Barry isn't the only guy who can't get a job because of steroids. The former Oriole (who's name slips my mind) hasn't found a job either. I'm sure there are others as well. All of this is because of Barry's name and name only. Collusion? Try common sense. Every owner knows what they get with Barry. Why would you want that distraction? Get over it Barry. You had your run. It's over. Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, Good-Bye!!!!
Wow, there's a LOT of ignorance on this thread. I don't know if it's racism, or just the fact that most people only know what they read in the papers, and thus think they "know" Barry Bonds. The truth is, Barry is still capable of being one of the top 10-20 hitters in the major leagues, right now. Calling him a has-been, etc, doesn't make it true: I posted his numbers from the last season, and they are stellar. He has never been convicted of anything- and his indictment is not for steroid use, it's for allegedly lying about it; shades of "It's not the blowjob in the Oval Office, it's the lying...". His steroid use has never been shown to be particularly egregious for this era, no more so than Yankee pitcher Andy Pettitte for example. And lastly, his alleged "clubhouse poison" reputation is purely from bastards like Rick Reilly and others who have ground an axe against Bonds for years. All you ranting about how awful he is, how he'll "demand" a private dressing room, have never actually met the man. His teammates, Jeff Kent aside (who despite his white cowboy trucker good ol' boy reputation is apparently as much a jackass as anyone else), have never said Barry was a problem. His on-field performance has likewise been impeccable. And I think with 4 RBI and 65 hits to reach two big milestones along with his HR and BB records- and no championship ring- this gesture of "league minimum pro-rated salary donated to buying tickets for kids" certainly suggests he's not looking to be a prima donna. That the Red Sox, for example, haven't picked up Bonds is understandable; they don't have a place for him with Ortiz and Ramirez, and they have the depth to last while Ortiz is healing. The three spots Bonds might play- LF, DH, or even 1B- are already filled with top caliber players. The Red Sox are so deep that when Ortiz got hurt, J.D. Drew stepped up and crushed the ball in June. They literally have nowhere they could put Bonds. However, by my count at this the halfway point of the season, there are only 7 teams that are more than 8 games out in their division; out of those 23 teams that have at least some possibility of making a run, there are 18 teams that are within 2 games of .500. Can we really say none of these teams would benefit immensely from an extremely high OBP player with tremendous power and plate discipline? That having that additional pop in the lineup wouldn't benefit not only replacement, but the protection/adjustment that would ripple through the lineup? Given the playing time granted to known steroid users even this year, and the multiple changes to criminally charged players, it literally is nonsensical that no one has made an offer to Bonds- unless there is an unspoken, and illegal, agreement to not hire him this year.
If there is collusion, who wins? That doesn't make any sense to me. I hate conspiracy theories.
Wow Hal, pulling out the race card??? Look, I'll be the first to admit I know very little about this situation, more than, like you said, what I've heard or read. BUT let me ask you this, Is it so hard to belive that, there ARE many people on professional teams locked in by contract that they would LOVE to get rid of? (I'm sure there are) With Bonds, they had the chance to do what apparently they wanted to do and other teams seemed to have picked up on that. Is that so wrong? I mean what does that say?? As many people here have said, there are probably PLENTY of teams that can benefit from his offensive output. The problem seems to be that there is SOMETHING else, whatever it is, that makes it not worth it. No I don't "know" B Bonds... Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think you do either. I don't know if he should play or not. What I do know is there HAS to be some reason NO team in the MLB wants him, and whatever that reason is, I don't think it's right to say someone HAS to hire him.
If there is collusion, who wins? That doesn't make any sense to me. I hate conspiracy theories. Who wins? Bud Selig and the MLB head office. If Bonds was playing, reporters would be talking about him and steroids. It might make things uncomfortable for Selig as it would be perceived as a black mark against baseball. Of course, the real problem would be when the reporters got tired of the same old song-and-dance ("Evil players! Deceiving the fans! The horror!") and then actually did their jobs and dug just a LITTLE bit deeper and realized that the league silently sanctioned the use of steroids ("Chicks dig the long ball.") by turning a blind eye and using a "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the clubhouse. Then Selig's whole regime would come under question, and that would be "a bad thing". So who wins by having teams collude to keep Bonds out of baseball? Bud Selig (and MLB). And who has the authority to actually enforce the collusion? Bud Selig (and MLB). Does that mean there really IS a collusion between the league and the teams? No. Does that mean we should immediately assume that there ISN'T? Given the past history of MLB to collude (four times: Collusion I, Collusion II, Collusion III and Collusion IV), it would be ridiculous to assume it's a "silly conspiracy theory".
his alleged "clubhouse poison" reputation Nothing alleged about it. Once Barry had stolen Hank's HR record, the Giants couldn't wait until the end of the season to cut him loose.
I offered every team in the league the same deal, and I haven't gotten any calls either.
