Thursday, April 24, 2008

Why not Bonds?

.276/.480/.565/170 OPS+
Would you want a guy putting up those numbers? DM doesn't. Now you can give me several reasons on why it would be a bad idea signing Barry Bonds but those numbers trump all of them.

“We’re always examining opportunities, but right now, we’re committed to the players we have. We feel we need to find out what we have not only for this year but for the future.” DM

Oh so now we suddenly care about finding out what we have in players? Didn't really want to see what Justin Huber could do with 500 at bats but can't part with Ross Gload or TPJ.

“We knew there would be times this year when we would struggle offensively,” Moore said. “We knew that before spring training. It’s going to be like that until some of our younger players become consistent performers.”

And yet you still broke camp with Gload as your starting first baseman. He of the mighty .309 SLG pct. He has 1 extra base hit and 4 RBI's in 55 at bats. For those keeping track at home Justin Huber has 2 extra base hits (including a home run off Randy Johnson) and 3 RBI's in 15 at bats. I'm just saying........

I don't buy the PED argument because it didn't stop them from signing Guillen. The legal issues may be legitimate but they won't affect his status this season. Clubhouse cancer? Just because he didn't get along with Jeff Kent? Not buying it.

I suppose you could point at the Giants offensive numbers from last season when their .322 OBP was 14th in the league and their .387 SLG pct was 16th. But that was more of a reflection of the players around Bonds, Randy Winn was the only other player with 200+ PA's that had a .350+ OBP. Right now KC has seven players at .350+, thats counting DDJ and Callaspo in limited playing time. The Giants this year? How about a .298 OBP and a .362 SLG pct.

I think the biggest obstacle to signing Bonds is that they have already decided Billy Butler is a full time DH. I don't think thats a very valid reason since he is just 22 years old and has looked decent in the few games they have let him play first base.

Bonds at DH and batting third would make the lineup better and they may even score more than six runs a few times and that would be a good thing regardless of what DM says.


  1. I'm with you on most of this. But, if the always-optimistic Royals have already given up on Butler at first, so must we.

    It only makes the Royals look worse for having their best prospect be a high-average, no-power DH. If they could, in any way, spin that he can also play defense, they would.

  2. Nice blog

    Hey don't forget to go here: