Second Greatest Home Run Hitter

[AstrosFan]

Babe Ruth was an overwhelming choice for greatest home run hitter, winning 46 of 56 possible votes, for 82.14%. Let's see who takes the number two spot. I hope you will give reasons for your choices. Let the debates begin.

[AstrosFan]

Remember to not only cast your votes, but also give nominations for the next poll. Also, I am shortening the length of time the poll will be open to four days, because that's around the time that the poll dies out.

[NJMetfan4life]

I nominate Mike Piazza. He probably won't win, or get my vote, but eventually, would get in.

[Frank]

I'm going with *Ralph Kiner,Forbes* was a pretty big park...

[four tool]

They moved the fences in at Forbes for Kiner--look up Kiner's Korner sometime.

Aaron gets my vote because of his consistency for so many years, and breaking Ruth's career record was a really big deal back then.

[AstrosFan]

Agreed. I love Aaron's consistency. Sure, he didn't hit 50 in one season, but he hit 755, without steroids and all the other advantages that makes this such a big home run era. It was a pretty easy choice for me.

[bob]

Another vote for Aaron from me. You could always count on him hitting 30, 40+ a season, without going crazy and trying to hit a homer with every ball and often resulting in a all or nothing result.

[CJMorello]

Like most before me, had to go with Hank because of the consistency for all those years.

[csh19792001]

I'm going with *Ralph Kiner,Forbes* was a pretty big park...

It was a big park, but (generally speaking), that was before and after Kiner was there.


Old Post of mine:

In 1947, the Pirates obtained Hank Greenberg, the '46 AL home run champ, and tailored Forbes Field to the two righthanded power hitters. A double bullpen, 30 feet wide by 200 feet long, significantly cut the distances in left field. "Greenberg Gardens" (later "Kiner's Korner") reduced the left-field line from 365 to 335 feet and the left-center power alley from 406 to 355 feet. The two sluggers became roommates and Kiner credited Greenberg with his continued success. Greenberg managed only 25 homers in his final season, but Kiner blasted 51 to tie Johnny Mize for the NL lead.

Kiner went from hitting 23 and leading the league to 51 after the change in dimensions. Undoubtedly most of that is attributable to the massive change in LF.

I fact, I doubt Kiner would have had a prayer at the HOF had it not been for Greenberg's decision to play his swan song in Pittsburgh. He would have probably ended up a good power hitter and a lousy fielder with a short career.

Kiner hit 8 at home and 15 on the road his rookie year. Afterwards, at Forbes:

Year (Home/Road)
47' (28/23)
48' (31/9)
49' (29/25)
50' (27/20)
51' (26/16)
52' (22/15)

163/108, and probably with at least a hundred more at bats on the road.

Perhaps not coincidentally, when he was traded, they pretty drastically reconfigured the park again, and it became horrible for homeruns once again.


Another old post on Forbes' effect on homers:



B.T.W., how many HR's did that park cost Stargell? If I remember right, Ruth's ball was the only one hit over that roof for a long time, then someone I never heard of (but I'll bet Sultan knows) did it, then Mantle did it in the 1960 Series, then Stargell did it several times. Ya gotta wonder how many HR's that park cost him, while he was in his 20's. He did out-HR everyone in the 70's, right? What could he have done in the 60's?

BHN

How many HR's did Forbes cost Stargell? Probably a TON. If fact, I think I may have stumbled upon something- I seriously doubt any of the alltime homerun hitters (guys with, say, more than 400 career dingers) was more routed by their home park than Willie Stargell.

Consider that through 1970 (last year at Forbes) Stargell had 196 career homeruns- and according to retrosheet, he'd only hit 74 of those at home.

And most guys- irrespective of the fact that everyone bats more on the road in the long run- hit more AT HOME. Had Stargell played in a fair park, he would have hit 250 homeruns during that timeframe. Had he played in a great homerun park, he would have hit more.



1962-1970
HOMERUNS HR
1 Harmon Killebrew 357
2 Hank Aaron 339
3 Willie Mays 309
4 Willie McCovey 308
5 Frank Howard 294
6 Frank Robinson 273
7 Billy Williams 264
8 Ron Santo 247
9 Boog Powell 237
10 Norm Cash 234

[philkid3]

[White Knight]

I would normally pick Babe Ruth, but since he came in first and I have to pick someone else, without a doubt Mark McGwire. Not counting Ruth, he's sooooooooo far ahead of everyone else it's frightening.

[philkid3]

Oh dammit, White Knight and I (sort've) agree on something.

;)

[dabigyankeeman]

A healthy Mantle over the course of his career would have blown everyone away. In addition to the health factor, he lost a ton of homers in death valley in Yankee Stadium, heck, in just one game that i was in the stadium, Albie Pearson ran down not one, not two, but three balls each over 440 feet and caught them all. Tony Kubek, who played shortstop with Mickey, honestely estimated that Mantle could have hit 100 homers in a year if he had played in a park like Ebbets Field. I met Mantle at a card show about 25 years ago, and I asked him about losing homers out there, and you see the upset come over his face, and he just said while shaking his head, YEAH IT WAS WAY TOO LONG OUT THERE.

[csh19792001]

I can't believe people are voting for Barry Bonds here. The drugs he was taking after 1998 are known to improve eyesight, hand-eye coordination, and overall physical acuity. The incredible, completely unnatural jump in his average and slugging numbers from 2000-2004 speak for to this.

Look at the natural Barry Bonds. He was one of the best all around players ever, but he wasn't an all time great hitter, and he was certainly not one of the top few home run hitters ever.

Through 1998, in an equal # of games:
Griffey: 481 homers
Bonds: 411 homers

Yeah, Griffey played in a better park for homers, but not THAT much better. Yeah, Bonds took a lot more walks, but so what? We're not talking about plate discipline, we're evaluating HR production.

There are a host of better candidates here who were awesome from the beginning and didn't need to make their bodies into a pharmecuetical lab to become all time great sluggers.

Hank Aaron is the best choice here.

Hank Aaron's 755 career home runs (http://www.sportingnews.com/archives/aaron/homerbreakdown.html)


Off Hall of Famers
Steve Carlton 6
Don Drysdale 17
Bob Gibson 8
Ferguson Jenkins 2
Sandy Koufax 7
Juan Marichal 8
Gaylord Perry 3
Robin Roberts 9
Nolan Ryan 2
Tom Seaver 4
Don Sutton 3
Hoyt Wilhelm 1

[George H Ruth]

I voted for Josh Gibson, I believe the hype that surrounds this guy, and I do believe that he hit all those home runs. I just wish there was more information out there that we can prove it. But Gibson was just a home run machine, he could hit the ball out of the ball park as good as anybody, even Babe Ruth. So in my opinion he's the second greatest Home Run hitter after the Great Bambino.

[philkid3]

I can't believe people are voting for Barry Bonds here. The drugs he was taking after 1998 are known to improve eyesight, hand-eye coordination, and overall physical acuity. The incredible, completely unnatural jump in his average and slugging numbers from 2000-2004 speak for to this.
I didn't vote for Bonds, but there's still no total proof he used, and beyond that, if he did, that made him a great home run hitter.

The poll doesn't have any stipulations about how someone became a great home run hitter.

[csh19792001]

I didn't vote for Bonds, but there's still no total proof he used, and beyond that, if he did, that made him a great home run hitter.

The poll doesn't have any stipulations about how someone became a great home run hitter.

There's plenty of proof. Read the portions regarding Bonds Game of Shadows. Why hasn't Bonds sued the authors? Because their research is air tight. If that isn't enough, look at what the guy did after age of 37. He went from being a Frank Robinson type hitter to a better hitter/slugger combo than Babe Ruth was in his prime.

Beyond that, any semblance of common sense should be enough to convince you.

