Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Congradulations Barry Bonds 756
#81
Posted 08 August 2007 - 05:34 PM
Im also getting tired of hearing that arron is the real king with and is just BS. the real king is ruth and had he played in arrons era...ruth has over 800 home runs and the single season home run mark would never be touched...Arron had an advantage over ruth...and as time has come and go bonds era produced an advantage for him that...
Bonds using sports enhancers is the same as Aaron getting those new rules...you guys need to quit whinning and realize that Arrons record wasnt even legit.

"I'm glad that the Gillette field was soft and messy
since I spent so much time down on it."-Tom Brady
17 POINTS!
#82
Posted 08 August 2007 - 05:38 PM
Yeah Aaron* had a real advantage over Ruth, what with all those pitchers INTENTIONALLY throwing at his HEAD only because hes BLACK. Yeah he had a real advantage when he had to hire body guards to follow him everywhere, open his mail, watch his house, start his car. Yeah Aaron had a real advantage over Ruth. I mean the guy only had to dodge frozen water bottles at his home stadium. BOY DID HE HAVE IT EASY!!!
If you seriously say that Hank's record isn't legit, AND you accept Bonds' record then you are some kind of baseball idiot
#83
Posted 08 August 2007 - 06:05 PM
Have you ever watched a bonds press conference? Ever?
#84
Posted 08 August 2007 - 06:29 PM
in my oppinion if you could somehow throw babe, bonds and arron in ruths era and all played during the same years....bonds nor arron would have been able to crack 600. Im not sure how familiar you are with rules from back in the day...but if you read them and checked them out i bet that anyones oppinion could be altered.
and tobe 100% honest i dont even like baseball all that much...i just read the facts and formed my oppinion...if you havent read about the older rules maybe you should...
is it Arrons fault he played in the era he did...of course not....is it arrons fault the rules changed and were more favorable to homerun hitters of his time...again absolutly not...Arron broke the record with the rules that were in place during his career. so if you are going to say that bonds record isnt legit....you should also say that arron's wasnt legit either...you could look at it this way...the rules cheated ruth...and the rules cheated arron...

"I'm glad that the Gillette field was soft and messy
since I spent so much time down on it."-Tom Brady
17 POINTS!
#86
Posted 08 August 2007 - 06:40 PM
haha to each their own...
hmmm spelled Aaron...now i know and knowing is half the battle! although i might have known that but wasnt thinking but its all good lol...

