David Ortiz elected to Baseball HOF but…

Non-Running

Page 5 of 5

1 4 5

Next Last

2 years ago 01/26/2022 3:57pm EST

re: carmine9

carmine9 wrote:
fell in love with a clown at a clown show wrote:
1994 was the strike year. Those numbers, extrapolated, would be much higher.
From 93-98, his HR average dropped 20%. His batting average had dropped 33 points. his slugging pecentage was down 68 points. He had fewer SBs than he'd had since he was 23. He was 33.
33 year olds whose numbers are dropping that quickly usually disappear within a year or two.
You chose his best pre PED homerun year 1993 to push your narrative.
Hear are his homerun totals from 1988 thru 1992: 24, 19, 33, 25, 34.
Doesn't really support your claim that the 37 homers in 1998 (pre drugs) shows he was in decline

Do you understand how declines work? you measure them from a peak.

you tell me if this looks like going up, coming down, or staying flat:

2 years ago 01/26/2022 4:02pm EST

re: Youwrong

The baseball HOF decided along time ago that rather be a shine to greatness—which takes on many forms, some quite ugly—it would be a meddling joke.

As long as Pete Rose is out, it is not a hall of fame. It’s a sham.

fell in love with a clown at a clown show wrote:
it's very simple:
You don't punish someone for doing what everyone else was doing, and it wasn't illegal, even if it was unethical. Nobody says Ortiz' entire career was owed to drugs, even if he and other were suspected at one time of using.
But you do punish someone for using those methods to make a mockery of the sport for your own personal gain. Clemens and Bonds' careers were falling, and they used drugs not only to stay in the game, but to make a joke of the sport and the record book.
Let's be clear: Ken Griffey Jr. would have obliterated all of Bonds' accomplishments if the playing field had been level. Bonds and Clemens did what they did because theircareers were declining and they used drugs to achieve levels of fame they ever could have achieved ontheir own.
Clemens won 4 Cy Youngs while doping. Bonds won 4 MVPs while doping. It's impossible to separate their career accomplishments on and off drugs because they used drugs to seperate themselves so outlandishly from their competition.
Bonds hit over 40% of his career HRs and had 44% of his career walks when he was doping.
48% of Clemens' career IP and 50% of his Ks came after he started doping.
You can't distunguish their pre- and post-doping careers, because they're too intertwined.
Bonds had 445 career HRs when his career started tailing off. There's a good chance he wouldn't get to 500. That's pretty good, but you know who he would have behind?
Carlos Delgado
Fred McGriff
Gary Sheffield
Adam Dunn
This narrative that Bonds was already a HoFer is silly. He might have been. He wouldn't have been first ballot. But it's moot, because every record he set, and almost half of his career numbers, happened while doping.
Is Jimmy Key a Hall of famer? He has better career stats than Clemens did when he started doping.
That's the dfference.

Can you let us all know exactly what date did Bonds start injecting? Since, it seems so clear to you that he was tailing off, and you have a clear date that his HR production would have let up. It is such an odd number to pick out HR #445.

And your premise is that only Bonds and Clemens juiced?

2 years ago 01/26/2022 4:41pm EST

re: Youwrong

For those saying Bonds never tested positive:

Skimmed the thread and may have missed someone already saying this, but Bonds was caught up in the BALCO scandal, during which

A) his personal trainer was indicted for providing steroids to his athletes,

B) Bonds himself testified (his sealed testimony leaked) that he took steroids unknowingly,

C) his girlfriend testified that Bonds told her he was using steroids, and

D) Bonds was convicted of perjury for lying/incomplete responses to questions about his steroid use.

I have no opinion on whether he should be or not, it depends on what the HOF is supposed to be about I guess. Just pointing out why Bonds is in a different boat when it comes to the certainty/proof of his steroid use.

Did you look up the slg? In the 7 yrs 1993-99, Bonds had a higher slg than Griffey in three. 1997 was the only year that Griffey was markedly greater than Bonds, .646 v .585. In the other years their numbers were essentially the same. There’s really no stats argument you can provide to argue Griffey was much better. I’m not saying Bonds was much better either, but your narrative that Griffey was the star and Bonds was washed up and on the decline is laughable.

2 years ago 01/26/2022 4:59pm EST

re: Orenthal James

To compare Bonds to Adam Dunn or Fred McGriff. Hahahahaha.

Ok, enough of me being trolled….clown show you must not have actually watched much baseball.

