Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, January 20, 2006

SF Gate: Alou: Bonds may bat 2nd for Giants

It’s up to you not to heed the line-up
I don’t wanna kill!

When Barry Bonds checks into spring training next month, he and Felipe Alou should have one doozy of a conversation about a radical idea the manager has. Alou is thinking about batting Bonds second in the lineup this season.

Felipe Alou…..If Barry gets out of the lineup batting second, then you can plug someone into that spot without breaking the lineup in two. When you take the cleanup guy out, you have no protection for the third guy.

I’m going to have to be real careful about this. I believe spring training is going to tell the story about how I go about it.

 

Repoz Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:33 PM | 66 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: giants

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. jacjacatk Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:53 PM (#1829970)
This is going to be an impressive departure from "normal" baseball thinking...

right up to the point where Barry hast to start bunting the leadoff hitter over.
   2. Steve Treder Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:55 PM (#1829971)
I've only been advocating Bonds batting 2nd for about 5 years now. It figures that when he's on his last legs is when they'd finally consider trying it. Oh well.
   3. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:58 PM (#1829976)
...so he's doing something smart (putting a guy who gets on 60% of the time second) for a dumb reason (not having to bat his defensive replacement 4th). Oh well. Blind squirrel, nut.
   4. azibuck Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:58 PM (#1829977)
The Clash, nice.
   5. Rancischley Leweschquens (Tim Wallach was my Hero) Posted: January 20, 2006 at 03:02 PM (#1829978)
At first, I thought it was a strange idea, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. Bonds is obviously a great RBI producer, but he's even better at getting on base. Anybody can produce RBI (to a certain extent anyway), but not everybody is able to get on base (well, I don't think I'm telling anything new here...). With Wynn following him, Bonds should get plenty of walks (as if he needed that! Could he actually get even more?), so Wynn and Alou should see some good pitches and often have someone on base when the come at bat.

Maybe I'm too much a Felipe Alou fan (he gave us some great years up here). I might be completly wrong. But if Bonds accepts, I think this could be a nice move.
   6. stealfirstbase Posted: January 20, 2006 at 03:35 PM (#1830014)
Or this could be like Ozzie Guillen when he says things he has no intention of doing, like batting Juan Uribe second. Or Iguchi ninth.

Let Bonds hit wherever. He's just going to tear the cover off the ball.
   7. Artie Ziff Posted: January 20, 2006 at 03:35 PM (#1830015)
A lot of S.F. fans I know have been predicting this for years. I assume it would work just fine. A base on balls is just as effective as a sacrifice hit.
   8. The Keith Law Blog Blah Blah (battlekow) Posted: January 20, 2006 at 03:50 PM (#1830044)
The Clash are in the preview for that Anthony Hopkins movie, The World's Fastest Indian, too. And, for a change, it's actually a good song: "Police On My Back."
   9. Van Lingle Mungo Jerry Posted: January 20, 2006 at 03:52 PM (#1830049)
Of course, Bonds' steroidally and bacterially ravaged knees could make him as big a base-clogger as the Bengie Molinas, Jason Phillipses and Paul Konerkos of the world. Will he be able to score from second on a double?
   10. shoewizard Posted: January 20, 2006 at 04:07 PM (#1830077)
I want to give Alou alot of credit, but then he says this:

"But I am thinking about batting him (Winn) third. If the power he showed is for real, and I believe it is for real, I have to put him where he can drive in some runs for us."


At age 31 Winn enjoyed career highs in BA, OBP, Slg, HR's, & Doubles. All thanks to an incredible hot streak, (that won my fantasy league for me I might add). So while I have a soft spot for Winn in my heart, this just seems incredibly naive to think Winn has suddenly become the type of slugging rbi man he is looking for the 3 hole.
   11. John Reynard Posted: January 20, 2006 at 04:25 PM (#1830116)
Batting Bonds second makes sense for 3 reasons.

