73 Days. Props to the first person who draws the comparison from 73 days til opening day and this picture:
http://www.corbisimages.com/images/6...1/U1799314.jpg
Printable View
73 Days. Props to the first person who draws the comparison from 73 days til opening day and this picture:
http://www.corbisimages.com/images/6...1/U1799314.jpg
Catfish Hunter and Tom Seaver
Cy Young winners in 73...
Jim Palmer was an Oriole in 1973, so it isn't him. But those are Catfish Hunter and Tom Seaver(who was the NL Cy Young winner) This was taken at the 1973 World Series.
Hunter and Seaver were game 3 starters at N.Y. which went 11 innings and the A's won in 11 innings
We have a winner, sadly you don't win anything. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by centennialdawg
I knew Seaver's # was 41 and nobody can mistake Catfish Hunter. Just a question of when the pic was taken. I knew A's beat the Met's in one of the world series. You also gave a big clue when you said 73 days, figured it to be in 1973. I then googled the series and found out they were the starting pitchers in game 3
Baseball can't get here soon enough. This weather is about to kill me.
Exhibition starts at the end of Feb.
If I can remember I'll do this everyday. In reality, I probably should have used Barry Bonds today but I couldn't bring myself to use a picture of him.Quote:
Originally Posted by centennialdawg
Yeah, Catfish was just too recognizable, especially since I was a huge A's fan at the time.
Killed the A's dynasty when they let Catfish go to the Yankees.
Ill do it for you;
the greatest left handed hitter any person on this board has ever seen swing a baseball bat.
http://www.gcobb.com/wp-content/uplo...arryBonds1.jpg
I saw Bonds play two to three times during the height of his steroid days and he was a freak. It was one of those deals when you saw him you just knew it wasn't legit.
whats not legit??
(bold led MLB)
129 runs, 46 home runs, 123 RBIs, 29 stolen bases, 126 walks, .336 (THREE THIRTY SIX) batting average, .667 slug % , 1.136 OPS, 365 total bases, 10.6 WAR (wins over replacement)
in 1993!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
what bout this one:
104 R, 33 HR, 114 RBI, 52 SB (FIFTY TWO!!!), 93 walks, .301 BA, .970 OPS (led MLB), 295 TB, 9.7 WAR
in Pittsburgh in 1990.
Baseball writes are morons. Barry Bonds should be right smack dab in the middle of Cooperstown, a first ballot HOFer who is only denied because guys like McGuire had to use roids to be good. Bonds DID NOT have to roid to be great.
Bonds is a first ballot HOFer
Bonds had ONE YEAR that did not reflect his career averages, the 73 HR year. Thats the only year he hit any more than his career average of HRs and RBIs. ROIDS DID NOT MAKE BONDS GREAT.
Career averages:
121 R, 41 HR, 108 RBI, 28 SB, 139 BB, 1.051 OPS (holy sh1t, that is incredible), 329 TB, career WAR around 8.
and its not as if Bonds was a terrible fielder, career fielding % of .984, average of 256 putouts and almost 8 putouts per year.
If Bonds is not a HOFer, they outta just tear the sumb*tch down and not let anybody in.
some career stats and rankings:
(bold = career MLB leader)
Wins Above Replacement (WAR):
171.8 (2nd all-time)
Defensive WAR:
20.4 (6th all-time)
OBP%:
.444 (6th all-time)
On-base plus slugging (OPS):
1.051 (4th all-time)
Runs scored:
2227 (3rd all-time)
Total Bases:
5976 (4th all-time)
Home Runs:
762 (1st all-time)
Runs Batted In:
1996 (4th all-time)
Stolen Bases (this is the stat that owns the Bonds haters):
514 (33rd ALL TIME)
Runs Created:
2892 (1st all-time)
Adj. Batting Runs:
1301 (2nd all-time)
Adj. Batting Wins:
122.3 (2nd all-time)
Times on Base:
5599 (2nd all time)
Offensive Win %:
.815 (3rd all-time)
Intentional Walks:
688 (1st all-time by a boatload)
At bats per Home Run:
12.9 (4th all-time)
Base-Out Runs Added (RE24):
1332.41 (1st all-time)
Situational Wins Added (WPA/LI):
131.4 (1st all-time)
Base-Out Wins Added (REW):
127.4 (1st all-time)
Putouts as a Left Fielder:
5224 (1st all-time) (another stat that counters Bonds was roids only)
Assists as a LF:
160 (2nd all-time)
Total Zone Runs as LF (a fielding stat):
179 (1st all-time)
Barry Bonds Statistics and History - Baseball-Reference.com
When your comparable players are Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, and Babe Ruth, you know you are one of the best to ever play.
