Bonds vs. Woods

[Dead]

[ QUOTE ]
"So you never talk about Mays, Dimmaggio, Mantle, Gehrig, Foxx, Shoeless Joe, Tris Speaker, Honus Wagner, Rogers Hornsby, Joe Morgan, Eddie Collins, Willie McCovey, Mike Piazza , Alex Rodriguez..."

How the hell did he get on this list?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe because he's the best hitting catcher ever?

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"So you never talk about Mays, Dimmaggio, Mantle, Gehrig, Foxx, Shoeless Joe, Tris Speaker, Honus Wagner, Rogers Hornsby, Joe Morgan, Eddie Collins, Willie McCovey, Mike Piazza , Alex Rodriguez..."

How the hell did he get on this list?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe because he's the best hitting catcher ever?

[/ QUOTE ]

so what? the reason he is "the best hitting catcher ever" is because the other duties of catching are far far more important than hitting. A good catcher who can also hit is a bonus.

[SGS]

Yea lets talk about the guy that did steroids. NO!

SGS

[TheBong]

[ QUOTE ]
I do not think Bonds will break Hank Aaron's homerun record and may not even pass Babe Ruth. You don't have many conversations about the #3 homerun hitter of all time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, he's just getting healthy. Everyone tends to forget he's still playing left field when most players of his caliber have gravitated to the American League to DH.

And screw the steroid debate too, there's far more pitchers than hitters on steroids, and lots of people are on them. Still gotta hit it, catch it, and throw it.

But - it's going to be Eldrick Woods first, although Barry will get his share, along with many other great athletes.

However, I'd rather tell my kids about players like Michael Jordan, Wayne Gretzky, John Elway and Jerry Rice before either of them. Strictly because they've already reached their highest plateau's. Bonds and Woods aren't there yet.

[TheBong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Cy Young, Nolan Ryan would be the most likely topics of converasation excluding currents events which would then include johnson, martinez etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Roger Clemens is better than Ryan, Johnson, and Martinez.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clemens is the best pitcher of the modern era. (For those who don't know an insane amount about the game, this was pretty much when teams had like 2 pitchers. Example: Cy Young has over 500 wins, Clemens has slightly over 300 in a longer career.)

Maddux is great, Pedro won't have the longevity, and Johnson bloomed too late. Nolan Ryan was my idol in my formative years, and now Clemens is definitely knocking him off that pedestal. Sure, he'll never match the K's or the no-hitters, but he'll have him in ERA, Wins, and Cy Youngs in a WALK. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Who is going to be very interesting to watch will be Mark Prior, and Oakland's former Big 3 in Zito, Mulder and Hudson to see if there's any 300 winners in there. If not, with the way the game is evolving we MAY have seen our final one.

[TheBong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Cy Young, Nolan Ryan would be the most likely topics of converasation excluding currents events which would then include johnson, martinez etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Roger Clemens is better than Ryan, Johnson, and Martinez.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said he wasn't. Ryan however is the all time strike outs leader, a record I saw broken, and something I am more likely to discuss 35 years from now then Roger Clemens, who like Bonds will be another "one of the greatest" players, yet not the all time leader at something.

I think you can make the case that Mays was a superior player to Aarron yet I think Aarron is discussed more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly, other than perhaps Jackie Robinson for being the first black player in the majors - you will never ever hear more about any single ballplayer than Willie Mays.

Do it, go up to anyone that's 55-60 and ask them who the best player of all time was, odds on they say Willie Mays.

[bisonbison]

so what? the reason he is "the best hitting catcher ever" is because the other duties of catching are far far more important than hitting. A good catcher who can also hit is a bonus.

No.

[Jack of Arcades]

I don't know, I listed a bunch of people that were the best or near it at their position. Okay, let's add Johnny Bench and Carlton Fisk to the list.

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
so what? the reason he is "the best hitting catcher ever" is because the other duties of catching are far far more important than hitting. A good catcher who can also hit is a bonus.

No.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, what he said.

Baseball people do irrational things and then come up with a bunch of different theories as to why they do them. See also: left handed catchers.

The fact of the matter is, all the shifting of below-average defensively catchers to other position (Matt LeCroy, Craig Wilson, Ben Petrick) has caused a dearth of bad hitting at catcher, to the point that the negative defensive value of Mike Piazza can in no way outnumber the value he brings to the table with his bat. In fact, you take someone with a league average bat, stick him behind the plate... if he catches a ball or two, he's probably an above-average catcher.

Well, that's exagerrating it a bit.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
I voted for Tiger.

The bottom line is, while Bonds will end up with great "counting" stats, few of those were really that memorable. I can remember his mammoth HR he hit off of Percival in the WS, but what else stands out?

Tiger on the other hand, has the advantage that golf provides a ton of easily memorable moments. The lore surrounding things like Watson's chip in on 17, etc, are easy to re-tell compared to a HR that someone hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

tolbiny covered this, but...

I think Kirk Gibson's WS HR with the Dodgers is more of a "moment" than any golf shot ever was. His '84 HR with the Tigers in game 5 is probably #2.

~D