Bonds: Has the tide turned on the media bullies?

Wait. That's simply not true.

In 2001-04, Bonds led the league four times with these HR-AB ratios:

2001 NL-6.5-1
2002 NL-8.8-1
2003 NL-8.7-1
2004 NL-8.3-1

But he led the league 3x from 1992-96, a period in which no one is accusing him of juicing up, with these HR-AB ratios:

1992 NL-13.9-1
1993 NL-11.7-1
1994 NL-10.6-4
1995 NL-15.3-5
1996 NL-12.3-1

Except for 2001, those other numbers do not stand out as markedly different from numbers he had put up previously. 8.8 vs. 10.6? That is NOT twice as frequent, not even close, especially considering that he has never put up a ratio of less than 16.0, even rounding down to 8.0 for your "twice as frequent" claim. Of course it's an improvement, and of course it's suspicious. But that's a different story ...

Aaron's best stretch of HR-AB ratio was this:

1969 NL-12.4-2
1970 NL-13.6-4
1971 NL-10.5-1
1972 NL-13.2-1
1973 NL-9.8-1* (did not qualify)

In the previous five seasons, however, he homered at this rate:

1963 NL-14.3-2
1965 NL-17.8-6
1966 NL-13.7-2
1967 NL-15.4-2
1968 NL-20.9-7

You want to talk about twice as frequent? Talk about an improvement from 20.9 to 10.5 in three seasons. THAT's twice as frequent. ;D

***

That said, the proper rebuttal (to my own numbers, even) is this:

Bonds' numbers across the board increased like his HR-AB ratio did, whereas Aaron's numbers steadily declined as he aged ... except for this particular stat, of course, which increased with no logical explanation.

The most likely explanation is that he might have been trying to hit more home runs as he approached Mays and then Ruth in 1970-73, playing for a middling Braves team that was far down in the standings. Aaron's career high for home runs came in 1971, with 47 HRs at age 37.

It's an interesting argument. But as Ragu likes to say, it's not remotely the point of this discussion.

 

Unfortunately, that still wouldn't be an accurate number. It doesn't take into account games he might have missed had he NOT been using.

Look, no one is denying Barry isn't or wasn't an incredible player. The man could swing the bat even long ago. But numbers aren't the be-all end-all of this. Whether we like it or not, the court of public opinion doesn't have to have facts to make a decision. And Barry can pretend all he wants that he doesn't care what the public thinks, but clearly, it can carry some weight down the line.

 

I didn't cherry-pick; I used the same stat and the same age range that you're using for Bonds. That's a valid comparison.

I understand they offer little context, as most stats don't when they stand on their own.

I'm just putting the numbers out. You're putting the numbers out with a purpose. But yours don't "say" anything more than mine do, unless you attach the other evidence with it. Which I admit there is plenty of.

 

Bonds is electing to not participate in the HR Derby on Monday. Story says he'll be co-hosting a party with Jay-Z

 

Partial AP story:

Barry Bonds will sit out of the Home Run Derby on Monday night, opting to rest his tired body before Tuesday night's All-Star game.

"Nope," Bonds said Thursday when asked about the Derby. "Especially when you're 42. It's not that you don't want to, it's that you just can't anymore. You can't. It's too long. Too much waiting. Too much sitting around. You can't do that."

Bonds, who turns 43 on July 24, was set to start in Thursday night's series finale, after playing in 74 of the team's first 82 games.

 

It's a reasonable decision if he were a reasonable person

 

Actually this is one time I would enjoy Bonds hitting a HR. He is a jerk and a cheater but you do have to be impressed with the fact that even a person on PED's can hit the ball so far and so often. This might have actually helped his cause, now he is throwing that away because he might get tired. I call b.s on that. Sure it is tiring but if you are a professional athlete you should be able to compete in a simple HR derby with out breaking down physically. I have never seen one athlete single handily throw away his possible good will. Bonds will always be remembered as a hall of fame player with a hall of shame attitude. His accomplishment on the playing field should be celebrated but because of his boorish attitude and refusal to accept his transgressions he has ruined his good will.

 

His decision to skip the HR Derby is typical. That he's doing it in his home park is what's horrible. This also means that Selig will be there.

 

I know Bonds may be a dick(scratch that, he is a dick) and all that, but do steriods really help that much? Isn't hitting a baseball arguably the hardest thing to do in sports?
This whole Bonds thing is very tough thing. There's evidence, but Im a huge believer in innocent until proven guilty. But here's something that many people dont talk about. Everyone keeps talking about how Babe Ruth did it on "hot dogs and beer", but no one ever mentions the fact that he never played against blacks. I mean dosn't that change some things? Shouldn't it give you second thoughts about Ruth's numbers?

 

Sorry, I missed them.
Whats your opinion?

 

Yeah, there is so much evidence out there yet a grand jury -- you know the one which could indict a ham sandwhich -- couldn't find any of it. Don't ever let facts and actual evidence get in the way of your speculation, innuendo and overall distaste for Bonds.....