Turn Off Ads?
Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 789101112 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 177

Thread: No one to the hall this year

  1. #151
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,912

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    And no one was using steroids in 1930.
    The Babe reportedly consumed a lot of hot dogs (and booze) that year.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #152
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,374

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by RedFanAlways1966 View Post
    So if it is not such a big deal or difference-maker, then:
    I didn't say it wasn't a big deal. I'm saying it was an additive into what was inevitably going to be on offensive era. Absolutely there's no way Bonds hits 73 HR without the juice. However, Bonds was going to have fairly huge 2000-2004 seasons regardless. But PEDs helped him take down the HR records and that is a big deal. PEDS made Mark McGwire's entire career and that is a big deal. PED definitely affected the era. Yet that's a far cry from making the era what it was. It is possible to be both a big deal and not the main factor in the offensive explosion we saw.

    One thing from your list I actually don't think is all that strange is Sosa's 66 HR in 1998. As mentioned above, Maris jumped from 39 to 61 HR in 1961. Sosa was well removed from being a skinny teenager and he'd been a consistent feature on the NL HR leader boards for five seasons prior to 1998. And 1998 was an expansion year. The conditions were primed for someone to make a run at Maris in 1998 and Sosa was certainly among the leading candidates to be that guy.

    The more suspicious thing about Sosa is that he averaged 58 HR a year from 1998-2002. Even in a wildly skewed hitters era, that's tough to do. At least it's better evidence that his boat got lifted higher than the tide.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  4. #153
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,912

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    The more suspicious thing about Sosa is that he averaged 58 HR a year from 1998-2002. Even in a wildly skewed hitters era, that's tough to do. At least it's better evidence that his boat got lifted higher than the tide.
    Yes it is tough to do. Sosa is the only MLB player to ever do it. He is also the only MLB player to ever have three 60 HR seasons.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."

  5. #154
    For a Level Playing Field RedFanAlways1966's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Oakwood, OH
    Posts
    11,766

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    I didn't say it wasn't a big deal. I'm saying it was an additive into what was inevitably going to be on offensive era. Absolutely there's no way Bonds hits 73 HR without the juice. However, Bonds was going to have fairly huge 2000-2004 seasons regardless. But PEDs helped him take down the HR records and that is a big deal. PEDS made Mark McGwire's entire career and that is a big deal. PED definitely affected the era. Yet that's a far cry from making the era what it was. It is possible to be both a big deal and not the main factor in the offensive explosion we saw.

    One thing from your list I actually don't think is all that strange is Sosa's 66 HR in 1998. As mentioned above, Maris jumped from 39 to 61 HR in 1961. Sosa was well removed from being a skinny teenager and he'd been a consistent feature on the NL HR leader boards for five seasons prior to 1998. And 1998 was an expansion year. The conditions were primed for someone to make a run at Maris in 1998 and Sosa was certainly among the leading candidates to be that guy.

    The more suspicious thing about Sosa is that he averaged 58 HR a year from 1998-2002. Even in a wildly skewed hitters era, that's tough to do. At least it's better evidence that his boat got lifted higher than the tide.
    Good stuff, M2. I guess none of us will really know how much difference it made. And I agree that all the other conditions you mentioned matter as well.
    Small market fan... always hoping, but never expecting.

  6. #155
    Potential Lunch Winner Dom Heffner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    6,120

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    It is possible to be both a big deal and not the main factor in the offensive explosion we saw.
    This is insanity.

  7. #156
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,374

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor View Post
    Drug program implemented, power numbers and scoring returns to historical norms, rabbit ball pulled?
    Power numbers are not back to historic norms. We're still seeing roughly 50% more HR than we were 20 years ago and scoring is still on the high side because of it. Power is a consistent feature of the game and it's not dropping off to any sort of pre-90s norm.

    What's changed most recently is pitching has caught up with the power. Pitchers can't stop the long ball, but they've learned to contain (or survive) it. Exhibit A - Bronson Arroyo. There's more power up and down a major league lineup than when we were young. Yet there's also more pitchers equipped to deal with that. That's been the leveling effect.

    Implementing the drug program didn't do anything in terms of deflating scoring.

    NL Scoring:

    2001 - 4.70
    2002 - 4.45
    2003 - 4.61
    2004 - 4.64
    2005 - 4.45
    2006 - 4.76
    2007 - 4.71
    2008 - 4.54

    That's a pretty consistent run. So you get a scoring spike immediately after the last round of expansion and then a decade in which very little changed even though players supposed went off the juice in the middle of it.

