Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 44

Thread: Will we ever see a 60+ homerun season done by a modern player who isn't a juicer?

  1. #1

    Will we ever see a 60+ homerun season done by a modern player who isn't a juicer?

    Obviously the players who have done so are known juicers, but I'm just curious if anyone thinks a modern player can do it without the juice.

    For an era that everyone claims is incredibly easy to hit homeruns, I've always found it interesting how many of the top homeruns seasons were done by juicers. Including many 50+ homerun seasons too. In fact, Howard's 58 in 2006 is the the highest total done by a modern player who hasn't been linked to steroids. After that you have Griffey who hit 56 twice. If it really is that easy to be a homerun hitter in today's age, why hasn't one player not linked to roids been able to smash 60 or more homeruns?
    Last edited by fenrir; 04-04-2012 at 09:43 AM.

  2. #2
    If we did, would we know?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    21,094
    I've always though Prince Fielder is the most likely current player to hit 60 HRs.
    Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    7,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post
    I've always though Prince Fielder is the most likely current player to hit 60 HRs.
    I like his chances too - Bautista might also have a shot.
    We own the West!

    Trusted Traders: ttmman21, Dalkowski110, BoofBonser26, Kearns643, HudsonHarden, Extra Innings, MadHatter, Mike D., J.P., SShifflett

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,142
    Quote Originally Posted by fenrir View Post
    If it really is that easy to be a homerun hitter in today's age, why hasn't one player not linked to roids been able to smash 60 or more homeruns?
    Not including the steroid era, the best era for HRs was from 1955-1962, but it's virtually tied with 2010-2011 as far as HRs per game. In that 8-year period (1955-1962), only one player hit 60+ HRs. Since the steroid era is barely over, it shouldn't be surprising that no one has hit 60+ HRs recently.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by ipitch View Post
    Not including the steroid era, the best era for HRs was from 1955-1962, but it's virtually tied with 2010-2011 as far as HRs per game. In that 8-year period (1955-1962), only one player hit 60+ HRs. Since the steroid era is barely over, it shouldn't be surprising that no one has hit 60+ HRs recently.
    I've heard many people claim that this era has been the easiest for homerun hitters. Maybe it is, but if that were the case, why have all the top homeruns seasons been done by juicers? Is being a natural power hitter really easier now than it was years ago? I think it's very possible we may never see a 60+ homerun season again, unless in the future they come out with legal supplements that replicate the benefits of steroids.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by fenrir View Post
    Obviously the players who have done so are known juicers, but I'm just curious if anyone thinks a modern player can do it without the juice.

    For an era that everyone claims is incredibly easy to hit homeruns, I've always found it interesting how many of the top homeruns seasons were done by juicers. Including many 50+ homerun seasons too. In fact, Howard's 58 in 2006 is the the highest total done by a modern player who hasn't been linked to steroids. After that you have Griffey who hit 56 twice. If it really is that easy to be a homerun hitter in today's age, why hasn't one player not linked to roids been able to smash 60 or more homeruns?
    The problem is that pitchers are incredibly good. the MLB does everything to make it easy for hitters (small strikezone, small parks, not allowing pitchers to throw inside) but pitchers have adapted by developing a plethora of pitches including new ones like the cutter. pitchers are just better than ever (maybe not in the top since there is currently no pedro or maddux but the field of good pitchers got much larger-even the 3 and 4 guys in these days throw 93 with a couple of off speed pitches).

    I think baseball history is a history of pitchers getting constantly better with the MLB every once in a while doing a rule change to help the batters back on track (mound from 50 to 60, live ball, smaller parks, smaller zone...).
    Last edited by dominik; 04-04-2012 at 11:47 AM.
    I think walks are overrated unless you can run. If you get a walk and put the pitcher in a stretch, that helps, but the guy who walks and cant run, most of the time hes clogging up the bases for somebody who can run. Dusty Baker.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by dominik View Post
    The problem is that pitchers are incredibly good. the MLB does everything to make it easy for hitters (small strikezone, small parks, not allowing pitchers to throw inside) but pitchers have adapted by developing a plethora of pitches including new ones like the cutter. pitchers are just better than ever (maybe not in the top since there is currently no pedro or maddux but the field of good pitchers got much larger-even the 3 and 4 guys in these days throw 93 with a couple of off speed pitches).

    I think baseball history is a history of pitchers getting constantly better with the MLB every once in a while doing a rule change to help the batters back on track (mound from 50 to 60, live ball, smaller parks, smaller zone...).

    I think other then the possibilty that the testing and penalty possibly scaring some previous users to quit using in recent years, I agree with your point, pitching has caught up with hitting. No way to prove that scaring some into stop using plays a part.

    I've said this before, not much feedback on it , what appears to me the increase in the number change ups in recent years and some darn good young pitchers with great change ups. The fact that some of these guys have lots of speed to go along with the change up. I think before the present crop of young pitchers, those pitchers that came before thought they had to blow away hitters with speed.

