sarasoxfan

I dont feel like arguing with you any more but I dont understand the mink reference--expect I'm sure Barry has a mink coat. this artcile sus up what i have siad all along. He's a monster alright an egotistical one. Bonds' late career surge has had other causes, from better bats to a greater uppercut in his swing. But I've been disappointed at some of the efforts from otherwise reasonable people to obscure the fact that Bonds' increased strength has had an impact on his unprecedented late-30s power surge. I meant to get to this when it ran in mid-December: the New York Times editorial by Will Carroll of the Baseball Prospectus (discussed here on his blog). I like and respect Carroll from his work at BP, but the Times piece has some serious issues. One is the point I make above: Carroll essentially implies that he is agnostic on whether strength helps with power hitting, contrary to 85 years' experience: [W]e have little or no idea what these drugs accomplish. Do stronger players hit the ball farther, swing the bat quicker or throw the ball harder? Does using steroids reduce fatigue so that they can do any of those things more effectively than "clean" players? While there is no doubt that these chemicals are effective at their stated goal, albeit with significant complications, the question of how their effects manifest themselves in a baseball game has not been answered. There are no credible studies that connect drug use to improved performance, nor any that determine what cost these athletes may be paying. Much more problematically, Carroll uses some seriously misguided examples to imply to the Times' readers that Bonds' power surge is not so unprecedented: It is true that Bonds's performance over what many would expect to be the twilight of his career has been incredible. Instead of a slow decline as he approached 40, Bonds has done what can only now be described as superhuman. . . . The raw numbers, however, only reflect his increased home-run production; they do not say whether he hits more homers that fly significantly farther. What of this late-career surge? Certainly we can point to that with an accusing finger, sure that Bonds's numbers in the record books have been written with some "cream" or "clear" substance. It's much easier to point than to find facts. According to Clay Davenport, a researcher at Baseball Prospectus, Hank Aaron's best year for home runs - when he had the most homers per at bat - was 1973, when he was 39. His second best was in 1971, at age 37. Willie Stargell had his best seasons after age 37. Carlton Fisk put his best rate in the books when he was 40. Even Ty Cobb had his best home run rate at age 38, though the end of the dead-ball era helped that. It is not uncommon, according to Mr. Davenport, for a slugger to change his mechanics as he ages, swinging for the fences as his ability to run the bases declines. These are terribly bad examples. First of all, Aaron in 1973, Stargell in 1978 and 1979 and Fisk in 1988 all had one thing in common: none of them were full-time, 500+ at bat players any longer, as they'd been in their primes. It's a lot easier for an older player to improve his production if he has a third to half of the season to rest as opposed to the years when he was playing every day, a fact that has absolutely zero to do with Barry Bonds. Let's take Stargell first, as he's the most egregious example. Willie Stargell's career best slugging percentages, both absolutely and relative to the league, came at the ages of 26, 31, and 33, well within the normal range. Stargell's home run rate improved slightly in 1978-79, at age 38 and 39, but his doubles - also a key power stat - dropped off sharply from 43 in 1973 to 18 and 19 in 1978 and 1979. Was he really hitting for more power? Also, Stargell had another thing going for him: while he wasn't, strictly speaking, platooned (his backup, John Milner, was also lefthanded), the decline in his playing time allowed him to see a much more favorable mix of pitchers: Stargell had 30.5% of his at bats against lefties in 1978 and 30.7% in 1979, as opposed to 39.5% in 1971 and 33.1% in 1973. For a guy with Stargell's big platoon splits, that's a significant advantage. Then there's Aaron. If you know the game's history, you already know that Aaron's late-career power surge was an illusion created by the improved offensive conditions of the 1970s as opposed to the 1960s, combined with his move in 1966 into homer-friendly Fulton County Stadium and out of pitcher-friendly Milwaukee County. Aaron hit 52 homers on the road and 37 at home in 1962-63; in 1971 and 1973, those figures were more than reversed to 55 at home and 32 on the road. But it doesn't stop there; with just 392 at bats in 1973 at age 39, the right-handed Aaron saw 44.4% of his at bats against left-handed pitching, up from 30.9% in 1971 and 26.5% as a full-time player in 1969. Then there's Fisk, whose "best" home run season was 253 at bats in 1988. Do I really need to explain why a catcher might hit better playing half the time? And yes, the right-handed Fisk faced lefties 36.5% of the time in 1988, compared to 22.9% in his actual best season, 1977. (Ty Cobb, whose career high in home runs was 12 but whose career high in slugging average was at age 24, is not even worthy of discussing at length). None of these guys - indeed, no other player in baseball history - compares remotely to what Barry Bonds has done, and it does no service to the debate to pretend otherwise. Prior to 2000, Bonds was 34 years old and had a career slugging percentage of .559, with his two best slugging percentages (.677 and .647) coming at age 28 and 29. Since then, he has slugged .781, a 40% improvement on his career average and a 15% improvement over a five-year stretch compared to his career best season. Neither Carroll nor Davenport could find an example anywhere, certainly not outside of guys who straddled the arrival of the lively ball in the 1920s, of an established player who had anything like a 40% improvement in his power numbers from age 35 to 39. (Bonds has also batted .358 over the past three years, compared to batting above .320 just once through age 35, also nothing like a normal aging pattern). Carroll's argument would have been better served by recognizing the fact that what Bonds has done is totally unprecedented and clearly not unrelated to his dramatic improvement in physical strength in his late 30s. Pretending otherwise does no one any good.

