Controverstial Cards we will never see
-
Mike Trout is a super stud! But his numbers arent even close to Barry so let’s hang back for a bit.
Are they not?
Let's compare the first 10 seasons of Bonds vs Trout.
Keep in mind Bonds had 10 full yrs vs Trout only having 8 plus seasons.
Trout's 1st year was a 40 game late call up and I am counting the numbers from this season (his 10th).
Trout had 3 MVPs (maybe a 4th this year?) 3 top 2 MVP finishes, 7 Silver Sluggers and was Rookie of the YearBonds had 3 MVPs, 1 top 2 MVP Finish, 5 Silver Sluggers and 5 Gold Gloves
Bonds Trout
G 1425 1214
AB 5020 4401
R 999 916
H 1436 1344
2B 306 252
3B 48 46
HR 292 293
RBI 864 768
SB 340 200
CS 103 36
BB 931 808
SO 795 1136
BA 0.286 0.305
OBP 0.398 0.418
SLG 0.541 0.583
OPS 0.827 1.002
WAR 73.4 73.2Still want to tell me Bonds is WAY better than Trout?
Trout hit for a higher avg, hit for more power, got on base more. Stole less bases, but got caught stealing a lot less.
Bonds has the advantage in Gold Gloves, but Bonds played LF and Trout is in a premium defensive position CF.Let's see where Trout goes from here, but through 10 yrs Trout is better than Bonds.
Yes, I know Bonds exploded in the 2nd half of his career, but we all know he was on PEDs. So when both players are clean, Trout has the edge.
And this is from a guy that before the last year or two considered Bonds the best player I have ever seen. Mike Trout is not only in the discussion, he is asking for a seat at the table. -
@PScrabro said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
John Rocker??? Guy pitched like 250 innings in his entire career.... there's guys that can do that in one season. He was a [censored].
How about:
Barry Bonds
Sammy Sosa
Manny Ramirez
Alex Rodriguez
Pete Rose
Randy Johnson....you know actual good players
That is why I specifically mentioned the 99 post season. Not his career, just that one post season.
-
@ItsaCanesthing said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
Mike Trout is a super stud! But his numbers arent even close to Barry so let’s hang back for a bit.
Are they not?
Let's compare the first 10 seasons of Bonds vs Trout.
Keep in mind Bonds had 10 full yrs vs Trout only having 8 plus seasons.
Trout's 1st year was a 40 game late call up and I am counting the numbers from this season (his 10th).
Trout had 3 MVPs (maybe a 4th this year?) 3 top 2 MVP finishes, 7 Silver Sluggers and was Rookie of the YearBonds had 3 MVPs, 1 top 2 MVP Finish, 5 Silver Sluggers and 5 Gold Gloves
Bonds Trout
G 1425 1214
AB 5020 4401
R 999 916
H 1436 1344
2B 306 252
3B 48 46
HR 292 293
RBI 864 768
SB 340 200
CS 103 36
BB 931 808
SO 795 1136
BA 0.286 0.305
OBP 0.398 0.418
SLG 0.541 0.583
OPS 0.827 1.002
WAR 73.4 73.2Still want to tell me Bonds is WAY better than Trout?
Trout hit for a higher avg, hit for more power, got on base more. Stole less bases, but got caught stealing a lot less.
Bonds has the advantage in Gold Gloves, but Bonds played LF and Trout is in a premium defensive position CF.Let's see where Trout goes from here, but through 10 yrs Trout is better than Bonds.
Yes, I know Bonds exploded in the 2nd half of his career, but we all know he was on PEDs. So when both players are clean, Trout has the edge.
And this is from a guy that before the last year or two considered Bonds the best player I have ever seen. Mike Trout is not only in the discussion, he is asking for a seat at the table.Bonds hit 60+ home runs in his 40s
Bonds is the all time in HR and walks (single season and career)
Trout is real good and building a heck of a career, but let's not compare him to Barry yet please.
Barry was by far the most feared hitter to ever play in his prime. The guy would have hit 100 home runs the record year if he wasn't intentionally walked twice as many times as any hitter has ever been intentionally walked in a season.... he averaged almost 2 walks per game. I watched Barry play... it was at the point where anything in the strike zone was gone. Any mlb pitcher who would say they would rather face Bonds in his hitting prime than Trout in his best season so far is lying to you.
Barry is the best hitter to ever play by a lot... he's just tainted and doesn't get talked about much. The New England Patriots have been caught cheating several times in their run, but that doesn't mean they weren't better than everybody else. -
@NCStateHokie said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@PScrabro said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
John Rocker??? Guy pitched like 250 innings in his entire career.... there's guys that can do that in one season. He was a [censored].
