Bonds and Sosa should be in the All Star Game

[Lucifer]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2915587&sportCat=mlb&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1

What do you think of this? I think it'd be ridiculous for Sosa/Bonds to be in the ASG this year, because they don't deserve it this year. Why should it matter it may be their last season? Isn't the all-star game about the best players this year? (well, in the fan's eyes at least)

[BoSox Rule]

.293/.500/.586 isn't AS worthy?

[Lucifer]

No. There are players more worthy

[cosmo34]

But who on the Giants/Rangers has been more worthy of being an All-Star?

[Lucifer]

Who says the Giants/Rangers need an all-star? They don't. Every team doesn't have an all-star..... and both those teams suck lol

[BoSox Rule]

Unbelievable.

[Lucifer]

What's unbelievable? Why don't you explain yourself

You're trying to tell me either of these guys are the best at their position this year? You've gotta be on something

[Williamsburg2599]

Who says the Giants/Rangers need an all-star? They don't. Every team doesn't have an all-star..... and both those teams suck lol

Actully, there is a rule where EVERY team nees an all-star. :atthepc

[cosmo34]

Who says the Giants/Rangers need an all-star?

umm...Major League Baseball All-Star rules?


Every team doesn't have an all-star

Yes every team has to have at least one representative

[Lucifer]

I don't think that's true. That doesn't make sense... so many deserving people would then get left out

[Lucifer]

I'll believe it when I see somewhere that it says that

But...... just another reason why the all star game sucks if that's the case.

[Williamsburg2599]

I don't think that's true. That doesn't make sense... so many deserving people would then get left out

Okay, me and cosmo34 are in on a practical joke.:crazy

From wikipedia.org (not the best place to source, but It's the only place I can find it and I know that it's true):

One of the most controversial aspects of the player selection process is a rule that each team has to have at least one representative on its league's All-Star roster. While this rule made sense in baseball's pre-expansion days, when there were only eight teams in each league, many now consider it to be outdated since there are now almost twice as many Major League teams in existence. Opponents of the rule contend that the purpose of the game is to spotlight Major League Baseball's best players, and many superior players get left off the roster in favor of less deserving players from weaker teams. Supporters of the rule maintain that if the rule were dropped, a small number of powerful teams could end up dominating most of the available roster space. Supporters say that this gives fans from every team a reason to watch the game, whereas if the game were dominated by players from only a few top teams many fans might not watch because they wouldn't have a familiar player to follow.

[Lucifer]

I found it, and im shocked...... thats retarded it doesnt make any sense with so many teams.

[Lucifer]

As far as Texas, Id rather see Texeira in there.... for the Giants... id rather see the bat boy playing in the outfield

[west coast orange and black]

lucifer: I think it'd be ridiculous for Sosa/Bonds to be in the ASG this year, because they don't deserve it this year.
to think it ridiculous that bonds does not belong on this year's squad makes me think (as politely as can be) that you have not been following baseball for too long.

Why should it matter it may be their last season?
'cause it's not fp santangelo or marvin benard's career, man.
start rattlin' off careers such as bonds and sosa, and you could do so in one quick breath.

Isn't the all-star game about the best players this year?
no, it isn't; it never has been.
for several reasons, better players get left off and lesser players are in ballot stuffing, injuries, managers playing favorites...). in this case, bonds is a very worthy candidate (see bosox's .293/.500/.586) to represent the giants.
also, the game is on mays field, bonds' home park, in the year of 755. if that ain't worthy in your book then i'm gonna hafta return to my original thought that you have not been following baseball for too long.

[Erik Bedard]

\You're trying to tell me either of these guys are the best at their position this year? You've gotta be on something


I think it'd be ridiculous for Sosa/Bonds to be in the ASG this year, because they don't deserve it this year.


No. There are players more worthy

Um, Bonds has been the best hitter in the NL this year. By quite a large margin, in fact.

[west coast orange and black]

cosmo: every team has to have at least one representative
lucifer: I don't think that's true.
this, also, makes me think that you have not been following baseball for too long.

