The Czech Republic Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 The sun came up this morning.
Mik Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 You're god damn right he did. Anything else would have been a CRIME against baseball. To channel Woody Paige... Look at the STATS! (ok, close enough to schedule). This might have been Bonds best year ever. The only people who will have something to say about this are the people who cry steroids! steroids! just because Barry isn't the nicest guy in the world.
Bored Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 I can't find the complete voting yet (Top 5 went: Bonds, Beltre, Pujols, Rolen, Edmonds) but apparantly one voter voted Bonds 3rd.
the pinjockey Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 Yup, 24-7-1 for Bonds. Beltre got 6 first place votes, Pujols and Rolen each with one.
kkktookmybabyaway Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 He won. yah. Don't care. As long as he doesn't win that Series ring, he can collect all the MVP's he wants...
Big McLargeHuge Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 Whatever. I'm happy for Barry, but none of this shit has ever led to a ring. Note: At least this year's thread title didn't involve the word Melon head.
CanadianChris Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 My favourite parts of the ESPN.com story previewing the voting were where they mentioned that, had Barry gotten no hits this year, he still would've had a higher OBP than the NL batting champ, and that Barry got more intentional walks than the AL walks leader had, total. How long can he keep this up?
Guest Brian Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 How long will it take for pitcher's to figure out that he can get a hit everytime they walk him?
Mik Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 My favourite parts of the ESPN.com story previewing the voting were where they mentioned that, had Barry gotten no hits this year, he still would've had a higher OBP than the NL batting champ, and that Barry got more intentional walks than the AL walks leader had, total. How long can he keep this up? Awesome stat.
The Czech Republic Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 I think Edmonds, Rolen, and Pujols were all much more deserving of the MVP than Bonds. I'm going against Moneyball here and saying FUCK on-base percentage. The three Cardinals earned it by busting their asses all season long. Bonds drew intentional walks. If I was a menacing black man with needles up my ass that made me hit baseballs into the stratosphere, I could just stand there and draw intentional walks from chicken-shit pitchers too. The three Cardinals were just outstanding baseball players in all respects. Bonds took intentional walks and hit home runs. He was no outstanding fielder. As worthless as the Giants are without Bonds, imagine how worthless the Cardinals would have been without Edmonds, Rolen, and Pujols. Bonds didn't earn this one.
CanadianChris Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 I think Edmonds, Rolen, and Pujols were all much more deserving of the MVP than Bonds. I'm going against Moneyball here and saying FUCK on-base percentage. The three Cardinals earned it by busting their asses all season long. Bonds drew intentional walks. If I was a menacing black man with needles up my ass that made me hit baseballs into the stratosphere, I could just stand there and draw intentional walks from chicken-shit pitchers too. The three Cardinals were just outstanding baseball players in all respects. Bonds took intentional walks and hit home runs. He was no outstanding fielder. As worthless as the Giants are without Bonds, imagine how worthless the Cardinals would have been without Edmonds, Rolen, and Pujols. Bonds didn't earn this one. You can't be serious. An OPS of over 1400 doesn't earn MVP? The Cardinals argument doesn't hold water, either, unless the voters are allowed to vote for a guy named Pujolsrolenedmonds. All three of them gone would be devastating, sure, but losing only one doesn't have nearly the impact on the Cards that losing Bonds would to the Giants.
The Czech Republic Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 A three-way tie would've been the fairest way to go.
Guest fanofcoils Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 I remember last year when Bonds won MVP there was no topic here that mentioned that. No love for 2003 Barry Bonds.
The Czech Republic Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 I don't have love for Barry Bonds of any year. He gets all the love he needs from ESPN. The hell does he need us for.
Bored Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 I remember last year when Bonds won MVP there was no topic here that mentioned that. No love for 2003 Barry Bonds. http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/index.php?...topic=45168&hl= And I started the thread! I hate Bonds but there is no legitimate argument for him not winning the MVP this year.
Fökai Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 As worthless as the Giants are without Bonds, imagine how worthless the Cardinals would have been without Edmonds, Rolen, and Pujols. Bonds didn't earn this one. Pujols, Edmonds and Rolen protected each other in the line-up. Bonds had the benefit of NOBODY to protect him, and still put up a 1400 OPS. Bonds' season was unparalleled statistically. He hit .362 to win his second NL batting title in three seasons and shattered the major league record with a .609 on-base percentage, topping the previous mark of .582 he set two years ago. He walked 232 times, 34 more than the previous record he set in 2002 and more than 100 better than anyone else in baseball this season, and his 120 intentional walks obliterated the old mark of 68, also set by Bonds in 2002. Bonds hit 45 homers in 373 at-bats, while Beltre hit a major league-leading 48 in 598 at-bats and Pujols had 46 in 592. "I never think I have a chance to win any awards being walked," he said. "Your chances are minuscule compared to their chances." Bonds' .812 slugging percentage led the major leagues for the fourth straight season but fell short of the record he set at .863 in 2001. He hit 45 homers and matched Aaron's NL record of eight 40-homer seasons, trailing only Ruth's major league mark of 11. He also became the first player in major league history with 13 consecutive 30-homer seasons.
Fökai Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 EDIT: Double post. ::waits for person who cast 3rd-place vote for Bonds to be revealed::
Guest Smell the ratings!!! Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 great moments in voting Clemens 8th (Randy Johnson 19th) Gagne 11th Pierre 16th Smoltz 21st Burnitez 24th Castilla 26th Rollins 30th
Dr. Tom Posted November 15, 2004 Report Posted November 15, 2004 Definitely the right choice. Sure, losing ALL three of Rolen, Edmonds, and Pujols would have been devastating to the Cardinals, but losing its three best offensive players should be devastating to ANY team. Losing just one of them would have a much smaller impact, as we saw when Rolen was hurt late in the season. Without Bonds, the Giants were a AAA team. With a cadaver hitting behind him all year, Bonds still put up ridiculous numbers and had one of the finest offensive seasons in history. There was no other choice to be made. Whoever voted him 3rd should be drowned in McCovey Cove.
Bored Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 Al needs to show some outrage over Bobby Abreu showing up on only two ballots and they were just a 9th and 10th place vote.
Guest Smell the ratings!!! Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 Al's probably just coming down from the high of a Jimmy Rollins MVP vote
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 Al needs to show some outrage over Bobby Abreu showing up on only two ballots and they were just a 9th and 10th place vote. You've got to wonder sometimes. Abreu hit .300, hit 30 home runs, stole 40 bases (at an 88% success rate), drew 127 walks, garnered 105 RBIs, and hit into only 5 double plays the entire season. J.D. Drew finished six for a similar performance. Seriously, do voters even know he exists?
the pinjockey Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 Come on al, as soon as the Phillies dropped out of the playoff race you knew that would happen.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 Come on al, as soon as the Phillies dropped out of the playoff race you knew that would happen. I don't expect him to come close to winning. But they couldn't even identify Abreu as more valuable than Jim Thome.
the pinjockey Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 Ok, I just looked at the full voting for the first time and Abreu's spot is just absurd. Getting stomped by Alou, Finley, Kent?!? I would like to know where the Philly voter put him.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 He got two votes, and there are two Philly writers in the voting. Sounds pretty straightforward.
the pinjockey Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 You would think so, but you know the Philly relationship with Abreu.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 Yeah. "His lack of hustle was maddening at times" was my favorite quote of the season. How can someone steal 40 bases without hustling?
the pinjockey Posted November 16, 2004 Report Posted November 16, 2004 Because 35 of those steals, apparently, came with noone on and Thome up to bat.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now