Official argue about all things Barry Bonds GOAT thread

[manbearpig]

Lets get back on track. The following are two quotes from you:

[ QUOTE ]



Here, lemme help....and as you would have guessed (ahem....as you already knew), there *IS* a discrepancy in the number of at-bats between the two samples....which is why your use of raw HR totals was used to argue your point, yet the HR Rate shows that it isn't the case.

Ages 32-35: 74HR in 1219 AB = 16.47 AB/HR
Ages 36-39: 62HR in 928 AB = 14.97 AB/HR

And oddly enough, while I'd love to believe you weren't trying to be dishonest with you sudden use of raw numbers...(HA HA 74 IS MORE THAN 62!!).....I found it odd that you did so after insisting previously on using rates instead of raw numbers.

Funny how it works, huh?

[/ QUOTE ]
Ages 32-35 cover the years 1966-1969, including 1968. Ages 36-39 cover the years 1970-1973.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

There was a bigger change in hr/500ABs in the years closely following 1968 than there was closely following 97.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because 1968 itself, much like 1987, was an aberration, and by comparing an aberration in a vaccum to the year following it is disingenous...although you may not have been aware of it.

Take a look at these league AB/HR ratios:

Pre expansion, pre-rules change:
1962-1967: 43.2

the 1968 season: 61.6

Post expansion, post rules change:
1969-1973: 43.99

The 5 years after expansion were a <u>decrease</u> in HR rate as compared to the 5 years prior to expansion, when accounting for the 1968 aberration.

Instead of relying on the one year aberration as the meat of your argument....

Granted, I am limited in my interest to be objective and factual, a constraint that doesn't seem to hinder most (hey samsonh!)....but the same exact argument you are making for a dramatic statistical increase from 1968 to 1969 could be made for a dramatic decrease from 1967 to 1968.....as the 1968 season was an aberration.

Only, there were no significant changes from 1967 to 1968....and your drawing conclusions only from viewing 1968 to 1969 in a vaccum without taking it into context may be a clear cut fallacy of "correlation_does_not_imply_causation".

But then again, if your just here to argue for the sake of arguing with me, like you've said, then you don't really care much about any of this....

[/ QUOTE ]
But in this one, you pull 1968 out as an aberration.


So lets look at some different numbers.

From 1966-69, excluding 1968, Aarons road ab/hr was 13.77. Including 1968 bumps that number down to 16.47.

The NL over those same period, excluding 1968, went 44.6 ab/hr. Including 1968 moves that number to 47.7.

Lets now look at 1970-73.

Aaron- 14.97 ab/hr on the road.
NL- 43.8 ab/hr

So depending on whether we include 1968 or not we can come to some very different conclusions.

Leaving 1968 out of both data sets we see that the NL went from 44.6 ab/hr (66,67,69) to 43.8 ab/hr (70,71,72,73). A small increase. Aaron over the same period went from 13.77 ab/hr (66,67,69) to 14.97 ab/hr (70,71,72,73). A slight decrease.

This should put to bed the argument that Aarons road ab/hr rate improved as he aged.