Wednesday, April 21, 2004
Locked on Sports: Will Bonds' worth ever be
appreciated?
By DAVID LOCKE
SPECIAL TO THE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Growing up a baseball fan, I would ask my father about Henry Aaron and what it was like when he
passed Babe Ruth. I would ask about Joe DiMaggio and his hitting streak. "Dad, tell me about
Willie Mays and Ted Williams," I would say.
He told me all the stories of the daily countdowns, of a nation engrossed with its heroes and how
they brought a welcome distraction in tumultuous times. I always dreamed that one day I could
experience a moment like that as a fan. Finally, we have one and it is not what I anticipated at all.
Barry Bonds is having one of those historical runs and it doesn't feel special at all. There is no buzz.
The national coverage feels forced.
What is it going to take for us to realize we are watching the greatest player in the history of
baseball? Moreover, what is it going to take for us to enjoy it?
No question the steroid issue is tainting everything.
In addition, Bonds' personality is as desirable as burnt toast and its lingering aroma.
However, the real issue is that the sanctimonious world of baseball is unwilling to have any of its
past heroes threatened. In basketball, you have never heard someone make the argument for George
Mikan. Instead, it is all about Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan and LeBron James.
In baseball, no one can touch Ruth, Aaron, Williams or Mays. But like it or not, someone is, and he
not only is touching them, he is on the verge of shattering them.
Bonds is going to leave little statistical doubt he is the greatest player to ever step on a diamond.
He is the most dominant player in
the history of baseball. He has made
us think of baseball strategy that
was previously absurd.
He has been intentionally walked
with the bases loaded. Some even
thought it was a good move.
In 2001, in a four-game series
against the Astros, he saw 64 pitches
and 51 were balls. On Opening Day
this year, the Astros pitched to
Bonds, leading 4-1 with two men on
and one out in the seventh. He tied
the score 4-4 and the Astros were
criticized for not loading the bases
with an intentional walk.
If you lead 2-1 in the fifth inning,
would you pitch to Bonds? It is a
real debate. Think about how
ridiculous that is. There is a Web site that has every game scenario possible, and when you should
or shouldn't walk Bonds (even I don't like stats that much!). The guy is hitting .243 on home runs
alone this season -- 9 homers in 37 at-bats.
He has won three Most Valuable Player awards, more than Mays, Aaron or Williams. He has eight
Gold Gloves, nearly 500 stolen bases, and led the NL in slugging percentage three times. Plus, he
led the league in on-base percentage four times.
That's something Aaron never did and Mays did only twice.
The most common argument against Bonds' achievements is that he is playing in an era of inflated
numbers. That argument has no legs because Bonds' numbers dramatically distance himself from
anyone else playing the game now.
For those who want to stick the steroids label on him, I would ask if you believe he is the only one in
the game who is juiced. If not, then why is he so much better than anyone else?
His slugging percentage over the past three seasons is .808.
The next closest is Sammy Sosa with .631, not even in the same ballpark.
From 1920-22, Ruth had a span of equal dominance with a slugging percentage 189 points better
than George Sisler, the next closest.
More remarkable is that Bonds' on-base percentage is .542 over the past three seasons -- the greatest
in baseball history.
In comparison to the players of his era, Bond is in a different zone. The next-best over the past three
seasons is Jason Giambi at .441. One hundred points below Bonds is the equivalent of getting on
base one fewer time every 10 at-bats.
Ruth never had a three-year stretch in which his on-base percentage was that much better than the
rest of the league.
Bonds is on his way to sinking other baseball records in McCovey Cove. In 2003, Bonds hit the
most home runs with fewer than 400 at-bats in history.
It is no longer a question. Bonds will catch Ruth this season and Aaron next.
The question is whether he will reach the true slugger of Ruth's era, Josh Gibson, who hit about 800
home runs in the Negro and independent leagues.
The larger question is will we ever embrace and enjoy his historic achievements?
David Locke hosts "Locked on Sports" from 7-10 p.m. weeknights on
Sports Radio 950 KJR-AM. His column appears Wednesdays in the P-I.
You can e-mail him at Davidlocke@clearchannel.com. |
