Barry Bonds is an alien, and we have the numbers to prove it

[WiffleWOOD]

Just in case you were wondering, Bonds is not an actual human being.

From Joe Sheehan on BP today:

"For someone who has suffered with a reputation as being unclutch, he's been dragging the Giants to the top of the wild-card standings with his teeth. He's hitting .400/.622/.930 since Aug. 1, a stretch in which every game has had huge importance to his team's chances.

My favorite Bonds stat actually isn't that one. Do you know what he hits after he falls behind 0-2?

.341/.386/.707

James Click tells me that the NL hits .194/.235/.303 when they fall behind 0-2. Bonds' 1093 OPS is a "normal" MVP line, and it's what he hits after getting into the worst possible situation for a hitter. Bonds hits like an MVP when he spots the league two strikes, which is insane.
......

Pac Bell Park remains one of the toughest run environments in baseball. In 2004, however, it's a berry patch for Bonds. He's hitting .420/.637/.938 at home.
.....

Bonds has an .825 OBP when the count gets to 2-0, with nearly three times as many walks as at-bats. (Intentional walks are a big part of this, but still....825?)
.....

Bonds' batting average, currently .368, is all the more amazing when you consider that he faces perhaps the most extreme shift in baseball history, one designed to kill his ability to get hits on balls in play."

http://baseballprospectus.com/articl...articleid=3467

[SoCal Pinstriper]

And thanks largely to Barry, the Giants have played only 11 meaningless (after being eliminated) games in the last 8 seasons. Remarkable when one considers the parade of mediocre players they have put around him.

I actually heard John Kruk and Dan Patrick agreeing that Beltre' should be the MVP yesterday on Patrick's radio show yesterday. I temporarily lost control of my car. Unbelievable! :rolleyes:

[RhodeyYankee2638]

Originally posted by WiffleWOOD

My favorite Bonds stat actually isn't that one. Do you know what he hits after he falls behind 0-2?

.341/.386/.707

Why would that be your favorite stat? Aren't you a SABR dude, batting average isn't that great a stat. His OPS is literally cut in half when down 0-2, and a .386 OBP for Bonds is human, even in a 0-2 count

[Nome]

Baseball should do what they did for Gherig and suspend the five year rule and elect Bonds unanomisly to the HOF the instant he retires.(Damn, I won a lot of spelling bees in Grade school, but suck now)

Andy

[WiffleWOOD]

that's a quote from the article. that's why there are quote marks around that whole block. i didn't write it.

[WiffleWOOD]

besides, a .386 OBP with an 0-2 count IS something to marvel at. Did you read the rest of the quote? It's .150 better than the rest of the NL.

[PinstripePride]

"Barry Bonds is an alien" Awesome.

As much as I dislike him, he just continues to amaze...Of course, if he's an alien, then it's much less impressive, but still.

[ForceFive]

Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638


Why would that be your favorite stat? Aren't you a SABR dude, batting average isn't that great a stat. His OPS is literally cut in half when down 0-2, and a .386 OBP for Bonds is human, even in a 0-2 count

Nobody into sabermetrics totally discounts batting average. The point is, it simply doesn't hold the weight or importance that many others give it because it is purely one-dimensional. When viewed in conjunction with other stats, it has more usefulness.

In fact, no stat whatsoever should be viewed in isolation including OPS, RC, EQA, etc., although if push came to shove, you should look at these ahead of BA.

[DCfan]

His line, AFTER the count is 0-2, is .341/.386/.707?!?!?! That's INSANE. So basically, if you just made it a rule that Bonds begins all his at-bats down 0-2, he'd STILL be, what, the second-best hitter in the game this year? Ahead of Pujols, ahead of Manny, ahead of Sheff, ahead of Thome . . . and that's starting out with an 0-2 count. At age 40.

The man is simply playing an entirely different game than anyone else. Wow.

[WiffleWOOD]

Originally posted by ForceFive


Nobody into sabermetrics totally discounts batting average. The point is, it simply doesn't hold the weight or importance that many others give it because it is purely one-dimensional. When viewed in conjunction with other stats, it has more usefulness.

In fact, no stat whatsoever should be viewed in isolation including OPS, RC, EQA, etc., although if push came to shove, you should look at these ahead of BA.

yup.