Hank Aaron had over 2,500 more at-bats than Bonds and Bonds still had more HR
Bonds should have played one more year to get his 3,000th hit, he was only 65 hits away and he easily gets that.
Theres little doubt in my mind we will never see another Barry Bonds. He was an egomanical arrogant jerk with no sense of reality, but he was the best **** hitter we have ever seen, and one of the greatest (if not THE GOAT) to ever step foot on a baseball diamond
one more thought and ill leave this baseball thread alone;
Alex Rodriguez might go down as the greatest IF hitter ever, would you vote him into the Hall of Fame on his first ballot?
What's not legit? I said I watched him during the height of his steroid days. He was a hall of fame player he ruined it by cheating.
I wouldn't vote for him period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggin
Please stop insulting the game.Quote:
(if not THE GOAT) to ever step foot on a baseball diamond
Something is really screwy about those stats if they rank Bonds the 21st best outfielder versus replacement. Bonds was not a great outfielder. Good coverage guy till about 98 in the field, but a terrible arm who loafed alot.
He had a great arm as a young guy, just look at the putouts
How in the world a guy can hit 46 HR and 29 SB and 33 HR with 52 SB not be considered one of the best ever?
Whitey Ford threw spitballs, Walter Johnson played in the dead ball era and never had to face black players, etc...
It goes both ways.
If you vote Whitey Ford and Gaylord Perry in, both confessed cheaters, why not Bonds?
Using something to gain an unfair advantage over the competition, is that not what Bonds and Perry both did?
Not to mention there was no steroid testing at all back then, how do we know none of them were using roids?
Also, Walter Johnson played in a dead ball era, Cy Young never faced black players, etc... Baseball is a funny sport because its been around hundreds of years. If players were cheating back then, whos to say that Ty Cobb wouldnt use roids if he was born in 1980?
Plus the fact that baseball players were hopped up on amphetamines hardcore until recently, I dont see how baseball writers can overlook some stuff but put their foot down on Bonds.
That's a great season. If we put the nine best of all time on the field by position even you wouldn't trot Bonds out to left field.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggin
Maybe because anabolic steroids didn't even exist in the days of Cobb, Johnson, Speaker, etc.?Quote:
Not to mention there was no steroid testing at all back then, how do we know none of them were using roids?
Who would you put?
Ted Williams?
What did Ted ever do that was better than Bonds, considering the era?
Williams had a higher average, Bonds had better power
Nope, anabolic steroids were derived in the 1930s, in the era of Speaker and such.Quote:
Originally Posted by pvfan
German soldiers are rumored to have been on testosterone in World War II. Anabolics have been around for over 70 years
You are viewed in comparison to the era in which you played and the rules that were used in your era. I don't think you understand that "doctoring" the baseball was legal at one point. The steroid users of the 1990's and 2000's broke the rules of their day.Quote:
Also, Walter Johnson played in a dead ball era, Cy Young never faced black players, etc... Baseball is a funny sport because its been around hundreds of years. If players were cheating back then, whos to say that Ty Cobb wouldnt use roids if he was born in 1980?
Read this:
Just a Reminder: Baseball Players Have Always Cheated -- MLB FanHouse
better yet, ill just post it.
In my continuing crusade to knock Americans -- particularly my Hall-of-Fame-voting colleagues -- off their moral high horses when it comes to steroids, I wanted to point out an op-ed piece that ran over the weekend in the New York Times.
Zev Chafets, author of an upcoming book about the Hall of Fame, reminds us that baseball players have been using performance-enhancing drugs for a long time.
