|
|
| Author |
Message |
verbal
Cole
Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 2569
Location: C-Town
  
Votes: 9
|
 Posted: 27 Jun 2003 01:47 PM Post subject: Re: Home Run #73 Baseball Auction |
 |
|
| chainsmokinmonkey wrote: | | verbal wrote: | | chainsmokinmonkey wrote: | | verbal wrote: | | chainsmokinmonkey wrote: | | elchrist wrote: | NEW YORK - (KRT) - The tug of war over the baseball that Barry Bonds smacked for his record-setting 73rd home run ended Wednesday night when the souvenir was auctioned off in Manhattan for $450,000.
The winning bidder was a familiar face among the monied memorabilia crowd: comic book mogul Todd McFarlane, who in 1999 paid $3.2 million for Mark McGwire's 70th home-run ball.
Barry Bonds ball fetches $450, 000
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/6170995.htm
I'm surprised that Todd McFarlane owns both record breaking home run baseballs, but what's no surprise to me is that the black man's ball is valued less. |
he also owns sammy sosa's 63rd homerun ball. last time i checked, he's black, and that ball sold for more than barry's. i just think that since not too many people like bonds, it hurt the sale. that, and the fact that pac-bell park is one of the smallest ballparks in the majors. it also helps when right field is only 309ft.
http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/sf/ticketing/sf_ticketing_ballpark_guide_list.jsp#field |
Sammy is the most marketable player in today's game. Also, it would be too obvious if Sammy got no love. Plus, playing in Pac-Bell had nothing to do with it. Though I agree that most people do hate Bonds, but the discrepancy if far too much.
This simple do you think that if the roles were reverse do you think Sammy's ball would have command the 3 mil that Mark got. If Sammy hit 70 and Mark 66, do you think the ball would have cleared 1.5 mill. I think not. |
pac-bell park did play a role in his breaking of the record. the majority of his homers were at pac-bell, and the majority of those were to right field. that's why they made it that way, to have a homer fest. |
Your partially right, but most batters are right handed. If you want to see a homer fest you either go to Colorodo or Houston. Have you seen the 'Stros ball park?
The majority at home, well he plays half his games there. He hit 37 homers at Pac-Bell and 36 on the road. You make it sound like there's a great discrepancy, but the man could hit in any ball park. He hit 5 at the Q. He hit 7 in Ball One Ballpark. His slugging % at home was .915 and on the road .817. Insane #'s. 36 on the road.
Let's look at distance at home.
His shortest at home run at Pac-Bell was '320 (2 x's). 1st against the Angels and then Colorado. The 3rd shortest is at '360. Other than that most of his shots were over '400. What advantage are you talking about? He was whoopin' the ball. |
you obviously like to throw numbers out like you're an expert. first of all, show your sources if you plan to give numbers, then i'll shut up. with your numbers, i would say that 37 out of 73 is a majority, right? i'm also saying that he never came this close when they were at candlestick. at least mark mcgwire was consitantly going up in his homerun numbers. there are a lot of factors that go into this. one: could steroids have played any part in this for any of these players? two: the ball is juiced. they did this to turn 1-0 games into the shit we see today like 5-4 games. i'll agree that sometimes we do get lucky and see a 1-0 game, but they are rare in today's game. could barry bonds have takien steroids? maybe. people have speculated that, especially since he went from a skinny fuck one season, then returned the following spring almost twice as big. |
I'm no expert just a fan. Show your sources...what is this a court room? What if I don't my opinion is discredited. ooohhhh. Fuck no. You got google or any search engine, a cable modem, so look it up you lazy ass.
First of, read the damn post. Then think what I said. I hate paraphrasing like bemisnorris stated that I do. I said he hit 37 at home. He plays HALF his games at HOME. Of course he is going to hit the majority of his 73 at HOME. Think.
Then I pointed out that you're argument that B.Bonds hit 73 because he played at a small '307 Pac-Bell was flawed in two ways. Let me repeat. 1. He hit 36 on the road.
2. His two shortest were at '320 and most of them being in the high '300 and low 400's. Most ballparks are not that deep at RCF. Should Barry be blamed for that. No.
Sure saying that only Barry used 'roids but McGuire did not. Nice try.
'97 190 lbs 40 hr
'98 206 37
'99 210 34
'00 220 49
'01 226 73
Twice as much weight. Skinny fuck. What? He added 16 from one year to the next, then 4, then 10, then 6.
He admitted to using creatine and other supplements, but adding 4 pounds aint all that. The most he increased was 16 lbs and he actually dropped 3 hr's. I know a lot of people who have gained more than 16 pounds in one year.