[WiffleWOOD]

Originally posted by DCfan
His line, AFTER the count is 0-2, is .341/.386/.707?!?!?! That's INSANE. So basically, if you just made it a rule that Bonds begins all his at-bats down 0-2, he'd STILL be, what, the second-best hitter in the game this year? Ahead of Pujols, ahead of Manny, ahead of Sheff, ahead of Thome . . . and that's starting out with an 0-2 count. At age 40.

The man is simply playing an entirely different game than anyone else. Wow.

you start him at 0-2. he still puts up MVP numbers. that is why this man is from another planet.

[bakntime]

Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638


Why would that be your favorite stat? Aren't you a SABR dude, batting average isn't that great a stat. His OPS is literally cut in half when down 0-2, and a .386 OBP for Bonds is human, even in a 0-2 count

.707 isn't his OPS on 0-2, it's his slugging percentage.

[Irony Of It All]

Originally posted by Socal Pinstriper

I actually heard John Kruk and Dan Patrick agreeing that Beltre' should be the MVP yesterday on Patrick's radio show yesterday. I temporarily lost control of my car. Unbelievable! :rolleyes:

Kruk also said Schilling is better than Santana because he has one more win. :rolleyes:

Bonds' batting average, currently .368, is all the more amazing when you consider that he faces perhaps the most extreme shift in baseball history, one designed to kill his ability to get hits on balls in play. To a certain extent, it works: Bonds' average on balls in play is just .316. It's rare for a player to have a lower BABIP than his overall average. It's virtually unheard of for a player to have a BABIP 50 points lower than his BA. (You have to have a high home-run rate and a low strikeout rate to pull it off.)

Pac Bell Park remains one of the toughest run environments in baseball. In 2004, however, it's a berry patch for Bonds. He's hitting .420/.637/.938 at home.

I want to know what the park factor would be if you take away Bonds' numbers... it was 1029 at the all star break.

http://baseballprospectus.com/articl...articleid=3289

[EddieCoyle]

Pujols, Rolen, Beltre, Edmonds, are all having great years but my god, if any writer gives a first place NL MVP vote to anyone not named "Barry Bonds", they should have their privileges revoked.

[DCfan]

Having read the community standards, I won't say that Kruk is a friggin' idiot.... so let's just say that he is as wrong about Schilling over Santana as he is about Beltre over Bonds.

Okay, scratch that. Nothing is more insane than ANYONE over Bonds this year. (It's almost an insult to his greatness to merely give him another MVP. he should be awarded the most valuable player of valuable players, or something).

But still, how can you even make the case for Schilling?

[ForceFive]

Originally posted by Irony Of It All

Kruk also said Schilling is better than Santana because he has one more win. :rolleyes:

Kruk is a complete idiot. He is the worst thing that ever happened to baseball tonight. He's not funny at all, he's just stupid.

Santana has been clearly superior to Schilling this season. He's been superior to everyone.

[Mo_04]

Originally posted by DCfan

But still, how can you even make the case for Schilling?

Being an idiot is probably the most important thing. A person with half a brain would probably be too embarrassed to make such a comment.

[jonnyc39]

Originally posted by WiffleWOOD

Bonds' batting average, currently .368, is all the more amazing when you consider that he faces perhaps the most extreme shift in baseball history, one designed to kill his ability to get hits on balls in play."

This is a question out of ignorance, and by no means a knock on Bonds at all...but if he is such a great hitter, how come Bonds doesnt scatter more hits to the opposite field to avoid the shift?

[Irony Of It All]

Originally posted by jonnyc39

This is a question out of ignorance, and by no means a knock on Bonds at all...but if he is such a great hitter, how come Bonds doesnt scatter more hits to the opposite field to avoid the shift?

Probably because when he actually swings at a pitch, it's one he can drive over the fence. I doubt he's ever up there just looking to get an opposite field single.

[ChewieTobbacca]

Even when the shift is on, Bonds can hit a groundball to where the 3rd baseman should be and easily get a double - he has done this many times this year

But the reason he doesn't do it on purpose is because he is best for hitting the ball as hard as possible - and even when the shift is on, he hits it so hard that it gets through quite often...

