Showing posts with label Barry Bonds. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barry Bonds. Show all posts

Friday, May 9, 2008

ESPN Editors Realize They Need To Start Fact Checking Bill Simmons

Bill Simmons wrote a piece about Barry Bonds for the magazine a few weeks ago. In it, he noted the following:

For all intents and purposes, Bonds' career has vanished into thin air. His home ballpark has had three different names (Pac Bell, SBC and AT&T), but it was mostly considered the House That Barry Built. This season, though, all traces of his dirigible-size head have been erased. Forget about a statue, inside or outside the stadium; there isn't a plaque, a banner or even a picture. It's like Bonds never happened.

That's mildly interesting, right? Problem is the May 5th issue of ESPN Magazine pointed out that it's dead wrong.

On page 16:

We whiffed when we wrote that the San Francisco Giants had removed all traces of Barry Bonds from AT&T Park. Turns out, nods to the slugger pop up in 10 places, including:

- Behind Right-Centerfield, where a plaque marks the landing spot of infamous no. 756.
- Rightfield Portal, where his name appears alongside those of the three other Giants with at least 500 HRs.
- Leftfield, where there are replicas of his five MVPs adorning the Coke-bottle platform.
- Rightfield Portwalk, where seven of the 14 monuments that line the sidewalk fence commemorate his milestones.
- AT&T Park grounds, where Bonds stars in various displays that celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Giants' arrival to the Bay.

Yeah, but after those five spots, and five other spots, they've totally erased him!

Thursday, July 12, 2007

You Want To Do What To Barry Bonds?

This column was discussed on FireJayMariotti, but I can’t let this slide.

Gregg Doyel of CBS Sportsline talking about the All-Star game and Barry Bonds. Take it away you sick, unfunny sonofabitch:

Even the pregame introductions are cool. One by one, the greatest players in America's greatest game trot onto the field. Sometimes the crowd cheers, sometimes the crowd boos, and half the fun is trying to guess what the reception will be. And then there's that goose-bump moment when the home stadium's All-Star is introduced. That guy, whoever it is, always gets the biggest cheer of the night. That's the way it should be, and even though I know it's coming, I still get tingly every time.

I don't want to tingle tonight. I would tinkle, however, all over Bonds if I could. I'd tinkle on Bonds and then the 30,000 or 40,000 hypocritical San Francisco fans who will cheer him tonight, their misguided applause producing a moment that would never give me goose bumps -- but might give me goiter.

Put aside the silly outrage. Put aside the hyperbole. How does something this stupid end up on a mainstream web site?

I have not heard the word tinkle since I was six.

I have nothing to add. I have a feeling this isn't the last I'll be featuring this wackjob though.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

An Open Letter To Bud Selig

Bud,

I realize that you’re a busy man. As Commissioner of Major League Baseball your job is to make important decisions, drive strategic direction around marketing and rulemaking, work with the owners and the unions, look after the financial picture and much more. I'm sure you have a lot on your plate.

But about this whole “I haven’t made up my mind” routine with respect to your attendance when Barry Bonds breaks the home-run record. I have a problem with that. You don’t have to go to every game after he’s hit 755 until he breaks it, but you should give it 3 or 4. It is widely regarded as one the top records in American sports history. This isn’t 3,000 hits or 300 wins or 700 homers. Those are arbitrary round numbers that we’ve decided mean something. This is the most homeruns, ever. According to this NY Times abstract, Peter Ueberroth was there when Rose tied the hit record. He was doing his job.

It’s your job to make an attempt to be there, to celebrate a historical moment in baseball. I have read/heard through media outlets no less than 100 times that “Bud Selig has not yet made up his mind if he’ll be there.” That’s ridiculous, and I’ll tell you why.

You had the chance to right this ship a long time ago. But you ignored it. You and the rest of baseball’s owners and general leadership (and of course, the union and players) did nothing about it. This is what that apathy has sewn, and you must deal with it. You don’t get to make a stance now, it’s too late. Just because you’ve stopped pretending that performance enhancing drugs weren’t being used by MLB players, it doesn’t mean you get to now conclude that what Bonds is doing doesn’t deserve your attendance.

You were in the stands when Cal Ripken Jr. broke Lou Gehrig’s consecutive games played record, and you’ve been in the stands for countless other moments while commissioner. I, as Joe MLB consumer, get to decide what I want to do with this record, and how I want to honor it. But you shouldn’t get this same right. This record is the logical, on field conclusion to the steroid era that you and MLB helped create by doing nothing.

So go to the game, and celebrate that.

Saturday, June 30, 2007

Jemele Hill: 1 + 2 Should Equal 3!

In my last Jemele Hill related post, I said this:

“I HATE when writers make arguments for themselves to counter like this. Jemele is the queen of that.”

Jemele’s latest cause: Barry Bonds belongs in the all-star game. Real quick, Barry Bonds is second in all of baseball in OPS. He’s hitting .298 w/ 16 homeruns. He’d have more runs and RBIs but his team sucks and he’s getting walked at an insanely high rate (hurts RBI chances, hurts Runs when teammates can't drive him in). He’s also clearly the best player on the Giants, who would need to have a representative. So who is she trying to convince? I have no idea.

