He’s rested, he’s ready…

DMZ · January 3, 2009 at 8:40 am · Filed Under Mariners 

Left-handed power, bargain price, willing to accept a one-year deal, West Coast… Barry Bonds underwent hip surgery to ensure he’s ready for the 2009 season!

What?

Weirdly, this story’s not carried on MLB.com, where the stories are not subject to the approval blah blah blah…

Comments

80 Responses to “He’s rested, he’s ready…”

  1. Mariner Melee on January 3rd, 2009 8:52 am

    No Thanks. I don’t know if he cheated or not, but the speculation is there and its not something I want to deal with all year.

  2. DMZ on January 3rd, 2009 8:55 am

    I look forward to your unstinting opposition to Morse making the team.

  3. Librarian on January 3rd, 2009 9:06 am

    Bonds would be awesome. He’s sure to be willing to sign for one year (probably for cheap) and I’ve little doubt he could come in and mash as soon as he’s healthy.

  4. msb on January 3rd, 2009 9:09 am

    well, heck, it didn’t even make barrybonds.com

  5. dcmarinerfan on January 3rd, 2009 9:11 am

    Do it ten times over. Sweet merciful Jesus tell me you have that kind of power, Jack.

    I look forward to your unstinting opposition to Morse making the team.

    Oh, it’s not the cheating he’s opposed to, it’s the speculation that he might have cheated that he’s opposed to. At least with Mike Morse there’s no speculation.

  6. mymrbig on January 3rd, 2009 9:16 am

    Sign him. Imagine signing him for a non-guaranteed contract for $1 million with incentives and a team out-clause based on legal problems.

    Listen, dude used some kind of performance enhancers in the past. Big deal, tons of players did, no reason to vilify Bonds more than anyone else. But you can pretty much guarantee that, between past allegations and legal problems, Barry will be clean if he plays again. Let him at an advanced age that he can still be an elite hitter without the performance enhancers. It would be a good opportunity for him to try and salvage a little of his reputation (as a player, not a person) where people can’t dismiss his momnumental achievements by whispering “steroids.” And the M’s would get a great hitter on the cheap, short-term, without losing talent.

  7. msb on January 3rd, 2009 9:48 am

    so how long is the March trial for “10 counts of making false statements plus an addition obstruction of justice charge” likely to take?

  8. Wolfman on January 3rd, 2009 9:59 am

    We’ve talked a lot about how important chemistry is. Isn’t Barry Bonds known as a bit of a self-centered jerk? What kind of effect would he have on such a young team? He also has been out an entire year.

    Personally, if we were to sign an older left-handed power hitter, I’d rather see Junior.

  9. awestby51 on January 3rd, 2009 10:00 am

    I look forward to your unstinting opposition to Morse making the team.

    It’s a totally different situation. People don’t want Bonds because he is the figurehead of the steroids epidemic. Mike Morse’s cheating, like most other players is easily forgotten, while Bonds sits atop the record books as a constant reminder. That’s why people are so against signing him, for all he represents. That said, I have no problem signing Bonds, he’s the power bat that could put this team in a playoff race. But how about taking a chance on Andruw Jones? He’ll cost 5 million next year, and without last year’s wasteland of a season, he was well on his way to a HOF career. If he loses some weight he could still play some mean outfield defense. If he was half the CF he was in Atlanta, he would be a damn good LF for us. Not to mention we could pawn off Yuni in the deal, the Dodgers do need a SS.

  10. DMZ on January 3rd, 2009 10:01 am

    Um, we have?

  11. Graham on January 3rd, 2009 10:03 am

    Personally, if we were to sign an older left-handed power hitter, I’d rather see Junior.

    I’d rather see someone who isn’t a terrible baseball player

  12. DMZ on January 3rd, 2009 10:06 am

    It’s not a totally different situation, as your comment clearly illustrates: you’re attempting to give a reason why a nebulous people might accept one and reject the other based on the prominence of one.

    That’s a generalized speculation about a wholly subjective judgment by an unmeasurable population.