"I'm glad that the Gillette field was soft and messy
since I spent so much time down on it."-Tom Brady
17 POINTS!
#87
Posted 08 August 2007 - 07:08 PM
hmmm spelled Aaron...now i know and knowing is half the battle! although i might have known that but wasnt thinking but its all good lol...
So many "nows" and "knows" that post blew my mindddddd
#88
Posted 08 August 2007 - 07:29 PM
Hank Aaron, on the other hand, is a true champion. He never complained, he didn't take days off so he could rest to hit the home run (and he did play on a bad team too), he didn't feel sorry for himself. Aaron was the victim of something he could control, he was the victim of mindless racist assholes and bigotry. Bonds is the victim of turning himself into a cheating, lying asshole. If he admits it and starts showing signs of kindness, I think people would have a new respect for him (see Jason Giambi).
Extmenace, you have got to be a fool to think Ruth is better. Ruth had a ballpark (Yankee Stadium) built for just him (does The House That Ruth Built ring a bell???) and his slugging abilities. The rightfield in Yankee Stadium at the time he played was under 300 feet long. That's why the Yankees have always coveted powerful left handed hitters (Ruth, Gehrig, Maris, Jackson, Mattingly, Giambi the switch hitting Mantle, O'Neill, Abreau, etc.). Plus, Aaron nor Bonds would've never been allowed to play in Ruth's era, because the heads of baseball were a bunch of racist bigots at the time Ruth played. Imagine if Ruth had to face a Bob Gibson, or a Fergie Jenkins, or a Don Newcombe, or any other great Black or Hispanic pitcher.
EDIT: Just saw in your post you said you didn't know much about baseball, sorry for ripping on you rather harshly.
The bottomlne is Bonds is no Hank Aaron, he isn't the player and certainly isn't the man that Hank was and still is. Aaron is the all time total bases leader (nearly 1000 more than Bonds). Aaron is 3rd on the all time hits list with over 3700. Bonds doesn't have 3000. Aaron is the all time RBI leader, and Bonds is over 300 behind Aaron. Only Aaron and Willie Mays have hit over 500 (make it 600 for that matter) homers and have over 3000 hits and have a lifetime average over .300. Aaron is also the all time extra base hits leader, and won 3 Gold Gloves when they were MUCH harder to come by. Aaron is more of a man on his right pinkie finger nail than Bonds has ever been and will ever be.
This is a tribute to the most underappreciated and greatest player of them all, #44, but #1 in our hearts and the record books, Hank Aaron!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Member since March 25, 2005.
#89
Posted 08 August 2007 - 07:53 PM
Im also getting tired of hearing that arron is the real king with and is just BS. the real king is ruth and had he played in arrons era...ruth has over 800 home runs and the single season home run mark would never be touched...Arron had an advantage over ruth...and as time has come and go bonds era produced an advantage for him that...
Bonds using sports enhancers is the same as Aaron getting those new rules...you guys need to quit whinning and realize that Arrons record wasnt even legit.
What are you talking about? there were no roid policies when he took them? Are being serious? So all this crap about him taking steroids and going to through motions and appeals and such is just a figment of our imagination?
No one is saying he's not a great athlete and very gifted. He's a cheater! YES! he's a cheater! Just deal with it. No ones saying he's not the HR king, people are saying he doesn't deserve to be. Like I said Bonds trainer is in jail for giving his clients steroids and you don't think his most famous client took any? Come on!.. and right O.J didn't kill nobody. hahahah come on!
and there is no bias at all here either because I'm a black man. So there is no favorisum going on. just so you know.
#90
Posted 08 August 2007 - 10:03 PM
in my oppinion if you could somehow throw babe, bonds and arron in ruths era and all played during the same years....bonds nor arron would have been able to crack 600. Im not sure how familiar you are with rules from back in the day...but if you read them and checked them out i bet that anyones oppinion could be altered.
and tobe 100% honest i dont even like baseball all that much...i just read the facts and formed my oppinion...if you havent read about the older rules maybe you should...
is it Arrons fault he played in the era he did...of course not....is it arrons fault the rules changed and were more favorable to homerun hitters of his time...again absolutly not...Arron broke the record with the rules that were in place during his career. so if you are going to say that bonds record isnt legit....you should also say that arron's wasnt legit either...you could look at it this way...the rules cheated ruth...and the rules cheated arron...
Well I'm not going to call you names, but I don't agree with your assesment of Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron. You didn't say anything about Babe Ruth playing during the live-ball era. An era when records were not only broken but shattered beyond belief. Many of the records broken during the live-ball era haven't been broken until recently.
I mean Ruth started in the major leagues in 1914 and became the all time homerun leader in 1921. Most of those HRs came in 1920 and 1921 (113 HRs in two seasons) and 1920 was when the rules were changed to increase offense (the live-ball era). I guess I can say Babe Ruth would not have hit 714 if he had played his entire career during the dead-ball era or before that. I mean you could just as easily say Roger Conner is truely the greatest HR hitter of all time because he didn't play during the live-ball era like Ruth did. Ruth benefited just as much from the live ball as Aaron did from smaller HR friendly stadiums.
Also let's not forget that when Babe Ruth played the MLB was segregated. As I said yesterday Josh Gibson IMO is the greatest HR hitter of all time. I personally believe had MLB not been segregated when Gibson played he would have been the HR king before 1974 and not Ruth. Unfortunatly we'll never know that for sure because Gibson wasn't allowed to play in the MLB, and the Negro Leagues didn't keep many stats and records. But that's just Gibson, Ruth never had to face players like Satchel Paige or Hilton Smith. Some can argure Ruth didn't play against or with ALL of the best players baseball had to offer during his era.
Basically as sports leagues grow they add more franchises, change rules, they try to be more entertaining, and they have to deal with players who look for ways to cheat one way or another for thier own gain. Every era is different and great players benefit from their era one way or another.

New York Jets
Super Bowl III Champions

Los Angeles Lakers
16-times NBA World Champions
1949, 1950, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2009, 2010
#91
Posted 08 August 2007 - 11:33 PM


#92 Guest_JCBizkit87_*
Posted 08 August 2007 - 11:37 PM
Well since i am a fan of Griffey Jr., but a hater of Barry Bonds that only proves that I am not racist, and it also shows that Bonds is an asshole. The people that actually give Bonds the "racist death threats" are ignorant people. I would never send anybody a death threat. I definatly am sure that if it were Griffey breaking this record that more people would cheer for him, then people would be cheering for Bonds.
#93
Posted 09 August 2007 - 08:54 AM
Recently Bonds hasn't been much of an asshole. He always seems nice when hes getting interviewed. his teammates seem to like him now and vice versa too.


