Open Bonds Thread

by Grant Brisbee on Jan 19, 2007 1:38 PM PST in News

Maybe I'm just naïve, but I can't wrap my head around the whole "Bonds Contract in Jeopardy!!!1" storyline. Every time I'm looking on news aggregators for Giants news, that's the only thing I can find. Bonds is rancid peanut butter; the Giants are moldy jelly. They can pretend all they'd like that they can survive without each other, but only freaks prefer peanut butter and honey. Inbred freaks.

To the Giants: If we assume that Bonds comes back, plays 130 games, and hits .300/.450/.650, the team still doesn't have an offense to speak of. If Bonds doesn't come back, the Giants might have trouble cracking 700 runs. The team doesn't like the circus? Their three options are to draft a player better than Marvin Benard, suck, or deal with the circus. The first option has already passed. There are worse things to have to deal with. If it has to be a circus, we can always hope for Jeff Passan to get sprayed with a seltzer bottle.

To Barry: Never open your mouth again. You no speaka the English from now on. Seriously. We really, really mean it this time. Just play baseball.

But this is an open thread to discuss the possibility of the Giants actually not re-signing Bonds at this point. I would expect the contract with Rich Aurilia to be reversed before the agreement with Bonds is reversed. Am I just being obtuse?

Tweet Comment 98 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Peanut butter and honey is far superior to PB&J. Frankly I am tired of your honey bashing. All you do is bash honey and you have no facts to back up your claim.

I move to have Grant banned from this blog and replace him with Wilriv. Now that guys got some opinions I can get behind.

I can't respect a team that wears Sonoran Red and black jerseys.

by camwoody on Jan 19, 2007 1:44 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

As a dedicated peanut butter and honey eater myself (there I said it and it felt good), I agree that the bashing needs to stop. In a city known for tolerance, it's just plain wrong to face this kind of prejudice.

As for Bonds, a certain quote comes to mind:

He's a loathsome offensive brute, but yet I can't look away."

anyone?

Biggest mankinder in the history of no brain.

by Goofus on Jan 19, 2007 1:52 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Is it the Seinfeld episode where the couple is looking at the Kramer portrait?

hung up on '02

by BondsApologist on Jan 19, 2007 1:54 PM PST up reply actions

Seinfeld

"The Letter"

The one where Jerry's girlfriend, as played by the wonderful Catherine Keener, paints the portrait of Kramer.

by English Professor on Jan 19, 2007 1:57 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

He transcends time and space.
He sickens me.
I love him.
Me too.

Here's to a good 2007. Or 2008. Or 2009. Or 2010. Or...

by WalrusMan on Jan 19, 2007 2:25 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

"Clerks II," when Becky is looking at the donkey show.

by Skaldheim on Jan 19, 2007 5:17 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

That's it dammit!! I'm off to create a half-dozen different diaries with polls to illustrate the superior status of peanut butter and honey. We'll show him !!

Hats for bats, keep bats warm !

by PacBellBoozer on Jan 20, 2007 11:25 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I guess I was owed that bit of karma for putting my foot in my mouth about propsing on the Jumbotron, but Grant, your tastes are inferior. Honey & PB is the clearly better.

If I had a vote for a circus debacle I'd wish for Passan to crash his unicycle into the fire jugglers and watch the tent fall in a ball of flames. Something like the Hindenburg...

"Strikeouts are boring. Besides that, they're fascist." Not fascist: SF Dugout

by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Jan 19, 2007 1:49 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Am I always going to giggle when I see Hindenburg and the image of Klaus Von Hillenbrand pops into my head?

Dear god, when will it stop?

Oh the humanity !!

Hats for bats, keep bats warm !

by PacBellBoozer on Jan 20, 2007 11:27 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Since I don't hold out a lot of hope for the season anyway, I'm pretty apathetic about whether Bonds is on the team or not. Frankly, I was ready to move on as soon as I heard he had an infected knee joint.

If the Giants were this ambivalent about their commitment to Bonds, they should not have signed up all those overpriced vets. Shades of the AJ trade!!(If Sabean didn't have enough faith in AJ to sign him to a longterm deal, then whytheheck make the trade in the first place?)

I would be happy to rewind the offseason. Trade for Willy Aybar to play 3B. Sign Jack Cust to play 1B. Offer arbitration, but don't sign Ray Durham, take the additional compensation picks and give the 2B job to Frandsen. Give Todd Linden and Fred Lewis starting OF jobs.

Too late now. We've invested too much in the season to back out now. Gotta get Bonds signed, warts and all.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jan 19, 2007 1:56 PM PST reply actions

With that lineup...

Is eight wins too optimistic?

by mxmob33 on Jan 19, 2007 2:01 PM PST up reply actions

Probably.....

But that's not the point. Even with Bonds, we've probably thrown a lot of good money after bad. Without him, we almost surely have. My plan would:

Possibly produce 2 or 3 young players who could cheaply fill roster spots for the next 3 or 4 years.
Give us 2 more high draft picks in a strong draft.
Keep our powder dry for future, better FA's.