[38Special]

give bonds a normal strike zone and id love to see that 0-2 stat again :rolleyes:

[ChewieTobbacca]

Yeah if you could come up with proof that suddenly he gets a different strike zone everytime he is up... oh wait, he's been called out on questionable and too-close-to-call calls by the ump before (most notably against Clemens)...

[DCfan]

Originally posted by 38Special
give bonds a normal strike zone and id love to see that 0-2 stat again :rolleyes:

Care to explain? You seem a little unimpressed by the greatest ballplayer of our lifetime. It's a shame; you're missing out.

[Xhibit]

LOL, the funniest part is seeing how far the 2B plays because of how hard Barry's hits are.

[YankeeFan1]

Originally posted by 38Special
give bonds a normal strike zone and id love to see that 0-2 stat again :rolleyes:

Whenever people say stuff like this, I wonder if they have seen every game that Bonds has ever played since his late 20s or more recently because this is such a blatantly inaccurate protrayal of the man's accomplishments at the plate based on everything ever written about Bonds by people who have actually followed his career.

[donniesrecordholdsup]

Originally posted by ChewieTobbacca
Yeah if you could come up with proof that suddenly he gets a different strike zone everytime he is up... oh wait, he's been called out on questionable and too-close-to-call calls by the ump before (most notably against Clemens)...

first of all those were strikes clemens threw and secondly thats clemens .a guy who won over 300 games and has over 4,000 strike outs .most other pitchers dont get a normal strike zone on barry .pedro didnt even get a normal strike zone on barry this year .

[donniesrecordholdsup]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DCfan


Care to explain? You seem a little unimpressed by the greatest ballplayer of our lifetime. It's a shame; you're missing out. [/QUOT

i hate that argument of missing out though .because imo bonds is cheating .its almost like your saying i should ignore the fact that bonds was mentioned in balco ,etc. this way in the future i can tell my grandkids i saw "the great barry bonds "

[goin for 27]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by donniesrecordholdsup

Originally posted by DCfan


Care to explain? You seem a little unimpressed by the greatest ballplayer of our lifetime. It's a shame; you're missing out. [/QUOT

i hate that argument of missing out though .because imo bonds is cheating .its almost like your saying i should ignore the fact that bonds was mentioned in balco ,etc. this way in the future i can tell my grandkids i saw "the great barry bonds "

I guess, but if you use this criteria, don't brag to your grandkids that you saw Jason or Sheff then.

Bonds is the greatest player I have ever seen. (Fan since 1970)

Also, as far as folks complaining about strike zones, etc. You don't think Joe D or Teddy or Ruth or Mickey or....
all the greats didn't get the benefit of calls? That's what you get when you are the best.

[donniesrecordholdsup]

Originally posted by goin for 27


I guess, but if you use this criteria, don't brag to your grandkids that you saw Jason or Sheff then.

Bonds is the greatest player I have ever seen. (Fan since 1970)

Also, as far as folks complaining about strike zones, etc. You don't think Joe D or Teddy or Ruth or Mickey or....
all the greats didn't get the benefit of calls? That's what you get when you are the best.

beleive me i dont leave out players just because their yankees unlike some of the giants fans here .and yes i know some players are going to get calls .but just from what i've seen since the 80's, i've never seen a player get a strike zone like bonds .i have heard ted williams brought up the most when people are talking about bonds getting calls .how people used to complain about his strike zone also .

[ChewieTobbacca]

Given how umpiring changes from game to game as each ump has his own strike zone, it is impossible for you or I to prove he's getting more calls or similar calls - we've seen so many questionable calls this year for our team alone.

And yes it is funny that 2B is essentially playing RF on the shift with the RF near the track...

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by bakntime
.707 isn't his OPS on 0-2, it's his slugging percentage.

[Xhibit]

Originally posted by bakntime
.707 isn't his OPS on 0-2, it's his slugging percentage.

LOL, just ridiculous.

[Jersey Yankee]

I don't study him, but what's Barry's strike zone, anyway? Instead of talk of cheating, Balco, cockiness, etc, can someone please just tell me what his strike zone is, and how that differs from other players?

Thanks.