeah…if roids are THE reason for all of his success, how do you explain his OBP. increases? That’s because you can’t! Shit, the best leadoff guys only DREAM about having the Obp.'s that Bonds accomplishes year after year.

Career in “big three” stats from age 21 up till 2004 (2005 to present are irrelevant since he’s been injured so often)

Year BA. Obp. Slg.
1986 .223 .330 .416
1987 .261 .329 .492
1988 .283 .368 .491
1989 .248 .351 .426
1990 .301 .406 .565 NL MVP/ML P.O.Y.
1991 .292 .410 .514
1992 .311 .456 .624 NL MVP
1993 .336 .458 .677 NL MVP
1994 .312 .426 .647
1995 .294 .431 .577
1996 .308 .461 .615 supposedly starts
1997 .291 .446 .585
1998 .303 .438 .609
1999 .262 .389 .617
2000 .306 .440 .688
2001 .328 .515 .863 NL MVP/ML P.O.Y.
2002 .370 .582 .799 NL MVP/B.A. champ
2003 .341 .529 .749 NL MVP
2004 .362 .609 .812 NL MVP/ML P.O.Y.

Holds the records for base on balls, intentional walks, most MVP’s, most consecutive 30HR seasons (13)…must be the roids.

PLUS…doesn’t anyone else see that he is the ONLY player accused performing THIS well? What did everyone else get shittier doses or does is he taking 2,000 times the dose that they do…it’s fuckin’ ridiculous!

[/quote]

Best post

Sums it up all real nice

73

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Scotacus wrote:
slimjim wrote:
Scotacus wrote:

Did Aaron have an asterisk beside his career? He played in an era of expanding teams and therefore more mediocre pitching.

If the numbers are any indication, the pitching pool has been way more dilluted during Bonds’ tenure than during Aaron’s. Coupled with the fact that Hank played during a time when racism was fairly rampant, segregation was still a reality during a portion of his career, and you would be hard pressed to say Hank had an easier go of it than Bonds.

I was using this to make a different point. Im not saying they should have astericks besides their names, just that nobody questions these guys’ careers or the legitimacy of their stature, when it seems a stronger case could be made to do so than with Bonds. You never hear about segregation having any bearing on the accomplishments of pre-Robinson baseball. Not a peep, which is pretty staggering.

Well said. If you got into the Hall of Fame during a period where every one of your team-mates and opponents were all hand picked to be all of one specific race, there should be an asterisk by your name.

I would start there before I started with potential/unproven anabolic hormone users.

This is one reason why I hate baseball anymore. Bonds is getting crap because of suspicion of taking steroids. And they cry about the integrity of the game. What would the records be if Josh Gibson could play or Satchell Paige and the rest of the Negro leagues.

I remember how people called for an asterisk with Aaron’s name because of more at bats.

It’s all crap. Baseball has to get over itself. It’s not on any higher plane than any other sport in terms of maturity. If they want to put an asterisk behind some guy’s name who never has tested positive, they need to wipe out all the stats from that era. I’m sure bonds played against pitchers on steroids, or other players in the filed.

[/quote]

This is the major problem with baseball, bitter old men thinking they are all high and mighty because baseball is somehow better than all other sports and was “more pure”

They need to get off their high horse its just 9 men with mitts 1 with a stick and 1 ball in a damn field with walls. Meant to entertain the general public.

Thats all it is.

74

For those who hate Bonds think about his life. He has been surrounded by fans and media that nit pick at every single little thing he says and does. Have you ever had a bad day and yelled at someone? Well if someone who is a star and surrounded by media does that then the harp on it for months. What if he is a person who likes privacy? Does it matter that some people don’t want to do interviews and others do?

Also, has anyone ever thought that Bonds may have never done steroids? He got pretty fat around the time he got big, what if he started lifting weights and eating big not caring about his abs. He could easily gain 30 pounds in the Offseason.

