WITH OR WITH OUT STERIODS...WHO WAS BETTER POWER HITTER?

[predatorkj]

Mark McGwire, without question. He could hit them higher and farther than anyone. Also, Big Mac has the best at bats per hr ratio in the history of MLB( 1 homerun every 10.6 at bats).

This is what I am talking about...him being able to hit them higher and farther than anyone.Thats mere perception and even if Mac had hit the furthest homerun or the highest homerun that does not = being a better power hitter.

The ab/hr ratio cannot be used fully for this argument.

"Power hitter" means just that "power". McGwire had more power than anyone. I'm not talking about doubles, slug, walks, batting average, or any other stats. Just pure flat out power. That was where McGwire was on his own little planet.

How do you figure...?

Are we talking muscles or strength or what?I am not grasping what your saying here.

I guess you never seen Mac's career. If you did, we must have been watching 2 different players. McGwire was the Paul Bunyan of our lifetime. As I said, a power hitter is just that. A power hitter. It's not doubles, triples, slugging %, ect, ect.. McGwire hit them higher and farther than any of the players mention in this debate. Bonds was a line drive hitter, who became a power hitter with steroid usage. McGwire was a power hitter from day one, when he slugged 49 bombs his rookie season. McGwire became an even more extreme power hitter after doing some steroids in the 90's.

I can see where we are headed with this argument and I usually try to stay away from arguing too much but a lot of your opinions are not based on facts.And as far as steriods go... I am not sure you can accurately say when Mac started taking.Nor can you prove what he took.You do know he was a teammate of Canseco as soon as he got on board with Oakland right?That was post 1990 if I am not mistaken.A lot of people believe he was on them from the getgo and that he increased as he went.Lets just leave it as an unknown.

As far as Paul Bunyun...Hulk Hogan looked strong in his heyday just like Brock Lesner looked too.That does not mean they are the most powerful people on the planet or even in wrestling.I think your getting a little strayed from the topic and trying to turn this into a who looks stronger contest.

As for the whole farther and harder thing...thats pretty irrelevant to the discussion as well.Mere perception.

 

[cartersprings]

Interesting. I see your point!

I would say however that doubles, if hit in quantity and consistency ,do represent power. A lot of your power hitter hit quite a few doubles.I will say though that a triple is a little hard to swallow if thrown into this argument because it is indicative of the ballpark and speed more than anything else but it also requires some power for them to be hit.Even a fast man has to hit the ball pretty far to be able to run to third on a hit.

Nice discussion though.And great points!

Edit: I meant the total at bats for each player by the fact that some players had way more at bats than others.I hate to use this argument though because it makes me think I am being hypocritical because we are not arguing whether or not Mac would have had the same numbers Bonds did if he had the same number of at bats.If we argue what we are arguing then its only by using whats there to use.If Mac had the same number of at bats then I believe things may have been different.Plus if you wanted to play it on the other hand we can shave everything past 2001 for Bonds and the story is quite different as well.

My basic argument is that combined with the amount of doubles and homers and slugging Bonds had that he is superior to Mac as a power hitter.

The thing is, with the way AB/HR is calculated, the differences in the total AB's for different players isn't all that important. The ratio allows players to be compared a little more accurately, as it provides a comparable, commonsized ratio. It's not a perfect indication of power, but it has a more solid standing than some of the other stats brought up(minus slugging percentage).
There's no denying what Bonds has done over his entire career. He is the all-time HR leader and his career numbers are better than McGwire's.

Well...do you think his career power numbers are better than Mac's?

I would also like to know how it would not affect anything if you consider Bonds had shy of 3,000 more at bats than Mac for his ab/hr numbers to widen a bit.That certainly has an influence and thats why I suggest that single stats be used when determining who was better at hitting for power. See if you can come up with Bonds through 2001 and use it against Macs ab/hr and see where we are at there.They may be a lot closer.I am not sure but I would hazard a guess they would be.But even after that...should we consider everything post 2001 for bonds irrelevant for this discussion when comparing the two?Thats my real debacle right there.Not sure how to call that one.

