Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz Best Red Sox Hitters Of The Decade
by Randy Booth on Jan 11, 2010 6:00 AM EST
in News
Email
PrintThere's a lot of reason to look forward when it comes to the Red Sox: John Lackey. Mike Cameron. Adrian Beltre. Those are just a couple of the new guys to look forward to. But sometimes looking back is just as fun.
I decided to go back throughout this last decade and find the best individual hitting performances of any given season for a Red Sox hitter. Perhaps the results aren't too surprising, but being able to say "Player X had the best season for any Red Sox hitter from 2000-2009" is really kind of cool.
I ranked the top 10, but also threw in the next best seven just for fun. After the jump, I reveal the best of the best Red Sox hitters from this past decade.
I could have performed the rankings in any number of ways, but I decided to keep it simple and rank batters by wOBA. wOBA isn't perfect, of course, and that is because no stat is perfect. But for right now, this is my stat of choice and I'm going to use it like I've got nothing else.
No more waiting. Here is the top 10 in descending order:
10. Kevin Youkilis - 2009 (.413 wOBA)
27 hr, .305/.413/.548, 145 ops+
Youkilis's performance from this past season was the only one from the 2009 season to make the list. It was quite an impressive season for Youkilis, with him going down as a "3-4-5" player. Meaning, he hit .300+, he got on base at a .400+ clip and he slugged .500+ or better. A very well-rounded season for Youkilis. I voted for him as the league's No. 2 MVP behind Joe Mauer, but he didn't get much love from any of the voters. Youkilis, though, may one day be an MVP.
9. Manny Ramirez - 2001 (.414 wOBA)
41 hr, .306/.405/.609, 161 ops+
Manny's first year in Boston was a fine one and he certainly showed Red Sox fans what he was capable of. He got on base at a great clip and just slugged the flesh off the ball. This is Manny's first appearance on this list, but it certainly isn't going to be his last. Let's just say Manny was a great baseball player. A really great baseball player.
8. Manny Ramirez - 2004 (.414 wOBA)
43 hr, .308/.397/.613, 152 ops+
Hey look! He's back! You can see how wOBA works a little bit. Manny's numbers are obviously different from 2001 and 2004, but has the same wOBA. In 2001, he has a higher on-base percentage and OPS+, but in 2004, he has a higher batting average and slugging percentage. Once again, a great season for Manny. He finished third in the MVP balloting in 2004 (Vladimir Guerrero won, but if you compare the stats, Manny was the clear winner).
7. David Ortiz - 2005 (.418 wOBA)
47 hr, .300/.397/.604, 158 ops+
Big Papi makes his first appearance on this list, but certainly not his last. He only gets better. Ortiz had a great season in 2005, slugging a career-best 47 home runs. He of course topped this total in 2006, but still the best Papi had put up at that time. It's interesting to note that the highest OPS+ we have seen is the second-worst wOBA on this top 10 list.
6. Manny Ramirez - 2003 (.421 wOBA)
37 hr, .325/.427/.587, 160 ops+
Hey, haven't seen these guy around. Manny's 2003 season was a complete effort. His home runs were down, but could we really complain about 37 home runs? It's also interesting to note that Manny played in a career-high of 154 games and had a career-high in plate appearances (679). The legend of Manny only grows.
5. David Ortiz - 2006 (.427 wOBA)
54 hr, .287/.413/.636, 161 ops+
A stellar season from Mr. Ortiz, for sure. His power shot up with 54 home runs on the season, but his average dropped. It seemed like in this season his usual doubles turned into home runs, as he finished with just 29 two-baggers. Still, Ortiz's power was impressive in 2006. He also set a Red Sox record for home runs in a season in 2006.
4. Nomar Garciaparra - 2000 (.432 wOBA)
21 hr, .372/.434/.599, 155 ops+
Finally, a new name on the list. Nomar's 2000 season was a beautiful one to watch. Everyone waited to see if Nomar could hit the magical .400 mark. It wasn't meant to be, but the run was great. This was when Nomar was in the heart of all of Red Sox Nation. He was the Nation's boy. It's too bad he's fallen from grace, but no one can take 2000 from him. Nomar is No. 4 on this list and also has the lowest home runs hit by anyone on this top 10 list. He's also the only position player to appear that isn't a first baseman, designated hitter or outfielder. He was fun to watch.