First, NOBODY protects Barry. You'd have to have Albert Pujolz to do it and the Giants don't. Thus he doesn't get many RBI opps anyhows cause people will just walk him even with a guy on 1st and only 1 out.

Second, batting 2nd will allow Barry to get more PA with less playing time in the field. This maximizes his value to the team as much as possible while reducing his negative (defense) as much as possible.

Finally, Whoever leads off will make it on base maybe 33% of the time. The one situation I don't see opposing managers walking Bonds intentionally in is 1st inning, man on 1st and nobody out.

Downsides to doing this:

Bonds might not want to or might change his hitting approach.

Bonds might clog the bases badly if he's lost more speed.

Opposing managers could conceivably start a situational lefty then yank them after the 1st if they want to be LaRussa-like.
   12. bunyon Posted: January 20, 2006 at 04:29 PM (#1830128)
So, as good a place as any for idle speculation:

Bonds' line and PAs for the year?

310/440/690, 280 PAs is my guess
   13. Hang down your head, Tom Foley Posted: January 20, 2006 at 04:35 PM (#1830143)
Downsides to doing this:

Opposing managers could conceivably start a situational lefty then yank them after the 1st if they want to be LaRussa-like.


I think wasting an opponent's pitcher would be a plus for the Giants.
   14. "Catching Dianetics" by Dr. L. Ron Karkovice Posted: January 20, 2006 at 04:50 PM (#1830185)
Anybody can produce RBI (to a certain extent anyway), but not everybody is able to get on base (well, I don't think I'm telling anything new here...). With Wynn following him, Bonds should get plenty of walks (as if he needed that! Could he actually get even more?), so Wynn and Alou should see some good pitches and often have someone on base when the come at bat.

- I sure hope Early Wynn comes back in 2006 to bat 3rd for the Giants. It would make him just the 3rd "5-decade" man in baseball history.
   15. The Balls of Summer Posted: January 20, 2006 at 04:57 PM (#1830200)
Opposing managers could conceivably start a situational lefty then yank them after the 1st if they want to be LaRussa-like

Since situational lefties have never really had much impact on Bonds (Ray King? Mike Myers?), I would welcome this strategy.
   16. Rusty Priske Posted: January 20, 2006 at 05:25 PM (#1830252)
Bad idea.


Not a bad idea strategically, but a bad idea for human resource management.

Bonds won't like it and doing things that Bonds doesn't like is a bad idea.

Stick him in third or fourth (I prefer third), and watch him break that all-time homerun record. Don't screw around.
   17. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity Posted: January 20, 2006 at 05:42 PM (#1830289)
If this is accompanied by the pitcher moving up to seventh, they're all set.
   18. Backlasher Posted: January 20, 2006 at 05:48 PM (#1830299)
...so he's doing something smart (putting a guy who gets on 60% of the time second) for a dumb reason (not having to bat his defensive replacement 4th). Oh well. Blind squirrel, nut.


As has been mentioned, I don't know how smart it is, and I think Felipe Alou may agree, to force those knees to run more than they have to.

Bonds has alreadly legitimately complained about the stress and fatigue of all those times on base prior to this season.

I'm trying to remember those all lineup probability numbers, but maybe I'll try to sim it using Szym's Zips, but I'd initially opine that you are going to increase (1) the number of pitches while on base; (2) Number of running opportunities for Bonds AND cost him RBIs that will not necessarily be picked up by other players.

If he were 35, the Runs+RBIs for Bonds would probably be a wash or perhaps even work to the Giants advantage, assuming no injury. Now, I'm not sure if it won't work to a disadvantage. But more important, I think you are increasing the injury potential of Bonds, which is definately going to cost you runs, win probability, and everything else that you strive for.