I think the treatment of Bonds is unfair, I doubt he is a bad guy, I really don’t care. I do know that if God had ever blessed me with that kind of talent in anything that I would not like that kind of attention and would probably be labeled an asshole where as my wife and kids do not think I’m an asshole, they think I’m a great husband and father.

It is easy to sit on the sidelines and say I don’t like this guy, he must be a steroid freak, he must be a jerk, he doesn’t deserve baseball. He isn’t going around acting like Pacman Jones, he has never shot anyone or beat a woman or drove 100miles an hour drunk. To me he seems to be a hard worker, a law abiding citizen and strong mentally and physically. How many people do you know that could put up with the shit he has put up with. To me when you factor that in he must be a pretty level headed dude. I probably would have beat the shit out of several people by now.

75

Yeah their comes a point in every carrer where muscle maturity and technique spike and an athelet has a few great years and then a decline begins. You can’t look at a few years of greatness and say oh he took steroids these two years look at his size and look at his stats it is obvious. No it isn’t! He gained weight both muscle and fat, he was mature in technique and he was mature in muscle, he had his prime years and then a decline, it fucking happens all the time in every sport.

Most of these assholes never played a sport yet they are experts because they have followed sports their whole lives…b.s. You have to know the stages your body, mind and technique go through to understand…

My strong opinion but…I could be wrong, it has happened before and will happen again.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
on edge wrote:
I believe Clemens juices. A few years ago he was barely hanging on. He was about he 3rd man in the Yankees rotation after El Duque and one or two others. Then suddenly, in his 40’s, he’s back to Cy Young form. Seems suspicious to me.

I don’t see how that makes any difference. Are you saying that he can’t be natural because he improved his game?

Ryan went through the same phase. Do you think the Ryan express juiced because he came back to his form after a rocky spot?

Maybe Clemens is juicing - but it can only be for recovery - there is no steroid on the planet than can improve technique. Pitching is 99% mechanics.

[/quote]

76

[quote]Kalle wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Scotacus wrote:
slimjim wrote:
Scotacus wrote:

Did Aaron have an asterisk beside his career? He played in an era of expanding teams and therefore more mediocre pitching.

If the numbers are any indication, the pitching pool has been way more dilluted during Bonds’ tenure than during Aaron’s. Coupled with the fact that Hank played during a time when racism was fairly rampant, segregation was still a reality during a portion of his career, and you would be hard pressed to say Hank had an easier go of it than Bonds.

I was using this to make a different point. Im not saying they should have astericks besides their names, just that nobody questions these guys’ careers or the legitimacy of their stature, when it seems a stronger case could be made to do so than with Bonds. You never hear about segregation having any bearing on the accomplishments of pre-Robinson baseball. Not a peep, which is pretty staggering.

Well said. If you got into the Hall of Fame during a period where every one of your team-mates and opponents were all hand picked to be all of one specific race, there should be an asterisk by your name.

I would start there before I started with potential/unproven anabolic hormone users.

This is one reason why I hate baseball anymore. Bonds is getting crap because of suspicion of taking steroids. And they cry about the integrity of the game. What would the records be if Josh Gibson could play or Satchell Paige and the rest of the Negro leagues.

I remember how people called for an asterisk with Aaron’s name because of more at bats.

It’s all crap. Baseball has to get over itself. It’s not on any higher plane than any other sport in terms of maturity. If they want to put an asterisk behind some guy’s name who never has tested positive, they need to wipe out all the stats from that era. I’m sure bonds played against pitchers on steroids, or other players in the filed.

This is the major problem with baseball, bitter old men thinking they are all high and mighty because baseball is somehow better than all other sports and was “more pure”

They need to get off their high horse its just 9 men with mitts 1 with a stick and 1 ball in a damn field with walls. Meant to entertain the general public.

Thats all it is.

[/quote]

Exactly, no records should be pre 46 since they screwed a substantial part of the population from playing. But these same folks like to talk aboutt he game like it was their daughter’s sacred virginity.

But what they don’t know is their daughter is the town ho and just blew an entire Hell’s Angels club last week.

