Barry Bonds is the DEVIL!!!

Compare the two in the following situations:

With Runners On:
Bonds - .376 BA, .690 OBP, .798 SLG, 1.488 OPS
Rolen - .344 BA, .421 OBP, .656 OBP, 1.077 OPS

With Runners In Scoring Position:
Bonds - .393 BA, .752 OBP, .875 SLG, 1.627 OPS
Rolen - .392 BA, .466 OBP, .817 SLG, 1.283 OPS

So who really is more valuable with runners on base, which is the only offensive category where Bonds trails Rolen?

ibb's aren't at all equivalent to "earned" walks as a rule, but bonds is walked so much that he probably makes up a lot of the gap.

barry has scored 25.6% of the time he's been on base. that's low, but probably pretty high for a guy who bats 4th in a weak lineup (what are the giants collective #5's 6 and 7 slots hitting?and is put on so often at the opponents' discretion. adam dunn is at 27%, to toss out one random comparison. rolen 36% from the last cell of the cards' murderer's row, pujols, 39%, thome 24%.

i remember harold reynolds doing similar calcs early in the season to try and demonstrate that OBP is overrated by showing that the slower OBP men just end up just clogging the bases. of course, he didn't show anything because he was comparing leadoff men to cleanup hitters (and probably cherry-picking at that) but it is interesting that the two fat, slow guys above are so low. probably meaningless, but i'd read a study if there was/is one on the subject. (i'm sure there is, actually, and i think i've read it, but i can't remember any of it now except that it had to do w/ ichiro)

One of the Mets' radio guys -- I hope it was the oft-clueless Howie Rose -- said yesterday "The Mets have pitched to Bonds, and that's to their credit..." Oh really? If they walked him every time, maybe they win 2 of 3.

http://barrybonds.mlb.com/players/bonds_barry/imgs/isync.jpg

Barry since the break:

.378/.578/.867

And that OBP is 50 points LOWER than the first half! He's gone free-swingin' on us!

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=3404

Top of the 7th Inning, Giants 5, D-Backs 0, 1 out
Barry Bonds up, Lance Cormier pitching

3 breaking balls (all curveballs I think) nowhere near the plate
4th pitch intentional walk

That's right, the Giants up 5 runs to 0, a team 55 games under .500 intentionally walks him.

He finishes the game 1/2 with 3 walks. Oh and he broke his MLB record for walks in a season.

"If one of them gets it, I'm just as happy," Mahan said. "I'm sure they'll want to give it to me."

wotta dickhole.

The obvious question is, if he is so anxious for the results, why didn't he just get tested voluntarily?

BB leads all MLB left fielders in Outfield Assists. Also, who would you think is the best defensive left fielder of the following:

Barry Bonds
Adam Dunn
Moises Alou
Miguel Cabrera
Manny Ramirez
Craig Biggio

The answer may surprise you.

Range Factor = ((PO + A) divided by innings)
Zone rating = The percentage of balls fielded by a player in his typical defensive "zone," as measured by STATS, Inc.

[i have a feeling i know what the answer is anyway; you got this idea from those quiz questions at georgewbush.com, didn't you?]

This is what I don't understand (John's comment about Alou only adds to the confusion).
Aren't both stats a measure of how many balls the player is able to field? Wouldn't having a high RF also indicate that you're fielding a high %age of balls in your defensive zone (=high ZR)?

Bill James introduced us to Range Factor (RF) as, essentially, the number of outs made per game. This was convenient at the time, because we had no other context but the game. The problem is that a game is not necessarily nine innings for each fielder. As well, each fielder is dependent on his pitching staff and "luck" for opportunities.

STATS began tracking Zone Rating (ZR) as, essentially, the total number of outs per balls in a fielder?s "area of responsibility" (i.e., zone). This addressed some of the shortcomings of RF.

think about the difference in balls in play b/w a staff like the cubs and one like the mets - ZR and RF would only be different measurements of the same thing if opportunities were equal across the board, but due to luck and variations among pitching staffs, they're not at all. so zone rating's quite a bit fairer as it tries to measure fielding ability on an equal opportunity basis, but it's got its own problems as you'll find (depending on how interested you are in this stuff) if you read on above.