I guess the one upside to the current roster is if it all goes south before the AS break, we can have reasonably producive firesale that could net us prospect who are closer to being major league ready than the draftees. My fear is that, once again, we will be in pennant race limbo at the deadline and, once again, we will make the wrong decision and be buyers.

by DrBGiantsfan on Jan 19, 2007 4:36 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Probably.....

I think Brian Sabean has faced up to the reality that many Giant fans have not yet grasped onto. Nobody deals their good young prospects anymore. A star player making close to the major league minimum is as good as it gets for a major league team, and these players are held onto like precious gold. You cannot rebuild unless you have a strong farm system, and the Giants don't have that. You cannot rebuild through free agency, because you simply can't afford to add more than one elite free agent unless you're the Yankees. So what do you do?? You do what Sabean did. Hold on to the few prospects you DO have, sign one elite free agent and then fill in with a bunch of affordable 35 year olds. Sabean hopes he does have those prospects further down the minor league chain, and the 35 year olds buys you a decent team until they're ready. What does all that have to do with Bonds?? The Giants tried to replace him when the free agent and trading market opened, and they were unable to. They need him even more now that nobody is left out there, and they have no choice but to work it out. All this is just posturing to make Bonds accept the contract on their terms. It would also be bad public relations to sign him while front pages all over the country are blaring headlines about his positive amphetamine test. When the furor dies down, (and it already is starting to) the Giants will finally quietly announce the official signing of Bonds, and both sides will claim victory.

by rxmeister on Jan 20, 2007 8:19 AM PST up reply actions

I think Bonds will be back

But for some chance if he doesn't its going to be really ugly. If I was running the Giants this offsesaon I would have centered around rebuilding with youth more but what can you do.

Without Bonds the Giants don't have a legitamite threat in the lineup.

by xanthan on Jan 19, 2007 2:09 PM PST reply actions

Re: I think Bonds will be back

To rebuild with 'youth,' there must be suitable 'youthful' prospects available. And they are?

by allfrank on Jan 19, 2007 7:53 PM PST up reply actions

Re: I think Bonds will be back

Hey Frank,

There definitely wasn't many sure fire young prospects on the FA market this year or in the organization. I'll agree to that but I would probably give guys like Linden, Lewis, and Frandsen shots. Then I would sign cheapy veterans to 1 year deals to make time. It will be ugly but thats what rebuilding is. The Giants seem forced to field a competitive team every year because of the stadium bills.

I just wish Sabes could curtail his boner for veterans just a little bit. And I would like to see the Giants try and take on some youth. Whether that be by trades or letting younger players get a shot or trying the market I don't care too much. There needs to be a shift in thinking within the Giants organization for that to happen.

I personally don't mind watching a young team struggle if it means the team gets better in a couple of years. Instead, I feel like the Giants are just treading water, noses barely breaking the surface to breathe. Rebuilding is always the next year, and the next, etc.

by xanthan on Jan 19, 2007 9:20 PM PST up reply actions

Re: I think Bonds will be back

Let me add too, that I think our farm system is on a up swing and should get better and this years draft where we hold a lot of good picks in the first round. Maybe I won't have to wait too long to see some homegrown players, who knows.

by xanthan on Jan 19, 2007 9:22 PM PST up reply actions

Re: I think Bonds will be back

as I said before, it is very hard to acquire good young players in trades. In fact when one is traded, like Adam LaRoche the other day, you ask yourself why the Braves would let him go. They received an outstanding young closer for him, and this is a team that was devastated the last couple of years because the bullpen was so weak, but you still have to wonder. They had a good young right side of the infield with LaRoche and Giles, and now BOTH are gone. Were they on steroids?? Do they have possible legal problems about to become public?? Do they have sex with sheep?? You start to wonder about these things because it is so rare to see a good young player like Adam LaRoche traded, and another one like Marcus Giles just cut loose. That tells you how hard it would be for Sabean to rebuild this team by trading for young prospects.

by rxmeister on Jan 20, 2007 8:25 AM PST up reply actions

Re: I think Bonds will be back

There has been a shift in thinking. The team is no longer built around Bonds. '07 is a transition year, but not a year in which to throw in the towel.
Give young guys a chance? Feliz, Niekro, T Walker, Ellison, Munter, Taschner? Aren't they young. If you want to see young, drive down to Fresno. These guys are not ready. What aboput Frandsen, Linden, Wilson, Lewis inicates any of them are deserving of being handed a starting job? Hand a starting job to a guy who'se not ready, then you're forced to trade away other talent to replace him mid season. See Niekro, L. Doesn't it make more sense to have a backup plan when 'giving the young guys a chance?' Personally, I am more confident going into the season with the Linden's and Frandsen's getting a shot, not a promise. If they out produce the vets and win the starter's position, I am thrilled. But if they don't, at least we have guys who, historically, have shown they can hit 260-275 and not make 2 errors a game.
And, in repeating the mantra criticism (totally without revision, IMO) of Sabean, I think you ignore the fact that the team HAS gotten younger. And you ignore the number of young players from the farm system currently playing and/or being given a shot: (from the farm, on the team) Cain, Lowrey, Feliz, Correia, Hennessey, Wilson (expected to make team) Linden, Frandsen, Notgardo, Sanchez (getting a shot) Taschner, Munter, Niekro.
Old guys gone: Fassero, Finley, Matheney (unfortunately), Schmidt.

