Re: More Bonds
he's def. done a good job of preventing facts in a reasonable way. I'm just not sure the Bonds/Aaron post 35 comparison is as close as he states.
I went back and looked at each guy Top 10 seasons in terms of .eqa (overall hitting effectiveness) and ISO SLG (power, using Davenport translated #'s). in terms of .eqa, Bonds post 35 years constitute his 4 best which are also his 4 "off the charts" years. His 42 and 35 seasons also crack the top 10.
Aaron, meanwhile, had his best years all fall in the more typical age range. his age 36 season was his 6th best, his age 38 season 10th best.
Bonds:
Age EQA
39 0.456
37 0.453
36 0.427
38 0.412
27 0.377
28 0.374
42 0.372
31 0.362
35 0.36
32 0.35
Aaron
Age EQA
29 0.362
25 0.351
24 0.35
28 0.342
30 0.337
32 0.336
36 0.335
34 0.335
23 0.334
38 0.334
in terms of ISO SLG, the story gets a bit better for Aaron.
his top 3 seasons came post 35.
Age ISO SLG
37 0.425
39 0.412
35 0.384
28 0.363
33 0.353
29 0.334
26 0.334
23 0.332
32 0.33
25 0.329
Age ISO SLG
for Bonds, the effect is even more extreme
36 0.553
39 0.49
37 0.459
38 0.448
28 0.418
27 0.415
40 0.404
35 0.395
29 0.376
34 0.375
So, while they both enjoyed power surges late in their career, Bonds was even more pronounced. and in terms of overall hitting, it's not even close between the 2: Bonds best years, easily, came post 35, while this isn't true for Aaron at all.
|