The Actual Top 20 Lifetime HR Leaders (OT)

Peter_Spaeth · #1 07-09-2014, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sniffy5

Wasn't Ivan Rodriguez also hitting 50 HRs at one point as well?

Not even close. 35 or so was his max. You may be thinking of Gonzalez or Palmeiro.

sniffy5 · #2 07-09-2014, 02:26 PM

Yeah, I don't have his stats in front of me. But I do recall a point when his offense went suspiciously berserk for a while during the steroid craze. But I agree, 35 hrs for a catcher isn't weird. Maybe he had crazy BA with lots of doubles and run production???

packs · #3 07-09-2014, 03:41 PM

Not that weird but Pudge did just so happen to put up his career year and won an MVP award the same season (1999) Rafael Palmeiro joined the Rangers and hit 47 homers. That doesn't bode well.

MattyC · #4 07-09-2014, 05:32 PM

Regarding increased muscle mass as proof of steroid use... A lot of fans just have no idea what serious training and nutrition can do to transform a body-- let alone a body that is already a genetically gifted specimen. Some people have never made intense training and nutrition a major part of their lives, and cannot fathom what the human body is truly capable of achieving. Point being that increasing lean mass and one's physique is by no means at all proof positive of steroids. I am not a pro athlete by any means at all, and at 6'1" I reduced body fat and added 10 lbs of lean mass in multiple consecutive years (and in my thirties, no less; I am 37 now), just by training intensely and taking nutrition very seriously. In contrast a pro athlete with a tremendous frame who wants to improve and has expert trainers and nutritionists on call can make immense gains in lean mass without the need of steroids.

sniffy5 · #5 07-09-2014, 06:12 PM

That's very true, but it also reminds me of the PR statements made by all the guilty parties back when the heat first started on them. Bonds' and Clemens' people would invite ESPN to do a clip on their incredible workout regimes. Of course leaving out one crucial detail. And these workouts explained to us how at 35 they still had yet to reach the apex of skill and just kept getting better and better, defying all logic and empirical evidence from 80+ years of live-ball baseball. Plus, I'm sure many of us hit the gym. We can spot the juicers immediately. And I do admit that it got difficult for a suspicious but also naive fan base to spot them in baseball at one point, because guys like Brett Boone and Jeff Bagwell and Ken Caminiti were what the best ball players looked like for a while. Of course we realize now that they were juiced out of their minds.

Duluth Eskimo · #6 07-10-2014, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattyC

Regarding increased muscle mass as proof of steroid use... A lot of fans just have no idea what serious training and nutrition can do to transform a body-- let alone a body that is already a genetically gifted specimen. Some people have never made intense training and nutrition a major part of their lives, and cannot fathom what the human body is truly capable of achieving. Point being that increasing lean mass and one's physique is by no means at all proof positive of steroids. I am not a pro athlete by any means at all, and at 6'1" I reduced body fat and added 10 lbs of lean mass in multiple consecutive years (and in my thirties, no less; I am 37 now), just by training intensely and taking nutrition very seriously. In contrast a pro athlete with a tremendous frame who wants to improve and has expert trainers and nutritionists on call can make immense gains in lean mass without the need of steroids.

If this is true, kudos to you. The only thing is that you should be the first person to recognize anomalies like these and not defending these guys. Speaking as someone who trained very hard in the past (clean) and worked out with many people who cheated, I find it very hard to believe most of these people are supposedly clean hitters in baseball. If you have have trained hard, it stands out like a sore thumb. Not sure what else to say.

Tabe · #7 07-09-2014, 06:25 PM

Pudge only hit 30 HRs once (the 1999 MVP season). He had other seasons of 20, 21, 25 & 27 HRs but mostly hit like 17-19 per year. The 1999 season IS an outlier but his 2000 season is more suspicious. It's a year after Raffy joined the squad and he hit 27 HRs - in just 91 games.

