Crewin06

Sorry I just couldn't let this go. Why is that in quotes. I know you determine standard deviations and other stats by just making things up but quotes? First off I never said it and secondly it's not even close to the basis of my argument.

Not to mention if only his road stats are taken into account for his ages 35-the end of his career, At age 39 Aaron still has his best HR/PA year of his career. Edit-OK I'm done before I get booted from the site. This is my last post on this subject and I will go back to posting very sporadically. Keep up the good work Brewerfan.

I'm sorry Fury I know I said I wouldn't respond to him anymore but C'mon. His 2 highest HR/PA seasons before 35 were .0683 and .0654. Even if you took out his ungodly home numbers, his road numbers provide the 2 best seasons of his career and 3 of the top 4 seasons of his career. Yeah the numbers might fit more neatly but they are still going to be easily the best stretch of his career.

No at that time I was just testing somebody's theory this is just pure annoyance at a poster that I happend to use a bad term. Don't worry I am done responding to that guy. Seriously though he asked what was the big deal about being low 1% in a 2-3% guess. Nevermind. Again don't worry I am done responding to him.

I can't help you with what you want.... but check this out.... 1.) Over 200 Hrs were hit in Fulton --- the next closest was 164 in the Stick. 2.) ATL pitchers pitching at home gave up 87 HRs, the next closest, the Phillies at 80, after that the Cubs at 72. 3.) ATL's pitchers Home ERA, 4.75 -- Phillies are next at 4.18, followed by the Cubs at 3.88 Aaron, Evans and Johnson were not the only dudes hitting HRs in Fulton in 1973. Lots of HRs were hit in Fulton in 1973 Nothing like the 1 year sample size to really emphasize a point. I'll concede that Fulton was a hitters park, and it probably did help him but the best HR total of his career at 37 and best rate at 39? Why not immediately? I just can't believe it. Also if Fulton County Stadium is such a launching pad (which I agree to a certain extent) and Aaron, Evans and Johnson all placing in the top 4 isn't an aberation why in the remaining 23 year history of the stadium was there only 3 other HR hitters to ever hit 40 in a season for a Brave. I mean Johnson hit 40 that season and only hit 93 more the remaining 8 full years and 12 total years of his career. Evans 26 at the time spent another 2+ seasons at Atlanta in the same stadium and never hit more than 25 in a season. What happend here? Am I really the only one that is suspicious that someone in baseball or in the Atlanta Braves asked the same question in 1973? Even among Hall of Famers he's unique. Just as Babe Ruth is. Just as Ty Cobb is. Just as Ted Williams is. Just as Rickey Henderson's SBs are. Agreed... At some point you have to concede that great players will be great sometimes... The only difference is Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Ted Williams and Rickey Henderson were great throughout their careers. Usually better around 25-34 and tapering off towards the end. They aren't very good on par with other all-time greats in the same era then at 35 when most players are starting to sputter turn it up another 5 notches and run off the best 5 year stretch of their career. If Babe Ruth all of a suddenly hit 65 at 37 years old in 550 Plate appearances (when he was getting 650-700 the rest of his career) and steroids where readily available to him nobody would have asked what was going on? Out of these 3 sluggers that all have over 500 homeruns none of them had seasons over 30 HRs after the age of 35. False -- Frank Robinson had 30 when he was 37. Also, McCovey had 29 at 35, and 28 at 39 -- Mays had 28 at 39 -- Killebrew had 28 at 35.... so your selection of 30 HRs as a benchmark seems arbitrary. Furthermore, McCovey and Mays were not full-time players at 39 yrs., had they been, they would have exceeded 30 HRs. How is my statement false. Reading comprehension. Who in that list had over 30 Home Runs. As for 30 its a nice round number that none of them had more than. And the numbers you threw out there Robinson with 30, McCovey with 29 and 28 and Mays with 28 those are nice numbers if they weren't 60% of their high HR total. Right about where the normal baseball curve would put them. To put it in comparison it would have been like Frank Robinson hitting 51, Willie Mays hitting 55 or Killebrew hitting 50 at 37 years old with about 550 PA's Please find me another player in the history of baseball who had their highest HR total or highest HR/PA percentage with at least 35 HR's after their age 35 season? What does this prove? -- I'd have a hard time finding another player that won 11 batting titles like Ty Cobb did as well... Aaron/Cobb/etc.. great players, even among the elites. I think if Aaron used steroids in 1971 and 1973, he would have used them in the gap years as well -- and we would not see big drops. Again I am not asking for someone who was the best at something throughout their career. I am asking for someone that was very good on par with the best of their time and then at the end of what would be a normal career kicked it up about 5 notches and had the best 5 year stretch of their career. And the gap year as you call it is a big drop off but to what? He still was top 5 in HR's in the league and he had more HR's than everybody in the 500 HR club even though he was 2-4 years older than all of them.

