If barry bonds wouldnt have been walked 200 times the past 2 years, he prolly would have hit 60 homers in each of those years. Thats why the homerun total came back down to earth. Just as a disclaimer I believe Bonds took steroids so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
CubsFan7724 wrote:If barry bonds wouldnt have been walked 200 times the past 2 years, he prolly would have hit 60 homers in each of those years. Thats why the homerun total came back down to earth. Just as a disclaimer I believe Bonds took steroids so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
well he had 4 less at bats in 2001 but had 24 more hr's. in 2002-2003 he only had 70 to 80 less at bats but 27 and 28 less hr's. to me that doesn't support your theory of the reason he didn't have monster years was less at bats. he only had about 80 less at bats.
you guys are all bringing up good points, and after re-reading my post, some of the things i've said have been pretty moronic. i've just grown up hating barry my entire life, and watching his team struggle this year is almost as great as watching the dodgers win, but my frustration with him in this thread is purely from a FB standpoint. i may be wrong, but i honestly feel that it'll come out that he has been taking some sort of illegal substances (according to MLB or some other sports' policies), and when it does it's just gonna be a mess. and if he has to make up excuses to deal with his slumping team now, i can't imagine what he'll do then. at that point i want to be able to watch it and smile as a dodger's fan, not with mixed emotions as a FB owner of his. and i can't trade him right now because i won't get anywhere near the value that i should get in trading a #1 pick. ya, i know he's gonna go through slumps like everyone. hell, i've got delgado too, and he's stunk it up this year so far, but i'm not crying about him because he's not making up b.s. excuses. if people are gonna compare barry to ruth and mays he should act in a manner of that standard.
"24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case. Coincidence? I think not."
nmarq8, how do you know he's coming up with "b.s. excuses?" You're not there, you don't know what Bonds is dealing with. Could it be possible that his back spasms are real? Other players have missed games because of back spasms or the flu or other maladies that don't seem worthy of missing a game. If you hate him as much as it looks like, please trade him so we don't have to hear you complain about a guy hitting .360 with 27 r, 10 hr, 22 rbi, and 3 sbs.
Bonds has them both beat and you're complaining that he's "underperforming."
Roger Angell: I was talking with Bob Gibson and I said: 'Are you always this competitive?' He said: 'Oh, I think so. I got a three-year old daughter, and I've played about 500 games of tic-tac-toe with her and she hasn't beat me yet.'
I live in S.f. The reason Bonds is having difficulty is because the CHEAP owner MAGOWAN (backstabber!) invested in the likes Of Jeffrey Hammonds & Dustin Mohr. Puh-leeeeeze !!
MAGOWAN the backstabbing SOB is your problem. He did nothing to back up Barry. You think Barry wants A.J. (Absence of Jacks) Pissynski hitting behind him? FART no!! He's got wet dreams oF Vlady...
CubsFan7724 wrote:If barry bonds wouldnt have been walked 200 times the past 2 years, he prolly would have hit 60 homers in each of those years. Thats why the homerun total came back down to earth. Just as a disclaimer I believe Bonds took steroids so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
well he had 4 less at bats in 2001 but had 24 more hr's. in 2002-2003 he only had 70 to 80 less at bats but 27 and 28 less hr's. to me that doesn't support your theory of the reason he didn't have monster years was less at bats. he only had about 80 less at bats.
73 at bats and 86 at bats seems enough for Barry Bonds to hit 20 more homers a season
"Nothing is this world worth remembering was ever accomplished without Pasion"-Hegel