[KCGHOST]

This is a cool thread. First, the author argues with everybody and says they are s****d <not too bright>. Then the <not too bright> successfully defend themselves at which point in stead of saying he stands corrected he moves on to attack MLB as being <not too bright>. So what we have is someone who doesn't understand the rules attacking everyone who does understand them as being <not too bright>.

[redlegsfan21]

Who all remembers Mark Redman. If you don't, you haven't been following baseball for a while.

Anyways, I think each team should have 2 representatives and the rosters being expanded to 40 players but both have to happen. I know Aaron Harang is going to not make the team even though he deserves to be on the All-Star team. He's the only thing that helps the Reds win.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20060702&content_id=1536229&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

[slugger33]

Bonds deserves to be there. I think he should be the Giant that is there. Maybe even in the home run derby.

[Lucifer]

lucifer: I think it'd be ridiculous for Sosa/Bonds to be in the ASG this year, because they don't deserve it this year.
to think it ridiculous that bonds does not belong on this year's squad makes me think (as politely as can be) that you have not been following baseball for too long.

Why should it matter it may be their last season?
'cause it's not fp santangelo or marvin benard's career, man.
start rattlin' off careers such as bonds and sosa, and you could do so in one quick breath.

Isn't the all-star game about the best players this year?
no, it isn't; it never has been.
for several reasons, better players get left off and lesser players are in ballot stuffing, injuries, managers playing favorites...). in this case, bonds is a very worthy candidate (see bosox's .293/.500/.586) to represent the giants.
also, the game is on mays field, bonds' home park, in the year of 755. if that ain't worthy in your book then i'm gonna hafta return to my original thought that you have not been following baseball for too long.


So the All Star Game should be played by the guys that currently play that are having the best career? Where's Frank Thomas? Roger Clemens? Randy Johnson? Why aren't all these guys in there? The game being played in Bonds' home park is a laughable reason. Im 20 years old, so I've been following baseball for however long I can remember, that doesn't mean that I can't see that Bonds and Sosa aren't worthy of All Star Game ballots. If it's not about the best players, why's it called all-star game? Why dont we call it Best Career Game?

[Lucifer]

Who all remembers Mark Redman. If you don't, you haven't been following baseball for a while.

Anyways, I think each team should have 2 representatives and the rosters being expanded to 40 players but both have to happen. I know Aaron Harang is going to not make the team even though he deserves to be on the All-Star team. He's the only thing that helps the Reds win.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20060702&content_id=1536229&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

2 from each team? WHY! So we can have even more of the best players in the game shafted out of making the All Star Game every year?

[cosmo34]

I've been following baseball for however long I can remember

Apparently not. Anyone who knows anything about baseball would have known about the rule for "1 player from each team". Or how the ASG works.

[west coast orange and black]

lucifer: So the All Star Game should be played by the guys that currently play that are having the best career?
no.
i put forth only one player, bonds. and there is no active player who has had a better career than bonds.

The game being played in Bonds' home park is a laughable reason.
the game is at mays field, which is a very good reason to have bonds on the squad. bonds not only defines that beautiful park -- please recall 2001: 37 home runs at home out of his 73 total... while 53 was the total for all visitors combined that season -- he defines an entire era.

If it's not about the best players, why's it called all-star game?
because the game reeks of nostalgia and tradition, and many old-timers have received one last tip of the cap based on their careers.

[Erik Bedard]

lucifer: So the All Star Game should be played by the guys that currently play that are having the best career?
no.
i put forth only one player, bonds. and there is no active player who has had a better career than bonds.

Roger Clemens and Greg Maddux have cases...


If it's not about the best players, why's it called all-star game?
because the game reeks of nostalgia and tradition, and many old-timers have received one last tip of the cap based on their careers.

See: Ripken Jr., Cal

[Lucifer]

So he should get a free pass, just cause of what he's done? What if he plays 5 more years and sucks, is just trying to break more records, you'd still have him in?

Why does it matter that it's at the home park? That doesn't make him an all-star.

And ok, Cosmo, you're gonna tell me that I don't follow baseball hah.. I just didn't realize that rule, as the all-star game is something Ive never concerned myself with until now.

