User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.5534 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Babe Adams Posted: July 24, 2008 at 12:20 PM (#2870997)This comment interested me, and so I dug a bit into Paciorek's archives. It seems that with Paciorek, it's all about technique. He says that unlike Williams, Bonds had power to the opposite field and could hit the low pitch. This was in a forum where he said that Bonds was baseball's greatest living hitter.
But just when you think that his method of evaluation is based on some sort of higher powers of observation, you read his pick for "greatest living pitcher" is. It's almost embarrassing to read his answer.
Not that Nolan Ryan wasn't in many ways a great pitcher, but this is the first time I think I've ever read "impeccable control" associated with Nolan Ryan's name!
I assume here that you're talking about Repoz. I'm more interested in Paciorek's evaluation of Nolan Ryan. When it comes to Bonds, que sera sera, and to each his own.
Minnesota has never (at least within my memory) shown an interest in Bonds' style of offensive play (to their disadvantage). I doubt that this will change any time soon.
Detroit has Sheffield under contract this year and next, and the team will likely try to avoid combining these two personalities in the same clubhouse.
Tampa could use him at DH.
I'm just unfairly lumping you in with kevin.
The A's trotted Emil Brown and Jack Cust out to left field this year. They could have used Bonds in LF much less at DH. I'm really not fired up either way about Bonds anymore as that ship has now sailed. I'm just growing weary of MLB's continuing conversion into corporate-ese. I don't mean that they only care about money--it's always been like that--but that their obsession with "branding" and "merchandising" is coupled with "risk aversion" and "community relations" meaning they are scared to death to offend anyone. It's just so damn boring. So Bonds is a villain. That's good theater, man. Better Bonds than ####### Josh Groban.
I'll agree with you on that. The Jays have been trotting out Shannon Stewart, Matt Stairs, Brad Wilkerson, and Kevin Mench in LF. What makes it worse is that they had a better in-house option than any of these in Adam Lind, but they only gave him 19 ABs early in the season to prove himself. At least Cust can generate some offense.
Up until a couple weeks ago, I would have enjoyed watching Bonds in a Blue Jays uniform. Since they've finally decided to just let Lind play, he's actually hit well, so now the Jays have an on-field reason to not sign Bonds. This is not saying that Lind would necessarily be better than Bonds this year (which I doubt), but just that developing a player who will be under organizational control for the next 5 years is probably more important at this point than whatever on-field boost they might get from Bonds for the remainder of the season.
Who thinks it's impossible to win a World Series? Is it still 1994?
How can you not give the man a thread on his birthday?
This paragraph would be stupid enough even if Boras were Bonds's agent, which he's not. (Next up: blaming Scott Boras for Katrina.)
It's not a matter of Bonds's agent "letting" him sign with one of those teams. Once more: The. Teams. Are. Colluding.
Yes; there's no telling what calamity would befall Detroit if Sheffield and Bonds were combined in the same clubhouse. Earthquake? Flood? Plague?
Anyway, there's a simple solution to this problem that doesn't exist, which would actually solve the problem that does exist: replace Sheffield with Bonds and release Sheffield, since Sheffield appears finished.
Just because you don't believe that teams consider clubhouse relations and player personalities doesn't mean it's true. Sheffield doesn't like Bonds, and has been vocal about it in the past, and has never been shy about loudly voicing his complaints to anyone who will listen, or causing a distraction. Detroit will consider this when evaluating whether or not to sign Bonds. Whether or not they weigh it correctly is another question.
Also, how likely is Detroit to eat about $20M for the ability to sign Bonds for the next two months? I'm inclined to think the answer is "not very", or they would have cut him already. For whatever reason, Detroit doesn't seem to think Sheffield is done, or aren't willing to admit it to others.
Indeed, the A's failure to sign Bonds is inexplicable, given the recent events which have shown that this is definitely a season they're trying to win now at all costs instead of rebuild for the future.
Anyway, this thread feels like old news... there are many teams who could benefit greatly by having Bonds in their lineup. They'll cite personality and public relations as the reasons not to sign him, but I don't buy it.
Not likely, since teams seem to have trouble understanding the concept of sunk cost. But Sheffield's last 400 PAs have been beyond horrible: he has a .696 OPS this year (260 PAs) and had something like a .565 OPS in August and September of last year (141 PAs). He's 39 years old and has been hurt or bad for a lot of the past three seasons. Even setting the Bonds issue aside, the Tigers have to find a better solution; they can't play Sheffield down the stretch if he's hitting this poorly.
Thanks for mentioning that. I didn't realize that there was an ignore list capability. Now that I know it exists, I'm curious as to who is the most ignored member of BTF.
I'm inclined to agree with you. At this point, those who believe that this is collusion are unlikely to be swayed towards no-collusion by any argument, and those who don't believe that this is collusion are unlikely to be swayed towards collusion by any argument. Those who don't have an opinion either way probably just laugh at these threads.