The utility of the experiment greatly depends on the health of Bonds, or what medicines he's taking for those knees.
   19. MM1f Posted: January 20, 2006 at 05:56 PM (#1830316)
I'll go with 280/420/590

I couldnt decide between him collapsing somewhat and bing the same old Barry so i tried to pick a point sortve in between (though i don think he;ll really hit what i put-he'll either be way over or under...sshows how useful i am at projecting things like this)
   20. Jose Molina wants a nickname like "A-Rod" Posted: January 20, 2006 at 06:03 PM (#1830334)
290/500/700
   21. KronicFatigue Posted: January 20, 2006 at 06:08 PM (#1830349)
i still contend that the best place to start Bonds is on the bench. Then, you pinch hit him when there is a maximum opportunity for rbis. If the game turns out to be "not close", then you just give him the full day's rest.
   22. G A Delgado Posted: January 20, 2006 at 06:16 PM (#1830363)
315/470/620
   23. bunyon Posted: January 20, 2006 at 06:18 PM (#1830370)
Hmm, I think KronicFatigue may, in fact, be Hank Aaron.

I think the bigger question about Bonds is how many PAs? How healthy will he be? We've read about how Dale Murphy had a similar injury and he never really recoverd. Bonds is older than Murph was and, if one believes BB has been artificial the last few years and isn't now, that further lowers his projected PAs.

So, I think he'll be very, very good but not Bondsesque but in not a lot of PAs as he spends a lot of time on the bench or DL. I don't think he gets to 755 this year even with no trip to the DL.
   24. Srul Itza Posted: January 20, 2006 at 06:51 PM (#1830441)
Awful lot of assumptions here that Bonds is still BONDS!!

I am not so sure. Giving Bonds the benefit of a doubt he may not deserve, and assuming that PEDs were not THAT big of a factor in his 2000-2004 run, he is still going to be 41, and coming off a year of continuous knee surgery.

A lot of his stupendous sabermetric statistics during that period were the result of sever scrotal deficiency on the part of opposing managers. They subtracted a huge number of outs and at bats, resulting in inflated OBP and SLG. He may have had an OBP north of .500, but his best BA was .370, and I doubt he has another one of those in him. In other words, if they pitched to him more, he might get some more dingers, but he would also make a lot more outs.

Are ML managers going to continue that strategy? Maybe, but maybe they will think that the new Barry (has his body begun to shrink yet? or his head?) is no longer so fearsome. Okay, so he still had a home run every 8.5 at bats when he came back last year, but at the start of the season, maybe they challenge him more. And maybe we will see a different result.

As to whether he would run more, that would be an interesting simulation. If he bats second, presumably he gets on base with 0 or 1 out. A good DP candidate, since I don't see him getting down there fast enough to break it up. If he bats 3rd, he would be coming up a lot with 2 outs, so maybe he is not on base so much. But if he bats 4th, which Felipe used to do a lot, he would come up with nobody on, and then he is on base the whole inning. Of course, this all gets shuffled after the first inning, and will be dependent on whether opposing managers are less likely to walk him with a runner on first and nobody out, or only one out in the inning and nobody on.
   25. Steve Treder Posted: January 20, 2006 at 06:56 PM (#1830453)
I don't think he gets to 755 this year even with no trip to the DL.

I agree. Obviously everything depends on his health, but realistically I doubt he'll be able to hit more than 20 or 30 HRs, and the possibility of him being shut down again for an extended period is very real. He's going to be 42 years old in July.
   26. Bob T Posted: January 20, 2006 at 07:12 PM (#1830493)
But the pitcher's spot preceded Bonds,
and so did Randy Winn.
The former was iffy,
And the latter was no Tony Gwynn.
   27. North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan Posted: January 20, 2006 at 07:18 PM (#1830504)
the possibility of him being shut down again for an extended period is very real.

That is quite a possibility, but I don't think Bonds batting second has much bearing on that happening. Bonds is going to have a *lot* of days off this year, which should mitigate any added strain from batting second. Also, I assume that Alou will pull Bonds whenever the Giants are significantly ahead or behind late in the game (which unfortunately means quite a bit of Finley, I fear). I would guess that the focus on the bullpen has something to do with this - holding leads becomes even more important when your best player is going to be pulled for a defensive replacement.