by allfrank on Jan 20, 2007 4:26 PM PST up reply actions

Re: I think Bonds will be back

I agree. The best way to find out about the young guys is to break them in slowly, not just throw them out there and see what they can do, that's what bad teams do. Todd Linden may prove to be a good everyday player or a career minor leaguer, and having him back up a guy who misses alot of games like Bonds is the perfect way to find out without risking your team's future. The same would have been true for Frandsen if they hadn't have picked up Ryan Klesko. I think Klesko gets the bulk of the starts at first base, and this frees Aurilia to move around the infield and forces Frandsen into nowhere land. However, that's ok, because I would think the .214 at the major league level last year is a better judge of what he can do than the .381 he hit in a rookie Fall league. I think he will eventually be a decent major league utility infielder, but to suddenly let Ray Durham walk away and hand Frandsen the everyday job would have been very risky, and not something a team that considers itself a contender would want to do.

by rxmeister on Jan 22, 2007 6:01 AM PST up reply actions

Re: I think Bonds will be back

I'm not sure I'd agree with that. The Braves have certainly been very very agressive over the last 15 years at throwing their prospects into starting positions and they've had very good success at it. The Yankees haven't exactly been shy about it either (remember when critics screamed that they were crazy for letting rookie Derek Jeter start at SS out of camp?). I'm not sure what the recipe is, although really really good talent evaluators probably plays a critical role.

by Roger on Jan 22, 2007 10:39 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I must have lived a very sheltered childhood. I've never heard of having peanut butter and honey. I'm intrigued. I grew up with PB&J (mixed together first, then spread on the sandwich for maximum tastiness), so I may not be easily converted.

by Snof on Jan 19, 2007 2:10 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I am more of a peanut butter and banana sandwhich man myself.

by xanthan on Jan 19, 2007 2:12 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

You and Elvis make two.

Never mind whatever I do!!! Fan is my tresure!!!

by leftymalo on Jan 19, 2007 2:38 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Speaking of Elvis, I watched Bubba Ho-tep today for the first time. It was great!

Any Bruce fans in the house?

by xanthan on Jan 19, 2007 2:53 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I saw it and was disappointed. I expected it to be freaking hilarious and it was just merely sort of enjoyable. That made me sad, as a huge Bruce Campbell fan.

"Strikeouts are boring. Besides that, they're fascist." Not fascist: SF Dugout

by BaronVonCurrentEvents on Jan 19, 2007 3:03 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I liked it a lot. I thought it was pretty funny and oddly enough, heart warming.

by xanthan on Jan 19, 2007 3:10 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Did you know they are doing Evil Dead: The Musical off Broadway? Further, M. Campbell, he has a great new as campaign for Old Spice:

http://www.experienceoldspice.com/

by Kelly Downsyndrome on Jan 19, 2007 4:57 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Love him. I can't wait for "My name is Bruce"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489235/

Don't forget to visit

http://www.bruce-campbell.com/

and buy his book "If Chins Could Kill" - you will laught out loud.

The Dodgers are evil.

by irwin on Jan 19, 2007 5:10 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Bubba Ho Tep surprised me. It was wistful and sad and still pretty funny. Nice message, too -- you can't live in the past; what you're doing now is what's most important.

by Skaldheim on Jan 19, 2007 5:19 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Great movie and Bruce Campbell rules!! I was once arguing back and forth with a Dodger fan on another board and then he mentioned the movie Evil Dead in a post and that he was a big Bruce Campbell fan. After that we got along great!! I was actually sad to see Campbell in a dumb commercial the other day, because he should be so much bigger than he is, and shouldn't have to do TV commercials. Army of Darkness is such a great movie. Who doesn't love funny horror movies??

by rxmeister on Jan 20, 2007 8:28 AM PST up reply actions

PB & J

is clearly the classic. It's the best, I agree. With good soft bread. But seriously, how can you bash PB & H? It's so good (especially with toasted bread). I had PB & H before anything else, so there's a special place in my stomach for it.

by stress on Jan 19, 2007 2:21 PM PST reply actions

No love for a fluffernutter?

Those are the best man!

And come on, Rich Draper already said he'll be back, what more do you need Grant? Jeez!

Here's to a good 2007. Or 2008. Or 2009. Or 2010. Or...

by WalrusMan on Jan 19, 2007 2:28 PM PST reply actions

Re: No love for a fluffernutter?

Unfortunately, fluffernutter will never get the mass love it truly deserves.

We'd be pretty good if we didn't suck so bad.

by nostocksjustbonds on Jan 20, 2007 11:36 AM PST up reply actions

Finally recognition!

