Amusing article about Bonds on Yahoo! Sports
yankeeno7
Posts: 9,248 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Bonds sucks
I dont know or dont care how respectable this "reporter" is but I like some of his thoughts on this recent Bonds incident and Bonds as a player.
I dont know or dont care how respectable this "reporter" is but I like some of his thoughts on this recent Bonds incident and Bonds as a player.
0
Comments
Barry being Barry: No end in sight
By Jeff Passan, Yahoo! Sports
May 13, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO – Since Barry Bonds is sure to take a public flogging for almost hitting into a double play when he failed to run out a pop-up, I will refrain from ripping him for the act itself. Surely Bonds knows what he did was wrong, much like the 3-year-old who chucks silverware across the dinner table.
Difference is, children have parents who dole out punishment and make the kid apologize and, hopefully, learn from the mistake. Barry Bonds, the biggest child in baseball, doesn't seem to care, and he has done such a magnificent job of shielding himself from everybody except the yes-men and stooges in his employ, he no longer understands the meaning of accountability.
To his teammates.
To his manager.
To his fans.
To baseball.
To himself.
Surely all of Bonds' slights are borne from a self-centeredness that seems to have been rubbed with a dab of the Cream. Not that Bonds ever has been a great teammate or an easy player to manage or a peach to the fans who pay to see him or a man the sport can be proud to support.
With this latest mishap, he managed to disrespect himself.
Even the most myopic Bonds devotees will have trouble defending him here. You are taught to run out pop-ups and ground balls for a reason: Fielders are fallible, and in this instance, Jeff Kent, Bonds' former teammate and nemesis, dropped a routine pop.
Bonds, of course, did not realize this because his back was turned. It was the eighth inning, in his third at-bat of the night, and Bonds was facing a journeyman named Joe Beimel. Bonds lifted a fly ball at Kent and took exactly eight steps down the line before pirouetting toward San Francisco's dugout. Not until someone yelled at Bonds did he start running again, and Los Angeles shortstop Rafael Furcal barely missed turning a double play after he'd received the throw from Kent for a force out.
On the field, Bonds was seen asking about the infield-fly rule. Boy, that's fresh. A ballplayer in his 21st year who doesn't know the infield-fly rule.
No, this was simply another red herring in a long line of them. Blame the media. Blame racial discrimination. Blame ignorance toward the rulebook. Blame, blame, blame until the story has morphed about the issue at hand into another episode of Angry Barry.
We fall for it, all of us. Because we're disaffected in that way, too. Shucking responsibility would make things so much easier. Imagine screwing up a cursory job at work that embarrasses your co-workers and company, then not having to explain it to the boss.
Bonds slogged into the dugout at the end of the inning, the Giants on their way to an ugly 6-1 loss, and didn't say anything to Giants manager Felipe Alou.
"I've got to talk with him," Alou said.
Alou threw out the idea that Bonds might himself address the bungle.
"No," Bonds said, "I'm not talking."
Someone asked whether he'd play Saturday.
"Still ain't talking," he said.
That is Bonds' prerogative. If he doesn't mind watching all of the attention on him funneled to teammates tired of talking about Barry, Barry, Barry, and to a manager so weary of the chase for Bonds' 714th home run that he regularly plays him in the ninth inning of blowouts, bully for him.
It simply reinforces Bonds' disconnect. When you're hitless in your last nine at-bats, you don't dog the 10th, even if it is a pop-up. When you're batting .231, slugging .487 and swinging through 90-mph fastballs you used to pop like Pez, you answer why. When you're moving like Abe Simpson in the outfield and can't help on a misjudged fly ball in the gap, you owe a reasonable explanation, at very least, to center fielder Steve Finley, who looked pretty silly without any help.
"We know (Bonds) has a lack of range," Alou said. "It didn't lose the game for us tonight."
That's not the point. The Giants have created the same kind of enabling environment for Bonds that baseball in the late 1980s and particularly the '90s created for steroid users. While there is no outward condoning of the actions, there is a passive acceptance. Barry being Barry, goes the lame excuse.
All of this happened the night the Giants celebrated Willie Mays' 75th birthday. Before the game, they presented Mays with a cake and commemorated his career and released colorful balloons. Bonds, his godson, admired the ceremony from the dugout before he went out and added another tick mark to the list of reasons fans loathe him.
In a way, it was sad to see this 41-year-old man, beaten down by injuries and pressure and who knows what else, hobbling through a nine-inning game. Because it was obvious that when the game ended, Bonds wasn't going to own up to any mistakes, miscues or missteps.
He had thrown his forks and knives, and he would go unpunished again.
Here is the correct link. You had this part twice. Http//Http... That is why it didn't work
<< <i>eh, Manny Ramirez does't run out his pop-ups either, and its dismissed as "Manny being Manny". I guess you can only discipline players if they make less than $10 million a year --- Alfonso Soriano barely made the cut. >>
Sort of like any person at the top of any field of human endeavor (i.e., Kennedy and Clinton in the White House, Corporate CEO's and CFO's, Jim Bakker and Tammy Faye Baker of Televangilism Fame, OJ Simpson, Duke Cunningham, Michael Jackson, the list is endless) who is in a position to where others gravitate to them, worship them, work for them and make a living off of them. Each person around them has their own motivations to "cover" for and "protect" the superstar. However, eventually the "Star" fades and burns out and the person is no longer in the public eye. Such will happen to Bonds and I would not want to be anyone who has to be around him and associate with him after he retires from baseball.
