I feel bad for Barry Bonds - Page 5

ThaSaltCracka · #41 03-23-2005, 12:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
You can't compare numbers in the 90s with numbers in other eras. You seem to know baseball. You should know that.

[/ QUOTE ] He didn't until the very end, your argument (while valid and correct) does not apply here to Jack's argument.

[ QUOTE ]
Off the top of my head, for starters. As of '99, Bonds didn't rank ahead of a single one of them. And I'm sure I am not the only one that thinks so.

[/ QUOTE ] sure you aren't the only one, but what does that prove? Nothing.

#42 03-23-2005, 12:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
trying to convince someone whom hates Barry with all their heart that he is one of the best baseball players ever(even "pre-steroid") is a lesson in futility.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you know I "hate" Barry Bonds "with all my heart"? Have we met? Talked about Bonds? I don't like his attitude, for sure. But I don't "hate" him. I don't even know him.

Anyway, what one thinks of him as a person should not have any effect on how a reasonable person should discuss or evaluate his talent. One thing has nothing to do with another. I like to think that, at certain rare instances, I am a reasonable person.

Criticize the argument. That's fair. Don't criticize me. You've got no reason to do so. It's fun to talk baseball, especially in March. Let's keep it fun.

ThaSaltCracka · #43 03-23-2005, 12:50 AM

my comment was more general in nature.

It has been my experience though that people will either hate Bonds(and not give him his props) or like him and give him his props.

The same thing happens with Shaq too.

#44 03-23-2005, 12:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can't compare numbers in the 90s with numbers in other eras. You seem to know baseball. You should know that.

[/ QUOTE ]
He showed how Barry dominated the league for the 90s, not how his raw numbers compared to those of past eras. Statistics as they compare to one's peers is a pretty powerful gauge of one's dominance.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. The OPS stat was used by the poster both to show that Bonds dominated the league and how he ranked all time. Any stat that includes slugging percentage will favor hitters in the '90s.

2. What are we arguing about? That Bonds didn't dominate in the '90s? I agree. He did dominate. He was the best player of the decade. He was as of 1998. He was a great player as of 1998.

The original post said he was a top-10 all-time as of 1998. That's a different matter. Reasonable people certainly can disagree about this one. I think that folks who think Bonds was top-10 as of '98 undervalue the careers of those who played earlier in the 20th century.

#45 03-23-2005, 01:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
my comment was more general in nature.

It has been my experience though that people will either hate Bonds(and not give him his props) or like him and give him his props.

The same thing happens with Shaq too.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean about Bonds not getting his "props"? I don't hear people saying that Bonds is not a great player. Do you? Anyone who says that he's not an all-time great -- maybe the best of all time -- doesn't know what he's talking about. But it appears that he also is a cheater. That damages his legacy, and criticizing him for taking steroids is, in my opinion, legitimate.

Soul Daddy · #46 03-23-2005, 01:08 AM

[ QUOTE ]
1. The OPS stat was used by the poster both to show that Bonds dominated the league and how he ranked all time. Any stat that includes slugging percentage will favor hitters in the '90s.

2. What are we arguing about? That Bonds didn't dominate in the '90s? I agree. He did dominate. He was the best player of the decade. He was as of 1998. He was a great player as of 1998.

The original post said he was a top-10 all-time as of 1998. That's a different matter. Reasonable people certainly can disagree about this one. I think that folks who think Bonds was top-10 as of '98 undervalue the careers of those who played earlier in the 20th century.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) How a player compares to the rest of the league favors no era. It's why OPS+ was also given.
2) No. No reasonable person would argue that. I'm simply stating that this is all that Jack's post illustrated.

The next step is to find the other candidates for this mythical top 10 and find their stats relative to the rest of the league. You may be right about undervaluing players of past eras. Statistics can actually provide the answers if one were to dig deep enough.

ThaSaltCracka · #47 03-23-2005, 01:11 AM

no, people do. They say he is nothing but a steroid ingesting freak and thats why he is good. You need to understand how stupid your everyday hater is.

Jack of Arcades · #48 03-23-2005, 01:16 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Ruth
Gehrig
Mays
Mantle
Musial
Ted Williams
Honus Wagner
Rogers Hornsby
Cobb
DiMaggio

Off the top of my head, for starters. As of '99, Bonds didn't rank ahead of a single one of them. And I'm sure I am not the only one that thinks so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Take a look at your list - the latest anyone on your list played was 1973. Why's this? Well, in a smaller league, with a smaller talent pool, it's much easier to dominate. Factor in modern medicine which allows the careers of useful players to continue on despite what used to be career ending injuries, and there's an environment in which it's MUCH harder to dominate.

Do you honestly think every single one of the top ten position players of all time started their careers over 50 years ago?

billyjex · #49 03-23-2005, 02:42 AM

Do you guys think that taking steroids makes you that great of a player? It makes you stronger, so you hit farther.

It doesn't make his eye/hand coordination great, his pitch reading ability great, his bat speed great.

sublime · #50 03-23-2005, 02:50 AM

trying to convince someone whom hates Barry with all their heart that he is one of the best baseball players ever(even "pre-steroid") is a lesson in futility.

i cant stand him (hate is a strong word for somebody i have never met) but have to admit he was a phenominal baseball player pretty much his whole career.