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

[Jack of Arcades]

bpc, I wasn't trying to sway you earlier, but I guess I'll try now.

Purely statistically, what do you think the difference in wins would be if you had Bonds on your team instead of Griffey? No clubhouse effect. 2 wins sounds reasonable to me, but it could be higher or lower depending on what metrics or time period you use for their primes.

2 wins/season is huge, and it's worth like $8m. Is Griffey's leadership and clubhouse effect worth that much?

[Pudge714]

bpc,
Bonds has had more playoff sucess than Griffey.
If Bonds wore a backwards hat and smiled would he be better than Griffey.

[BLdSWtTRs]

This one isn't even close.

What does Bonds have 7,8 MVPs and he's been robbed of at least two?

His OPS is way higher than ARod and Griffey.

[Mr biggums]

[ QUOTE ]


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

[/ QUOTE ]

And that's why you're not a GM. Derek Jeter and David Ortiz over Barry Bonds? You realize that you'll win more games with Bonds, but you still choose not to take him. Trolling much?

[jesusarenque]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a GM, you would suck, and your team would be terrible.

[Oski]

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



[/ QUOTE ]

and with the bases full