It doesn't make sense for the SF Giants to not bring back Bonds for one more year in 2008. First off, even

Question

though they paid Bonds 19 million this season for part-time duty, he brought the fans in and packed em in like sardines, which brought the seasons attendance at AT&T Park to well over 3 million. That's a lot of people, hot dogs, beers, hats and everything else the average fan buys. I'm sure the Giants still made a ton of money this season. It would be fiscally smart to bring back Bonds for one more season next year even at a discounted rate of around 10 million, because, the Giants will still pack em in. As Bonds is like 65 hits short of 3,000 and 4 RBI's short of 2,000. It makes sense to keep him around one more season for this milestones. He is a cash cow for the Giants. He is their marquis name. Even with the steroid controversy, Bonds still makes tons of money for the Giants.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/bondsba01.shtml

Answer 1

as a giants fan, a season ticket holder and someone who lives in the city-this is a sad move but its still a good one. I agree they should have tried to keep him maybe use him off the bench..but the problem with that is (1) bond's won't come off the bench (2) he won't take a pay cut) (3) he can't run no more and in all reality cost us THIS YEAR A LONE no less than 20 games because of his defense. In all reality he didn't win us many games either. As for being a cash cow. yes he was (hey he's one of my favorite players and i own a bonds jersey) anyway the real CASH COW in any team isn't a player but a WINNING TEAM. the giants understand that they need to move on...now is this just talk? will the give us more crappy players like roberts or durham or klesko? hey all nice guys but we are past that nice guy stage we need winners. will the giants go out and get better younger prospects? a hanely rameriz, jose reyes type? fast with power and 5 tool player type?

for me this is just a cost cutting move. I really doubt the giants will make efforts to sign really good players. because here in san fran though many of us locals are fans-the fact is many of the seats are often filled with out of towners or tourists or the coporate types who use the tickets to host clients (they know nothing about the game) so point being the giants figure they can still rip the fans off by keeping ticket prices high (even if they have a crappy team on the field) because fans COME TO THE GAME TO FOR THE STADIUM. its so nice

but that's how it goes. I just hope my giants make a run at someone decent. adruw jones? who knows. but i hope its not mike lowell (and it probably will be) or some other junk player like him.

Answer 2

Bonds may very well have packed 'em in, but he was going for the highest-profile record in the sport. Yes, 2008 will bring his 2000th RBI (no one will care), and likely his 3000th hit and the runs scored record, and those will be rousing moments, but -- so what? It's just more Barry asserting Barry; we already know how good he is and has been, we've seen his best. And it's hard to inspire the masses to buy tickets when they have maybe a 2 in 3 chance of watching him play.

However, nothing packs in the fans like a winning team, and the Giants are not going to be that in 2008, with or without Bonds. Regardless that he has been the best player on the team, and probably would be still in '08, he's not going to be around for the next Giants contender, and the team may as well get a jump on the rebuilding. There's a lot of deadwood on the roster, players seriously too old and declining to think they've got one last push for a pennant next year (not in that division), so the team may as well get on with the wholesale brush-clearing, and saying good-bye to Barry is far and away the biggest hurdle. Better now than later.

And, who knows? Maybe some foggy January morning Magowan will see that 2008 season ticket sales are not up to snuff and give him a call, if no AL team has picked him up to DH by then. And they'd still have to negotiate price.

Answer 3

I believe that the Giants are not looking into how much marketability Bonds is, locally. They are looking into the future, building a good, young team infused by players from the minors. The past few seasons, they tried to build a veteran team that had Bonds as the centerpiece. Next season, they will realize that they will lose a few here and there at the gates. But, after a few years, the team will have a very good team with the youngsters as the major pieces, then sign one young veteran, like what happened in '93 when they signed Bonds. I hate to see him play for another team, but we have to bite the bullet to get the team back to winning.

Answer 4

Those are all valid reasons.

I also cannot imagine which teams would sign Barry Bonds to a 19 million dollar contract next year. I'm pretty sure that he will have to take a cut to his paycheck, specially with his deteriorizing defense and speed on the bases. I'm sure the Giants could have arranged that.

Answer 5

And yet the team, as a whole, was terrible. They need the money they paid him to rebuild the team. Bonds has a long ball, but a team needs more than home runs to win.

Answer 6

Barry Bonds, would be enjoying for a American League group as (DH),keep in mind San Francisco,needs to armed a youthful group finding in direction of the destiny.Bonds is (40 3) 12 months.previous, he does not has youthful legs from now directly to cover the outfield place. he would be greater advantageous of interior the "A.L./ DH",What he relatively needs is the "3000" hit mark to function to his legacy,simply by fact a championship ring is incredibly uncertain.

Answer 7

agreed whit what youre saying. but now that bonds is the new so called:"homerun king" no body cares. he gets less attention. he`s 19million and he aint worth that much on how he plays on the field. if youre going to pay bonds 19mil. get arod at 30mil. hes more worth it. i`m saying that about arod and im a redsox fan so...

Answer 8

No one wants to see him hit 770 or 775. They don't care anymore.