    Beyond which, that would mean that it was okay to use steroids if it made you just barely good enough to get onto a major league roster but not good enough to go from great to super-great, which is an odd distinction to make with a whole set of additional implications.

  13. DMZ on January 3rd, 2009 10:08 am

    And before this degenerates into another horrible steroids thread –

    The whole point of that post was the “what?” joke — that considering just the first part in isolation of the looming legal issues, the controversy, MLB’s almost certain pressure to not sign him, etc. was a laughably limited position

  14. awestby51 on January 3rd, 2009 10:09 am

    How else do you explain the unwillingness to sign Bonds, an obviously useful player, while other past offenders are employed, and in some cases embraced? Also, what about Andruw Jones?

  15. DMZ on January 3rd, 2009 10:12 am

    I think I wrote a whole post answering that Bonds question a while back.

  16. awestby51 on January 3rd, 2009 10:14 am

    Ok whatever, I haven’t been reading for that long, I’ll look it up. What about Andruw Jones?

  17. VeteranGrit on January 3rd, 2009 10:15 am

    I think it’s time to stop discussing Bonds period. The discussion is pointless because there is no chance he is ever going to sign another major league contract ever again. This was proven last season. There were many teams with a need for a hitter of Bonds’ caliber, and nothing materialized because nobody wants that distraction on their team.

    Bonds is so hated in the fan’s and media’s eyes, even if he did well in Seattle it would still be looked upon as a bad move. If he didn’t do well, it would be very ugly.

    I don’t want that big old distraction on our team, no matter what his OPS. That is not something I want to deal with on a weekly basis whether it be discussing baseball with my friends, family, or blogosphere. Every paper within 500 miles of Seattle would have headlines every week about Bonds, and that is not something I wish to read about or watch on TV on a regular basis.

    Seriously, I would hate this move for personal reasons. I don’t care whether it makes the Mariners better for one season. The distraction would be too much and in my personal opinion that outweighs the best that Barry Bonds would give the Mariners.

  18. juneau_fan on January 3rd, 2009 10:29 am

    I just love when folks demand responses from the writers, as though they’re performing animals.

    “Dance for me, pony! Dance!”

    Mmmmmm….ponies….*sniffle* Gonna miss you, Willie.

  19. Spanky on January 3rd, 2009 10:32 am

    …he’s ready for the 2009 season.

    Yeah right! I think he underestimates how much impact sitting out a year will have on him at his age. It’s different when you’re in your prime years…but as you get older…the old reflexes just don’t come back the same way!

    Bonds was great before there was any hint of his PED speculations. But, I’ve always disliked his personality even back when he was with the Pirates and all the PED speculation and perjury trials don’t help any.

    Could he help the M’s…sure. But his history suggests he’d want to play the field which gives us Ibañez redux in LF. So I don’t think he’d fit with the plan that Dr. Z has set out for remaking the M’s.

    In general then, I think his value the the M’s in 2009 would be minimal and would be offset by other impacts he could have in personality and media coverage and personal issues.

    Put me down for a NO on Bonds. I’m still pessimistic on the M’s chances and feel that they aren’t going anywhere in 2009 anyway so why waste it on someone that won’t be here in 2010? Find someone without the baggage and that could help this year or someone that will be around to help for several years.

  20. Jeff Nye on January 3rd, 2009 11:11 am

    I’ve never seen any reason not to sign Bonds that doesn’t come from a mindless knee-jerk reaction colored by the media choosing him as the whipping boy for the entire PED problem in baseball.

    They would have to special-order his hats though. His head is HUGE.

  21. Sports on a Schtick on January 3rd, 2009 11:26 am

    Bonds would cause too much a distraction. Same with Clemens. Hell, probably the same with Sosa.

  22. terry on January 3rd, 2009 11:26 am

    Production-wise, Marcels thinks Bonds would be pretty much like Milton Bradley offensively in ’09.

    Both probably should be a DH (Bradley mostly for health reasons) but Bonds doesn’t want 3 yrs, is a better fit for Safeco, and probably would be cheaper even if Bradley settled for a single year.