[west coast orange and black]

lucifer: So he should get a free pass, just cause of what he's done?
well, yes + no.
bonds has had a tremendous career and is still delivering. that alone makes him deserving. on top of that, who's your pick to represent the giants, if not bonds?

What if he plays 5 more years and sucks, is just trying to break more records, you'd still have him in?
no; that would be unreasonable. besides, he would have already had his last hurrah.

Why does it matter that it's at the home park? That doesn't make him an all-star.
you're right, the park would not make him an all-star. but it would be a shame/sham to leave him off the squad when the game's in his own backyard in a season that's he's hammerin' the ball.

[Lucifer]

So when he comes back next year, if he has the same year as he's having now, he should be in?

And I don't know who else on the Giants is a possibility, I don't follow them at all. My point was made before I knew that each team needed a rep., so given that, I guess he would be the best option for the Giants

I don't get why every team needs a rep, it should be the best players no matter what team they're on

Edit: I'd be pleased to see Matt Morris out there instead of Bonds, lol

[Richmond Hill Phoenix]

I don't get why every team needs a rep, it should be the best players no matter what team they're onSure, but if you take out that rue you'll have no one from KC, Pittsburgh, Washington etc... and you'll have a starting roster full of Mets Yankees and Red Sox every year. Great if you're a fan of the big-market teams with lots of fans who will vote, but sucks to be a small-market fan.

The idea is that everyone will watch if they have a player from their team in the game.

[Lucifer]

"All-Star Game"

In every other sport this is the best players, regardless of the team, I don't see why baseball should be any different.

[cosmo34]

So when he comes back next year, if he has the same year as he's having now, he should be in?


Maybe we should worry about the task at hand for now. We're not talking about the 2008 ASG.


And ok, Cosmo, you're gonna tell me that I don't follow baseball hah.. I just didn't realize that rule, as the all-star game is something Ive never concerned myself with until now

All I'm saying is, my mom and girlfriend both knew about that rule. And the only reason they watch baseball is at my games, or when I jack the remote. They know it, but you don't? If you really "knew" baseball, you would have known about that rule.


"All-Star Game"

In every other sport this is the best players, regardless of the team, I don't see why baseball should be any different.

No that's not how it goes.

[YOUgodofwalks]

Um, Bonds has been the best hitter in the NL this year. By quite a large margin, in fact.

Bonds has not been the best hitter in the Nl this year, however I have to agree he is the best candidate from the Giants.

[Lucifer]

Haha ok cosmo, whatever you say buddy.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Let's keep the posts about the thread topic and not what we deem someone should know. It's not anyone's place to tell anyone that.

Lucifer, baseball is different because no other sport has the history or tradition of baseball. The all-star game, outside of the ridiculous "this one counts" rule because two managers didn't manage their lineups very well one year, has always been set to cater to the fan, which is why each team is represented. As far as the host city goes, the all-star game is treated as a showcase for that city. They have a fanfest and other baseball activities the whole week, built around the home city, and it's pretty important the city's best players are represented. Like him or not, since Bonds is doing well, it's pretty natural he play in his home park's All Star Game.

[NYMets523]

Bonds? Yes. Sosa? No.

[EricDavis]

Who says the Giants/Rangers need an all-star? They don't. Every team doesn't have an all-star..... and both those teams suck lol

Well that's just an ill-informed statement. Every team does have someone selected to the all-star team.

[Lucifer]

The fan doesn't wanna see all the best players in the game play in the All Star Game? I kno that's what I wanna see... and yes, even if it's no Yankees in the lineup.

As for knowing about that rule.. I've been diehard Yankees fan my whole life, a few years later started following the AL a bit, and just recently (last 2 years) have started following and paying more attention to the rest of baseball. This is a stupid thing to talk about.

[Lucifer]

If you read the thread, Eric, you'd know that's already been established a long time ago.

[bluezebra]

Um, Bonds has been the best hitter in the NL this year. By quite a large margin, in fact.

Um, are you wearing blinders? Or are you on Bonds' publicity staff?

NL: BA..(.292) 21st; HR..(15) 8th; RBI..(35) 48th

If this is your idea of this best hitter in the NL this season, you know squat about baseball.