I like Pandryball's prediction - 315/470/620 - with about 400 PA.
   28. North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan Posted: January 20, 2006 at 07:21 PM (#1830507)
Oh - and also this supposedly allows Felipe Alou to have relatively stable 3 and 4 spots in the lineup, which would make someone else happy. Of course, injuries will screw that up too, but it's a nice thought.
   29. AROM Posted: January 20, 2006 at 07:29 PM (#1830525)
I think this move could help Bonds, as far as minimizing his time on base for health reasons.

He'll likely bat more often with noone on base, and pitchers won't walk him as much then.

Alou and Winn are the next best hitters, so you'd be less likely to walk Bonds if he's batting in front of them instead of behind, though they certainly aren't the kind of hitters to really protect him. They'd need to trade for Manny Ramirez for that. (Imagine Winn taking a break so they can field a Barry-Manny-Finley OF).

On the other hand, when he's on base he'll get there with 0 or 1 out more frequently than in the past, increasing the time he spends on base (as Backlasher mentioned in #18). He'll get slightly more PA/g as well.

I wouldn't worry so much about being on base, though, even if he had an .800 OBP Bonds spends far more time on his feet in the outfield. How he stands up to his defensive position will determine how much he can play in 2006.
   30. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: January 20, 2006 at 07:34 PM (#1830532)
.340/.590/.760
in 500 PA
   31. Backlasher Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:01 PM (#1830577)
I would guess that the focus on the bullpen has something to do with this


The focus on the bullpen may have something to do with having the worst save conversion rate in baseball last year.

I wouldn't worry so much about being on base, though, even if he had an .800 OBP Bonds spends far more time on his feet in the outfield.


I don't quite get this one Anaheim Monkey. He has to spend the same amount of time in the OF whether he bats 2nd or 4th. The question is does he have to run more when he bats 2nd. And that is too variable to solve analytically. Nevertheless, my working hypotheis would unless you really rearrange your lineup drastically. You have run producers and run creaters in your lineup. A normal lineup is designed to get em on, get em over, get em in. Lately a lineup is designed to get em on, get em on, get em on, and get em in.

If you have RBI men at 3 and 4 they are still your base clearers. IOW, it doesn't matter what Felipe intends and the precise lineup number he bats Bonds; if he is putting crappy hitters in front of 'em (and now we've got the #8, and pitcher in that cycle) and good hitters behind him, he has to run the bases more than if you put good hitters in front of him and crappy hitters behind em. And what is even more significant is Treder's prediction. If his HR's plummett, but OBP stays in the same range, he's on base more for the purposes of running. (I don't think he's complained about getting tired from trotting the bases after HRs).
   32. Mefisto Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:11 PM (#1830594)
Bonds might clog the bases badly if he's lost more speed.

On most teams this would be a real issue. But the 2006 Giants have about as much team speed as Ernie Lombardi. My grandmother (she's 97) wouldn't clog the bases for this team.
   33. Hang down your head, Tom Foley Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:14 PM (#1830598)
1.000/1.000/4.000 in 3 PA
   34. Traderdave Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:21 PM (#1830610)
The only running Bonds will do all year will be on basepaths. He won't run a single stride in the outfield.
   35. DCA Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:23 PM (#1830615)
Awful lot of assumptions here that Bonds is still BONDS!!

He did hit 286/404/667 in September. Clearly, that's not BONDS!! but it's easily consistent with what BONDS!! might put up in an off month, and would be a very good month for anybody else. And he isn't likely to be less healthy this year. At the very least, we should be pretty confident that he'll be the best hitter on the Giants and at least on a par with the best hitters in the game.
   36. Traderdave Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:23 PM (#1830616)
.265/.440/.540 in 180 PA
   37. Santanaland Diaries Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:26 PM (#1830619)
I don't quite get this one Anaheim Monkey. He has to spend the same amount of time in the OF whether he bats 2nd or 4th.

