It's listed on the front page of the espn.com baseball section ( here (sports.espn.go.com)). No story with it yet.
He needs 48 to break the record, and having done that only twice in his career, I think that Aaron's record might be safe until Arod makes a run at it.
Where does Bonds rank all-time? I'd have to say the only guys in the same conversation as him are Ted Williams and Babe Ruth, but there are definately a few others that could be included in that conversation. It should be interesting to see people debate that question more thoroughly after Bonds retires, and we have a little more perspective on his career.
He's got that hand-waving deal. He can become INVISIBLE! This means MONEY, Dawg! - AWARulz on Cena.
Originally posted by BigSteveWhere does Bonds rank all-time? I'd have to say the only guys in the same conversation as him are Ted Williams and Babe Ruth, but there are definately a few others that could be included in that conversation.
When you throw in his pitching, Ruth goes into his own conversation. At that point, the conversation moves to the Williams/Mays/F.Robinson/Aaron/Gehrig/Hornsby/DiMaggio/Cobb (Cobb was a despicable human being. But, he hit over .320 every season from '05-'28)/Musial territory(#'s 2-10 in no particular order and can be argued in many directions). After that I'd thrown Bonds into the category with Tris Speaker and Jimmie Foxx, and Mantle as guys who might be able to argue their way up into the Top 10 (mainly over Hornsby), but are definitely in the Top 15. Steroid cloud plus juiced balls plus hitter friendly parks will hurt Bonds in the historical debate.
(edited by redsoxnation on 19.2.06 2118) Any complaints about the preceding post can be directed at the time traveling aliens who edited it.
Originally posted by StaggerLeeNo, but plenty of positive tests for being an ASSHOLE.
So was Cobb, but he's still considered one of the all-time greats, right?
That doesn't preclude the smart remarks, though. Bonds belongs in the HOF, no question. First ballot. Unanimous. Don't know that it will happen, but it should.
But he's still an assclown.
ESPN's SportsNation Poll right now has 76% saying they don't want him to break Aaron's record, and I was surprised at how LOW that "no" column is. It's not about steroids (cause he was a great player, if not as powerful, before he allegedly got juiced) but the fact that he's just a giant penis. A very talented, HOF-worthy penis.
If Bonds was just an asshole, I wouldn't have a problem with him breaking Aaron's record. If he was good enough to do it, more power to him. It's the steroids cloud hanging over him that makes me wish he actually does hang it up. I have to wonder if he's really serious, or if the temptation if he ends the year at 745 or something will be just too much. Then again, perhaps he actually has too much respect for the game and for Aaron to break the record knowing that he (may have) cheated.
BTW, Mays is the best five-tool ballplayer of all time, but Ruth is the 'greatest' since he could pitch, too.
"Oh, gosh, you know, I'm not much on speeches, but it's so gratifying to leave you wallowing in the mess you've made. You're screwed, thank you, bye."
A Barry Bonds press conference/interview/Q&A session ranks up there with the most entertaining moments in sport. I hope there's a few more this year before he walks away.
Ruth would be the greatest player of all time even if he had never pitched. If you're going to downgrade the modern homer totals because of the era--and I agree you should--you have to upgrade his for the same reason. There were a couple of years where he led the AL in home runs FOR A TEAM! He revolutionized the game, plain and simple.
Bonds isn't on a level with him, but I think he's a little higher than Redsoxnation gives him credit for. Behind Ruth/Mays/etc., but ahead of Hornsby, Frank Robinson, and probably a couple other guys on that list. How many of those guys were consistently pitched around for any length of time the way he was for the last few years before his injury?
Still, I hope he doesn't get Aaron's record--unless he was actually clean all this time, which seems highly unlikely. I'm with Big Bad on that.
Bonds can't play in 07 until 07. Lets wait until then to believe him. If he hits 40 home runs this year, I would bet $1000 that he would be back for 07, no matter what he says today.
There is no way that Bonds' ego will let him stop at #2 if he is that close.
Its not like the Giants would make him go to Spring Training or anything at that point, either. They will make a ton off of the eventual record if it happens, and he's going to have the business men kissing his ass trying to milk the cash cow a little more.
Originally posted by BigSteveIt's listed on the front page of the espn.com baseball section ( here (sports.espn.go.com)). No story with it yet.
He needs 48 to break the record, and having done that only twice in his career, I think that Aaron's record might be safe until Arod makes a run at it.
Where does Bonds rank all-time? I'd have to say the only guys in the same conversation as him are Ted Williams and Babe Ruth, but there are definately a few others that could be included in that conversation.
Hank Aaron has got to be there. No. 3 in hits all time, No. 1 in HR, No. 1 in RBI, .305 lifetime batting average isn't fantastic, but hey, he hit .300 or better fourteen times. Throw out his last two years and he hits .310 and still has 3,600 hits and 733 homers. My favorite all-time Hank Aaron stat: if you took away every single one of his home runs, he'd STILL have 3,000 hits.
Anyway. I'd say that Bonds, Ruth, Aaron and Williams, in no particular order, are the four greatest hitters of all time. As for Aaron's record, if Bonds doesn't get it, I don't think anybody gets it for a long, long time. Yeah, yeah, A-Rod's on pace, but I just don't see him doing it.
Originally posted by Guru ZimBonds can't play in 07 until 07. Lets wait until then to believe him.
Indeed, he's already backing off it. In the ESPN story, he says he was just talking about his state of mind, but says that if he can play in 2007, he will.
Originally posted by Guru ZimYou could actually argue that racism inflated the output of all pre-integration whites by excluding some of the best players.
And you could actually argue that numerous rounds of expansion inflated the output of players post-1961, post-1969, post-1977, post-1993 and post-1998 because of the addition of pitchers who would not have been in the majors as the sport went from 16 to 30 teams. Now, if you want to strengthen the argument for the Frank Robinson/Hank Aaron/Willie Mays grouping as compared to Bonds or any post-1970 hitter, the fact that the mounds were of a greater height in the 1960's through 1968 diminished their numbers and caused the game to tilt dramatically towards pitching. Put Drysdale, Marichal, Koufax, Gibson (little known fact: Tim McCarver used to catch Gibson. Tim's too modest to acknowledge it though.) etc. on a 10" instead of 17" mound, and their dominance would have been lessened, thus leveling the field for hitters. Then, from the rabbit ball of '87, the smaller ballparks, the wearing of body armor by hitters, and the use of better hitting through chemistry the game tilted dramatically towards hitters.
(edited by redsoxnation on 20.2.06 2249) Any complaints about the preceding post can be directed at the time traveling aliens who edited it.
Originally posted by Guru ZimYou could actually argue that racism inflated the output of all pre-integration whites by excluding some of the best players.
Agreed. My point was that Cobb being a racist didn't make him hit the ball more often and farther, but Bonds steroid use most likely did.
How about them Cubs, eh? Best pitcher in Prior I've seen for a while, Kerry Woods, Sosa, Choi. 1st in strikeouts, 2nd in ERA. I'm looking to ride this success for a while, at least until the late season collapse. A Cubs fan, cynical? For shame.
Thread rated: 5.99
#
#