Bob

[Dalkowski110]

Okay, Bonds I can understand, but SAMMY SOSA? Are you kidding?

.246/.306/.364 with a .770 OPS and 97 OPS+ is NOT ASG material, nor should it be. Steroids or no steroids, Sammy Sosa does NOT belong in the All-Star Game.

[Captain Cold Nose]

The fan doesn't wanna see all the best players in the game play in the All Star Game? I kno that's what I wanna see... and yes, even if it's no Yankees in the lineup.

As for knowing about that rule.. I've been diehard Yankees fan my whole life, a few years later started following the AL a bit, and just recently (last 2 years) have started following and paying more attention to the rest of baseball. This is a stupid thing to talk about.

The average fan wants to see who they know, because that's who they identify with the easiest. The average fan doesn't care about OPS+ or win shares or WARP or CCH or SNICKR or singular hot streaks that have a player doing well in June. That's why the same players go back year after year after year. There are far more average fans than there are die-hards who care about who's playing the best at the time.

[rdonahue]

A few things:

1) I'd support Bonds. Like everyone else has already said, who's been better on the Giants? Who's more popular against SFG fans? (I might be wrong about this so if any Giants fans want to correct me, fell free). The game is in SF and he's going after the record. He belongs. He isn't the best hitter in the NL as some have suggested but it's not like he's batting .198 with 1 HR, and 15 RBIs so far.

2) 2 reps per team is a little extreme even with a 40 man roster. Some teams are just really bad and don't deserve two. I don't have a problem with 1 per team because for a long time my team (the Tigers) were horrible and nobody really deserved to go but by having a Tiger on the roster I watched. A rule I might be interested is have at least 2 representatives for the host team and at least 1 of them should start.

3) The voting needs to be redone. Certain teams stuff the ballot with their players (I won't name names, you all know who I mean) and that's not right. On a side note, what's with my Tigers? All the sudden they're amongst the leaders at every position. Detroit isn't that big of a market. Even Craig Monroe is in the top 15 for OFers and most Tiger fans I talk to (or at least those that vote Tigers only) are writing in Curtis Granderson instead of Monroe.

4) I saw this somewhere and I loved this idea (too bad it'll never happen). The fans should vote on the announcers. Pick 1 announcer per league. Vin Scully and someone else (sorry, I can't think of a good AL announcer right now even though that's the league I follow) would be a little better than the two we get.

5) Lastly, I have a question that hopefully someone can answer. Why can't fans vote on pitchers? I was on milb.com a while ago and voted for the AA All-Stars just for the heck of it and you could vote pitchers there.

[cbenson5]

Um, are you wearing blinders? Or are you on Bonds' publicity staff?

NL: BA..(.292) 21st; HR..(15) 8th; RBI..(35) 48th

If this is your idea of this best hitter in the NL this season, you know squat about baseball.

Bob

Bonds is leading the NL in OPS+ this year at 187. I believe the closest person to him is Chipper Jones with a 170. A 17 point lead over your closest competitor in OPS+ is fairly significant. Mr. Bonds certainly has an argument for being the best hitter in the NL so far this year.

[Lucifer]

Obviously his OPS is gonna be so high people just walk him all day

[bluezebra]

Bonds is leading the NL in OPS+ this year at 187. I believe the closest person to him is Chipper Jones with a 170. A 17 point lead over your closest competitor in OPS+ is fairly significant. Mr. Bonds certainly has an argument for being the best hitter in the NL so far this year.


ONE stat (that about 98% of the fans no nothing about) makes him the best hitter in the NL. Suuuurrrre.

This is what Baseball Almanac has to say about OPS+:
"On Base Plus Slugging [OPS]

On Base Percentage + Slugging Average

This is not a true statistic by definition but it is often used as an index for rating an overall player's performance and production versus his fellow players. The formula above requires the use and understanding of two others [OBP and SA], also on this page, and when seen in text appears without the decimal point."

He walked into that high OPS+.

[fenrir]

I have no problem with Bonds starting. i hate his guts, but he has a .504 obp. sosa on the other hand stinks. shouldn't even be playing because his skills are gone.

