Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • BlueJayPower
    Banned
    • May 2014
    • 101

    #1

    Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

    To me it did. It doesn't seem have that same aura about it that it once did.

    I was 7 when Cecil Fielder did it and I recall it being a huge deal. I didn't even know much about baseball then but I still remember how all the older kids in the neighbourhood were talking about it. Then came the steroid era (and no explanation needed here I think).

    So now that we are seemingly clear of the steroid era (at least the HEART of the era) do you still view 50 home runs the way you used to? Or is it just another great season? And does your mind automatically think "steroids" when a guy does reach or approach that mark now?
    Last edited by BlueJayPower; 08-12-2014, 10:22 PM.
  • TripleCrown9
    Keep the Faith
    • May 2010
    • 23706

    #2
    Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

    It's still pretty damn impressive just to hit a 3-inch ball going 100 mph with a bat that's only 3 inches thick. Then you bring in the fact that you get lucky enough to meet those parameters with enough power to send that ball 400 feet in the opposite direction. THEN you happen to do it 50 times.

    So no, steroids didn't ruin the 50 home run mark. Because steroids or not, it's still really damn hard.
    Boston Red Sox
    1903 1912 1915 1916 1918 2004 2007 2013 2018
    9 4 1 8 27 6 14 45 26 34

    Comment

    • BlueJayPower
      Banned
      • May 2014
      • 101

      #3
      Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

      Originally posted by TripleCrown9
      It's still pretty damn impressive just to hit a 3-inch ball going 100 mph with a bat that's only 3 inches thick. Then you bring in the fact that you get lucky enough to meet those parameters with enough power to send that ball 400 feet in the opposite direction. THEN you happen to do it 50 times.

      So no, steroids didn't ruin the 50 home run mark. Because steroids or not, it's still really damn hard.
      Thanks for the amazing detail Mr. Baseball, but that's not what this thread is about. It's also "really damn hard" to kick a 50 yard field goal, but it doesn't make headlines when someone makes one. Anybody that can actually understand the OBVIOUS point of the original post please share .
      Last edited by BlueJayPower; 08-12-2014, 10:21 PM.

      Comment

      • TripleCrown9
        Keep the Faith
        • May 2010
        • 23706

        #4
        Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

        I'm pretty sure I get the point. Regardless of a guy sticking a needle in his *** or not, 50 home runs is still special. But what it comes down to is opinion, which I originally gave.

        And as for your field goal example, you pretty much answered your own question. They don't talk about a guy hitting a 50-yard field goal, but they do talk about a guy hitting 50 home runs.

        Don't read the spoilers if you don't want "detail".

        Spoiler
        Last edited by TripleCrown9; 08-12-2014, 10:33 PM.
        Boston Red Sox
        1903 1912 1915 1916 1918 2004 2007 2013 2018
        9 4 1 8 27 6 14 45 26 34

        Comment

        • BlueJayPower
          Banned
          • May 2014
          • 101

          #5
          Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

          Well your post came across in a kinda condescending way but all good. What I'm saying is (and I don't know how old you are) that 50 home runs seemed A LOT more difficult to reach pre-1993 or so. Then all of a sudden 20 guys did it in like a 15 year span, or so it seemed (I don't have exact numbers).
          Last edited by BlueJayPower; 08-12-2014, 10:33 PM.

          Comment

          • TripleCrown9
            Keep the Faith
            • May 2010
            • 23706

            #6
            Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

            My apologies, didn't mean to sound condescending. Just stating that no matter how hard you can hit, you still have to hit. And I'm 23, born in '90. But I started following baseball in the early 2000s, so I got in just in time for the whole Bonds show.
            Boston Red Sox
            1903 1912 1915 1916 1918 2004 2007 2013 2018
            9 4 1 8 27 6 14 45 26 34

            Comment

            • LowerWolf
              Hall Of Fame
              • Jun 2006
              • 12270

              #7
              Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

              I don't think so.

              There were some crazy numbers put up in the late 90s and early 00s, but nobody has hit 50 in the NL since 2007. And it's only happened twice in the AL in that span.

