[brunswickreeves]

There's no doubt Ruth was among the greatest players and hitters of any generation. Many factors influenced this: his amazing ability to compute the incoming pitch, size/stature, exercise regimen, and also the end of the Dead Ball Era in 1920, which provided a greater advantage to the batter. However, digging into the stats, correlation appears here to be causation (but not from more exercise)...with more at bats Ruth's total stats increased. However, as a % of those at bats, Ruth's stats in Hits, HRs, RBI, BA, and Slugging % actually balance out between career 1/2s (1914-1924) and (1925-1935).

Hits as a % of at Bats, and BA were better in the 1st 1/2 of his career. HRs as a % of at Bats was actually equal with less than a 1% difference between career 1/2s. Slugging %, and RBI as a % of at Bats were better in the 2nd 1/2 of his career. However, RBI is dependent on better batting and OBP by teammates...

See attached Excel analysis.

So did Ruth become a significantly better player/hitter as he aged, or did he actually make everyone around him better and he sustained his individual dominance?