lastingsgriller wrote: mweir145 wrote:
lastingsgriller wrote:I'll even give you broken or close to broken. But 73 HR's is 19.7% higher than the previous record. It's not even close.
do me a favor. open up your excel. copy in the top 100 HR seasons of all-time. Then, make a column graph of the data. you'll notice right away that 66, 70, and 73 are complete outliers. they don't even look like they belong in the same data set. and, obviously,the more data you add over the past 100 years, the sillier those numbers look.
This is actually a reason to believe there was much more impacting the offense in that time period than just prevalent PED use. PED use has been prevalent in baseball for the last 50+ years (and is still likely prevalent now), but there was only one stretch when elite hitters started going off for 65+ HR.
What about the fact that all 6 of those 63 hr+ seasons just happen to come from 3 known steroid users?
Don't you think that if something else was the prevailing factor there would have been more than 3 people cranking out those numbers?
The only good argument to that is that those 3 would have been the elite power bats of that generation with or without steroids, but, I think Sammy Sosa debunks that theory.
There might not have been other players cranking up numbers as high as the true elite power hitters did, but players were putting up huge numbers.
In the 2000 season, 16 players hit 40+ HR and 47 players hit 30+ HR. 19 players had an OPS above 1.000 and 48 players had an OPS above .900. The league's average OPS was .782. If you put an elite power hitter like Stanton or Bautista into this kind of power environment, they would likely be hitting 60+ too over a full season.
In contrast, in the 2010 season, only 2 players hit 40+ HR and 18 players hit 30+ HR. And only 4 guys had an OPS above 1.000 and 14 guys had an OPS above .900. The league's average OPS was .728.
Now unless you think PED use has somehow diminished significantly among MLB players (and there is little reason to think it has), I'm not sure how anybody can explain that enormous differential away by simply attributing it to PED use. It is only reasonable to assume there was much more at play (and if you read the articles I posted, you'll see what that "more" probably was).