[Myankee4life]

I have no problem with Bonds starting. i hate his guts, but he has a .504 obp. sosa on the other hand stinks. shouldn't even be playing because his skills are gone.

His skills are gone and yet he's 2nd on the rangers in HR's and first in RBI's :crazy

[Lucifer]

The Rangers suck, point blank^.

As for Bonds, after looking thru more stats and the fact every team needs an All-Star ill admit I was wrong and he is deserving.

[skeletor]

Bonds? Yes. Sosa? No.

If I had my way..both Bonds and Sammy would be taking the game off...

however, due to the rule that every team MUST have a player, then you'll
probably see Bonds and Sosa at the game..

Myself, I can't stand Bonds..record or not...just a selfish player..but
that is neither here or there..despite the spectre of ROIDS, Bonds has
put up some huge numbers..and most fans WANT to see him...

on the flip, it will be interesting a few years down the road, to see if
both of those guys MAKE it into the HOF....Maybe...Maybe not.

I suspect LaRussa will choose Bonds..Don't think Leyland will choose Sosa.

[Whitesoxnut]

http://thesteroidera.blogspot.com/ Bonds and Sosa??:hyper: :hyper:

[Seattle1]

What do you think of this? I think it'd be ridiculous for Sosa/Bonds to be in the ASG this year, because they don't deserve it this year.

I agree, I'd rather they weren't there. Firstly, they don't have the numbers to deserve it as you point out, secondly everyone knows they're cheaters. They should be barred from participating.

[538280]

Barry Bonds should absolutely be in this year's ASG. He's the best LFer in the NL right now. He's leading the league in OPS+ by 19 points and his OBP is nearly .500. He's clearly still one of the best players in the game. Sosa shouldn't, his production has been essentially average from a corner OF and he's not even good defensively.

[538280]

He walked into that high OPS+.

...and those walks result in runs for his team! A player has two goals offensively: Get on and move runners along. Bonds has gotten on like no one else has this year. He has done well moving runners along as well with his .578 SLG through today. You know why teams walk him? Because they know that he is one of the best hitters in the game and they know what he's capable of doing (killing them with his bat). Bonds has probably been the best hitter in the NL this year IMO, the only thing that holds him back is his relatively few PAs. Him or Miguel Cabrera IMO. He absolutely deeserves the ASG (even if his team had a ton of other good candidates). He probalby should start IMO.

[538280]

His skills are gone and yet he's 2nd on the rangers in HR's and first in RBI's :crazy

Power is the one thing he still has some of. His .476 SLG is solid and his ISO is very good. The problem is that his overall offensive skills aren't parituclarly good. He has eaten up a lot of outs with his .312 OBP. He drives in some runs becaue #1 he has a little power,band #2 he bats in the middle of the order. In total his OPS+ is 101. He's a nothing speical defensively RFer. Ian Kinser, Kenny Lofton, Michael and Hank Blalock have all been just about as good hitters as Sosa and all are better defenders at more important defensive positions.

[Erik Bedard]

I agree, I'd rather they weren't there. Firstly, they don't have the numbers to deserve it as you point out, secondly everyone knows they're cheaters. They should be barred from participating.

This has to be one of the most ludicrous statements I've ever read on this site. Of the two objective points you make, only one is half-true. Sosa does not have the numbers to go to the ASG this year. The rest is just plain wrong, for three reasons:

1) Bonds ABSOLUTELY has the numbers to go to the ASG. Think about this: Over half the time he steps up to the plate, he gets on base.

2) While it is very likely that Bonds has used steroids, there is no hard evidence that guarantees that he cheated. Because of this, he cannot be "barred from participating". Also, as long as a player plays in the MLB, he is eligible to play in the ASG.

3) I don't know if Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa used any performance enhancers. Nor do I know if they in fact did use these substances, if that use was in violation of MLB's policy regarding anabolic steroids and other performance-enhancing substances.

[Seattle1]

Well pardon me if I choose to desire my MLB to be "clean."

:)

[538280]

Well pardon me if I choose to desire my MLB to be "clean."

:)

Right, fall back on something like that when MLB actually does test now. Bonds' performance to this point isn't only that of an All Star-it's that of a definite MVP candidate and an All Star Starter. Sports Weekly has a weekly poll asking who the MVP of the league is from many BBWAA members and Bonds came in 5th last week I believe. He's an All Star for sure even according to those writers. Never mind leading the league in OPS+ by 19 points and getting on base over half the time. I'd probably make him 2nd or 3rd right now for NL MVP.

[Whitesoxnut]

3) I don't know if Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa used any performance enhancers. Nor do I know if they in fact did use these substances, if that use was in violation of MLB's policy regarding anabolic steroids and other performance-enhancing substances.

You gotta be a Lawyer:hyper: Oh this game of MLB makes me laugh hysterically. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=steroids&num=3 http://thesteroidera.blogspot.com/2006/08/list-of-steroid-hgh-users-in-baseball.html#ken_caminiti

And even if I say "the game of MLB makes me laugh hysterically", that isn't prima facia evidence that it is indeed "hysterical", or that I am indeed "hysterical" because I have never been found in possession of "hysterical'ness", and my statement does not in fact meet the standard of acceptable evidence, and can not in fact be permitted to be introduced as evidence in a court of Law. Nor have I violated any Baseball Fever rules by being in possesion of hysterical'ness.

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?clip=/media/2005/03/17/video681410.rm

[Lucifer]

Barry Bonds should absolutely be in this year's ASG. He's the best LFer in the NL right now. He's leading the league in OPS+ by 19 points and his OBP is nearly .500. He's clearly still one of the best players in the game. Sosa shouldn't, his production has been essentially average from a corner OF and he's not even good defensively.

We've already established his OPS is completely blown up cause of all the walks that are issued to him. And he's prolly the worst defensive LF in the NL. And yes they walk him cause of his bat, but its also cause look at his team! They've got nobody else, he's their only good hitter, why pitch to him? This is why he's been walked a million times over the last couple years, not cause he's still the Barry Bonds hitter. All he can do now is put his deflated juiced up body into a ball

Bonds has absolutely no chance at the NL MVP, that's absurd, and id stop watching the NL all together if that happened.

Is there really people who still honestly think Bonds isn't on steroids? I don't see how you could want a guy like that in the ASG nevermind MVP

[538280]

We've already established his OPS is completely blown up cause of all the walks that are issued to him.

And he's prolly the worst defensive LF in the NL. And yes they walk him cause of his bat, but its also cause look at his team! They've got nobody else, he's their only good hitter, why pitch to him? This is why he's been walked a million times over the last couple years, not cause he's still the Barry Bonds hitter. All he can do now is put his deflated juiced up body into a ball

Why are walks issued to him? Because they know that he's a great hitter! They don't intentionally walk a player like they are Bonds unless they're terrified of what he may do if they don't walk him. The amount of times Bonds is walked IMO shows how great of a hitter he still is. Besides, him getting walked puts him on base which still results in runs for the team. You are correct that the Giants don't have any other particularly good hitters, but that still doesn't explain that his IBB rate is FAR better than anyone else's. They don't give players who are the only good hitter on a team the same treatment as Bonds.

Even beyond his IBBs though he's still an excellent hitter. If you take out his IBBs (to take out any supposed artificial advantage they give to him) to take only those PAs where they pitched to him and they didn't take the bat out of his hand his SLG would still be what it is, .578, and his OBP would go down to .450. He's still be first in the NL in OBP and still 6th in SLG. His OPS+ would be 172 which woudl still lead the NL. Even without all the IBBs Bonds still may be the best hitter in the NL.


Bonds has absolutely no chance at the NL MVP, that's absurd, and id stop watching the NL all together if that happened.

Well the BBWAA writers polled disagree with you, and so does the production Bonds has had this year.


Is there really people who still honestly think Bonds isn't on steroids? I don't see how you could want a guy like that in the ASG nevermind MVP

MLB tests now. Bonds has not tested postive (though he did fail an amphetamine test and took the penalty for that). Yes, I want the best players in the ASG and Bonds is one of them.