    Back to Warren Spahn who said it all, word to this effect............Hitting is timing, pitching is upsetting timing, so simple, makes so much sense. You don't always have to throw 90+ MPH to get a hitter out.
    Also, many young pitchers in the game with a good assortment of other pitches.
    Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 04-04-2012 at 12:31 PM.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by dominik View Post
    The problem is that pitchers are incredibly good. the MLB does everything to make it easy for hitters (small strikezone, small parks, not allowing pitchers to throw inside) but pitchers have adapted by developing a plethora of pitches including new ones like the cutter. pitchers are just better than ever (maybe not in the top since there is currently no pedro or maddux but the field of good pitchers got much larger-even the 3 and 4 guys in these days throw 93 with a couple of off speed pitches).

    I think baseball history is a history of pitchers getting constantly better with the MLB every once in a while doing a rule change to help the batters back on track (mound from 50 to 60, live ball, smaller parks, smaller zone...).
    I agree with everything you say, and I guess the main point I was trying to get make is that I don't think it's easier to hit a lot of homeruns today then it was years ago. If it was, then wouldn't at least one player not linked to steroids have at least hit 60 or more homeruns? Hell, it seems like many 50+ homeruns guys were juicers too. Only Thome, Griffey, Howard, Prince Fielder, and Bautista haven't been linked to the juice

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    1,371
    I'm not sure about Bautista. He was crushing balls the 1st half of last season. Then post all star, it seemed as if pitchers found a weakness and his productivity dropped.

    If Prince Fielder is going to do it, this may be the year he'll do it. Depends if the put him before or after Cabrera in the line up

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Rockland County, NY
    Posts
    12,069
    Blog Entries
    1
    Nobody's hitting 60+ at Comerica Park. Cabrera hasn't even reached 40 yet in four seasons as a tiger. That is a tough ballpark to hit homeruns. I'd be surprised if Fielder hits more than 44 or so in any of his 9 seasons as Tiger. Just look at his last two seasons in Milwaukee - he played at least 161 games in each season and hit only 38 and 32 home runs respectively.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by GiambiJuice View Post
    Just look at his last two seasons in Milwaukee - he played at least 161 games in each season and hit only 38 and 32 home runs respectively.
    And Miller Park is favorable to hitters isnt it? Lefties especially?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    21,094
    Quote Originally Posted by GiambiJuice View Post
    Nobody's hitting 60+ at Comerica Park. Cabrera hasn't even reached 40 yet in four seasons as a tiger. That is a tough ballpark to hit homeruns. I'd be surprised if Fielder hits more than 44 or so in any of his 9 seasons as Tiger. Just look at his last two seasons in Milwaukee - he played at least 161 games in each season and hit only 38 and 32 home runs respectively.
    Excellent points, GiambiJuice.
    Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Perth, Australia by way of Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,814
    Blog Entries
    1
    Ryan Howard almost did it with 58. It's safe to say that a player can only do it if he plays home games in a bandbox.
    Using a stolen chant from Boston Celtics fans whenever an L.A. team is playing up there just reeks of inferiority complex.

    If hitting a baseball is the toughest thing to do in sports, then pitching must be the easiest thing to do in sports.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    21,094
    Quote Originally Posted by UnderPressure View Post
    Ryan Howard almost did it with 58. It's safe to say that a player can only do it if he plays home games in a bandbox.
    When Howard hit 58 HRs in 2006 he had 29 HRs at home and 29 HRs on the road. Howard hit slightly better on the road as well.

    Home: .309/.422/.656
    Road: .318/.427/.662
    Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Home of the Twins
    Posts
    1,838
    It'll take a TEAM effort for a clean guy to break 60 HRs. We've only had 2 clean sluggers smack 60 HRs. And each time, the slugger came from a star-studded lineup that took its team to the World Series. And both of the guys that did it had a teammate nearly matching him for 85% of the season. I.e, I believe that the next player to break 60 will need to be on a legendary lineup with another teammate nearly matching him. Without Gehrig, Ruth would have probably been walked 170 times in 1927. And thus, he hits maybe 52-54. Maris was a sleeper since he wasn't expected to challenge the record. Besides, he had the best hitter in the game protecting him. As a case in point, Maris ONLY had 94 walks in 1961.

    The other option is for some guy out of the Woodworks would need to start the season on fire. By the time the league finally thought he was for real and started walking him, he'd have a bundle of HRs(perhaps 40 by mid-July).

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Anderson, SC
    Posts
    9,447
    Of course we will. Babe Ruth and Roger Maris weren't superhumans (and juicers aren't either). The perfect storm of luck should occur again.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by SamtheBravesFan View Post
    Of course we will. Babe Ruth and Roger Maris weren't superhumans (and juicers aren't either). The perfect storm of luck should occur again.
    Personally, I don't think either Ruth and especially Maris would have hit 60 or more homeruns in today's game.