3. Manny Ramirez - 2006 (.434 wOBA)
35 hr, .321/.439/.619, 165 ops+
Playing in 130 games this season, Manny still racked. Perhaps he could have hit 50 home runs had he played a full season, but that's asking a lot for a guy that seemed to lose hustle toward the end of seasons. Still, look at the numbers and you can't say you wouldn't love that for a full season. Manny, however, is not done on this list.
2. David Ortiz - 2007 (.448 wOBA)
35 hr, .332/.445/.621, 171 ops+
Once again, an all-around great season from Ortiz. Not only did he hit 35 home runs, but he compiled 52 doubles as well. His 111 walks and his .445 on-base percentage was the best in the league. It's another year where Ortiz was snubbed from really competing in the MVP race. Alex Rodriguez hit 54 home runs in 2007, but I'm sure Ortiz is happier with the end result: he had a ring, A-Rod did not.
1. Manny Ramirez - 2002 (.459 wOBA)
33 hr, .349/.450/.647, 184 ops+
Ah, the greatest season of the Red Sox's decade and, of course, it comes from the bat of Manny Ramirez. It was a shortened -- but still qualified -- season. Just look at the numbers and let's just hope we can see that from a Red Sox again (and can someone tell me how Miguel Tejada won the MVP this year?). Manny led the league in 2002 in both batting average and on-base percentage. He was second in slugging, OPS and OPS+. A full season of this Manny probably wouldn't have kept up the same numbers, but damn, imagine if he did.
To put this into context, American League MVP Joe Mauer had a 170 OPS+ and a .438 wOBA this past season. A great season by all accounts, but not Manny in 2002. Close, but not quite.
Here are the honorable mentions that didn't make the top 10. These are all Red Sox players that had a wOBA greater than .400. It's nice to see names that don't start with "Manny" or "David." A couple surprising names on this list may be Trot Nixon, Carl Everett and JD Drew. Do you still think Drew isn't a good baseball player?
| RK | NAME | YEAR | wOBA |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Trot Nixon | 2003 | 0.412 |
| 12 | Manny Ramirez | 2005 | 0.411 |
| 13 | David Ortiz | 2004 | 0.408 |
| 14 | Carl Everett | 2000 | 0.402 |
| 15 | Kevin Youkilis | 2008 | 0.402 |
| 16 | David Ortiz | 2003 | 0.400 |
| 17 | JD Drew | 2008 | 0.400 |
63 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Goddammit I miss Manny.
Sigh. The good old days…
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
I have a five-tool player in my pants.
screw manny
the original man child cry baby. he is everything that is, was or has been wrong with sports. he doesn’t “get it”.
Nonsense.
Nobody who loves hugs that much can ever be “everything that is wrong with sports”.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
I have a five-tool player in my pants.
manny - crying and hugging aside
the man-child was a hitting wizard with a bat.
i also believe that he did not actively use roids as a red sox. he did as a dodger and possibly as an indian.
which leads to another point about a certain 3rd baseman, to be left unnamed, who had a hof type season in 2004, which was in the last year of his contract. in 2005, he became a very well paid and rich major leaguer. he probably quit after – i would have.
i’m always suspicious of career years in the last year of a player’s contract (back to manny – see 2008 season’s difference in august/september).
Note to some people worried about our offense
Jason Bay didn’t even put up a top 17 finish in this decade with his performance this season. Our offense is pretty spread around.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Manny was a really great hitter
not a great baseball player. Huge difference.
(and, it’s “threw”, not through, to be a grammar nazi)
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Thanks for the catch
SB Nation's Boston Red Sox community:
OverTheMonster.com
Follow Randy on Twitter: @RCBooth
by Randy Booth on Jan 11, 2010 12:22 PM EST up reply actions
Something in common
Ya know, I’m reading this and a light bulb goes off. All 4 guys (except Youkilis) on this list have been accused of taking steroids. It’s amazing to me how much steriods help a player. I mean everyone who has been either accused of it or on “the steriod list” are all very good players to begin with but then they put up these crazy numbers while on steroids. There are other players as well… McGuire, Tajada, A-Rod, Giambi, Clemons, etc… and perhaps even the newest Red Sox, Beltre, with his crazy 2004 season where he hit .334 with 48 home runs and hasn’t put up numbers anywhere near that either before or after 2004. And yes, steroids can raise your batting average simply by making you stronger so that when you make contact the ball hits the holes faster and there are more solid shots. I’m not one of those guys who are against the whole steroids thing but I am a huge baseball fan and in a way it’s sad to see how in order to make any of these “best” lists 90% of the time you have to be juiced. What if all the players were juiced? Would that make for better baseball?
