A question, and I'm just askin'....................
RonBurgundy
Posts: 5,491 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
If Junior Griffey wasn't on steroids, how did he manage to hit his career peak in HR's during the late 90's when many opposing pitchers might've been juicing?
The common assumption has been that Griffey would've been the last power hitter to be associated with steroids. And I agree. But it seems odd that he jacked 50 + out for many seasons at the same time everybody else was. Are we to believe his was a clean 50 HR's while others were not?
Ron
The common assumption has been that Griffey would've been the last power hitter to be associated with steroids. And I agree. But it seems odd that he jacked 50 + out for many seasons at the same time everybody else was. Are we to believe his was a clean 50 HR's while others were not?
Ron
Ron Burgundy
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
0
Comments
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
Bosox1976
<< <i>If Junior Griffey wasn't on steroids, how did he manage to hit his career peak in HR's during the late 90's when many opposing pitchers might've been juicing? >>
That just shows you how great he was....
<< <i>Are we to believe his was a clean 50 HR's while others were not? >>
No. The best solution is to not stupidly try guessing which people are drug abusers and which are not and instead appreciate their talents
<< <i>No. The best solution is to not stupidly try guessing which people are drug abusers and which are not and instead appreciate their talents >>
People just cant do that though!
Really? The best solution would be for the players union and MLB to not put fans in the position of having to guess. But if you want to label fans as the stupid ones - and not the abusers - have at it.
Ron
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
<< <i>
<< <i>No. The best solution is to not stupidly try guessing which people are drug abusers and which are not and instead appreciate their talents >>
People just cant do that though! >>
That is because nobody can trust this generation. There are many big names who are guilty that will eventually come out ... even well after the Mitchell report. To me ... the STUPIDITY is in appreciating "talents" that are probably tainted. And thank goodness people are not "doing that" .... for the most part.
edited to say ..... BURGUNDY ..... perfect answer.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
He also took advantage of the small ball parks, possibly further flying ball, the better bats, and the crackdown against inside pitching just like everybody else.
The steroid factor is but one of many factors for the drastically increased number of players dwarfing their competition.
The reason why it has been so easy for the superstars to dwarf the competition is that they don't have as many super starst to compete against. There simply weren't as many men born compared to the previous era, and of the ones that were, many are lost to increasingly popular sporting alternatives. And FOUR new teams were added!!! What results is that they get compared to a bunch of guys in the league who are bad enough to make the league average go down...while the superstars look that much better.
Take away those four expansion teams, bring back all the people lost to other sports, have more people born like before to compete against, eliminate the crackdown on inside pitching, move the fence back to where they should be, use a normal ball....and he like every other slugger in this era wouldn't have near the HR totals they put up.
The fact still remains that the dwindling available baseball age population of the late 90's, coupled with a double expansion.
<< <i>The reason why it has been so easy for the superstars to dwarf the competition is that they don't have as many super starst to compete against. There simply weren't as many men born compared to the previous era >>
But remember that most previous generations in baseball were not fully integrated with dark skin players, both blacks and hispanics. Even if the balls and bats were different, the strikezone and ballparks were smaller, he still hit more homeruns than anyone else in the league four times. (double expansion doesn't is somewhat of a fallacy since so much of his greatness comes from pre-Devil Rays and Diamondbacks)
For most of those seasons his overall offense was typically "only" in the top 10 or so. But usually among those 10 hitters, he would be the only one providing top level defense. To provide that combination for a full decade is extremely rare in baseball history
Of any all-time great defensive players at up-the-middle positions, how many were as good offensively as Griffey, even after adjusting for all the post-1990 offense?
That is what sets him apart, not the homeruns and RBIs
(and the answer is Willie Mays, Tris Speaker, maybe DiMaggio. . . )
Also interesting to see, before the homerun and offensive explosion in 1993 that you mention in, Griffey was still a very good hitter. 20+ homeruns, very good K/BB ratio, top 10 OPS+, All-Star, MVP votes, Gold Gloves. At ages 20, 21, and 22. Ted Williams was much better than that and Rick Monday was almost as good, but it is proof that his talent was not an illusion based on an evolving sport
Tom, actually he never led MLB in HR in any season.
Griffey's top ten finishes in MLB in Batter Runs is...
4th, 7th, 7th, and 7th.
His best finsih in MLB as a hitter was 4th in 1993, and 7th in 1997.
The HR have given the perception that he was the best hitter in the game. He was 4th one season, and his next best were some 7th place. After that he had no other top ten seasons as a hitter.
But, the point is, he saw a marked offensive rise starting in 1993, and leaping increase in 1994 and on, just like everybody else. He was not as good in 2001, and fortunately for him he had an easy environment to hit in to mask his decline in ability(compared to harder eras to hit in).
He benefitted from the environment just like everybody else, steroids or not.
Some may say it was his prime that caused the increase...and partly so. However, I find it extremely hard to believe that the league saw such a massive increase in offense(and domination) from 1994 on...yet his increase was only due to becoming better, while EVERYBODY else's was due to steroid use.
No question being a CF helps his value, but that wasn't the topic. But, his CF ability isn't as high as perceived either. Baseballprospectus has him at -58 runs below average for his career defense. Obviously defensive measures have much leeway...but not enough to say a -58 guys is a +120 guy.
There really is no difference between superstars of all generatiosn. The difference is the numbers look different because of the circumstances(circumstances far outweighing steroids). It gives the impression that they were all better, but that is an illusion...unless one believes all the best pitchers come from before WWI.
The league was whites only pre war era and right after...and coupled with a few other reasons, that is why it was so easy for the stars to dominate then as well.
I was referring to the generation immediately before his in terms of most men to compete against.