- The Giants agreed to terms with Andres Torres on a deal worth around $2.1MM
- Barry Bonds' trial hearing is set for Friday.
- Jim Caple of ESPN.com ranked all 30 MLB logos. He grew up a Giants fan, but he certainly didn't let his bias get in the way here.
- 24 Days of Magic has posted their interview with Eric Surkamp.
- Tim Lincecum was named by GQ as one of the 25 coolest athletes of all time.
- Sad news here...Mychael Urban will not be continuing his pre/post weekend radio shows with KNBR. There is good news, though, in that he could be bringing his shows to CSNBayArea.com.
Showing posts with label Barry Bonds. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barry Bonds. Show all posts
Friday, January 21, 2011
Notes: Eric Surkamp Interview, Barry Bonds, Andres Torres
Sunday, January 16, 2011
The San Francisco Giants and Home Runs
As a baseball blogger, I read dozens of baseball articles each day. I'm fascinated and influenced by the myriads of brilliant pieces out there. A while ago, I ran into this post on Athletics Nation, examining the A's home runs using Hit Tracker Online. I've been meaning to look at the Giants' home runs for quite some time, but I would be remiss if I didn't first acknowledge the Athletics Nation post that influenced this. Anyway, here goes...
I love Hit Tracker Online. It shows the true distances of home runs, the speed off the bat, the date, the ballpark, the pitcher, the hitter, the teams, and a link to the Top Plays Archive, where a video of the home run can be found. To put it simply, it's awesome.
Without further ado, some notes on the Giants 2010 home runs...
I love Hit Tracker Online. It shows the true distances of home runs, the speed off the bat, the date, the ballpark, the pitcher, the hitter, the teams, and a link to the Top Plays Archive, where a video of the home run can be found. To put it simply, it's awesome.
Without further ado, some notes on the Giants 2010 home runs...
- The longest home run of the year...Andres Torres off of Rodrigo Lopez on July 22, 2010, in Arizona. This one had a true distance of 450 ft. I love that Torres has the Giants' longest home run of the year. Not Pat Burrell. Not Pablo Sandoval. Not Aubrey Huff. The speedy guy, whose power nobody seems to trust. Yet, over the past two seasons, in 740 PAs, he's posted an ISO of .223...that's legitimate power. And he swings the heaviest bat on the team. Literally. I also love what Kruk says after this home run..."That's up where Barry Bonds used to hit 'em."
- The second, third, and fourth longest home runs of the year...courtesy of Pablo Sandoval. He may not have had a great season in terms of power, but when he got a hold of 'em, he hit 'em deep. And these were spread throughout the season....One was in April, one came in June, and one came in August.
- Home run with the fastest speed off the bat...Aubrey Huff off of Chris Narveson at Miller Park. 113.4 MPH off the bat.
- Home run with the highest apex...Andres Torres off of Carlos Villanueva at Miller Park. Apex of 134 feet. (Gotta love that four-game sweep at Miller Park...)
- The Giants had two inside-the-parkers...Andres Torres and Aubrey Huff. "That's right Mr. Huff. You hit home runs here, you gotta earn 'em."
- Some other great home runs from 2010, just because...Juan Uribe's HR in World Series Game One. Juan Uribe's HR in NLCS Game Six. Juan Uribe's HR off of Jonathan Broxton. Cody Ross' home runs in NLCS Game One: first and second. Pat Burrell's grand slam (his second HR of that game). Juan Uribe's grand slam (his second HR of that inning). Oh yeah, and I love this Huff home run, for whatever reason. Lastly, of course, Edgar Renteria's HR in World Series Game Five.
- One of my favorite things in baseball is the walkoff home run. I love walkoff home runs. Something about a player being able to end the game with one swing of the bat. Something about the brief period of time in which you can watch the ball sail through the air, awaiting its descent into the stands. Something about the way in which the player who hits the home run pauses for a second to gaze at the beautiful work he's done. I love them. I'm very saddened by the fact that the Giants went the entire season without a walkoff home run....but this one from 2009 was pretty awesome.
Friday, December 31, 2010
Hall of Fame Thoughts
Soon, the 2011 National Baseball Hall of Fame inductees will be announced. At this point, I'm losing respect for it. I'm starting to believe it's just a sanctimonious institution regarded as a baseball heaven in spite of the fact that highly subjective criteria determines induction.
It's comments like these that make me lose respect for it:
In terms of how the steroid issue affects the Hall of Fame, I don't know where I stand. Some take the stance that, no matter how great a player was, if he used steroids, he should not be considered. Others take the opposite stance, believing that steroids were ubiquitous for a certain era in baseball, and that Hall of Fame voters should simply not take steroid use into consideration. I guess I stand somewhere in between. If a player was good enough at baseball that their name should be imprinted in the minds of future generations of baseball fans for decades to come, then they should be in the Hall of Fame, regardless of steroid use. Barry Bonds has earned his spot in the Hall.