In 1961, during his home run race with Roger Maris, Mickey Mantle developed a sudden abscess that kept him on the bench. It came from an infected needle used by Max Jacobson, a quack who injected Mantle with a home-brew containing steroids and speed. In his autobiography, Hank Aaron admitted once taking an amphetamine tablet during a game. The Pirates' John Milner testified at a drug dealer's trial that his teammate, Willie Mays, kept "red juice," a liquid form of speed, in his locker. (Mays denied it.) After he retired, Sandy Koufax admitted the he was often "half high" on the mound from the drugs he took for his ailing left arm.
For decades, baseball beat writers - the Hall of Fame's designated electoral college - shielded the players from scrutiny. When the Internet (and expos?s by two former ballplayers, Jim Bouton and Jose Canseco) allowed fans to see what was really happening, the baseball writers were revealed as dupes or stooges. In a rage, they formed a posse to drive the drug users out of the game.
So right there you've got Mantle, Aaron, Mays and Koufax all connected to some sort of performance-enhancing chemical. Maybe their stuff didn't work as well as the stuff the players of the 21st century have at their disposal, but does that make them innocent and today's players guilty?
You can also argue that we have only snippets of alleged "one-time" use when it comes to these old-timers. Of course, what would we say if a current player said he used steroids "only once"? Also, the evidence against the old-timers is flimsy because back then no one was looking for it.
What that tells me that baseball players have been trained since the dawn of time to do whatever they could get away with if they thought it would help them perform
Let's not forget what Hall of Famer Mike Schmidt told Bob Costas in 2005:
"Let me go out on a limb and say that if I had played during that era I would have taken steroids. ... We all have these things we deal with in life, and I'm surely not going to sit here and say to you guys, 'I wouldn't have done that.'
(Schmidt wrote later in his autobiography that he thinks he wouldn't have taken steroids, but he understood why players did.)
The point to all of this is not to excuse the steroid users. What they did was wrong. The point is just to keep a little perspective on the atmosphere in which they did it. Let's put away the torches and pitchforks.
So did Gaylord Perry/Whitey Ford.Quote:
Originally Posted by pvfan
Plus the fact that baseball has only started mandatory drug testing in 2002!!!!!! If they arent testing everybody, how can you say baseball really wanted to stop cheaters?
Baseball players were using performance-enhancing drugs over ONE HUNDRED years ago, testosterone supplements. Plus that no rules at all were outlined about PED use until 1971 at the absolute earliest (1991 is more accurate), how can you keep Bonds out, when we have no idea if Mays or Mantle juiced? Theres evidence to suggest that both used PEDs
Williams lost four seasons due to serving in the war. In the two seasons prior to his service he led the league in home runs and had already accumulated 127 home runs at the age of 23! He had also already hit over .400 in his early 20's. When you take into account that ballparks were much larger in his day it's not hard to fathom Williams hitting well over 600 home runs. Also, the league had not yet expanded making the level of play much higher overall. Generally speaking, you had to be better back then to make it to the show than you do now. Williams led the American League in batting average, on base percentage, slugging, and on base plus slugging in the same season five times. Ted Williams is by far the greatest hitter that ever lived and it's not debatable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggin
Using a spitball and steroids is night and day in my opinion. it was pretty much accepted forever in the game. At one time the only penalty was a fine. The league even allowed every team to carry a specific number of spitballers for a while.
Thats silly. To say that pitchers were better on the whole back then is laughable. With modern advancements in training technique, strength and conditioning, and the overall level of talent in modern baseball, pitchers now, on the average>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>pitchers in Williams' era.Quote:
Originally Posted by pvfan
Williams hit 127 in his first four years; Bonds had 101, not that far behind.
Im not doubting how great Williams is, but to suggest that Bonds is not in that status is BS
Pitchers today are better in my opinion. I was using his era when the league had larger parks and fewer teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggin
You think stealing a sign at second base is the same as using steroids.
I give up, you are right. Williams was only 26 home runs ahead of the all time record holder at the same age playing in bigger ballparks and without steroids.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggin
And steroids were pretty much accepted until the mid 2000s with comprehensive testing and such.Quote:
Originally Posted by pvfan
There were no drug testing until the 90s, so its ok that Bonds did it because it was not tested for at one point?
Thats what you are saying with spitballs, because it was not stopped at one points means its okay to do it at a later point even after the rules have changed.
We are talking about getting ejected from a baseball game and going to jail. Are those the same?