**This is a topic that I coped and pasted from another forum that I'm a member of. I thought I would share it with everyone here. I started this topic over there because I wanted to set the record straight.**
National Baseball Debate –
Barry Bonds is the Greatest of All Time
Both parts to this series will explain why I pick Barry Bonds over Babe Ruth. The difference is that the second part will get EXTREMELY technical, especially for those who wish to argue against my beliefs in the this post. Part II will bring so much more to the argument that it will literally make your head spin. But for now, let's settle for this.
—-
Barry Bonds was put in the leadoff spot by the Pirates. For five years he averaged 21 HRs per season but struggled with his batting average.
1986 — .223
1987 — .261
1988 — .283
1989 — .248
You had to look beyond his heavy bat to see the talent emerging. In those first four seasons, Bonds stole 117 bases and had 231 extra-base hits.
When Bonds was still learning how to play, the majors were dominated by pitching. In 1988, the National League average was 3.8 runs per game. The next season, it was still 3.94 runs per game. By contrast, the majors have averaged over five runs per game in each year since 2000, just as in Ruth's best seasons.
In that context, what Bonds did in 1988 was great. Bonds batted "only" .283 — but the league average was .255 that season. Barry slugged "only" .491 — but the league average was .363, and Darryl Strawberry led the league at .545. Bonds was ninth in home runs, seventh in on-base percentage, seventh in slugging percentage, and sixth in OPS (on-base plus slugging).
By 1990, Barry had it all figured out. He batted .301, 33 HRs, 114 RBI, and added 52 stolen. Bonds captured the MVP award (with a near-unanimous vote) at the age of 26. His bat speed was the reason Bonds was able to belt 33 HRs (fourth in the NL) despite weighing *under* 200 pounds.
If I split up his slugging percentage by six-year increments and compare him with other NL leaders, we can see how Bonds has improved over time.
NL Slugging Percentage Leaders
1986 – 1991
1. .520 Darryl Strawberry
2. .518 Kevin Mitchell
3. .512 Will Clark
Even if Barry wasn't the mega-superstar since Day One people expected him to be, no one in the league slugged higher than .520. Bonds slugged .485, not far from the leader despite batting leadoff, stealing a ton of bases, and being one of the youngest players in the game.
NL Slugging Percentage Leaders
1992 – 1997
1. .620 Barry Bonds
2. .580 Larry Walker
3. .576 Mike Piazza
Bonds was the best player in the league, slugging .620 over a six-year run. Our mistake was thinking that this represented the apex of his career.
NL Slugging Percentage Leaders
1998 – 2003
1. .719 Barry Bonds
2. .683 Mark McGwire
3. .635 Sammy Sosa
McGwire had two big seasons (1998, 1999), then managed 535 more at-bats in his career. McGwire basically the same age as Barry (both were rookies in 1986), was through at age 37, and his last big season came at age 35. That's when Bonds began his historic seasons.
—-
Now let's talk about a few things that the Bonds haters have to say about him.
But, National, he took…
STEROIDS
I really don't care about who took what drug to improve his performance. I really don't. If Barry took them, he did it to become the best baseball player he could become. John Lennon and Paul McCartney used illegal drugs — hallucinogenic drugs — to create music that has lasted for 40 some-odd years and will be remembered for at least 400 more. If I studied art history, I would've found many great artist who did the same. Does it mean we dismiss the music and art because the artists had an "unfair" advantage over everyone else who did their works sober? I don't mind those people using mind-altering drugs that helped these songwriters create the soundtrack of your life, and people should be grateful that they did whatever it took to entertain and inspire people and their kids and their children's children. I'm not going to knock Bonds because he isn't a role model to children — there are too many ghosts in too many old-timer's closets.
My arguments are threefold:
1. Bonds was a great player — a GREAT player — before anyone ever accused him of bulking up and using steroids to gain advantage.
2. If steroids were responsible, then everyone taking them taking them would have numbers like Bonds. But they don't. No other player has increased his own production like Bonds has. I've shown how Bonds has towered over the competition — even over players accused of taking steroids.
