May 09, 2007

The Numbers Don't Lie, Do They?

Player A is hitting a nifty .358/.427/.797. His OPS is 1.222 and he's crushing a Home Run every 8.2 times he has an at bat.

Player B isn't doing too badly either. He's hitting .338/.527/.805. His OPS is an insane 1.332 and he's biffing a Home Run every 7.0 at bats.

You've probably guessed that one of these players is Alex Rodriguez, officially off to The Best Start To A Baseball Season Ever. That takes care of Player A.

So who's Player B?

Step forward our old friend Barry Lamar Bonds who, despite turning 43 in July, could stake a decent claim to being the National League's Most Valuable Player through the first month of the season. Yes, of course it's only May, but were he to continue at this pace (a conceit too-beloved by baseball writers admittedly) he'd pass Hank Aaron's home run record weeks before the All-Star break.

I'm not a drugs expert by any means, but do recall that the effects of steroids wear off (eg, Ben Johnson's failed comeback after his first drugs ban). Assuming that common sense suggests Bonds would be a fool to be taking performance enhancing drugs this season (it seems reasonable to think he has taken them in the past) given that one would have thought it a certainty that he'd be tested, how does one explain his current form?

True, it is just 30 games, so the usual caveats about smallish samples apply. But still, people, come on. This is remarkable. Could it be that, at 42, he really is still this good?

Barry Bonds is still Barry Bonds of course and being Barry Bonds seems to mean being a jerk. But that ought not to prevent one from appreciating just how remarkable a baseball player he remains. Hell, even if he were juiced up to the eyeballs these would be pretty eye-popping numbers for a 42 year old... But what if he's clean?

Dan Drezner and Matt Yglesias have a Bloggingheads segment on Bonds, here

9 May 2007 13:50:31 | Baseball, Sports

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
What goes around comes around etc An old university chum, now transplanted to the Bay Area, kindly - if that's the right word - alerts me to a piece I wrote in autumn 1995 for our college magazine TCD Miscellany (a publication with a distinguished past but, in our day at least, an erratic publishing schedule) about Blair's new Labour party and the challenge facing John Major. Today, of course, the parties have swapped places and it's David Cameron who poses a severe challenge to a Labour party grown fat and cynical on power. So, just swap the parties and this could almost be true of Britain today, as the country looks towards the next election: "Most commentators have already written the Tories off, feeling that a party so bereft of policy initiatives, riven by faction, discord, sleaze and scandal cannot possibly retain the affections of the electorate. On the face of it this is true: [John] Major will require an unprecedented recovery in the polls even to come close to Tony Blair's all-smiling, all-dancing, all-things-to-all-men toy Labour Party." It's depressing, mind you, to be reminded that apparently I was writing, in that same issue, about the slippery slope potential of smoking bans fully 12 years...
PREVIOUS POST
Quote of the Day David Frum tells it like it is. Have Republicans absorbed how much trouble their party is in? To the (limited) extent that we do, we tend to to attribute everything to Iraq — as if Katrina, the Schiavo affair, corruption in Congress, and the intensifying irrelevance of our domestic-policy agenda did not exist. And so we demand from our candidates ever more fervent declarations of fealty to an ideology that interests an ever dwindling proportion of the public. I wish somebody at the Reagan Library had said: "Ronald Reagan was a great leader and a great president because he addressed the problems of his time. But we have very different problems — and we need very different answers. Here are mine." But if one of the candidates had said that, would we have hearkened? Or would we say: The path to the nomination will be crossed by the candidate who does the best job of ticking the boxes of a coalition that probably now spans no more than 30 percent of the electorate? Barring some calamitous mistake by the Democrats (and true, that can never be ruled out from the "war is lost" party), the GOP enters the 2008 election...

alex massie

Search

My Online Status

Recent Comments