Here's to a good 2007. Or 2008. Or 2009. Or 2010. Or...

by WalrusMan on Jan 20, 2007 12:18 PM PST up reply actions

I think we need a poll!

Would you rather see Grant get banned?

Get hit by a bus while you eat a pb&j ?

I can't respect a team that wears Sonoran Red and black jerseys.

by camwoody on Jan 19, 2007 2:30 PM PST reply actions

Re: I think we need a poll!

Puppies!

I've grown up a lot since before dinner, when we last talked.

by groug on Jan 19, 2007 5:40 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I like peanut butter sandwiches. I like jelly sandwiches. But for whatever reason, I don't like PB&J sandwiches. *shrug*

LicenseToPills: barry bonds says words, they have nothing to do with his thoughts, they are just subjects and predicates in his mental kingdom

by Natto on Jan 19, 2007 2:37 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Do you guys know what's IN peanut butter?? I mean the amount of roach parts and rat hairs that the government legally allows?? I took a course in consumer education and stopped eating peanut butter five minutes after we started talking about it. Gross!! And besides, my kid is allergic to peanuts and I took a vow to stop eating them in sympathy. Of course if he was allergic to steak or chicken he would pretty much be on his own.

by rxmeister on Jan 20, 2007 8:32 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I know all about the crap that ends up in food.

But, it doesn't make me sick, is probably somehow healthy (yum, protein...), and just might be that thing that makes it taste great.

I love food. So I'll eat it despite what gets in. The number of maggots allowed in spaghetti sauce is pretty ridiculous, too, but man it tastes great.

Coming to you by proxy

by howtheyscored on Jan 20, 2007 10:52 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Lineup Analysis tool

Best lineup with Bonds in it: 802 Runs
Replace Bonds with Linden lineup: 726 Runs

And these totals are "best possible". Taking into account how managers usually don't have a very efficient lineup, you are looking at a sub 700 run offense if Bonds isn't signed and there isn't some kind of major trade for a Manny Ramirez type hitter.
vr, Xei

Go Dodgers!

by Xeifrank on Jan 19, 2007 2:49 PM PST reply actions

Hmm...really?

The Giants are better with Bonds? That's amazing..never thought of it that way.

Here's to a good 2007. Or 2008. Or 2009. Or 2010. Or...

by WalrusMan on Jan 19, 2007 2:51 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

haha, the point I was trying to make, and yes perhaps it's an obvious one, was how pathetic the offense would be without him. The offensive is already pretty average with him playing full-time, below average part-time, and god awful without him. vr, Xei

Go Dodgers!

by Xeifrank on Jan 19, 2007 3:26 PM PST reply actions

Bonds, Schmonds. Let's Taser us some Dodger fans.

My new heroes, the Saginaw, Michigan Police Department tasered a guy for wearing a Dodgers hat.

"It means more than just a hat," he said. "It's like my crown. It's like asking a king to remove his crown."

I ask you, friends - why have police departments across our great nation waited so long to enact this enlightened policy?

And why don't we have a farm team in Saginaw?

Can we send the Chief of Police some season tickets?

I demand answers! Get me Magowan, stat!

Oro en Paz, Fierro en Guerra. Feliz grounds out.

by HughG16 on Jan 19, 2007 3:28 PM PST reply actions

Re: Bonds, Schmonds. Let's Taser us some Dodger fa

Without a doubt this guy is a nutjob . He's now facing 6 years in prison. Which means he will probably get 100 hours of community service, sent to anger management with a 30 day suspended sentence.

On principle alone, this should be mandatory for any asshole that wears a Dodger cap; whether they remove it at public hearings or not.

Save The Pitcher. Save The World

by E Ticket on Jan 20, 2007 9:57 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Personally I got tired of defending Bonds last year...but now I've got my second wind. I love telling Padre fans that they're watching the best player in the history of the game.

I only want the Giants to be good. I don't find it morally complicated to root for them and Bonds at the same time. I don't feel that strongly about steroids because I am pretty sure they were rampantly used in baseball, and that players in all the major sports are still hammering down HGH and designer steroids by the bucketload. I'm a huge 49er fan, and I find it highly unlikely that Vernon Davis and Shawne Merriman weren't both roiding up in Maryland. Does that bother me?..a little bit, but not too much, its the nature of the game.

by hammystyle on Jan 19, 2007 3:29 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

the world is so against steroid use that Shawn Merriman was STILL voted to the Pro Bowl and finished near the top in the MVP voting. Not only do Charger fans continue to love him, but fans of other teams never even bring up the fact that Charger wins may be tainted. The media are a bunch of hypocritical bastards. If Barry kissed everyone's ass like most pro athletes do, and smiled nice for the camera, nobody would even talk about all this roid crap. It's only an issue for one man.

by rxmeister on Jan 20, 2007 8:36 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

It also demonstrated an important difference between the NFL and MLB, and the way the two are managed from the top down.

