He can't let McGwire one-up him on anything, can he?

I think he'd be a pretty good one, actually. If he's serious, he should offer to work as a roving instructor or something so a team can get a feel for if he's serious and if he really can communicate his knowledge.

bonds worked with ryan howard over the last offseason and at points throughout the regular season.

this seemed to culminate with howard striking out in half of his playoff plate appearances.

All off-field stuff aside, the guy clearly knows as much about hitting as anyone in the universe. I'm with Shooty on this one - if Bonds is serious and has the ability to teach, there's no reason he can't be an excellent hitting coach.

Of course, you could have said most of the same things about Eddie Murray: Surly, moody, often tough to get along with, and a guy who knows a metric assload about hitting. Murray got fired mid-season twice in three years, so it's tough to qualify him as a success.

I'm convinced Bonds will be hired as a hitting coach right after he does his tearful Bob Costas interview.

Huh, I thought Bonds was thrown in jail right in the middle of the 2008 season. Is he out already?

Well he's certainly skinnier now these days.

Funny that, eh?

Huh, I thought Bonds was thrown in jail right in the middle of the 2008 season. Is he out already?

Now you're sounding like whats-his-name.

--

You laugh, but I think Bonds would make a pretty good hitting coach. Would definitely much prefer him giving my players advice than McGwire.

So is this a de facto retirement announcement? I don't know how he can be a coach when he recently insisted that he wasn't retired, unless he thinks he's going to the first player-coach since Pete Rose.

You can rest easy now--yet another player isn't going to play anymore. Hopefully one day all these jerks will just retire en masse.

You laugh, but I think Bonds would make a pretty good hitting coach. Would definitely much prefer him giving my players advice than McGwire.

Why? I mean, I have no idea which guy would be a better hitting coach, but they both seem to have broadly the same approach at the plate. Swing at strikes. Don't swing at balls. Hit the ###### hard. That Bonds was more skilled at it means he was a better player, but I'm not sure there's any reason to think that would make him better at teaching it to others.

How many great hitters have been good to great hitting coaches? Most of the hitting coaches I'm most familiar with as successes weren't that great as hitters - Lau, Hrniak, and Gaston are the three who first come to mind.

Of course, this isn't to say that Bonds (or McGwire) couldn't be a great hitting coach, but success as a hitter doesn't always translate to success as a teacher of hitting.

Of course, this isn't to say that Bonds (or McGwire) couldn't be a great hitting coach, but success as a hitter doesn't always translate to success as a teacher of hitting.

I don't think we know how to evaluate hitting coaches anyway.

edit: It could be hitting coaches will mesh with one player but not another. It's a weird alchemy.

I'd like to know how Bonds used a maple bat and did not turn it into kindling on a regular basis like most of the current players do.

I'd like to know how Bonds used a maple bat and did not turn it into kindling on a regular basis like most of the current players do.

A) Wouldn't it have to do with where he made contact on the bat?

B) Among all the goofballs who post here, aren't you supposed to be the one who can answer that question?

this seemed to culminate with howard striking out in half of his playoff plate appearances

But he did that in the 2009 World Series, which is presumably more Damaso Marte's fault, rather than Barry Bonds.

I can see Bonds trying to teach Nate Schierholtz.

"No! No! No! No! This is how you do it!"

<Bonds steps in and hits a long home run to right>

"See??"

I can see Bonds trying to teach Nate Schierholtz.

"No! No! No! No! This is how you do it!"

<Bonds steps in and hits a long home run to right>

"See??"

I prefer the Zack Greinke method: "In case you forgot, this is what a home run looks like."

Bonds should work as a personal consultant for awhile (which it sounds like he did with Howard). Since other players (non-Jeff Kent division) always seemed to like him, he could probably build up a good rep.

Barry Bonds is probably the most similar living player to Williams in terms of approach, skill, and knowledge of hitting, and Williams seemed to have a positive impact on the Senators' hitting when he was the manager. But that's not much evidence to go by.

How many great hitters have been good to great hitting coaches?

