Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How will you rank Bonds now?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What about Duke Snider?
    Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
    Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
    Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
    Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
    Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

    Comment


    • Billy got his numbers playing in the best offensive environment the majors had to offer and it took him 18 seasons to do it. It took Bonds 13 seasons with two of them shortened by strike to get to those levels. In terms of careers Manny Ramirez and ALbert Belle had similar careers. In terms of hitting that is, not the baserunning and defense.

      By the way through 1998 Bonds had 1216 RBI's

      Comment


      • The similarity scores say that through age 33 (Bonds 1998 season) Frank Robinson was the most simlar player. With Duke Snider being the most similar between the age of 30 and 32, and Duke being the second most similar at age 33, along with Ken Griffey. All three of similars are actually pretty close with Frank slightly ahead by a few points.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Ubiquitous
          The similarity scores say that through age 33 (Bonds 1998 season) Frank Robinson was the most simlar player.
          Ironic that Robinson is that #1 guy, given what I stated a few nights ago, not ever caring (and really never even looking at) the similarity scores, which I discounted long ago.

          Here.

          Originally posted by csh19792001
          Through 1997, Barry had a .288/.408/.551 career line (and this is a player's natural physical peak, playing the weakest defensive position on the field). That's not a top 10 alltime player.

          A natural, pre-steroid Barry Bonds was very much like a Frank Robinson- outstanding, but clearly not in the class of Mays and Aaron (or Cobb, Ruth, and Wagner, for that matter). Assuming a normal decline (note DECLINE), somewhere around 15th alltime is the most reasonable projection.

          Comment


          • Personally I think a "normal" Barry would have hit over 600 homers, 500 doubles, steal more then 500 bases, and approach 3000 hits. Not sure if he would actually make it to 3,000 he might just do that. That to me would be a pretty great combo. I looked for any player in history that more then 400 doubles, 400 homers, and 400 steals. The answer? None besides Bonds. Lowered it all to 350, how many now? None besides Barry. Lowering to 300 I finally get Willie, Bobby, and Andre.

            A normal Barry was everything Willie was except for the arm in the outfield. If he had the arm he would have stayed a CF'er and the natural Barry would probably be considered greater then Willie. As it was he moved over to Left so he loses the defensive value.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Ubiquitous
              Personally I think a "normal" Barry would have hit over 600 homers, 500 doubles, steal more then 500 bases, and approach 3000 hits. Not sure if he would actually make it to 3,000 he might just do that. That to me would be a pretty great combo. I looked for any player in history that more then 400 doubles, 400 homers, and 400 steals. The answer? None besides Bonds. Lowered it all to 350, how many now? None besides Barry. Lowering to 300 I finally get Willie, Bobby, and Andre. .
              Right, but the numerical thresholds come with a big caveat. Nobody hit homeruns for the first 50 years of baseball (mainly because the parks and equiment rendered it nearly impossible and a futile approach), and hardly anyone stole a significant amount of bases between 1920 and the early 60's. You don't think Mays and Mantle could have stolen 500 bases had they played their entire careers in an era where managers ran their fast guys instead of playing station-station?

              Originally posted by Ubiquitous
              A normal Barry was everything Willie was except for the arm in the outfield. If he had the arm he would have stayed a CF'er and the natural Barry would probably be considered greater then Willie. As it was he moved over to Left so he loses the defensive value.
              Bonds in left wasn't nearly as great as Mays in center, even when compared only against their respective positional peers.

              And saying "if he'd had an arm" is a gigantic if. As it is, he played the weakest defensive position on the field.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by csh19792001
                Bonds in left wasn't nearly as great as Mays in center, even when compared only against their respective positional peers.

                .

                Forgot to talk about this. Bonds had Ted Williams and Stan Musial in left. Mays had Cobb and Mantle. Mantle destroyed himself and made it easier for one to view Mays over Mantle. Bonds is going up against Ted Williams and Stan who never destroyed themselves and Ted generally gets a bonus for his missed time. Now then if Bonds stays normal he ends up I think ahead of Stan. So he finishes second or at least third in left. Mays is either first, second, or third on most peoples list for Center. Mantle isn't Mantle then possibly Mays aggregate rank could be slightly lower, say 2.2 instead of 1.7. Now then if Bonds stays in Center well then things get interesting. Because now you have Mays, Cobb, Mantle, and Bonds all duking it out. Mays would have the most homers, but Bonds wouldn't be far behind, nor would he be trailing him in almost all the other counting stats. Plus you have Mantle and his greatness and the legendary skill of Cobb. If Bonds stays in center those 4 players I think become the top 4 CF'ers of all time. With rankings different for everybody.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Ubiquitous
                  Forgot to talk about this. Bonds had Ted Williams and Stan Musial in left. Mays had Cobb and Mantle. Mantle destroyed himself and made it easier for one to view Mays over Mantle. Bonds is going up against Ted Williams and Stan who never destroyed themselves and Ted generally gets a bonus for his missed time. Now then if Bonds stays normal he ends up I think ahead of Stan. So he finishes second or at least third in left. Mays is either first, second, or third on most peoples list for Center. Mantle isn't Mantle then possibly Mays aggregate rank could be slightly lower, say 2.2 instead of 1.7. Now then if Bonds stays in Center well then things get interesting. Because now you have Mays, Cobb, Mantle, and Bonds all duking it out. Mays would have the most homers, but Bonds wouldn't be far behind, nor would he be trailing him in almost all the other counting stats. Plus you have Mantle and his greatness and the legendary skill of Cobb. If Bonds stays in center those 4 players I think become the top 4 CF'ers of all time. With rankings different for everybody.
                  Mays also had Dimaggio and Speaker

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by MetelEd
                    So that's how I rate him. That's how I've been rating him for a long time now. Without a doubt, as the best player of his generation, and the second best hitter (behind Frank Thomas) of his generation, he derived a unique benefit from youthing drugs in his mid-30's. He was just at the point when his physical skills would have started to decline, which would have forced him to rely more on his superior experience and know-how, until his physical skills totally left him and all the experience and know how in the world wouldn't allow him to compete at the big league level anymore. That's how it is for all ballplayers, in the end.

                    But Barry found a modern medical fountain of youth in his mid thirties, and all that veteran experience was combined with a body that was superior to Barry's 25-year-old body. [/b]Totally unique circumstances that could never happen again - even if every player in the league in 2001 was juiced to the eyeballs, none of them would have been in Barry's situation, none of them would have derived the same advantage from the drugs that Bonds did.[/b] That's why the "but so many of his competitors did it" argument doesn't hold water for me[/b] - yes, maybe everyone did it, but not everyone stood to gain as much from it as Barry did.
                    BINGO !

                    We had seen his peak prior to '99 and while I think he would have aged pretty well, even the greatest players don't add much to their legacy in their mid to late 30's.

                    Here's a PCA chart tracking these players' careers. Take away Williams' fluky last year where he had just 310 AB, (actually two of his last four years were pretty damn good, but again, these are the elites here) and that orange would really stick out.

                    Bonds ('86-'04), Ruth ('18-'35), Mays ('51-'73; no '53 of course), Williams ('39-'60; no '43-'45, and no '52 - only 12 PA, large spike in middle for Ballgame is '53 when he played in 37 games - shouldn't have included that.)
                    Attached Files

                    Comment


                    • I still would have to say Bonds ranks on my top 5 of all time greatest players
                      Join Marapets | Virtual Pets | Games

                      Comment

                      Ad Widget

                      Collapse
                      Working...
                      X