    Of course, there is that possible jail thingy though but if it came to that, maybe the judge would let Bonds wear an ankle bracelet.

  23. bonesbarry on January 3rd, 2009 11:34 am

    …he’s ready for the 2009 season.

    …Yeah Right! I think he underestimates how much…….

    Dollars to donuts Bonds rolls out of bed tomorrow and hits 25 bombs….

  24. terry on January 3rd, 2009 11:36 am

    Beyond which, that would mean that it was okay to use steroids if it made you just barely good enough to get onto a major league roster but not good enough to go from great to super-great, which is an odd distinction to make with a whole set of additional implications.

    To me the Mike Morses of the world are even worse than Bonds. PED use by Bonds didn’t potentially cause a clean player to either compeltely miss a chance at his “sip of coffee” or possibly miss getting enough service time to earn full veteran’s benefits. Bonds basically smashed romantic fantasies about counting stats that aren’t even thought of with misty eyes by every baseball fan.

    Morse warred with families and livelihoods. Bonds mostly battled sportswriters and lets us fans “road rage” without feeling guilty because climbing upon such a cheaply bought moral pedestal doesn’t require us to examine our own actions.

  25. mkd on January 3rd, 2009 12:04 pm

    Steroids aside, do we really want Seattle to become the epicenter of a media frenzy? I know that Ichiro is trailed by a massive contingent of Japanese media, but there isn’t that adversarial lets-poke-him-until-he-says-something-crazy-and- then-spend-a-week-tearing-him-down relationship. You bring in Bonds you bring in a buttload of hostile media douchebags that want to talk about nothing but Bonds. As a fan, I just don’t want that.

  26. Steve Nelson on January 3rd, 2009 12:08 pm

    We’ve talked a lot about how important chemistry is. Isn’t Barry Bonds known as a bit of a self-centered jerk? What kind of effect would he have on such a young team? He also has been out an entire year.

    If you think chemistry is important, you would be hard pressed to find a better example for the benefits of chemistry than Barry Bonds, Jr.

  27. Adam S on January 3rd, 2009 12:15 pm

    Bonds, yeh. He he. Still good enough to play, I don’t think anyone will touch him.

    without last year’s wasteland of a season, [Andruw Jones] was well on his way to a HOF career
    Without touching the second part of that conjecture, Jones was awesome in 2004-2006. He sucked offensively in 2007 and managed to follow it up with an even worse 2008 (150/250/250 — is there a worse season by an OF with 200 PA in the last 20 years? 50 years? Ever?). The BEST thing he did was go on the DL thus raising his play to replacement level. After TWO horrible years, I think Jones is done — he’s at best an average CF defensively — but I’d rather take a flyer on him than Griffey. Jones will at least be a + defender in LF and if he can’t hit, there won’t be a PR nightmare about releasing him and he’s only 32.

  28. CC03 on January 3rd, 2009 12:35 pm

    I’ll pass.

  29. BLYKMYK44 on January 3rd, 2009 12:42 pm

    C’mon everyone…we all know that Baseball holds a signifcantly higher place in the moral standard of all of America. Signing Barry Bonds would be unethical!!

    I even have a professional ethicist to prove that I am right:

    http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-baseball-ethicist-why-nobody-signed-barry-bonds/

    …end sarcasm

  30. BLYKMYK44 on January 3rd, 2009 12:47 pm

    Jones will at least be a + defender in LF and if he can’t hit, there won’t be a PR nightmare about releasing him and he’s only 32.

    - I don’t get this “PR Nightmare” that everyone assumes is going to happen. The fans of San Francisco generally loved the guy. If he came in and led the Ms to the playoffs I think we can all pretty much assume the same thing would happen here.

    Also, why is it that I am supposed to hate Barry Bonds (and my team if they had the stones to sign him) beacuse of his alleged drug use…but support my team when they sign Rickey Henderson who used recreational drugs I am supposed to suppot that move completely?