    If steroids caused the spike, then where's the drop?

    That's why I say steroids fed the spike, but it still managed to endure afterward and, indeed, the game today still features important remnants of that spike.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  8. #157
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,374

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by Dom Heffner View Post
    This is insanity.
    Why? Because it's impossible for something to be a factor yet less than 50% of a totality?

    If so, somebody break out a ouija board and inform Ty Cobb that his career batting average wasn't a big deal because it was way below .500.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  9. #158
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,690

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    Why? Because it's impossible for something to be a factor yet less than 50% of a totality?

    If so, somebody break out a ouija board and inform Ty Cobb that his career batting average wasn't a big deal because it was way below .500.
    It wouldn't necessarily be 50% to be a "main factor." It depends on how many factors you are proposing are in play. Plus, are all factors equally weighted? In other words, was this a perfect storm, where a number of ingredients mixed to cause an explosion that would not have been as great in isolation?

    It is apparent to me that it is going to be very difficult to determine because the evidence is not of a very good quality, regardless of what factor is being considered. Anyone taking a dogmatic stance on their theory (and I'm not implying M2 is doing this) is going to have a hard time finding supporting documentation. Whatever went on, the tracks were covered pretty well, and I imagine those who would stand to lose the most are banking on the thing dying on the vine for lack of interest eventually. Of course, they will have to face their Maker.
    Last edited by traderumor; 01-11-2013 at 03:39 PM.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  10. #159
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,202

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by RedFanAlways1966 View Post
    So if it is not such a big deal or difference-maker, then:
    * Why test for it? - Because the public wants you to more than anything else.
    * Why do so many athletes seek it out and use it? - Why do so many people buy lottery tickets? You're talking about an insanely competitive and insecure group that looks for every possible advantage they can find. Even those who wouldn't take Steroids to gain an advantage would be influenced by thinking that their competitors were gaining an advantage on them.
    * Why do BALCOs exist and take the risk of jail/fines to manufacture and distribute it? - See market above. Lots of demand, little supply equals big profits.
    * Why did Barry Bonds increase his HRs from 34 to 73 (more than doubled from a sure Hall of Famer pre-PED)?
    * Why did Sammy Sosa increase his HRs from mid-30s to 66?

    If you think the last two bullets are relative to mostly weaker pitching, smaller parks and juiced balls, I have to say no freaking way.


    In Bonds' case, health played a large role. He hit 34 homers in 1999 in 434 plate appearances and hit 49 the next year in 607 PA. In the record breaking season, he hit 73 in 664 PA.
    The better question to ask is not how did it help him hit so many homers, it's how did a 16 year veteran stay so freakishly healthy(PED's).

    It's somewhat similar in Sosa's case, his PA/HR from age 27-35 was only above 15 once. In 1997, he "only" hit 36 home runs in 162 games that year, but from '98 to '03 he was under 15 PA/HR which is an impressive streak.


    PEDS are not like a pet rock. There must be something about them that causes all of the above to happen
    .

    I think the point those of us "defending" the players are making is that it's not quite as neat and tidy as "A bunch of players took PED's, they hit a bunch of HR's, therefore PED's led to the jump in home runs."

    There's a lot of correlation between steroids use, smaller ball parks, livelier balls, expansion era pitching, and the resulting strategic decisions that led to such a huge jump.

    For example, in 1996, Barry Larkin had 7 sacrifice bunts. He never layed down more than 3 in a season after that. Why? Because as the club's #3 hitter, in an era when a guy was in "scoring position" when he stepped to the plate, it became a more prevelant strategy to just "grip it and rip it."
    When people say that I donít know what Iím talking about when it comes to sports or writing, I think: Man, you should see me in the rest of my life.
    ---Joe Posnanski

  11. #160
    Viva la Rolen kaldaniels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    8,115

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Does anyone think Roger Maris and Hank Aaron would still have their records if steroids weren't used by Mac/Bonds/Sosa...?

    It is fair to say no, but I am just wondering who thinks so.

  12. #161
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,202

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by kaldaniels View Post
    Does anyone think Roger Maris and Hank Aaron would still have their records if steroids weren't used by Mac/Bonds/Sosa...?

    It is fair to say no, but I am just wondering who thinks so.
    I believe no on Maris, yes on Aaron. As I implied in my post above, I think the PED's really helped Bonds stay healthy into his late 30's when he had his largest home run numbers.