How often would the 2-spot shift in the batting order allow Alou to replace Bonds defensively earlier? How much does that compare to the extra times he spends on the basepaths?
   38. DCA Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:28 PM (#1830623)
I smell a Giambi-style prediction contest ... metric = (AVG difference + OBP diff + SLG diff)*(100 + PA diff)

262/389/617 in 434 PA
   39. Jose Canusee Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:36 PM (#1830637)
Seems I remember reading that Ted Williams was occasionally batted 2nd in his later years for the IBB reason but don't have evidence. That would have had similar pros/cons and he might have had a better supporting cast in many of those years.
   40. Steve Treder Posted: January 20, 2006 at 08:40 PM (#1830645)
Seems I remember reading that Ted Williams was occasionally batted 2nd in his later years for the IBB reason but don't have evidence.

FWIW, the only Williams years we have Retrosheet split data available for are 1959 and 1960, and he never batted second in either of those years.
   41. Eraser-X is emphatically dominating teh site!!! Posted: January 20, 2006 at 09:04 PM (#1830711)
The Giants should get Thomas to play first. That would be awesome to see those old guys hobbling around the bases together.
   42. A triple short of the cycle Posted: January 20, 2006 at 09:43 PM (#1830803)
"I want to leave Randy in one slot because he was so good in the leadoff slot last season," Alou said. "But I am thinking about batting him third. If the power he showed is for real, and I believe it is for real, I have to put him where he can drive in some runs for us."


Winn sure picked the right place and time to go on a half-season tear huh? Stupid stupid Giants.

Anyone seen the video for The Call Up? It's quite silly.
   43. DCW3 Posted: January 20, 2006 at 10:04 PM (#1830831)
.317/.514/.706, in 351 PAs.
   44. smileyy Posted: January 20, 2006 at 10:44 PM (#1830882)
#24...I'll just let you read that one over again.

He may have had an OBP north of .500, but his best BA was .370

It could only have been better if you had said "only .370"...
   45. Srul Itza Posted: January 20, 2006 at 10:48 PM (#1830887)
What is your point, smileyy? The difference between .370 batting and the OBP means that if he puts the ball in play, he makes an out more often than if you just walk him. I doubt he has another .370 in him, so pitch to the guy.
   46. Dizzypaco Posted: January 20, 2006 at 10:56 PM (#1830898)
Bonds said at the end of last year that he was going to lose some weight, in order to better stay healthy and take less stress off the knees. Anyone know if he's doing it? Any predictions what his playing weight will be this year?

If he does lose weight, for whatever reason (different exercise routine, different diet, less illegal stuff), there's a chance his power will shrink as well - less muscles, less homers. No guarantee, but its a possibility.
   47. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 20, 2006 at 11:15 PM (#1830920)
I think this is a good move for the Giants. It makes the IBB more valuble.

1.000/1.000/4.000 in 3 PA

Against he Dodgers no less. Actually, if we are repeating the Giambi contset with Bonds, my guess is .300/.470/.645 in 382 PA, no longer the feared slugger of 2001-2004.

But the pitcher's spot preceded Bonds,
and so did Randy Winn.
The former was iffy,
And the latter was no Tony Gwynn.


Oh, yeah well
<rap>
Bonds is battin' second due to his OBP
where he'll bring his awsome bat an' 7 MVP
The Giants have a healthy Bonds now; you know what he can bring
All those silver sluggers and golden gloves, he jus' does every thing
except you know (chuckle) win a ring
I know his gloves no good no more, but jus' look at his bat
from '01 unitil '04, only Ruth comes close to that
Sure Bonds is slowin' down now and needs his days of rest
But when he's in the line-up, his bat is surely best
Thats the reson why I fear S.F. in the N.L. West
'cause Bonds is comin' back to lead the Giants to first place
Good thing he's still in left field, not over at first base
'coure as a DH he could do his bestest work
That's why I hope the Giants choose to trade him to New York
</rap>
   48. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 20, 2006 at 11:18 PM (#1830921)
If Bonds losses weight, it will probably be from a having a smaller appetite, as steroids increase appetite. Just look at what happened to Sosa.
   49. DCA Posted: January 20, 2006 at 11:59 PM (#1830971)
No, I think he just stopped smoking the herb.
   50. Moloka'i Three-Finger Brown (Declino DeShields) Posted: January 21, 2006 at 12:34 AM (#1831002)
Bonds said at the end of last year that he was going to lose some weight, in order to better stay healthy and take less stress off the knees. Anyone know if he's doing it?

