[Sladeophile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gshan Eh...in the past few seasons Bonds has had like 40% less at bats than say, an Albert Pujols yet he can still hit 40 of em. I don't think that's underperforming, and I'm not sure if anyone else will ever be able to hit like that.

What has he done for his team?

 

[incognitoedleon]

As of now:

.262 AVG
5 HR
.510 OBP
.569 SLG

If you know how crappy the Giants offense is right now, he's very important.

 

[Sladeophile]

how about as of the last 5 years?

 

[Sladeophile]

Oh and yeah, what did that one guy, um, oh yeah RUTH ever do for his team???

 

[incognitoedleon]

.... You're not making any sense.

 

[Sladeophile]

Sure I am. A great player is able to carry his team to greatness, so explain to me what makes BB a great player in terms of team success. Aren't they in last place right now? When was the last time his team won the world series? Compare these answers to when you ask the same questions of Ruth. I am simply saying that Ruth was a much better asset to his team than Bonds has been and will ever be.

 

[Homeless]

I never claimed to be an expert on baseball, I haven't been able to watch a full game since the Blue Jays won the World Series...anyway...I don't really think one player can carry a team on his back like other team sports. Basketball is possible, but even then, most of the dominant players had a sidekick/right hand man. In hockey, one player can swing a game in their teams direction, but hardly over the course of the whole season. It seems like a truly great player makes his team mates better players, and I can't see that in baseball.

 

[felixkrull6]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Homeless I never claimed to be an expert on baseball, I haven't been able to watch a full game since the Blue Jays won the World Series...anyway...I don't really think one player can carry a team on his back like other team sports. Basketball is possible, but even then, most of the dominant players had a sidekick/right hand man. In hockey, one player can swing a game in their teams direction, but hardly over the course of the whole season. It seems like a truly great player makes his team mates better players, and I can't see that in baseball.

You're absolutely right on this one. I think Ruth had some guy named Gehrig behind him.

Ted Williams went to exactly one World Series in his lifetime and he stunk it up during it for good measure but no one would ever question his greatness. Steve Carlton won 27 games in 1972 along with the Cy Young in the NL but according to Sladeophile he would not have been considered great because he couldn't carry his team to more than 68 wins.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sladeophile Sure I am. A great player is able to carry his team to greatness, so explain to me what makes BB a great player in terms of team success. Aren't they in last place right now? When was the last time his team won the world series? Compare these answers to when you ask the same questions of Ruth. I am simply saying that Ruth was a much better asset to his team than Bonds has been and will ever be.

Baseball is a team sport but it is also the sport where a particular player's abilities are the most easily identifiable. Sabermetrics are popular for a reason. To answer your question as to what makes a great baseball player, great individual accomplishment irrespective of what the team does. A great batter gets to bat once every nine times, fields one of nine positions, and these days does not pitch. Therefore, how much of an effect can he really have? Obviously he has some sort of effect but probably not enough to offset a lousy team. As to the effects of leadership, nebulous and unprovable but do you think that if Bonds was a nicer guy and gave his teammates more support they would hit, field, and pitch better?

As to the relative worth of Ruth vs Bonds, this is debatable based on the numbers with Ruth usually still coming out on top, but it's unfair to say that Ruth is more valuable simply because his teams won more. The 1927 Yankees had Murderer's Row not just one murderer. Ruth had many HOF teammates; name one of Bond's teammates that you think is a HOFer?

 

[EyeAmEye]

Wasn't Ruth a part of the Yankee lineup dubbed "Murderer's Row"? That would seem to indicate that there was alot more than the Babe to worry about. No single ballplayer can carry a team, it's impossible. Barry Bonds may be a selfish a-hole, but no matter how many balls he hits in the bay, it can't carry a team throughout an entire season.

edit- missed felixkrull6's post. Murderer's Row it is!