I have some more problems with the Hall of Fame as an institution, though. There's a fine line between a Hall of Fame player and a great player, and that line hasn't been clearly drawn. Some people use subjective and meaningless milestones -- like the 500-home-run plateau, or the 3000 hits club. Others' opinions have evolved, as they've realized that they must dig deeper through a player's stats to truly understand how great they were. Power numbers and batting averages need to be taken into context, as the rules of baseball change over the years, and some players' stats are boosted significantly by the quality of the teams they played for -- I'm talking about stats like win-loss records, and RBIs. The problem with this is that over the years, as the baseball world is becoming more sabermetrically-inclined and insightful, their standards for the Hall of Fame are changing. And that's simply not fair, because, under different standards, some players who are in the Hall of Fame wouldn't be there, and some who aren't in the Hall of Fame would be there. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are no set standards, and thus, as people's approach to evaluating baseball players changes, the perceived values of names on the ballots change significantly, and players who would get in one year, would not get in if they were on the ballot in a different year.
Looking at the big picture, though, there are different opinions on whether the Hall of Fame should be a very small, select group of people, or an expansive collection of great, but not legendary, baseball players. It's these subjective matters that irritate me when it comes to the Hall of Fame. I guess I'd just be more comfortable if the line was more well-defined.
Lastly, the Hall of Fame is not true to its alleged moral values. The fifth rule for Hall of Fame election is as follows...
The Hall has drawn moral lines for induction, but has not fully stuck to them. And for this, among the other stated reasons, I cannot fully respect the Hall of Fame as a holy institution of baseball, but rather, one of false morals and many but not all great baseball players -- granted induction into the said institution for completely subjective reasons.
Am I suggesting that the Hall of Fame should be conducted objectively, based on whether a player's statistics meet certain determined values? No, not at all. But there has to be a more distinct line drawn here. And moreover, if there's no evidence that a player took steroids, then they should be voted on as though they had never taken steroids. That should be a no-brainer, but apparently it isn't.
---
The Giants have three former players on this year's ballot -- Kirk Rueter, Benito Santiago, and Marquis Grissom. While they've all had good careers, none of them will get inducted (Santiago's steroid allegations will make sure of that, although it is impressive that he managed to put up respectable offensive numbers as a catcher for twenty seasons...not to suggest that he would otherwise merit induction). Rueter's 105 wins as a San Francisco Giant secure his place in franchise history as having the most wins by a southpaw...he was a true Giant, and having been at Kirk Rueter Day, I can speak to how much the San Francisco Giants community of fans and personnel love him; he and Santiago will forever be remembered as crucial members of that great 2002 San Francisco Giants team, and that's certainly something special. Marquis, well, he was part of that great 2003 San Francisco Giants team.
It's comments like these that make me lose respect for it:
No, I didn't vote for Jeff Bagwell for the Hall of Fame. Yes, it's for the reason everybody loves to hate. I don't know for sure that Bagwell took steroids or any other performance-enhancing drugs to help him attain his Hall of Fame-caliber numbers. I don't have evidence, like we do against Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro. But I'm suspicious. And this year, that suspicion was enough to make me send back my ballot without the Bagwell box checked. I'd rather withhold the vote based on suspicion than vote the guy in only to find out later that he cheated and I shouldn't have.Is "innocent until proven guilty" not one of the tenets of our country? I just don't understand how a player could have such a great career and possibly be denied induction because some sportswriter, with no evidence whatsoever, is suspicious that they might have taken performance-enhancing drugs. That's the kind of stupid subjective decision that make me lose respect for the Hall.
In terms of how the steroid issue affects the Hall of Fame, I don't know where I stand. Some take the stance that, no matter how great a player was, if he used steroids, he should not be considered. Others take the opposite stance, believing that steroids were ubiquitous for a certain era in baseball, and that Hall of Fame voters should simply not take steroid use into consideration. I guess I stand somewhere in between. If a player was good enough at baseball that their name should be imprinted in the minds of future generations of baseball fans for decades to come, then they should be in the Hall of Fame, regardless of steroid use. Barry Bonds has earned his spot in the Hall.
I have some more problems with the Hall of Fame as an institution, though. There's a fine line between a Hall of Fame player and a great player, and that line hasn't been clearly drawn. Some people use subjective and meaningless milestones -- like the 500-home-run plateau, or the 3000 hits club. Others' opinions have evolved, as they've realized that they must dig deeper through a player's stats to truly understand how great they were. Power numbers and batting averages need to be taken into context, as the rules of baseball change over the years, and some players' stats are boosted significantly by the quality of the teams they played for -- I'm talking about stats like win-loss records, and RBIs. The problem with this is that over the years, as the baseball world is becoming more sabermetrically-inclined and insightful, their standards for the Hall of Fame are changing. And that's simply not fair, because, under different standards, some players who are in the Hall of Fame wouldn't be there, and some who aren't in the Hall of Fame would be there. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are no set standards, and thus, as people's approach to evaluating baseball players changes, the perceived values of names on the ballots change significantly, and players who would get in one year, would not get in if they were on the ballot in a different year.
