PDA

View Full Version : In a better world, Griffey has 700. Article



jcmac3
07-04-2007, 12:30 AM
Not exactly new material, but a nice Article in the Charleston, WV Gazette.


July 02, 2007
In a better world, Griffey has 700


By Doug Smock
Staff writer

BARRY BONDS has hit the 750 mark in career home runs, the second man to do so. He sits five behind Henry Aaron.

Whether you like him (and I donít, even if you remove the entire steroid issue), itís time to start paying attention. Hey, the man starts a three-game series Tuesday at Cincinnatiís Great American Ball Park, where no lead or home-run record is safe.

I mean, the Redsí stable of incendiary arms could easily send Hammeriní Hank to second place in two games (expect olí Barry to sit out the day game Wednesday), assuming the pitchers throw it over the plate.

And I hear you out there ó thereís no way Barry ties or breaks the record on the road, right?

Well, yes, itís an excellent theory. Only the folks in íFrisco love him, and they do want to see him cream a fastball clear into McCovey Cove for No. 755 and 756, right? But remember this: Much like itís tough to turn down a plate of spaghetti and meatballs, itís very hard for a home run hitter not to salivate over Reds pitching.

But thatís not really my point. This is: Had fate, in the form of injuries, been kinder to one Ken Griffey Jr., this three-game set could take on enormous historical significance.

What if both Bonds and Griffey were in the 700 club, at the least? With Griffey hitting his 585th Sunday, you know it could have happened.

Griffeyís last four years in Seattle, he played full seasons, more or less. He belted 209 home runs in 618 games from 1996-99, easily outpacing the 153 homers by Bonds. (Bonds did play just 102 games in 1999.) Add the 2000 season in Cincinnati, and Griffey smacked 249 homers in 753 games in a five-year span.

2000 was about the time Bonds turned up the juice, er, home run pace. He cranked out 49, 73, 46, 45 and 45 homers from 2000 through 2004, a Ruthian total of 258.

But those came in full seasons, with any games missed mostly by design. By 2004, you could pretty much bank on Barry sitting out a day game after a night game.

But Griffey was sitting out a whole bunch of games, against his will. In 2001, it was a torn hamstring. In 2002, he injured the patella tendon in his knee

while changing directions during a rundown. In 2003, he dislocated his shoulder while making a diving catch, and later tore a tendon in his ankle. In 2004, another hamstring tear.

(Pardon me, but what would the odds be on Bonds suffering all those injuries? Just asking.)

All told, Griffey played 492 of a potential 810 games from 2000-04. That ratio shrinks dramatically, from 347 of a possible 648 games from 2001-04. And shoot, he played just 128 games in 2005 and 109 in 2006.

So letís take Griffeyís pace of once per 2.96 games in his last four years in Seattle and apply it to all the games he missed in Cincinnati, up to 155 played per season, and you get about 120 extra homers.

That would put Junior at 705, which would be just fine by me. Let Bonds break the record and retire, and then we could watch Griffey, who is just 37 currently, chase him down.

A better ballplayer and a better human being, Griffey would be most deserving, donít you think?



Bonds hasnít been belting homers so quickly these days, as we know. After Sundayís game, he has hit all of four over his last 29 games.

If he picks up the pace just a little, here is a juicy possibility: What if he entered a three-game series July 20 on the brink of the record? That little get-together commences at Milwaukeeís Miller Park.

Would commissioner Bud Selig, who has vowed not to see Bondsí record-breaking dinger in person, boycott in his old backyard? Hmmmm ...



When Bonds finally does break the record, there is hope for it to be broken. Commence rooting for:

Alex Rodriguez, even if he is a Yankee. He has 492, and heíll turn just 32 this month.
Albert Pujols, who has hit at least 34 every season since his 2001 debut. He has 266, and he is 27.
Ryan Howard, who reached his 100th career homer in just 325 games, fastest ever.

Goten
07-04-2007, 12:41 AM
Griffey was never the better ballplayer.

nate
07-04-2007, 07:09 AM
Griffey was never the better ballplayer.

Griffey was the better ballplayer.

Chi-Town Red
07-04-2007, 07:44 AM
Griffey was never the better ballplayer.if you had a chance to see Griffey play everyday like i did in the 90's, you never would have said that

JLB5
07-04-2007, 09:54 AM
If Griffey can somehow hold all the screws and tape together, finish out this year at a solid pace, and put up 3 more similar seasons, there will be debates if he was the greatest of all time. He would be bearing down on, if not surpasing 700 HR, 3000 hits, and 2000 RBI. He would need about 150 hits, 35 HR, and 100 RBI per year to reach those marks.

durl
07-05-2007, 09:14 AM
Griffey: member of the All-Century Team.

Bonds: nope.

fielder's choice
07-05-2007, 09:30 AM
Griffey was never the better ballplayer.