Yesterday on his radio show, Charley Steiner said he saw Bonds at a function recently. Steiner noted that Bonds looked like he lost about 15 pounds and "was in one of his good moods."
   51. Rafael Bellylard: The Grinch of Orlando. Posted: January 21, 2006 at 12:47 AM (#1831021)
For the Giambi-like contest: .275/.385/.540 in 300 PA. Trips to the DL: 3
   52. DCW3 Posted: January 21, 2006 at 12:57 AM (#1831024)
For the Giambi-like contest: .275/.385/.540 in 300 PA.

I'll bet you a jillion dollars that if his AVG and SLG are that high, his OBP is going to be much better than .385.
   53. The Run Fairy Posted: January 21, 2006 at 01:01 AM (#1831031)
That's why I hope the Giants choose to trade him to New York

That would solve their hole at the DH slot, certainly, especially if he hits like 2001-2004 or even like last year for a whole season.

Nice rap by the way.
   54. The Run Fairy Posted: January 21, 2006 at 01:03 AM (#1831034)
I'll bet you a jillion dollars

It doesn't seem like much of a bet if you don't even use a real number. I'll bet you i dollars against that.
   55. SPICEY WITH A SIDE OF BEER ON A BABYYYYYYY Posted: January 21, 2006 at 01:04 AM (#1831035)
My Bonds prediction: .258/.402/.580, 300 PA
   56. Srul Itza Posted: January 21, 2006 at 01:06 AM (#1831037)
My guess for Bonds:

.277/.420/.580 in 450 PA

The Man Who Fell to Earth
   57. DCW3 Posted: January 21, 2006 at 01:12 AM (#1831046)
It doesn't seem like much of a bet if you don't even use a real number.

Tell that to Philip Fry.

Fine, I'll bet you $250, which is everything I've earned in my career to date.
   58. Flynn Posted: January 21, 2006 at 01:20 AM (#1831053)
I predict 1.000/1.000/4.000

because Barry Bonds is cooool!
   59. Rafael Bellylard: The Grinch of Orlando. Posted: January 21, 2006 at 02:32 AM (#1831125)
For the Giambi-like contest: .275/.385/.540 in 300 PA.

Was a typo on my part.... .275/.385/.450 in 300 PA's

And I think I'm still high. First exhibit: Sosa, Sammy 2005.
   60. Shock Posted: January 21, 2006 at 02:52 AM (#1831139)
.330/.530/.670

Trips to DL: 2
Intentional walks: 85
Articles about how he's on the juice: OVERFLOW
   61. DCW3 Posted: January 21, 2006 at 03:16 AM (#1831149)
Was a typo on my part.... .275/.385/.450 in 300 PA's

I would still be absolutely stunned if his walk rate is that low.
   62. ligtreb Posted: January 21, 2006 at 08:11 AM (#1831278)
Why not have Bonds bat leadoff while we're at it?
   63. mgl Posted: January 21, 2006 at 08:32 AM (#1831287)
It is pathetic that in the "information age" that we live in, that batting your best hitter (with a ginomrous OBP no less) 2nd is considered "radical." Your best hitter in general should bat either 2nd or 4th. You would, however, prefer to have your #2 hitter's outs be strikeouts, to avoid the GDP. With the shift, however, I am not sure how many GDP's Bonds ground into (off the tiop of my head). We have a great chapter in our book (due out next month) on optimizing lineups. It is a misunderstood area. BTW, I agree that Bonds will probably be ay nowhere near the level of the last few years. Knee, age, and PED's. You never know though.
   64. Rafael Bellylard: The Grinch of Orlando. Posted: January 21, 2006 at 11:09 AM (#1831322)
I would still be absolutely stunned if his walk rate is that low.