[if it's still not clear, here's one of those extreme examples that sometimes help: a guy who gets to just 10 balls in a season can have a much higher ZR than a guy who fields 200 - provided only a handful of balls were hit into his (the former's) zone. of course, the latter fielder would have a much higher RF, since range factor merely measures PO+A regardless of actual opportunity]

Where's the attention? Not from equivocators like Joe Morgan & Co.

Of course ESPN isn't gonna mention it (tho I've seen SportsCenter graphics on FAR more arcane matters), or audiences would never stop laughing at J*e M*rgan's "Beltre, Pujols and Bonds are all MVPs."

It illustrates BB is underrated, is all.

sure a mention would be nice but i can never get my head around these "per out" stats...it's just not very natural, ya know?

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2006/01/20/SPGECGQDM71.DTL

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/3918/photos

yeah i knew someone was gonna drive through that; good work, librarian

find a way to ask both in the same question

You know I had to Google Ozuna to find out he wasn't a Japanese player.

Ask him why Ichiro doesn't hit more home runs

not the devil, but "special advisor" to the Giants' chief executive (whoever that is)

back home where he belongs <3

Currently on television, speaking about hitting mechanics, wearing Giants gear.

"Can you still hit?"

"Very well."

He could still slug as a DH I bet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwMfT2cZGHg&t=3s

http://www.sbnation.com/2017/4/11/15264034/barry-bonds-2004-stats-chart-party

I understand the point he's making, but without a bat, well, you know...

Barry, other retired stars flee fire

http://www.sfgate.com/athletics/article/Barry-Bonds-among-star-athletes-evacuated-from-12265500.php

John Perrotto was a guest on Friday’s episode of FanGraphs Audio, and among the subjects addressed by the longtime Pittsburgh Pirates beat writer was the team’s famously parsimonious ownership. The penny-pinching ways date back to the departure of Barry Bonds via free agency in 1992. I asked Perrotto if there was there any chance that the the reigning NL MVP was going to stay in Pittsburgh.

“No, the Pirates weren’t going to pay him,” Perrotto said on the podcast. “The picture that has been painted here over the years is [that] Barry hated it in Pittsburgh and couldn’t wait until the minute he could get out of town. That’s not true…. In fact, during the 1992 season — this was some time after the All-Star break, probably in August — I talked to him after a game. Let me set a little background here before I get ahead of myself.

“The two Pittsburgh newspapers were on strike, so you didn’t have as much media as you normally would in the clubhouse after the game,” continued Perrotto, who was covering the team for the suburban Beaver County Times. “He’d been the star of the game… and after we talked about that, I said, ‘Hey, what would it take for you to stay here?,’ thinking he was going to say, ‘I don’t know. That’s something for my agent to discuss.’ [Instead], he goes, ‘Five years/25 million and I’ll sign tomorrow.’ I said, ’Is that on the record?’ He said, ‘Yeah, man. Write it. Five years/25 million and I’ll sign tomorrow.’”

Hall of Fame catcher Ted Simmons was the Pirates GM at the time. Perrotto walked back to the press box, picked up a phone, and called Simmons to pass along what Bonds had said. Simmons — equal parts excited and pleasantly surprised — proceeded to call the team’s president.

“Mark Sauer had been brought in to cut costs.” Perrotto said of the former Pittsburgh executive. “I know people will find this hard to believe, but the Pirates had the sixth-highest payroll in baseball in 1991. They weren’t always cheap; they weren’t always at the bottom of the payroll standings. They did spend money in the early ‘90s, when they won three division titles in the National League East from ’90 to ’92. But they were on a payroll-reduction kick, and Mark Sauer told Ted Simmons, ‘No, we can’t do that.”

Bonds went on to sign a then-record six-year/43.75M contract with the San Francisco Giants in December. As Giants owner Peter Magowan put it at the time, “It’s a lot of money, but there’s only one Barry Bonds.”

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/sunday-notes-danny-coulombe-executes-sliders-and-curves/

https://i.imgur.com/nuKeiZB.png