Bonds
- Thread starter Ranger68
- Start date
Well, the baseball writers who vote on these awards are at least thinking a bit more about who to vote for, after 2 guys got kicked off the voting list last year when they did not list Carlos Delgado ANYWHERE on their MVP ballot (I think they get to list their top 10 choices)....so at least now they know if they vote stupidly they could get bumped off....
I still don't have to root for him.
No, he didn't deserve it. He just played better than everyone else. Jordan got in his teammates face if they didn't play well. He had an expectation of them and himself. It forced everyone to play harder. Bonds is disintersted in his teammates, the media, the fans, pretty much everything but himself. He'll never win a ring. He is a clubhouse cancer and a liar.ebonymale said:
I disagree that Bonds didn't make everyone around him better. He didn't get in his teammates' faces but those in the lineup got better numbers because he was there. While he wasn't much inspiration, the gave he others around him in the batting order better pitches to hit.
Bonds presence affects the guy in front of him primarily, the guy behind him less so. The 7 or 6 hitterwould get the same pitches anywhere. He's a freak. His numbers shouldn't be possible considering no one pitches to him. The best hitter of my lifetime, and I saw Yastrzemski, Aaron and Mays.
Those comments were mostly directed towards Bush League, whose obvious dislike for Bonds has blinded him to the painfully obvious fact of Bonds' greatness.
However, the effect of adding or subtracting a player from the batting order *on other players in the order* is vanishingly small. You can check the stats, if you'd like, but many already have. There is NO effect.
However, the effect of adding or subtracting a player from the batting order *on other players in the order* is vanishingly small. You can check the stats, if you'd like, but many already have. There is NO effect.
I didn't say he wasn't the best player, please read first. I said he is a prick and I'd much rather spend dollars watching someone else. Also, if you have a superstar player on your team that everyone dispises or can't relate to, it makes winning very difficult. I've lived this in college. Why is it that every team that A-Rod has left has played better after he is gone? I used Jordan as maybe a bad example in this case, but clearly with winners like the Patriots and the Pistons and conversely the Yankees, chemistry can be very critical towards winning. I believe Bonds disrupts chemistry. They day he wins a ring, I'll happily eat my words, but I'd bet he won't.
I did read. You said "he didn't deserve it", then quoted me crap about how MJ raised the level of play of others around him. If Bonds had the players around him that MJ did, he'd have won a bunch of titles, too.
Nonsense.
Bonds deserves the MVP award because he's easily the best player in baseball now. It's no contest.
A-Rod doesn't play for Seattle anymore, and they suck.
Try again.
To quote Bill James, it's a bullshit dump.
Nonsense.
Bonds deserves the MVP award because he's easily the best player in baseball now. It's no contest.
A-Rod doesn't play for Seattle anymore, and they suck.
Try again.
To quote Bill James, it's a bullshit dump.
Settle down beavis, don't get your panties in a bunch. We just having a friendly bar room discussion here. I admitted he played better than any other players. But he doesn't "deserve" anything based on his actions away from the plate. The statement was how can anyone vote against him. I think it boils down to the old arguement of the defination of MVP. Is he the best/most dominant player, yes. Is he the most valuable member/component to that teams success. There may be some others that have to be considered as well.
As I recall Seattle had a pretty good run after A-Rod left and Texas had a much improved season this year. Oh, and your absolutely right, Bonilla, Bonds, and VanSlyke, that was a crappy outfield. Drabek, Bell, Heaton, Reuschel, Kent, Will Clark, Matt Williams, Burkett, Nen, Beck, Snow, Shmidt, those guys all sucked.
I think he's had as much help as anyone else. Excuse me for not kneeling at the alter of Barry Bonds. I simply don't believe him about steriod use which is cheating. And I don't belive cheaters "deserve" to win anything. This is a guy who couldn't throw out Sid freaking Breem from deep third, now he hits 500 foot bombs?
As I recall Seattle had a pretty good run after A-Rod left and Texas had a much improved season this year. Oh, and your absolutely right, Bonilla, Bonds, and VanSlyke, that was a crappy outfield. Drabek, Bell, Heaton, Reuschel, Kent, Will Clark, Matt Williams, Burkett, Nen, Beck, Snow, Shmidt, those guys all sucked.
