Barry Bonds vs Mike Schmidt

[TomBodet]

Mr Michael Jack Schmidt was a great player. Don't sell him short.

[filihok]

Barry Bonds is probably the most dominant player not named Ruth.

[willshad]

Without steroids, Bonds' numbers would have probably been very close to Schmidt's for his career. Offensively its virtually a wash. The question is does Schmidt's positional advantage overcome Bonds' stolen bases. That's really the deciding factor.

[chicagowhitesox1173]

This is a tough one but if I had to pick between Schmidt and Bonds while starting a MLB team, I would have to go Mike Schmidt. I'm discounting Bonds for steroids with my decision too. If no discount then Bonds by a longshot.

[filihok]

Without steroids, Bonds' numbers would have probably been very close to Schmidt's for his career.

No possible way to know this.

[chicagowhitesox1173]

No possible way to know this.

With a normal decline like Ken Griffey Jr.had and Schmidt is generally ranked higher over Griffey, I feel Schmidt would beat out Bonds. It is tough to say though because Bonds was still better than Griffey in his non ped years.

[JR Hart]

Without steroids, Bonds' numbers would have probably been very close to Schmidt's for his career. Offensively its virtually a wash. The question is does Schmidt's positional advantage overcome Bonds' stolen bases. That's really the deciding factor.

Sheer fantasy That's only possible if Bonds goes from slugging .650. for about 5 years in a row up to age 34, to slugging .360, as a poster suggested on another thread. Even without roids, Bonds hits at least 620 hrs, outhits Schmidt by 30 points, has a better OBP by at least 20 points. Plus Bonds was better baserunner, by far.

It's Barry any way you spin it.

[chicagowhitesox1173]

Sheer fantasy That's only possible if Bonds goes from slugging .650. for about 5 years in a row up to age 34, to slugging .360, as a poster suggested on another thread. Even without roids, Bonds hits at least 620 hrs, outhits Schmidt by 30 points, has a better OBP by at least 20 points. Plus Bonds was better baserunner, by far.

It's Barry any way you spin it.

With the position difference Schmidt would be right there with a clean Bonds. I don't think Bonds hits as many homeruns clean as some think.

[White Knight]

Bonds by a mile. Take away the PED, and Bonds has an edge anyway, even surpassing him in home runs clean. Plus with the higher BA and OBP, and stolen bases it's no contest.

[White Knight]

With a normal decline like Ken Griffey Jr.had and Schmidt is generally ranked higher over Griffey, I feel Schmidt would beat out Bonds. It is tough to say though because Bonds was still better than Griffey in his non ped years.

Griffey's decline wasn't normal, it was awful and too young.

[willshad]

Griffey's decline wasn't normal, it was awful and too young.

I don't see why people seem to think that Bonds would have declined much better than everyone else from his generation. What made him so special (besides the steroids) that he would supposedly still keep slugging .600 and have a .450 OBP, while all of his contemporaries slide heavily into decline? He MAY have pulled a Jim Thome, or Chipper Jones, but that's a best case scenario to be sure. Jeff Bagwell, practically a twin for Bonds offensively, did very little after age 33. Sheffield had a couple more good, but declining, seasons, and then faded. Frank Thomas had 1 or maybe 2 more good seasons. Mike Piazza's last good year was age 34. Griffey had one season with more than 120 OPS+ after age 33. Albert Belle wasn't even in the league anymore. Mcgwire was out of baseball by age 37. Sosa had one more pretty good season. Vlad Guerrero fell off a cliff after age 33. A-rod was already slipping after age 31...same for Giambi......same for Pujols apparently.

I see a clean Bonds as having maybe 3 more 30 home run, 140-150 OPS+ type seasons, and then a couple of bad seasons. Would he hit 650 home runs? Not likely. Hitting over 200 home runs after age 33 is an incredible feat. Many other players, even on steroids, could not do it. Manny Ramirez had a GREAT decline, plus was a juicer, and he only hit 120 after age 33. He would have to average 40 a season until age 39 season, assuming he lasts that long. 550 is a more reasonable guess.

[White Knight]

I don't see why people seem to think that Bonds would have declined much better than everyone else from his generation. What made him so special (besides the steroids) that he would supposedly still keep slugging .600 and have a .450 OBP, while all of his contemporaries slide heavily into decline? He MAY have pulled a Jim Thome, or Chipper Jones, but that's a best case scenario to be sure. Jeff Bagwell, practically a twin for Bonds offensively, did very little after age 33. Sheffield had a couple more good, but declining, seasons, and then faded. Frank Thomas had 1 or maybe 2 more good seasons. Mike Piazza's last good year was age 34. Griffey had one season with more than 120 OPS+ after age 33. Albert Belle wasn't even in the league anymore. Mcgwire was out of baseball by age 37. Sosa had one more pretty good season. Vlad Guerrero fell off acliff after age 33. A-rod was already slipping after age 31...same for Pujols apparently.

I see a clean Bonds as having maybe 3 more 30 home run, 140-150 OPS+ type seasons, and then a couple of bad seasons. Would he hit 650 home runs? Not likely. Hitting over 200 home runs after age 33 is an incredible feat. he would have to average 40 a season until age 39 season, assuming he lasts that long. 550 is a more reasonable guess.

He doesn't have to be better than average to decline better than Griffey. Griffey and Frank Thomas aged terribly. Thomas was too massive and Griffey didn't work out (he said he hated it, I'll look for a quote). By his last year, he looked like a 40 year old fat man (which he was, I guess). Bonds was thin and in shape. There are strong indications that he would have aged well anyway.

Look at Jeter. That's how a player should age, getting 216 hits at 38. Not fat and old at 32 like Andruw Jones.

[willshad]

He doesn't have to be better than average to decline better than Griffey. Griffey and Frank Thomas aged terribly. Thomas was too massive and Griffey didn't work out (he said he hated it, I'll look for a quote). By his last year, he looked like a 40 year old fat man (which he was, I guess). Bonds was thin and in shape. There are strong indications that he would have aged well anyway.

Look at Jeter. That's how a player should age, getting 216 hits at 38. Not fat and old at 32 like Andruw Jones.

I don't know if being 'fat' or 'in shape' has much to do with it. As players age, they decline, they get injured, it's natural. Tony Gwynn got fat, and continued to lead the league in batting into his late 30s. A-rod is in amazing shape, and he's been declining since 2007. Thome is as big as Thomas, and he got better in his 30s. Pujols is a workout fiend, and he's certainly in decline already.

I'm not saying Bonds would suddenly fall apart like Albert belle did, and be out of the league at age 34. But we have to be reasonable in our estimations, and compare him to his contemporary stars with regards to aging patterns.

[pheasant]

Mike Schmidt was incredible. I have him ranked 13th all-time. However, a clean Bonds could have put up 600 HRS and 600 SB with a .400 ob% during the most competitive era. That is top 5 material there. Bonds was a workout freak by the early 1990s. And more importantly, he kept limber with his martial arts for many years. I believe he still would have declined very well as a clean player.

[BigRon]

I can't play the PED game- I can only go by how they performed on the field.

Mike Schmidt is the greatest 3rd baseman in history- a superior fielder, fine base runner, and one of the great power hitters. The only thing keeping him from being a top 5 alltime player is about 20 or 25 points of BA. His contact numbers just weren't quite high enough. I have Schmidt ranked as about number 12-13 alltime among position players.

Bonds was an outstanding defensive leftfielder for the first 2/3 rds of his career, despite a so-so arm. He was a terrific baserunner, hit for power, hit for a good average. Based on what he did on the field I see him as the second most productive position player in ML history.

Two alltime greats- edge to Bonds.