More Bonds

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Bonds actually led the NL 3x before his late career surge so my entire analysis was off base.


[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting.

[ QUOTE ]

Aaron 30-34 2.71 Bonds 30-34 2.61
Aaron 35-39 3.80 Bonds 35-39 3.86

I'm not sure why my #'s are different (maybe rounding plus I took Aaron and Bonds' #'s out of the league #'s which maybe Red Bean didn't do) .


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure the difference is in the rounding. I rounded to two decimals when figuring the league, then the player, then the rate times the league.

I also didn't remove their numbers from the league as a whole. I also only used the National League.

[ QUOTE ]

but to me this is significant


[/ QUOTE ]

Even using your numbers:

One player went from 2.7 to 3.8 times the league.
The other went from 2.6 to 3.9 times the league.

That isn't a significant difference when using the metric to show that a post age-35 power surge is not unprecedented.

You see it for yourself. The increase in Bonds HR rate relative to the league after age 35 is definately preceded by a strikingly similar increase from Aaron.


[ QUOTE ]

These are terribly bad examples. First of all, Aaron in 1973, Stargell in 1978 and 1979 and Fisk in 1988 all had one thing in common: none of them were full-time, 500+ at bat players any longer, as they'd been in their primes.

It's a lot easier for an older player to improve his production if he has a third to half of the season to rest as opposed to the years when he was playing every day, a fact that has absolutely zero to do with Barry Bonds.


[/ QUOTE ]

So the basic assertion here is that it was easier for Aaron to achieve a higher HR rate because he was "no longer a 500+ AB guy" late in his career, he had a "third to half a season to rest", and it has "absolutely zero to do" in Bonds case because it is implied he stayed at "everyday 500+ at bat levels".

Hmm....let's look at something real quick:

<u>Age 35</u>
Aaron - 147gms 547AB
Bonds - 143gms 480AB

<u>Age 36</u>
Aaron - 150gms 516AB
Bonds - 153gms 476AB

<u>Age 37</u>
Aaron - 139gms 495AB
Bonds - 143gms 403AB

<u>Age 38</u>
Aaron - 129gms 449AB
Bonds - 130gms 390AB

<u>Age 39</u>
Aaron - 120gms 392AB
Bonds - 147gms 373AB

Oops!!!

<u>Age 35-39 yearly average:</u>
Aaron - 137gms 480AB
Bonds - 143gms 424AB

<u>Assertion:</u>"none of them were full-time, 500+ at bat players any longer"
<u>Fact:</u> Aaron averaged 480AB's from age 35-39, surpassing 500+ twice, and missing it nearly a third time with 495. He also average 563 plate appearances during this time. He had more AB's than Bonds at every comparable year in age.

<u>Assertion:</u>"he has a third to half of the season to rest"
<u>Fact:</u> Aaron averaged 137 games played from age 35-39. He never missed anything close to half a season, nor even a third of a season during this time. Bonds average 143, or 6 games more per year.

<u>Assertion:</u>"a fact that has absolutely zero to do with Barry Bonds."
<u>Fact:</u> Apparently what serves as a "reason" for Aaron doesn't apply to Bonds equally. (even when it is falsely asserted in Aaron's case).

As a matter of fact, what is being asserted in favor of Aaron is actually only true of Bonds, not Aaron, when looking at ages 35-39

Aaron had 500+ ABs twice (plus one near miss).
Bonds hasn't had 500+ AB's since age 33.

Also, Aaron never "rested" by missing a third or half of a season.
But, Bonds missed over a third in 1999, and well over half in 2005.