Bonds will be in uniform this summer after an AL team in the playoff hunt loses one or two big bats to injury. posted by rcade Agreed. I think he'll be picked up eventually. Unless he spends the entire season without a team, I don't see a conspiracy. A national league team would have to play bonds in the field. A young team rebuilding isn't going to want him. A team doing well isn't going to want to mess with him. And bonds fault or not, he comes with more baggage than any player named in this thread. It's going to take an american league team that needs a bat to push them over the edge. The idea that there's X amount of teams in the majors and all could use him just isn't true; it's actually a much smaller group.
Great point justgary, the fact is, very few teams will want, or need him. Keeping in mind that the group of teams that "could use him" will include teams like the Twins that will never pay for him, the group becomes smaller yet. It doesn't matter that his agent says he'll play for free, the league minimum, and the social cost of signing him will be too much for many teams.
He'll wind up on an American league team with a grass field.
Would love to see the White Sox take a chance on Bonds. Jim Thome is just not ripping the ball anymore and the Sox have a legit opportunity to go deep in postseason play.
Our system of "juris-prudence" is set up so that "the guy everyone hates, or loves, will have an equal chance in our court rooms". Most of the comments (not all) posted on this discussion would automatically dismiss most of you from serving on Barry Bonds jury. "Comments by a Guilty Bystander" Edward P. O'Brien
Welcome to Sportsfilter. Say, Edward P. O'Brien you do know that your name does appear in blue under all of your comments, don't you? In this instance, directly below your name in the comment.
Good answer, Grum, I'll buy that
Most of the comments (not all) posted on this discussion would automatically dismiss most of you from serving on Barry Bonds jury. What a shame. I'm sure everyone here would want to spend hours of their time being jurors in Barry Bonds' trial.
However the truth of the matter is that Barry is like TO in the clubhouse. A cancer. Let me know when TO wins a super bowl... Oh please. Save these crappy comments when you have actual knowledge about them and not just an opinion. TO is not a cancer in the Cowboys locker room! In fact, he's the main guy out there helping the young recievers get better with their routes. What happened in Philly was years ago, let it go already. To all the Bonds haters, get over yourselves. This man will go down as the greatest home run hitter in MLB history and the only reason why people hate on him is because the media portrayed him to be the villian just because he never kissed their self-important asses. These are the same people who dictate who should or shouldn't be allowed in the Hall of Fame and if you were Mr. Media and had the numbers as well, then you're a lock as a 1st ballot Hall of Famer. If not, then that player will be lucky to get in the 2nd, 3rd or 4th time around and that's a crock of shit! Barry Bonds needs to be out there playing since he is fully capable of playing ball, even at the age of 44. Bonds could wake up from a coma after 15 years and still hit the ball, steriods or no steriods. All this talk about him taking 'roids is blown so out of proportion. So what if he did? You have a guy like Terry Bradshaw that won 4 SuperBowl rings with the Steelers on the 70's but because he come clean, that's ok? Get the hell outta here with that garbage. What about when he was playing? Should we go back and take those championships away? We have no idea what the athletes of yesterday did but we put them so high on a pedastal that the moment we find out the they were in fact human and made mistakes, they're no onger looked at with the same awe. These are just people that excelled in a sport, nothing more & nothing less. Whatever they do in their personal lives has nothing to do with us but if we were all put in the same spotlight as these people and had to endure the same scrutiny day in & day out, I wonder how many of us would become the next villian. Just let the man play.
I think you missed two points: 1) Nobody is stopping the man from playing; 2) This is a sports blog, where we all get together to share our opinions about sports. If someone's opinion is that Barry Bonds is a piece of shit, then no matter how many times you tell them to "get over themselves," it's probably not going to change that opinion. Oh please. Save these crappy comments when you have actual knowledge about them and not just an opinion. TO is not a cancer in the Cowboys locker room! In fact, he's the main guy out there helping the young recievers get better with their routes. So, you obviously know what's going on in the Cowboys' locker room, right? After all, you wouldn't tell somebody else not to make a statement without knowledge, then do the same thing yourself, would you? 'Cause that would make you out to be a huge freakin' hypocrite.
1) Nobody is stopping the man from playing; That we know of . . .
Considering that it's been said over & over on ESPN and sportsradio that since TO has been with the Cowboys, he's been the one helping the young recievers learn the play book and that's not my opinion. I would take what his own teammates and coaches are saying over than someone who obviously isn't a TO fan. And to your 1st point, I would say that there's people that are stopping Bonds from playing since he isn't on any MLB team roster where he belongs. The man can still play and help a team win.
Considering that it's been said over & over on ESPN and sportsradio that since Bonds has been with the Giants, he's been the one cancering and that's not my opinion. Fixed it for you. I'm not saying that Bonds is a cancer, just wondering when it's ok to believe ESPN and sportsradio.