OK, in a discussion someone is using easily attainable stats that are facts the other guy is making up any stat he wants and can't be called out on it. For the love of god he gave a made up standard deviation without even thinking of running a regression analysis. Everything in his post I was referring \is made up. He didn't answer my question and used fake baseless stats. That line I got a strike for had more fact in it than any of Roberts posts put together.

If you can tell me how he got that Fulton County Stadium gave the ball 2-3% more carry other than he made it up then you can give me a strike or kick me off otherwise I stand by my assertion that he wrote down a bunch of contrived BS and he couldn't answer my question. Then he picks apart Sbrylinski's graph that has actual data showing Aaron hitting alot more HR's and picks it a part pointing out a Stadard deviation of .5 and the rest is noise when if the standard deviation is .5 like he asserts and the mean is 2.5 like it looks then Aaron's 37 and 39 seasons are 3-3.5 standard deviations away from the mean which is a huge deal Either the guy is making up a bunch of contrived BS or he is just a tool that doesn't know what the hell he is talking about.

Or he got less PA's like I have been saying all along Year Age XBH PAs XBH/PA 1965 31 73 / 630 .1158 1966 32 68 / 676 .1005 1967 33 79 / 663 .1191 1968 34 66 / 670 .0958 1969 35 77 / 634 .1215 1970 36 65 / 590 .1101 1971 37 72 / 566 .1272 1972 38 44 / 551 .0798 1973 39 53 / 460 .1152 Pretty much tied Babe Ruth's record 1974 40 36 / 479 .075 1975 41 30 / 535 .056 1976 42 18 / 306 .058 Again the more opportunities to hit homers the more homers one might hit. and as for the 40 HR 53 XBH campaign does it remind us of any other HR hitter of the past 10-15 years?