Of course, that won't stop me from arguing, as I seem to enjoy banging my head against brick walls, which may also explain why I keep arguing.
Even in the "Mt. Crushmore" days of the late 1980s? (Though even then, none of the four "sluggers" - Brunansky, Gaetti, Hrbek, Puckett, ever hit more than 34 HR in a season for the Twins. Gaetti did hit 35 for the Royals later.)
Yeah, it feels like old news to me, too. But anything that increases Joey B.'s involvement is a good thing. Butt-boy and Veejayjay-girl awayyyyyyyyyyyy!
This is largely true. I do think that public perception also plays a role - GMs (and the owners who authorize the signings) don't like to admit that they've made a brutal mistake, which is what releasing someone with $20M on their contract looks like, even if the organization would be better if they did admit it.
If you change that to hurt and bad, then I agree.
That's probably true too. Does Detroit have anyone available in-house who might make a suitable replacement, or did all the options go to Florida in the Cabrera deal.
I only started following baseball in the late 1980s, which is why I qualified it with "within my memory", and the Twins weren't really on my radar. Either way, the Twins seem to have been focusing more on small-ball offensive players for 20 years now - doubles in the gap, hit-and-runs, defense first, and so on. At this point, it just seems like an organizational philosphy.
Except that just a couple weeks ago we were within 4 games at one point and the trades we made haven't appreciably hurt us at all yet. Gallagher's 1-0, 3.00 with the A's in two starts and Braden won the one "Blanton start" we've missed so far.
The reason we're 10 back now is because we have one of the poo-pooiest offenses in the league, and Huston Street (who we're trying to trade) has been pretty poo-pooey as of late.
If we'd have had Bonds since the beginning of the season instead of throwing away plate appearances on the likes of Emil Brown, Mike Sweeney, and Wes Bankston, among others, Billy could have made all the same deals and we'd still probably be within 5 or 6.
Unless "Not quite as good a hitter as Ted Williams" is a limitation, I don't know WTF this guy is talking about.
Because we all know what happens to elite players who've had their careers artifically shortened, or who never had a decline phase. They NEVER loom larger in abstentia.
This is such obvious collusion by baseball it isn't even funny.
Amount of future income from MLB: $0.
Seeing him convicted and sent to prison: Priceless.
Where they may be butt-boyness going on. I'm sensing a pattern. An obsession, you might say. But is it unhealthy? Let's ask Veejayjay-girl...
I'm curious as to what part you think 33-year-old Emil Brown, coming off a .257/.300/.347 season with KC, is going to play in Oakland's future.
"Seeing him convicted and sent to prison: Priceless."
It'll happen, too, as long as they catch him passing nuclear secrets to the North Koreans at some point in the next six months. Otherwise, not so much.
Perhaps the lack of response to this is telling you something?
I'm joking, of course. Not that anyone can see this post.
I still love you! I ignore no one. I'm like Jesus that way.
Why do you allow African children to starve?
Jesus has me on "Keep Until Space Is Needed."
Seriously, is "Ignore" a liberally used feature? I have to imagine it makes things more confusing than it's worth.
I wonder what the Newstand looks like if you put Repoz on "Ignore."
Why do you allow African children to starve?
Hey, man, I said I'm like Jesus, not that I was Jesus. If I was Jesus, the A's would have a new stadium high above the clouds and the fans would be transported to the games by pegasi. And Dwayne Murphy would have eternal youth and play his shallow centerfield forever.
I have two people on Ignore, which doesn't really cause that many problems. The only reason I put those posters on Ignore was that they made me want to stop reading BTF, so being able to read the site in peace is worth a small amount of confusion.
I'd guess people have around an average of one poster on Ignore, although I don't really know.
I doubt it's used liberally here, although Joey B. may find himself a target unless he can come up with fresher material than "butt-boy". Most people here, even when they state a controversial or annoying position, aren't deliberately trolling.
At Fark, on the other hand, it seems to be used quite extensively, especially on the "Politics" tab.
Now that's comedy.
I'm 100% serious about this, when is this finally going to be put to rest? Are we going to go through this absurd routine all of next year too?
When someone signs Bonds, or when Bonds is obviously no longer a ML-quality player.
My guess on the latter would be three years or so.
So, right around the time he's getting released from prison, in other words.
I believe that you are 100% serious. I believe that you are always 100% serious, actually.
Come on, now. I already made that joke.
I'm 100% serious about this, when is this finally going to be put to rest? Are we going to go through this absurd routine all of next year too?
Why don't you just ignore the ####### threads, then? You have some Pavlovian need to post in every Bonds thread, yet you keep ######## about them being posted. Shut the #### up about them, don't post in them, and perhaps you'll find things better. Jesus Christ.