3. Even if he came out and admit to taking them, it would not matter in my ranking of Bonds on my list of greatest players of all time. I believe what Bonds had accomplished — even if people reasonably deduct his score from the possibility of cheating — exceeds what Babe Ruth and every other player in MLB history has done.
Babe Ruth projected an image of drinking, smoking, and eating too much. Mickey Mantle, saying in retirement how he wished he would've taken better care of himself during his playing days. In contrast, Barry Bonds has always looked like the picture of health. From the beginning, his was a story of an athlete who pushed himself in the weight room and in the batting cage. If we went too much in that direction — to the point of risking his health — then I wish to thank him for playing in an era that I can witness, unlike Babe Ruth.
Is it cheating if you take every advantage that is legal? Then there is a distinction between the legal and the illegal human growth hormones that may have been used by Bonds. Cheating is as old as the game. Gaylord Perry won enough games to gain entry into the Hall of Fame, and he used an illegal pitch (the spitball) before he threw them. Are his stats "tainted"? For one hundred years, teams have stolen signs, grooved pitches, soaked down infields, and there have been countless of cases where the players have manipulated the game for betting purposes — but now all of a sudden we're going to question the integrity of baseball statistics because a certain percentage of players were found to have engaged in taking steroids (through anonymous testing)! Many people will view spitballs and stealing signs as gamesmanship as opposed to outright cheating. That argument doesn't quite make it with me. So much of this is personality-driven. People looked the other way when a popular star like Sammy Sosa got caught corking a bat. People look to discredit Bonds because (a) they don't like him, and (b) he has exceeded every known parameter.
This is a study in ethics, and I prefer not to engage in the holier-than-thou argument. Should managers not used computerized charts to help them make decisions since earlier generations didn't have computers at their disposal? Players have millions of dollars at stake in their careers. Hitting a baseball is the hardest thing to do successfully in sports. Pitchers have gotten bigger and stronger. Batters never face a fatigued pitcher, as specialists have evolved. Babe Ruth never had to face a fresh Mariano Rivera or a Johnathon Papelbon out of a bullpen.
—-
But, National, what about…
HIS ARMPADS
Body Armor takes away the fear of being hit by a pitch. Hmm. Bonds has been hit by 106 pitches throughout his career, a surprisingly low number considering how he crowds the plate, daring the pitchers to throw the ball extremely close to his body. Bonds has made a living turning on the inside pitch and belting it out. If the umpire allows him to go up to the plate in a Tin Man costume, then who are we to judge? If we enforce a rule that says a player cannot wear protective gear for his elbow, then fine. Otherwise, lay off Barry. We allow pitchers to intimidate and scare the batters, but batters can't do the same back? Barry has dug in and crowded the plate without fear. For this, I tip my cap to him.
—-
But, National,…
HIS PERSONALITY
Former teammates (Pirates outfielder Andy Van Slyke, Giants second baseman Jeff Kent) have blasted Bonds in print. Jeff Kent told Sports Illustrated's Rick Reilly in 2002, "On the field, we're fine, but off the field, I don't care about Barry and Barry doesn't care about me. Or anybody else. Barry does a lot of questionable things … I was raised to be a team guy, and I am, but Barry's Barry." Am I missing something? If Jeff Kent were, let's see, Lou Gehrig, then Barry might have a couple of World Series rings, just as Ruth did. He might not have Ruth's seven, but he would have more than zero. What more could you possibly do for your team than what Barry has done for the Giants?
You can't swing at bad pitches because you're the only player capable of driving in runs for your team. At some point, your teammates have got to help you out. Do you think Babe Ruth or Mickey Mantle were knocked for taking too many pitches? Strictly by his on-field performance, there couldn't have been a better teammate than Barry Bonds. If teammates object to an abrasive me-first personality, well, there's validity to that, but big movie stars get their private trailers and surround themselves with their people. Baseball is entertainment in this day and age. So what if Bonds is standoffish and a jerk to reporters?