I think his walk rate will start out high, but as other teams figure out he's a 42 yr old with gimpy knees and no juice, they'll be less afraid to pitch to him.
   65. bunyon Posted: January 21, 2006 at 01:42 PM (#1831351)
With the shift, however,

I hadn't thought of that. If Bonds were to come back as BONDS, batting him second might get them to knock of the shift. Which I think was a good defensive play and, so, would help the Giants a bit.

I think he won't fall as far as Sosa because I think he is naturally a much, much better hitter than Sosa. I recall stories of Ted Williams in his 60s still making good contact, he just could do the athletic parts of the game. I think Bonds goes that route. Flashes of the old Bonds interspersed with a guy who can't stay in the lineup. Which leaves fuzziness to the question of how much PEDs helped. (Unlike say, a BONDS! like season or a sosa like season).
   66. EddieA Posted: January 21, 2006 at 04:59 PM (#1831444)
You would, however, prefer to have your #2 hitter's outs be strikeouts, to avoid the GDP. With the shift, however, I am not sure how many GDP's Bonds ground into (off the tiop of my head).


No DP's last year in 52 PA.

He'll hit fly balls or pop ups for his outs.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
JPWF13
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 19 June 2017: Bipartisan baseball: Dems best GOP, give trophy to wounded Scalise
(793 - 9:57am, Jun 23)
Last: TDF, situational idiot

NewsblogOT - March 2017 NBA thread
(7030 - 9:52am, Jun 23)
Last: STIGGLES don't want to talk about cracker barrel

NewsblogBeyond the Box Score: On the lack of interest in Albert Pujols’s 600 HR and Adrián Beltré’s pursuit of 3,000 hits
(57 - 9:52am, Jun 23)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogThe Mets Are Pissed At Yasiel Puig For Admiring His Homer
(57 - 9:45am, Jun 23)
Last: Dillon Gee Escape Plan

NewsblogKyle Schwarber headed back to Triple-A Iowa
(35 - 9:44am, Jun 23)
Last: Jesus Frankenstein

Sox TherapyRed Sox Retire Rich Garces' Number
(3 - 9:31am, Jun 23)
Last: Batman

NewsblogRecounting the many ways baseball has changed in 20 years
(23 - 9:27am, Jun 23)
Last: AROM

NewsblogJarrod Dyson breaks up perfect game with bunt – and Justin Verlander isn’t mad
(30 - 9:25am, Jun 23)
Last: Hysterical & Useless

Sox TherapyMinor Moves
(1 - 9:03am, Jun 23)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogYour 2017 MLB local broadcaster rankings
(51 - 7:41am, Jun 23)
Last: Jose is El Absurd Bronson Y Pollo

NewsblogCan rising prospect be roundabout solution to Yankees’ 1st base problem? | New York Post
(9 - 1:58am, Jun 23)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogMy OMNI has a second name, it's CHATTER, for June 22, 2017
(47 - 1:48am, Jun 23)
Last: Jesus Frankenstein

Sox TherapyFeeling A Draft - Part II
(10 - 1:11am, Jun 23)
Last: Dillon Gee Escape Plan

NewsblogNegro Leagues Baseball Museum receives $1 million gift from MLB, players union
(10 - 10:52pm, Jun 22)
Last: Alex meets the threshold for granular review

Sox TherapyWitty Minor League Thread Title Here
(35 - 10:45pm, Jun 22)
Last: Jose is El Absurd Bronson Y Pollo

Page rendered in 0.6601 seconds
47 querie(s) executed