More Bonds

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not really. Most of Hank's improvement came from stadium and Barry's first improvement came from the era.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the Giants went from Candlestick to PacBell Park that year.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meant his first improvement - from the Pirates to the Giants. Barry "improved" because it includes his age 21-24 seasons and because he joined the Giants the year the offensive explosion occurred.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Not really. Most of Hank's improvement came from stadium.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oddly enough, his numbers didn't improve until after his fourth season in the new park, and coincided exactly when he admitted to using illegal substances.

In his last 6 years in Mil:
Hank averaged 1 HR per 16.23 AB at ages 26-31

In his first 3 years in Atl:
Hank averaged 1 HR per 16.15 AB at age 32-34

Nearly identical. Not much of an improvement based solely on the new stadium.

Then, something happened between 1968 and 1969. Hank turned 35, and as he admitted in his own autobiography, this was when he first used illegal drugs in hopes of assisting his performance.

In the next five years after this:
Hank averaged 1 HR per 11.82 AB, from the ages 35-39.

In their dissection of late-career surge statistics as "evidence" against Bonds, SI and other sports media won't dare look at other outliers performance's with the same scrutiny. They don't cite the numerous examples of players who had similar career highs at such late ages. That wouldn't serve the agenda to villify Bonds.

In their glorification of Aaron as the anti-Bonds, the revisionist history exploits Aaron and attempts to present him as a "beloved legend", but you will never read within their pages that Aaron admitted using illegal substances in hopes of improving his performance at age 35, and then set out on an unprecedented late-career surge.

The sports media wants it to be a black/white issue, and I don't mean race, but in terms of simplicity. They want you to think in terms of Aaron being a heroic angel, and Bonds as a big bad wolf, and not look any deeper.

Because if you did, you'd start to realize they parallel each other in almost uncanny fashion.

[Gregatron]

Nice post again RedBean.

[Pudge714]

If you keep following the links on that blog you get some really good stuff. Especially in regards to Bonds and SI.

[shemp]

[ QUOTE ]
Then, something happened between 1968 and 1969.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. They moved the fences in 10 feet in the alleys.

Meanwhile, at 35, Barry Bonds went to one of the worst parks for a lefty in the league.

I'm fine with Barry. Comparing their respective renaissance at 35 without mentioning the parks is silly.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

Exactly. They moved the fences in 10 feet in the alleys.
Comparing their respective renaissance at 35 without mentioning the parks is silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the 5 years from age 30-34, on THE ROAD:
Hank averaged 1 HR every 19.76 AB.

In the 5 years from age 35-39, ON THE ROAD:
Hank averaged 1 HR every 14.22 AB

That's a pretty significant power increase in ROAD homers.

Do you really figure moving the fences in 10 feet in the gaps at Fulton County helped give him such a late career power surge while on the ROAD????

[Jack of Arcades]

OK, RedBean owned me re: Aaron. nice one, I just accepted conventional wisdom which is obviously bad. I never held Aaron in too high esteem though.

Still, the "progressive power" thing about Bonds is sketchy. His Pirates time is hurt by his developmental years and his 2nd period is helped by the era shift.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Still, the "progressive power" thing about Bonds is sketchy. His Pirates time is hurt by his developmental years and his 2nd period is helped by the era shift.

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally agree. I don't really buy that theory either, as much as it has been presented as a progression in a vacuum in the abscence of any other factors, as if Bonds could have sat on the couch each winter, clocked in and progressively hit more homeruns.

Anyone can see his late career surge in power is primarily because he lifted weights, bulked up, stayed in shape, etc.

The point of contention is whether or not the bulk, longevity, or resulting numbers is a "smoking gun" of proof of steroid use, which just isn't the case.

Suggestive, circumstantial, speculative...sure. But certainly not "proof of steroid use".

[Victor]

whats up with aaron using illegal substances? i never heard this before. what did he use? when did he admit it?

[THAY3R]

Everyone used Amphetamines back then. It's not really a big deal, but it becomes annoying when people think Bonds using steroids is a big deal when everyone now uses steroids.