So Guys I give you 3 simple questions and you can't answer any of them but give more contrived BS. First off RobertR how do you get the the 2%-3% increase in carry? why not make it 50% while you are just making up random numbers. And Hank didn't see any benefit from this added 2%-3% increase in carry till 4 years after the fact? What a line of Bull. You would think it would be immediate and gradually decline instead it has the oppositte affect. What's more, looking at the graph, I think we're getting some distortions due to scale. To me, it looks like there's a standard deviation of around .5 HR/PA. A lot of what we're seeing in the chart is noise, IMO. A slow increase with age in HR rate, although a relatively stable OPS+, followed by a spike after the mound was lowered, and then a quick decline at the end of his career. HRs and BBs are "old player's skills". Frankly, what's most notable about Aaron to me is not the HR rate, but the longevity and durability. If HR's and BB's are old player skills why doesn't any player in the history of the game age as well as Aaron. The reason the HR rate isn't notable to you is because you don't want to see all the facts. Its unbelievable how you are trying to twist things. Its not that hard. I'm not looking for an open and shut case that Aaron did Steroids I just want a concession that their is a good possibility. HR's and BB's are old man skills what a crock of !%#@. While I understand that it's impossible to disprove something like that, I do think that the lowering of the mound is not something that can be waved away. Heck, it's not the only reason, 1969 also saw expansion of baseball by an unprecedented 4 teams with Montreal, San Diego, Kansas City, and Seattle all getting franchises. Aaron's biggest spike occurs in the 1969 season. No it isn't the biggest spike is in the 1973 season when he is 39 years old and hitting them at such a rate that if he gets 700 PA's (like he did multiple times before) he breaks the single season home run record. Its rediculous that you guys can't admit that its a possibility. I understand that correlation isn't necessarily causation, but the whole point to lowering the mound in the first place was to increase offense. Occam's Razor is still an awfully good axiom, the simplest explanation for Aaron's increase in HRs in 1969 is that the mound was lowered and pitching was diluted. And he was able to benefit more from it than the average player because he already was far above average. And it's the most likely reason. Especially since Ball Four had no problem relating the widespread use of amphetamines in baseball but had no mention of PEDs. Again running around in circles. Why didn't Robinson, McCovey and Killebrew prosper as much then, why hasn't any player before or since been able to put up even close to the late career surge that Aaron has seen. I don't know why I even respond to this anymore. I ask to provide simple answers to simple questions and I get made up rediculous numbers on standard info, 2-3% increase in carry, .5hr/pa standard deviation. None of the stats that I have given are made up or off the top of my head but all your arguments are unmeasuable and you keep regurgitating them because there is nothing solid to stand on. I am not even looking for yeah Hank Aaron did Steroids I just want people to aknowledge that there is a good possibility. Whizkid I admire your research but we aren't talking about Bonds. I would assume the Performance enhancers are alot better than any that Aaron took. Also bringing up a player (Davey Johnson) that has 136 career HR's who had 43 HRs 1 year the year he came to Atlanta in 1973 and no other years in which he broke 20 and only 2 other years in which he broke 10 is not really a great way to prove that Aaron did not do Steroids especially when he played the better part of 9 seasons and 13 seasons total. Darrell Evens is another case of what the hell happend sets his career mark at 26 and never hits 30 again until 10 years later and doesn't hit 40 until he is 38 years old? I'm not saying I'm just saying. But I guess I have my answer name me one other player in baseball history to have his best HR season or best HR/PA of his career while hitting 35 or more past the age of 35: the answer Darrell Evens a Hank Aaron teammate. Darell Evens almost achieved it twice once at the age of 38 slugging 40 HR's in 590 PA's and almost achieving it at 40 falling 1 HR shy at 34 HR's and .01 HR/PA short. Hank must have taught him that pattented older HR swing or maybe Tigers Stadium was just a HR launching pad. No it must have been the changes that took place in 1985 and the better air density in Detroit. Man you guys proved me wrong. Who would guess that a guy could put up huge numbers sporadically in certain years of his career taking 10 years off to be mediocre at best ? I'm guessing Brady Anderson wouldn't. 41 at 26 years old putting up numbers with a person that hit 1/3 of his career homers in that year and he doesn't hit more than 25 again until 10 years later when he gets his fountain of youth and at Tigers Stadium hits 30, 40, and 34 homers at 36, 38 and 40 years old. Personally I think it is just a great being great but what do I know

