Oakland Park Baseball

I posted this on another topic, but I think it needs its own forum. it's in response to this:

gohlkus wrote:Wait, did I say Barry Bonds? Yes, yes, I did. I wish people would pitch to him. I remember hearing that statistically it actually was more advantageous to do so. Also, there is very little in baseball that is more annoying than watching and listening to how Giants fans respond to things that happen on the field -- especially when Bonds gets walked intentionally. It is a gift -- smugly accept it. Don't fucking boo, idiots -- it's more likely if they pitch to him that he'll fly out to right than hit a homer. Get me to the fucking Coliseum, where any baseball-related conversation you overhear (and there are many) is refreshingly well-informed.

But I digress. I am not a fan of Barry Bonds because he's a roided-up disingenous jerk who is going to get in the record books dishonestly. By the time his career is over, he will have had an effect on the game approximated only by Pete Rose and, before him, the Black Sox of 1919.

This is becoming a rant, but if Selig reinstates Rose, I will have a bonfire with all of my MLB-licensed apparel.

The MLB says (unofficially) that 5 of 7 players are taking steroids, most more powerful than what bonds had taken. Bonds is still better than anyone in the game right now. The only reason you don't say the same things about McGuire is because you liked him better.

The booing? If the A's had the best player in baseball but they only got to play 1/3 of the time cuz of walks you'd be upset too. And, if you went to more games and knew of what you speak, you would see that during some points in the games, we are happy with the walks, if the players coming behind him are hot, or whatever.

Imagine if you never got to see Tejada hit. Wouldn't you be disappointed? Time, and time again? And I see that most people who posted in this forum agree that its bad for the game... so we should cheer something bad for the game.

Again, back to the steroids, if Bonds had the number of ABs as Puljos did last year, Bonds was on pace for 66 HRs. Drug testing had started, and even though Bonds had the "clear," the BALCO people had already told the MLB how to track it. So, most likely, whatever Bonds was on, he was no longer taking.

At best, I’ve read, the drugs that McGuire was using (stronger than what Bonds was using) can help you hit 10% more homeruns. So Bonds was on pace for 66, that would go down to 59. 59 HRs! But due to walks, he only had 45 HRs. But he still had over 100 RBI, with so few ABs. So, the walks are having a bigger effect on the record books than the drugs. We Giants fan know it's our hometown player, our team, our City that will be going into the record books, and we're feeling cheated by the walks.

Besides, durgs aren't new. from the 1920s to the 1970s and even 1980s, cocaine was used often before games to pump up players. Ty Cobb bet on baseball. Pitchers take amphetamines to give their fastball an bit extra juice. Nearly all games are at night, were the ball travels 15% less that during the day, especially on waterfront ballparks. Baseball is always changing, and while there may be that one player who stands out, you can be sure that others are following his lead.

Some of you beloved A's are taking the drugs too. Don't single out our player, because you don't like his personality. He's a ball player, not a talk show host.






Nothing persoanl Jason!

I think the real cheating that's going on here is Peter's abuse of copy&paste in this forum to boost up his # of posts, and thus to move beyond being a Veteran!

I bet that, even though I've technically only posted 1/2 the posts he's posted, my total number of words is still probably 33% more than his words in his posts.

You're a posting forum cheater, Peter. (rhymes)

In fact, I think you might be taking some performance enhancers to click that mouse button more frequently. I'm worried about you.

I will exclude myself from the record book for posts then , scott.

See, i'm at work, working on other thigns. So, that way, I have time for lots of little notes: not to many essays, however.

Ok, I just want to make sure you know that when you take short-cuts, there can be some real long-term consequences for your health, such as carpal-tunnel.

Now, as for Barry Bonds/Pete Rose/drugs in baseball....

First, Pete Rose (along with George Brett, see avatar) were my childhood heros. I'll never forget when Brett almost batted .400 in 1980, or when Pete Rose broke Cobb's all time hits record (9/12/85). I try to model my playing style after "Charlie Hustle". And, while we're at it, I'll never forget seeing (in person) Barry Bonds hit a post-season HR into the SF Bay against the St. Louis Cardinals in 2002 (I think 2002). I love baseball. I mean, I love it so much that I don't even care that entire neighborhoods have been cleared and peoples' lives ruined just for stadium construction. I barely care that many MLB players are right-wing wackos, or even racists, homophopes, and xenophobes. (Though Curt Schilling campaigning for Bush right after the World Series ended did piss me off.) Look, I place a political judgement on everything in my life as it is--I can't afford to place that same scrutiny on MLB--it's my refuge. So bring on the wife-beating, SUV-driving, alimony-dodging baseball players!!!! I <3 John Rocker.

All of this of course only shows why I don't care that Pete Rose bet on baseball, but provides no explanation for my feelings of acceptance of Barry Bonds. (Though it does show why I don't care about his unappealing personality.)

