Did they? Perhaps you are correct, I'm not sure, but I'd like to see a statistical breakdown of runs scored by SF in innings that Bonds was intentionally walked vs. innings that he wasn't even though the situation may have called for it from 2001-2004. Considering that Bonds' rate statistics were Ruthian or better during that time (.560 OBP, .810 SLG), and he played a full schedule, I would think that either his run totals and RBI totals should have also been equally or near equally gargantuan. But they weren't. Of course they were still near the top of the league, but not really in line with his off the charts rate stats. What does that say? When he got on base he didn't score as often as the average person who got on base, and when he hit a homer/double, he didn't drive in as many runs as the average guy who gets a homer or a double. This is a very rough, eyeballing the stats way to do this sort of thing, but it seems to me that managers did a good job of pitching around him during that time.