2 years ago 01/26/2022 5:23pm EST

re: Wise Old Man

Wise Old Man wrote:
The Indianapolis wrote:
With Bonds you can determine his pre steroids career. It's been said that he was jealous of the attention McGuire and Sosa were getting for "saving" the games after the 98 season so he started taking PEDs in 1999 or 2000. He wouldn't ended up the best player of his generation, but had he retired after the 2000 season season he still would have had HOF numbers.
Again, not true. Bonds OPS was > 1 in the 7 years leading up to his use of steroids (92-98). He was the league leader in 4 of those years. If you want to argue that Griffey was better and would have remained better, it’s a close call, but this idea that of course Bonds would not be the player of his generation without steroids is not supported by the facts. After the steroid use of course, it’s no contest.

I think we're petty much in agreement. The primary point I've been trying to make is that Bonds' steroid years can be completely disregarded and he still had a HOF career. 400 or so home runs, 500 or so steals. 3 MVPs, lots of all-star games. several gold gloves. For that reason, he should be in the HOF.

I definitely agree his steroid years put him on a level never reached by Griffey or maybe anyone not named Babe Ruth, if him even.

2 years ago 01/26/2022 5:55pm EST

re: Youwrong

Youwrong wrote:
These are interesting debates but remember the fact that Nixon could have won the election in 1972 without Watergate did not mean he was not going to have to pay a price for it. Just saying…If Bonds deserves to be in the HOF, the argument that he was good enough without cheating is irrelevant to me. That said, I can see the argument for his inclusion.

Nixon did win the election in 1972, 49 states to 1.

2 years ago 01/26/2022 6:01pm EST

re: The Indianapolis

Yes, we agree, but even if Bonds HR production dropped to a half of his usual numbers starting in 2000, he would have been well over 500 HRs and probably close to 600 or more by the time he retired. He was a HOF lock without steroids, that’s for sure.

2 years ago 01/26/2022 6:06pm EST

re: carmine9

carmine9 wrote:
Youwrong wrote:
These are interesting debates but remember the fact that Nixon could have won the election in 1972 without Watergate did not mean he was not going to have to pay a price for it. Just saying…If Bonds deserves to be in the HOF, the argument that he was good enough without cheating is irrelevant to me. That said, I can see the argument for his inclusion.
Nixon did win the election in 1972, 49 states to 1.

Thank you Captain Obvious. That was my point.

2 years ago 01/26/2022 6:10pm EST

re: Youwrong

Youwrong wrote:
carmine9 wrote:
Nixon did win the election in 1972, 49 states to 1.
Thank you Captain Obvious. That was my point.

"...remember the fact that Nixon could have won the election in 1972 without Watergate..".

2 years ago 01/26/2022 6:12pm EST

re: carmine9

carmine9 wrote:
Youwrong wrote:
Thank you Captain Obvious. That was my point.
"...remember the fact that Nixon could have won the election in 1972 without Watergate..".

Yeah that is the point. Are you stupid?

BTW, The Sporting News did name Bonds, and not Griffey, the MLB player of the decade 1990-1999. See the July 12th, 1999 edition. Guess they did not agree that Griffey dominated Bonds during most of the 90s.

2 years ago 01/26/2022 6:25pm EST

re: Wise Old Man

Wise Old Man wrote:
Yes, we agree, but even if Bonds HR production dropped to a half of his usual numbers starting in 2000, he would have been well over 500 HRs and probably close to 600 or more by the time he retired. He was a HOF lock without steroids, that’s for sure.

Yep. He could have limped his way to at least 500 home runs.

Page 5 of 5

1 4 5

Next Last

Reply Replying to

Username

Password

Leave the password field blank to post anonymously.

Post Preview

By posting you acknowledge that you have read and abide by our Terms and Conditions.

Remember me on this device.

David Ortiz elected to Baseball HOF but…

Of General Interest

This thread has already been deleted.

You have been subscribed.

David Ortiz elected to Baseball HOF but…

Jump To A Page

Follow VAboi

Block VAboi

Follow Wise Old Man

Block Wise Old Man

Follow Wise Old Man

Block Wise Old Man

Follow carmine9

Block carmine9

Follow Wise Old Man

Block Wise Old Man

Follow carmine9

Block carmine9

Follow Wise Old Man

Block Wise Old Man

Jump To A Page

Of General Interest

This thread has already been deleted.

Reply Replying to

You have been subscribed.