Bonds and Aaron from guys with ties to both

#26
#26
wbarron said:
Okay. Then what do you think constitutes the greatest? Greatest for a season? 5 seasons? 10 seasons? Career?

George Foster had arguably one of the best seasons ever in 1977. Same with Hack Wilson in 1929-30. Should they be in the debate?
Click to expand...
we will all define greatness a little differently, but the greatest of all time should be inarguably the greatest of his era. Two fit that bill - Ruth and Bonds. Everyone else, it's arguable.
 
#28
#28
ya see you all know nothing compared to Fine Vol about baseball, by the way what does ERA mean?
 
#29
#29
BigPapaVol said:
we will all define greatness a little differently, but the greatest of all time should be inarguably the greatest of his era. Two fit that bill - Ruth and Bonds. Everyone else, it's arguable.
Click to expand...

agree. equipment changes, exercise routines change, diets change, ballparks change. But what is constant is how you compare to your peers. And if we go by that relative basis, which I think is fair, then it's hard not to say Ruth is the greatest ever.
 
#30
#30
I'm surprised some are saying Bonds is unquestionably the greatest of his era... what about Griffey? Bonds has the edge in numbers, but what about Bonds' late career "explosion" and Griffey's body betraying him, both around the same time, ironically.
 
#31
#31
tidwell said:
I'm surprised some are saying Bonds is unquestionably the greatest of his era... what about Griffey? Bonds has the edge in numbers, but what about Bonds' late career "explosion" and Griffey's body betraying him, both around the same time, ironically.
Click to expand...

That's just my opinion. Might have to do with me seeing more of Bonds play, as I'm a Braves fan and NL guy. In his prime, Bonds could do it all - hit for average, for power, drive in runs, steal bases, and play a Gold Glove outfield. And this is pre-"explosion." Taking nothing away from Griffey (or A-Rod, for that matter), but Bonds seemed a step ahead of the others.
 
#32
#32
I began watching baseball in the mid-90s (albeit at a young age, so I probably didn't really understand the game as well as I could), and it just seemed like Griffey was the guy talked about as being he best of his generation.

All of this got me wondering what their numbers looked like through 2000 (About the time Bonds began his late career "explosion" as Vercingetorix called it and after Griffey's first season with the Reds which he hit 40 HR, his last season where he was relatively healthy for a big chunk of the season).

Griffey's average season from 1989-2000
37 HR (438 total), 106 RBI, .295 BA, .942 OPS

Bonds' average season from 1986-2000
33 HR (494 total), 94 RBI, .289 BA, .979 OPS

Many people look at OPS as the indicator of a better. When looking at just that, Bonds blows Griffey away. Griffey has only had 4 seasons with an OPS of 1.000 or higher. Bonds has had an OPS of 1.000 or higher EVERY season since 1992, except 2006 when it was .999. Bonds has about 1000 more walks than Ks while Griffey has about 400 more Ks than walks.

Bonds also has a definite edge in stolen bases. Neither were slouches in the field in their prime, either.
 
#33
#33
wbarron said:
That's just my opinion. Might have to do with me seeing more of Bonds play, as I'm a Braves fan and NL guy. In his prime, Bonds could do it all - hit for average, for power, drive in runs, steal bases, and play a Gold Glove outfield. And this is pre-"explosion." Taking nothing away from Griffey (or A-Rod, for that matter), but Bonds seemed a step ahead of the others.
Click to expand...
.....and don't forget choke in the postseason! its funny Dan Marino can't be the greatest qb because he never won a ring.....
 
#34
#34
OPS is the big reason Bonds is so obviously the best player of the modern era. I like to look at OPS+, actually, which is normalized to a league average and gives you nice round numbers (a league average OPS is 100, a 110 is 10% better than league average, a 90 is 10% worse, etc.) Bonds had consecutive years in the early 90s with over a 200 OPS+; those are Ruthian numbers. Griffey was a great hitter (and a better home run hitter than Bonds, at least before Bonds started juicing), but his value at the plate was never as good because of Bonds's ridiculous OBP. Bonds was always great at drawing walks even before he started juicing, wearing body armor, and standing on top of the plate, and one he started doing all that, he went off the charts. (I still don't know why NL pitchers stood for it, but they did.)

Griffey gets extra credit because of the position he played. If he had stayed healthy and Bonds's career had continued along a normal arc of decline, you could probably have a good argument either way. But Griffey hasn't been able to stay in the lineup, so it's a moot point. A shame, because he and Bonds would otherwise be pretty close in the home run chase, and that would be fun.

We can talk about Alex Rodriguez in five years. Moving from shortstop to third base didn't help his argument.
 
#35
#35
crimedawg12 said:
.....and don't forget choke in the postseason! its funny Dan Marino can't be the greatest qb because he never won a ring.....
Click to expand...
Yeah, don't let the fact that Bonds had the most dominant postseason in the history of the game in 2002 override the perception that he doesn't perform well in the postseason. That would require putting opinion aside and dealing with actual fact.
 
#36
#36
hatvol96 said:
Yeah, don't let the fact that Bonds had the most dominant postseason in the history of the game in 2002 override the perception that he doesn't perform well in the postseason. That would require putting opinion aside and dealing with actual fact.
Click to expand...

8 HR in 45 AB is ridiculous.

Then again, wouldn't you have some pent up, revenge-seeking frustration against a team who manhandled you 10 years earlier? That's a long time to wait to get payback.
 
#37
#37
wbarron said:
8 HR in 45 AB is ridiculous.

Then again, wouldn't you have some pent up, revenge-seeking frustration against a team who manhandled you 10 years earlier? That's a long time to wait to get payback.
Click to expand...

Or maybe the pent up energy was due to the 1 HR in the other 106 postseason at bats.
 
#39
#39
I wonder how Jr feels seeing Bonds excel as he got older like no other player in the history of the game(I wonder why??) as he faded naturally. That would have to be pretty tough.
 
#41
#41
tidwell said:
I'm surprised some are saying Bonds is unquestionably the greatest of his era... what about Griffey? Bonds has the edge in numbers, but what about Bonds' late career "explosion" and Griffey's body betraying him, both around the same time, ironically.
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top