The ball being juiced is valid. I personally think the league does it on purpose, but can you blame the player for hitting the required ball. The Ball maybe juiced, but you still have to hit the damn ball. Barry swings is one of the most efficient swings in the league. He doesn't swing at bad pitches. He walked 198 times last year breaking another record set by Ruth in 1920. He doesn't strike a lot. He had a .328 batting average ('01), and a above .500 OBS. He is the only 500 500 member in the league. Fuck why am I defending this fuck.
Last edited by verbal on 27 Jun 2003 01:56 PM; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
chainsmokinmonkey
Peanut Salesman
Joined: 29 Nov 2002
Posts: 967
Location: unemployment
|
| Posted: 27 Jun 2003 01:55 PM Post subject: Re: Home Run #73 Baseball Auction |
|
|
| verbal wrote: | | chainsmokinmonkey wrote: | | verbal wrote: | | chainsmokinmonkey wrote: | | verbal wrote: | | chainsmokinmonkey wrote: | | elchrist wrote: | NEW YORK - (KRT) - The tug of war over the baseball that Barry Bonds smacked for his record-setting 73rd home run ended Wednesday night when the souvenir was auctioned off in Manhattan for $450,000.
The winning bidder was a familiar face among the monied memorabilia crowd: comic book mogul Todd McFarlane, who in 1999 paid $3.2 million for Mark McGwire's 70th home-run ball.
Barry Bonds ball fetches $450, 000
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/6170995.htm
I'm surprised that Todd McFarlane owns both record breaking home run baseballs, but what's no surprise to me is that the black man's ball is valued less. |
he also owns sammy sosa's 63rd homerun ball. last time i checked, he's black, and that ball sold for more than barry's. i just think that since not too many people like bonds, it hurt the sale. that, and the fact that pac-bell park is one of the smallest ballparks in the majors. it also helps when right field is only 309ft.
http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/sf/ticketing/sf_ticketing_ballpark_guide_list.jsp#field |
Sammy is the most marketable player in today's game. Also, it would be too obvious if Sammy got no love. Plus, playing in Pac-Bell had nothing to do with it. Though I agree that most people do hate Bonds, but the discrepancy if far too much.
This simple do you think that if the roles were reverse do you think Sammy's ball would have command the 3 mil that Mark got. If Sammy hit 70 and Mark 66, do you think the ball would have cleared 1.5 mill. I think not. |
pac-bell park did play a role in his breaking of the record. the majority of his homers were at pac-bell, and the majority of those were to right field. that's why they made it that way, to have a homer fest. |
Your partially right, but most batters are right handed. If you want to see a homer fest you either go to Colorodo or Houston. Have you seen the 'Stros ball park?
The majority at home, well he plays half his games there. He hit 37 homers at Pac-Bell and 36 on the road. You make it sound like there's a great discrepancy, but the man could hit in any ball park. He hit 5 at the Q. He hit 7 in Ball One Ballpark. His slugging % at home was .915 and on the road .817. Insane #'s. 36 on the road.
Let's look at distance at home.
His shortest at home run at Pac-Bell was '320 (2 x's). 1st against the Angels and then Colorado. The 3rd shortest is at '360. Other than that most of his shots were over '400. What advantage are you talking about? He was whoopin' the ball. |
you obviously like to throw numbers out like you're an expert. first of all, show your sources if you plan to give numbers, then i'll shut up. with your numbers, i would say that 37 out of 73 is a majority, right? i'm also saying that he never came this close when they were at candlestick. at least mark mcgwire was consitantly going up in his homerun numbers. there are a lot of factors that go into this. one: could steroids have played any part in this for any of these players? two: the ball is juiced. they did this to turn 1-0 games into the shit we see today like 5-4 games. i'll agree that sometimes we do get lucky and see a 1-0 game, but they are rare in today's game. could barry bonds have takien steroids? maybe. people have speculated that, especially since he went from a skinny fuck one season, then returned the following spring almost twice as big. |
I'm no expert just a fan. Show your sources...what is this a court room? What if I don't my opinion is discredited. ooohhhh. Fuck no. You got google or any search engine, a cable modem, so look it up you lazy ass.
First of, read the damn post. Then think what I said. I hate paraphrasing like bemisnorris stated that I do. I said he hit 37 at home. He plays HALF his games at HOME. Of course he is going to hit the majority of his 73 at HOME. Think.
Then I pointed out that you're argument that B.Bonds hit 73 because he played at a small '307 Pac-Bell was flawed in two ways. Let me repeat. 1. He hit 36 on the road.
2. His two shortest were at '320 and most of them being in the high '300 and low 400's. Most ballparks are not that deep at RCF. Should Barry be blamed for that. No.