I really don't buy the Beltre thing at all.
Unless he very specifically targeted his steroid use so it would ONLY effect his 2004 numbers, then there’s no explanation for why he didn’t, y’know, do very well in 2005. He was, in fact, best later, when you’d expect the roid boost would be wearing off as compared to earlier in the year, when you’d maybe expect him to retain some of the ’04 “magic”
USG
by Ben Buchanan on Jan 11, 2010 11:11 AM EST up reply actions
Agreed. I don't see any indications that Beltre was a PED user
plus, as I mentioned elsewhere, his ‘power ratio’ (the ratio of extra base hits to hits overall) that year wasn’t really unusual for him – he’s had a higher number in years when he’s hit far fewer HRs.
He just happened to get more would-be doubles and would-be flyballs over the wall that year.
If he was somehow ‘juiced’ to have more power ‘that year’, you would expect a more significant % of his hits would be extra base hits. And yet his percentage is fairly consistent all the way into more recent years (well after testing got serious in 2005). Beltre’s power ratio is right around 37% most of his career, plus or minus a few percent. Actually, when healthy, his number is right around 40%. His career number is dragged down by a couple of distinctly un-healthy years. His overall numbers are, of course, suppressed by playing in Dodger Stadium and Safeco for half his at bats. But we are mostly interested in sustained deviations here. Here are Adrian Beltre’s power-ratio numbers by year:
1998: 38.1% (rookie year, only 214 PAs)
1999: 31.8% (wierd year – became a singles hitter with decent OBP – no power)
2000: 35.1%
2001: 31.0% (injured this year – only 126 gms played)
2002: 34.4%
2003: 41.0%
2004: 40.0% (his 48 homer year. Age 25)
2005: 36.4% (first in Safeco Park)
2006: 41.0%
2007: 42.1%
2008: 37.2%
2009: 29.4% (injured, only 111 games played)
So those numbers don’t really show an indication that he became ‘juiced’ for any period of time.
You wanna see what looks more compelling evidence of PED usage? We go right to the poster boy:
Barry Bonds
1986: 48.9% (first year in MLB)
1987: 47.2%
1988: 38.8%
1989: 41.0%
1990: 43.5% (His first MVP year, age 25)
1991: 38.9%
1992: 51.0% (Note the jump from this point on. Still in Pit, so not a park effect)
1993: 48.6% (first in SF)
1994: 47.5%
1995: 47.0%
1996: 45.3%
1997: 45.8%
1998: 52.4%
1999: 61.5% (injured part of this year – did he start to really juice up in order to heal?)
2000: 55.1%
2001: 68.6% !!!!!! (The year he hit 73, age 36. This is not human. It is kryptonian).
2002: 53.0%
2003: 51.1% (Initial MLB testing started in 2002 – don’t know if Bonds was tested though.)
2004: 55.6%
2005: 50.0% (only 52 PAs. Injured. Stronger MLB testing starts.)
2006: 49.5%
2007: 44.7%
Looking at those numbers, I think Bonds almost certainly juiced up starting around 1992, then ‘doubled his prescription’ somewhere around 1999 and probably finally stopped using as testing was implemented, trailing off to more ‘human’ numbers in those last 3 years. Note the gradual tailing off. All that muscle mass doesn’t just disappear overnight.
Beltre’s numbers don’t have anywhere near those sort of stepped variations.
Note that both Beltre and Bonds had a big year at age 25. Neither really posted a big deviation in their power ratio in that year. But Bonds then kicks it up a huge notch a few years later and goes on to have bizarro numbers. The 2009 numer is just plain inhuman.
