40 years ago today

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by CurtisontheBay

Pete Rose's injustice is the worst thing to happen to MLB. Pete is quite possibly the best player ever

You're just trying to get on my good side

You know how I feel about him. I agree. 5 different positions too.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

So does almost everybody else.

If we don't honor the actual record in the book, we could say that about anyone at any time. How would you like it if i decided that i didnt 'honor' the time that your favorite team won the World Series? I didnt accept them as champions. David Ortiz is a member of the Red Sox, does that mean they didnt really win the series last year, or when they had Manny Ramirez, they didnt win those serieses either? Maybe the Yankees win in 2009 didnt really happen because A Rod was on the team.

Its hard to pick and choose which records you want to honor, but if you do pick and choose, that opens up the ability for all of us to pick and choose which statistics and which winning teams we want to 'not recognize'.

Just a little bit of a slippery slope.

[Marshall Bennett]

No, his former teammates shouldn't be punished. I do however have a problem giving his personal achievements any respect.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Marshall Bennett

No, his former teammates shouldn't be punished. I do however have a problem giving his personal achievements any respect.

So, if Bonds had a World series trophy on his mantle, you would be willing to let him have the trophy as long as you were able to essentially "erase" his personal stats? Seems like if you want his stats stricken from the record, you should want his trophy taken away too, right?

You say the former teammates shouldnt be punished, but if the steroids are a big enough deal to strike records from the books, couldnt you make the case that you're not really punishing his teammates by taking THEIR world series trophy away (if they had one with Bonds as a Teammate) because without the steroid use of at least one player, a strong case could at least be made that they wouldnt have won that title anyway?

[rastajenk]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

50 years ago today, Pete Rose played in his first MLB game

He had one at bat and walked

Actually, he probably ran (to first).

[Robert Goren]

The sad thing about Bonds is that he didn't need to do it. He was already the best hitter of his era.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

The sad thing about Bonds is that he didn't need to do it. He was already the best hitter of his era.

Thats true. He'll get in to the HoF at some point, basically on his resume before 1999.

[Marshall Bennett]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

So, if Bonds had a World series trophy on his mantle, you would be willing to let him have the trophy as long as you were able to essentially "erase" his personal stats? Seems like if you want his stats stricken from the record, you should want his trophy taken away too, right?

You say the former teammates shouldnt be punished, but if the steroids are a big enough deal to strike records from the books, couldnt you make the case that you're not really punishing his teammates by taking THEIR world series trophy away (if they had one with Bonds as a Teammate) because without the steroid use of at least one player, a strong case could at least be made that they wouldnt have won that title anyway?

Where do you come up with my assumption to all of this from my post, all of 2 sentences having little to do with what you've posted here?

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

The sad thing about Bonds is that he didn't need to do it. He was already the best hitter of his era.

I don't buy it. How many warning track fly balls ended up going out instead of being caught?

By doing it he turned the emphasis on the long ball into his glory. It elevated his profile like no other.

He was a good player, but he turned himself into a larger than life sports figure.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

I don't buy it. How many warning track fly balls ended up going out instead of being caught?

By doing it he turned the emphasis on the long ball into his glory. It elevated his profile like no other.

He was a good player, but he turned himself into a larger than life sports figure.

Check out his numbers pre-1999. Pretty good. His size increase came between the 1998 and 1999 seasons. Rumor has it he was jealous of all the attention McGwire and Sosa received so thats when he turned to roids.

[NJ Stinks]

I saw Barry Bonds play in July 1987 in Cincinnati. He was in his second year in the majors with Pittsburgh and 23 years old. Here's what I remember:

1. He played center and he obviously loafed going after a fly ball(s).

2. He was skinny - definitely built like a center fielder.

The guy I saw bears no resemblance to the guy younger guys here remember. To say that Barry was destined for the Hall of Fame long before he became Shrek is preposterous to me. He was a guy with a bad attitude - unless you think lack of hustle is a good thing - who had some power.

One more thing. In my opinion, Bobby Bonds was a better ballplayer than his son for at least the first 5 or 6 seasons both played. And I don't think most people thought Bobby was ever destined for the Hall of Fame.

[NJ Stinks]

On second thought, I'll change my last sentence. Bobby Bonds may have had Hall of Fame potential after 5 or 6 years in the majors.

[JustRalph]

I read somewhere that Bonds actual helmet size went up a full size and a half from the time he started until the end. How does that happen?

[PaceAdvantage]

He's back to his old self now...wonder if his head shrunk?

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

I saw Barry Bonds play in July 1987 in Cincinnati. He was in his second year in the majors with Pittsburgh and 23 years old. Here's what I remember:

1. He played center and he obviously loafed going after a fly ball(s).

2. He was skinny - definitely built like a center fielder.

The guy I saw bears no resemblance to the guy younger guys here remember. To say that Barry was destined for the Hall of Fame long before he became Shrek is preposterous to me. He was a guy with a bad attitude - unless you think lack of hustle is a good thing - who had some power.

One more thing. In my opinion, Bobby Bonds was a better ballplayer than his son for at least the first 5 or 6 seasons both played. And I don't think most people thought Bobby was ever destined for the Hall of Fame.

Here's the reality: Bonds had won THREE MVPs before the 1994 season was even played. I'm not a Giants fan or particularly a Bonds fan, but lets get the facts straight.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...ondsba01.shtml