Merriman's case was handled as quietly as possible for his own sake. He was quickly served his punishment, as allotted by league rules, and will serve the next most severe punishment as quickly and quietly if it ever happens again. And so on until he's out of the league.

But the NFL does not make targets out of players. MLB does.

Coming to you by proxy

by howtheyscored on Jan 20, 2007 10:54 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Your point is well taken, but a couple of corrections are in order:

Merriman was not near the top in MVP voting (Tomlinson got 44 votes, Brees got 4, Manning got 2)
Writers choose the MVP
By many accounts, the steroid ordeal probably cost Merriman the award for Defensive Player of the Year.
Players did criticize Merriman and said he shouldn't win the award because of the steroid suspension, including Jason Taylor, the player who won it.
Merriman was voted to the Pro Bowl. Because players and coaches pick, comparing it to Bond's's' situation is apples and oranges.

Biggest mankinder in the history of no brain.

by Goofus on Jan 20, 2007 4:02 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

EXCEPT, during the whole Taylor-Merriman story, I heard two different conversations on ESPN radio (one on Colin Cowherd's show and one on the Sportsbash) where the hosts said straight out that steroids in the NFL didn't bother them the same way as steroid use in baseball. No rationale, no justification.. it was just their "gut feel" about it. I actually for a second felt like calling in, but what exactly do you say to such illogicality?

I had a similar discussion about salaries the other day with a friend: why do people get all riled up about salaries in baseball signaling the apocalypse, but don't seem to mind the multiple stiffs in the NBA riding pines (and getting released) for $20 mil/yr?

by Roger on Jan 20, 2007 5:25 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Football players only compete with their peers as the records and long history aren't nearly as revered.

Baseball players compete against their peers, but when the great ones get compared to the great ones of the past, it bothers more people's "gut" is the playing field isn't more level.

I think a big reason for that is that game hasn't changed nearly as much as much as football and basketball have. If you watch film of Willie Mays, Joe Dimaggio or Roberto Clemente, it's easy to see them playing today. On the other hand, Paul Hornung or Bob Cousy or Raymond Berry wouldn't probably be stars in today's world.

Biggest mankinder in the history of no brain.

by Goofus on Jan 22, 2007 6:27 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

"If you watch film of Willie Mays, Joe Dimaggio or Roberto Clemente, it's easy to see them playing today"

Yeah. I look at game film of Babe Ruth waddling around the bases and say to myself. "Now thats true poetry in motioon. Such grace. Such athleticism. Such a striking resemblence to Armando Benitez maybe.

Save The Pitcher. Save The World

by E Ticket on Jan 22, 2007 7:52 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

You're just underlining my point, which is that all the talk of health issues and ethics are really just rationalizations to cover a "feeling in people's guts." To whatever degree it's true that Paul Hornung and Bob Cousy couldn't be stars today, it's the exact degree that sheer physical skills (size, strength, speed) matter more in football and basketball -- in other words, the degree to which steroids are more important of a performance enhancement in other sports than they are in baseball.

If the media were really really serious about investigating this issue (or the Mitchell bunch either for that matter) the VERY first thing they would do is conduct extensive medical research into the advantages gained in baseball from taking steroids (and contrasting them to the advantages of just engaging in rigorous physical training and nutrition regiments). I've seen no such thing in any of the scientific journals.

I'm a bit of a cynic on this issue, but after 20 years of watching the networks drag "scientists" onto their shows constantly to explain why global warming may not exist, I don't trust that the medical experts you see on ESPN are really giving me the best scientific understanding of the issue.

As for the level playing field argument: well, setting aside the color barrier; the DH; lowering the mound; juicing the ball; building bandboxes; the advent of night games; changing surfaces; and the incredible advances in sports medicine, surgery, and training; I wonder what people like Honus Wagner, Ty Cobb, Nap Lajoie, and Cap Anson would say about the level playing field? Essentially their entire careers were rendered meaningless because owners wanted to keep the crowds from leaving in the wake of the Black Sox scandal and so changed the very nature of the game by creating the "live ball".

To talk about the "sanctity of baseball records" is a perverse misuse of the sacred. Baseball history and all those who have taken part in it is every bit as vulgar and vital as the culture it's been apart of. Sadly, santimony, hypocrisy, and an extraordinary capacity for self-delusion are also important ingredients of that culture.

by Roger on Jan 22, 2007 10:33 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

All great points.

While I agree that "sanctity" is the wrong choice of words for baseball records, the fact remains that baseball records and numbers are for more important to our collective consciousness than any others. Numbers like 56, 60, 61, 73, 714, 715, 755 and .400 don't even need explanation. The only thing I can think of that even comes close is Wilt's 100.

Biggest mankinder in the history of no brain.

by Goofus on Jan 22, 2007 1:52 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I agree with you that that's true. It would just make me feel better if I heard more sports commentators who seemed to really think through and question the assumptions that lay behind their opinions once in a while -- or even admitted that they have assumptions and cultural biases informing their opinions. That's an important aspect of "informed debate" in my book.

by Roger on Jan 22, 2007 2:15 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Am I the only one that loves me some surly sports stars? The guys that are always there to give the cliche answer and be the media sweethearts never did much for me.

by mxmob33 on Jan 19, 2007 3:42 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Albert Belle is one of my all-time favorites.

