Bonds hit #584

playr050

He's in sole possesion of 5th now and 2 back of Frank Robinson. It's only the 7th, and they're in Colorado, so you never know.

Derrick

I wish the balls weren't "juiced" in this day and era. It's a real shame that these REAL records have to fall because of a ball that is wound too tightly. Not too long ago, hitting 50 homeruns was a GREAT achievement...now it's a common cause. Now, there's shortstops hitting 45-50+ homeruns...such a shame. I truly believe that they started wounding the balls tighter after the 1994 strike to bring the fans back. Because, of course, the homerun is what people want to see...and by juicing the balls, it'd cause more homeruns from players and overall teams. I personally think it sucks.

autobilia

"Juiced"?? No, the players are bigger and stronger now than they were in the past.

KOBEcollector

the balls aren't juiced but some would say that the players certainly are

autobilia

Yep. Since when did Babe Ruth and Roger Maris ever hit the weight rooms?

Derrick

It's true, and it's not hard to see. In fact, there have been a number of coaches in the majors that KNOW it's true. These guys that have been hitting fungos to the infielders and outfielders for decades and several have said they can feel a difference in the way the ball comes off the bat. They say it just seems to jump a little more than it used to. Unless gravity has changed since the strike, we feel safe saying the baseballs have.

autobilia

I still disagree. I think the players are just bigger and stronger. That's in any sport. Take basketball for example, other than Dr. J, why wasn't players getting jiggy like Vince Carter, Steve Francis, Chris Webber, etc.?

First it was some players using corked bats, but now I think players are just stronger and hitting the ball harder (which is why a lot of them have back problems).

Derrick

I still disagree and say that the balls are "juiced".

As for today's bigger, stronger players, I'm not convinced. There are obviously some players that are bigger than players in the past. That's obvious to see. However, another thing that is obvious is that players like Rich Aurilia are NOT bigger and stronger than past players. Aurilia (who is listed at right about 6'1, 180 pounds) hit around 30+ homeruns last year. A little "Did you know" trivia here: Did you know that slugger Dwight Evans hit over 22 homers only 6 times in 18 full seasons in the majors? Also, another Boston player who played with the inviting Green Monster, Jim Rice, hit over 25 homers only 6 times in 14 full seasons. Now you tell me honestly that Rich Aurilia is bigger and stronger than Evans and Rice and we'll quit this argument right now. OK, we'll keep going then....

Pitchers are flying balls out of the yard and even the all-powerful Doug Glanville is hitting lots of homeruns...Glanville (6'2, 170 soaking wet) is a clear example that you don't have to be a power hitter to hit homeruns. The way the game is played has changed, but not all of the players are bigger and stronger. That's simply not true. So don't try to come up with all these excuses for why homerun totals are up...It was a nice idea to get people back in the seats, but you got your stupid homerun record from McGwire...and then just three years later for Bonds...so just get some real baseballs that don't have dimples in them with "Titleist" stamped across them.

autobilia

<< <i>I still disagree and say that the balls are "juiced".

As for today's bigger, stronger players, I'm not convinced. There are obviously some players that are bigger than players in the past. That's obvious to see. However, another thing that is obvious is that players like Rich Aurilia are NOT bigger and stronger than past players. Aurilia (who is listed at right about 6'1, 180 pounds) hit around 30+ homeruns last year. A little "Did you know" trivia here: Did you know that slugger Dwight Evans hit over 22 homers only 6 times in 18 full seasons in the majors? Also, another Boston player who played with the inviting Green Monster, Jim Rice, hit over 25 homers only 6 times in 14 full seasons. Now you tell me honestly that Rich Aurilia is bigger and stronger than Evans and Rice and we'll quit this argument right now. OK, we'll keep going then....

Pitchers are flying balls out of the yard and even the all-powerful Doug Glanville is hitting lots of homeruns...Glanville (6'2, 170 soaking wet) is a clear example that you don't have to be a power hitter to hit homeruns. The way the game is played has changed, but not all of the players are bigger and stronger. That's simply not true. So don't try to come up with all these excuses for why homerun totals are up...It was a nice idea to get people back in the seats, but you got your stupid homerun record from McGwire...and then just three years later for Bonds...so just get some real baseballs that don't have dimples in them with "Titleist" stamped across them. >>



Aurilla may not be bigger, but how do you know how strong he is? Bulk doesn't always mean strength. Look how skinny NBA players legs are, yet they jump higher than most people. You have to take into the account of bodyfat %.

Derrick

That's a good point. But the players legs aren't THAT skinny. They just look skinny on television.

When the strike hit in 1994, major league baseball said they would look into some changes to try to get the fans back. Is it just irony that the homerun totals have exploded since the 1995 season or did all of these players use that year to gain 15 pounds of muscle and suddenly become power hitters? I think not. MLB (a.k.a. Morons leading baseball) claim the balls are the same as they were last year. Well, duh. Of course they are the same as last year, and the year before that. But what about the balls used in say 1991? Conveniently, MLB reported that they can't find any of these baseballs to compare test results with. Can't find any baseballs? Do you know how many players, coaches, fans, umpires, executives, etc. have a game ball in their homes? I'm sure several of them would be willing to part with it for a couple of days so MLB could run some tests on it. Peter Gammons reported that today's baseballs travel anywhere from 15 to 30 feet farther than those of earlier years, but said that's not much of a difference and there are a lot of other factors that are causing the homeruns. Umm, Peter I think 30 feet is quite a bit of distance. You only have to hit a ball 300 feet to homer in any stadium down the lines then. Here's a test for you or anyone else...If you Count the number of homeruns you see land in the first 3-5 rows of the stands this week. That's how many fewer homeruns there would be if the only thing MLB did was change the baseball. MLB has admitted the baseballs are at the limit of the "lively scale"...so just fix them and get them back to normal.

KOBEcollector

i think both of you guys are right. guys obviously are bigger and hit the weight room much more than they did years ago. and i've seen shows where they have said that the balls are wound tighter than previous years. add those 2 factors together and thats why you have seen so many hr's

lafrentz06

<<I wish the balls weren't "juiced" in this day and era. It's a real shame that these REAL records have to fall because of a ball that is wound too tightly. Not too long ago, hitting 50 homeruns was a GREAT achievement...now it's a common cause. Now, there's shortstops hitting 45-50+ homeruns...such a shame. I truly believe that they started wounding the balls tighter after the 1994 strike to bring the fans back. Because, of course, the homerun is what people want to see...and by juicing the balls, it'd cause more homeruns from players and overall teams. I personally think it sucks. >>

even tho he prolly hate me....i agree!!!

Cubby

Keep hittin them bombs, Barry!

yanyak5

Derrick...did you happen to see my post about the balls being "juiced"...your post looks a lot like mine.... lol.....

Derrick

yeah I did...lol...what a coincedence eh?

yanyak5

lol....

robdemakis

Just a comment, but I believe Derrick is correct..The only reason is the year Mcgwire hit all his homers, there was a test to see if the balls had been wound tighter....They took a ball from the 80s and bounced it from a certain height and took a ball from that year and bounced it from a certain height....And the ball from that year bounced an inch or more higher than the 80s ball.....Just some proof they were wound tighter