 

[incognitoedleon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sladeophile Sure I am. A great player is able to carry his team to greatness, so explain to me what makes BB a great player in terms of team success. Aren't they in last place right now? When was the last time his team won the world series? Compare these answers to when you ask the same questions of Ruth. I am simply saying that Ruth was a much better asset to his team than Bonds has been and will ever be.

Hmm, my reply to this last night seems to have disappeared. But anyway, Bonds did not have good hitters surrounding him through this run. That's why he gets walked around 200 times a season - no teams fear whoever's backing him up. Jeff Kent is a pretty good hitter, but teams were not exactly shaking in his cleats when he came up to the plate. The only time where he had good hitters surrounding him was 2000, but the pitching was spotty. Unlike other sports, baseball is a much more contained sport than the rest. One great hitter cannot make the others hitters look better, and obviously cannot make pitchers better.

 

[mr_baseball_08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by felixkrull6 Ruth had many HOF teammates; name one of Bond's teammates that you think is a HOFer?

Jeff Kent. Not one of his teammates now, but was for many years.

While I'll agree that it's near impossible for one person to carry a team on his back, I'll also say I don't believe Bonds has been a "team player" since his late 80's and early 90's days. And since that's what the whole game of baseball is based around, it's one of the biggest reasons I don't like him. He doesn't like the media, and I don't believe he cares for his fans much either. I think he cares about himself and his home run record and that's about it. However, I don't think he was always like this. In his early days, he stole as many bases as he hit homeruns and I think that had a lot to do with his father raising him as a complete player, not a guy who swings for the fences every at bat. I guess somewhere down the road something went to his head (perhaps the death of his father?) and he stopped caring about the actual game, and started caring more about his own image, money, fame, etc..

 

[Homeless]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr_baseball_08 In his early days, he stole as many bases as he hit homeruns

I'd don't know the stats but I'm guessing he doesn't steal bases anymore. Looking at him it's hard to imagine a lot of hustle coming from his, shall we say "burly" physique...lol

 

[mr_baseball_08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Homeless I'd don't know the stats but I'm guessing he doesn't steal bases anymore. Looking at him it's hard to imagine a lot of hustle coming from his, shall we say "burly" physique...lol

Yeah, thats why I said his early days. If I'm not mistaken he had 2 or 3 30/30 seasons and maybe a 40/40 season once. IMO he used to be a great all around player. Decent power, the ability to steal bases, good at getting on base and making things happen. His presence in the outfield has never been anything to brag about, though.

Edit: Only 3 out of his first 14 seasons resulted in more than 40 home runs. From 2000 on, he's hit 45 or more home runs every season. Yeah, I guess he just "beefed" up in the off season..

On the flip side, he hasn't stole more than 13 bases since 2000.

For the Ruth argument I think it's interesting to note he hit more than 35 home runs for almost 14 consecutive seasons, and 12 of those 14 seasons he had 100+ BB's (One season he only played 98 games.) He also had a lifetime ERA of about 2.30. Not bad at all.

Link to his stats.

 

[incognitoedleon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr_baseball_08 His presence in the outfield has never been anything to brag about, though.

He has won several Gold Gloves. Since he has always had a weak throwing arm he may not be a great all around outfielder. However, I don't think he wasn't ever mediocre defensively (except this season).

EDIT: I know we're veering off into a lot of directions, but why didn't Ruth still start and play the rest of the games when he was not in the OF? Back then, they didn't believe in rest as much as they do now.

 

[Tuberoller]

Call me the "tater" of the bunch but has anyone actually Proven that Bonds used or is using steroids?

I've seen all the proof I need that he's a jerk but none that would ever,in a million years,convince me(or a jury) that he is a user. Show me the results of a drug test or perhaps something in the ways of sworn testimony(from a credible witness) implicating Bonds. Does'nt this whole issue belong in the courts? If Bonds really is a user,he's a criminal and not just a cheat. If the further charge of his involvement as a sort of "medium" between players and the drug maker and sellers is true,he should be prosecuted as a major dealer and not just a casual user.

I'm all for throwing the big book at this jerk if it can be proven he used steroids,until that time,I think we all need to take a step back.