Harry "The Hat" Walker was a pretty good hitter, and a pretty good hitting coach. He's best known for his work with slap-and-dash guys like Matty Alou.

Barry Bonds is probably the most similar living player to Williams in terms of approach, skill, and knowledge of hitting, and Williams seemed to have a positive impact on the Senators' hitting when he was the manager. But that's not much evidence to go by.

IIRC (well, I don't "recall" since I wasn't alive, but as I understand it), the hitters under Williams improved dramatically in his first year there, but then tailed off considerably thereafter.

He may well make a good hitting coach. But I think any of these guys should have to go to the minors and make their bones. As stated above, being a great hitter doesn't necessarily make one a great coach of hitters. Go to the minors and prove a) you really want to do the job and b) you really can do the job. With that done, come back to the majors.


I thought that was the main mistake McGwire made. His getting the Cards job made it look like it was just handed to him. It would have been better all around (including the PR bit) if he'd done the job in A ball for a summer.


It could be hitting coaches will mesh with one player but not another. It's a weird alchemy.

I think this is true of any teacher/student situation. There are certainly students I click with, who basically think like me and, so, pick up my lessons as soon as I say them. There are others that I could spend 24/7 with for a semester and not teach anything. The vast majority are in between and their progress is where teachers should be evaluated.

Bonds is a high volatility candidate: I think he'd probably be great given his scientific approach to hitting, but there's some chance he'd get frustrated with the inferior hitting abilities of all major league players (that Pujols is supposed to be good but can't even manage a lousy .500 OBP -- what a joke) and become a distraction. I also expect there are many so-called "fans" of baseball who prefer to moan than to watch great players who might complain loudly about Bonds being back and create a circus -- I don't think this was actually an issue with McGwire, though.

A high volatility candidate is probably best served going either to a fringe team where Bonds's upside could mean contention, and his downside isn't too harmful, or a complete joke like Pittsburgh (if they ignore the history) where there is no downside, and Bonds can prove himself and create interest.

“I have a gift, and sooner or later I have to give it away,” Bonds said. “I have to share it. Hopefully I’ll get the opportunity here.”

Didn't he steal this line from Boogie Nights?

He may well make a good hitting coach. But I think any of these guys should have to go to the minors and make their bones. As stated above, being a great hitter doesn't necessarily make one a great coach of hitters. Go to the minors and prove a) you really want to do the job and b) you really can do the job. With that done, come back to the majors.

Isn't it possible that a hitting coach might work better with major league hitters than minor league hitters (or vice versa)? Nobody expects an aspiring college professor to make their bones in a fourth grade classroom.

I don't think we know how to evaluate hitting coaches anyway.

Since they seem to exist only to give a struggling team a scapegoat to ####-can in June, it probably doesn't matter if he can communicate that knowledge or not.

I can see Bonds trying to teach Nate Schierholtz.

"No! No! No! No! This is how you do it!"

(Bonds steps in and hits a long home run to right)

"See??"

Along this line of thinking is why I thought that Wayne Gretzky really wouldn't make for a great coach, or would get too frustrated and quit.

"When skating into the zone with the puck, immediately calculate the skating trajectories for every player on the ice, and determine the perfect passing lane to your winger for the easy goal. Okay, let's run this drill a few times."

Isn't it possible that a hitting coach might work better with major league hitters than minor league hitters (or vice versa)? Nobody expects an aspiring college professor to make their bones in a fourth grade classroom.

Dude, no one expects an aspiring college professor to be able to teach. :)


You make a good point, but I would argue that MLB hitters and minor league hitters are much closer in terms of talent than are college kids and 4th graders. It would be more like teaching grad students and undergrads.

“I have a gift, and sooner or later I have to give it away,” Bonds said. “I have to share it. Hopefully I’ll get the opportunity here.”

What if one of his guys goes all Bautista? There would be some serious questions.

I can see Bonds trying to teach Nate Schierholtz.

"No! No! No! No! This is how you do it!"

<Bonds steps in and hits a long home run to right>

"See??"