  31. TomTuttle on January 3rd, 2009 1:17 pm

    Too old, hasn’t played in over a year, and too much baggage.

    Pass.

  32. bookbook on January 3rd, 2009 1:30 pm

    [this is not a board]

  33. BLYKMYK44 on January 3rd, 2009 1:39 pm

    I don’t even get the recreational drug parallel I’ve seen drawn here and on several other boards.

    - If you can’t prove with any sort of certainty how much PEDs improves a player’s game and how widespread PEDs were within the league (therefore seeing how much was counterbalanced by opponents using PEDs)…it seems that the only way to hold players in such low regard for the PED usage is because it is illegal to take PEDs without a specific need…much like cocaine.

  34. sugar2323 on January 3rd, 2009 1:49 pm

    enough Barry Bonds talk. He’s old, hasn’t played in a year, and he’s an ass.

    My question is at what price is Bobby Abreu a good deal for the Mariners. It seems like he brings a lot of what they are looking for to the table (defense may be digressing) with patience, some power, high average, some steals, and I think players like having him around. They need a legitimate 3 hole hitter and he seems to fit the bill. With the prices coming down and so many DH types on the market, it seems we might be able to get him for under $10 million per for maybe 1 or 2 seasons.

  35. Graham on January 3rd, 2009 1:54 pm

    enough Barry Bonds talk

    Oh. Ok then.

  36. sugar2323 on January 3rd, 2009 1:58 pm

    I guess that was a little matter of fact, huh? Didn’t mean it quite like that. I think there are much better options than a old and broken down dude.

  37. Mariner Melee on January 3rd, 2009 2:02 pm

    I look forward to your unstinting opposition to Morse making the team.

    I don’t care if Bonds cheated or not, but the rest the world does. Its going to be one huge distracting story all year.

  38. Roger on January 3rd, 2009 2:22 pm

    Distracting from what? This has to be the biggest non-starter there is.

  39. Adam S on January 3rd, 2009 2:37 pm

    BLYKMYK44, my PR nightmare that you quoted referred to a preference of Jones over Griffey. Releasing Griffey mid-season because he’s a below replacement level DH would be a PR nightmare.

  40. BP on January 3rd, 2009 2:52 pm

    Yes! Yes! 1000 times yes! That would be the cherry on the top of this offseason for me. I’ve always been a fan and I have to think he’d quite possibly be the best DH in baseball. Maybe second if Papi is healthy but up there for sure. I hoped they’d sign him last year, so hopefully with a new, smarter GM there will be a different outcome.

  41. Sports on a Schtick on January 3rd, 2009 3:00 pm

    Distracting from what?

    A sense of normalcy? Don’t think the Giants players are glad they don’t have to answer the same questions any more? Because I’m sure the M’s are eager to talk about perjury charges in spring training.

  42. Typical Idiot Fan on January 3rd, 2009 3:12 pm

    Bonds would cause too much a distraction.

    Distracting from what?

    A sense of normalcy?

    You’re right. Let’s go sign Ken Griffey Jr so HE can distract the media for the entire season and so the other Mariners players, most of which never played with the guy before, can answer questions about him until he retires.

  43. Sports on a Schtick on January 3rd, 2009 3:26 pm

    I don’t believe the ramifications of signing Junior and Bonds are in the same stratosphere.

  44. mkd on January 3rd, 2009 3:36 pm

    Don’t think the Giants players are glad they don’t have to answer the same questions any more?

    Like how does it feel to play for a winning ballclub?

  45. JerBear on January 3rd, 2009 3:51 pm

    …an older left-handed power hitter, I’d rather see Junior.

    Well 2 out of 3 aint bad, eh?

  46. DMZ on January 3rd, 2009 4:25 pm

    I really should know better than to post about Bonds.

  47. Secret Agent Man on January 3rd, 2009 4:38 pm

    I’d rather see someone who isn’t a terrible baseball player.

    I think the only way signing Griffey would benefit this team is if it results in a 20% ticket sales profit increase.