So for Bonds, first I gotta say that I hear where both Peter & Jason are coming from. And I do like the conversations I hear at the A's Coliseum much more than what I hear at SF's Willie Mays Park (thanks Peter). But I digress. Peter brought up the point that the drug scandal broke a while ago, yet Barry keeps on producing. I think that's persuasive, however 2005 will be the real test for Barry on those terms. As I mentioned in previous post, the physical breakdown of drug dependency is most apparent 2 years, not 1, after no longer using (recall McGuire's foot problems in 2001 when he hit only .187 in 300 at-bats, then retired). So Barry, who's 4 years older than McGuire, will have all eyes on him (nothing changed in that regard) this season. This all having been stated, I think Barry will come through. I'm just not convinced that the 'roids can make Barry do what he does. 'Roids do not enhance your pitch selection. I don't think any serious person can argue that Barry Bonds does not have the best "eye" at the plate in baseball history---in fact he does. Another thing about Barry that 'roids doesn't effect is his ability to adjust. Watch him over time and he will adjust to where the defense plays him, who's throwing from where in the outfield (when running on basepaths), who's pitching versus who's warming-up-and-likely-to-come-in-to-face-him, etc. He has a great baseball mind, from tons of experience. I mean this guy even has stolen 22 bases since turning 37 (including 6 last year at age 40), and that's not due to quickness! It's hard to imagine a more exciting batter to see come up to the plate in a key situation. The one Peter mentioned (vs Gagne) is a great example... I'll never forget that! It's like when Barry faces Randy Johnson. I just wish we could see him face Jason Schmidt! Now we get to see him face Pedro Martinez, that should be cool.

Anyway, the point Peter made about drugs being in sports forever is true, but kind of misleading. There's a difference between amphetamines (uppers) that give you bursts of energy to turn on an inside pitch at 1:00 AM in extra innings on a 10 day road trip. Those have been in baseball for centuries, literally. (Note those are omitted from the new MLB drug testing policy.) The difference now is that the new drugs, can actually add muscle strength (ie bulk) and also provide a means to quicker healing. Amphetamines don't do that, they're just a jolt of energy, like super-caffeine.

I hope Barry has a great year and silences all the critics, many of which are just bitter sports writers that are pissed because Barry won't smalltalk with them.

Oh, as for walks... I agree it's so tiresome on one hand to see the bat taken out of Barry's (or any big slugger's) hands. It's also tiresome to hear the fans (in any stadium, regardless of context) boo and complain when an intentional walk is issued. While what Jason said is true (that odds are the batter will make an out), in some situations it just doesn't make sense to take even that chance with the game on the line. But at SF's Willie Mays Park, opposing teams often take it way too far. Even late in the season, in blowout games, you'll still see opposing managers (of teams that are out of contention) put up the 4 fingers to indicate intentionally walking Barry---that I can't stand. Pitch to Barry!!

Ok, I know this is a long post (is anyone still even reading?), but this all brings up something for us to consider for DeFremery Park Baseball---should we allow intentional walks? I can recall a situation when Carlos came up in the top of the 9th with his team only 1 run down and there was a man on 2nd (2 out). It would have made sense, some would argue, to have given Carlos the intentional walk (IBB) at that point, rather than letting him drive in the tying run in scoring position.

Should we allow intentional walks at DeFremery? Look for this poll in another post, you can't put a poll in a reply to an existing post, it has to be a new topic post.

Scott aka Baseball=Life

It's Barry himself, but it's also what he represents AND how people choose to respond to him. Everything around him seems to be tainted. He has made himself a lightning rod through his conduct. The fact that he is going to break one of the most prominent records in baseball with an asterisk really irks me.

I don't really like McGwire either.

"if you went to more games and knew of what you speak"

Where do you get off saying that? How do you know how many games I've been to? How do you know I haven't had long conversations with people who have watched the fan base deteriorate since the move from Candlestick? I've been to enough Giants games at the current stadium to know what the crowd's tendencies are, especially in comparison with other stadiums I've been to.

Of course there are some individual Giants fans who are knowledgeable about the game, and I'm sure you're one of them; overall, crowd reactions just don't seem as nuanced as in other parks I've been to.

Just because drugs and corruption aren't new in baseball doesn't mean we should like them. I don't.

In high school I increased my longevity and efficiency in the weightroom by using creatine and protein powder anytime I was going to workout. I put on 20 pounds (a good thing) in a month using only what amounts to very strong dietary suppliments and a dedicated work ethic.

Anything beyond that should be strictly prohibited in the ranks of proffessional sports (and amateur sports for that matter).

I will say that Giants fans are some of the shittiest around. I was specifcly talking about the walks issue. And I'm sorry Jason that I went off on you like that. It was a reaction to people harping on the Giants and Bonds. I am really sorry Jason. I just love my team and my city, and I hate to see it hurt.

As far as Bond's test, you're right about the 2 year thing scott. I will point out that Bonds did say that he was taking the drug sparsely, and that he wasn't noticing an effect "if it was a sertoid."

My worry is that Bonds is 40, but any drop off will be atributed to the drugs. I'm happy if Bonds hits 39 HRs, at his age. But people will say "Look! See! It was the drugs." Or he could juts have a bad year.

But, if he were to drop off in HR production, it would be offest by him reciving less walks.

I just stumbled onto this since-forgotten discussion and thought it appropriate to mention that Barry is now under investigation by the FBI for tax fraud. So it seems that Jason may be right about him being a lightning rod for bad mojo.

I would like to point out that the players that the MLB has so far suspended are not exactly home run hitters (in fact, not at all). This is not to say that the MLB is doing terribly good testing... as to that, I have no idea. But it proves the point that performance enhancing drugs, by themselves, do not make homeruns-- much less an all-time great.

As far as Bonds a lightning rod, I would agree. But notice how it was reported a few days ago by an "MLB official" that Bonds was being investigated by the MLB. Well, today, the MLB came out and said this was not true. Despite Bonds' bad karma, when will people demand that the media know what the fuck it's talking about before it indicts an athlete, or encourages a war abroad. I see a connection there. Whatever happened to “innocent until proven guilty”?

Right, Peter. Like you've never seen Cops.

Well... I hope we can aim higher than that.