Is There a Bigger Jackass Than Barry Bonds? - Page 11

Jack of Arcades · #**101** 02-23-2005, 04:30 PM

He said he doesn't see how Steroids would physically help someone hit the ball. IE, hand-eye coordination.

If you look at the statistics, Barry's HR numbers are pretty-consistent 1996-on, with a slight jump in 2000, a spike in 2001, and then his HRs return to 2000 levels.

Bonds's HR increase comes at the same time as his walk increase.

"Well, duh, Jack. No one's pitching to him."

Well, not exactly. Bonds has amazing eyesight and pitch recognition, as well as a very short and compact swing that allow him a slightly longer window than most to decide where the pitch will end up. If it's to his liking, he can unleash hell on a baseball.

Maybe steroids help shorten his swing. I dunno. It wouldn't surprise me. But you misquoted him, he mentioned hand-eye coordination - the actual physical act of coming into contact with the baseball. Bonds has an amazing ability to do that - along with Gary Sheffield and Albert Pujols - because he strikes out rarely.

Whatever. Bonds is an amazing player, just look at his 1992 season. Better than Albert's ever done, that's for sure.

Bulldog · #**102** 02-23-2005, 04:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Is there a better baseball player than Barry Bonds?".....

[/ QUOTE ]
which barry, juice or no juice?

[/ QUOTE ]

Other than Babe Ruth, I think the answer is "no" either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because the Babe could pitch, too, I'd say he is the best baseball PLAYER ever. Barry is the best HITTER ever. Of course, the Babe only competed against whites, so we'll never really know, huh?

[/ QUOTE ]
and of course theres been so many great black pitchers during bonds' career

[/ QUOTE ]

There have been many, many great non-white pitchers in Bonds's career.

[/ QUOTE ]
ok, ill open myself up here, name 5 GREAT non white pitchers in the nl during his career

[/ QUOTE ]

I will. But first let us also consider that the entire pool of players from which to select the top 700 or so is far larger, even proportionally, than the pool of players that Ruth's 250 peers were selected from. So aside from the pitchers, there are tall first basemen, speedy middle infielders, and extra-base hit-robbing outfielders that Ruth didn't have to contend with. And Ruth only had to learn how to hit against what, 40-60 pitchers a year instead of 200+ that Barry might face.

Having said that, here is the requested list:

Pedro Martinez
Dwight Gooden
Fernando Valenzuela
Lee Smith
Dennis Martinez

I'll concede that it's not the most impressive list, but let's put it up against the five best non-white pictures from the American League, 1914-1935...

[/ QUOTE ]
doesnt matter, the point is that bonds isnt facing anything scary just because non whites are allowed to play
lee smith? dennis martinez? cmon

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't dismiss Lee Smith.

But besides that, it's unfair to only list the BEST non-white pitchers Bonds has faced. For EVERY non-white pitcher in the league, if non-whites were banned, there would be a white pitcher of lesser talent in his place. It's not that the best pitchers faced were better or worse. It's that, ON THE WHOLE, Bonds faced better pitchers than Ruth.

coltrane · #**103** 02-23-2005, 04:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]

This is a key point. Baseball is an entertainment medium. Nothing more, nothing less. Barry Bonds, or any professional athlete, does not owe us anything. He doesn't need to answer our questions about any part of his life. He has no obligation to be nice to you at the ball park(even though he most certainly is). He has no obligation to "be nice to the media," which, unlike the fans, is not even a customer of his organization. He is an entertainer. If he doesn't entertain you, then don't pay attention to him. I love sports, and follow them as or more closely than probably 99% of the world - but I find people's need to insert themselves into the personal lives of professional entertainers laughable at best.
-James

[/ QUOTE ]

yup.....and it is that exact reason that I don't have a problem with steriods.....I want to see the highest quality entertainment - the most competitive possible baseball....and if athletes are willing to incur health risks (which most do anyway - with or without just "steriods") to rise to a higher level of competition , it's fine with me....it leads to higher level of play and, hey, it's not my body.....just like it's not my 7-figure paycheck that gets deposited every month.....

mostsmooth · #**104** 02-23-2005, 05:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
A few things.

1) Dennis Martinez and Lee Smith were both very good, near hall of famers.
2) It's not just Barry Bonds facing non-white pitchers. It's Bonds facing non-white defenders (quick, name some of the best defenders of all time. Ozzie Smith. Pudge Rodriguez. Willie Mays) and, by comparison, non-white hitters. How much more impressive would Bonds's accomplishments be without guys like Mays and Aaron before him, and guys like Pujols and Beltre in his own league? It's much easier to dominate a league that isn't drawing from its whole talent pool.