For reference: Babe Ruth’s best seasons were probably:
1920: 57.6% (36 2B, 9 3B, 54 HR, .376/.533/.849, Age 25)
1921: 58.3% (44 2B, 16 3B, 59 HR, .378/.512/846)
1927: 55.7% (29 2B, 8 3B, 60HR, .356/.486/772, Age 32)
So Ruth, in his absolute prime seasons, did not crack 60% and never came within a country mile of Bond’s ridiculous 69%, age 36 season in terms of power ratio. Note that in slugging percent, Ruth was much closer as his age 25 season (.849) is second only to Bond’s age 36 season (.863) for all time. That’s because Ruth hit for higher average and had more singles to pump that up to make up for the lower power ratio.
Okay, I digressed (but its interesting stuff). At any rate, I don’t see a sign in Beltre’s power ratio that he ever ‘juiced up’.
'92 Bonds hit age-27
Aka the age when players are supposed to hit their peak. Bonds used, no doubt, but the steroids didn’t force him to somehow refuse to swing out of the strike zone, like from ‘01-’07.
Of the cheaters, nobody was close to Bonds’ production. He’s still not as good of a homerun hitter as Aaron, but that had nothing to do with injections and all with era.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Part of Bond's walk number increase
came from other team’s refusing to pitch to him.
At any rate, the power ratio is BB independent. It is mainly a measure of hitting power / bat speed and independent of how good of an eye the hitter has.
Sure, a lot of hitters peak somewhere between 25-30, and age 27 is popular. But he didn’t just have a temporal ‘peak’ there. His year-on-year power ratio steps (significantly) up there and stays there. It never comes back down. And then in 98-99 jumps up AGAIN!!???
And its been awhile since I looked at a lot of these numbers, but I don’t think most hitters, when they have their late-20s peak, jump that dramatically in power ratio in one year.
Not considering swinging = more selective =
more power. Bonds cheated, but he also simply became selective on an unbelievable level.
There’s simply not one cause for any of this. The ball is juiced, the league expanded in ‘98, non-steroid training increased dramatically over the 80s and 90s, and some people cheated. What also cannot be denied is that Bonds, the human being, is one of the top 5-10 athletes in baseball history. Normal rules don’t apply to certain people in baseball history. If they did, Rogers Hornsby wouldn’t be the only person to hit .424, while he was a raging alcoholic.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Too much of a jump in one year, that then was sustained
for it to be accountable by most of those other factors.
Bonds was great, prior to age 27. But not Ruthian. Suddenly he was Ruthian and stayed that way for a few years … and then he became ridiculous.
I am sorry – people do have outlier performances and some people are exceptional, but Bonds deserves no credit here. Open your eyes and LOOK at his numbers from ages 21-26. Then LOOK at his numbers after that. He is a product of PEDs. Of chemistry.
For the record – Babe Ruth also put up ridiculous walk numbers – his OBP was much higher than Bonds. He started putting up such numbers when he was much younger – when he was already pounding the crap out of the ball and … pitchers feared him.
But back to raw power.
Go look at the greatest SLG % season numbers ever:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/slugging_perc_season.shtml
Bond’s name is up there at the top and in several spots (5 times in the top 50!). But not once does he appear in the top 50 before he reached age 35 (and you can see the bizarre jump he took in his partial year at age 34). And his BEST slugging years were 36-39!
In all of baseball, full of truly exceptional hitting seasons, the only guy past age 35 to ever post a .730+ SLG was Ted Williams at age 38 with a .731. Ruth managed the same at age 35. McGwire and Sosa (also probably on PEDs) both managed it at age 32. Nobody else has managed it past the age of 30! Yet here comes McGwire, Sosa and Bonds all of a sudden. And Bonds put up ridiculous .790+ seasons at ages 36, 37 & 39 ????
Give me a break. I totally reject that “Bonds, the human being, is one of the top 5-10 athletes in baseball history.” That statement dropped off reality with “the human being” part. That is not what he was. He was a PED-enhanced human being.
If he had played out as his early 21-26 years indicated he would, he would probably have finished as sort of a ‘top 100’ baseball player. Maybe even top 50 overall. Instead he cheated.
“Normal rules don’t apply” ??? Oh yes they do. The laws of nature don’t make exceptions and the human body is very much subject to them.
For the latter part of his career
Bonds was playing 1). in a park built for him, and him alone, 2). in a division with the greatest hitter’s park in the last 30 years, 3). with a team that had just joined in ’98, 4). with a juiced ball.