Barry Bonds Took Steroids, Reports Everyone Who Has Ever Watched Baseball
(http://www.theonion.com/content/node/46188)
Obviously HOW a player became the second greatest HR hitter of all time has a tremendous amount to do with who votes for who. If Ned Williamson played for 20 years in Lakefront Park II in Chicago, he might've hit 500 homers against the deadball, but 95% (or more) of his homers would have been at home. Would he be a candidate for greatest HR hitter ever?

Yeah, the poll doesn't explicitly state that how someone did it is important, but it is obviously implicit in the question that how a player did it is just as important what he did.

[four tool]

I can't see voting for Gibbie because he never played in the majors--had he played, he probably would be one or two.
But that's like saying that Mantle is the best because he was robbed so much by the size of the park.

Ruth played in large parks and Ruth lost many HRs because they cleared the field/stands fair but landed foul.

[AstrosFan]

When did that rule change? Today, a ball that clears the fence fair but lands foul is a home run.

[philkid3]

There's plenty of proof. Read the portions regarding Bonds Game of Shadows. Why hasn't Bonds sued the authors? Because their research is air tight. If that isn't enough, look at what the guy did after age of 37. He went from being a Frank Robinson type hitter to a better hitter/slugger combo than Babe Ruth was in his prime.
That's not proof, it's reason for speculation.

I'd bet a ton of money he used steroids from '99 on. That doesn't mean there's proof.



Barry Bonds Took Steroids, Reports Everyone Who Has Ever Watched Baseball
(http://www.theonion.com/content/node/46188)
Now I know you're not actually posting the Onion in any seriousness. :laugh



Yeah, the poll doesn't explicitly state that how someone did it is important, but it is obviously implicit in the question that how a player did it is just as important what he did.
How is that implicit? And how is it wrong to say Bonds was great because he used steroids?

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I got down to Aaron, Mantle and Killebrew, tough choice and went with Mick. Once again I find it impossible to fix Josh with a specific number not enough info, stats or level of pitching faced. he should make the list, where I don't know.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

When did that rule change? Today, a ball that clears the fence fair but lands foul is a home run.

I think 1930 is close give or take a few. Also to be considered not only were balls that curved foul not home runs but park configurations made this more likely in the old parks, 1900s-1920s-1930s.

This was because fewer of the old parks had upper decks so balls could travel much further past the foul line or foul pole unobstructed, more distance in which to hook or curve foul.

[Frank]

*Harmon Killebrew*- won't get many votes,just wanted to throw his name out there.One of the games most feared sluggers ,From-*1959-1972*-he hit 530-HR's in 7,000-AB's a HR every 13.2 AB's ....

[philkid3]

And Csh, I'm not saying you should vote for Bonds or that your interpretation is crazy or anything, I explained how people can vote for Bonds.

It makes a lot of sense and there's plenty of room for interpretation. If you want to dock Bonds for steroids, proof or no, do so. If you don't, don't.

[four tool]

When did that rule change? Today, a ball that clears the fence fair but lands foul is a home run.

The rule change was sometime in the 1930s, AFAIK. I don't have Jenkins or any other source handy for a definite date.

[Dogdaze]

I can't see voting for Gibbie because he never played in the majors--had he played, he probably would be one or two.

Agreed, while I guestimate Gibson may be one of the best 5 home run hitters, and possibly the best I just can't vote for him at this point, since NEL stats are sketchy and he played against a lot of non mlb teams so unfortunately I can't make a clear judgement on his HR abilities.

I would have picked Bonds or McGwire as #2, but I believe they juiced, so I'm discounting their numbers, thus Aaron was my pick as 2nd best.

[four tool]

I'm ignoring the posssible juicers and taking Aaron over high non-juiced HR/AB sluggers like Killebrew and Williams (Ted that is).

I'm also leaving out all active players until their careers are virtually over--Arod may get to be my #1 someday.

[Buzzaldrin]

Well, I took Killebrew. Over 500 homers in a 13 year peak. Eight 40+ seasons, primarily in the 60s. This poll is just homer run hitting, right? No other skills measured? I'll take Killer as number two.