Quite frankly, I thought Pudge was in the "yeah, there's no doubt he used" group. He got significantly smaller once testing started. He never got popped for anything but, yeah, he's a no-brainer for me.

clydepepper · #8 07-09-2014, 06:38 PM

Bert Campaneris - 22 HRs in 1970 - never more than 8 any other year.

Wade Boggs - 24 HRs in 1987 - had 11 in another season, but other than that, never had more than 8 any other year.

- By the way, why in the HECK haven't the Red Sox retired Boggs' #26? Whatever the reason, it is petty.

sniffy5 · #9 07-09-2014, 07:15 PM

It's because Boggs jumped to the Yankees and won a ring, I'm sure. Have they retired Clemens' number? I misremember. But I'm relatively sure they are really displeased with his post Sox success with the Yanks.

As for Campaneris and Boggs, abberation years to a degree, but apples and oranges to steroid/HGH users. Baseball all star teams lining up on the foul lines looked like WWE dudes dressed in baseball uniforms for a span of several years. Take a look at the photos in that Game of Shadows book if you get the chance. Bonds and the other players are so huge in their uniforms that they look like they are about to explode.

packs · #10 07-09-2014, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Bert Campaneris - 22 HRs in 1970 - never more than 8 any other year.

Wade Boggs - 24 HRs in 1987 - had 11 in another season, but other than that, never had more than 8 any other year.

- By the way, why in the HECK haven't the Red Sox retired Boggs' #26? Whatever the reason, it is petty.

It's not the amount, it's the timing. The year Palmeiro, a no doubt about it cheater, joined the Rangers Pudge had a career year and put up his best power numbers of his career.

Peter_Spaeth · #11 07-09-2014, 07:33 PM

Boggs hit .363 to go along with those 24 homers and finished 9th in the MVP voting. Says everything you need to know about Boggs. His number does not deserve to be retired.

bnorth · #12 07-09-2014, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Bert Campaneris - 22 HRs in 1970 - never more than 8 any other year.

Wade Boggs - 24 HRs in 1987 - had 11 in another season, but other than that, never had more than 8 any other year.

- By the way, why in the HECK haven't the Red Sox retired Boggs' #26? Whatever the reason, it is petty.

I also think Wade Boggs # should be retired. As far as his 24 HRs in 1987 if you ever seen him take batting practice you would think 24 would be an off year. He was a homerun hitting machine during BP.

I think a lot of players did PEDs since the 1950's but do not think Wade is one of them.

clydepepper · #13 07-09-2014, 08:08 PM

Woah Boys! It was not my intention to imply that either Campy or Boggs juiced...only another poor attempt at humor.

Peter- Boggs DOES deserve to have his Red Sox number retired.

Here's a question for everyone:

Who would your rate higher: Carew, Boggs, or Gwynn?

Right now, more folks would probably say Gwynn - especially if you include defense...

but what if you are just comparing who is the better pure hitter...that is my question.

Peter_Spaeth · #14 07-09-2014, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnorth

I also think Wade Boggs # should be retired. As far as his 24 HRs in 1987 if you ever seen him take batting practice you would think 24 would be an off year. He was a homerun hitting machine during BP.

I think a lot of players did PEDs since the 1950's but do not think Wade is one of them.

Yeah if given his choice Boggs almost certainly would have opted for .350 and 0 HR than, say, .290 with 30-35 HR, even if the latter would have helped his team more. The 24 year was weird, because he hit for the same high average, then he dropped to something like 5 the next year, almost as if he said FU.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Anyone seen the actual photo used for Bender's T-3?	jerseygary	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	0	06-23-2014 12:47 PM
My lifetime collection for sale	ocjack	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	1	05-07-2013 08:21 AM
My lifetime collection for sale	ocjack	Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T	1	05-07-2013 08:21 AM
Actual Set History	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	4	05-28-2006 02:48 PM
Actual worth vs want	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	2	04-18-2005 07:29 AM