Protection in a lineup now doesn't help a player? What a curious argument - I thought it was the other way around. Well whatever the case, protection in a lineup is mostly immaterial.
I'd take Prince Fielder on my team too over Bonds - but only because Prince is much more likely to play 162 games and can play a position on the field. Bonds' fielding isn't very good these days and he has to sit out a fair amount.
Bonds is still one of the top hitters in the league. If not the top, in the top three.
I said protection in a lineup would tank his OBP. He'd get more pitches to hit - he'd have a higher percentage of homeruns, sure, but considering the mind boggling number of walks he had last season, and considering how much that would go down with protection, his OBP would be very much compromised. Hitting by itself didn't give bonds the OBP he had, it was the walks. Unless I'm very mistaken, a guy with protection isn't going to have an OBP 200 points higher than his batting average.
Also, how is protection immaterial? He scored 75 runs last season, and generated 28 of them by himself! When essentially everyone else on the team pales in comparison to him, he's going to get walked, which is an easy OBP raise. Bonds is still a great hitter, but I don't really see his OBP as a good argument for that.
Edited by metallidevils, 11 October 2007 - 05:48 PM.