    I really should know better than to post about Bonds.

    Well, personally, I’m totally game for putting aside my morals if it means signing a very good baseball player.

  48. Steve Nelson on January 3rd, 2009 5:03 pm

    I really should know better than to post about Bonds.

    That all depends on the Bonds you are posting about. I believe that a thread about the also greatly unappreciated Gary “US” Bonds would be quite nice and would fit nicely into a year-end USSM Mariner music theme.

  49. Jeff Nye on January 3rd, 2009 5:26 pm

    Actually, I think Bonds posts are an excellent way to clarify whose opinions are worth listening to, and whose aren’t.

  50. qwerty on January 3rd, 2009 5:31 pm
  51. Mat on January 3rd, 2009 5:36 pm

    I don’t believe the ramifications of signing Junior and Bonds are in the same stratosphere.

    There’s no way of really knowing for sure, but if they were going to impact the attitude in the clubhouse, I imagine that both of them could foster resentment amongst their teammates.

    Bonds is reasonably likely to be good, so players won’t resent that an inferior player is taking their playing time and hurting the team, but they might resent that he’s an ass or at least that the media will focus on him. And he would be subject to the same drug testing that they are in 2009, so I’m not sure how much the cheating thing specifically would be an issue.

    Griffey is likely to be fairly bad–especially relative to what he’ll get paid and the amount of attention that he’ll garner–so players might resent that he’s losing games or that he’s taking their playing time or that the media keep writing stories about Griffey and ignore most of the rest of the team. Which could be a problem even if Griffey is a really nice guy and the fans love him.

    As for the relative magnitudes of the problems, I would guess that Bonds would be a somewhat bigger problem, but that it wouldn’t be as big of a difference as the media might lead you to believe. Signing Griffey for PR reasons would be more or less like the M’s hired the coach’s son to make the coach happy. No players like having the coach’s son on the team unless he’s clearly the best player out there.

  52. eponymous coward on January 3rd, 2009 5:36 pm

    I’ve never seen any reason not to sign Bonds that doesn’t come from a mindless knee-jerk reaction colored by the media choosing him as the whipping boy for the entire PED problem in baseball.

    I’ll bite.

    - He may be looking at jail time after March. It’s not unreasonable to not want to sign somebody who will be physically unable to make your roster because he’s in federal custody.

    - He’s old, and after a year off, it’s an open question whether he could perform at his age 42 level at age 44.

    - The Mariners as an organization don’t want to be signing steroid users who are unrepentant (Morse admitted it).

  53. DaveValleDrinkNight on January 3rd, 2009 6:24 pm

    Can the professional ethicist hit for power and play LF?

  54. Sklyansky on January 3rd, 2009 6:44 pm

    He can’t be an any worse teammate than Washburn or Silva. I don’t think we’ll hear quotes of him wanting to beat up Ichiro, or blaming other people for his own performance problems.

    I’ve always felt he got a bad rap, in much the same way that Erik Bedard does. The media asks stupid questions (“how did it feel?”), he chooses not to answer them, which makes *him* the bad guy.

  55. diderot on January 3rd, 2009 6:50 pm

    I’ve never seen any reason not to sign Bonds that doesn’t come from a mindless knee-jerk reaction

    Really? OK, so how about this:
    ABs for Shelton, Branyan, Balentien, Clement…hell, for that matter, maybe Johnson, Carp, Tui and Morse by the end of the year.
    There is NO sense in signing Bonds, Griffey (and maybe even Jones) from a pure baseball perspective. They figuratively and literally are on their last legs. How do they help us when we really could be competitive?
    The signing of any of these guys frankly smacks of Bavasi logic.

    Actually, I think Bonds posts are an excellent way to clarify whose opinions are worth listening to, and whose aren’t.

    Jeff, no offense, but could it be that you just called yourself out?

  56. JI on January 3rd, 2009 7:18 pm

    I think Jones is done — he’s at best an average CF defensively

    UZR/150 had him at +12 last year, and ~17 for his three year average.