Steroids will never be the single reasoning. Bonds was simply better than everyone else in the 90s and ’00s, cheating or not.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
But his first jump occured BEFORE he left Pit
Pitt wasn’t exactly a huge park either.
And he also had to play some games in Dodger stadium.
And a juiced ball? Pardon me, but aren’t you now listing out a lot of factors that really applied to a LOT of players? Yes, Bonds is partly a product of those factors. But you are significantly overrating their combined effect.
By far and away, his use of PEDs is almost certainly due the lion’s share of credit for his production.
I still don't see how you get to that conclusion.
Are you suggesting that Bonds, out of everyone in baseball, simply used more steroids, or better steroids, or found the perfect concoction for himself?
Dozens of players cheated, and none came close to .328/.515/.863/1.379. The juice ball applied to everyone, dozens used steroids, and everyone pretty much played in the same ballpark. In the end, nobody was from the same planet as Barry Bonds.
If steroids were the magic drug they’re made out to be, Alex Sanchez would’ve hit better than .296/.330/.372/.702.
If Bonds were like everyone else, why didn’t anyone else come close to a 1.4 OPS?
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Because maybe it just wasn't as rampant as you think
The 2003 testing seems to have indicated about 10-15 % were using (or at least that tested positive for ‘something’ on the banned list – not everything was actually a PED).
Sure, some players maybe managed to skirt the test – and some may have gotten falsely flagged. Still, 10-15% is a long ways from 100%
That means a hell of a lot of players were actually clean. Maybe if some of those guys had used, one of them would have posted a 1.4? We’ll never know. We’ll also never know how good Bonds might have been if he had not used PEDs.
wow
Steroids cant help you put the bat on the ball. Fact is NO ONE was pitching to that guy. NO ONE!!!!! He saw 2 pitches a game and was still hitting 40+ homers a season. Dont even look at the homer run record year. The year he got the 232 walks is unbelievable. And steroids cant help you with your patience (actually prob the opposite), hand and eye coordination. Also y isnt laser eye surgery frowned upon. That is something that is performance enhancing!!!! “oh but that is legal”. Well what is the problem, the legality of it or if it is performancing enhancing??? Steroids or not Barry Bonds is one of the best hitters in baseball history!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You mean "With steroids"
With steroids Barry Bonds is (was) one of the best hitters in baseball history.
Its not a question of “or not”. We don’t know how good he would have been “without steroids”. Maybe he would have been great. Maybe he would have not recovered from injury and had a shorter career. Who knows?
We also don’t know what steroid usage might have done for hitters like, say, Ted Williams, or Babe Ruth or Stan Musial, or Frank Robinson or …. If we could have seen those guys, “with steroids”, maybe Bonds’ numbers would look like bird crap in comparison.
ppor
’#4 – testing never found a ball to be juiced.
and your other 3 numbered points – what? ppor
saying that bonds was better than everyone with or without roids – post the proof or we will know you retracted.
ha ha
Someone learned a new acronym.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
I have a five-tool player in my pants.
Aren't you cute, learning something
And thinking it can be used for everything in lieu of basic research.
The one supposedly scientific study was paid for by MLB, leading only to speculation and informal testing. We’ll never know for sure, but it’s at least likely as part of the 90s jump. The simple drop test shows different results for old vs. new dates, so it comes down to whether you believe balls deaden with age or not If nothing else, the ’87 jump is well documented and bizarre.
SBC was built with Bonds in mind, hence the short RF dimensions and large everything else.
Coors’ park factors are easily available, look them up.
Do you need proof that the Diamondbacks joined the league in 1998?
But no, STOREIREOIERDS111111 are the answer.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
I don't buy it
Considering that 80% of the player on the top ten list are only two people you can’t really say that only juiced players perform well. Manny Ramirez is a GREAT hitter, juice or not juice. Did the best of the best feel they had to be better, so then got on steroids, probably. But who else in the past decade would be on this list?
What?
“it’s amazing to me how much steroids help a player.” Are you serious?
It is absolutely ridiculous how steroids have become the magic solution to the offensive explosion of the last 2 decades. The ball was juiced, the league was expanded twice in 6 years, smaller parks were built, but steroids are the only thing anyone mentions. It’s just lazy.