#94
Posted 09 August 2007 - 09:00 AM
I mean Ruth started in the major leagues in 1914 and became the all time homerun leader in 1921. Most of those HRs came in 1920 and 1921 (113 HRs in two seasons) and 1920 was when the rules were changed to increase offense (the live-ball era). I guess I can say Babe Ruth would not have hit 714 if he had played his entire career during the dead-ball era or before that. I mean you could just as easily say Roger Conner is truely the greatest HR hitter of all time because he didn't play during the live-ball era like Ruth did. Ruth benefited just as much from the live ball as Aaron did from smaller HR friendly stadiums.
Also let's not forget that when Babe Ruth played the MLB was segregated. As I said yesterday Josh Gibson IMO is the greatest HR hitter of all time. I personally believe had MLB not been segregated when Gibson played he would have been the HR king before 1974 and not Ruth. Unfortunatly we'll never know that for sure because Gibson wasn't allowed to play in the MLB, and the Negro Leagues didn't keep many stats and records. But that's just Gibson, Ruth never had to face players like Satchel Paige or Hilton Smith. Some can argure Ruth didn't play against or with ALL of the best players baseball had to offer during his era.
Basically as sports leagues grow they add more franchises, change rules, they try to be more entertaining, and they have to deal with players who look for ways to cheat one way or another for thier own gain. Every era is different and great players benefit from their era one way or another.
You make a great point here Mr. Jet. Legend says that Gibson easily hit over 800 homers, possibly even over 900 in his Negro Leagues career. How there's a fact that he got to face Major League pitchers in 9 at bats, in those nine ABs he got 4 hits, 2 of which were homers. Imagine how different the game would be if Gibson, Cool Papa Bell, Jackie Robinson, Elston Howard, Larry Doby, Monte Irvin, Satchel Paige, and Elston Howard among others were given the chance to play a full career in the Majors. Even Aaron lost a few years of his career since he was in the Negro Leagues. Too many people overlook the fact that the Negro Leagues housed arguably the best baseball in the world at that time.
However, I personally don't feel Gibson is the greatest slugger of all time, I think he is 3rd behind Ruth and of course Aaron. That's the biggest shame in sports, the fact that so many great athletes didn't get the chance to show off the skills they had because of the color of their skin.
Member since March 25, 2005.
#95
Posted 09 August 2007 - 10:10 AM
However, I personally don't feel Gibson is the greatest slugger of all time, I think he is 3rd behind Ruth and of course Aaron. That's the biggest shame in sports, the fact that so many great athletes didn't get the chance to show off the skills they had because of the color of their skin.
I dont know if I'd call Aaron a 'slugger'. yeah he hit alot of home runs but when I think of a prototypical slugger I think of a guy that slams balls into the stands and hits majestic homers. Aarons homers were all 'just homers' which obviously there is NOTHING wrong with that...just not what I look for in a slugger.


#96
Posted 09 August 2007 - 10:42 AM
#97
Posted 09 August 2007 - 10:51 AM
The greatest PLAYER of all time was Willie Mays and I dont even think it can be debatable.


#98
Posted 09 August 2007 - 11:30 AM
No, I think it is, it comes down between 2 other players, Aaron and Ruth. People forget that when he was with the Red Sox, he wasn't just the most feared power hitter in the league, he was the most feared left handed pitcher in the league too. Other than his incredible hitting for both average and power, he was good, not great, at fielding and base running (though you wouldn't expect that from a guy his size). However, his pure combo of pitching and hitting ability make him so rare.
Mays on the other hand in the perfect example of a 5 tool player. Over 300 steals, 660 homers, career .302 hitter, over 3000 hits, and the greatest fielding CF of all time, and also the greatest CF of all time.
Aaron, on the other hand, didn't have the talent of the two, but was by far the most consistent hitter of his time, and possibly all time. While his single season stats aren't great (never hit 50 homers in a year), his career numbers are insane. He was a .305 career hitter, he's 3rd on the all time hit list, has the most extra base hits and total bases ever, and, along with Mays, is the only player with over 500 homers, 3000 hits, and a .300 career average. Was also a winner of 3 Gold Gloves, and did with an MVP award once.
If I were to rank these 3 players, this is what it'd look like:
1. Hank Aaron.
2. Willie Mays.
3. Babe Ruth.
If you were to have a 1-5 year franchise, I'd take Ruth over the other 2. A 5-10 year franchise, I'd take Mays. But a 10-15 year franchise, definetly Aaron. Basically, Hank Aaron in the Curtis Martin of baseball, a classy, great man who isn't flashy, won't win MVPs or get much attention, but gets the job year in and year out with no complaints.
Member since March 25, 2005.
#99
Posted 09 August 2007 - 12:25 PM
How many games did he win as a pitcher?

Sign In
Register
Help

This topic is locked


MultiQuote