    However, every year players were banging on the door to 61, it was only a matter of time before someone got it.
    When people say that I donít know what Iím talking about when it comes to sports or writing, I think: Man, you should see me in the rest of my life.
    ---Joe Posnanski

  13. #162
    Viva la Rolen kaldaniels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    8,115

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by Hoosier Red View Post
    I believe no on Maris, yes on Aaron. As I implied in my post above, I think the PED's really helped Bonds stay healthy into his late 30's when he had his largest home run numbers.

    However, every year players were banging on the door to 61, it was only a matter of time before someone got it.
    Who do you think would have got it? One of the roid guys, sans roids?

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...R_season.shtml

  14. #163
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,172

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor View Post
    I think the expansion theory is muddying otherwise clear waters. And I don't think the mud belongs there. I'm sure it was a factor, that much of the point is valid. But the overarching explanation for the power surge of the late 90s early 00s era is rampant PEDs use. That passes the duck test when all the dust settles. Rabbit ball, with the evidence of "been done in the past," not so much.

    Drug program implemented, power numbers and scoring returns to historical norms, rabbit ball pulled? I think its more likely that PED use has been greatly reduced. With the big name failed tests, I'm sure there is a cat and mouse game going on, especially with the contracts up for grabs.

    Maybe they'll put the rabbit ball back in play again so they can justify even more stringent testing and penalties, all sarcasm intended.

    One thing that does give the rabbit ball theory some legs, admittedly, is the manipulation of the baseballs for Coors Field. It demonstrates that baseball can and will play games with the pill to get the results it wants. However, I'm not convinced that it is a primary factor in the steroid era power explosion. That is on the players. Why folks are running to defend guys who got rich by fleecing the system, I really do not understand.

    I'd also like to see some real time evidence of rabbit ball suspicions from the era. Or is this a recent theory?
    Then there's the White Sox balls in the mid 60's

    The White Sox in this era were also illegally storing baseballs in the freezer, which caused run scoring levels in games played in Comiskey to be at historic lows.
    Code:
    1963-1968
    
    WINNING PERCENTAGE displayed only--not a sorting criteria
    
    ERA                             DIFF   PLAYER   LEAGUE     PCT    
    1    White Sox                  0.63     2.76     3.39     .541   
    2    Orioles                    0.24     3.15     3.39     .558   
    3    Yankees                    0.23     3.16     3.39     .522   
    4    Twins                      0.20     3.19     3.40     .547   
    5    Angels                     0.09     3.30     3.40     .472   
    6    Indians                    0.06     3.33     3.39     .502   
    7    Tigers                     -.10     3.49     3.39     .550   
    8    A's                        -.45     3.84     3.39     .420   
    9    Senators                   -.45     3.84     3.39     .414   
    10   Red Sox                    -.49     3.88     3.39     .474   
    
    
    RUNS CREATED/GAME              RC/G    
    1    Twins                      4.34   
    2    Tigers                     4.31   
    3    Red Sox                    4.26   
    4    Orioles                    4.07   
    5    Yankees                    3.76   
    6    Indians                    3.74   
    7    A's                        3.66   
    8    White Sox                  3.56   
    9    Angels                     3.51   
    10   Senators                   3.41

  15. #164
    Redsmetz redsmetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Winton Place
    Posts
    11,235

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Here's an interesting piece from the Times baseball blog about other years in which no one was elected to the HOF:

    http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/0...?smid=pl-share
    ďIn the same way that a baseball season never really begins, it never really ends either.Ē - Lonnie Wheeler, "Bleachers, A Summer in Wrigley Field"

    The Baseball Emporium - Books & Things, that's Rallyonion.com

    The Baseball Bookstore

    http://tsc-sales.com/
    http://tscsales.blogspot.com/
    http://silverscreenbooks.com/

  16. #165
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,264

    Re: No one to the hall this year

    Quote Originally Posted by kaldaniels View Post
    Does anyone think Roger Maris and Hank Aaron would still have their records if steroids weren't used by Mac/Bonds/Sosa...?

    It is fair to say no, but I am just wondering who thinks so.
    Yes. I think if you take a non PED enabled aging pattern you see a significant drop in production as you age into your late 30's. Look at what happened to Griffey and his body breaking down. Look at ARod without roids and his body is breaking down.

    Aaron had to play until his was 42 to amass his 755 HR's. Do you think a guy like ARod would be able to hit 40+ HR's after he turned 40? Especially with his injury history over the past couple of seasons.

    I know I am using ARod to compare but he is on a more realistic path sans roids that Bonds/Mac/Sosa were ever on.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25