Looking at the big picture, though, there are different opinions on whether the Hall of Fame should be a very small, select group of people, or an expansive collection of great, but not legendary, baseball players. It's these subjective matters that irritate me when it comes to the Hall of Fame. I guess I'd just be more comfortable if the line was more well-defined.
Lastly, the Hall of Fame is not true to its alleged moral values. The fifth rule for Hall of Fame election is as follows...
Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.Must I even get into the fact that players who lack integrity, sportsmanship, and character have been granted plaques in the Hall of Fame? Ever heard of a guy by the name of Ty Cobb? Yeah, well, he wasn't the most moral person. If he's in the Hall, the guy who surpassed his all-time hits record also deserves a place in the Hall. And Shoeless Joe Jackson deserves a place in the Hall of Fame. And Eddie Cicotte certainly warrants good consideration.
The Hall has drawn moral lines for induction, but has not fully stuck to them. And for this, among the other stated reasons, I cannot fully respect the Hall of Fame as a holy institution of baseball, but rather, one of false morals and many but not all great baseball players -- granted induction into the said institution for completely subjective reasons.
Am I suggesting that the Hall of Fame should be conducted objectively, based on whether a player's statistics meet certain determined values? No, not at all. But there has to be a more distinct line drawn here. And moreover, if there's no evidence that a player took steroids, then they should be voted on as though they had never taken steroids. That should be a no-brainer, but apparently it isn't.
---
The Giants have three former players on this year's ballot -- Kirk Rueter, Benito Santiago, and Marquis Grissom. While they've all had good careers, none of them will get inducted (Santiago's steroid allegations will make sure of that, although it is impressive that he managed to put up respectable offensive numbers as a catcher for twenty seasons...not to suggest that he would otherwise merit induction). Rueter's 105 wins as a San Francisco Giant secure his place in franchise history as having the most wins by a southpaw...he was a true Giant, and having been at Kirk Rueter Day, I can speak to how much the San Francisco Giants community of fans and personnel love him; he and Santiago will forever be remembered as crucial members of that great 2002 San Francisco Giants team, and that's certainly something special. Marquis, well, he was part of that great 2003 San Francisco Giants team.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Barry Bonds Congratulates Giants
From BarryBonds.com --
Congratulations to the 2010 World Series Champion San Francisco Giants!
There is no city that deserves this championship more and I congratulate Bill Neukom, the entire ownership group, Bochy and most of all the guys on the team that fought hard to bring that trophy home to the city of San Francisco. I also want to congratulate Mike Murphy who has spent over 50 years working tirelessly for the organization. Murph has witnessed so much Giants history and I am thrilled that he finally gets his San Francisco Giants World Series Championship.
I grew up watching my dad and godfather as Giants, lived out my dream playing in the same uniform in front of the best fans in the world and I just witnessed the Giants winning the World Series. I am ecstatic for the team, the city and all the fans - you truly deserve it.
Barry Bonds
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Stat Table: Giants with 3+ Hits in a Postseason Game (since 2002)
| Player | Date | Series | Gm# | Tm | Opp | PA | H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aubrey Huff | 2010-10-20 | NLCS | 4 | SFG | PHI | 5 | 3 |
| Buster Posey | 2010-10-20 | NLCS | 4 | SFG | PHI | 5 | 4 |
| J.T. Snow | 2003-10-04 | NLDS | 4 | SFG | FLA | 4 | 3 |
| Edgardo Alfonzo | 2003-10-03 | NLDS | 3 | SFG | FLA | 6 | 4 |
| J.T. Snow | 2002-10-27 | WS | 7 | SFG | ANA | 4 | 3 |
| Barry Bonds | 2002-10-24 | WS | 5 | SFG | ANA | 5 | 3 |
| Jeff Kent | 2002-10-24 | WS | 5 | SFG | ANA | 6 | 3 |
| Kenny Lofton | 2002-10-24 | WS | 5 | SFG | ANA | 6 | 3 |
| Rich Aurilia | 2002-10-23 | WS | 4 | SFG | ANA | 4 | 3 |
| Kenny Lofton | 2002-10-23 | WS | 4 | SFG | ANA | 4 | 3 |
| Kenny Lofton | 2002-10-14 | NLCS | 5 | SFG | STL | 5 | 3 |
| Benito Santiago | 2002-10-09 | NLCS | 1 | SFG | STL | 5 | 3 |
| Rich Aurilia | 2002-10-06 | NLDS | 4 | SFG | ATL | 5 | 3 |
| Jeff Kent | 2002-10-06 | NLDS | 4 | SFG | ATL | 5 | 3 |
| Benito Santiago | 2002-10-02 | NLDS | 1 | SFG | ATL | 5 | 3 |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)