Tazer4mvp
New member
- Joined:
- May 12, 2012
- Posts:
- 1,315
- Liked Posts:
- 259
- Location:
- Salt lake city
From the time frame of 1980 til present who would you take?
- Status
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,105
Tazer4mvp
New member
- Joined:
- May 12, 2012
- Posts:
- 1,315
- Liked Posts:
- 259
- Location:
- Salt lake city
80-present I would take Ken Griffey Jr
- Joined:
- Apr 24, 2010
- Posts:
- 29,061
- Liked Posts:
- 7,246
thats tough because you are entering into another era of greenies and roids.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,105
Bonds was better even before he started roiding around the 1999 season
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
Since it's still up for debate, I'd respond with a solid "I don't give a shit" :lol:
Bonds on steroids was the best player I've ever seen in person. And since Willie Mays actually had to play against black players, I think Mays gets the nod for greatest OF of all time over Babe Ruth.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,105
I see sort of where you are going for this and I don't have empirical data to back it up but was there a large jump in statistical norms after blacks were included?
I mean Mays etc were all great but it's not as though white players hadn't put up similar or better seasons over the course of MLB history prior to the color line being broken. Black players came in and proved they belonged..but didn't dismantle the record books or embarrass the white players. They pretty much fell in line with what other players were doing..both good and bad.
I guess I just don't see Ruth having to face black pitchers as that big of a deal or something that would have mattered.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
There's no empirical evidence or anything I'm going with here. I'm just saying that since an entire class of citizens who were able to play were not allowed to play, that we'll never know and I arbitrarily chose Mays over Ruth for this reason that I freely admit is subjective.
- Joined:
- Jun 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 2,236
- Liked Posts:
- 668
- Location:
- UofM-Twin Cities Campus
Griffey easily! And firsttimer gotta say that was a dick, dick move, at least respect the man, it's not his fault tazer thinks he's better than Mays
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,105
How?
- Joined:
- Jun 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 2,236
- Liked Posts:
- 668
- Location:
- UofM-Twin Cities Campus
I'm at work right now I'll try and justify my reasonings later, can't really look up stats ATM
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,105
Not gonna help you.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bondsba01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/griffke02.shtml
Last edited:
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
If the argument is about which outfielder was projected to have the greatest career, maybe Griffey wins.
But no way that he's better than Bonds ever was steroids or not.
But no way that he's better than Bonds ever was steroids or not.
- Joined:
- Jun 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 2,236
- Liked Posts:
- 668
- Location:
- UofM-Twin Cities Campus
So I ran some numbers and this is what I came up with:
According to First Timer's propasal we should look at the first 13 years of each player's career
Griffey
11x All-Star
MVP
10x Gold Glove Award Winner
7x Silver Slugger
In 1, 861 Games he:
Hit 468 HR
Batted in 1,358 Runs
Maintained a .314 AVG w/ a .405 OBP and a 152 OPS+
Bonds
8x All-Star
3x MVP
8x Gold Glove Award Winner
7x Silver Slugger
In 2000 Games or 139 more games (3/4 season more than Griffey) he:
Hit 445 HR
While batting in 1,298 runs
Maintaining a .309 AVG w/ a .438 OBP and a 175 OPS+
I think this is good starting point for a debate.
Although had a better eye and got on base more Griffey was a better pure hitter and defense outfielder than Bonds, Bonds could do the small things a little better than Griffey but Griffey was also supporting a franchise on his back, and was expected to be aggressive and score runs. Griffey has a more HR and RBI than Bonds considering he played 139 games less and he also had a better batting average. Considering like I said earlier than Griffey also single-handedly saved the Mariners in this time span I will rest my case.
According to First Timer's propasal we should look at the first 13 years of each player's career
Griffey
11x All-Star
MVP
10x Gold Glove Award Winner
7x Silver Slugger
In 1, 861 Games he:
Hit 468 HR
Batted in 1,358 Runs
Maintained a .314 AVG w/ a .405 OBP and a 152 OPS+
Bonds
8x All-Star
3x MVP
8x Gold Glove Award Winner
7x Silver Slugger
In 2000 Games or 139 more games (3/4 season more than Griffey) he:
Hit 445 HR
While batting in 1,298 runs
Maintaining a .309 AVG w/ a .438 OBP and a 175 OPS+
I think this is good starting point for a debate.
Although had a better eye and got on base more Griffey was a better pure hitter and defense outfielder than Bonds, Bonds could do the small things a little better than Griffey but Griffey was also supporting a franchise on his back, and was expected to be aggressive and score runs. Griffey has a more HR and RBI than Bonds considering he played 139 games less and he also had a better batting average. Considering like I said earlier than Griffey also single-handedly saved the Mariners in this time span I will rest my case.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,105
How does that matter at all?
That's kind of an issue out of Bonds control. The Pirates haven't made the playoffs since Bonds left. I rest my case?
Wut?
You also leave out that Bonds was a far better base stealer as well. His OPS was also higher as well. I'll take the better basestealer, better slash line, etc over Griffey. Griffey was a hell of a player, and my favorite player growing up but Bonds could hurt you in a few more ways and was better at it than the Kid.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
But I think the argument over Griffey on the Mariners and Bonds before steroids is closer and a better one than Clemente and Mays.
- Joined:
- Jun 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 2,236
- Liked Posts:
- 668
- Location:
- UofM-Twin Cities Campus
It really doesn't matter to be honest, but it is just something that makes Griffey's numbers loo better considering his situation. And Bonds made the Pirates better yes, but they were never threatening to leave Pittsburgh unlike the Mariners who were on the verge of relocating had it not been for their magical 2001 season.
And I left out SBs and OPS because I was running the numbers manually not looking at stats someone already compiled, took me like 20 minutes and I didn't feel like doing more math.
But I do concede that Bonds was a better base-stealer, but Griffey was better in the field, an extra base is nice, but when you have a fielder preventing players from reaching base period that is more valuable.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,105
Umm..I think you mean 1995.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
2001 was pretty magical for Bonds :lol:
- Joined:
- Jun 5, 2012
- Posts:
- 2,236
- Liked Posts:
- 668
- Location:
- UofM-Twin Cities Campus
Yes thank you 1995 but yea that's my argument
- Status