Official Barry Bonds Countdown Thread

[tuq]

RedBean,

There's an easier way to circumvent the profanity filter than that. PM for details.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is true that, excluding the 2001 season, Bonds never hit more than 49 home runs in a season -- a number that has been bested many times. However, Bond's peak years of production, 2000 - 2004, came when he was 35 to 39 years old. Hitting this many home runs so late in one's career is unprecedented:

* In 130 years of major league history, only 11 times has a man aged 35 or over hit 45 or more home runs. Bonds did it five of those eleven times. Ruth did it twice; no one else did it more than once.
* Since turning 35, Bonds has hit 300 home runs. The next-closest is Aaron with 245.
* Bonds is the all-time leader for home runs at ages 36, 38 and 39, and is second all-time at ages 35, 37 and 41. At earlier ages? He doesn't exist. He's 7th all-time at age 28 (46 homers in 1993), but doesn't even crack the top 10 at any other age.
*
* Prior to age 35, Bonds hit one home run every 15.68 at bats -- an extremely good rate. Since age 35, he has hit one ever 8.77 at-bats -- almost unheard of. (Ruth averaged 1 homer per 11.76 AB over his career, and never did better than 1 in 10 during any 5-year stretch. The record is held by Mark McGwire, another suspected steroid user: 1 home run per 10.61 AB over his career, and 1 in 8.13 during his five peak years.)


it is odd how ungodly good at hitting HRs bonds got at the end of his career..maybe it was sheer skill and luck
but given the huge amount of circumstantial evidence that he used one would assume steroids played a factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please check out Maris' freak season and look at his average and his other best seasons.

Please check out Aaron's production in his mid to late 30's.

Then read a chapter on outliers in a stats book or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

Babe Ruth was the best or second best player in baseball as late as age 37. And was still a top 10 player as late as age 39.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was just trying to comment on the sidepoint that it is also evidence that all the guys on that team are whiny bitches who don't care about winning and are probably playing for the wrong reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmmm. I'm gonna go ahead and believe my friends and the stories I've heard - knowing that they're stand-up guys and the farthest thing from whiners - instead of going with this wild conjecture you're offering.

[/ QUOTE ]

Voting a guy off the team for being a jerk= whiny bitches, IMO. I'm not offering wild conjecture, I'm offering a definition of a phrase. You can choose to reject that definition if you want, but I'm not trying to pretend I know your friends better than you. You described their behavior, that behavior is the very definition of being whiny bitches IMO. No conjecture.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think we can both agree that it's super weird. The difference of opinion we're having is that you're assigning the guilt on the 'whiny bitches' and I'm seeing Bonds as being the problem.

Seriously, something like this is unheard of. This is a powerhouse D-I program with a loaded roster and a chance to win it all, and yet there's mutiny. I'm sure they weren't proud of themselves - why would these guys do something like that if Bonds wasn't an insufferable prick? Your response will be 'because they're whiny bitches'. I think that's a dumb, poorly thought out thing to say, so we will agree to disagree.

Also,

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said earlier, your anecdote is strong evidence that Bonds is a huge prick, maybe even an unprecedented prick. But voting off your best player for being a prick is absurd. If it turns out Bonds raped all of their moms or electrocuted their dogs or something, its probably borderline (hyperbole!) but come on. This is like quitting a poker game because you can't beat all the retards, they call with any two cards! It demonstrates a lack of understanding of where your bread gets buttered.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously. The burden of proof is on you, Drew! If you're going to claim he has used steroids, knowingly or unknowingly, you have to prove it! You can't say, "Well, you guys better prove he didn't! If you don't have any evidence that he hasn't, or if you don't believe he hasn't, then I win by default."

Um, no. You lose.

(Jesus christ 2p2 keeps failing.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I've already "proved" it to the extent I can on a message board, by presenting compelling evidence to that fact. Semantical parsing of words and red herrings followed, but not any disagreement with my assertion.
Redbean's already said he won't accept any evidence other than a confirmed violation of the MLB steroid policy, so it is impossible for me to "prove" Bonds used steroids to his satisfaction. Meanwhile, he has yet to even state that he thinks Bonds is clean. And even thayer has said that everyone knows Bonds did steroids, but so what.

I just don't understand all this semantical argumentation when everyone seems to agree that Bonds used steroids.

[tuq]

vhawk,

One of the stories I remember did involve dog electrocution.

[offTopic]

[ QUOTE ]
vhawk,

One of the stories I remember did involve dog electrocution.

[/ QUOTE ]

...and that started the fires?!

Now we're getting somewhere!

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
Drew,

Please prove to us that you've never raped little children.

1-2-3 go.

[/ QUOTE ]

The key difference here is that there is no evidence that I have ever raped little children, whereas there is a lot of evidence that Bonds did steroids.

If this were a trial, I would present all my evidence that Bonds did roids, then the defense would attempt to (a) refute my evidence (that witness's eyesight is bad) AND (b) introduce other evidence in its favor (my client wasn't in town that night).

So far, the Bonds defenders have only offered (a).

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
However, Bond's peak years of production, 2000 - 2004, came when he was 35 to 39 years old. Hitting this many home runs so late in one's career is unprecedented:


[/ QUOTE ]

Hank Aaron hit more homeruns in the 5 year period from age 35-39 than he did in the 5 year period from ages 25-29 or 30-34.

Known, proven, or otherwise admitted users of steroids (ie, Canseco, Caminiti, etc) have shown a sharp drop off at these ages.

If anything, the stats show Bonds is a whole lot more like Aaron than being similar to known steroid users.

Also, hitting a lot of homeruns as you get older is not against MLB rules, nor does it constitute a violation of the MLB steroid policy.


[ QUOTE ]
maybe it was sheer skill and luck
but given the huge amount of circumstantial evidence that he used one would assume steroids played a factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bonds 1986-1999 used ash bats.
Bonds 2000-present used custom made, maple "SAM" bats.

What factor does this account for, if any?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
vhawk,

One of the stories I remember did involve dog electrocution.

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[THAY3R]

Drew,

I present to you Exhibit A:




I see no needles anywhere.