Sure saying that only Barry used 'roids but McGuire did not. Nice try. |
i never said mcgwire didn't use steroids. you did right there. maybe it wasn't creatine that he used. maybe he did use steroids. i just think that it's a more likely that bothe bonds and sosa used steroids because they weren't as consistant and mcgwire was. i think something is pretty fishy when a guy no one has heard of like sosa at the time, becomes a powerhouse. bonds was more of a speed and timing batter than anything, all of a sudden he's killing the ball? sure there's nothing fishy about that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
verbal
Cole
Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 2569
Location: C-Town
Votes: 9
|
| Posted: 27 Jun 2003 02:00 PM Post subject: |
|
|
I edited my post from above. More stuff.
Fishy or not, the man still hit those damn balls.
So if both were juiced (McGuire and Bonds) then why did one ball go for a lot more than the other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elchrist
See-thru Afro
Joined: 09 Oct 2002
Posts: 7668
Location: Calecia.com
Votes: 14
|
| Posted: 27 Jun 2003 02:14 PM Post subject: |
|
|
| verbal wrote: | I edited my post from above. More stuff.
Fishy or not, the man still hit those damn balls.
So if both were juiced (McGuire and Bonds) then why did one ball go for a lot more than the other. |
Because the higher bid ball was the same color as the player? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spic-ole
Coffee
Joined: 10 Oct 2002
Posts: 1657
Location: UC Calecia
Votes: 1
|
| Posted: 27 Jun 2003 11:43 PM Post subject: Re: Home Run #73 Baseball Auction |
|
|
| verbal wrote: | | The ball being juiced is valid. I personally think the league does it on purpose, but can you blame the player for hitting the required ball. |
The ball is not juiced, it's simple. You got guys on team's payrolls that do nothing but analyze the way the opposing pitchers pitch. They learn every fastball, curveball, knuckleball, slider, etc. etc.
Then, they train their guys to hit against these pitchers. You didn't have that back in the day.
Pitchers have nothing nowadays. A good pitcher back in the day, was someone who could throw a good, consistant fastball and curveball. Nowadays that means nothing. These guys can't just be good pitchers, they have to be great pitchers, then we can see them as alright pitchers.
Shit man, Roger Clemens would have stucken Babe Ruth out every single at bat, can't do it today though.
The ball ain't juiced, baseball just isn't a sport anymore, it's an industry with a whole lot of guys who do research. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
verbal
Cole
Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 2569
Location: C-Town
Votes: 9
|
| Posted: 30 Jun 2003 09:57 PM Post subject: Re: Home Run #73 Baseball Auction |
|
|
| spic-ole wrote: | | verbal wrote: | | The ball being juiced is valid. I personally think the league does it on purpose, but can you blame the player for hitting the required ball. |
The ball is not juiced, it's simple. You got guys on team's payrolls that do nothing but analyze the way the opposing pitchers pitch. They learn every fastball, curveball, knuckleball, slider, etc. etc.
Then, they train their guys to hit against these pitchers. You didn't have that back in the day.
Pitchers have nothing nowadays. A good pitcher back in the day, was someone who could throw a good, consistant fastball and curveball. Nowadays that means nothing. These guys can't just be good pitchers, they have to be great pitchers, then we can see them as alright pitchers.
Shit man, Roger Clemens would have stucken Babe Ruth out every single at bat, can't do it today though.
The ball ain't juiced, baseball just isn't a sport anymore, it's an industry with a whole lot of guys who do research. |
Great pitching will be out great hitting any time.
I do agree that batters today are better athletes. Plus, they have more scouts and so forth. That was started in the mid 1980's by Tony Gwynn. T was the first man to tell someone in the clubhouse to record every game from every pitcher. Then after the game he would study the deliver, the pitch count, and the tendencies. Now I believe every player has there own lab top with every game from that pitcher.
Mariano Rivera. Won how many rings for the Yankees?
Kurt Shilling and Randy Johnson.
The Braves have won how many pennants in the 90's. Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine... their problem was that they couldn't hit the ball.
The Angles won it last year because their bullpen was awesome. Mainly that one kid some Francisco kid (Cabrera or Gonzalez?).
The Yankees have been solid the last 6 years because they have the best lineup and the best pitchers. Roger, David, Mussina, there set up was awesome, and their closer was money.
Stats are up because after great pitching you have a lot of crap. Too many teams thin out the positions/players. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bemisnorris
Cole
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 2096
Location: Not Here
Votes: 1
|
| Posted: 18 Feb 2004 02:08 PM Post subject: Re: Home Run #73 Baseball Auction |
|
|
| chainsmokinmonkey wrote: | | could barry bonds have takien steroids? |
Very likely.
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Barry Bonds' personal trainer told federal agents he gave steroids to several baseball players, according to documents released Tuesday. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
