JoeyB

Current stats are inflated and pitching is diluted with expansion. I'll even accept the argument about smaller stadiums and juiced balls.

Barry Bonds has just become the 4th player to hit 650 homeruns.

Out of the thousands of players to have played the game, 4 have hit that many. I don't care if the ball's juiced, if he's juiced, if he bites the heads off of chickens in the on-deck circle, it's still an amazing accomplishment.

He had to stay healthy, connect more than 600 times and work around constant intentional walks.

I respect the history of the game and an educated fan can certainly take into account changes in the way the game is played. Anyone who loses sight of this accomplishment is either narrow-minded, or longs for the days when they didn't wear helmets.

__________________
My mom is a Diamondbacks fan. She really likes the Big Unit

sportsrule101

the fact that their numbers are even close shows how amazing Ruth was, with balls being deader, and stadiums being bigger, mounds being higher. Try looking up the closet compeiter during each lifetime. You will find that Ruth was heads and shoulders above all. Bonds is Arod on a better team.
Bonds = postseason washout

__________________
winning isn't everything but
losing isn't anything

Konichiwaneko

I would argue with Sports, but then I realize he's a baltimore fan....

__________________

grayman

Last year's postseason Barry Bonds:
.356 avg. 8 hr's 16 rbi's

Yes, definitely a postseason washout.

__________________
That's right - I'm a guy in a suit eating a Blizzard. F U.

Andrew

Guys, you're forgetting one thing in the Ruth/Bonds debate.

Ruth complied all his stats against all white players.

Bonds has done it against white, black, and international stars.

Tex

I think if he truly wants to, he can do it. With today's medicine and training, I think he could easily stay in shape for a few more years to make a run at the record. Unfortunately, as stated in a previous posts, he doesn't really care too much for the Aaron record, but more for the Ruth record.

Looking way into the future, I think at the pace Pujols is at now, he can probably come close. Of course, a few seasons of greatness doesn't always equate to long term success. For whatever reason, things can go wrong ( see Ken Griffey Jr. )

__________________
"All I know is that I know nothing..."

BigGov

...I've stated that many, many times...

Andrew

Not in this thread.

BigGov

Well I'll be damned...Must have been in the other thread. I stand corrected.

__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

JoeyB

Comparing players from different generations is fun and is standard in any sports discussion, but there's never any final answer. They can't be compared, so it's always just a personal preference. You simply can't compare players who played SO many years apart. The game has changed far too much.

Does anyone have a problem saying that Babe Ruth was amazing? Hank Aaron was incredible? Barry Bonds is awe inspiring???? They were all great. None can be accurately and fairly compared, just because it's not a balanced comparison.

Willie Mays wasn't bad either!

__________________
My mom is a Diamondbacks fan. She really likes the Big Unit

GTI03

Here's a website that lists the percentage of probability that some of today's top players have of breaking Aaron's record. Of course, Bonds is tops:

http://jeays.net/756watch/stats.htm

BigGov

Of course it's a pretty shitty job of statistics. It has Pujols projected at only 464 career home runs.

__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

BigDonkey2

i refuse to take part in this poll because i HATE barry bonds with a passion...hes such an asshole....did you see the way he reacted after he lost the world series.....what a bitch

Konichiwaneko

Odd question, if you play less games in a season I think your batting average should be better then someone who plays more games.

It's hard as hell to keep a 325 batting average over 160 games rather then 140 don't you agree?

I was just noticing that to the stats comparison above.

__________________

BigGov

The number one thing that keeps coming up is everyone is saying Barry Bonds is an asshole, while in the meantime they seem to think everyone else is perfect.

For everyone that thinks Barry Bonds is an asshole, go read Ball Four by Jim Bouton. People are far from perfect, athletes are even farther.

__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

GTI03

"Of course it's a pretty shitty job of statistics. It has Pujols projected at only 464 career home runs."

Well, whether or not it's "shitty" or not, it's based on Bill James' "favorite toy" calculation, which basically takes into account yearly totals, age, and a variety of other stats to calculate the totals. Bear in mind that the calculation is equivalent to foretelling the weather a few years from now...

Also, I think that 464 is a reasonable number to project for Pujols:

1) He may or may not be 23.
2) He's more of a line drive hitter than a pure power hitter (30-40 home runs rather than 40-50 home runs a year).
3) Players get hurt.
4) He's an excellent hitter, the second best hitter in the league, but he would have to maintain his present production for ten more years to hit 460 home runs. Definitely possible, but it's also definitely possible that he might have a few 25 home run seasons mixed in there...

I personally think that he'll end up with over 500 for his career, but that's a long way away. Just look at Griffey for a comp

GTI03

"Odd question, if you play less games in a season I think your batting average should be better then someone who plays more games."

Well, sample size issues are always a problem; if a player hits .400 in 100 at bats, it's much more likely due to a hot streak than if he hits .400 in 400 at bats.

The inverse is also true: a player is much more likely to hit .100 in 100 at bats than .100 in 400 at bats.

But the difference between 140 games played and 160 games played is not very big at all, in terms of maintaining batting average.

Konichiwaneko

well for bonds, 8 years in the majors now equals 9 75 years ago.

playing 160 games is hell, and to be consistent...wow.

__________________

BigGov

GTI03, it's also possible for someone to play as many as 15-20 seasons in MLB. Take Pujols, add in a few bad seasons, add in a few great ones at the end (see Bonds) and you got a few hundred more than 464.

__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

Ryan

I think Barry Will stop at around 720 HR's.. He will maybe lose his power and just wont be able to stay as healthy as healthy as he currently is in a couple of years.

GTI03

"GTI03, it's also possible for someone to play as many as 15-20 seasons in MLB. Take Pujols, add in a few bad seasons, add in a few great ones at the end (see Bonds) and you got a few hundred more than 464."

Like I said, I think that Pujols will have more than 500 when he retires.

Everything you say above is possible, but is it likely? Is it likely that Pujols will boost his production levels? That he won't get hurt? That he won't lose his bat speed? That he plays 15-20 years? That he has the same type of late-career peak as Bonds has?

Those last two are the biggies. What Bonds is doing is VERY unusual (to have a 30% hike in production in his +35 seasons), and I think that it's very unlikely that Pujols (for example) will have a similar hike.

In fact, I think that it's MORE likely that he'll have UNDER 464 home runs than it is that he'll have over 650 home runs...actually, far more likely.

But it's all weather-forecasting at this point.

lions20

I don't like Bonds and I don't think he should even be compared with the old-time greats. Basball is so much different now than it was back then and Bonds has been hitting the juice in previous years.