How about:
Barry Bonds
Sammy Sosa
Manny Ramirez
Alex Rodriguez
Pete Rose
Randy Johnson....you know actual good players
What was controversial about Randy Johnson? His nickname? His height? His fastball?
The murdered bird on live T.V.????
Your right, I guess he's not controversial, but I would just really like to see him in the game along with Pedro. -
@PScrabro said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@ItsaCanesthing said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
Mike Trout is a super stud! But his numbers arent even close to Barry so let’s hang back for a bit.
Are they not?
Let's compare the first 10 seasons of Bonds vs Trout.
Keep in mind Bonds had 10 full yrs vs Trout only having 8 plus seasons.
Trout's 1st year was a 40 game late call up and I am counting the numbers from this season (his 10th).
Trout had 3 MVPs (maybe a 4th this year?) 3 top 2 MVP finishes, 7 Silver Sluggers and was Rookie of the YearBonds had 3 MVPs, 1 top 2 MVP Finish, 5 Silver Sluggers and 5 Gold Gloves
Bonds Trout
G 1425 1214
AB 5020 4401
R 999 916
H 1436 1344
2B 306 252
3B 48 46
HR 292 293
RBI 864 768
SB 340 200
CS 103 36
BB 931 808
SO 795 1136
BA 0.286 0.305
OBP 0.398 0.418
SLG 0.541 0.583
OPS 0.827 1.002
WAR 73.4 73.2Still want to tell me Bonds is WAY better than Trout?
Trout hit for a higher avg, hit for more power, got on base more. Stole less bases, but got caught stealing a lot less.
Bonds has the advantage in Gold Gloves, but Bonds played LF and Trout is in a premium defensive position CF.Let's see where Trout goes from here, but through 10 yrs Trout is better than Bonds.
Yes, I know Bonds exploded in the 2nd half of his career, but we all know he was on PEDs. So when both players are clean, Trout has the edge.
And this is from a guy that before the last year or two considered Bonds the best player I have ever seen. Mike Trout is not only in the discussion, he is asking for a seat at the table.Bonds hit 60+ home runs in his 40s
You do know why Bonds was hitting 60+ home runs in his 40’s, right? You don’t stay on the field that often and produce at that level into your 40’s without PEDs.
There is a reason ItsaCanesthing stuck to the first 10 years as a comparison. If you want to compare actual ability and non-tainted statistics, it’s best to compare the stats before Bonds started juicing like Hi-C Ecto Cooler was about to be discontinued.
-
@PennStateFencer said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@PScrabro said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@ItsaCanesthing said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
Mike Trout is a super stud! But his numbers arent even close to Barry so let’s hang back for a bit.
Are they not?
Let's compare the first 10 seasons of Bonds vs Trout.
Keep in mind Bonds had 10 full yrs vs Trout only having 8 plus seasons.
Trout's 1st year was a 40 game late call up and I am counting the numbers from this season (his 10th).
Trout had 3 MVPs (maybe a 4th this year?) 3 top 2 MVP finishes, 7 Silver Sluggers and was Rookie of the YearBonds had 3 MVPs, 1 top 2 MVP Finish, 5 Silver Sluggers and 5 Gold Gloves
Bonds Trout
G 1425 1214
AB 5020 4401
R 999 916
H 1436 1344
2B 306 252
3B 48 46
HR 292 293
RBI 864 768
SB 340 200
CS 103 36
BB 931 808
SO 795 1136
BA 0.286 0.305
OBP 0.398 0.418
SLG 0.541 0.583
OPS 0.827 1.002
WAR 73.4 73.2Still want to tell me Bonds is WAY better than Trout?
Trout hit for a higher avg, hit for more power, got on base more. Stole less bases, but got caught stealing a lot less.
Bonds has the advantage in Gold Gloves, but Bonds played LF and Trout is in a premium defensive position CF.Let's see where Trout goes from here, but through 10 yrs Trout is better than Bonds.
Yes, I know Bonds exploded in the 2nd half of his career, but we all know he was on PEDs. So when both players are clean, Trout has the edge.
And this is from a guy that before the last year or two considered Bonds the best player I have ever seen. Mike Trout is not only in the discussion, he is asking for a seat at the table.Bonds hit 60+ home runs in his 40s
You do know why Bonds was hitting 60+ home runs in his 40’s, right? You don’t stay on the field that often and produce at that level into your 40’s without PEDs.
