Home run numbers are down

asap nutrition

Member
With the inclusion of a stiffer steriod policy in MLB and media attention more focus on drug testing so far Runs per game are down compared to this same time last year. Do you think this will benefit the Owners in the fact that since numbers are down, players can't demand such ridiculous salaries. Or do you guys think that it will hurt the whole game of baseball because of less fans interests?

Also if less fans attend games and watch it on T.V, do you ever think that the media will admit that maybe the general public does want athletes using "sports enhancing drugs"
 
I don't think owners will save much money from lower home run numbers because players will naturally want more money 5 years from now than what they're making now. It's just a matter of time before someone demands a 30 million dollar a year price tag.

If less fans attend the games than it will be because of the ridiculous cost to attend a game but the media may think it was the roids because their out of touch with reality and because their job is to sell newspapers.
 
asap nutrition said:
Also if less fans attend games and watch it on T.V, do you ever think that the media will admit that maybe the general public does want athletes using "sports enhancing drugs"
Click to expand...

That will never happen.
 
If hitting is down it just makes the pitching look good, so instead of the hitters demanding more money, the pitchers will.

I don't think less-juice is 100% the reason for the lack of runs. There are lots of factors that go into it.
 
I don't think you will see a baseball player being able to demand for a 30 million dollar a year contract because of the fact that if homerun numbers continue to decline I really think you will go back to seeing 12, 13 or 14 million a year as highest in contracts. But I have been doing some interesting research lately and it is interesting that the media doesn't mention that many of the MLB hall of famers of 30, 40 and 50 years ago hit home runs in parks where the right or left field line was as low as 295 feet. I will post some interesting statistics to show the media's bias in future postings.
 
30, 40, and 50 years ago a 12, 13 or 14 million dollar ppy contract was probably a ridiculous thought... so I'd say a player worth 30 million + ppy is either being concived or lying in a baby crib somewhere.
 
I can definitely see a $30 mil a year somewhere down the line. Just a few years ago the thought of a $25 mil a year contract was ridiculous and it happened. Hell, we've even got $18 mil a year PITCHERS now so why not a $30 mil a year player. I don't think we're as far away from seeing it as people may think. As far as the HR numbers being down , I remember reading that the numbers are a little deceiving because something like 60% of the total decline was because of just 5 older players that were either "hurt" or having off years so far ( Bonds, Sosa, Thome, Berkman and I can't remember who the 5th guy is). i'll look for the article and post the link.
 
yankees3 said:
As far as the HR numbers being down , I remember reading that the numbers are a little deceiving because something like 60% of the total decline was because of just 5 older players that were either "hurt" or having off years so far ( Bonds, Sosa, Thome, Berkman and I can't remember who the 5th guy is). i'll look for the article and post the link.
Click to expand...
Yes great point, lots of good hitters have missed time this year. I also believe the increase in HR numbers has to do with worse pitching than in the past, and hitter friendly parks.
 
Pitching has been getting better and better the past few years. Teams are realizing pitching and defense wins games and staffing accordinly. Teams such as the Twins with an incredibly low payroll but with good pitching and defense are able to still compete at a very high level. The White Sox completely changed their style of play and now rely on small ball and "smart ball" as Guillen calls it and it's paying dividends. The Braves, with a MUCH depleted lineup and pitching staff have found terrific young guys that have learned to pitch well. The Nationals, same thing, built on solid pitching without all the strikeout studs of before.

I also see hitting truly coming back. I mean real hitting, not striking out 160 times, hitting 40 HRs, and hitting .260.

This is a great time to be a fan of baseball as I think it's a "back to basics" era we're starting to see.

Look at the All-Star game with so many new faces. It's also a younger game right now and the stars of the past are aging and leaving quickly. It's not leaving a hole, yet producing a new baseball era for us. I think the public will forget about baseball because those major offenders will be riding off into the sunset shortly. I truly believe Bonds did a lot of bad for the game and should walk away. I'd love to see a truly classy guy surpass Babe or Hank... but I don't beleive Bonds deserves it. I'm the first to admit steroids are fine for us, but not for sports figures. It creates an uneven playing field. They DO help. When other players can put on a few lbs of muscle in the off-season and he can put on 20... well... we know what happens. Guys don't train to gain in the regular season, they can't. If they did, they wouldn't be able to play with recovery and such. Guys need to stricly lift and train hard in the offseason, so that 3-4 month window is vital and if some guys have an extra edge, it's just not fair.

Anyway, I've rambled enough.
 
the white sox line-up is goodamn good. I wouldnt call it weak by any stretch.....
u have: carl everett, frank thomas, jermaine dye, aaron rowand, paul konerko, scott posednik to name a few....
 