    I'm sure most would disagree though, especially regarding Ruth.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by pheasant View Post
    It'll take a TEAM effort for a clean guy to break 60 HRs. We've only had 2 clean sluggers smack 60 HRs. And each time, the slugger came from a star-studded lineup that took its team to the World Series. And both of the guys that did it had a teammate nearly matching him for 85% of the season. I.e, I believe that the next player to break 60 will need to be on a legendary lineup with another teammate nearly matching him. Without Gehrig, Ruth would have probably been walked 170 times in 1927. And thus, he hits maybe 52-54. Maris was a sleeper since he wasn't expected to challenge the record. Besides, he had the best hitter in the game protecting him. As a case in point, Maris ONLY had 94 walks in 1961.

    The other option is for some guy out of the Woodworks would need to start the season on fire. By the time the league finally thought he was for real and started walking him, he'd have a bundle of HRs(perhaps 40 by mid-July).
    Not well known, only a fluke prevented Babe of a 60 homer season before he had Gehrig batting behind him, 1921.
    January 1921 Babe to a group of reporters, "Sixty home runs or more will be my slogan for 1921".
    Polo Grounds July 6, 1921, he lines one into the right field bleachers, spectator deflects ball back on to the playing field, his second homer of that game.... wait a minute. Umps send Babe back to second base, a double, he finishes the year with 59 home runs.

    Not a Ruth hand me down story, I have a copy of both articles from the NY Times, the prediction and the lost home run.

    Poor Roger Maris, most Yankee fans pulling for the "real Yankee" Mantle to break Babe's record. It only took at least a couple or more decades for Roger to get his due. He may not have been The Babe, but he did do what only one hitter before him had done, reached 60 then hit one more..

    Imagine a hitter passing the most recognized number in the game.............and his teammates have to push him out of the dugout to take a bow, in his own park. Compare that to the phony McGwire/Sosa love fest, Mac and Sammy hugging, being cheered even in opponents parks, Maris hearing some booing, even a few in NY, his home.

    For sure, no Mickey Mantle on deck, no 60 for Roger. Remember up till near the end they were both on pace to break sixty. They were not going to walk Maris and pitch to Mick. Maris hitting them out on record pace and not a single IBB the whole season. Not taking anything away from Roger, he earned it, he deserved better than the way he was treated.
    After what we have found about Mac, Sammy and Barry, Roger's 61 looks better than ever.
    Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 04-05-2012 at 04:40 AM.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by SamtheBravesFan View Post
    Of course we will. Babe Ruth and Roger Maris weren't superhumans (and juicers aren't either). The perfect storm of luck should occur again.
    Your right Sam, everthing has to go the hitters way. Until some users turned the trick, late 90s and 2001 with those 60's and two 70's +, think of how many hitters came so close after Ruth in 1927. A couple of 58 homer seasons long ago, Foxx, Greenberg, Hack Wilson with 56 all long ago. Since then a number of 54, 56, 52, some more recent years at 56, 57 and 58.
    So a good number really came close, some missing by a couple, a few and not much more. Shows that it's not that easy, a good number were very close but just falling a bit short.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    7,459
    How about Adrian Gonzalez? That short porch is meant for him...
    We own the West!

    Trusted Traders: ttmman21, Dalkowski110, BoofBonser26, Kearns643, HudsonHarden, Extra Innings, MadHatter, Mike D., J.P., SShifflett

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Home of the Twins
    Posts
    1,838
    Quote Originally Posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    Your right Sam, everthing has to go the hitters way. Until some users turned the trick, late 90s and 2001 with those 60's and two 70's +, think of how many hitters came so close after Ruth in 1927. A couple of 58 homer seasons long ago, Foxx, Greenberg, Hack Wilson with 56 all long ago. Since then a number of 54, 56, 52, some more recent years at 56, 57 and 58.
    So a good number really came close, some missing by a couple, a few and not much more. Shows that it's not that easy, a good number were very close but just falling a bit short.
    "60, count 'em, 60! Let's see some son of a bitch match that". It looks like Maris did it, but 13 years after Ruth passed. And no one clean has since.

    The Babe called it pretty well, I would say.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Braves Country
    Posts
    767
    Quote Originally Posted by Zito75 View Post
    How about Adrian Gonzalez? That short porch is meant for him...
    He never commits to home run pull hitting.
    Chop! Chop! Chop!

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    725
    I'll immediately feel sorry for any player that exceeds 60. Even if he's perfectly clean - and a model citizen - there will be many naysayers out there cutting him down, calling him a juicer, etc. It'll be a witch hunt.
    Swing and a drive! This one is deep! This one is... over the fence and into the neighbor's yard!

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Home of the Twins
    Posts
    1,838
    I believe someone will break 60. Who's to say that a clean person can't match a Sosa, Mcgwire, or Bonds?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •