- 22,885
- 2,317
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2000
Good for you SC, you are like my bro. Huge baseball and Pirate fan above all else. I'll take hockey any day of the week 
2016 MLB thread. THE CUBS HAVE BROKEN THE CURSE! Chicago Cubs are your 2016 World Series champions
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by proshares,
- Start date
- Status
- 6,714
- 4,606
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
Wow something positive said about the Astros. Right track in terms of baseball means 3-5 years until your decent to good unfortunately.
Went to the first Rangers at Astros series at Minute Maid Park, only to have our new rivals (no longer the Cardinals) and Darvish pitch 8 and 2/3 innings of perfect ball. Still can't believed I stayed all the way through and cheered/hollered so hard for that last hit to be hit.
Last edited:
jumpmanfromdabay
Banned
- 25,730
- 2,900
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
Last edited:
- 13,655
- 1,083
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2006
, Bonds had a longer career, wonder how that happened, Griffey>Bonds
Ill take Griffeys injury plagued and unaided 630hr career over Barroids 753*. Plus Griffeys glove in Seattle, no contest.
Best player you ever saw is kind of a subjective statement and personally it wasn't BALCO Bonds.
jewbacca
Banned
- 3,349
- 508
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2013
Griffey>Bonds
Ill take Griffeys injury plagued and unaided 630hr career over Barroids 753*. Plus Griffeys glove in Seattle, no contest.
Best player you ever saw is kind of a subjective statement and personally it wasn't BALCO Bonds.
This is the baseball logic that drives me crazy. How do you know Griffey was clean? In the steroid era I think it's a bold assumption to assume anyone is clean. It is basically selective enforcement. For example some HOF voters want to drag Bagwell's name through the steroid mud. No positive tests, no paper trail and the dude had an insane work ethic in the gym. Why is it fair to assume player X used steroids and player Y didn't?
There is no way concrete way to know someone used steroids without a positive test. It is a logical fallacy to assume steroid innocence or that someone is guilty in the steroid era of baseball.
Since you can't factually say who used and who didn't throughout the league, these random assumption about (insert player name) become a moral argument as opposed to a factual/logical one. All numbers must be viewed on an equal level due to the uncertainty of who used and what effect steroids actually have.
Do I think Barry Bonds used steroids? Yes. Do I care that Barry Bonds or anyone else used steroids? No. Just as a guideline, in Canseco's book, he claimed that 85% of the MLB population had used steroids. While that number is extremely high and impossible to confirm, it sheds light on just how wide steroid usage was throughout the league.
To wrap this up, I'm gonna say what I always say. Am I supposed to villainize Bonds for producing, but not care about Greg Zaun and Todd Pratt (Mitchell Report names) because they weren't very good? Whether someone used steroids or not, all numbers must be taken at their face value because you truly don't know who was/wasn't using and the true effects of steroid usage. It's the only way to keep an argument factual and logical.
- 60,034
- 50,944
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2004
^ we don't know if Griffey used anything. His name was never brought up, didn't have the build of a user. He might have but I personally don't think he did. We know for a fact that Barry did.
- 13,655
- 1,083
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2006
Awful argument, but just for the sake of giving it to you, I'm still taking Ken Griffey Jr
His 96-99 years were insane. It kind of sucks that when people say "the best I ever saw, they often look at an entire career as opposed to the best they ever saw". Another example is Albert Pujols, St. Louis Cardinals Pujols was one of the best offensive players I've ever seen, now Angels Pujols is a complete shell of his former self, and it's only going to get worse.
Example: Grant Hill was one of the best basketball players I've ever seen, all around beast, unfortunately his career was derailed due to the devastating ankle injury he sustained. Prior to that, triple double machine.
Career wise, based on numbers, Bonds is the GOAT... however, we all know those numbers come with an *
- 20,396
- 14,184
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
As smooth of a play you'll ever see in the field...
Rays are something else....
AL East is murder.
Rays are something else....
AL East is murder.
- 31,920
- 26,211
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
No matter how fat he gets, his arm and hands are so he good he can stay a plus fielder.
- 9,530
- 91
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2003
- 31,920
- 26,211
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
Give me 93 bonds, or 1990 Bonds over any Ken Griffey Jr season.
jewbacca
Banned
- 3,349
- 508
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2013
Would you say the same thing about Brauns' build? There are plenty of steroid users who don't have the build of a super hero like Bonds.