Wow Hal, pulling out the race card??? What else explains the anger and the hate (besides an influx of yutzes)? To suggest he's single-handedly responsible for ruining the Great American Pastime ignores a zillion years of cheaters, hacks, assholes and plenty of people who played for teams other than the Red Sox.
Just let the man play. So if cheating by using performance enhancing drugs isn't enough to keep this guy off of your team, what would? At what point do you draw a line between ability and character? It doesn't matter what the guy does or has done, so long as he can play? I think its unfortunate in a lot of ways that too many people who think like you have turned a game into an entertainment spectacle.
So if cheating by using performance enhancing drugs isn't enough to keep this guy off of your team, what would? It was, at most, cheating in the past before baseball instituted its steroid policy. You are going to have to kick a lot more people out of baseball if you want it clean. Is your chosen team 100% clean without any past PED use whatsoever?
Is your chosen team 100% clean without any past PED use whatsoever? In a word, yes. If you have used a drug to give yourself an unfair advantage over other players, your stats and records should be expunged and you have played your last game. If its proven that anyone in management knew about and tacitly (or overtly) condoned your cheating, then the team forfeits the games you played in while using the drugs. Its either that or you lower the standards, change the rules to allow an acceptable level of cheating, and let anyone play. At which point it would cease to be a game I would want to watch. it would become nothing more than a contest between drug companies rather than athletes.
Out of curiosity clones, do you have a "chosen" MLB team?
There is zero good reason an eligible, healthy player who hit 28 HR with a 1.045 OPS the previous season should be unsigned by any team currently in playoff contention. Are we talking about the same player who was released by his team of the last 15 years shortly after he broke a home run record and before the season was over? The same player whose team of the last 15 years removed practically every vestige of him from the ballpark before the next season opened? Why isn't he signed? Let's number the possible reasons, shall we? 1. If he's only going to be hitting DH, that cuts the number of eligible teams by half. 2. For the sake of arguement, lets say that of those 16 teams, half of them will be in contention for post-season play. 3. Of those remaining 8 teams, which teams have the required space in the clubhouse for the personal staff, the barcaloungers, and the big flat panel tv? 4. For the sake of arguement, lets say that of those 8 teams, half of them have the required space in the clubhouse for the personal staff, the barcaloungers, and the big flat panel tv. 5. Of those remaining 4 teams, which ones with room in the clubhouse for the personal staff, the barcaloungers, and the big flat panel tv, have owners and managers willing to gamble on the performance of a 44 year old sullen, brooding, egotistical, known cheater, non-team player with a small matter of a federal indictment hanging over him? So Watson, by the process of elimination, we see that 2, or at the most 4 teams, may have all of the needs and requirements to sign mr bonds to a contract. I would submit therefore, that bonds still has a 1 in 8 chance of being signed to play this season.
"chosen" MLB team This season, a specific era, or all time?
This season, a specific era, or all time? If you change favorite teams more than you change your socks...ur probably not much of a fan.
I think there is a difference between "chosen" and "favorite", although I admit I might be getting too semantic about it. The Giants and A's are the local teams, but I suppose my heart will always be with the Cubs.
2. For the sake of arguement, lets say that of those 16 teams The AL has 14 teams. Your argument consists entirely of opinion and conjecture.
minimum pro-rated salary donated to buying tickets for kids" certainly suggests he's not looking to be a prima donna. Unfortunately Hal, fans and perhaps major league ballclubs, have long memories on prickdom and short memories on alleged lying and cheating. Like to see him play again, however being realistic, don't see much chance of that happening.
The Giants and A's are the local teams, but I suppose my heart will always be with the Cubs. The Giants and the A's both have had big name players who have admitted or are under suspicion for steroid use. I haven't followed the Cubs enough to know if they have or have had players who are under the same suspicion.
Your argument consists entirely of opinion and conjecture. OK, now we are really splitting hairs. As if 73.457% of the posts here aren't entirely opinion and conjecture. Just substitute 14 for 16 and redo the math. the point was and is, there aren't that many teams that would actually need Bond's services, and of that few, how many would be willing to take him on with all the baggage.
It was alleged but never proven that at least two players on the Cubs roster from 1998 to 2000 used steroids. The player who made the allegations, Matt Karchner, refused to divulge their names. There were a number of former Cubs players listed in the Mitchell report, meaning that they were not with the Cubs when they took steroids. Former Cubs listed in the Mitchell report implicated by Kirk Radomski included: Glenallen Hill Matt Franco Todd Hundley Jerry Hairston Rondell White Todd Pratt Kent Mercker Benito Santiago Gary Matthews Rafael Palmeiro
I think its unfortunate in a lot of ways that too many people who think like you have turned a game into an entertainment spectacle And I think that it's unfortunate that way too many people who think like you believe that Bonds is the sole reason why steroids ran rampant in the sport of baseball.
believe that Bonds is the sole reason why steroids ran rampant in the sport of baseball Normally I'm jealous of how often your posts are right on target, but you are way off base here (pun intended). I never said or even intimated that Bonds was the sole reason for steroids in baseball. I only think that his steroids use is more egregious than most given that he attained two of baseball's most prestigious records while juiced.
