Barry Bonds 90's only vs. Albert Pujols

Check that.

I guess you have to account for the fact that by 2002, he was firmly in possession of Dumbo's magic feather.

 

Albert Pujols winning a gold glove is as big a joke as Raffy Palmeiro winning one the year he was a DH. Anyone who thinks Pujols is a gold glover shouldn't be allowed to vote for the award.

 

You aren't giving Pujols nearly enough credit for his defensive play. Then again, given the soure, that is no surprise at all. Normally, I would assume you were using hyperbole to make your point, but given your hatred of Pujols, you probably mean it.

 

Yes, Bonds such a clubhouse cancer that his teams won 3 consecutive divisions from 90-92, won 103 games but missed the playoffs in 93, made the playoffs in 97, tied for the Wildcard in 98 and finished second in 99.

 

He's a decent fielder. Not a gold glover. I don't think that's an unreasonable position to take.

And I'd take him over Bonds in the postseason.

 

He was better than decent at his best, though he has gotten worse. Part of that, I think, is the elbow problems. It still doesn't warrant a comparison to the year they gave the Gold Glove to a guy who barely played in the field.

And I agree with you regarding the postseason, especially given the parameters of this thread. Bonds consistently stunk in the playoffs during the '90s.

 

Pujols got his mumbers against juicing pitchers?