There is a reason ItsaCanesthing stuck to the first 10 years as a comparison. If you want to compare actual ability and non-tainted statistics, it’s best to compare the stats before Bonds started juicing like Hi-C Ecto Cooler was about to be discontinued.
Are you another dreamer that thinks Trout is better than Bonds? Peds or not... I said Bonds was the best hitter ever to play and that is 100% fact, anyone who thinks Trout is better than Bonds needs brain PEDs
-
@PScrabro said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@PennStateFencer said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@PScrabro said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@ItsaCanesthing said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
Mike Trout is a super stud! But his numbers arent even close to Barry so let’s hang back for a bit.
Are they not?
Let's compare the first 10 seasons of Bonds vs Trout.
Keep in mind Bonds had 10 full yrs vs Trout only having 8 plus seasons.
Trout's 1st year was a 40 game late call up and I am counting the numbers from this season (his 10th).
Trout had 3 MVPs (maybe a 4th this year?) 3 top 2 MVP finishes, 7 Silver Sluggers and was Rookie of the YearBonds had 3 MVPs, 1 top 2 MVP Finish, 5 Silver Sluggers and 5 Gold Gloves
Bonds Trout
G 1425 1214
AB 5020 4401
R 999 916
H 1436 1344
2B 306 252
3B 48 46
HR 292 293
RBI 864 768
SB 340 200
CS 103 36
BB 931 808
SO 795 1136
BA 0.286 0.305
OBP 0.398 0.418
SLG 0.541 0.583
OPS 0.827 1.002
WAR 73.4 73.2Still want to tell me Bonds is WAY better than Trout?
Trout hit for a higher avg, hit for more power, got on base more. Stole less bases, but got caught stealing a lot less.
Bonds has the advantage in Gold Gloves, but Bonds played LF and Trout is in a premium defensive position CF.Let's see where Trout goes from here, but through 10 yrs Trout is better than Bonds.
Yes, I know Bonds exploded in the 2nd half of his career, but we all know he was on PEDs. So when both players are clean, Trout has the edge.
And this is from a guy that before the last year or two considered Bonds the best player I have ever seen. Mike Trout is not only in the discussion, he is asking for a seat at the table.Bonds hit 60+ home runs in his 40s
You do know why Bonds was hitting 60+ home runs in his 40’s, right? You don’t stay on the field that often and produce at that level into your 40’s without PEDs.
There is a reason ItsaCanesthing stuck to the first 10 years as a comparison. If you want to compare actual ability and non-tainted statistics, it’s best to compare the stats before Bonds started juicing like Hi-C Ecto Cooler was about to be discontinued.
Are you another dreamer that thinks Trout is better than Bonds? Peds or not... I said Bonds was the best hitter ever to play and that is 100% fact, anyone who thinks Trout is better than Bonds needs brain PEDs
It’s ironic that you claim it is 100% fact while simultaneously ignoring the facts which were actually presented to you. There is nothing wrong with having a difference of opinion regarding how great a player is/was, but if you’re going to attempt to insult the intelligence of someone else...you may want to actually disprove their points. Otherwise you just come off as an ignorant fool.
-
The facts were comparing early years. I chose not to compare first ten years or compare ped or non ped. I simply said Bonds is the best hitter that ever swung a bat and said Trout is really good but cant even be compared to him when talking about hitting. If you are confident Trout is better then maybe you think he will break the HR record someday, but I seriously doubt he gets even close. I'm not trying to be ignorant and not an expert, but I watched both play with my own eyes and I know anybody denying Bonds was better either is in denial or don't understand how dominating Barry was. How many times has Trout been intentionally walked with no outs and nobody on base?
-
Billy Ripken F-Face card
-
@ItsaCanesthing said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
if rocker were ever to see the light of day in this game it would only show sds is racist and homophobic, rocker is a douche.
Yeah Rocker is a douche, that isn't up for debate.
But having a player in the game is not an endorsement of their beliefs.Agreed why is this so hard for people to understand. How many wife beaters or other degenerates have cards. They are in there because they played baseball not because they have good character to model.
-
@Markis6224 said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@ItsaCanesthing said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
if rocker were ever to see the light of day in this game it would only show sds is racist and homophobic, rocker is a douche.
Yeah Rocker is a douche, that isn't up for debate.
But having a player in the game is not an endorsement of their beliefs.Agreed why is this so hard for people to understand. How many wife beaters or other degenerates have cards. They are in there because they played baseball not because they have good character to model.
Exactly, last year we had Enos Slaughter in the game and that dude was garbage.