Omar don't scare.

by SF Pete on Jan 19, 2007 4:59 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

All hail Hac Man, good ol' Penitentiary Face, One Flap Down -- Jeffrey Leonard.

by Skaldheim on Jan 19, 2007 5:22 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

preach on, brother.

Also, it's not like the media is a hugely popular group, either.

We'd be pretty good if we didn't suck so bad.

by nostocksjustbonds on Jan 20, 2007 11:40 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Ralph Barbieri and Ted Robinson are having an interesting discussion about this topic right now on KNBR. (So sue me, I listen to sports talk radio sometimes.) They're wondering if the Giants brass has just reached the breaking point with Bonds. Because he tested positive for greenies? Because he supposedly ratted out Sweeney? It's hard to imagine that, at this point, there is anything about Bonds's behavior and actions that should surprise Sabean and Magowan.

They made their play for Soriano, Lee, etc. and came up empty, so now they're "stuck" with Bonds. Literally. Walking away from the guy now, after hitching your wagon to him for one more season, would be a huge mistake, not to mention completely counterproductive, the ultimate case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I'm guessing the Giants will get over their buyer's remorse, take a deep breath, and get the contract worked out.

by Kitspool on Jan 19, 2007 3:56 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

But this is all bullshit. Of course they are going to sign him - along with Aurelia, Molina, Klesko, Barry Redux, Durham...
This is just posturing/negotiating the non monetary clauses in the contract. Hell, what else is there to do??? It's 4 weeks from pitchers and catchers, for Chrissakes

by allfrank on Jan 19, 2007 8:01 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Are you people retarded? Peanut Butter butter is vile! And evil too. I think they have to grind up live puppies to make it.

The Dodgers are evil.

by irwin on Jan 19, 2007 4:16 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Thank you, I couldn't agree more. The smell of it makes me sick.

by sfgreg on Jan 19, 2007 4:46 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

So what about the puppies? I voted for kittens!

Hats for bats, keep bats warm !

by PacBellBoozer on Jan 20, 2007 11:35 AM PST up reply actions

Sign or Not Sign

But this is an open thread to discuss the possibility of the Giants actually not re-signing Bonds at this point.

Peter and Co could be re-thinking the re-signing. Maybe the failed test and Sweeney issue was the last straw. Possibly the organization is asking themselves how much did the failed test improve his play in 2006? What effect will it have on his play in 2007?

by wilriv21 on Jan 19, 2007 4:24 PM PST reply actions

Re: Sign or Not Sign

Wil, the best information I have read indicates the "greenies" were part of a weight loss package, which Bonds certainly needed. Hell, with thighler and Armando, the team brass should have required its ingestion.
Second, while there are rumors and innuendo, I have not seen anything authoritative that says BB threw Sweeney under the bus. My recollection is BB denied he mentioned Sweeney at all.
They definitely are not "re-thinking whether to sign BB. And replace him with... Sweeney? Christ, I'd rather watch Fresno.

by allfrank on Jan 19, 2007 8:05 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

What? No one's going to start a chunky vs. creamy peanut butter argument?!

Biggest mankinder in the history of no brain.

by Goofus on Jan 19, 2007 4:49 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Chunky all the way, man.

LicenseToPills: barry bonds says words, they have nothing to do with his thoughts, they are just subjects and predicates in his mental kingdom

by Natto on Jan 19, 2007 4:54 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Hell no, creamy or nothing!

by Skaldheim on Jan 19, 2007 5:22 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

And to think I used to respect your opinions!

Peanut butter should be crunchy, just like my orange juice should have pulp in it.

by Snof on Jan 19, 2007 6:41 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Amen to that, brother!

LicenseToPills: barry bonds says words, they have nothing to do with his thoughts, they are just subjects and predicates in his mental kingdom

by Natto on Jan 19, 2007 8:28 PM PST up reply actions

NO PULP!!!

Creamy too.

Here's to a good 2007. Or 2008. Or 2009. Or 2010. Or...

by WalrusMan on Jan 19, 2007 10:01 PM PST up reply actions

Re: NO PULP!!!

Dude, Pulp is the orange juice! And peanut butter just tastes funny without chunks. No texture, and somehow just not as wonderfully peanutty.

I go Superchunky, by the way.

Coming to you by proxy

by howtheyscored on Jan 20, 2007 10:56 AM PST up reply actions

Pulp is unnatural

Chunky is way better.

I've grown up a lot since before dinner, when we last talked.

by groug on Jan 19, 2007 10:34 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

The peanut butter hierarchy is as follows:

CRUNCHY
CHUNKY
...
...
...
...
...
creamy

Peanut butter must have peanuts in it. Them's the facts. Without peanuts, it's peanut-flavored spread. If that's what you prefer, then may Goddess have mercy on your soul.

