Re: Bonds Responds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This post should cover all your Hank Aaron comparisons:

park effects.

And a linky for you: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=2795

[/ QUOTE ]

Hank definately benefited from HOME park effects at the launching pad, as the article shows.

But...it doesn't "cover all the comparisions" for his late career surge...considering he played half his games AWAY from the home stadium, and through the magic of statistical splits, we can quantify the difference over the same time period independent of his home park.

Let's look at what Hank did over the same time period, away from Fulton County.

AB/HR on the ROAD:
Age 30-34: 19.77
Age 35-39: 14.22

A HUGE increase in ROAD HR Rate.

Oops...

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me have a go at cherry picking numbers:

From 1966 to 1969 (ages 32 to 35)

Aaron hit 84 hr's at home and 74 on the road.

From 1970 to 1973 (ages 36 to 39)

Aaron hit 97 hr's at home and 62 on the road.

Please to be explaining.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you using HR and not AB/HR, which is, you know, ACTUALLY a measure of power, instead of raw HR which is a measure of nothing.

Re: Bonds Responds
 

[ QUOTE ]

If you take into account just offense, his EqA jumps from a previous career high of .364 to a new career high of .427 at 36, then again with .453 at 37, a slight drop to .412 at 38, and his third career high in EqA in four years at age 39 with a .457 mark.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two of those years prior to testing, and two of them after testing was implemented.

And notice that the best season came during a season of full-fledged testing and penalites under the MLB Steroid Policy, and a season AFTER he testified at the grand jury.

Wow...

Just imagine what he could have done all along his career under a program that would've kept all those pesky pitchers off the juice. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Bonds Responds
 

[ QUOTE ]
Two of those years prior to testing, and two of them after testing was implemented.

And notice that the best season came during a season of full-fledged testing and penalites under the MLB Steroid Policy, and a season AFTER he testified at the grand jury.

Wow...

[/ QUOTE ]

unfortunately, a lack of a positive test does not prove innocence, as strange as that sounds. if you have no or insignificant tests for the PED in question, the fact that you were tested means little.

Re: Bonds Responds
 

[ QUOTE ]

Fact: Bonds' EqA skyrocketed at an age and to a level which no one else has ever approached.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, Bonds was better than anyone else.

And guess what, he was even better once MLB did something to reduce steroid use amongst it's players.

<u>Fact:</u> Bonds' EqA skyrocketed to it's highest level AFTER the MLB Steroid Policy took effect, and everyone was tested for performance enhancing substances.

Sweet....

Re: Bonds Responds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Two of those years prior to testing, and two of them after testing was implemented.

And notice that the best season came during a season of full-fledged testing and penalites under the MLB Steroid Policy, and a season AFTER he testified at the grand jury.

Wow...

[/ QUOTE ]

unfortunately, a lack of a positive test does not prove innocence, as strange as that sounds. if you have no or insignificant tests for the PED in question, the fact that you were tested means little.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are saying what I think you are saying you probably cant just say PED. At the very least, PED* or "PED."

Re: Bonds Responds
 

&lt;3 RedBean

Re: Bonds Responds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Right, but he got better as he got older. He didn't maintain. His power numbers increased dramatically as he got older,

[/ QUOTE ]

So did Hank's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. They maintained, but didn't really grow, especially when you factor in park effects.

I count 5 35+HR seasons before the age of 30 and 6 after, with 4 of those 6 coming after the move to Atlanta and the moving in of the fences.

Re: Bonds Responds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This post should cover all your Hank Aaron comparisons:

park effects.

And a linky for you: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=2795

[/ QUOTE ]

Hank definately benefited from HOME park effects at the launching pad, as the article shows.

But...it doesn't "cover all the comparisions" for his late career surge...considering he played half his games AWAY from the home stadium, and through the magic of statistical splits, we can quantify the difference over the same time period independent of his home park.

Let's look at what Hank did over the same time period, away from Fulton County.

AB/HR on the ROAD:
Age 30-34: 19.77
Age 35-39: 14.22

A HUGE increase in ROAD HR Rate.

Oops...

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me have a go at cherry picking numbers:

From 1966 to 1969 (ages 32 to 35)

Aaron hit 84 hr's at home and 74 on the road.

From 1970 to 1973 (ages 36 to 39)

Aaron hit 97 hr's at home and 62 on the road.

Please to be explaining.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you using HR and not AB/HR, which is, you know, ACTUALLY a measure of power, instead of raw HR which is a measure of nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know I should be, but I am at work and dont have time to spend all day digging.

Edit: I agree with you that his ab/hr would be better but this is not useless I dont think. Unless there is some large discrepancy in the number of at bats he got over each of those samples that I am missing the raw numbers should be relatively significant.

Re: Bonds Responds
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Marcus Allen was at his party? Barry must be a good guy. Marcus wouldn't hang out with bad people, you know other than OJ Simpson anyway.


[/ QUOTE ]

I take it your not so up to date on the relationship between Marcus and OJ.

But, don't let that get in the way of you trying to draw comparisions between someone found liable for killing people and someone who hits curveballs for a living.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't even close to comparing Barry and OJ, and I definitely am not up to date with the OJ/Marcus relationship, who gives a [censored] about that. My point was that dropping names of people that attended his party is a funny way to argue that he must not be a bad guy. Lots of famous, rich people have parties where tons of other famous people attend. It doesn't make them good people.

Re: Bonds Responds
 

[ QUOTE ]

And guess what, he was even better once MLB did something to reduce steroid use amongst it's players.

[/ QUOTE ]

And now I have you arguing an entirely different thing.

[ QUOTE ]

Because I strongly disagree with your assertion of it being a general consensus that elite baseball players begin to decline after age 30.

In fact, what usually sets them apart is their longevity and production much after others usually decline.

Bonds is no exception to the rule, he's just another in a long line of HOF'ers who've done it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're obviously going to say, OMFG I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT EQA AND THIS AND THIS. But whatever. My general point wipes out anything you can do to defend Bonds' massive statistical increase.

Jose Guillen allegedly bought steroids from 02 to 05. I guess we'll never know if he used them or anything, but he allegedly spent 19K on them. He's been testing clean, and since his performance increased after 02, OPS-wise it's been about the same; he's kept most of his gains. So has Juan Rincon, who was caught cheating. I guess it's a good thing I wasn't ever arguing Bonds has been caught cheating, have I?

Just curious: what's your reasoning as to Bonds' unprecedented offensive explosion at age 37 and on? It's never been remotely rivaled in history, and I'm sure any statistical study would show it is statistically viable and not just random fluctuation.