77

For what it’s worth, a friend of mine worked on an add campaign with bonds and some major leaguers a few years back. He said Bonds was very polite and gracious and great to work with.

Maybe he is a dick at times, but how many of us would be super patient with the media in the same position.?

78

[quote]rainjack wrote:
on edge wrote:
rainjack wrote:
on edge wrote:
I believe Clemens juices. A few years ago he was barely hanging on. He was about he 3rd man in the Yankees rotation after El Duque and one or two others. Then suddenly, in his 40’s, he’s back to Cy Young form. Seems suspicious to me.

I don’t see how that makes any difference. Are you saying that he can’t be natural because he improved his game?

Ryan went through the same phase. Do you think the Ryan express juiced because he came back to his form after a rocky spot?

Maybe Clemens is juicing - but it can only be for recovery - there is no steroid on the planet than can improve technique. Pitching is 99% mechanics.

I’m saying it’s suspicious.

Ryan was never better in his 40’s than he was in his 30’s. Baring brief periods of injury.

I agree it’s for recovery. Pitching is not 99% mechanics. It’s mostly genetics.

Clemens is only 42.

If he was a knuckleballer, would you have a different opinion of him?

The genetics/mechanics debate is not a winnable argument from either side. [/quote]

I’m pretty sure Clemens is 44. If he was a knuckle-baller I wouldn’t be so suspicious. With the knuck it is mostly technique. The guys name escapes me right now, but the great Knuckleballer for the Red Sox finds himself in the AAA all the time due to some minor flaw or another in his mechanics.

Re. Nolan Ryan. His no hitters came further apart from a peak. When he was 43 he didn’t have a season like he had ten years earlier. It was one great game.

All of Clemen’s seasons with the Astros were great. I believe it was three seasons, I think one was a Cy Young. His last three seasons with the Yankees were a strugle by his standards. Certainly no Cy Youngs.

79

[quote]StandTall wrote:
He isn’t going around acting like Pacman Jones, he has never shot anyone or beat a woman…[/quote]

Actually his girlfriend has accused him of hitting her on a couple separate occasions.

As far as him being an asshole because of constant media presence, that comes with the job. It annoys me to a celebrity complain of lack of privacy. It comes with the territory. If they don’t like it, come back down to the general population and make $30,000-$60,000 a year like everyone else.

A celebrity, and Bonds, like most superstar athletes, is a celebrity, can be an asshole and complain of a probing media, but he’s not going to get much sympathy from the public. He’s been around baseball his whole life, he should be used to it by now, anyway.

And using the media and lack of privacy as justification to be rude and be an asshole is bullshit. Thousands of other celebrity athletes deal with it everyday and don’t act that way.

Again, he can act however he wants and he is still a great ball player, but he just isn’t going to be as embraced.

80

[quote]on edge wrote:
I’m pretty sure Clemens is 44. If he was a knuckle-baller I wouldn’t be so suspicious. With the knuck it is mostly technique. The guys name escapes me right now, but the great Knuckleballer for the Red Sox finds himself in the AAA all the time due to some minor flaw or another in his mechanics.[/quote]

My mistake. I thought Clemens was 42.

The only thing genetic about pitching is the velocity. Some guys naturally throw harder than others. Aside from the fastball, all other pitches require proper mechanics. Just go out and try to throw a 70 mph curve ball, and tell me it is all genetic.

The greatest knuckleballer of all time was Phil Neikro

Ryan was only with one great team - the '69 Mets. His strikeoute ratio was just as high at the end of his career as it was at the beginning.

According to your logic, Ryan had 7 great games in his career. Which makes him the greatest pitcher of all time, seeing as no one has had anywhere close to 7 great games.

[quote]All of Clemen’s seasons with the Astros were great. I believe it was three seasons, I think one was a Cy Young. His last three seasons with the Yankees were a strugle by his standards. Certainly no Cy Youngs.

[/quote]

Clemens went 50-18 his last three years in NY, including a Cy Young.

All of his last 3 seasons in NY were better than his last year in Houston.