___ Eats It

Guys, let's just give this argument to BullShizzNitz. I mean, obviously if you can steal 50 bases in a season, it doesn't matter if you score less, get on base less, hit less, strike out more... you're the best thing since sliced bread and roids are OK! : : : : I'm always amazed at how blind people can really be when they refuse to see the obvious. Williams was definitely the best HITTER of all time and is in contention for the best PLAYER of all time. Bonds is merely the best home run hitter of all time, and that's probably due to juice. There's absolutely no freaking comparison.

As short as they are, they won't be able to advertise much. =)

Iggy Pop! ****, he was the man.

You can lead a Bonds-lover to water, but you can't make him drink... ;D

He also walks about one out of every two at bats. That'll cut down on the K total right off the top. Bonds "the best of all time?" Good Lord, Smazza, gimme a break... I thought you were a baseball fan. Bonds MIGHT make the top 10 of all time, and that's only if it comes out that he's not a juicer, which he obviously is...

1996 vs Philadelphia. I was there, I'm proud to say, for two home games, including the largest (at the time) hockey crowds of all time in the ThunderDome

I thought it was self explanatory, myself...

By the way, as far as your fielding argument goes... Williams committed 27 more errors than Bonds in his career, which spanned 19 seasons.  That's less than 2 errors a year. Hardly a drastic total to warrant him being considered THAT much better of a fielder, or Williams that much worse. Bonds HAD more speed when he was younger and HAS more power now that he's roided up.  But he had only a few select seasons where he could put the two together, and even then his all around hitting didn't compare to Williams. Try again. ÂÂ

Steroids don't help you hit a baseball. You have to have the hand-eye coordination already. But, if you've put on 40 lbs of muscle thanks to Roids, you have increased bat speed which turns those 370 ft fly outs to left into 400 ft bombs into the seats. It's not rocket science. By the way, added muscle also slows you down. Isn't it ironic then that Barry's homer totals started skyrocketing from 2000-2003 (49, 73, 46, 45) while his Stolen Base totals are about a quarter of what they were when he wasn't juicing (11, 13, 9, 7 for the same years, respectively, down from a high of 52. It's ironic that he's gotten "better" with power and yet slower, isn't it? Couldn't be related to all that roid weight he put on, could it? Williams is better. Plus, he didn't cheat.

Single Season records that he's just achieved in the last 5 years since his alleged juicing occurred. Bonds can't hold a candle to Williams, Ruth, Dimaggio, Mantle, Foxx, Gherig. Check out the Top 10 CAREER stats for those numbers you just mentioned, and aside from HRs, I wonder how many Bonds is in. Just because Roger Maris had 61 dingers in a season didn't make him a better player than Mantle was. Single Seasons can be flukes... just ask Brady Anderson. The sad thing is, Bonds WOULD be pretty close to those guys naturally. The guy can hit a baseball a ton, and he's a great all around player. However, IF it comes out that he juiced up, his legacy is tarnished. His career will be forever tainted, and we'll all wonder how good he would have been if he'd have just stayed natural...

Since the Gold Glove award didn't arise until 1957, Williams wouldn't have been able to win any for the majority of his career, so that stat is useless. What isn't useless is production stats... PER GAME, Williams has more hits, 2b, 3b, R, RBI, a higher average, a higher slugging percentage, and fewer strikeouts. Bonds has more SB and Homeruns. Come on, dude... I know you have this thing for Bonds, but you can't tell me that more SB and HR makes a man a better ALL AROUND player than a guy who pretty much dominates all other statistical categories! As far as the steroids issue, I'm sure the truth will come out when all the facts are learned. Out of curiosity, what will your opinion of Bonds be if it is indeed proven that he has been juicing for the past 5 years or so?

Gee, if those are the requirements that dictate whether or not we can cheer loudly for the Bulls, I guess a lot of us might as well just turn in our tickets now and stay home with our Geritol. I don't necessarily agree with The Sheriff a lot of the time, but he's cheering the team on. This thread has provided them with more publicity than they've had all year on this board. If I'm not cheering loudly for the Bulls (alongside my kids) when I'm 60, well... you might as well just shoot me. That's what being a fan is all about. The worst thing I can say about The Sheriff is that he's an O's fan. Keep it up, dude.

MVPs are awarded based on opinion, not stats. If it were stats, then Ted Williams would have won it the year he batted .406. Your right you can't compare eras. Teddy wasn't juiced up, and still played a better all around game than Barry. Take away Barry's roids, and there is no comparison at all.

I accept the nomination ;D

I'm even NOT watching the Red Sox game tonight in order to watch the Lightning cook up an order of Frog Legs!!! RIBBIT!

My little Bull ;D Crush the Frenchies!!! ;D

That's because there's nothing else to do in Montreal except follow hockey, drink Molson, and boo the US national anthem. I hope they crush these Frenchies. I hate Montreal.

With those numbers, he'd fit right in on the Yankees staff this year ;D

Bonds needs to retire before it comes out that he actually WAS juicing. He did it. It's just a matter of them proving it now. And they will... you better believe they will.

By that logic, Brady Anderson was a better ballplayer than Ted Williams, as he hit 50 homers. Come with something better. The best of all time is defined by CONSISTENCY, not single season roided-up marks.

So your point is that Bonds had better years in the various categories here and there throughout his career. That's hardly enough to call him the best of all time, particularly when there's a remarkable lack of consistency when compared to Ted. I put it in my original post. It's obvious Bonds has way more speed. Considering he didn't score any more runs per game than Ted did, all those extra bases he stole are irrelevant when it comes down to it. According to Bill James, Baseball Sabermetrician and author (co-author) of the book "Moneyball", the closer is statistically unimportant in modern baseball. So I'm not impressed with that. Minorities, sure... to a degree. But there were about half as many teams as there are now, so Ted went up against the best of the best in MLB. Bonds is good, but Ted was better.

Aaron didn't hold the record in 1960, when Ted retired, so he WOULD have been the all time HR champ. I never said he wouldn't be passed up at some time.

I still laugh when I think about Tejada's temper tantrum after Lowe shut him down to end the series last year. "My kids are in the stands, and he's making obscene gestures!" Didn't stop him from cussing up a storm when he K'd. What a jackass.

Ted would have been the all-time home run champ if he didn't go fight. He had 521 already and averaged .227 home runs per game. If he didn't miss those 650+ games, you could tack on another 150 home runs to that total, putting him at 671. That's if he just kept up his career AVERAGE of 36 per season. In the prime of his career, you figure he's good for 10-15 more per season. Tack on 50 more dingers, and Teddy's your all time homer champ. God, I miss him.

Remember, Smazza.... "numbers don't lie"