RobertR - Yeah I know the gas law isn't that complicated but to use it justify a player hitting significantly more homeruns per plate appearance when the air samples aren't that different and the altitude isn't really that dramatic is just ludicrous. Especially considering he was aging every year. As far as Aaron goes, his SLG really didn't take off until 1969, the year the mound was lowered. So 4 years went by in Atlanta where his slugging didn't improve but its the air? Again three 500 home run hitters (Frank Robinson, Harmon Killebrew, and Willie McCovey) went through the mound lowering with Hank, all of which were younger than Hank by a couple of years , all of them had bigger years than Hank ever had before the age of 35 and the lowering of the mound. Out of these 3 sluggers that all have over 500 homeruns none of them had seasons over 30 HRs after the age of 35. Doesn't that make you question Hank Aaron at all considering the seasons from 35-39 for Aaron were 44, 38, 47, 34, 40. These 3 players all played 10 + seasons before the mound lowering and all played their 35-39 seasons after the mound lowering, all had 500+ HR's and none of them hit more than 30 HR's in their 35-39 season but hank hit 30+ in all of them including his best HR total of his career and his best HR per PA of his career. The fan comment was a joke which I think you know. I have tried to debunk every myth no matter how ludicrous. Can RobertR, Invader 3K, or Bullox please answer one of my questions instead of coming up with new minor myth on why Aaron's HR total spiked dramatically in his late 30's Please find me another player in the history of baseball who had their highest HR total or highest HR/PA percentage with at least 35 HR's after their age 35 season? Isn't the data on Sbrylinski's graph weird for a non steroid user? And Doesn't that make you question Hank Aaron at all considering the seasons from 35-39 for Aaron were 44, 38, 47, 34, 40? These 3 players (Robinson, McCovey, Killebrew) all played 10 + seasons before the mound lowering and all played their 35-39 seasons after the mound lowering, all had 500+ HR's and none of them hit more than 30 HR's in their 35-39 season but hank hit 30+ in all of them including his best HR total of his career and his best HR per PA of his career. If any of you could answer any or all of those questions it would be much appreciated.

Fine say Aaron benefited from moving to Fulton County , although I don't believe 400 feet in elevation makes a big deal its not like he is moving from mile high to Pac Bell park where there is about a 5,000 foot difference in elevation, also you can say the tempurature in the move helped him although why stop at just the weather why not claim the fans were friendlier allowing giving Aaron more confidence (wait I can't suggest anything negative about Milwaukee or any player that played in Milwaukee) scratch that but these changes came to fruition when Aaron was 32 why did he keep getting better at hitting homers till the age of 39 when he was almost equal with Ruth then started to show his age and act like normal players his age. I know the mound and player expansion. And although Sbryliski layed out a great graph that took these factors into account supposedly we can't trust it because the changes affected players differently. I don't like to repeat myself but as I noted before 4 other All-time homerun greats in their 30's were going through this same period 3 of which were a couple years younger and none of them were affected by this hardly at all especially the way it affected Aaron if any of Mays, Frank Robinson, Willie McCovey, or Harmon Killabrew had the burst from the 35-42 seasons that Aaron got they would be the Home-run king instead of sitting around the high 500's and in Mays case mid 600's.

Sbrylski nothing that is on the internet will really be conclusive but that graph does a really good job of visualizing what I am trying to say and Willie Mays had a decent 35-end of his career. If you compare it to some of the other HR greats that I mentioned that played during Aaron's time like Killabrew, Frank Robinson and Willie McCovey I think it will look even uglier. Burnzy, If a player doesn't want everyone to know they wouldn't be shooting up in the clubhouse or around untrustworthy people. Do you really think Rodriguez would have got caught if there wasn't a drug test that was supposed to be destroyed immediately? And Rodriguez is living in a time when there is a steroid witch hunt and player privacy almost non existent. I just don't think it would be as hard as people are making it out to be.

Is that not indicative on its own, that there aren't any admitted steroid users 75 years old?Not really how many admitted steroid users are out there that weren't caught and weren't trying to get something out of admitting?

Admitted Steroid users in baseball that are 75 years old. No offense but there isn't that big of population to compare. If there was one I would try to compare but I can't think of any. I wouldn't really compare to any in football or weightlifting because they are entirely different sports and take entirely different doses or tolls on the body. Without knowing which steroids he took (if he did them) I don't think we can accurately assess the mental and physical tolls it would take on him.

I'd love to see ESPN's official statement on that suspension if they have one.