Rocker was a hateful person and that manifested itself in the infamous SI interview. But he only verbalized his hate, Slaughter on the other hand acted upon his hate. And to me that is much worse. -
That Pete rose guy maybe
-
Mike Trout does not induce the fear in opposing teams the way Bonds did. Trout is the best player of this generation though, easily.
-
@MikeForbes101 said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
Mike Trout does not induce the fear in opposing teams the way Bonds did. Trout is the best player of this generation though, easily.
Before we got the juiced version of Bonds, he did not induce fear either. You were careful with him, but not fearful. Now Pujols put the fear of God in opposing pitchers ( St. Louis Albert, not Angels Albert).
Those Pirates teams were stacked so they could not pitch around him.
The PEDs changed everything. His body did not breakdown like most players in their thirties.
Combine that with HOF talent, he was a sure fire HOFer before the roids, and we have the Incredible Barry that we saw over the last 10 or so years of his career. -
@ItsaCanesthing said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
Mike Trout is a super stud! But his numbers arent even close to Barry so let’s hang back for a bit.
Are they not?
Let's compare the first 10 seasons of Bonds vs Trout.
Keep in mind Bonds had 10 full yrs vs Trout only having 8 plus seasons.
Trout's 1st year was a 40 game late call up and I am counting the numbers from this season (his 10th).
Trout had 3 MVPs (maybe a 4th this year?) 3 top 2 MVP finishes, 7 Silver Sluggers and was Rookie of the YearBonds had 3 MVPs, 1 top 2 MVP Finish, 5 Silver Sluggers and 5 Gold Gloves
Bonds Trout
G 1425 1214
AB 5020 4401
R 999 916
H 1436 1344
2B 306 252
3B 48 46
HR 292 293
RBI 864 768
SB 340 200
CS 103 36
BB 931 808
SO 795 1136
BA 0.286 0.305
OBP 0.398 0.418
SLG 0.541 0.583
OPS 0.827 1.002
WAR 73.4 73.2Still want to tell me Bonds is WAY better than Trout?
Trout hit for a higher avg, hit for more power, got on base more. Stole less bases, but got caught stealing a lot less.
Bonds has the advantage in Gold Gloves, but Bonds played LF and Trout is in a premium defensive position CF.Let's see where Trout goes from here, but through 10 yrs Trout is better than Bonds.
Yes, I know Bonds exploded in the 2nd half of his career, but we all know he was on PEDs. So when both players are clean, Trout has the edge.
And this is from a guy that before the last year or two considered Bonds the best player I have ever seen. Mike Trout is not only in the discussion, he is asking for a seat at the table.You know what, you’re correct when you talk about first 10 years. When I say not even close, I’m referring to the numbers Bonds put up between ‘98-‘04. No one will ever equal Barry’s numbers. But first 10 years, yes you’re correct. Good post!
-
How about a card for the "Big Cat" Andres Galaraga? Dude fought cancer twice and won comeback player of the year for it. He was a 5x all star, 3x Gold Glove, 2x Sliver Slugger and won a batting title
-
Billy Ripken's "F--- Face" Topps card. If they blurred out the "F--- Face" sharpie text that was written on the knob of his bat, it could be appropriate.
-
How about a card based on a controversial moment—Armando Galarraga. Earn the card by pitching a perfect game.
-
You know what, you’re correct when you talk about first 10 years. When I say not even close, I’m referring to the numbers Bonds put up between ‘98-‘04. No one will ever equal Barry’s numbers. But first 10 years, yes you’re correct. Good post!
Props brother. Good to see we can have a conversation without insults, it gives me hope.
You are correct about Bonds 98-04. Those were video game numbers.
Only a handful of guys have had similar runs - Ruth, Gehrig and Foxx. -
@ItsaCanesthing said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@Markis6224 said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
@ItsaCanesthing said in Controverstial Cards we will never see:
if rocker were ever to see the light of day in this game it would only show sds is racist and homophobic, rocker is a douche.
Yeah Rocker is a douche, that isn't up for debate.
But having a player in the game is not an endorsement of their beliefs.Agreed why is this so hard for people to understand. How many wife beaters or other degenerates have cards. They are in there because they played baseball not because they have good character to model.
Exactly, last year we had Enos Slaughter in the game and that dude was garbage.
Rocker was a hateful person and that manifested itself in the infamous SI interview. But he only verbalized his hate, Slaughter on the other hand acted upon his hate. And to me that is much worse.I enjoyed the concept /idea of this thread and the input from those that can actually read and comprehend. Reading comprehension unfortunately has not been used by everyone here.