As if 73.457% of the posts here aren't entirely opinion and conjecture. Sure, but hopefully most of the posts aren't insisting on wrong-headed "facts". Just substitute 14 for 16 and redo the math. the point was and is My point was that if you can't be bothered to know how many teams are in each league, maybe you aren't the best source on this one. there aren't that many teams that would actually need Bond's services Barry Bonds' career OPS: 1051 Number of AL teams with a DH hitting better than that, even in a small number of at bats: 0 He must be a real clubhouse cancer to not be worth taking on for 3 extra wins the rest of the way. 73.456% now
Well sure, that's his career OPS, yerfatma. He's in his 40's now, and declining. Why, last year his OPS was only 1.045, which would only the fourth-highest among all active players in the majors right now! And his SLG was an anemic .565, which would be only tenth overall (only two points higher than another drug using criminal type, Josh Hamilton). And his .480 OBP would only be third, 5 points behind currently-injured Chipper Jones. I mean, who wants a guy who reaches base only 48% of the time?! Hell, I'm convinced- not only is he a cancer in the clubhouse, as who among us hasn't personally endured the hell that is Barry Bonds' presence- he's a botulism on the basepaths. No team could handle that kind of shitty production from any of their players, much less an aging junkie...
aren't insisting on wrong-headed "facts" OK, from now on I will use the disclaimer "tongue in cheek". I thought that the references to the barcalounger and large flat screen tv were sufficient to indicate humor. maybe you aren't the best source on this one. And who is the best source on this one, since none of us (to the best of my knowledge) are MLB GM's or owners that actually know why they haven't hired Bonds yet. And if we aren't an MLB GM or owner, than all of this is pure conjecture and opinion. My opinion isn't that much different than yours. Oh wait, you actually haven't posted an opinion on this topic, just opinions on other's posts. Barry Bonds' career OPS If it were just about the stats Bonds would have been playing since opening day. So what possible reason could 30 MLB teams have for not signing this guy?
So what possible reason could 30 MLB teams have for not signing this guy? Some sort of Gentleman's Agreement not to sign him. Another word for that would be: COLLUSION! Thanks for playing.
Thanks for not blasting me into next week yerfatma. All joking aside, I respect your knowledge of all things baseball and your wealth of life experience, and so I honestly seek an answer to some questions. Do you really think that all of the 30 MLB teams might have a place for Bonds? I would think that one concern would be his ability to play every game in the season. On the NL side any team that signed him would need to have a reasonably good replacement for him when he couldn't play. Or, proceeding on the basis that he would sign as a DH, how many of the 14 AL teams might have a place for Bonds?
Or, proceeding on the basis that he would sign as a DH, how many of the 14 AL teams might have a place for Bonds? At least 1. Joe Posnanski says KC should. It's hard to imagine there aren't other teams. Assuming David Ortiz comes back healthy, I'll admit the Red Sox have no place for Bonds. Other than that, I think almost any AL team would be smart to take a look. If he's playing for free, he's cheaper than a AAA player sitting on your bench. Why wouldn't you let him DH 3 or 4 days a week?
I only think that his steroids use is more egregious than most given that he attained two of baseball's most prestigious records while juiced. Point taken, IRFC but his "steriod use" is still alleged. Not to beat on a dead horse (my bad Barbaro) but people can claim whatever they like but the truth of the matter is, Bonds' trial is basically for perjury. Meaning: The defense is out to prove that Bonds knew that he was taking steriods while he's standing by his story that if he did take them, he unknowingly did so. If the man is lying, that's one thing but because the way the media has portrayed him thru-out the years, everyone has an opinion about Bonds and it's not in a good light. I for one, don't really care one way or another, I just rather would wait until everything is said & done with his trial before I can actually have an honest opinion about him. I may be somewhat baised but that's only because I have watched this man play ball for most of his career and I simply want to believe that he is telling the truth. I also tell my niece and nephew that the tooth fairy is real so....
This is was sucks about baseball, and why the NFL NBA have long surpassed it in ratings and such. I mean the man can play for lots of A.L teams all that should matter is can he help you win. Plus fan equally show up to hate on a person as they do to cheer. Bad commissioner and gutless owners and gm's make for some team suffering from lack a good run producing bat come playoff time. GET REAL MLB
You all need something else to talk about....
You all need something else to talk about.... Comment icon posted by knowsalittle at 7:47 PM CDT on July 3 Really? On a sports site? In a baseball thread? About Barry Bonds?