let me introduce you to jason varitek...much as I love him and cant sya I care one way or another he is being overpaid, and I'd also likt to introduce you to BK Kim, anything over a bag of peanuts is paying him more than he is worth.

a moron, that's a compliment...what a douche bag. f*** him.. here's a wonderful observation out of the globe (note: it's not formthe new york post) Barry Bonds said, "Babe Ruth ain't black, either. I'm black. Blacks, we go through a little bit more." Is that supposed to mean that Barry had it tougher growing up than the Babe? Whoa. Barry was pampered from birth, the child of a millionaire big league ballplayer. He lived in the finest homes and hotels, traveled first class, and used the best equipment. The Babe grew up over a barroom and later lived in an orphanage. scumbag, pompous freak....Him and alice should get together....

I wonder if there is any truth in it at all. the stuff abot mark and other steroid stuff sounded believable I would have sounded more believable if it hadnt come from jose. I read today that he has been recieving death threats, I hope you didnt hate his book that much.. I also saw he is still broke and selling stuff on his website.. his world series ring for 40,000, game jersey for 750, and an autographed copy of the book for 58.

unfortunately that slobber disfugured the right side of her face and she also contracted malaria from your spittle. plastic surgery and years of delousing now have helped her regain her place in society..she's still mad at you though. i should fix her up with joe.

yeszir--I got an e-mail from peggy sue and she even hates barry...

barry bonds is black?? who gives a s***, he's an ******* black or white. That press conference reminded me of another who guy who holds press conferences and gets mad at questions he doesnt want to answer and doesnt really answer anything either--oh, except when he lies. The guy hit 46 home runs once before 199 and hit 40 only twice before that time. He is cheater and liar. Hank Aaron had more class in his batting glove than barry could ever dream of having. Whether you think steriod use is overblown or not is irrelevent. It is against the rules and he cheated-- The eye hand theory is a nice try but it's irrelevent also--the fact is they can all hit and cheating adds footage to their hits. He is just a baseball player and a good one, but he is an egotistical cock and whether he's black or white--I think he is a sorry human being who has become so full of himself he can rationalize cheating to further his achievements..I dont think joe would want him as a friend and I know I dont.

there is no possible way he'll become a nomar. I think in the end they will pay him a lot but not too much, and he'll go for a lengthy contract at a reasonable figure to stay here. He is a a great leadoff hitter and if he puts numbers up like he has been and stays healthy I'll think they might be willing to stay with him for a few more years. His defensive skills need help and his arm is nonexistsnet. But like Millar there are certain guys they seem to stick with for reasons beyond the field. I hope johnny is one of them, becasue he is really good player and appears to be a very cool guy. Maybe he could be joe's friend.

a dirty f*** damon????? call the paramedics I'm so outraged by that line I am about to passout... I need to compose myself before I repsond...

I'll get on it today.... if you see tim's demise mentioned on ESPN, dont mention any of this.

I dont think this has anything to do with curt schilling but this isnt the best thread around anyway, as others have pointed out but I wanted to mention that the other day I was driving along and not paying much attention and I swerved and almost hit a biker...As I looked in my rear view mirror and saw the guy getting up off the grass and dusting himself off, I was thrilled to see it was Tim McCarver...Then a day or two later I was buzzing downt the street and a biker on the side stopped and mouthed the words--"slow down" as I went by him I noticed it was Tim again and I shot him the bird..He flew off the handle and not only gave me the finger back and began screaming some words and phrases at me, that seemed to include the word f***, a lot!! I was beaming with pride...the third time's a charm so now I'm looking for him while I drive around.

The thing I love about schilling is that it appears he is just regular guy, like one of us....if they ask him a question he answers it with an opinion and with honesty. He just doesnt fire off one of the ridiculous cliches, "I came to play", "evrey game is important"...blah, blah..."they cant take that away form me"...which is the one I hate the most...because I never understand who would do the taking.. I disagree with him on a lot of stuff but I give him credit for being honest and accessible, plus while he 's a redsox as I have said before I really dont give a s*** what his opinion is as long as he does well on the field. We dont need him to be smart we need him to pitch for crying out loud. Hey, he helped us win the championship and now no one can take that away from us. ..

that was cool, good post. Johnny Damon 80% Theo Epstein 73% Jason Varitek 67% Curt Schilling 60% Kevin Millar 60% David Ortiz 50% Manny Ramirez 43% Mark Bellhorn 23%

speaking of rings;you know what has a nice ring to it... Welcome to the 2005 season and the defending World Series Champion Boston Red Sox....

