If We Sign Bonds; or, Hypothetical Rage
So now that Big Frank is (more or less) goneski to the land of logging, snow, and the Quebecois, there is talk that Barry Bonds could fill the obligatory "possibly washed up slugger" role. And if the A's sign him, I quit.
If my favorite team, the team I've followed since I was a small lad in Santa Rosa, California, the team I've kept highest in my affections even as a college student Moscow, Idaho, signs a disgusting, self-absorbed, steroid-grubbing excuse for a ballplayer like Bonds, I'm going to put a moratorium on my fanhood; a moratorium that will last until he leaves the clubhouse that sheltered my childhood heroes.
I'll still root for individual players on the team-- I'll cheer every time I see Chavvy on Web Gems, I'll flush with pride when Bobby Crosby hits .270 with 18 bombs (bold prediction!), and I'll smile when I see Joe Blanton on SportsCenter carving up opposing hitters with his lethal fastball-changeup-yellow hammer combination. But I'll refuse to watch even 1 game. I'll abstain from wearing any of my extensive collection of A's gear. And if the boys went all the way to the World Series, I'd be happy for 'em, but I wouldn't celebrate.
I always felt comfortable that we'd never even have to think about Bonds playing for us because his inflated ego would always insist he was owed a bloated contract, despite declining performance. Clearly, that's not a certainty.
Please, Billy. Please don't let Bonds break that record in an A's uniform. Haven't we suffered enough this off-season?
0 recs |
31 comments
Comments
Take a chill pill...
When you say "a disgusting, self-absorbed, steroid-grubbing excuse for a ballplayer", I say, the A's had a player who fit that description to a T for more than five years. His name is Jose Canseco.
Yes, the loss of Frank Thomas leaves a gaping hole in offensive production that must be filled if the A's are serious about 2007. I could live with Bonds. But I think that trading for Manny Ramirez is the best option, and he's actually a bargain in the current marketplace.
by MJB on Nov 16, 2006 4:36 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I can honestly say
by BobbyCrosbysGirl on Nov 16, 2006 4:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I hated him too.
But I will say when Giambi left Oakland, I punched the air with glee.
Homeruns are nice. Character counts.
by Ozzz on Nov 16, 2006 6:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
on the field, but not in the front office?
Now, I don't agree with this line of reasoning myself, and I'm sure you don't either from your criticisms of the anti-movers, but I'm curious: if it's OK by you and me for Lew to be a heartless businessman with a concern only for the bottom line of his investment, then why is it somehow not ok for the players on the 25-man roster to be concerned only with their own "bottom lines"?
by monkeyball on Nov 16, 2006 6:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Many ANers
by mikeA on Nov 16, 2006 8:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Monkeyball
by Pucking Insane on Nov 16, 2006 9:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Allow me to make some parallels.
Moving the A's twenty minutes down the road = akin to swinging at an 0-3 bases loaded pitch in May.
That's how I see it. If Lew was being greedy, there are a multitude of better places to end up than Fremont - period. And as much as certain folks say Vegas and Portland etc aren't real options, who amongst us considered Fremont to be a 'real option' when that city first started talking about it?
The A's gave Oakland a chance to show them love - and not even a lot of love, I'm just talking the minimum. and what did they get for it? A scoreboard that showed 8's as 0's, Mt Davis, and nothing else.
We've all seen other teams move at a moment's notice because they didn't get a taxpayer-funded stadium every ten years. The A's current deal is SO not anything close to that, that to say otherwise is sheer blind cynicsm.
Nobody can tell me the Col was a good place to see or play baseball - not after you've been to the Phone Booth or Great American or Wrigley or Petco or (choose any of about 25 other stadiums that kick the ass of ours). It wasn't about to get upgraded, so the A's looked after themselves AND the fans by staying close, improving their lot, and trying something - anything - to improve their market size.
Meanwhile, Barry Bonds is a fuckhead.
by Ozzz on Nov 16, 2006 9:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Canseco is different
I can't stand the guy, don't want him on the team, and will ignore him if he's here.
by jeepers on Nov 16, 2006 5:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I never realized how fickle this fan base was
Sign Barry Bonds? Done.
I mean I wouldn't fault anyone for being upset for either move, of course, but ditching the team entirely is an awfully fool-harded move.
Barry Bonds will be a better offensive contributor in 2007 than Frank Thomas was in 2006. I have no doubt about that, given, if healthy, I expect him to easily amass at least 35 home runs and put up a ridiculous on base percentage. I, for one, have no problem welcoming such an addition as that, one that would greatly help towards repeating as AL West champs.
by walk off bunt on Nov 16, 2006 4:42 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
20 minute move...
I will continue to be a fan until then..and I'll cross that bridge when I get there.
As for Bonds, sign him. He's a Bay Area boy...keep him in the Bay.
by Erik being Erik on Nov 16, 2006 4:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Glad you are back :-)
by OaktownPower on Nov 16, 2006 5:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say I'd stop being a fan altogether
by Joey C. on Nov 17, 2006 12:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Can we start a DQOTM Award?
by The Dogfather on Nov 16, 2006 4:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
This diary wouldn't win
Or maybe it should be a "Chicken Little" award. "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

by MJB on Nov 16, 2006 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You can if you want, but...
I've already got the new header design for Notes From The Nat that includes no mention of the A's, just in case Bonds should become an Athletic.
I can take a lot - losing star players, leaving Oakland, the woeful choice for manager, I could even stand a Giambi return - but there's no way I'd ever cheer for, care for, or promote a team that included Barroid on its roster.
And not for nothing, but the owner of the Rangers just said as much about his own team.
by Ozzz on Nov 16, 2006 6:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Amen!
by LilAnnieOaktown on Nov 16, 2006 6:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My view
Of course when we add Hu it makes me have second thoughts. I'll be happy if we sign Bonds and I'll happy if we don't. I just think we really need some bats, and Barry's still swings a mighty big one.
by vignette17 on Nov 16, 2006 4:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Toronto's in Ontario, mon frere
by monkeyball on Nov 16, 2006 5:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
What are you talking aboot?
by jeepers on Nov 16, 2006 5:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
take off, you hoser
by monkeyball on Nov 16, 2006 6:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Surrender pronto, or I'll bomb Toronto.
by jeepers on Nov 16, 2006 7:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know Quebec is in Alberta
by Joey C. on Nov 17, 2006 12:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think he just called Joey a monkey.
by The Dogfather on Nov 16, 2006 6:11 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Current lineup without Bonds:
by Nico on Nov 16, 2006 8:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
and 85 is pretty generous
by monkeyball on Nov 16, 2006 9:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bonds would help this team in so many ways...
by IM4Oakgal on Nov 16, 2006 9:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
speaking of whiney millionaires ..
by monkeyball on Nov 16, 2006 10:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Glad you mentioned that.
by IM4Oakgal on Nov 16, 2006 10:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if they sign Bonds
by Brian in 317 on Nov 17, 2006 7:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
shouldn't the alternate title for this diary be
by monkeyball on Nov 17, 2006 10:42 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 


















