« Could Jeremy Bonderman Be Available? | Main | 2007 Toronto Blue Jays »

Will Bonds Hot Streak Affect Future?

Since the beginning of August, Barry Bonds has been on a tear.  He's hitting .329/.459/.709 over those 27 games.  The slugging ranks 4th among Major Leaguers, behind Travis Hafner, Ryan Howard, and Adam LaRoche

Overall, Bonds's 1.001 OPS this season ranks 11th in baseball, right behind Miguel Cabrera.  Any reports of his demise were greatly exaggerated.  Bonds has appeared in 112 games this season, or about 81% of the Giants' contests.  The 130 game pace beats preseason expectations.  He also sports the game's best OBP at .462.  The OBP leaderboard is littered with similarly slow-footed sluggers, so we shouldn't hold that against him too much.  The one true flaw in the 42 year-old's game is his left field defense.   

Aside from Ryan Howard, Bonds has been the game's hottest hitter over the last week.  It's sparked more debate about his future.  Bonds says he'd like to stay, but it's unclear whether the Giants want him back to pursue Hank Aaron's record.  A lot of folks are dismissing the once-popular destination of Oakland because of Frank Thomas's resurgence.  But if Thomas sticks to his desire for a two-year deal, the A's seem likely to let him walk.  If they can secure Bonds as their DH for less than $10MM it could be a steal.

The Yankees are an intriguing option if they choose to let Gary Sheffield go and use Giambi or Bonds at first base.  Same goes for the Red Sox, who could stick David Ortiz at first and create the most dangerous trio in baseball.  Bonds could also fit with the Tigers, Mariners, or Rangers in '07.  The Dodgers could be a long shot; they could use Bonds at first base for a year if Nomar Garciaparra departs.



TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Will Bonds Hot Streak Affect Future?:


Bonds said a while ago that Boston was a "racist city" and he'd never play there (this was a few years after he offered a slight discount to Dan Duquette to play for the Sox). I'd put my money on him going to the Angels.

Interesting that the Giants wouldn't want him back for one more year. He brings bad publicity, but it's still publicity. Breaking, arguably the most popular record in sports, regardless of the steroid cloud, would bring in a ton of revenue for whatever team Barry Bonds plays for next season.

Boston fans, having nothing to do with racisim, would never allow Bonds to step on to the field. There is an integrity to the game in Boston that would trump any benefits from having a juicer on the team.

Bonds to Boston makes no sence for them anyway! Ortiz doesnt have the Knees or the defensive skills(Thats the mistake Minnesota did keeping out there on the rug) Ortiz would fall apart and Bonds could never last with the media which is Boston or New York! Period

Bonds has said repeatedly that he will never play first base.

Integrity in Boston? Don't mean to start anything, but Boston is a big homer town masquerading as a sports town.

You know, I keep waffling between thinking Bonds is a good idea or a bad one for the A's.

But if Thomas wants a multi year deal, and he could be expensive, I could see the A's taking the draft pick and picking up Bondso.

Keep in mind that the week in which Bonds was such a hot hitter included two games against the Cubs and their rookie pitchers (except for Zambrano pitching less than 2 innings of one game), in which Bonds went 1-3 with a HR and a walk in each game.

He may be hot, but not against a superior opponent, that's for sure.

To be fair, the Zambrano game was against the Pirates.

Even before he got hot, Bonds and his near 1.000 OPS was one of the top hitters in baseball.

From a purely baseball standpoint (i.e. moral issues aside), he'd fit in nearly every AL team as their DH. You don't look for a team that fits for Bonds - you sign him, then make the other pieces fit around him.

In fact, I think the only teams where he wouldn't fit are the White Sox, Indians, Red Sox, and As (if they resign Thomas).

Roto,taking cracks at Boston as a sports town is like taking cracks at the Stones as a rock band. As for integrity, Boston has a rather impressive recent history of dumping players who beat their wives, crash their cars while drunk, or otherwise disrespect the team, the city and the game they play. Boston is not alone in this integrity, but sadly many teams and many, many fan bases, do not care if their players perform the above mentioned actions. Boston fans do. And as other posters have agreed, the fans and the media would eat Bonds alive.

Off the top of my head, didn't the Red Sox try to trade for Julio Lugo this year? Did Carl Everett disrespect the team? Derek Lowe, didn't he cheat on his wife? Is Shea Hillenbrand a good guy? What about admitted steroid user Jeremy Giambi.

Must we continue this? Carl was hated and is gone. Lowe is gone, Hillenbrand is gone, Giambi is gone. The only one on that list the fans got behind is Lowe and I am not sure alleged infidelity and "good guy" criteria are what we are talking about. Even as far back as '97 Wil Cordero, after hitting his wife, was taken out of the lineup and suspended from the team for 8 games. He was gone after that year as well. If you must trash Boston feel free, but I think the point has been made. Bonds and Boston would not mix. Now, the Phillies could have him. He and Myers would be good together.

I just don't agree that Boston has a history of integrity in player acquisition. If so, many of the above named players would never have been acquired in the first place.

Oh please Roto, if we go down this road then no team has a history of integrity.

You might as well go off on The Cardnials, for signing Ponson the drunk (Yankees too). Dodgers for signing Furcal and Lowe (both drunks). Braves for wanting to retain Furcal. Every team that Everett played for. Every team Wells has played for. Etc... I could go on forever.

What you're forgetting is this: Baseball has a long history of cheaters and jerks. You want integrity, hire a bunch of alter boys to play.

Now that's accurate. No team has a history of integrity in all player decisions. I agree with that one. Not the Red Sox, not the Cards.

I'm not forgetting baseball's history at all. I am pointing it out to show that no team has proven to be above Barry Bonds.

I believe that's the point I was trying to make, Roto, and I'm glad you agree. I know most red sox fans are instantly branded as fanatics, and maybe I am... but still if we're gonna start admonishing individual teams for their past descisions we might as well start going off on everyone.

"He may be hot, but not against a superior opponent, that's for sure"

Please! He has been hot since mid-August. He went 5 for 9 with a HR and 3 walks against Arizona, which was in 2nd place, 3 games ahead of the Giants. He then hit 4 for 10 with 2 walks against Cincinnati, who was leading the wild card at that time. Then went 5 for 7 against Atlanta with 2 HR (against Tim Hudson, who some consider a superior opponent) and 3 walks, and they are one of the teams the Giants are competing against in the scramble for the wild card. Sure, Chicago put up two youngsters but he can't help who he bats against. And while he went only 1 for 7 against Cincy, his 1 was a key 2-run HR and he did get 2 walks.

I guess one could quibble about who exactly he faced against Cincy, Atlanta, and Arizona, but they were all either above the Giants in the standings or close enough to be competitors for the wild card, and he's been hitting great against them when the Giants needed him to. Or let's put it this way: he was facing the same teams and types of pitchers earlier this season and wasn't killing them then, but now he is at least doing that much.

Post a comment

This weblog only allows comments from registered users. To comment, please Sign In.