yeah to prove that they aren't the biggest chokers in the history of baseball....

from the new york daily news ... Fans demand Fenway ring-ding FORT MYERS - One of their owners dubbed the Yankees "the Evil Empire." And a few of their giddy players have taken turns making wisecracks about Alex Rodriguez all winter. But suddenly, have the Red Sox developed a soft spot for their biggest rivals? Baseball sources confirmed a report that the Sox are considering not presenting their players their World Series rings at their home opener April 11 against the Yankees, thereby eliminating the appearance of "rubbing it in." However, an overwhelming Boston backlash still might sway the team to revert to the original Opening Day plan, one person with knowledge of the situation said last night. Either way, the team's first World Series championship banner since 1918 still will be raised that day, with the Yankees in attendance. "I'm sure we'll enjoy our rings whenever that day comes," GM Theo Epstein said. Epstein is expected to meet with owners John Henry and Tom Werner and team president Larry Lucchino in the coming days or weeks to discuss a definitive date for the ring ceremony.

I just remebered they had that f*** face bucky dent throw out the first pitch in a playoff game--they have been rubbing our noses in s*** for 80 years.. I hate all this political correctness crap.. The ceremony is supposed othat date and the fact that it is against the Yankees is a great coincidence. I think it is only fitting.. Ratings....schmatings..like every sox fan in the world wont be watching opening day... f*** THE YANKEES... Just to see A-f***s face when our boys get their rings,,,,ahhhh..

what a pathetic thing to evevn consider by red sox management. As someone here suggested the yankees wouldnt hesitate for a minute and wouldnt even consider the "feelings" of the opposition. That's ridiculous... They apparently have been getting so many complaints that they are consdering just going ahead with the ceremony.. I say it is fitting the yankees are the opponent, and combined with the biggest choke in the history of baseball this a moment that I have spent my entire life waiting for and I could give two shits whether it's throwing salt in the yankee wounds or not. I say where's the mOrton's.

I looked up steriods use online and even using them at safe levels preoduces the following side effects: stunted growth, testicle shrinkage, bad acne, reduced sperm count, impotence, baldness, breast development, painful urination, and severe mood swings. I could live without testicle shrinkage and having tits...seems a tad risky to me...

i gotta go with schill and ortiz, I think schill has become the de facto face of the sox and with pedro leaving the ace and with his yapper the most vocal member of the team.,

I know what you mean however, until the law is changed it is still illegal whether we agree with the law or not. And whether or not steroids are safe or not, which I believe is still debatable--it is still cheating in my book.

either way--they are being used illegally, and is that part of the equation that means it's wrong, and untilt the law is changed they are a controlled substance--and thus against the law to use recreationally, so like the gambling the use is prohibited--so these guys should be punished. IMO

I havent really heard too much about steriods being okay to take...at any level, particularly in younger people, but it appears you know more than I do about the subject--having actually considered injecting yourself....probably a good thing you didnt. The problem as I understand it is like any kind of addiction, that ultimaely it f***s with your head just as much as it does with your body...I gather that most people arent qualified to take the drug properly, unlike serious body builders who know their bodies and know exactly what the different drugs can do. It just seems to me that enhancing your performance--even if it means adding a few extra homer runs and hits is till cheating no matter how you look at it. Pete rose got ripped apart for gambling, taking illegal performance enhancing drugs seems a far worse crime than gambling--or just as bad, and yet these guys arent punished at all.

are you talking about the article I posted or Canseco's book.

speaking of george bush... Canseco claims he did steroids with Bush First Lady Laura Bush said the fact that her husband is "ripped" does not prove he did steroids with Jose Canseco. By John Breneman Former pro baseball knucklehead Jose Canseco claims in a new book that he shared steroids not only with the slugger Mark McGwire, but also with George W. Bush. Canseco goes on to speculate that Bush's subsequent behavior -- including his dishonest and boneheaded leadership in the Iraq war -- may be a result of the phenomenon known as "roid rage." Canseco claims that Bush -- whose daddy's friends gave him a cushy baseball job with the Texas Rangers after he lost his shirt in the oil industry -- confided his desire to "get big" and admitted he didn't see it happening in business or politics. Canseco says that when he suggested steroids, Bush grinned and said, "Bring 'em on." Bush, who served as a co-owner of the Rangers when Canseco joined the team in 1992, denied any knowledge of steroid use and claimed he has no recollection of the psychologically deranged he-man ever poking him in the ass with a needle. The White House issued a statement saying that when Bush brought Canseco to Texas he had no clue that everyone else in the world knew the artificially pumped-up player was a poster boy for steroids. Canseco -- who also claims to have injected Barbara Bush, Rush Limbaugh and Arnold Schwarzenegger -- is unrepentant about his own steroid use, saying that without the drug he might never have become the only man in baseball history to have a fly ball bounce off his head and into the stands for a home run. This just in: The White House is denying a report that Canseco obtained nuclear weapons from North Korea in exchange for shooting steroids into the buttocks of Kim Jong Il.