18 Responses to “Results: Would You Sign Barry Bonds”

1. gameball says:

   July 9, 2008 at 9:57 am

   The in-game text poll on sny had 75% against. Gary + Ron sounded a little relieved by the result, with Gary noting that there is no way on earth that the Mets approach Bonds.
2. guildrysan says:

   July 9, 2008 at 9:59 am

   The mets don’t need another 40yr old veteran on the team enough!!!
3. grotesmask says:

   July 9, 2008 at 10:10 am

   But hey, if there’s a vacancy on the team for an A-hole, let’s call him.
4. MetsFan4Decades says:

   July 9, 2008 at 10:12 am

   Omar’s non-answer answer when asked about Bonds aside…..can we please put this to rest? It’s clear the fans don’t want him here, I haven’t heard one baseball analyst saying it’s a good idea, and I’m willing to bet the players are not behind it either.

   For the record: I don’t want to see Bonds in a Met uniform ever. I don’t care what the cost, it’s not worth the circus or any expected results.
5. GravediggerHebner says:

   July 9, 2008 at 10:13 am

   If the Mets needed a DH I would poke myself in the eyes with pointed flaming sticks while saying “sign him” but until/unless the NL adopts the DH (and I’m hoping they don’t) that’s asking Beltran to cover too much ground.
   • Ludacrispat says:

     July 9, 2008 at 10:32 am

     That’s a good point. Because, you know, when Minaya’s hope of Alou playing out there comes true, he’s just going to be flying in the outfield. Gold glove quickness from the likes of Alou, Tatis, Marlon Anderson, and Nick Evans.

     And it’s not like Bonds would make up for his defensive shortcomings with a .400+ OBP.
     • GravediggerHebner says:

       July 9, 2008 at 10:37 am

       All those guys can at least move laterally a little bit. Bonds, not at all, especially considering he hasn’t been in an outfield in about 10 months. The statue of Roberto Clemente outside old 3 Rivers Stadium covers more ground than Bonds. Plus Bonds would at least in theory have to get used to playing without performance enhancing drugs, unlike the other guys.
       • Ludacrispat says:

         July 9, 2008 at 10:50 am

         Bonds isn’t THAT bad in left. Alou moves and he gets injured.

         And with Chavez/Church and Beltran, the outfield will be just fine defensively.
       • atobe says:

         July 9, 2008 at 10:52 am

         Mets fans and baseball fans in general seriously use Bonds defense as a reason to NOT sign a guy, when all the statistics show Bonds is still a major league level defensive LF.

         In 2007, the creaky old Barry Bonds had a .831 RZR, not amazing by any means but better than names like Endy Chavez and Damion Easley, and better than sluggers like Adam Dunn, Pat Burrell and Carlos Lee.

         In 2008 the Mets are playing guys like Marlon Anderson in Left Field. Mets fans shouldn’t be ‘disgusted’ to sign Barry Bonds, they should be disgusted that the Mets carry total scrubs like Marlon Anderson and his .506 OPS. They should be disgusted that Fernando Tatis, Brady Clark, Angel Pagan, Moises Alou, Endy Chavez, Anderson, Damion Easley, Trot Nixon, Andy Phillips and Chris Aguila have all played Left Field for the Mets at one point and they all flat out suck for one reason or another (or a bunch).
       • atobe says:

         July 9, 2008 at 10:53 am

         Whoops, I forgot Nick Evans
       • GravediggerHebner says:

         July 9, 2008 at 11:30 am

         Ludacrispat and atobe, you both make valid reasonable arguments that make me glad I am not the GM, and I’ll assume that both of you have not been in the “the Mets roster is too old and decrepit” camp because otherwise this desire for Bonds would be hypocritical. I have had the MLB package for the last 3 years, and watching Bonds “move” in the OF made me feel physical pain. I admit that at the end of the day, I just HATE the guy (irrational? perhaps) and I would pretty much rather try anyone else out there. Apparently 30 GMs agree with me. Collusion anyone?
6. metphan says:

   July 9, 2008 at 10:41 am

   Yea because these polls arent tainted with the glowing description of Bonds that preceeds them….
   • Ludacrispat says:

     July 9, 2008 at 10:52 am

     x100.

     It’s why you don’t have polling data with biased questions.

     It’s unfair to ask, “Fans, would you want that cheating loser Bonds on your team?”
     • NC_MetsGuy says:

       July 9, 2008 at 11:07 am

       Why is also why Matt shouldn’t give his opinion before he asks his reader’s to vote.

       We need Barry Barry!

       Who’s Frank?
     • 0h the ag0ny says:

       July 9, 2008 at 11:07 am

       BONDS is a great player. Could probably still hit 14 HR after the allstar break if he had the chance. But his time is done, that simple. People in baseball want the steroids era to be a forgotten memory && it starts with Bonds being excluded.

       I still firmly believe the commish went to all mlb teams confidentialy && said “for the sake of baseball, do not let this man play.”
       • atobe says:

         July 9, 2008 at 11:25 am

         If baseball really wanted the steroid era to just disappear then how come the 2008 AS team has Miguel Tejada on it. Why is Jason Giambi a last man vote for the team? It’s obvious that the fans do not care because Giambi might actually win it. And it’s obvious the players and managers don’t care because guys like Tejada are on it.

         The commish and other MLB executives are blackballing Barry Bonds for their own reasons, and it’s a lot more than “please don’t sign him” it’s more like “sign him and you will pay the consequences down the road”.
7. Peter H says:

   July 9, 2008 at 11:06 am

   Personally, I think the benefits Bonds brings - namely, a 170+ OPS to a team that desperately needs another corner outfielder - outweigh the costs (e.g. the media circus, the lack of mobility in the outfield, the injury risks). But since it’s never going to happen, I’m wondering what alternatives the Mets are considering. I hope the Mets realize (1) they can’t rely on Church & Alou to play regularly in the 2nd half (2) they’re not going to win anything giving their corner OF starts to Chavez, Tatis, & Anderson.
   • toomanyuniforms says:

     July 9, 2008 at 3:24 pm

     You forgot “punting your integrity out of the stadium” among the “costs,” but that’s fine.

     I’m really not sure they won’t win anything with Tater and Chavez out there. Chavez is really coming on offensively, and I like what he’s brought to the lineup and (especially) defense. How many ENORMOUS catches has he made look absolutely routine in the last 10 games? Unreal. I also have no problem with Tatis platooning with a Lofton/Nelson Cruz/virtually anyone else type in left.