  57. DMZ on January 3rd, 2009 7:51 pm

    Whether or not there’s a “pure baseball” reason to sign those guys depends on your definition of that term. If there’s a way Bonds or Jones wins games next season without blocking player development, sure. Wins are always good.

  58. Jeff Nye on January 3rd, 2009 8:04 pm

    But Mike Morse needs at-bats, Derek!

  59. The Ancient Mariner on January 3rd, 2009 8:25 pm

    I’m really surprised no one caught the Nixon (Richard, not Otis) reference in the title — that should have made it clear to everyone that the post was a joke . . .

  60. Roger on January 3rd, 2009 9:29 pm

    I haven’t got any work done today because I’m distracted. Darn you, Barry Bonds! (shakes fist) Darn you to heck!

  61. BigB on January 3rd, 2009 9:38 pm

    Left-handed power, bargain price, willing to accept a one-year prison sentence, West Coast…

    /fixed

    Seriously though, if he wouldn’t disrupt the clubhouse too much, he could just be worth the gamble.

  62. Milo on January 3rd, 2009 9:45 pm

    Bring him, all dissention will fade when the first ball goes over the right field fence.

  63. GTownHoyas on January 3rd, 2009 10:54 pm

    Bring him, all dissention will fade when the first ball goes over the right field fence.

    If after 762 home runs, no dissension has faded, what makes you think that after one over the right field fence of Safeco Field, it will?…

  64. gwangung on January 3rd, 2009 11:08 pm

    Really? OK, so how about this:
    ABs for Shelton, Branyan, Balentien, Clement…hell, for that matter, maybe Johnson, Carp, Tui and Morse by the end of the year.

    Um, you really mean that about Carp and Morse?????? And why should we care about Shelton and Branyan? Particularly when Bonds is better than even money to out-produce them—the point of those is that they’re cheap and easily expendable.

    I see some twitching of the knee there.

  65. xeifrank on January 3rd, 2009 11:32 pm

    How many HRs does Bonds need to pass Oh as the all-time leader? Might be nice for a team to have him on the roster for the chase. Kind of sucks for Bonds that he appears to be stalled at #2 on the all-time HR list.
    vr, Xei

  66. diderot on January 4th, 2009 1:00 am

    I see some twitching of the knee there.

    OK, I admit I have no idea what that means.
    Jeff’s original point was that he’s never seen an opposition to Bonds based on anything but ‘a mindless knee jerk reaction’. I say there are other legitimate baseball reasons.

    If there’s a way Bonds or Jones wins games next season without blocking player development, sure. Wins are always good.

    Absolutely. Having cake and eating it at the same time is great. But I still think not very realistic in this case.
    But most importantly, whatever happened to this?…

    Speculation on any player’s use of steroids, that’s going to be gone as soon as we come across it in almost every case.

  67. awestby51 on January 4th, 2009 1:17 am

    There is NO sense in signing Bonds, Griffey (and maybe even Jones) from a pure baseball perspective. They figuratively and literally are on their last legs.

    Griffey is, and Bonds could done, but CHONE projections show Jones as a 7.5 million dollar player if he’s only an average defender. Since he only gets paid 5 million next year, there is definitely sense in getting Jones.

  68. xeifrank on January 4th, 2009 1:40 am

    Griffey is, and Bonds could done, but CHONE projections show Jones as a 7.5 million dollar player if he’s only an average defender. Since he only gets paid 5 million next year, there is definitely sense in getting Jones.

    I think we will be seeing the automated projection systems breaking down when it comes to the Andruw Jones projection(s), especially the ones that have Andruw Jones worth $7.5Mil.
    vr, Xei

  69. Sports on a Schtick on January 4th, 2009 3:33 am

    Andruw Jones was a train wreck last year. 76 strikeouts, 3 home runs in 209 at bats. He made Yuni look disciplined at the plate.

  70. Corey on January 4th, 2009 9:14 am

    Before I started reading, I thought this was almost going to be a Cam Bonifay joke or something. Let Bonds go rot, as he should, on the sidelines of life from now on. Yeck.

