Bonds to pass Aaron

[chrisfostermusi]

Just a hunch but looking at the numbers I predict that we will see Bonds break Aarons record of Home Runs and possibly his RBI record.

Bonds Needs 188 Home Runs. He has just finished his 16th season. Aaron played 23 seasons So lets say Bonds has 7 more years.

He would need to average 26 home runs and 107 RBI's for the next 7 years.

Will he do it?

I say yes to the home run mark and no to the RBI mark. NO to the BB mark

Hank played until he was 42. I say that unless he's Nolan Ryan, Bonds may not play until he's 44 (37+7).

As to Hank's MLB record 2,297 RBI, that's just as unfathomable. He'd need to be super-productive to get that, since Barry's 1,542 leaves him (drumroll, please) 755 short. That's almost 50% more than he's got now, but in 7 seasons, which is <1/2 of his 16 seasons.

Barry would need 27 dingers over 7 years for 189 to get to 756. He's got history against him, since Aaron (42), Mays (40), Babe (6), Teddy (39), Frank Robinson (3) hit a combined 130 HRs on or after the _year_ in which they turned 40, according to age listed on b-r.com (not from the _date_ of their 40th).

I have no idea how Barry would do this, since 755 isn't exactly an unfathomable number. Think of it like a heavy duty bench press where 500 lbs is the mark and many guys have done this. Now one guy benches 660 but someone else benches 755 lbs. Who's gonna top this and how?

[Duque]

Folks - I think we've already got a thread on this here:

http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/...&threadid=1825

[mandamin]

Originally posted by chrisfostermusi
Bonds Needs 188 Home Runs. He has just finished his 16th season. Aaron played 23 seasons So lets say Bonds has 7 more years.

You know that if Bonds plays seven more seasons he'll retire at 45, right? Aaron started two years earlier than Bonds (he was 20, Bonds 22) and played at least two years past his usefulness. It's really unrealistic to expect Bonds to play seven more years, IMO. I'd guess he'll fail to meet the requirements of the fifth year of his contract and be done after 2006--four more seasons. He'll be 41 years old--how much more can you really ask of a guy?

He would need to average 26 home runs and 107 RBI's for the next 7 years.

Will he do it?

I say yes to the home run mark and no to the RBI mark. NO to the BB mark

Let's do 4 years. He needs 188 homers, 755 RBI, and 417 BB; an average of 47 homers, 189 RBI, and 104 BB. Rickey's still trying to play, I know, but even if he does con some team into taking him on, I think we can all agree he's not going to get enough PT to add too many more walks to his record. Over the course of his entire career, Barry's averaged 37 homers, 101 RBI and 113 walks per 150 games; in 1998, 2000 and 2001 (1999 was a partial season for him) he averaged 53 homers, 122 RBI and 141 BB per season.

I don't think it's completely out of the question for him to average 47 homers, although I personally don't think it will happen (he might come close, in which case he'll probably hang on too long to get it, like Aaron did). The BB mark is his, all the way. He might break that in three years (139 per). I think the RBI title is pretty clearly out of his reach.

Just out of curiosity, why did you say no to the BB record? If he played 7 years, he'd only need to average 60 walks; the last time he drew fewer than 60 walks was 1987, age 23...

[mandamin]

Originally posted by Duque
Folks - I think we've already got a thread on this here:

http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/...&threadid=1825

You think so? This is about more than just the HR record, and specifically about Bonds...sure seems different enough to me...but then I know nothing

Bonds has averaged over the past three seasons:

63 HR, 133 RBIs, 149 walks per 162 games.

Let's assume he'll play 145 games a year, and assume a 7 percent decline in productivity from this every year:

51 HR, 107 RBIs, 120 walks
47 HR, 100 RBIs, 112 walks
44 HR, 93 RBIs, 104 walks
41 HR, 86 RBIs, 97 walks
38 HR, 80 RBIs, 90 walks (65 percent of Bonds is still good!)

221 466 RBIs 523 walks

788 HR, 2008 RBIs, 2247 walks

People don't generally age like this, the big stars usually have a big dropoff somewhere, then hold steady for a few years, then fall into oblivion. I think Bonds has another year somewhere between 2000-2001 in him, meaning, an MVP type season, and then he'll drop off significantly and put up good numbers for three-four yeras. Bonds' walks, if anything, should hold steady though.

[Xanadu Dragon]

Weren't we all projecting McGwire like this a few years back?

All it takes is one injury - - hasta.

[cubfan33]

Again, I will say "See Neyer's column on ESPN.com" I hate to sound redundant, but Neyer had this type of Favorite Toy stuff covered this week, math and all. Sosa has a better shot at it than Bonds.

The better point on Bonds is whether he is an outlier (sp?) to the known career path data (ie, peak-27) or whether he is an early, defining point for a change. Quick and dirty, conditioning, weights, and technology may allow some players not only a higher peak, but a slower decline. In Bonds case, so many factors came into play allowing for arguably the greatest season in history. (I havent seen adjusted numbers.)

Originally posted by Xanadu Dragon
Weren't we all projecting McGwire like this a few years back?

All it takes is one injury - - hasta.

Yes but. Bonds is better than McGwire, a better athlete, in better condition. Bonds has never had the chronic injuries McGwire did. Frankly, if he wasn't on creatin, McGwire would have never hit 60 in a season.

[Xanadu Dragon]

Originally posted by Baudib
Frankly, if he wasn't on creatin, McGwire would have never hit 60 in a season.

See the before and after photos of Barry Bonds in this thread:

http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/...=&threadid=627

and tell me what he was on during the winter of 2000-2001.

At least Mac had reached 50+ before he got to 70. Bonds' highest was 49, and then he shot to 73!

You just don't get that stronger at age 37 by working out. Barry's been dipping into something too, IMHO.

No doubt.

Again...the difference is...Bonds has actually been able to play 150 games before. McGwire wasn't, or hadn't been for several years.

If Bonds suddenly stops juicing up, will he suddenly go into a career crisis and miss 80 games, like McGwire? I doubt it.

[Xanadu Dragon]

Barry went down in 1999 and missed 60 games that season. That could always happen again, which was my point.

Only 4 players in the history of the game have managed seasons of 140+ games past the age of 36 more than three times.

Odds are, Barry's good for missing time at this stage of his career.

I don't want to keep going over this silly point, but my point was that it was always dangerous to project McGwire to do anything beyond the next 50 games, that he has basically not been able to finish a real season since 1992 sans creatin.
The reason no one plays 140 games past age 36 is because almost no one is good enough. Only 1 guy in history has hit 73 homers at age 35...

[Xanadu Dragon]

I always think of that line on SportsCenter, when the say a guy is "day-to-day" and then follow it with "but, then again, aren't we all?"

To project anyone, regardless of the past condition, is a crap shoot. I remember when Griffey was going to pass Hank, and Carlos Baegra was going to the HOF, and Knoblach's career was as good as Robby Alomar's, etc. In baseball, tomorrow means you'll never know - Bonds included.

Originally posted by Xanadu Dragon
See the before and after photos of Barry Bonds in this thread:

http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/...=&threadid=627

and tell me what he was on during the winter of 2000-2001.

Those photos were shot under very different circumstances. One is a studio "team photo" and the other is a regular shot, like a lockerroom shot for a sports news interview.

I heard he bulked up by 25 lbs but I'd need to see more than a head & shoulder shot. I'd think a full-length shot or at least showing his legs would better show what he's done as far as bulking up.

He's got his own nutritionists and diet staff so it's not totally unfathomable to me that he could bulk up legitimately. Boxers and weightlifters change weight divisions so I don't think everyone is necessarily cheating.