Media members have regularly criticized him. The two most prominent long-form pieces were in ESPN Magazine in the summer of 2000 with Dan Patrick, and a 2002 Sports Illustrated piece by Rick Reilly. Both articles just killed Bonds.
Following the 2002 season, Bonds was awarded his fifth (of seven) MVP awards. At this point, it became logical to compare him to icons in other sports. Bill Russel and Micheal Jordan won five MVPs, Wayne Gretzky captured nine MVPs in the NHL, and Gordie Howe had six. When Bonds was asked to comapre himself to some of those players, he said the following:
"I probably wish I was liked as much as them. That would be nice. I wish I had the same form of respect that they have. They're all very admired. People admire their achievements and accomplishments. Everyone has their ups and downs through the media. I wish my career could be respected as much as theirs. Unfortunately, that's never going to happen."
—-
But, National…
HE's NEVER WON A WORLD SERIES
Oh, my motherfucking God! Here we go again…
You see, that's the problem with baseball. As great as one player is, he needs teammates to perform. Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, and Ted Williams COMBINED have two World Series rings. Just two! Bonds is just one person, so if you weigh it out, he's equal to what those other three have accomplished in the World Series.
Bonds has had some bad postseasons early in his career, for which he took a lot of criticism. In the 2002 World Series, the Giants were three innings away from winning Game 7 against the Angels, a series in which Bonds did everything humanly possible to help his team win. (I'll get to those stats later)
—-
But, National …
HE WASN'T THAT GOOD EARLY IN HIS CAREER
What are you — fucking stupid?! Bonds did a lot early in his career, winning the MVP awards three times in four seasons. He won in 1990, 1992, and 1993.
In 1991, he was robbed. The voters selected Braves third baseman Terry Pendleton, who batter .319 with 22 HRs and contributed to the Braves' division-winning season. Bonds batted .292, 25 HRs, 116 RBI, 43 SB for the Pirates. That team also made the post season.
His numbers didn't look like Ruth's in the early 1990s, but no one put up bigger number than Barry. When new ballparks became smaller, pitching became diluted, and weight training was supplemented (?) with whatever, then everyone's numbers went up — none more than Barry's.
—-
As significant a record as 73 HRs in a single season is, there is one distinction to be made. Barry Bonds was no one-trick pony. Even is he had never hit more than 59 HRs in a season, he would still be ranked number one on my list of greatest players ever.
Barry Bonds was the only player to surpass 600 career HRs in over 30 years. Frank Robinson fell a little short. Mark McGwire faded from view. Bonds not only went over 600, but zoomed past Willie Mays and his 660.
Bonds had tremendous expectations put upon him when he arrived in the National League in 1986 and he exceeded them all. He made 14 All-Star teams. He won seven MVP awards and finished second in two other seasons. There were no MVPs awarded in the early 1920s when Ruth played, but no one besides Barry has won more than three since they began awarding them since 1931. Did you just read that last sentence? I'm going to repeat that because it bares repeating: No one besides Barry has won more than *three* since they began awarding them since 1931.
Willie Mays had a (then) record 11 years between his two MVP seasons (1954 and 1965). Bonds won his first MVP in 1990 and his seventh in 2004. He won MVP honors 14 years apart.
Bonds was a great defensive left fielder, as well. He won eight Gold Gloves, although I will admit that the last few were awarded to him more on reputation, rather than on skills.
No one has drawn more walks than he has. Only two guys have scored more runs. He has stolen over 500 bases. He is the all-time leader in home runs hit.
In his only World Series appearance, he had 30 plate appearances. He made exactly nine outs in the seven games. He had 13 walks and eight hits. In that series, his on-base percentage was .700. Four of those eight hits were home runs.
—-
Barry Bonds during the 2003 All-Star break on what he said about his godfather, Willie Mays:
"Willie's number is always the one that I've strived for. And if it does happen, the only number I care about is Babe Ruth's. Because as a left-handed hitter, I wiped him out. That's it. And in the baseball world, Babe Ruth's everything, right? I got his slugging percentage and I'll take his home runs and that's it. Don't talk about him no more."