I truly believe Bonds did a lot of bad for the game and should walk away. I'd love to see a truly classy guy surpass Babe or Hank... but I don't beleive Bonds deserves it. I'm the first to admit steroids are fine for us, but not for sports figures. It creates an uneven playing field. They DO help. When other players can put on a few lbs of muscle in the off-season and he can put on 20... well... we know what happens. Guys don't train to gain in the regular season, they can't. If they did, they wouldn't be able to play with recovery and such. Guys need to stricly lift and train hard in the offseason, so that 3-4 month window is vital and if some guys have an extra edge, it's just not fair.

Anyway, I've rambled enough.[/QUOTE]
Steroids don't help hand eye coordination. Yes they may help w/ the distance the ball travels, but Bonds still has a great eye and is a great player. An ESPN columist did an article this past winter during the height of the MLB Senate hearings and it had to do w/ the true home run king. The writer went through and axed every homerun king all way back to when blacks were first let in the league. He axed them all b/c of several reasons, from steroids, to blacks not being allowed to play to conspiracies and other things. I wish I could find the article, but haven't been able to. Anyhoo...
 
Remember these guys are already great hitters. These guys already have top eye/hand coordination. They're the BEST at hitting a baseball. Now, you give them more time to concentrate the on the ball because they have better bat speed and can get around quicker, and you give them a little more pop and distance and you have killers.

They DO help you hit the ball better when you're already THAT good. We're not talking scabs, we're talking the guys with the best eye/hand coordination around. Guys that can already hit 90+ MPH fastballs... now they have more time to wait on the ball and can crush it farther. Suddenly during the regular season guys that are older are healing better and faster. They aren't as tired through a grueling 162 game season as they were before. They've suddenly become better players because of increased stamina, increased recovery, increased power, increased batspeed.

Look at Sosa, he's a .280 hitter with good power and all of a sudden he's a .300+ hitter with amazing power. Hmmm... I'm not saying he was on roids, but look at the increases. He was already a "good" player that became much better.

Flat out, they DO help you hit the ball better.
 
7-20-2005

46 HR's from 44 players
19 NL / 27 AL

*(NYY-6: T.Martinez:2, Giambi:2, Posada, Cano)

Pitching sucks...?
 
TenMan said:
I truly believe Bonds did a lot of bad for the game and should walk away. I'd love to see a truly classy guy surpass Babe or Hank... but I don't beleive Bonds deserves it. I'm the first to admit steroids are fine for us, but not for sports figures. It creates an uneven playing field. They DO help. When other players can put on a few lbs of muscle in the off-season and he can put on 20... well... we know what happens. Guys don't train to gain in the regular season, they can't. If they did, they wouldn't be able to play with recovery and such. Guys need to stricly lift and train hard in the offseason, so that 3-4 month window is vital and if some guys have an extra edge, it's just not fair.

Anyway, I've rambled enough.
Click to expand...
Steroids don't help hand eye coordination. Yes they may help w/ the distance the ball travels, but Bonds still has a great eye and is a great player. An ESPN columist did an article this past winter during the height of the MLB Senate hearings and it had to do w/ the true home run king. The writer went through and axed every homerun king all way back to when blacks were first let in the league. He axed them all b/c of several reasons, from steroids, to blacks not being allowed to play to conspiracies and other things. I wish I could find the article, but haven't been able to. Anyhoo...[/QUOTE]



Of all the guys who's games improved by juice, Bonds is the only one who would be in the hall no matter if he juiced or not. Barry Bonds is the best fucking hitter this game has ever seen, no one was as scared of Hank, Frank, Willie, Ted or even the Babe himself like they are of Bonds. Hank Aaron is like a more powerful version of Rafiel Palmeiro (stats wise) the reason he's on that list is because he's played for fucking ever, not cuz he's the best power hitter the game's ever seen. Just because Bonds is a dick to the media (and rightfully so) and the media decides to put a bullseye on Bonds and try to defame him in anyway possible doesnt mean he's a really bad guy. These assholes have made up so much **** about Barry that he stopped talking to them completly. Questioning me? Just compare statistics and you will see......

Oh and steroids? Guess what, they werent banned in the major leagues when he was using them? So who is at fault really? Did steroids fix his batting eye? No. Did Steroids help him make better contact with the ball when he sees about 1-2 hittabler pitches a game? No. Did steroids turn some fly outs into home-runs? distinct possiblity..... But still you can't blame an aging athlete for trying to keep his performance level up. Anyone with a half-cent of competitive spirit in them would do the SAME THING....

Oh and by the way bulking doesnt always help your swing, it's really more about the contact you make with the ball..... When people are throwing as hard as major leaguers throw, it really doesn't take much of a muscle up type of swing to hit it out, especially in todays ballparks. LOVE HIM OR HATE HIM Barry Bonds is the MOST DOMINANT HITTER TO EVER PLAY THE GAME OF BASEBALL, all things considered including: The evolution of the game (foreign and african-american influence) the amount of pitchers and specialists used (alot more than back in the day) The way he is pitched (no one has ever been so scared) His walk total (ever seen anyone put on that much?)

case and point....
 