Norm Cash wasn’t juiced for his 1961 season, nor was Walt Dropo for 1950, Ripken in ‘91, Lynn in ’79, Lonborg in ’67, and so on. Players have outlier seasons, it’s a part of baseball.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Steroids
Can make you physically stronger, yes. but they cannot help with hand-eye coordination, batting mechanics, etc. I truly believe that many players took them primarily to overcome injury faster or keep from getting injured.
Nah.... most likely they took them for the $$$
Very simply, if you are in a profession that is blatently and clearly rewarding players who are taking PEDs, then if you want the $$, you are going to use the PEDs.
And I’m not even going to say that is completely unethical. If I had a chance to earn Millions of dollars by taking some pills or getting shot in the butt – and I’m in a profession where a career ending injury could occur at any moment – then damn straight I believe I WOULD have used PEDs. You owe it to your family.
Remember, PEDs technically were not even against baseball rules through much of the era of misuse. That isn’t to say it was right. Its still cheating to be gaining a competitive advantage over your fellows if that same advantage is not equally available to them and its definitely fraud to be selling your skills (i.e. tickets) under false pretenses (that your skills are ‘natural’). But its not black and white.
by mmmmm on Jan 11, 2010 2:58 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
In reply to sportshail post
I would have to agree sportshail. It seems that anyone who holds a record now a days is on steroids. It just makes you that much stronger. Not even that it taints the game of baseball but it’s unfair to the guys who are not on the stuff. It’s also a bad influence on say a kid in high school trying to become a pro. Why would they not take steroids to make themselves better?
As a fan...
…I demand that all players take steroids.
If I’m spending my hard-earned money on baseball, football, whatever, I demand that the athletes perform freakish and amazingly obviously extrahuman feats of physical prowess that I couldn’t do – rather than underappreciated less-obvious feats of physical prowess that I still couldn’t do. Pure athleticism is relevant in the Olympics only.
(only like 80% joking)
Rock me, sexy Jesus...
by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 11, 2010 11:36 AM EST up reply actions
I hear what you are saying
Not sure I agree or disagree.
On one hand, so long as all measures are safe, openly disclosed and equally available to all competitors, I’m all for any means of improvement.
On the other hand, it really distorts the historical context (see up above comparing Bond’s age 36 season to Ruth’s age 25 season).
Pitching Seasons
Randy, if you have the time would you do one of these for pitchers….Pedro’s name will be all over the list but its nice to go back and look like you said…Its down right amazing for instance to see how dominant Pedro was in 2000 with an absolute sick 291 ERA+
I already have, actually
I just need to sort by a good stat. I used FIP, but maybe I should go the ERA+ route…
SB Nation's Boston Red Sox community:
OverTheMonster.com
Follow Randy on Twitter: @RCBooth
Interesting that Manny's 2002 was his best hitting season in Boston
b/c it was actually his least valuable season in Boston overall… which reminds us all why he had to go (and all the off the field crap). Dont miss him and his wagon load of BS even a little.
Replying to - I really don't buy the Beltre thing at all.
Ben Buchanan – So you’re saying Beltre was better in 05 than in 04? Look at his stats. He was horrible in 05 and not much better for the rest of his career up until now. His best season besides 04 when he hit .334 / 48 HRs was in 07 when he hit .276 / 27HRs…. FAR cry from 2004.
Yeah, he also changed leagues and ballparks between those years, too
Nor was he “horrible in 05.”
In 2005, he provided $11.4 million dollars of value for his team. He was a 2 and a half win player.
there is more to life than just HRs and Batting Average, son.
In fact, by themselves, those are pretty poor numbers with which to measure a hitter.
Ben’s main point is that if he WAS juiced in 2004, then just stopping the usage after that one year shouldn’t result in the precipitous drop in power that he had in 2005. The increased muscle mass doesn’t just disappear immediately. And his second point is that, if he did use only in 2004, and the benefit did wear off, it would be more worn off in the second half of 2005 than in the first half of 2005 – yet his splits for 2005 show him to have had a better second half.
At any rate, as I said, his raw HR number and batting average are not very good numbers all by themselves.
If you are looking for signs that someone is ‘juiced’, and thus able to hit the ball harder, I believe that the ratio of extra base hits to hits is a more telling statistic. See my post above.
no you misread what he was saying
he was saying that he was better in the second half of 05 than he was in the first half of 05- with the argument being that if he was juiced, it would have taken time for the muscle mass developed to slow down, so we would have seen him start off 05 strong with his production dropping towards the end of the year.