Damn Jeff. I hope no one at works asks me why I'm giggling like a lunatic right now. How could I even begin to explain?
I could care less what "some people" think, be they long-time posters such as myself, or anyone else. I could even especially care less what you think. I just wish you'd either shut up about Bonds articles (being posted, feel free to say whatever you want about the topic; though I think you're a useless nitwit on those topics as well) or go the #### away to another site that doesn't post Bonds articles.
And you think that I care what you think? Stick it where the sun don't shine, buddy.
I wouldn't bet so heavily on the nuclear secrets theory, if I were you. It looks like diplomatic relations there are thawing somewhat.
anyway, i still think the cards should sign bonds. we'd kill.
see, that's why i get ignored.
Again with the ass. Always ass.
Nope, but I'd at least think that you'd listen to anyone who reminds you that if you don't want to read threads about Bonds, you don't have to click on the little link. Nobody has you at gunpoint, so stop ########.
Stick it where the sun don't shine, buddy.
I'm not your buddy, guy.
see, that's why i get ignored.
Hi phredbird!
(Just felt like I should say something.)
I would also ask that a little decorum be exercised here and now? Thank you.
i keep bringing up the cards and bonds cuz tony said something about wishing they'd sign him. i just think that would be funny as hell.
didn't the mblpa say it was going to look into collusion re bonds? what happened with that?
I'm sure they're looking but I doubt they'll find anything tangible. Going public was there way of trying to apply pressure. TLR wants Bonds because TLR wants to win. It's what makes him so good at what he does.
exactly. when i say 'funny as hell' i mean i would enjoy it immensely. there'd be a bunch of crying in the pressbox and some grumbling from some of the fans, the players won't say anything one way or the other, and then the first time barry mashes one everybody in stl will go nuts ...
Friends of Barry saying they are just concerned about the market inefficiency of not signing Bonds because he's "a ML-quality player" are as oblivious as the people who think Bonds is going to be thrown in jail at any moment.
What about Kenny Lofton, Reggie Sanders, Royce Clayton, Jeff Cirillo? All of them could help out just about any ML team at a reasonable price. Does anyone presume that all of them are desperate for work and would take the minimum salary? No, they would rather sit out than get less money/a smaller role than they think they deserve. Why would it be different for Bonds? And don't link to those implausible quotes from his agent.
You make an interesting point, but Bonds had more collective value by himself last season than all those guys combined. I don't think you can lump him with any of those guys except Lofton. Maybe.
You mean you couldn't care less. If you could care less, that means you do care, not that you don't care.
He doesn't want to retire without a ring. At this point in his career, after all he's accomplished, I'd imagine that he's not alone in feeling that he is entitled to one.
I don't see any way that the MLBPA or anyone else could prove anything about collusion, unless Dave Littlefield dropped his memo from Bud Selig on his way out the door.
Barry Bonds had a 170 OPS+ last year. Reggie Sanders last had a 170 OPS+ in high school or something. He last had a good season of regular playing time in 2005. He was miserable in 2006. In 2007, he was good in all of 73 ABs, which isn't exactly highly significant. Could he be of some use? Perhaps. But an awful lot of 40 year olds who haven't played well in 3 years don't have jobs; lots of teams would prefer not to find out.
Look, Bonds is exactly like the group you describe, except for, you know, being good. None of those guys were as good at their bests as Bonds was last year. And none of those guys were at their bests last year.
Theoretically he could be doing it in order to gain sympathy for his client. Also, he has the unique advantage that no GM is going to claim that Bonds/Borris are in reality seeking more money, since then the GM would receive the negative publicity from admitting that he pursued Barry Bonds, but without the beneficial effects of actually having Bonds on the team.
Who said that?
Who said that?
:( D'oh.
On the other hand, a function by which you can read the comment, but not know who posted it, could be handy.
Start Matt Joyce in LF, Thames to DH. Problem solved.
Especially in threads like these, I could probably take a lot of good guesses.
Yay!!!!!!
kevin, I'm probably the only one left in this thread who can even see this.
In recent years, the Cards have had pretty good luck with ex-Bucs.
How likely is it that some teams have unpublicized financial information that would simultaneously undermine Borris & Bonds' credibility and strengthen their own alibi against collusion, but they're sitting on this information because of "negative publicity"? You mean as opposed to the parade of "Why is Bonds at home?" articles we've been seeing?
I like any projection system that uses Kip Wells as a comp for Barry Bonds.
OK, but how's the soup?
Is this the reason why Lofton remains unsigned? Because my big hope for the begining of the season was for the Twins to sign Lofton and start Gomez in Rochester.
Joey called me that once WRT Bonds, too. Probably the only time me and Ray will both get name-called by Joey B. on an issue. ;- I am not a use-the-ignore-list kind of guy, though.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main