More On Bonds

[andyfox]

Barry, that is. Here is one of the stangest statistical lines I've ever seen:
AB: 286
Runs: 100
Hits: 106

Has anybody ever scored 100 runs on just 286 at bats? He's scoring a run every 2.86 official at bats. The only one ever close that I could find was Babe Ruth in 1921, at one every 3.05.

[Taxman]

Steroids or no, Bonds is one of the most amazing ball players ever to play the game. Every Giants game I watch is practically in anticipation of his next at bat.

[Boris]

Yes that is amazing. Everyone rips the Giant's because they don't have anyone to hit behind Bonds. But, I heard on sports talk radio yesterday that the Giants have scored more runs than the Cardinals. Kind of shows the importance of getting on base. Also notice the Bonds is getting pitches now. Teams realize the putting him on is not a good option.

[andyfox]

On Base % plus Slugging %, normalized to the league and park adjusted (from Baseball Reference.com)

Lifetime totals:

1) Babe Ruth 207
2) Ted Williams 190
3) Barry Bonds 179 (thru 2003)
3) Lou Gehrig 179
5) Rogers Hornsby 175
6) Mickey Mantle 172
7) Joe Jackson 170

This seems to me to locate Bonds, historically, about where he belongs as a hitter: below Ruth and Williams, but even with Gehrig and ahead of Hornsby and Mantle.

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes that is amazing. Everyone rips the Giant's because they don't have anyone to hit behind Bonds. But, I heard on sports talk radio yesterday that the Giants have scored more runs than the Cardinals. Kind of shows the importance of getting on base. Also notice the Bonds is getting pitches now. Teams realize the putting him on is not a good option.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it was a huge mistake not signing Vlad Guerrero. The Giants should have done everything they could to get this guy batting behind Bonds.

That would have made for the best show in "The Show."

[bugstud]

that would have been hell to pitch through. Even 6 AAAA guys with those two is a competent lineup

[nolanfan34]

I think a lot of people would be surprised to see Joe Jackson that high. I know I was.

Bonds is amazing, and I hope the guy is clean. I'm not convinced steriods make you a better hitter per se, but to have that cloud hanging over his accomplishments is not good.

[B-Man]

I agree--IF you ignore the steroid factor.

However, if you look at Bonds' career statistics through 1999 or 2000 (i.e. pre-steroids (pre-suspected steroids for the doubters)), then project what he would have done 2000-2004 if he had continued his excellence typical of his 1992-1999 seasons (as opposed to the ridiculous numbers he actually put up), then I think you have to move him down at least several notches--still an all-time great and easily a first-ballot HOFer, but if it wasn't for steroids, he would not have put up OPS+ of 262, 275 and 231 the last 3 years (not to mention whatever it is this year).

[Taxman]

I still don't think this evidence flies. Even if Bonds used steroids, his accomplishments given so few at bats are things that I doubt steroids could influence. McGwire (now there's an example of someone who drastically increased his physical stature since his early years) and Sosa very likely could have doped as well, but they still struck out a lot and had hot/cold streaks like everyone else. Bonds incredible focus and ability to constantly be "hot" have nothing to do with steroids. The pure power numbers might be steroid influenced, but the on base percentage is not. Steroids do not increase your focus and consistency.

[B-Man]

[ QUOTE ]
Even if Bonds used steroids, his accomplishments given so few at bats are things that I doubt steroids could influence.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The pure power numbers might be steroid influenced, but the on base percentage is not.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is incredibly short-sighted.

The three primary factors which influence whether a batter walks are the pitcher, the batter and the unpire. Assuming the umpires, on average, are equal for everyone, then walks are mainly determined by batter and pitcher.

No question Bonds is selective at the plate, which is part of the reason he walks so much.

The other reason he walks so much is that most pitchers are terrified to give him anything to pitch. Why do you think that is? It's because he is such a devastating hitter when they do give him something to hit. You don't see singles hitters walking 200 times, do you? What makes Bonds so devasting is his power--in the 1990s, when he was merely the best player in baseball (but not a modern-day Babe Ruth), you didn't see him shattering the walk or slugging percentage records, did you? But once he became enormous and started hitting with ridiculous power, he started walked more. Hmmm, see a correlation? Do you really think steroids could not influence a players on-base percentage?

[Taxman]

I thought you might make a response like this and I should have been more clear. Yes his walk numbers are somewhat inflated by pitchers not giving him much, but he still was intentionally walked more than anyone in the game for years. The Barry Bonds shift is one of the longest and most well known instances of such a thing. Didn't the bases loaded walk moment come before his 73 year as well? In 1996 and 1997, Bonds walked 151 and 145 times, while the intentional walk numbers were at 30 and 34 respectively. That's a lot of non intentional walks. Last year, Bonds only walked 148 times total. His batting average has also reached new levels over the past few years, another thing I really don't think you can attribute to steroids.