David
SPORTSZILLA - kickass sports writing

by David A. Arnott on Jan 20, 2007 2:48 AM PST up reply actions

Tastes Great!

We'd be pretty good if we didn't suck so bad.

by nostocksjustbonds on Jan 20, 2007 11:42 AM PST up reply actions

Sweeney defends Bonds

Sweeney says that he does not believe Barry had anything to do with linking him and Barry's reported failed drug test. Sweeney believes the link came either from an agenda driven unnamed source or an agenda driven media with in either case no factual basis.

http://www.nbc11.com/news/10796895/detail.html

by giantsrainman on Jan 19, 2007 5:25 PM PST reply actions

Re: Sweeney defends Bonds

Thanks for the link. I wish his statement was as clear-cut as you say, but it's murkier. He says things like "There was a miscommunication last summer and we dealt with it then... it was over and done with then as far as we're concerned." What the Hell does that mean?

by achiappanza on Jan 20, 2007 5:43 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

All this on the assumption that peanut butter is in the house or that Barry B. doesn't break down. I expect the latter, and as much as he WAS the premier player for the past _ years, he is going to bring this already overmatched team to its collective knees. Sweeney looks awful with tread marks across his face. Who's next? Time to rebuild, and that may mean we have to trade a young pitcher to get an Alex Rios. . .maybe more. Time to suck it up.

wCovington

by wcovington on Jan 19, 2007 5:42 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Sailor one: "I heard they may have seen an iceberg hereabouts a couple of weeks back."
wcovington: "Man the lifeboats."

by allfrank on Jan 19, 2007 8:12 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Oh, by the way, crunchy!

wCovington

by wcovington on Jan 19, 2007 5:44 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I'm surprised nobody has brought up the issue of money. If the Giants pass on Bonds, they will save $16 million. Great. How will they spend it.

Hmmm...there aren't any free agents left to spend it on.

Are they going to reduce ticket prices? Right. Add it to next year's budget? No.

I'm paying freakin' $61 a seat for a nice close look at the proceedings, and if they ain't bringing back Bonds, Peter McGowan and his homeys can go screw themselves. I want out.

Just one time before I die

by Katman on Jan 19, 2007 5:52 PM PST reply actions

Trade the pack of 'em

I keep thinking (wishing, really) that Sabean is going to package Pete Happy, Ray-Ray and Lowrey to one of the teams that desperately need pitching and a second baseman (I don't care what they do with Pedro), and in return, we'll get a solid power-htting outfielder, and when Barry isn't signed, Todd will fulfull his promise, Frandsen will blossom, and we'll be rid of the guy that got Larry Kruger fired. Rebuild, it's a future thing.

wCovington

by wcovington on Jan 19, 2007 6:20 PM PST reply actions

Re: Trade the pack of 'em

Signed free agents can't be traded until July. And when Ray Durham and Pedro Feliz WERE free agents, it looked to me like the only teams that had interest in them were the Giants. So basically what you're saying is that teams who didn't want them when they could have had them for nothing will now want to trade something to get them?? Not likely, even if you throw in Noah, and by July, Noah will either prove himself to be a player the Giants don't want to trade, or a player who has little to no trade value.

by rxmeister on Jan 20, 2007 8:42 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Trade the pack of 'em

That's why I said "wishing" ... nothing like this is GOING to happen.

wCovington

by wcovington on Jan 25, 2007 3:08 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

My own thinking is that the Giants management is being leaned on by the rest of the league. MLB wants to blame steroids on Barry Bonds and a few other players no longer in the game. The last thing they want is Barry breaking Aaron's record. So, someone leaks Barry's test results and tells the Giants it would be best for all concerned if Barry didn't play anymore. Sure it's collusion, but it's not like they haven't done it before. The fact this is the height of hypocrisy from a group of owners who knowingly benefited from players injecting themselves with PEDs is immaterial to the slime who run the game.

Will the Giants management buckle under the pressure and not sign their best player? My bet is yes, but then I've little love and no respect for any of them.

yob

by Sayhey on Jan 19, 2007 8:16 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I said it before and I'll say it again. If MLB wants Bonds out, Selig should pick up the phone and use his influence to get some team to give us a superstar replacement for nothing. And since every team will tell Selig to take a hike when he requests this, I think we should continue to keep Bonds. How about every other team just dumping IT'S best player just to be fair??

by rxmeister on Jan 20, 2007 8:45 AM PST up reply actions

"NEVER HAPPENED"-.Mark Sweeney

What bus? There was no stinking bus. Not even a van.

Now I don't recall reading any of this in mainstream. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it sure has not been bandied about much. Its not in every ticker tape on every cable channel like the disputed allegations were, thats for sure. Nor is it being breathlessly reported on ESPN. If anything can be gleaned from what I've come across it is being dismissed and marginalized. For what purpose, you can infer for yourself.

Rich Draper (MLB.com) interviewed Mark Sweeny: Here is the crux of the interview.

