ESPN Poll : Bonds, Griffey, or A-Rod in their prime?

[bpc009]

[ QUOTE ]
Were you around in 2001? Did you realize that Barry Bonds got intentionally walked with the bases empty?

Full post season stats:
9 Postseason Ser 2-7 48 151 33 37 8 2 9 24 52 26 .245 .433 .503 9 1 0 4 1

But sample size, yadda yadda, only one year of prime barry bonds, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was, and that's why I would have loved him on my fantasy team. I was also around for Big Mac's year too, but I'm not going to start a team with him either. For some reason, I also took the "healthy" part of the equation to mean no roids. In other words, Barry when he was a 5 tool player. That Barry was a great overall player, but didn't instill the "I might hit a HR every at bat" fear in his opponents, and was known to choke in the playoffs.

[THAY3R]

[ QUOTE ]
Eh, I'd go 1990-2004.

His lowest OPS+ in this time period was 161.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would just like to quote this again for it's insaneness.


In other news, Griffey's highest OPS+ year was a 172(good enough to be Bonds 13th best season), and he has topped 155 only 3 times.


But yea, "Fear instilled on opponents" and "Media's perception of one's clutchness" and "Symbolic plays of a franchise" definitely need to be a factor and ultimately sway the pendulum back towards Griffey.

[Jack of Arcades]

Also note that he finished 2nd in MVP voting in his "worst" year, not counting 1999 when he had a nearly identical OPS+ but missed time.

Of the years Bonds could qualify for the batting title:

OBP
First place in the NL - 4 times
2nd place in the NL - 3 times
4th - twice
5th - once.

SLG
First place - 3 times
3rd - once
4th - three times
5th - once
6th - once

OPS
1st - Five times, all from 1990-1995.
2nd - Twice
Third - three times

His lowest OPS was .924 in 1991, when he lead the league.

He's been first or second in walks every full year since 1990. He was third in 1989.

He made 7 top 10s in stolen bases, and is the 2nd active leader in SB.

He was intentionally walked 43 times... in 1993. (Griffey's highest total is 25).

Oh yeah, he has 2 less golden gloves than Griffey.

[bpc009]

Bonds has much better numbers than Griffey. I will not argue that.

I also think that pre steriods Bonds is one of the top 5 statistical players in the history of the game (clearly steriods Bonds has THE best stats). If I had to choose between him and ARod to start a team, I would choose Bonds. But in a choice between Bonds and fun Griffey (not the injured moaping one), I would choose Griffey. Then again, I would choose many other players than Bonds to build a team. Coming back at me with stats will not sway my opinion. I gave Bonds the best stats award years ago.

[Triumph36]

at least someone's here arguing the griffey side

people have been programmed by the media to think that these bonds/rodriguez dramabombs have a huge effect on the teams they play for, when it's easily demonstrable that they don't. that is how you sell papers/magazines/ads on sportscenter.

[sylar]

[ QUOTE ]
at least someone's here arguing the griffey side

people have been programmed by the media to think that these bonds/rodriguez dramabombs have a huge effect on the teams they play for, when it's easily demonstrable that they don't. that is how you sell papers/magazines/ads on sportscenter.

[/ QUOTE ]

uhhh... what effect does griffey have on his team? how many times have they gone deep into contention/postseason?

[Triumph36]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
at least someone's here arguing the griffey side

people have been programmed by the media to think that these bonds/rodriguez dramabombs have a huge effect on the teams they play for, when it's easily demonstrable that they don't. that is how you sell papers/magazines/ads on sportscenter.

[/ QUOTE ]

uhhh... what effect does griffey have on his team? how many times have they gone deep into contention/postseason?

[/ QUOTE ]

i suggest reading comprehension - i am not saying that griffey should be voted ahead of bonds or rodriguez at all. i'm saying at least someone on this board is trying to make that argument, so we can see what it looks like.

and griffey's ALDS in 1995 was pretty good, fwiw.

[sylar]

[ QUOTE ]
i suggest reading comprehension - i am not saying that griffey should be voted ahead of bonds or rodriguez at all. i'm saying at least someone on this board is trying to make that argument, so we can see what it looks like.

and griffey's ALDS in 1995 was pretty good, fwiw.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, but the context is somewhat skewed. sure, Bonds and ARod may be portrayed as hurtful drama in the papers, but that should not really be a factor in a Bonds-ARod-Griffey poll. not because it doesn't exist, but because all three (and pretty much any superstar on any team) come with it.

that ALDS was only 5 games. he only had 1 post-season HR after that (10 games). it was a sick series, but that's it.

[Triumph36]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i suggest reading comprehension - i am not saying that griffey should be voted ahead of bonds or rodriguez at all. i'm saying at least someone on this board is trying to make that argument, so we can see what it looks like.

and griffey's ALDS in 1995 was pretty good, fwiw.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, but the context is somewhat skewed. sure, Bonds and ARod may be portrayed as hurtful drama in the papers, but that should not really be a factor in a Bonds-ARod-Griffey poll. not because it doesn't exist, but because all three (and pretty much any superstar on any team) come with it.

that ALDS was only 5 games. he only had 1 post-season HR after that (10 games). it was a sick series, but that's it.

[/ QUOTE ]

it shouldn't? Dude, don't you know that team chemistry is everything and that Bonds and Rodriguez HURT THE TEAM? When did Griffey in his prime HURT THE TEAM?

And most of the voters just plain don't like Bonds and Rodriguez too. If you think that isn't a factor, you're crazy.

[bpc009]

Remember, with the original question we were supposed to put on our GM hats, not just our stat analyzer hats. *Putting GM hat on, and...*

Ironically I think the answer to this is both Bonds and Griffey.

The problem I have with Bonds is that he is a lonewolf in a team game. Fine if he was just a cog, but he's not. He's the best player without question. Hence he'll always be looked up to to lead, but he wants no part of that. Thus I wouldn't choose him. To me, it's too hard to make the rest of the team work well with your best player not interested in being the team leader. The only way I could see it working real well is if Bonds had a friend on the team who was good enough player for him to consider as a partner, who could also bridge the gap between Bonds and the rest of the team. Enter 90s Griffey. He seems to be one of, in not Bonds' only friend in the league. He also seemed like a great clubhouse guy. He also showed against the Yankees in '95 that he could inspire his teammates, and bring the best out in them. The two of them together would seem to make a potent combo.

Alone, Bonds is great. But alone on the team, as a GM I don't like it.