Columnists have nailed Barry for this. Did Barry really want to pass Ruth because he was a left-handed hitter, or did he want to surpass the white man, content to have Aaron and himself remain as the top two all-time homerun leaders?
Micheal L. Gibbons is the executive director of the Babe Ruth Museum (located in Baltimore, Maryland). He said in a statement in response to Bond's infamous words:
"To suggest that those feats are somehow capable of 'wiping out' Ruth illustrates a complete disregard for the history and tradition of our national game, and its greatest player and star. Can Bonds 'wipe out' Ruth? Not today, not forever."
Whoa! Not so fast, you stupid idiot. First off, my argument for Bonds over Ruth has everything and nothing to do with race. It was Ruth who grew up in an orphanage, while Bonds was the privileged son of a major leaguer, hanging out at a young age with superstars like Willie Mays. Bonds was raised like a elite Republican, while Ruth was raised in the ghetto.
But race also has everything to do with this argument of mine concerning these two guys. Bonds should be justifiably proud of his accomplishments over the best baseball players of all time. Ruth was the giant among a sizable subset. Segregation allowed a select few players who pushed the scales of human limits to dominate (some might say artificially) the sport. We'll never know, but it's my guess that Ruth would've dominated play in his era even if everyone was allowed to play.
Yes, Babe Ruth is symbolic of baseball — but them, so is racism and segregation. The fact that Ruth had faced his own form of racism — there were rumors about his true blood lineage — is even more ironic.
A lot of people failed to appreciate to total picture of Barry Bonds's power explosion in the early 2000s. It's a lot more than home runs. Bonds had become extremely selective at the plate that he got on base on a historic rate. And his slugging percentage are equally historic. Look at the following lists of the greatest single-season marks for on-base percentage and slugging percentage.
On-Base Percentage, Single Season
1. .609 Barry Bonds, 2004
2. .582 Barry Bonds, 2002
3. .551 Ted Williams, 1941
4. .542 Babe Ruth, 1921
5. .529 Barry Bonds, 2003
Slugging Percentage, Single Season
1. .863 Barry Bonds, 2001
2. .847 Babe Ruth, 1920
3. .846 Babe Ruth, 1921
4. .812 Barry Bonds, 2004
5. .799 Barry Bonds, 2002
6. .772 Babe Ruth, 1927
Both Bonds and Ruth dominate those statistics, but remember, all of the great slugging marks took place either between 1920 and 1932 or between 1994 and 2003. There have been 28 instances where a player slugged no lower than .708 in a season. Of those 28 episodes, 26 of them took place in those two eras. Did you read that last sentence? How incredible is that stat? Only Ted Williams slugged .730 or better in a season between 1940 and 1993.
But my point is this: Babe Ruth towered over his competition, and Bonds towered over his.
Slugging Percentage, 1920-1924
1. .777 Babe Ruth
2. .650 Rogers Horsby
3. .591 Harry Heilmann
Slugging Percentage, 1998-2003
1. .719 Barry Bonds
2. .683 Mark McGwire
3. .635 Sammy Sosa
Bonds has the single-season records for slugging and on-base percentage, and he set them in different seasons. He has the single-season home run record, with 73. Ruth does hold the record for career slugging percentage at .6898, and that's about 56 points higher than runner-up Ted Williams. But Bonds has done better than .690 for a seven-year period — and that's very impressive, considering the competition, relief pitchers, and everything else modern ballplayers has to contend with.
Since 1941, only two players have batted better than .390 in a single season. Barry Bonds batted .370 at the age of 38 to win his first batting title. he batted .362 at 40.
Besides, Barry Bonds did not sneak up on us. He was a great player since Day One.
–National
Login 
Register 
megansafox.com Discussion Forum
Print this Post 
There will be one less lonely girl
Who Dat… No One!
Topic RSS 
Search 