This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
7/24/2013 11:22 PM
.262/.389/.617

That was Bonds' batting line in 1999, the season he turned 35.  Around then is when he supposedly started juicing, and suddenly we see these batting lines from 2000-2004, when he was 36-40 years old:

.306/.440/.688
.328/.525/.863
.370/.582/.799
.341/.529/.749
.362/.609/.812


It sorta feels off, you know?



7/25/2013 2:45 AM
To be fair, Bonds was injured in 1999. His full season stats from the previous three seasons aren't too far off from his 2000 triple-slash:

.308 .461 .615
.291 .446 .585
.303 .438 .609

.306 .440 .688 in 2000 isn't far off at all from those numbers above from 1996-1998. 2001 saw an offensive explosion league-wide, but otherwise, those numbers are a little off, but not as off as by going just off of the 1999 numbers. However, anytime someone puts up numbers never seen before they'll probably seem a little off, but Bonds was one of the few who would've been capable of such an extreme performance at that time.  
7/25/2013 1:04 PM
you could do the same for Ruth though Crazy - 

1925 (when he turned 30 - his line was:

.290/.393/.543

the next few years he put up the following:

0.372 0.516 0.737
0.356 0.486 0.772
0.323 0.463 0.709
0.345 0.430 0.697


looks just as off as Bonds stats in my opinion
7/25/2013 1:09 PM
to quote my brother:

"anytime someone puts up numbers never seen before they'll probably seem a little off" 

Bonds was doing things, IN THE STEROID ERA, that had never been seen in the history of the game.  In my mind, to consider "the greatest players of all time", you don't just look at stats, you look at their stats in the era they played in.  Ruth was incredible not just because of what he did, but of what he did in comparison to the rest of baseball.  Bonds was incredible, not just because of his stats, but because of what he was doing compared to the rest of baseball.  If steroids were the issue, then why was Bonds the only one putting up those INSANE stats?  Sure there were some good numbers out there, but no one was as consistently good, or AS GOOD as Bonds
7/25/2013 1:24 PM
Look at his Adjusted OPS+ numbers at b-r.com.  Bonds' best OPS+ prior to his 2001-2004 run was back in 1993 -- 206.  The only other time his OPS+ was over 200 was the previous season, 1992, when it was 204.  He was 27-28 years old those seasons.  

Fast forward to 2001, when he begins the season aged 36 (turns 37 in the summer), and he puts up an OPS+ of 259.  Next season, it's 268.  Then in 2003 it's 231, and in 2004 -- the season he turns 40 -- it's 263.  

So he's shattered his personal bests roughly a decade past his "prime" -- and by prime I mean his natural, biological, God-given, un-juiced prime.  He's not only shattered his own records in those 4 seasons, but 3 of those seasons represent the best ever OPS+ years ever.  

To put this in perspective, let's look at the players Bonds was compared to in the initial post above. Here are their best OPS+ seasons, and their ages at the time:

Ruth 255 (25)
Williams 235 (22)
Mantle 210 (24)

We'll never know what sort of numbers Bonds would have put up those 4 seasons without juicing, but I think it's safe to say he wouldn't have improved so much on his previous bests.  In fact, I think it's reasonable to assume that he wouldn't have matched those previous bests.  
7/25/2013 1:34 PM
Point 1/ these days, specialists working in the PED field call themselves "anti-aging" docs. It's the polite euphemistic name for it, for regular guys and gals who are just using to look younger.

Point 2/ compared to the era he played in. Everyone else was using, too. Part of the testimony against Lance from other riders was that some guys said the stuff didn't do the sane things for them. Human bodies react differently to drugs. I can let knocked out by a Tylenol, most women I know can't even feel two or three. Ozzy Osbourne and Keith Richards can take heroin and not die. Some people just take drugs better than others.
7/25/2013 1:42 PM
I think the body armor that was specially made to groove his swing is overlooked also.
7/25/2013 5:11 PM
all interesting points.  But we can all agree, he was miles ahead of his peers during the steroid era.    The other side of the argument.  He took cattle steroids and his head turned into the shape of a freak.  (balanced reporting here)
7/25/2013 5:59 PM
If he just admitted that he was jealous of McGwire and Sosa (2 incomplete players) I would give him a pass.  He was a Hall Of Famer before he took the roids.  And all the players  from the 70's whining about these guys is ridiculous.  Like they wouldn't have taken them if they were available.
7/25/2013 9:28 PM
The thing I most remember about Bonds, and McGwire and Sosa for that matter, was how much fun I had watching them play baseball.  Those were fun years.  Sure, in retrospect we're questioning the numbers and all, but at the time, that was some flat out fun.
7/26/2013 12:51 AM
Posted by cuppie1 on 7/25/2013 9:28:00 PM (view original):
The thing I most remember about Bonds, and McGwire and Sosa for that matter, was how much fun I had watching them play baseball.  Those were fun years.  Sure, in retrospect we're questioning the numbers and all, but at the time, that was some flat out fun.
I remember a brief conversation I had with someone the night McGwire broken Maris' record.

Zubin S: "You think Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa are on steroids, don't you?"
Tim Y: "Of course!"

I don't think there is any "retrospect" about it.  

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.