I just want to bump this to clarify my point...had it been missed. These are some record number I have posted. I am at a loss for a source, it was tickered accross the screen last night while I watched the game. I see if I can find a record source to post.

My point was that these are some serious number in this "post steroid induced homerun era" that MLB substance testing has tried to implement. It ain't all in the juice.
B5150 said:
7-20-2005

46 HR's from 44 players
19 NL / 27 AL

*(NYY-6: T.Martinez:2, Giambi:2, Posada, Cano)

Pitching sucks...?
Click to expand...

BTW...6 team homers for the bombers ain't to shaby...and two for the washed up, never was any good ex-juicer, Giambi.
 
So I guess strength has no impact on bat speed, huh? Nor does it have any impact on how far you can hit the ball?

I guess the fact that Bonds homers averaged something like 395 feet his first 10 years in the league and like 425 feet the next couple of years were just something that happened?

Bonds is a truly great player, no doubt. He would have been in the HOF no matter what, no doubt. But for a guy to suddenly become head and shoulders above the rest makes me clearly doubt it was all-natural.

Tell me how you generate batspeed. Tell me that your strength has nothing to do with it. Tell me that if have more batspeed that doesn't mean you have more time to wait on the ball.

I'm not going to sit and argue back and forth, but there's never been a player, at his age, to suddenly blow up muscularly, start dominating the game to extent he has, period, that I know of.
 
And no, it clearly aint all in the juice either. I think it's a nice little helper to some players. If I was getting older, I'd be the first guy to start juicing to help my body compete with those young chaps.
 
Rictor33 said:
Steroids don't help hand eye coordination. Yes they may help w/ the distance the ball travels, but Bonds still has a great eye and is a great player. An ESPN columist did an article this past winter during the height of the MLB Senate hearings and it had to do w/ the true home run king. The writer went through and axed every homerun king all way back to when blacks were first let in the league. He axed them all b/c of several reasons, from steroids, to blacks not being allowed to play to conspiracies and other things. I wish I could find the article, but haven't been able to. Anyhoo...
Click to expand...
I saw that article - it was great.

I'm pretty sure it was written by Bob Costas.

BP
 
I think it's ridiculous to compare baseball stats. The demensions of the ball parks are not all the same. Does anyone know how far the outfield wall used to be in Yankee Stadium? The corners were really shallow 281'(L) and 295'(R),but the fence was pushed out from those points. Left center was 460' and center field was a whopping 490'. Candlestick Park where Willie Mays played wasn't an enclosed park until 1971. The wind before and after the enclosure used to be horrendous. Had Mays played in another stadium he would've hit over 800 home runs.
 
az2u said:
I think it's ridiculous to compare baseball stats. The demensions of the ball parks are not all the same. Does anyone know how far the outfield wall used to be in Yankee Stadium? The corners were really shallow 281'(L) and 295'(R),but the fence was pushed out from those points. Left center was 460' and center field was a whopping 490'. Candlestick Park where Willie Mays played wasn't an enclosed park until 1971. The wind before and after the enclosure used to be horrendous. Had Mays played in another stadium he would've hit over 800 home runs.
Click to expand...

This is true. And another thing about the bonds homers... He had only 2 homers over 450 feet from the years 1990-1999 and in 2000-2004 he had 26!!!! that's craziness and yes that shows that juice did help him..... But that doesnt change my point....
 
yankees3 said:
I can definitely see a $30 mil a year somewhere down the line. Just a few years ago the thought of a $25 mil a year contract was ridiculous and it happened. Hell, we've even got $18 mil a year PITCHERS now so why not a $30 mil a year player. I don't think we're as far away from seeing it as people may think. As far as the HR numbers being down , I remember reading that the numbers are a little deceiving because something like 60% of the total decline was because of just 5 older players that were either "hurt" or having off years so far ( Bonds, Sosa, Thome, Berkman and I can't remember who the 5th guy is). i'll look for the article and post the link.
Click to expand...
Well the only reason I suggest that contracts will never reach the $30million mark is because contracts are in decline now. I mean about 4 years ago if Pedro was a free agent he would have easily been able to demand about 20million dollars a year. What is he making now, like 15 or 16million. And his contract is at 5 years tops when just 4 or 5 years ago you would have seen 6-8 year contracts.
 
asap nutrition said:
Well the only reason I suggest that contracts will never reach the $30million mark is because contracts are in decline now. I mean about 4 years ago if Pedro was a free agent he would have easily been able to demand about 20million dollars a year. What is he making now, like 15 or 16million. And his contract is at 5 years tops when just 4 or 5 years ago you would have seen 6-8 year contracts.
Click to expand...
I see your point on the decline of contracts, especially the lengths. I don't think there will be another 10 yr Arod-like contract but I can see a shorter length deal for the around that amount of money (per year not total $) . Somebody is crazy enough to do it . Unfortunately, it'll probably be the Yanks since they have a ton of money coming off their payroll in the next few years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top