Bonds or Maddux?
craig44
Posts: 12,692 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
In the 1992 offseason, the 2 biggest free agent prizes were Barry Bonds and Greg Maddux. Bonds was 28 years old and had won 2 MVP awards. Maddux was 26 years old and was just coming off from his first Cy Young award.
if you were a GM at the time, and could only sign one, who do you choose?
It is certainly a difficult choice. In retrospect, Maddux was more dominant sooner, he had such a great 7 year stretch after signing. Bonds had a better overall career until they both retired. I do believe an ace number 1 starter is a the most important player in baseball come playoff time. He can affect a series like no other single player.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
0
Comments
It would depend on my lineup and pitching staff
Whichever was lacking would push me in that direction
Unrelated to the topic but if I were to build an all time team my first pitcher taken would be Maddox without hesitation
Maddux.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
Hard to go back and "unknow" what happened after, especially with Bonds.
Overall, Maddux was not great from 1987-1992 with a 3.30 ERA.
Bonds was, at that time, already a stud.
I would have chosen (poorly) and picked Barry in a heartbeat at the time.
Knowing what I know now, it's the other way around.
Bonds.
Bonds would bat about 4-5 times a game. Bonds would also be helping in the field.
Maddux being a pitcher is only playing every 5 games and is probable more prone to injury as pitchers are and rarely play a full 9 inning game. Also when pitchers are injured they tend to spend more time to recover.
Pitching. I think a great pitcher is scarcer providing not injury prone. Yes, hitters can play every day, but that increases their chances to get injured.
I've never seen Bonds pitch though...
If I was still in a Strat-O league...and I had to pick either Bonds or Maddux...I'd pick Bonds; and Sell Barry to my younger cousin...
I would probably take Bonds but there's no wrong answer here.
One is a hall of famer… one is a cousin of the Sasquatch…. how do weird questions like this always come up on this board.
Let’s at least do human/human scenario’s so we have a level playing field.
Bonds or McGwire…. Which one juiced at a more impressive rate?
That would be an example of apples and apples.
I agree I would need to know my roster, but without knowing it I would take Bonds.
Even back then you werent getting 40 starts from a starting pitcher and getting less than 300 innings from them meanwhile the position player is playing almost every day for the full game
Fire AJ Preller
based on principle alone, i'm taking the guy who wasn't a supreme d-head and whose melon stayed the same size throughout the duration of his career
and the fact that Maddux unintentionally walked 140 out of 20,241 batters in his entire 23-year career while throwing a whiffle ball is rather appealing to me too
which type of player is more valuable during the regular season, a number 1 starter or a top 2 or 3 in the league position player?
which player is more valuable in the post season?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
@craig44, I think you know the answer. It is the #1 starter, especially when that starter is Maddux.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
The Braves almost had them both at one point before the deal for Bonds fell through.
Position player is more valuable. especially in the NL before they got the DH They could potentially have a chance to win every game while the pitcher is irrelevant in most of the games. Postseason you get maybe 2 starts a series from them, 3 if it goes 7 and the position player starts every game.
Even looking at Maddux where he had that stretch throwing the most innings and CGs pitching to contract only once every 7 games over his career did he play a complete game and he was only involved in under 40 games to begin with. He also never had more than 2 post season starts in a single series.
Back then pitchers in the NL had to hit and Maddux was basically an automatic out
Fire AJ Preller
Seems the more challenging question might simply be… did Maddox get a career boost in leaving Chicago for Atlanta? In hindsight we already know the Cubs made a mistake by not matching what was offered by the Braves.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Absolutely. Not because of the better team, but had he stayed he would have gotten abused like Kerry Wood did that derailed his career
Fire AJ Preller
We know how Bonds got his "career boost"!
In retrospect the answer is easy since Greg Maddux went on to immediately win three Cy Young awards in a row comprising one of the best stretches a pitcher has ever had in the modern era of baseball.
Bonds did well too, but not at that same level in those immediate years after the contract or for the duration of the five and six year deals they received.
If we go by WAR, Bonds totaled 49.6 WAR over the 6 years of his contract (1993-1998), leading the NL four times in that stretch. Over the same stretch, Maddux totaled 45.6, leading the NL three times.
Yeh it is close. Those Bonds years were better than I thought off the top of my head.
The immediately is a good argument, but I just cant get over the difference in playing time and number of games they impact when they cost basically the same.
Fire AJ Preller