You are absolutely correct that his power is what makes pitchers fear him so, but he always had great power. Anyone who can hit 40+ HRs is a premier power hitter and he was that long before he hit 73. Even with his supposedly steroid enhansed power however, it is not easy to hit so many homeruns. You can be as strong as can be, but you need to make perfect contact to knock it out of the park. He has done that time and time again even though he gets almost no chances. This is not just because of his selectivity. He's just on a whole nother plane of hitting than anyone else. Like I said McGwire and Sosa were nowhere near the hitters Bonds is and they probably used some kind of supplement as well (I will admit they are nicer than Bonds, well McGwire anyway). Do you think Bomds is the strongest player in the league? I certainly don't. He's hit over 40 homeruns 7 times in his career 3 of those before 1998. He's hit over 50 homeruns just once (and over 30 every year since 1992).

Also you're wrong about single hitters. Do you think with runners on base Tony Gwynn was getting good pitches to hit very frequently? I don't.

Even if Bonds used steroids, his amazing statistics have not been a mere result of that. He has elevated his entire game to a new level and for that he has my utmost respect. It's really a shame if he has used steroids just because I'd wager he wouldn't be much behind his current numbers if he hadn't.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

If Bonds has used steriods, his amazing numbers are not because of brute stregnth. It's because of his absolute knolwedge of the strike zone.

Steroids don't teach plate displine, and that is what makes him a terrifying power hitter, not his stregnth. I don't think it's a coincidence that his OBP, BA and BB/K ratio have gone up while his strikeouts have gone down over the years as he has gotten smarter and sharper with his skills over age.

Billy Beane has said that plate displine is the natural progression to power numbers and Bonds is the prime example.

[1111]

Honestly, I think your post is short-sighted. If what Bonds is doing is pure talent plus steroids, then many others would be putting up ungodly numbers as well. Yes Barry is a large man now, but the main cause of homeruns are bat speed, solid contact, and patience. Bonds has always had arguably the quickest bat in the league since he broke into the majors, he has made solid contact progressively more in his career, and he has now taken patience to a diffent plane. Steroids or not, the man has perfected his swing and his eye, the main aspects of hitting homeruns. We also know that a fair percentage of major leaguers have used steroids, but no one is even close to accomplishing what Bonds is doing. To discount his feats because of alleged steroid abuse is to miss what makes Bonds the player that he is -- perfected talent on a level we will not see again for decades, if ever.

[brassnuts]

It seems like umpires just leave up all of the calling of balls and strikes to Bonds.

[NoChance]

Another reason he was not walked as much the first half of his carreer is because of the stolen bases. That is another thing everyone seems to overlook. When he was younger and you walked him, he would just take off and steal a base on you. Now that he is older, that doesn't happen nearly as often. The stolen bases is just another one of his feats that adds to his all-around talent for the game.

[WillMagic]

Reminds me of a story about Ted Williams. This guy was pitching to Williams, and there were a couple of pitches that were close to the zone that were called balls. The pitcher said something along the lines of "Come on, blue, that was a strike!"

The umpire responded, "Mr. Williams will let you know when you've thrown a strike."

Will

[stagasaurus]

For all the times that Bonds is on base, nearly 300 already this year, he has only scored 100 times. And 35 of those runs have been on his own home runs. If the Giants had a good run-producer hitting behind Bonds, imagine how many times he'd score. (of course he wouldn't get pitched around 3 times a game either)

Sooga, if you read this, it's your old buddy Fred.

[andyfox]

Though he now runs less, he's no less efficient: Over the last six years he's stolen 61 bases and been caught only 11 times.

[sfer]

He's also the most exciting player to watch. He went like 7 for 8 against the Mets during my annual pilgrimage to Pac Bell and it was a treat. Especially when he falls behind to two strikes, visibly shortens up his swing and lines a single. Show me another power hitter with that kind of discipline.

[Sooga]

So I was looking at the top 10 in SLG in the entire major leagues today, and here's the quick and dirty list:

Beltre, LA .658
Edmonds, Stl .655
Pujols, Stl .652
Helton, Col .619
Ramirez, Bos .618
Thome, Phi .615
Rolen, Stl .608
Ortiz, Bos .605
Dunn, Cin .595

Bonds' ON BASE percentage is .606. That would rank him #9 out of the MLB's SLUGGING percentages. Incidentally he's slugging .820. He's also leading the NL in batting average by 24 points.

Let's see, crushing the major leagues in OBP and SLG, leading the NL in BA by 24 points. Leading the world in walks and frightened pitchers, and even hitting the occasional homer. I tried to rack my brain with reasons NOT to vote this guy as MVP and I seriously could not think of any. If he does not win it this year, I may seriously quit following baseball.

[DonWaade]

As much as I do not like the guy he is a fantastic player. As much as his walks may not be "good for baseball" it does his team a lot of good. I saw today that SF is 11 games below .500 in games that Bonds DOES NOT WALK. I know that is slightly jaded because there are likey so few games that he does not walk. But, Andy said it right: he may not be too fleet of foot anymore, but his baserunning saavy is still top notch. And the amount of time he gets on base via a walk is directly correlated to the Gaints winning games.