When was Hank Aaron's 'peak'?

[willshad]

Looking at Aaron's career, it seems he didnt follow a normal career path. He didnt really have a peak, or a decline phase..he was just amazingly consistent for over 20 years. Im curious as to what people think his 'peak' was. Was it in the late 50s, when he scored best in MVP voting? Was it early 60s, when he had his best triple crown stats, or was it '69-'73, when he had his best OPS+ scores?

[leecemark]

--Not the latter. He was missing more games and was not the defensive player or baserunner in had been. I'd go with 1959-63. He had 3 of his top 5 OPS+ years, played quite a bit of CF and missed only 7 scheduled games over the 5 year period.

[philkid3]

You're right, he was extraordinarily consistent, and his peak actually seems like something around 14 years.

If I'm picking an absolute peak I'd say it was about the mid-to-late 60s when he seemed to be at his most complete as a player.

[Skin & Bones]

You're right, he was extraordinarily consistent, and his peak actually seems like something around 14 years.

If I'm picking an absolute peak I'd say it was about the mid-to-late 60s when he seemed to be at his most complete as a player.

It's actually amazing how underrated his defense and baserunning are.

[willshad]

I think he was a bit overshadowed by Mays. Mays was considered just as good a hitter, and a much better fielder and baserunner. I remember reading a book written in 1970 or so, and they talked about how Mays should break the all time home run record, and for Aaron they didnt even mention him as having a chance.

[philkid3]

Somewhere I read that Aaron's flaw was that everything he did Mays did just a little bit better. And Frank Robinson's flaw was that everything he did Aaron did just a little bit better.

They're not 100% comparable or 100% peers, but it was still a good description.

[leecemark]

--As hitters Mays are Aaron are virtually identical. Defensively and on the bases Mays wasn't a little bit better - he was alot better. Not that Aaron wasn't very good in those areas, just that Mays was amoung the greatest all time at both. Robinson was just a tad behind Aaron across the board for most of their careers, but Aaron stuck at the elite level enough longer to clearly pull away.

[Los Bravos]

It's actually amazing how underrated his defense and baserunning are.

I have tried, again and again, to make people understand that.

You're right, he was extraordinarily consistent, and his peak actually seems like something around 14 years.

I was thinking about writing "1957-1974"

If I'm picking an absolute peak I'd say it was about the mid-to-late 60s when he seemed to be at his most complete as a player.

Agreed. If you look at his numbers, he starts stealing many more bases in 1963, at the suggestion of Bobby Bragan. He ran a little before then, but he left a lot of potential steals out on the field, for various reasons (mainly that before Maury Wills electrified the game anew in '62, the practice was somewhat out of vogue for most players.)

[DiMag4Life]

I don't think he had a peak. He was the same player for the longest time.

You can't really skim through his stats and say *that was his year.* It's strange to say that about an inner circle Hall of Famer, and arguably top 10 player.

[stevebogus]

While Aaron really had an unusually broad peak a portion of his statistical consistency is an illusion created by the ballparks he played in. Milwaukee's County Stadium was a pitcher's park. Atlanta's Fulton County Stadium favored hitters to a large degree. When Aaron's skills began to erode he had the good fortune to move to a park where it was easier to put up good numbers.

I'd put Aaron's peak as 1957-1963. '57 was his MVP season and you could argue that he had several seasons better than that, such as 1959, 1962, and 1963. His 3 Gold Gloves were won in 1958-1960.

[DoubleX]

This is why Aaron is a very unique player, IMO. His peak may not have been as high as some of the other all time greats, but it lasted essentially 20 years. Between 1955 and 1973, his OPS+ was never lower than 143, and was below 150 just three times in that span. Imagine building a team knowing you're going to get that kind of production every year for almost 20 years? No one else has done something like this.

The move to Atlanta helped Aaron's numbers, but that may have just made up for some of what he lost while playing in Milwaukee. He also had 3 of his 5 best OPS+ seasons in Atlanta, that is adjusted for park, but also shows that a better hitting environment likely boosted his OPS+. So his years in Milwaukee might not actually reflect what a good hitter he was from an OPS+ standpoint either

[willshad]

Somewhere I read that Aaron's flaw was that everything he did Mays did just a little bit better. And Frank Robinson's flaw was that everything he did Aaron did just a little bit better.

They're not 100% comparable or 100% peers, but it was still a good description.

very true...you can even expand it to say that Willie Mccovey's flaw was that everything he did Frank Robinson did a little better, and Wille Stargell's flaw was that everything he did, Mccovey did a little better.

[digglahhh]

While Aaron really had an unusually broad peak a portion of his statistical consistency is an illusion created by the ballparks he played in. Milwaukee's County Stadium was a pitcher's park. Atlanta's Fulton County Stadium favored hitters to a large degree. When Aaron's skills began to erode he had the good fortune to move to a park where it was easier to put up good numbers.

I'd put Aaron's peak as 1957-1963. '57 was his MVP season and you could argue that he had several seasons better than that, such as 1959, 1962, and 1963. His 3 Gold Gloves were won in 1958-1960.

Beyond that, Atlanta moved the fences in, particularly in the power alleys, between '69-73. Over those five years, an aging Aaron (age 35-40) hit 203 homers despite averaging fewer than 140 games played per season.

[willshad]

While Aaron really had an unusually broad peak a portion of his statistical consistency is an illusion created by the ballparks he played in. Milwaukee's County Stadium was a pitcher's park. Atlanta's Fulton County Stadium favored hitters to a large degree. When Aaron's skills began to erode he had the good fortune to move to a park where it was easier to put up good numbers.

I'd put Aaron's peak as 1957-1963. '57 was his MVP season and you could argue that he had several seasons better than that, such as 1959, 1962, and 1963. His 3 Gold Gloves were won in 1958-1960.

If Atlanta was so great for hitters, then how did he manage to post 3 of his highest OPS+ scores while playing there? Isnt OpS+ park adjusted?

[stevebogus]

If Atlanta was so great for hitters, then how did he manage to post 3 of his highest OPS+ scores while playing there? Isnt OpS+ park adjusted?

Different batters have different abilities, and a park may help one type of hitter a lot while doing little for another. Let's say the ball carries 10 ft further in Atlanta. That will help the flyball hitters but do nothing for those who hit lots of grounders. Homeruns may increase by 40% in that park. Which batters can take advantage of that? The guys who hit plenty of long flyballs. The guys who hit lots of groundballs don't share in the bounty. From a value standpoint, the strong flyball hitters see their value increase while the weak singles hitters remain the same.

In Aaron's case he was the right kind of hitter to take advantage of Fulton County Stadium. In addition, as he became a serious threat to challenge Ruth's record they brought the LF fence in (as digglah noted).