I know this is being fairly heavily debated among writers and the BBTN crowd, but Jemele's story captures the crux of all the wrong sides of the argument.

He is getting on base over 50% of the time. Only Bonds, Mickey Mantle and Ted Williams have done that since 1950. So I'm sorry, yes, another Jemele Hill post. As usual though, her logic is totally backwards. She believes Barry Bonds belongs in the All-Star game, in spite of his non-all star stats, because his chasing the all-time home run record is the biggest story in baseball. She believes that the fans are sending him a message with the voting, because he's 4th.

All-Star Game loses relevance without Bonds

I have about as much love for Barry Bonds as Pacman Jones has for district attorneys.

Ha ha ha, those guys DO hate district attorneys!

Yet even I would be hugely disappointed if Bonds wasn't an All-Star.

Because he’s second on the majors in OPS and he's getting on base over 50% of the time?

This is not about statistics.

Huh? Why not? Shouldn’t it be about his performance in the first half of the year?

This isn't about what the fans want, because in this case, they have no idea what that is. This isn't about steroids, either, because the federal government has been unable to nail Bonds. Certainly baseball's farce of a steroids investigation is unlikely to discover anything that will stop Bonds from piling up home runs.

Then what is it about? Isn’t the selection system set up to be A) What the fans want and B) The best players (theoretically) as picked by the players and coaches?

Just to get this out of the way, I believe Bonds knowingly took steroids. It just doesn't change anything. He's going to be the home run king.

It doesn’t change the number of home runs he hit, but to many it changes the perception that it was Bonds and his hard work/talent that did all the work. So yeah, it changes the perception of the validity of the record. That’s something.

And as the soon-to-be home run king, Bonds has a place in the All-Star Game. Baseball, if anything, is a sport infatuated with tradition. If the player about to break the game's most important record isn't apart of a celebration of the sport's best, something just wouldn't feel right.

He deserves to be in the game because he’s played baseball at an All-Star level this year, not because he’s breaking the record. What if he started the season with 754 and had hit only 1 HR so far, does he deserve to be in then?

The fans are trying to make a point, which is why Bonds is currently fourth in the voting among National League outfielders.

Right, he’s fourth in the voting, that means he’s getting a lot of votes and a lot of fans want him in.

A fine ideal, just not the entire truth. If the fans really wanted to make statement, they wouldn't pay extra to see him play at parks across the country.

Huh? So you’re saying the fans are making a statement AGAINST Bonds by having him fourth, and if they really wanted to make a statement, they wouldn’t go watch games that he’s playing in? What are the fans saying to Matt Holliday, who has been great but has 400,000 less votes than Bonds?

No story in baseball is bigger than Bonds. He's bigger than any superficial comeback Roger Clemens can muster. Bigger than the Yankees' nosedive. Bigger than any Dice-K start. Bigger than any A-Rod infidelity caper.

Right, because he’s breaking the all-time home run record. I agree.

So how would it look if the biggest story in the sport is absent from the league's marquee showcase? A marquee event, by the way, that's held in San Francisco -- the one place in the solar system where Bonds has unwavering support.

How would it look if the guy who is second in the entire major leagues in OPS and is his team’s MVP was not in the all-star game? Pretty crazy! You’re right for all the wrong reasons.

Aren't All-Star games supposed to be entertainment for the fans?

Yes, partially, that’s why the fans vote. They have him 4th so far, pretty good.

Despite Bonds' transgressions -- both real and imagined -- he is a transcendent figure in sports. He's a star. And last time I checked, that's the defining characteristic in an All-Star Game.

What is the defining characteristic in an All-Star Game? Transcendence? Being a star? Huh? Like Mark Redman last year?

You can use Bonds' stats (.293 batting average, 15 homers, 35 RBIs, through Sunday) and dwindling defensive ability as an argument against him earning his 14th All-Star selection, but Bonds wouldn't be the first declining player to get a free pass into the All-Star Game.

What? He’s 2nd in the majors in OPS! He has a .505 on base %! What is wrong with 15 homers (now 16, good for 7th in the NL)? He doesn’t get RBIs/Runs this year because of his teammates and the fact that he’s walked so much hurts his RBI chances. His numbers compare quite favorably to Beltran, Griffey Jr. and Soriano who are all in front of him.

Also, you just implied that his stats may not be all-star worthy, but earlier you said that the fans were making a “statement” by having him 4th in the voting. You implied that the statement was negative. If you don’t think his stats are all-star worthy, then wouldn’t it be surprising that he’s 4th in the voting? Wouldn’t it be a positive statement by the fans?

It happens all the time in other sports. Magic Johnson was voted to the 1992 NBA All-Star team after his HIV announcement because people were inspired and sympathetic. And let's not forget Cal Ripken received his share of gimme All-Star appearances, too.

These examples have nothing to do with Bonds getting into the all-star game this year.

Deleted: Blah blah blah steroids, Selig, McGwire….stuff irrelevant to the all-star game…blah blah blah…

Bonds is part of the ugly, historical incident that baseball should acknowledge, accept and remember. His All-Star selection wouldn't be a reward. It's a reminder of the long-lasting damage that is done when principles are abandoned.

His All-Star selection would be justified based on his performance on the field so far this year, and any other attention brought upon it by columnists like you is just noise.