              Comment

              • BlueJayPower
                Banned
                • May 2014
                • 101

                #8
                Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

                Originally posted by TripleCrown9
                My apologies, didn't mean to sound condescending. Just stating that no matter how hard you can hit, you still have to hit. And I'm 23, born in '90. But I started following baseball in the early 2000s, so I got in just in time for the whole Bonds show.
                All good. You were born the year that Cecil Fielder hit 50, so you couldn't have witnessed baseball before the steroid era. Prior to Fielder the last guy to reach the milestone was George Foster in 1977. From 1995 to 2010 15 different guys did it a total of 24 times. Had the '94 strike not happened you could have added another half dozen to that list. But like I said pre-'93 or so (when the offensive numbers started to become ridiculous) 40 home runs was a pretty big deal, let alone 50.

                Comment

                • Jr.
                  Playgirl Coverboy
                  • Feb 2003
                  • 19171

                  #9
                  Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

                  I think the 50 HR season has returned to marvel status. With the dominance of pitchers the last few years, 50 is a big deal again. Also knowing that it's much, much more likely that someone did it cleanly makes it impressive again, to me.
                  My favorite teams are better than your favorite teams

                  Watch me play video games

                  Comment

                  • TheMatrix31
                    RF
                    • Jul 2002
                    • 52927

                    #10
                    Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

                    I actually kinda feel like even 40 homers is a big deal these last couple of years.

                    Comment

                    • wwharton
                      *ll St*r
                      • Aug 2002
                      • 26949

                      #11
                      Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

                      The thread just seems like a sneaky way of expressing an opinion on steroids.

                      My answer to the question is not only "no" but "of course not". Brady Anderson hit 50+ before steroids became a big deal to the masses. People looked at it as more of a joke even when he did it, and blamed it on steroids and didn't blink an eye. Anderson is actually a great trainer for hitters and pitchers to this day and was a damn good player, but he will never be known as one of the 50 HR guys... that didn't change when the reports came out, it was always like that.

                      Also, I believe it was Rawlings that began making the balls wound tighter. Whether it was a conscious effort to make them go farther or not, it was clear that was a result... and that was talked about widely, along with new, smaller ball parks, before anyone cared about steroids.

                      As for steroids themselves, players have been taking PEDs since the beginning of time. They've just gotten better, and I'm not just talking about steroids or HGH. Approved substances are also much better than back in the day, along with training, practice facilities, etc, etc. Evolution may have tainted the 50 home run mark... singling out steroids wouldn't be fair.

                      Comment

                      • BlueJayPower
                        Banned
                        • May 2014
                        • 101

                        #12
                        Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

                        Wow. Shock and awe after reading that, really. There are so many things wrong with the post above I don't have the time or the energy to list them. ESPECIALLY the paranoid accusation to start things off (if someone wanted to start a thread about steroids, why wouldn't they just do exactly that?) But I digress.

                        By the way, is it just me or does someone else think this post is just a sneaky way to stick up for Brady Anderson?
                        Last edited by BlueJayPower; 08-13-2014, 12:57 PM.

                        Comment

                        • wwharton
                          *ll St*r
                          • Aug 2002
                          • 26949

                          #13
                          Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

                          Originally posted by BlueJayPower
                          Wow. Shock and awe after reading that, really. There are so many things wrong with the post above I don't have the time or the energy to list them. ESPECIALLY the paranoid accusation to start things off (if someone wanted to start a thread about steroids, why wouldn't they just do exactly that?) But I digress.

                          By the way, is it just me or does someone else think this post is just a sneaky way to stick up for Brady Anderson?
                          How does "paranoid accusation" describe anything I posted?

                          For that matter, how does anything I posted defend Brady Anderson?

                          Comment

                          • BlueJayPower
                            Banned
                            • May 2014
                            • 101

                            #14
                            Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

                            Originally posted by wwharton
                            How does "paranoid accusation" describe anything I posted?

                            For that matter, how does anything I posted defend Brady Anderson?
                            I dunno man. Try reading your post again. Either way it doesn't matter. Agree to disagree!

                            Comment

                            • wwharton
                              *ll St*r
                              • Aug 2002
                              • 26949

                              #15
                              Re: Did the steroid era ruin the 50 home run mark?

                              Originally posted by BlueJayPower
                              I dunno man. Try reading your post again. Either way it doesn't matter. Agree to disagree!
                              Why would I read my post again, lol? If you want to agree to disagree, that's fine. But I did provide context and you responded with "paranoid accusation". If you want to discuss it, I'm willing to. If you don't... well just don't I guess.

                              I'm not sure you understood my post though bc I said Brady Anderson is widely known as a steroid user and his 50 homer year is considered a joke and always has been... but you said I'm defending him. Again, if you want to talk about it, that's fine, but you're not making any sense.

                              Comment

                              Working...