"Basically it's something that never happened," he said. "My name somehow got linked to it and it wasn't through Barry. I don't blame Barry for this and I don't know where it came from."

Bonds released a statement last week declaring Sweeney "did not give me anything whatsoever and has nothing to do with this matter, contrary to recent reports," and Sweeney said the matter is resolved.

The two Giants had a good relationship in 2006, with Sweeney ever the effervescent comrade long noted for being a friendly force, eager to help any way he could on the field or in the clubhouse.

The pair clicked right away, and it was Sweeney and catcher Todd Greene who bought champagne and engraved flutes to celebrate Bonds smashing career homer 715 last year. Sweeney was also instrumental in getting Bonds involved in last spring's "Giants Idol" competition, with Barry dressing up as judge Paula Abdul.

And there are certainly no hard feelings now, said Sweeney."

"NEVER HAPPENED".
"I DON'T BLAME BARRY FOR THIS."
"I DON'T KNOW WHERE THIS CAME FROM."

At some point, these media idiots are going to realize that there is a direct correlation between declining credibility and declining circulation?

That eventually it will make writers like Bruce Jenkins, Gwen Knapp and Ray Ratto irrelevant. Even when they have credible facts or knowledge to report. Because they have let their anger and envy dictate how they go about making their living.

Long after Bonds is gone, their credibilty and relevance will still be sullied.

Save The Pitcher. Save The World

by E Ticket on Jan 20, 2007 10:41 AM PST reply actions

Re: "NEVER HAPPENED"-.Mark Sweeney

Well, exactly what is wrong with the Chron and the other major news outlets relying on that paragon of virtuous, credibly sourced, newsreporting, the NY Daily News?
And, really, why is it expected that journalists, who do this for a living, whose credibility, one would think, is critical, cannot rely on an unnamed source?
Why would they even have to be expected to, say, ask Sweeney, or Bonds?

by allfrank on Jan 20, 2007 4:35 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

Boy, go on vacation for a few days and people get their panties in a bunch. I chalk all of this too people needing a baseball fix. This hot stove crisis is creating a lot of agita for the Giants fan. How long 'til pitchers and catchers report and I can start worrying about first base and the bullpen?

by out machine on Jan 20, 2007 1:16 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds Thread

I've been worrying about first base since 1994.

We'd be pretty good if we didn't suck so bad.

by nostocksjustbonds on Jan 20, 2007 3:01 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds/ Giants Thread

It makes one wonder why some of these stories about the Giants are coming out of New York; Zito's father supposedly called the Yankees and was said to be offering his son's services for 17 million a year. When hearing from the father, he said it never happened. NY Daily News reports that Barry failed a drug test (no other player named although there were plenty who failed) and blames a fellow player. Barry said he never said that or blamed anyone. NY Times reports the Giants are rethinking of resigning Barry. No comment from the Ball club, which is not unusual because they rarely comment while negotiations are still on going.

What gives New York? Is the reason Steinbrenner has taken a low profile and Cashman is running the team, so no juicy tidbits from the Boss? Or is it that Barry past the Babe and you folks resent it?

He may not be the fuzziest and warmest interview that you want him to be, or the nicest person, but he is without a doubt one of the best to ever play the game.

by Buzzword on Jan 20, 2007 3:35 PM PST reply actions

Re: Open Bonds/ Giants Thread

The headquarters for MLB is in New York.

yob

by Sayhey on Jan 20, 2007 6:02 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds/ Giants Thread

it's not paranoia if they really are out to get Bonds.

We'd be pretty good if we didn't suck so bad.

by nostocksjustbonds on Jan 21, 2007 10:55 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds/ Giants Thread

Nope. Selig wants him gone. Now how many think a Giant player or employee picked up a phone and called the New York Daily News because of some story they heard around the clubhouse? The Chronicle, maybe, but the Daily News smells of the Commissioner's office.

yob

by Sayhey on Jan 21, 2007 2:57 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds/ Giants Thread

exactly. someone doesn't want an awkward photo-op moment and a PR problem with the anti-Bonds sycophant media.

We'd be pretty good if we didn't suck so bad.

by nostocksjustbonds on Jan 22, 2007 3:02 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Open Bonds/ Giants Thread

I live in New York and read the papers daily, and the head of the "Get Bonds" crew here is midget Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News. His hypocracy is amazing, too. On Sunday, after he did his daily hack job on Barry, he took his next few paragraphs to comment on what a great man Jason Kidd is. That's the name Jason Kidd who punched his wife full in the face after she told him to stop eating their son's french fries. In Lupica's world, hitting your wife is not as bad as a player using performance enhancing drugs. Then again, they don't seem to have a problem when a Mets player like Guillermo Mota uses steroids, only when it's Bonds. I might add that it's far worse when a pitcher uses steroids than a hitter. This was proven a few years ago when Mota threw a 100mph fastball at Mike Piazza's head in a spring training game. The worst thing that Barry Bonds has ever done because of possible steroid use is hit a ball further.

by rxmeister on Jan 22, 2007 7:36 AM PST up reply actions