[/ QUOTE ]
i can argue just as easily that although there are obviously some talented non white players, there is also an overabundance of below average players in general who wouldnt be in the league if there were 16 teams instead of 30. this dilluted talent pool allows bonds to accel.
how impressive would bonds' numbers be if he didnt do juice? very. but he wouldnt have approached mays, ruth, and aarons hr totals, thats pretty obvious.

Jack of Arcades · #**105** 02-23-2005, 05:33 PM

Obvious is the most overused and annoying word in the English language. People like you should not be allowed to use it.

You can try to argue that the talent pool is diluted, but you'll fail.

Ricky Slade · #**106** 02-23-2005, 06:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Obvious is the most overused and annoying word in the English language.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. One word people should use more often... strategury.

mostsmooth · #**107** 02-23-2005, 06:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Obvious is the most overused and annoying word in the English language. People like you should not be allowed to use it.

You can try to argue that the talent pool is diluted, but you'll fail.

[/ QUOTE ]
hey dont tell my po i used obvious, ok? it was one of the conditions. thanks

jesusarenque · #**108** 02-23-2005, 06:17 PM

<blockquote>En respuesta a:<hr />
<blockquote>En respuesta a:<hr />
A few things.

1) Dennis Martinez and Lee Smith were both very good, near hall of famers.
2) It's not just Barry Bonds facing non-white pitchers. It's Bonds facing non-white defenders (quick, name some of the best defenders of all time. Ozzie Smith. Pudge Rodriguez. Willie Mays) and, by comparison, non-white hitters. How much more impressive would Bonds's accomplishments be without guys like Mays and Aaron before him, and guys like Pujols and Beltre in his own league? It's much easier to dominate a league that isn't drawing from its whole talent pool.

[/ QUOTE ]
i can argue just as easily that although there are obviously some talented non white players, there is also an overabundance of below average players in general who wouldnt be in the league if there were 16 teams instead of 30. this dilluted talent pool allows bonds to accel.
how impressive would bonds' numbers be if he didnt do juice? very. but he wouldnt have approached mays, ruth, and aarons hr totals, thats pretty obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Diluted talent pool? You have to be kidding. There are 6 billion people on the planet. I think we can find 700 MLB ballplayers out of that pool.

Bulldog · #**109** 02-23-2005, 06:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A few things.

1) Dennis Martinez and Lee Smith were both very good, near hall of famers.
2) It's not just Barry Bonds facing non-white pitchers. It's Bonds facing non-white defenders (quick, name some of the best defenders of all time. Ozzie Smith. Pudge Rodriguez. Willie Mays) and, by comparison, non-white hitters. How much more impressive would Bonds's accomplishments be without guys like Mays and Aaron before him, and guys like Pujols and Beltre in his own league? It's much easier to dominate a league that isn't drawing from its whole talent pool.

[/ QUOTE ]
i can argue just as easily that although there are obviously some talented non white players, there is also an overabundance of below average players in general who wouldnt be in the league if there were 16 teams instead of 30. this dilluted talent pool allows bonds to accel.
how impressive would bonds' numbers be if he didnt do juice? very. but he wouldnt have approached mays, ruth, and aarons hr totals, thats pretty obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Diluted talent pool? You have to be kidding. There are 6 billion people on the planet. I think we can find 700 MLB ballplayers out of that pool.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Versus 400 out of less than a billion then.

jesusarenque · #**110** 02-23-2005, 06:36 PM

<blockquote>En respuesta a:<hr />
<blockquote>En respuesta a:<hr />
<blockquote>En respuesta a:<hr />
<blockquote>En respuesta a:<hr />
A few things.

1) Dennis Martinez and Lee Smith were both very good, near hall of famers.
2) It's not just Barry Bonds facing non-white pitchers. It's Bonds facing non-white defenders (quick, name some of the best defenders of all time. Ozzie Smith. Pudge Rodriguez. Willie Mays) and, by comparison, non-white hitters. How much more impressive would Bonds's accomplishments be without guys like Mays and Aaron before him, and guys like Pujols and Beltre in his own league? It's much easier to dominate a league that isn't drawing from its whole talent pool.

[/ QUOTE ]
i can argue just as easily that although there are obviously some talented non white players, there is also an overabundance of below average players in general who wouldnt be in the league if there were 16 teams instead of 30. this dilluted talent pool allows bonds to accel.
how impressive would bonds' numbers be if he didnt do juice? very. but he wouldnt have approached mays, ruth, and aarons hr totals, thats pretty obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]

Diluted talent pool? You have to be kidding. There are 6 billion people on the planet. I think we can find 700 MLB ballplayers out of that pool.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Versus 400 out of less than a billion then.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true. Unlike today, many players back then were exluded from playing. Also, today baseball is played in parts of the world where it was never played back then. The pool of players was much, much smaller then.