Obviously you've witnessed my brother-in-law, the golf pro, attempting to teach me to hit a damn drive.

Barry Bonds is probably the most similar living player to Williams in terms of approach, skill, and knowledge of hitting, and Williams seemed to have a positive impact on the Senators' hitting when he was the manager. But that's not much evidence to go by.

IIRC (well, I don't "recall" since I wasn't alive, but as I understand it), the hitters under Williams improved dramatically in his first year there, but then tailed off considerably thereafter.

That's exactly what happened. And apparently the interpersonal dynamic was that everyone was very eager to listen to Williams, then got really tired of his incessant carping and stopped listening, and then finally he just pretty much gave up and checked out too. It started off beautiful and turned out ugly.

the hitters under Williams improved dramatically in his first year there, but then tailed off considerably thereafter.

That's exactly what happened.

1968 Senators (managed by Jim Lemon, not lemonade) 91 OPS+

1969 Senators* (managed by Teddy Ballgame) 103 OPS+
1970 Senators (managed by The Fighter Pilot) 92 OPS+
1971 Senators (managed by Ted's Frozen Head) 85 OPS+
1972 Rangers (managed by Theodore Williams) 77 OPS+

1973 Rangers** (mostly managed by The White Rat) 95 OPS+

*Superjew had a super season in '69; Frank Howard was Howardian; and Lee Maye was Maysian.
**See Seasons in Hell by Mike Shropshire.

That's exactly what happened. And apparently the interpersonal dynamic was that everyone was very eager to listen to Williams, then got really tired of his incessant carping and stopped listening, and then finally he just pretty much gave up and checked out too. It started off beautiful and turned out ugly.

So bring in Bonds for a year and then fire him. Actually, the orioles should do that. Having Bonds and Showalter for 2011 should guarantee a WS title in 2012 once they're gone.

Ray it wasn't exactly first year with the Senators, it was first year or so working with Williams. By the end of his run with the Senators you had the Underminers Club in operation. Kind of like Joe Adcock and Ted Kluszewski arguing who hated Rogers Hornsby more.

Ray and Rich, past 1969 you've got Dave Nelson, Dick Billings (if that 87 OPS+ doesn't impress you, this is a guy who'd hit .211/.313/.330 in the minors the year before hooking up with Williams) and a few others.

The problem is that while this worked for Billings (for a while at least), Eddy Brinkman went back to being Eddy Brinkman, Paul Casanova slipped, Tim Cullen never did pick up anything. Too many passengers. Guys who were playing because Williams firmly believed they'd hit if they paid attention to him.

While he never had the title of hitting instructor, Ty Cobb functioned in that role in the later part of his career. Seems to have had a tremendous record with a wide variety of hitters (from high average line drive hitters like Heilmann to all OBP guys like Bassler and Blue)

Eddy Brinkman went back to being Eddy Brinkman,

Well, no. Brinkman sustained his amazing 1969 improvement all through 1970. Then Short sent Brinkman away as part of the idiotic McLain deal, and Brinkman went back to being Eddie Brinkman while he was also apart from Williams' coaching.

Paul Casanova slipped,

No, Casanova had already slipped before Williams arrived. And Casnavova never made a meaningful improvement under Williams anyway (getting Paul Casanova to take a pitch, any pitch, was beyond the capacity of any mortal).

Tim Cullen never did pick up anything.

This is true.

But the guys who made the most dramatic improvements under Williams in 1969, and then regressed, were Mike Epstein and Del Unser. And Frank Howard, whose walk rate skyrocketed under Williams' influence, just got old.

The Senators didn't tailspin following 1969 just because the players and Williams got sick of each other. The primary issue was Short's inability to add talent to the roster, or even keep what he had. But it was a team effort.

#36 Sloppy editing by me (we've had this discussion before -- I should have just copied it).

But the point I'd intended to make was that Williams was an indirect part of the personnel problem. He absolutely believed he could teach most anybody to hit and thus wasn't too concerned about where they were as an offensive player when they joined the team.