[Dodgerfan1]

I, too, must go with Aaron for many of the same reasons already listed. I can't go with either Bonds or McGwire for obvious reasons, but had drugs not been a major factor, I would have gone with McGwire. He was one of the very few players who, every time he stepped up to the plate, I was thinking home run. As it is, in the spirit of appreciating and honoring fair play, it has to be Hank for me.

[four tool]

Well, I took Killebrew. Over 500 homers in a 13 year peak. Eight 40+ seasons, primarily in the 60s. This poll is just homer run hitting, right? No other skills measured? I'll take Killer as number two.

And look at Kill's age when he finally got to play full-time: he could have been a 675-700 man if he had been given the chance.

Even so, it's still Aaron for me.

[cards kid]

mine is hank aron cause if u look at stats its barry bonds but he might of had help with unknown substances

[parlo]

I am torn between Aaron and Willie Mays.
Since there are several nominations here for Aaron, I will go with Mays.

Willie Mays lost two years to military service in 1952 and 53.
Also, Candlestick Park in the 1960s was not as friendly to hitters as Milwaukee or Atlanta Fulton County Stadiums.

Mays hit 660 HRs with many less ABs than Aaron.

[four tool]

Aaron's HR\AB is better than Mays, despite more AB, and Mays"' home\road splits don't show a loss to candlestick

[Frank]

I see a couple of other sluggers that have no votes so far--Jimmie Foxx and Eddie Mathews...*Foxx*- had a stretch from 1929-1940 12 seasons where he hit at least 30-HR'S--6,527-AB,,484-HR,,13.5-AB per HR...
*Eddie Mathews*- from 1952-1961-his first 10 seasons,and before his 30th birthday had-5,466-AB,,370-HR,,14.8-AB per HR....

[parlo]

Aaron's HR\AB is better than Mays, despite more AB, and Mays"' home\road splits don't show a loss to candlestick
You are right.
It was getting late and I really didnt phrase that properly.

What I should have said is that Aaron had (IMO) a big home field advantage at Fulton County Stadium in his later years.
Mays did not have that.

[four tool]

True mays did not have that home field advantage later on, but aaron had a home field disadvantage in Mukwaukee, so IMHO, it balances for Aaron.

I will admit that had Mays moved to Atlanta in 95 or 66, he may have gone for the record.

[four tool]

I see a couple of other sluggers that have no votes so far--Jimmie Foxx and Eddie Mathews...*Foxx*- had a stretch from 1929-1940 12 seasons where he hit at least 30-HR'S--6,527-AB,,484-HR,,13.5-AB per HR...
*Eddie Mathews*- from 1952-1961-his first 10 seasons,and before his 30th birthday had-5,466-AB,,370-HR,,14.8-AB per HR....

Great peaks but many others also have great peaks--neither qualifiers as second best because of that. After all, Arod has outdone them both so far, so how either one rate over Arod, let alone many others?

[bob]

Foxx had 12 seasons with very good, consistant HR hitting and if he had carried on at that rate and played as long as Aaron or Mays then he would certainly be in contention.

[four tool]

Ifs don't amke the cut.

[White Knight]

Oh dammit, White Knight and I (sort've) agree on something.

;)

Lol, I think it happened once or twice before. Weren't you the one who agreed with me that Ryan and Ripken are over-rated? Also, I think we both have the same top two: Ruth then Cobb. :)

[philkid3]

I agree that Ryan is overrated. I think Ripken is underrated, if anything. I'd say he's generally rated about correctly.

And Cobb is not in my top two.

[White Knight]

I agree that Ryan is overrated. I think Ripken is underrated, if anything. I'd say he's generally rated about correctly.

And Cobb is not in my top two.

Wow, I guess we agree less than I thought. :) Just out of curiosity, who do you have as your number 2, Wagner? Mays?

[fenrir]

i went with mantle.

[philkid3]

Wow, I guess we agree less than I thought. :) Just out of curiosity, who do you have as your number 2, Wagner? Mays?

I've got Bonds at two.