:laugh:

Caveman Techie
07-05-2007, 09:51 AM
Griffey was never the better ballplayer.

I honestly think this is the most silly thing I have ever read.

nate
07-05-2007, 10:27 AM
BTW, that isn't to say Bonds isn't a great ballplayer. He's one of the greatest hitters ever. Whether you want to get into the whole steroids thing is another story but what he's done on the field speaks for itself.

But Jr. was probably the greatest player of the 90s.

Of course, if one was born in 2000, I can maybe understand why they'd say this.

Or if you're Barry Bonds' mom.

DTCromer
07-05-2007, 11:43 AM
Bonds was/is a better hitter. . . Griffey was a better overall player.

fielder's choice
07-05-2007, 11:45 AM
Bonds was/is a better hitter. . . Griffey was a better overall player.

How many times did Bonds hit 50 HR's before steroids? Griffey was BY FAR the more dangerous hitter before Bonds started cheating.

DTCromer
07-05-2007, 11:47 AM
How many times did Bonds hit 50 HR's before steroids? Griffey was BY FAR the more dangerous hitter before Bonds started cheating.

Look at the numbers. He's a better hitter.

nate
07-05-2007, 12:41 PM
Look at the numbers. He's a better hitter.

Since you're making the argument, why don't you share the numbers you think make your point?

Goten
07-06-2007, 05:12 AM
Bonds was the better player, even before 2000. He was the better offensive player, hit for about the same power ( when taking into account the difference in home parks and atbats), was the better basestealer, and fielded better, though Griffey played at a more demanding position.

Just because Griffey had his face on the cover of videogames doesn't make him a better player.

The all century team? Ha!, I guess you believe Mark Mcgwire is better than Jimmie Foxx.

Gizmo
07-06-2007, 08:09 AM
Since you're making the argument, why don't you share the numbers you think make your point?

well, i was bored so i'll provide some numbers, looking at the shared 1989-2006 span:

Bonds:

Year Age Team Gms Hits HR RBI SB AVG OBP SLG
1989 24 PIT NL 159 144 19 58 32 0.248 0.351 0.426
1990 25 PIT NL 151 156 33 114 52 0.301 0.406 0.565
1991 26 PIT NL 153 149 25 116 43 0.292 0.410 0.514
1992 27 PIT NL 140 147 34 103 39 0.311 0.456 0.624
1993 28 SFG NL 159 181 46 123 29 0.336 0.458 0.677
1994 29 SFG NL 112 122 37 81 29 0.312 0.426 0.647
1995 30 SFG NL 144 149 33 104 31 0.294 0.431 0.577
1996 31 SFG NL 158 159 42 129 40 0.308 0.461 0.615
1997 32 SFG NL 159 155 40 101 37 0.291 0.446 0.585
1998 33 SFG NL 156 167 37 122 28 0.303 0.438 0.609
1999 34 SFG NL 102 93 34 83 15 0.262 0.389 0.617
2000 35 SFG NL 143 147 49 106 11 0.306 0.440 0.688
2001 36 SFG NL 153 156 73 137 13 0.328 0.515 0.863
2002 37 SFG NL 143 149 46 110 9 0.370 0.582 0.799
2003 38 SFG NL 130 133 45 90 7 0.341 0.529 0.749
2004 39 SFG NL 147 135 45 101 6 0.362 0.609 0.812
2005 40 SFG NL 14 12 5 10 0 0.286 0.404 0.667
2006 41 SFG NL 130 99 26 77 3 0.270 0.454 0.545

Griffey:

Year Age Team Gms Hits HR RBI SB AVG OBP SLG
1989 19 SEA AL 127 120 16 61 16 0.264 0.329 0.420
1990 20 SEA AL 155 179 22 80 16 0.300 0.366 0.481
1991 21 SEA AL 154 179 22 100 18 0.327 0.399 0.527
1992 22 SEA AL 142 174 27 103 10 0.308 0.361 0.535
1993 23 SEA AL 156 180 45 109 17 0.309 0.408 0.617
1994 24 SEA AL 111 140 40 90 11 0.323 0.402 0.674
1995 25 SEA AL 72 67 17 42 4 0.258 0.379 0.481
1996 26 SEA AL 140 165 49 140 16 0.303 0.392 0.628
1997 27 SEA AL 157 185 56 147 15 0.304 0.382 0.646
1998 28 SEA AL 161 180 56 146 20 0.284 0.365 0.611
1999 29 SEA AL 160 173 48 134 24 0.285 0.384 0.576
2000 30 CIN NL 145 141 40 118 6 0.271 0.387 0.556
2001 31 CIN NL 111 104 22 65 2 0.286 0.365 0.533
2002 32 CIN NL 70 52 8 23 1 0.264 0.358 0.426
2003 33 CIN NL 53 41 13 26 1 0.247 0.370 0.566
2004 34 CIN NL 83 76 20 60 1 0.253 0.351 0.513
2005 35 CIN NL 128 148 35 92 0 0.301 0.369 0.576
2006 36 CIN NL 109 108 27 72 0 0.252 0.316 0.486