[Lucifer]

I don't even know what the F these stats youre talking about are. And you're telling me Bonds didn't juice? Then im not gonna respond to you anymore, that's just stupid

[538280]

I don't even know what the F these stats youre talking about are.

I was referecing OPS+ which is just the player's OBP and SLG compared to league norms and park adjusted. It's not complicated. Even if you take out his IBBs and focus only on PAs when the opponents pitched to him, Bonds' OBP and SLG taken together and park adjusted are still the best in the NL. His OBP/SLG would be .450/.578. He would still be first in OBP and 6th in SLG.

I forgot to say as well I don't agree that Bonds is the worst defensive LF in the NL at all. When I watch Bonds I see an outfielder who has lost a lot of range with age but who still, as he has always been, is very smart in the outfield. He makes the best out of his range through good anticipation and jumps on the ball. He's not a great LF IMO, he's probably about average, but I do think he gets the most out of his skills in the field right now.

[Back-to-Back-to-Back]

Hitters with 60+ Runs Batted In:

Major League:

1.A Rodriguez 77
2.V Guerrero 69
3.M Ordonez 68
4.P Fielder 63
5.S Sosa 62 (only 67 games)
-.C Lee 62
-.V Martinez 62
8.M Holliday 60
-.C Utley 60


American League:

1.A Rodriguez 77
2.V Guerrero 69
3.M Ordonez 68
4.S Sosa 62
-.V Martinez 62

...
6.J Morneau 57


Major League Outfielders:

1.V Guerrero 69
2.M Ordonez 68
3.S Sosa 62
-.C Lee 62
5.M Holliday 60

...
6.T Hunter 59



American League Outfielders:

1.V Guerrero 69
2.M Ordonez 68
3.S Sosa 62

...
6.T Hunter 59



Only 70 Games or less:

1.S Sosa 62 ( 67 G)
-.V Martinez 62 (70 G)
3.J Morneau 57 (71 G)*
4.C Guillen 56 (67)
5.M Lowell 54 (72)*


No chances? :silent:

[rdonahue]

His RBIs are high but that alone shouldn't be good enough. Also, the fact he's played 67 games is irrelevant in my opinion. If a guy plays 10 games all year and gets 15 RBIs is he your MVP? With that pace he'd have 243 in a full season.

[Erik Bedard]

Well pardon me if I choose to desire my MLB to be "clean."

:)

Nobody who has tested positive for steroids will be in the All-Star game. At least I don't think so, I'm not sure where Alex Sanchez, Matt Lawton, and others are in the voting.


I don't even know what the F these stats youre talking about are. And you're telling me Bonds didn't juice? Then im not gonna respond to you anymore, that's just stupid

As much as both of you would want it, MLB can't just say "Oh, Lucifer says that Barry Bonds used steroids, so now we can't let him play in the All-Star game, because Seattle1 doesn't like players who have been suspected of using steroids".

And as a matter of fact, there is exactly as much hard evidence against Ichiro as there is against Sammy Sosa.

BTW, Sosa plays for the Rangers, in their bandbox that they call a ballpark. His RBI totals shouldn't mean anything.

[west coast orange and black]

erik bedard: ...there is exactly as much hard evidence against Ichiro as there is against Sammy Sosa.
i am with you on this one...

Nobody who has tested positive for steroids will be in the All-Star game. At least I don't think so
but not on this one.
there will be players who tested positive. it's just that test results were not made public.
i would not be surprised if about 40-50 out of the 64 players have used.

[eric_p]

i could care less about the all star game and always have
but now, what with the home field advantage deal, i am forced to
i do not appreciate anything "chosen by the public, for the public" in any context if it runs the risk of denying deserved parties proper treatment
if it's going to count, fan voting and BS policies like each team sending a player to represent them must be thrown out the window
if the fans are going to call it, it's entertainment plain and simple... whoever is chosen can elect to participate at their own free will, guys like bonds and sosa can play and everyone can get all sentimental, fine
the commish needs to pick one or the other
so in summation, if the home field advantage deal stays
emphatic "NO" on these guys being chosen to play/playing
the all star game is so imbalanced that represents nothing as it is
(i'm an NL enthusiast obviously)

[cbenson5]

ONE stat (that about 98% of the fans no nothing about) makes him the best hitter in the NL. Suuuurrrre.

