Bonds-related comments I hear often that drive me crazy
jamesryanbell
Posts: 1,108 ✭✭✭
How many idiotic broadcasters are going to say this?
"Well, should be put a "racist" title on all of Ty Cobb's memorabilia in the HOF, and should we put "alcoholic" next to Ruth's? Then we shouldn't put an asterisk next to Barry's 756 HR Ball or anything to do with his career even if he did use steroids".
STOP. THINK for a moment.
Does being a alcoholic help your stats out? NO. It probably makes them worse. Is it illegal? No. Next question.
Does being a racist give an unnatural boost to your stat lines? Absolutely not. While not a good display of character, is it downright ILLEGAL to be a racist? No.
Do steroids help your stat lines? Yes. Would you have been as good without them? FACTUALLY, no. Factually. I'd go that far with it. Yes, he still would've been good, but not even close to AS good. His physique totally changed. A lot of those HR balls would've been pop/line outs. Having a good eye (which he does have) doesn't make you the HR King, so don't sit there and tell me he still would've broken the record and been just as good, and that it really "probably didn't make a big difference". What a joke.
Still doubt? Take a look at the number of games it took ole "alcoholic" Ruth to hit 714 HR. Right at 2500. Hmm. (No disrespect to Aaron either...his longevity and consistency were amazing, and he deserved to be the King as well)
/rant
"Well, should be put a "racist" title on all of Ty Cobb's memorabilia in the HOF, and should we put "alcoholic" next to Ruth's? Then we shouldn't put an asterisk next to Barry's 756 HR Ball or anything to do with his career even if he did use steroids".
STOP. THINK for a moment.
Does being a alcoholic help your stats out? NO. It probably makes them worse. Is it illegal? No. Next question.
Does being a racist give an unnatural boost to your stat lines? Absolutely not. While not a good display of character, is it downright ILLEGAL to be a racist? No.
Do steroids help your stat lines? Yes. Would you have been as good without them? FACTUALLY, no. Factually. I'd go that far with it. Yes, he still would've been good, but not even close to AS good. His physique totally changed. A lot of those HR balls would've been pop/line outs. Having a good eye (which he does have) doesn't make you the HR King, so don't sit there and tell me he still would've broken the record and been just as good, and that it really "probably didn't make a big difference". What a joke.
Still doubt? Take a look at the number of games it took ole "alcoholic" Ruth to hit 714 HR. Right at 2500. Hmm. (No disrespect to Aaron either...his longevity and consistency were amazing, and he deserved to be the King as well)
/rant
-- Ryan Bell
0
Comments
"my rants get raves"-haweye pierce
Chris
My small collection
Want List:
'61 Topps Roy Campanella in PSA 5-7
Cardinal T206 cards
Adam Wainwright GU Jersey
The ball was branded because it is what we all voted for, all for our own reasons
<< <i>I agree with all you said. Except that Ruth took more than 3,000 at bats to hit 714.
Chris >>
That was a typo....fixed
<< <i>
<< <i>I agree with all you said. Except that Ruth took more than 3,000 at bats to hit 714.
Chris >>
That was a typo....fixed >>
I wasn't aware of the games number. That is amazing! Thanks for the info!
Chris
My small collection
Want List:
'61 Topps Roy Campanella in PSA 5-7
Cardinal T206 cards
Adam Wainwright GU Jersey
Should he be inducted to the Hall as a manager? Absolutely not. Should he be inducted as a player? Absolutely.
What he did completely altered his effectiveness as a manager, but what he did as a player was natural talent.
To play devil's advocate to your rant:
Selling and transporting alcohol (or promoting such activities) was illegal during much of Ruth's career - prohibition.
One can (Bonds certainly does) argue that racism contributed to Cobb's dominance by limiting his competition to whites.
Just throwing out some food for thought.
edited for spelling
<< <i>I'll bring up Pete Rose too...
Should he be inducted to the Hall as a manager? Absolutely not. Should he be inducted as a player? Absolutely.
What he did completely altered his effectiveness as a manager, but what he did as a player was natural talent. >>
And greenies
<< <i>Ryan,
To play devil's advocate to your rant:
Selling and transporting alcohol (or promoting such activities) was illegal during much of Ruth's career - prohibition >>
I think he probably just drank it, which wasn't illegal.
edited to add: But this time, people have it right.
<< <i>I'll bring up Pete Rose too...
Should he be inducted to the Hall as a manager? Absolutely not. Should he be inducted as a player? Absolutely.
What he did completely altered his effectiveness as a manager, but what he did as a player was natural talent. >>
just want to refresh your memory on ROSE...he bet on baseball when he was a player/manager, not only when he was a manager.....that gives him a black mark on his forehead forever
Who cares either way? He still bet.
My hypothetical point is:
If he bet against his own team during his playing/managing years, who knows? However, if he did bet against his team, I believe it would be most hurtful as a manager, not as a player, because a manager has his hands in nearly every aspect of a game. A single player can only be accountable for himself when all is said and done. If he was throwing games as a player, his stats sure don't support that ideology.
So, do you let Bonds in for that?
I doubt that Bonds will get "banned for life" by MLB, but considering the vitrol I've been reading in the papers as the sportswriters rail on this guy, he's not going anywhere as long as the sportswriters are casting the votes. At best, he'll take the Steve Garvey route of languishing on the ballot for 15 years, then fall off. At worst, he'll take the Albert Belle route and never see more than 8% of the vote.
I doubt that he'll get ZERO votes though. Shoot. Even Jose Canseco got 6 HoF votes.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>INDICTED >>
That's pretty funny!
<< <i>
<< <i>INDICTED >>
That's pretty funny! >>
All you gotta do is picture his face instead
Somebody that knows how to mess around with computers should put Bond's face there LOL.
i hope so,ballplayers didnt like him,the writers dont like him because of his attitude just for one,he'll have to pay em alloff to vote for him, hes going to boycott the hof anyways remember
<< <i>Ryan,
To play devil's advocate to your rant:
Selling and transporting alcohol (or promoting such activities) was illegal during much of Ruth's career - prohibition.
One can (Bonds certainly does) argue that racism contributed to Cobb's dominance by limiting his competition to whites.
Just throwing out some food for thought.
edited for spelling >>
Good points, and well taken.
However, my opinion only....
While the prohibition thing was in fact going on (and honestly, I forgot about that), still...it wouldn't have affected Ruth's #'s positively. However, I do see your point here, and I could even argue against myself on this point, so I'll leave it alone.
Regarding Cobb, he didn't really "limit his competition to whites" because he didn't have full say over the matter. It was an attitude...that's all...and albeit a bad one, he didn't have total say over the league. Just influence. Big difference. If there's something I don't know though, I reserve the right to retract my comments.
-- Ryan