In that span:
Bonds 2453 games, 2453 hits, 669 HRs, 1765 RBI, 424 SB, and roughly .307 BA, .456 OBP, and .643 Slug
Griffey 2234 games, 2412 hits, 563 HR, 1608 RBI, 178 SB, .286 avg, .371 OBP, .547 Slug

so averagewise, Bonds hit better, but in 220 fewer games Griffey only had 40 less hits and 100 less HR, 150 less RBI.

So i decided to equalize them by taking griffey's average numbers and expanding them to meet Bonds:

Bonds average season during span: 136 gms, 136 hits, 37 HR, 98 RBI, 24 SB
Griffey average season during span: 124 gms, 134 hits, 31 HR, 89 RBI, 10 SB
Griffey expanded average to 136 games a season:136 gms, 147 hits, 34 HR, 98 RBI, 11 SB

thus during the same span a Griffey as healthy on average as bonds would have put up roughly the same numbers, minus 3 HRs and only half as many SB, but made up for with the 13 more hits. Obviously walks would also be Bonds heavy, though if Griffey had been putting up the same numbers maybe those would become negligible too as he becomes pitched around.

One final set of numbers to look at... taking the expanded average season for Griffey and setting them to the 18 season span, here's how they compare to Bonds during that same stretch:

Bonds total: 2453 gm, 2453 hit, 669 HR, 1765 RBI, 424 SB
Griffey adjusted: 2450 gm, 2645 hit, 617 HR, 1763 RBI, 195 SB




wow that was a nice waste of time, but does provide some numbers for who the "better hitter" was.

jcmac3
07-06-2007, 09:36 AM
lol the article makes a good arguement as far as numbers are concerned. I would take into accoutn 89' till 99'. We all know after that Bonds juiced up and Griffey got hurt, so Im willing to look at the decade from 89'-99'

Griffey’s last four years in Seattle, he played full seasons, more or less. He belted 209 home runs in 618 games from 1996-99, easily outpacing the 153 homers by Bonds. (Bonds did play just 102 games in 1999.) Add the 2000 season in Cincinnati, and Griffey smacked 249 homers in 753 games in a five-year span.

fielder's choice
07-06-2007, 09:40 AM
Just because Griffey had his face on the cover of videogames doesn't make him a better player.


Really? Maybe he was better because he consistently had better years before Bonds got on roids smart guy.

nate
07-06-2007, 10:01 AM
well, i was bored so i'll provide some numbers, looking at the shared 1989-2006 span:

Right, overall, Bonds might be better. I was arguing that I felt Jr. was the better player during the 90's.

Griffey had more hits, HR and RBIs during the 90s. Bonds slugged and get on base more. The average is the pretty much the same (interesting to me!) Bonds did win 3 MVPs to Jr's 1.

On the other side of the ball, Jr. played a pretty darn good CF vs. Bonds pretty darn good LF. Bonds won 8 GG but Jr. won 10 during that time.

Jr. was an all-star every year in the 90's where Bonds missed 2 years.

Looking at the numbers a bit closer, I'd have to say its more a wash than I thought. Oddly enough, according to baseball-reference.com, Jr's 4th closest comp at age 36 is...Barry Bonds!

Gotta figure out how to post a readable table and I'll "show my work"!

Gizmo
07-06-2007, 02:30 PM
Right, overall, Bonds might be better. I was arguing that I felt Jr. was the better player during the 90's.

Griffey had more hits, HR and RBIs during the 90s. Bonds slugged and get on base more. The average is the pretty much the same (interesting to me!) Bonds did win 3 MVPs to Jr's 1.

On the other side of the ball, Jr. played a pretty darn good CF vs. Bonds pretty darn good LF. Bonds won 8 GG but Jr. won 10 during that time.

Jr. was an all-star every year in the 90's where Bonds missed 2 years.

Looking at the numbers a bit closer, I'd have to say its more a wash than I thought. Oddly enough, according to baseball-reference.com, Jr's 4th closest comp at age 36 is...Barry Bonds!

Gotta figure out how to post a readable table and I'll "show my work"!


I didn't look into the numbers to argue for Bonds, but actually to help disprove or at least look deeper into the "Bonds is the better hitter" comment. I'm a huge Griffey fan and Bond basher, and was actually hoping that Griffey would come out better, but for the most part the numbers show a wash, making a numbers argument nearly non-existant. Both in their prime were exceptional ball players, for sure.