Comments on: MLBPA won’t find collusion in Bonds case

By: E-ROC

E-ROC — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:10:00 +0000

It’s going to be weird following baseball without any Barry Bonds news, if he doesn’t find a job.

By: brad k

brad k — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:35:48 +0000

Consider this. The year that Bonds signed with the Giants, their attendance increased more then 600,000. That’s a lot of butt’s in the seats. While it declined some in the following years, after 1996 is began a steady climb to 2.7 million last year.

By: yankeesdaily.com » Blog Archive » Pride of the Yankees 2/19/2008 The Bloggers

Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:26:12 +0000

[...] MLBPA won’t find collusion in Bonds case - Joseph P. - River Ave. Blues [...]

By: rbizzler

rbizzler — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:56:24 +0000

I agree somewhat, but there isn’t the same successful track record with Cust as there is with Barry. Cust could end up being a flash in the pan (I know he has always had potential).

That being said, your main point was that Oak was not a good fit for Barry while I said that it might be a good ‘wait and see’ spot for him. If Cust busts, but the injury guys remain healthy and the team is competitive, Barry might be a good signing for them.

I know, that is a lot of if’s.’

By: Curramba

Curramba — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:41:03 +0000

What did these idiots forget that Bonds has a court date? No one wants to deal with his attitude and on top of that him having to miss time to be in court along with the media circus that that idiot will cause.

By: Joseph P.

Joseph P. — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:40:49 +0000

There’s no arguing Bonds is better. But you said “much” better. And when you’re considering that, you’re not just putting Bonds’s numbers in the lineup. You’re taking Cust’s away. So is the upgrade really worth it? I don’t see any way it is.

By: mehmattski

mehmattski — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:26:48 +0000

Collusion doesn’t always have to be explicit, with owners sitting in a room deciding on a course of action. Collusion may also be implicit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collusion

One example that folks may be familiar with is during poker tournaments. If one player is “all in” and there are multiple players still in the hand, the other players tend to “check it down.” This means 1) there are more hands in play that could beat the all in hand, and 2) all players stand to gain (in terms of tournament winnings) by ensuring the all-in player busts.

Free agency, meanwhile, is supposed to be a game of perceived value. If teams are adjusting their perceived value of Bonds based not upon his ability to play baseball but other circumstances, they may be guilty of implicit collusion.

By: Bruno

Bruno — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:21:32 +0000

For what it’s worth, he probably won’t be in court until after the season, those things take time. Any proceedings before a trial will most likely only require his lawyers to be there, not Barry himself.

Since #756 his media following has dwindled (but still larger then the norm, to be fair). However, Seattle has the veterans to handle them, and they’re not that demanding or vicious out there to begin with.

http://knickerbockerchatter.blogspot.com/

By: rbizzler

rbizzler — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:06:51 +0000

I would say that Bonds is a better option than Cust. Cust has one good season to his credit and even then his OPS+ was 129 compared to BB’s 163 average over the last two years.

If you want to argue cost efficiency, Cust looks a bit better depending on what BB’s financial demands are.

By: Whitey14

Whitey14 — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:45:53 +0000

Ahh, thanks for the clarification, that makes more sense to me now.