There are issues that surround Barry Bonds and will follow him for the rest of his career, and beyond.
But of all the questions that have hounded him over the years, the biggest one might have to be asked this week, after Bonds signs a one-year deal with the Giants: Who on earth thought it was a good idea to give Barry Bonds $16 million?
For the sake of argument, I’ll forgo the legal issues surrounding Bonds at the moment, and even pretend (as if it were possible) that the issues do not exist.
Sure, Giants’ management sees a guy that has hit 734 homers in his career, and who has been the primary drawing card for the team since he arrived in 1993.
I’m sorry, but all I see is a 42-year-old guy who turns 43 in July. I see a guy who has hit only 31 homers in the last two seasons, missing more than 170 games over that span.
Bonds is also someone who would benefit greatly from only having to swing the bat. By signing in the National League, the 20-year veteran will have to pick up a glove nearly every game he starts.
Those who are in favor of the signing can point to two things: First, Bonds is 22 homers away from breaking Henry Aaron’s all-time mark, a moment which will result in a number of sellouts and revenue.
The second reason is Bonds’ proven track record as a draw. The Giants drew more than 3 million fans in 2006, and since the Giants managed just 76 wins last season, you’d have to figure it was his allure that brought them in.
But assuming that all those things remain consistent in 2007, can the salary still be justified? In over 20 seasons in the Major Leagues, the slugger has appeared in one World Series. The Giants have missed the postseason in each of the last three years — all with Bonds’ off the field issues hovering over the franchise. Does the signing really help the Giants contend? Given Bonds problems getting along with some teammates, isn’t it possible the signing does just the opposite?
Article comments
1 - BruceH
Hey Zach, You miss the point. Professional baseball is entertainment. Barry Bonds is good entertainment, plain and simple, people in San Francisco (more than other cities) are very likely to buy lots of tickets to the games to see him play.
2 - Zach Baker
True, but what if his body breaks down and he plays 15 games?
3 - alessandro nicolo
Of course they overpaid. But they are calculating he'll bring so much more. Indeed, if he breaks down will it be worth it? I don't think Bonds will ever be a part of the big one.
4 - Gordon
Zach, I live in San Francisco and I know lots more poeple wanted him back for one reason: to hit Homeruns. If he really does break down after 15 games, then we'll go rioting to Brian Sabean. If Bonds makes it the whole season and breaks Hank Aarons's HR record, then it won't be as bad.
But the bottom line is Bonds is a selfish person and is too old and has such bad knees that he should'nt even get a millions dollars for 1 year.
But some people in this city wanted him back because he was part of this city for so long and they didn't want him to retire in a different uniform.
I also heard that he will also get performance bonuses so his contract coul be worth up to 20 million dollars.
5 - Matthew T. Sussman
Performance enhancing contract?
6 - RJ Elliott
Well, I certainly hope no opposing pitcher beans him in the face with a 98 MPH fastball or anything...you know, for the Giants' sake.
7 - Sammy
He'll still draw a crowd. Thats the name of the game. Money.
8 - Snogo
I myself don't live anywhere close to a professional sports venue but unfortunatley was a
SF Giants fan and Bonds was magnificent to watch and i'm sure the fans got their over priced ticket cost, moneys worth. Just look at what other players have recieved in the last 3wks during the Baseball meetings. Bonds has more talent and Power than most in the news.
Call me old fashion but, "sports" should really be a part of the financial section.
9 - Paul
LOoks like the writer was wrong here. Bonds is doing awesome so far this year!
GO BONDS!!!