I don't believe this about Griffey, but I'm just throwing this out there for argument purposes. Steroid usage leads to tendon injuries because muscles get stronger at a faster rate than tendons.
Griffey dealt with hamstring injuries for years. Is it not possible that his injuried hamstring was from a result of steroids?
Regardless if you look at build or injury history, they're all assumptions. A strong argument is not made with assumptions.
The logic of if someone looks jacked, they used steroids and the contrapositive of if someone is not jacked, they did not use steroids just doesn't work.
- 22,885
- 2,317
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2000
do work son
Banned
- 17,118
- 5,186
- Joined
- May 22, 2010
"Why should I stretch? Does a cheetah stretch before it chases its prey?" - Ken Griffey Jr.
- 6,459
- 1,841
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
Barry Bonds from 1990-98 is better than Griffey from 96-99. His OPS was higher than Griffey's in every single one of those seasons. So was his OBP as well as his batting average and he stole more bases than Griffey did in his entire career in that 9 year span. Bonds also walked over 105 times in all but one of those seasons and never struck out more then 87 times in any of those seasons.
- 19,563
- 6,838
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
Love hearing sf fans make excuses for bonds but act like the Seahawks are the devil because some of them got caught with adderall. But that's besides the facts.
Griffeys shoe size didnt grow 5 sizes and his head didnt grow an inch in circumference.
Griffeys shoe size didnt grow 5 sizes and his head didnt grow an inch in circumference.
- 13,655
- 1,083
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2006
... your opinion, *shrug*Barry Bonds 1990-1998
Averaged: 36 home runs, 110 rbi's, .305 BA, .438 OBP, 1.038 OPS, 31 doubles, 36 sb's
Ken Griffey Jr 1996-2000
Averaged: 50 home runs, 137 rbi's, .290 BA, .382 OBP, .986 OPS, .604 SLG, 28 doubles, 16 sb's, no asterisk and better defense.
The good thing with baseball is that numbers don't lie. Want to use advanced metrics, Bonds in 1990 and 1993 had a WAR of 9.7 and 9.9 respecitvely. Griffey's best seasons were arguably 1996 and 1997 when he had a 9.6 and 9.1 WAR.
Making it sound like it's a crazy notion,
Sticking with my horse,
- 31,920
- 26,211
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
yeah i don't belive in the magic post season clutch ability.
- 2,312
- 214
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
hey man I understand what you are saying here. However, I don't hold any of those guys in high regard (Canseco, McGwire, Bonds, and unfortunately, probably Rickey Henderson. I mean just look at the guy!).
They are all cheaters in my book and I'm not proud of any of them.
- 6,459
- 1,841
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
Bonds wasn't on the juice then so there's no asterisk and Bonds was a gold glover himself, albeit he wasn't playing CF. It's not a crazy notion but if numbers don't lie like you said Bonds was the better player.
Barry Bonds 1990-1998
Averaged: 36 home runs, 110 rbi's, .305 BA, .438 OBP, 1.038 OPS, 31 doubles, 36 sb's
Ken Griffey Jr 1996-2000
Averaged: 50 home runs, 137 rbi's, .290 BA, .382 OBP, .986 OPS, .604 SLG, 28 doubles, 16 sb's, no asterisk and better defense.
The good thing with baseball is that numbers don't lie. Want to use advanced metrics, Bonds in 1990 and 1993 had a WAR of 9.7 and 9.9 respecitvely. Griffey's best seasons were arguably 1996 and 1997 when he had a 9.6 and 9.1 WAR.
Making it sound like it's a crazy notion,
Sticking with my horse,
jumpmanfromdabay
Banned
- 25,730
- 2,900
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
- 22,885
- 2,317
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2000
- 13,655
- 1,083
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2006
Yes, Bonds wasn't on the juice, he was on numerous PED's.
So GG's and MVP's are the basis, since we all know awards always go to the deserving player,. If Bonds is the best player YOU ever saw, fine, not arguing that, he wasn't the best player I ever saw. That goes to Griffey, personally Griffey was the better player and none of you have posted anything to dispell that.
So GG's and MVP's are the basis, since we all know awards always go to the deserving player,
. If Bonds is the best player YOU ever saw, fine, not arguing that, he wasn't the best player I ever saw. That goes to Griffey, personally Griffey was the better player and none of you have posted anything to dispell that.- Status