I think he's had as much help as anyone else. Excuse me for not kneeling at the alter of Barry Bonds. I simply don't believe him about steriod use which is cheating. And I don't belive cheaters "deserve" to win anything. This is a guy who couldn't throw out Sid freaking Breem from deep third, now he hits 500 foot bombs?
I'm just sick of the whole "this guy's a team player and that guy's a clutch player and that guy, no matter that he's the best hitter in history, won't ever win because his character is flawed".
It's all a big bullshit dump.
Any team that gets A-Rod will be better for having A-Rod, all other factors being equal. Period. To say otherwise is not to understand how baseball is won and lost - because the things that players do like hit singles and go first to third and strikeout and make leaping catches at the wall, all of these things lead to runs scored and prevented in very predictable ways, which leads to wins and losses in very predictable ways.
Now, note that I said "all other factors being equal". Of course, that's hard to ensure. A team signing A-Rod has committed a big chunk of its salary to him, leaving less for everyone else. They may have traded for him, and the team is just moving one way or another from season to season anyway.
Your arguments about the players around Bonds are very weak. How good were any of the teams Bonds played on? How often did they make the playoffs, or not make them? If you're going to propose that Bonds has hurt his teams, you're going to have to study the issue, rather than just make a gut call and spout some teammates' names at me.
Because, otherwise, it's a bullshit dump. It's a way of correlating what you see with your beliefs, without any evidence to support one side or the other. This position can neither be attacked, nor defended. "Barry Bonds is a total ass, and his team has never done much in the playoffs, despite the fact that I think they've had some decent players, so it must be the case that his being a jerk-off has hurt his team." It's a very satisfying conclusion. And it's a bullshit dump.
I'll say it one more time so you get it - all other factors being equal, a team that adds Barry Bonds (or Alex Rodriguez, for that matter) is going to be much better off for it. There isn't a player they could add that would help more than Barry Bonds. If that doesn't make him the MVP, I don't know what would.
If you don't like the guy, just say so, and we'll move on. But, to argue that he's not as great as he is, well, it's becoming a more foolish opinion as time goes on.
Just don't get your panties in a knot over it.
It's all a big bullshit dump.
Any team that gets A-Rod will be better for having A-Rod, all other factors being equal. Period. To say otherwise is not to understand how baseball is won and lost - because the things that players do like hit singles and go first to third and strikeout and make leaping catches at the wall, all of these things lead to runs scored and prevented in very predictable ways, which leads to wins and losses in very predictable ways.
Now, note that I said "all other factors being equal". Of course, that's hard to ensure. A team signing A-Rod has committed a big chunk of its salary to him, leaving less for everyone else. They may have traded for him, and the team is just moving one way or another from season to season anyway.
Your arguments about the players around Bonds are very weak. How good were any of the teams Bonds played on? How often did they make the playoffs, or not make them? If you're going to propose that Bonds has hurt his teams, you're going to have to study the issue, rather than just make a gut call and spout some teammates' names at me.
Because, otherwise, it's a bullshit dump. It's a way of correlating what you see with your beliefs, without any evidence to support one side or the other. This position can neither be attacked, nor defended. "Barry Bonds is a total ass, and his team has never done much in the playoffs, despite the fact that I think they've had some decent players, so it must be the case that his being a jerk-off has hurt his team." It's a very satisfying conclusion. And it's a bullshit dump.
I'll say it one more time so you get it - all other factors being equal, a team that adds Barry Bonds (or Alex Rodriguez, for that matter) is going to be much better off for it. There isn't a player they could add that would help more than Barry Bonds. If that doesn't make him the MVP, I don't know what would.
If you don't like the guy, just say so, and we'll move on. But, to argue that he's not as great as he is, well, it's becoming a more foolish opinion as time goes on.
Just don't get your panties in a knot over it.
Barry Bonds outplayed everybody in MLB, but he ever win because he is not the best TEAM player. to be the best player you have to be the best TEAM player, because it is a TEAM game.
Texas was better without A-Rod.
Yankees was not better with A-Rod.
Btw, character is part of the TEAM game, therfore all other factors cannot be equal.
Texas was better without A-Rod.
Yankees was not better with A-Rod.
Btw, character is part of the TEAM game, therfore all other factors cannot be equal.