  71. ProdigalReality on January 4th, 2009 9:26 am

    Sign Bonds, we could use a player like Bonds teaching the young players how to be an absolute cancer in the locker room.

  72. CCW on January 4th, 2009 9:41 am

    If no one signed him last year, no one’s going to sign him this year. Some day, the GMs will come clean and explain why he wasn’t offered a job last year (maybe he just demanded too much money?). Until then, though, we’re just going to have to be content knowing that he’s unsignable… for some reason.

  73. msb on January 4th, 2009 9:54 am

    speaking of B Bonds, the free online game this morning is Millwood’s no-no vs the Giants. Both Barry & I think the HP ump has a very generous strike zone.

    btw, Harry Kalas is another announcer with no compunctions about mentioning that Millwood has a no-hitter going.

  74. DMZ on January 4th, 2009 10:13 am

    Bonds’ agent last year was supposedly willing to sign league-minimum deals.

  75. Dave Clapper on January 4th, 2009 10:52 am

    Derek, I’m sorry that an entire thread worth of comments (well, with the exception of the Ancient Mariner) fails to recognize a joke when they see one.

    Nobody’s signing Bonds, folks. Explaining humor sucks, but… hello? The humor is that this news was put out there at all, that “Oh, Barry had knee surgery? Well, we’ll for sure sign him now!” would ever enter the heads of ANY GMs who wouldn’t consider signing him last season when the trial wouldn’t have impacted THAT season.

    Get it?

    Jeez.

  76. joser on January 4th, 2009 11:01 am

    Normally I won’t even wade into a Bonds thread (“abandon hope of sensible debate, all ye who enter here”) but I saw this rumor and thought “I bet Junior came up in the Bonds thread” and, yep, sure enough, so that makes this on topic:

    Five teams have shown interest in future Hall of Famer Ken Griffey Jr., his longtime agent Brian Goldberg said. According to Goldberg, three American League teams and two NL teams have expressed some level of interest. The Mariners and Rays are known to be two of the AL teams eyeing Griffey, who’d like to play at least one more season.

    Of course agents say all sorts of things to the press. Some of them are even true. Sometimes.

    Personally, I think the Rays should sign Bonds. Why not? Give him his own locker room at Tropicana where he can entertain the press, or not, as he pleases. Would certainly get fans out to see/boo the Rays when they play in the other AL East cities…

  77. Secret Agent Man on January 4th, 2009 3:31 pm

    Derek, I’m sorry that an entire thread worth of comments (well, with the exception of the Ancient Mariner) fails to recognize a joke when they see one.

    As Derek said, “Weirdly, this story’s not carried on MLB.com.”

    Or, more to the point, “What?”

  78. beadyeyes123 on January 4th, 2009 3:55 pm

    Bobby Abreu, yes. Barry Bonds no. Abreu has some legs and solves a power issue without the media frenzy that Bonds brings. I am not opposed to Bonds due to speculation of steroids, I am opposed because he will bring distractions that we just do not need.

  79. BobbyAyalaFan4Life on January 5th, 2009 10:02 am

    *yaawwwwwwwwn* Barry who?
    Hells to the no.
    With all the positive moves the M’s have been making, I’d hate to see them bring in anyone that’s going to be a negative presence or a general distraction…we don’t want the media circus. I like what Z, et al., are doing, and I’d rather we get to do it just as quietly as possible so when we are back int he thick of things, it’ll be a nice surprise for the rest of the west.
    Aaron M.

  80. BigJared on January 5th, 2009 2:22 pm

    He’ll take a cheap one year deal, Abreu most likely will not. Jones and Jr.? Done and more done.
    Even at his advanced age Bonds would likely outproduce any of the three and quite possibly Jr. and Jones combined. I’ll even boldly predict he’s still a much better hitter than anyone on our current roster which sorely lacks that mythical impact bat.

    The arguments against seem to have very little to do with winning baseball games. It isn’t likely to happen but I fully support the idea.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.