Should the Yanks sign Barry Bonds?

by anaconda on May 14, 2008 5:07 PM EDT in New York Yankees Analysis

Our friends at RAB raises the question.

With the offensive woes now stretching 40 games into the season, it was just a matter of time before someone said the "B" word.

In my opinion, he's not worth the hassle and enormous distraction, but I'd be interested to hear your take on the issue.

Discuss.

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I don't see

room for him without moving (cut or trade) Giambi and/or Matsui. But I am not opposed to the idea. I almost wrote about it last night in my fury over the offense’s inability to capitalize on one of the best starts of the young season.

This entire era has been and will continue to be a deal with the devil for all of baseball- MLB may pretend that contracts has expired, but the players have simply switched to drugs we don’t have tests for.

"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."

by jscape2000 on May 14, 2008 5:17 PM EDT reply actions

No.

End of discussion.

by docgonzo on May 14, 2008 5:48 PM EDT reply actions

Bonds is under indictment

for perjury. This means that the government also feels it can establish as fact that he used PEDs. If we sign him it means we value winning over morals, rules and laws. I do not.

Signing Bonds would make me think long and hard about whether I could continue to support the team. Yankees, if you are listening, I am a season ticket holder.

Lose with honor first. (And I do not concede the Yanks will lose if they don’t sign him, or would win if they did.)

A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. Herm Albright (1876 - 1944)

by Cbeck3 on May 14, 2008 6:06 PM EDT reply actions

Hell no

Like we need the chemistry issue, negative press, and the joy of the perjury trial coming up real soon. Plus he’s old, declining and injury prone. Pass.

Barry, it’s not collusion. It’s every major league team recognizing the issues above.

by mrljdavid on May 14, 2008 7:15 PM EDT reply actions

Nope

The indictment and the distractions that will come with it outweigh any positive contributions on the field. Besides, we need a first baseman, not a designated hitter.

by stusviews on May 14, 2008 8:41 PM EDT reply actions

Holy crap no

That would be the single dumbest move this side of re-signing Clemens. Toxic.

I always feel pressure. What I don't have is fear. -- El Duque

by LateInningRelief on May 15, 2008 10:15 AM EDT reply actions

Sure ...

and then let’s sign Palmeiro to play first, MacGwire to DH, and Sosa to come off the bench. ... ARE YOU FREAKIN’ INSANE, MAN????

I thought we got rid of Roth?

"Baseball is the background music of my life." -George Will

by Ronster22 on May 16, 2008 2:31 PM EDT reply actions

Are you speaking to me?

Because I’m completely against the idea.

by anaconda on May 16, 2008 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Nope, our delusional friend at RAB ...

Without even reading your post I knew you were against it ‘cause you aren’t a moron.

"Baseball is the background music of my life." -George Will

by Ronster22 on May 19, 2008 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions

Signing of Bonds?

With Torre at the helm – yes. With Girardi – no. Torre was the perfect guy to manage all that distraction and combined with the veteran leadership of Jeter, Rivera, Posada and Pettitte, Bonds would have been kept in check.

Best place for Barry Bonds is in Toronto where they desperately need some offense from the left side. Lyle Overbay, Matt Stairs and Greg Zaun just don’t cut it from the left handed batters box.

He would also put a lot of fannies in the seats up at Rogers Centre.

by thejobarules on May 16, 2008 8:28 PM EDT reply actions