This is what Baseball Almanac has to say about OPS+:
"On Base Plus Slugging [OPS]

On Base Percentage + Slugging Average

This is not a true statistic by definition but it is often used as an index for rating an overall player's performance and production versus his fellow players. The formula above requires the use and understanding of two others [OBP and SA], also on this page, and when seen in text appears without the decimal point."

He walked into that high OPS+.

Sir, I would like to say that I have great respect for your knowledge of the game. I am thoroughly enjoying your commentary on the "ask the umpire" thread, but I have to respectfully disagree with you on this issue. My question to you is, who is the best hitter in the NL (if not bonds)? The only people I see as having an argument are Chipper Jones, Miguel Cabrera, Prince Fielder, and Chase Utley. I'm not a Barry Bonds fan, but I have to give the nod to him up to this point in the season.

Take Care,
Charles

[538280]

guys like bonds and sosa can play and everyone can get all sentimental, fine
the commish needs to pick one or the other
so in summation, if the home field advantage deal stays
emphatic "NO" on these guys being chosen to play/playing
the all star game is so imbalanced that represents nothing as it is
(i'm an NL enthusiast obviously)

I really don't get it guys. I don't understand why many just fail to see that Bonds (not Sosa, I don't think he should be in the ASG) is having a truly outstanding season right now and is one of the best players in the NL RIGHT NOW. Never mind being sentimental and just putting the old stars in the game-Bonds is still one of the current stars and still one of the best in the NL.

[AstrosFan]

Why on earth should we care whether Bonds or Sosa make the All-Star game? If they're good enough put them in. You can't taint a meaningless exhibition. And don't give me the "decides home-field in the World Series" crap. Remember every team is represented. You really think Kansas City's representative is going to go all out so the Angels or Red Sox can take home field?

[redlegsfan21]

Why on earth should we care whether Bonds or Sosa make the All-Star game? If they're good enough put them in. You can't taint a meaningless exhibition. And don't give me the "decides home-field in the World Series" crap. Remember every team is represented. You really think Kansas City's representative is going to go all out so the Angels or Red Sox can take home field?

He's going to go all-out because he somehow got into the game and now is his time to shine since he won't be on TV ever again (unless he leaves KC).

[west coast orange and black]

538280: Bonds is still one of the current stars and still one of the best in the NL.
i hear you, man.

39 runs scored
.298 batting average
.505 on base
.608 slugging
113 total bases
16 big flies
191 at bats

[gotigers54]

As much as I don't want to, I can argue for Barry Bonds with all that honour and junk but, Sosa no way! If any ranger should be goign Micheal Young should be and Sosa has average numbers. Let's hope neither make the roster.:pray: Bonds only shot in my mind is to be in that round of 5 fans vote in.:baseball:

[swingman24]

I believe Bonds used some illegal help to put up the numbers he did and is a cheater in my eyes. Still having said that,there has yet to be proof other than that of Bonds' own physique(which some people seem to just ignore as evidence)that he did steroids or anything else illegal. So I say the game is in San Fran and Bonds' numbers are deserving so I have to say he should be there. But not Sosa,no way,unless there is no one else to pick from the Rangers.

[flash143817]

Bonds certainly deserves to be in, based on his play THIS YEAR. As has been said, he certainly has an argument for being the best hitter in the NL...THIS YEAR. He is woeful in the field, but his hitting alone gives him an easy case into the ASG.

On the other hand, Sosa has no case for the ASG. If you let Kruk and EY pick the AS team, then they'd pick Sosa, but that means nothing to me. As soon as they both said they'd take Jimmy Rollins over Jose Reyes in a heartbeat, I confirmed that they were mental midgets whose opinions I could never trust.

Basically everyone is infatuated with his high RBI total, which is more a testament to his team than him. He has been basically a league average hitter, from a position that you normally count on for well above league average production. So basically, he's a below average hitter for his position...not someone I'd consider AS-worthy.