As for the SF Giants, I suspect that the ownership of the club has made a decision that they desire to have Bonds break Ruth's record and hopefully Hammerin Hank's record of 755 homes while playing for the Gigantes and then give him a hero's send off into retirement. The Giants can then proudly claim that the #1 home run King is a Giant (while not having to have him on the club and deal with him on a daily basis).
It is really too bad that he was hurt so much of last year. Had he played the entire 2005 season, he probably would be about 10 home runs away from Hank Aaron's record and everyone could hope for him to break the record in by June or July. Unfortunately, after he passes Ruth, he still will need another 41 home runs to get to 756. The way he is playing this year (hobbled by continued injury problems) he will not even come close to 756 until next year or the year after (maybe, just maybe his only chance will be to sign with the Angels in the American league).
I suspect that when he finally does retire or go to the American Leauge, many in the Giant's organization from the owners to the equipment managers will breath a big sigh of relief.
<< <i>IF Bonds ever hits 756, you can bet it will be next year wearing Yankee pinstripes in a part time role. They'll milk it for all they can................ >>
And they'll want him to go into the hall wearing pinstripes (that's if he gets in...there is more and more dissent among voters who are saying they won't vote for a cheater). But then cheaters in NY are nothing new...Giambi, Sheffield, add Bonds to the list and you've got the BALCO all stars!
Steve
<< <i>Bret Boone
Steve >>
What about Bret Boone? Did you ever see me defend him, ya big dope?
Steve
<< <i>Yes dopey you have
Steve >>
Links please, otherwise, shaddup.
Another reason it would make a lot of sense to trade the guy is that they'll actually be able to get a good young player/prospect for him now where they won't get anything in the offseason if he leaves, which he'd be crazy not to. The best fit for him is not the Yankees by any stretch, it's the Oakland A's right across the bay. His fan base is already there, he'd fit well as the DH in that line-up, especially with Frank Thomas always injured and no longer significantly productive when he is playing. And Oakland would give up a prospect for him with little hesitation He's constantly on base because of all the walks, which is what Billy Beane wants from all his players, and he'd also sell tickets for them at a time when they are desperate to sell more season tickets.
While I dislike Bonds and wish he would retire before he screws up one of the most significant records in baseball history, it's clear that he has his own agenda set to ruin those records. There cannot be any other possible reason the man is still playing - he's practically a cripple and he sure as hell doesn't need the money. San Francisco ought to be sick of him and the losing that comes along with him by now, but clearly they're willing to put up with it as long as it puts people in the ballpark. The least they can do is trade him so he's not a disgrace on the field any longer.
LOL
Steve
Also, the Yankees never liked the press of having two players who have admitted to steroids...I think they would avoid any further steroid controversy. The Yankees even considered voiding Giambi's contract.
Does Bonds have a no trade clause in his contract? If he does, I highly doubt he would allowed to be traded out of SF. I also highly doubt he would sign with any other team unless he is completely hellbent on the all time HR record. The other question is, would anyone else even want him? I suppose they could do it to put butts in the seats but with Bonds' ego I doubt anyone would be willing to pay him the money he would want.
The yankees don't care about that crap, and Bonds would be signed there if Bonds wants to play another year.
I could see Steinbrenner offering Bonds $10 million next year...hell, he's given tons of worse players more money than that.
You sound more and more like an idiot every time you post.
<< <i>And that's because you are a Yankee's inside man, right Axhole? hahahaha
You sound more and more like an idiot every time you post. >>
No one has to be an 'insider' to see the ridiculous contracts the yankees have signed in recent history...by your own admission:
<< <i>No one disagrees the Yankees have signed their share of players at the end of their careers and spent a lot of money doing it but they have done it to win. Some choices were bad ones, ie Kevin Brown. >>
So please tell me how my hypothesising the yanks making him an offer is 'idiotic'?
Oh that's right, you can't.
Actually from what the papers were reporting around that time YES they were. Cashman was quoted as saying that they (the yanks) were exploring all the options.
It took his mea culpa for them to basically back down.
Steve
ahh I see you're here now dopey, you got killed over at the other thread so you came here to hide.
If it was truly about the steroids, and not his piss poor performance in the early part of the year, why wasn't Sheffield's contract possibly being voided?
Because Giambi's voided contract had NOTHING to do with steroids and everything to do with the possibility of getting out from under a huge contract for a player who wasn't performing. Anyone who tries to say the yankees tried to take the moral road and get rid of a steroid user is delusional.
whatever
steve
Can you walk and chew gum at the same time yet, dope?
It's a ridiculous hypothesis for the reasons I gave but you are too stupid to comprehend.
LOL and on both you are looking more idiotic with every reply you make.
btw i was adding a card to my set. you remm? cards?
when was the last time you added a card? Oh that is right the other day you stated that none were available that you need.
<eyeroll>
Steve
<< <i>I'm on both threads, unlike you, I can multitask.
LOL and on both you are looking more idiotic with every reply you make.
btw i was adding a card to my set. you remm? cards?
when was the last time you added a card? Oh that is right the other day you stated that none were available that you need.
<eyeroll>
Steve >>
Hey moron, why don't you look at my sets and see if I am adding cards or not. Then maybe you'll finally (please?) shut the f**k up about thing you have no idea about?
Here's a link for you, WP.
I made it super duper easy, because I know complicated things make your puny little brain spin and smoke.