1549 Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 I think the only person in the 'other' slot worthy of a vote is Musial. Food for thought: Bonds has a 2 part career, 5-tool Bonds which ended in 1997 or 1998, Steroids Bonds enters the picture in 2000, 2001. A few stats: Bonds 1990: AVG: .301 HR:33 RBI: 114 SB: 52 OPS: .971 Bonds 2002: AVG: .370 HR:46 RBI: 110 SB: 9 OPS: 1.381 Career (not counting 2004): AVG: .297 HR: 658 RBI: 1742 SB: 500 OPS: 1.350 Williams 1941: AVG: .406 HR: 37 RBI: 120 SB: 2 OPS: 1.288 Career: AVG: .344 HR: 521 RBI: 1839 SB: 24 OPS: 1.116 IMO, this one goes to Ted, but Bonds is probably the best athlete in MLB history, and one could argue that steroid bonds is a better hitter than Williams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Bonds dominated his era more than anyone since Babe Ruth has. That makes me vote for Barry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Carlos Lee Seriously, how is there any comparison between a roid freak who is always and I mean ALWAYS crying to the media and a legend like Ted Williams. Come on now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Don't forget Williams lost a portion of his career to military service, or his career stats would be even better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 What was Splinter's OPS+? What is Bonds's? Granted, since Bonds is better defensively, infinitely better on the basepaths, and hit into less GIDP.........Williams's OPS+ be MUCH higher for him to be a "better LF". Who was better a hitter with RISP or RO? If both are tied, the fact that Williams fought in the War in his prime is a tie-breaker. If Bonds is proved to have taken steroids, then Williams wins by disqualification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Carlos Lee Seriously, how is there any comparison between a roid freak who is always and I mean ALWAYS crying to the media and a legend like Ted Williams. Come on now! Bonds isn't a crybaby on the field Bonds has never been caught with a banned substance Ted Williams is the greatest left fielder, and outdoor enthusiast ever. Didn't Carlos May play left? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Don't forget Williams lost a portion of his career to military service, or his career stats would be even better. Excately. That's why my vote goes to Ted. Imagine him staying in baseball in those years...Whoa! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Difficult to say. Williams was quite possibly the best pure hitter ever. I'm not sure anyone knew as much as Williams knew about hitting in general. But in the same regard, Bonds is the most dominant player in today's game, and he has been probably the biggest offensive force in baseball for several years now. If I had to say one, I'd say Bonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 If you count club house, leadership, and making those around you better, which may be old school values, Ted is head and shoulders above Bonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Be Good Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Barry Bonds is the 2nd best baseball player ever!!! Behind the babe!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 it's the guy in my avatar. Thats a fact Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 If you count club house, leadership, and making those around you better, which may be old school values, Ted is head and shoulders above Bonds. Except Ted Williams was arguably just as selfish and just as arrogant as Bonds. George Will had a pretty good, very short essay about it. Back on topic..................................................................... Ted Williams -- 1116 career OPS. Missed 3 years of prime where he would have averaged 1160 OPS, 130 RBI in all likelyhood. So he should have 620+ HR, 2200+ RBI and 1130 OPS if he had played those years. . Barry Bonds -- 1035 career OPS. Again with those 3 missed years, Williams is probably at 1130. Big difference. Now, if I were to count Bonds's SB and bases he "saved" as a GG LF toward his OPS, then his REAL OPS is closer to unreal 1200, far ahead of Ted Williams even if the latter was a better RBI man. So Bonds is a better player. But because he is playing in a Sluggin-oriented era AND because IMO he has been a roid-head at least since 2000, I have to take whatever he did in the last 4+ years with a humongous grain of salt. Therefore I would say that they are about EQUAL all things considered. Ruth is still king. Williams and Bonds are not far behind along with Mays, Mantle and DiMaggio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxin' Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 I think it is without question Ted. Bonds is playing with a juiced ball and body while Ted played with a deadball and had to serve for his country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 All these are great points, and despite all the media attention Bonds is getting, it's obscurd to think that Bonds is a better player than Ted Williams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 it's obscurd to think that Bonds is a better player than Ted Williams. Huh? What's "obscurd" is to think a player from the 40s is by far superior to the player from the 90's. In any other sport, such suggestion would be laughable. Bonds blows him away in base-running and defense and hitting-wise he's not that far behind. Bonds also almost singlehandedly took the Giants to a few outs away from winning the World Series, while Williams totally choked in the only playoff series he even played in. The only reason why Bonds is not better is the steroid allegations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Huh? What's "obscurd" is to think a player from the 40s is by far superior to the player from the 90's. In any other sport, such suggestion would be laughable. Bonds blows him away in base-running and defense and hitting-wise he's not that far behind. Bonds also almost singlehandedly took the Giants to a few outs away from winning the World Series, while Williams totally choked in the only playoff series he even played in. The only reason why Bonds is not better is the steroid allegations. I have to agree with you on this one. To me it is a no brainer. I know he is not well liked and not a popular player, but damn there is no doubt he is the best LF to ever play the game. Hell he may be the best overall player, let alone LF, to ever play the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 yeah but ted didnt juice, and ted didnt have such small ballparks to hit in. Ted had like 40-20 eyesight and was a better pure hitter than bonds could hope to be. Bonds just freaking cheats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 yeah but ted didnt juice, and ted didnt have such small ballparks to hit in. Ted had like 40-20 eyesight and was a better pure hitter than bonds could hope to be. Bonds just freaking cheats Prove to me that Bonds juiced and prove to me that Teddy didn't. I also believe Bonds' home park is not to his or any other hitter's advantage yet he continues to hit homer after homer into the bay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 yeah but ted didnt juice, and ted didnt have such small ballparks to hit in. Ted had like 40-20 eyesight and was a better pure hitter than bonds could hope to be. Bonds just freaking cheats Of course Bonds is juicing which is why I could never place him over Ted Williams. Remember Williams made his living off the Green Monster, so let's not exaggerate the park effects. Bigger parks hurt HR boppers, but they also help singles and doubles hitters. It's not as if Bonds is playing in a sandbox -- and most of his homers are 400+ feet to RF-RCF. As far as watered down pitching......There is every reason to believe pitchers didn't throw as hard in the 40's as they do now. Also, a hitter could time a pitcher better because he would that pitcher more often. There was no slider, and most pitchers featured 2 pitches. Dead ball, big parks, big strike zone, pitchers knocking batters off the plate, yadadadada............Look at the league averages from that era. They had lower slugging in that era but higher OBP. OPS wise, the difference is neglegeable. 750-760 was average then and it is average now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 Prove to me that Bonds juiced and prove to me that Teddy didn't. Thank you. Bonds is a gym rat, and I know for a fact that you can increase your strength very, very quickly if you just flat out work your ass off. It has not been proven that he has done it, and in lesser cases like this, you are innocent until proven guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Bonds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.