Hand / eye
Hand, eye coordination doesn’t improve on roids but it does make you stronger, your bat faster, and when you connect the ball flys harder. Isn’t it a little surprising why Ortiz can’t catch up to fast ball anymore? His bat speed isn’t what it once was… Injury or no injury he was much stronger on the juice. And yes, Manny is a great hitter even without the juice… He’s a pure hitter.
Because he's a fat 33 year old with a series of injuries?
But no, the only possible answer is steroids apparently. Rice’s last good season was at 33, I guess he was juicing too.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
1) There is no proof Ortiz was ever “on the juice.” He tested positive for something, we have no clue what. It could be Andro, it could be lots of things that arent steroids.
2) His bat speed isnt what it was b/c he’s a big fat guy who’s getting older.
I hate the logic that
a sudden drop in production must mean that they were using PEDs!
That just doesn’t make any sense. A sudden rise in production should be a more telling clue. A sudden drop can happen for many reasons – injury being the main culprit. Stopping PED usage should be more gradual effect as your body is gradually not able to maintain the same muscle mass without the juice. But it doesn’t mean you suddenly can’t pick up a kitten.
Im actually not sure we can draw any conclusions from performance, though that would also be what I would look for...
There’s a whole school of thought that the biggest advantage lies in increased endurance and resilience, especially returning from injury.
Hank Aaron noted this was the big difference, in his opinion. As he aged, little injuries would waylay him. As you get older, a little neck stiffness that would go away in a day when you were 18 is suddenly a week long problem when you’re 30. Its that sort of thing…
a sudden rise
shouldnt automatically be viewed as PED use. Look at Roger Maris’ 61 season the most he had in any season was 39 (year before) and only had 30 in one other season (year after). So that must mean Roger Maris was on steroids or HGH??? Sometimes people just have great years!!!
Oh I agree
You have to look further into the numbers than just HRs in a given year.
But if you are looking for your first clue that someone MIGHT have started something to gain advantage, the clue isn’t to be found in the fact that the advantage has disappeared. Its that it appeared at all.
And then, as you say, you have to really look at the numbers carefully to determine if there really was anything unusual. If a guy hits 30 doubles and 10 HRs one year, and the next year hits 10 doubles and 30 HRs, has he suddenly had a power burst? That’s 3 times the HRs!! Or is he just now pulling the ball differently or playing in a different park?
2 best hitters are juicers
Wow, there are two guys to be proud of. Thanks for reminding us.
NOMAR
I was glad to see Nomar on the list!!! Nomar was/is my fav player ever and I hope the true Sox fans remember how great that season he had. He only stuck out 50 times that year!!!!!!! It seemed he destroyed the ball even when he made outs. It was just too bad that it all went south so damn quick!!!! NOMAR!!
Nomar was the reason I became a die hard Sox fan. I can remember all the heated arguments I’ve had with people on why I thought he was better than Jeter.
Nomar was the most feared hitter
in the game for a few years. Nobody wanted to pitch to him, he wouldnt K that much, and he could he bad pitches hard!!! If he hit a dribbler (rare) and he would beat it out for an infield hit. That was my fav part of Nomar, he ran everything out. He would hit a 400+ ft homer and they would show the replay. He would be rounding first and you could tell when the ball hit the stands cuz that is when he would slow down!!! That was so refreshing to see from a pro ballplayer.
No argument from me.
Until injuries took him out of the SS picture, Nomar (and A-Rod, until he moved to 3B) were WAAAAYYY more valuable shortstops than Jeter. Not even close.
God, I remember going to the game against the Mariners
where Nomar had it seemed like a zillion hits including just a monster HR into centerfield in Fenway. I was sitting just a few rows back behind home plate. It was a hell of a show.
hah!
In the middle of this steroid conversation, McGwire admits to using steroids to the AP.
Building Fenway from the ground up - Virtual Fenway
Great article, Greg. 'Really stimulated some discussions.
Now, I know someone asked for pitching performance rankings.
What about WAR values?
When you factor in defense, who has had the biggest seasons this last decade for the Red Sox?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