No offense here, but I think you are missing the point a little. With the AB/HR ratios provided, it doesn't matter much that Bonds had more AB's than McGwire. That's the reason for using them.
Here are the stats only up to (and including) 2001:
AB/HR
Bonds: 13.99
McGwire: 10.61

AB/(HR + 2B)
Bonds: 7.55
McGwire: 7.41

AB/(HR + .5(2B))
Bonds: 9.81
McGwire: 8.73

 

[stanthemanmusial]

[quote="stanthemanmusial":r0pd5glp]Mark McGwire, without question. He could hit them higher and farther than anyone. Also, Big Mac has the best at bats per hr ratio in the history of MLB( 1 homerun every 10.6 at bats).

This is what I am talking about...him being able to hit them higher and farther than anyone.Thats mere perception and even if Mac had hit the furthest homerun or the highest homerun that does not = being a better power hitter.

The ab/hr ratio cannot be used fully for this argument.

"Power hitter" means just that "power". McGwire had more power than anyone. I'm not talking about doubles, slug, walks, batting average, or any other stats. Just pure flat out power. That was where McGwire was on his own little planet.

How do you figure...?

Are we talking muscles or strength or what?I am not grasping what your saying here.

I guess you never seen Mac's career. If you did, we must have been watching 2 different players. McGwire was the Paul Bunyan of our lifetime. As I said, a power hitter is just that. A power hitter. It's not doubles, triples, slugging %, ect, ect.. McGwire hit them higher and farther than any of the players mention in this debate. Bonds was a line drive hitter, who became a power hitter with steroid usage. McGwire was a power hitter from day one, when he slugged 49 bombs his rookie season. McGwire became an even more extreme power hitter after doing some steroids in the 90's.

I can see where we are headed with this argument and I usually try to stay away from arguing too much but a lot of your opinions are not based on facts.And as far as steriods go... I am not sure you can accurately say when Mac started taking.Nor can you prove what he took.You do know he was a teammate of Canseco as soon as he got on board with Oakland right?That was post 1990 if I am not mistaken.A lot of people believe he was on them from the getgo and that he increased as he went.Lets just leave it as an unknown.

As far as Paul Bunyun...Hulk Hogan looked strong in his heyday just like Brock Lesner looked too.That does not mean they are the most powerful people on the planet or even in wrestling.I think your getting a little strayed from the topic and trying to turn this into a who looks stronger contest.

As for the whole farther and harder thing...thats pretty irrelevant to the discussion as well.Mere perception.[/quote:r0pd5glp]


Once again, you fail to see the point. I don't care who "looked" stronger, nor have I ever said a specific date/time as to when McGwire used steroids, but Canseco mentioned that McGwire started dabbling in steroids during the early 90's(hence, the body type of McGwire did start changing around that time frame). Canseco knows far better than I, since he was there dosing them out, so that is what I am going off of.

While you try to distort my comments for no reason, I have to say I am talking about facts you can't refute. McGwire has the record for at bats per homerun at 1 every 10.6 at bats. Homeruns ARE ALL about "power". You don't have to be a power hitter to hit singles, doubles, triples, batting average, ect, but you do have to be a power hitter to hit homeruns. McGwire simply done it better than anyone else. The stats are there to prove it.

 

[fengzhang]

With steroids, it clearly was Bonds since he owns the career HR as well as the single regular season and single postseason homerun records.

Without steroids, I'd say McGwire (or if you believe McGwire took steroids, then probably Ken Griffey).

Arod is pretty overrated as a power hitter. His career AB/HR ratio is about the same as a pre-steroids Bonds. He just happened to get 625 AB's every year while Bonds was getting walked 120 times a year.

 

[nborton]

This is sorta off subject, but it got me thinking about the HR Derby this year. At least for a one time outing Hamilton showed some crazy power.

Also, I don't think anyone really considers doubles or triples "power". Most double and triples are line drive shots. Generally no where near the wall when they land, but end up there on the roll. Also, speed does factor into those as well. I can't tell you how many times Cabrera or Ordonez hit balls for singles that Granderson turns into doubles easily.

If there were a guy who hit 1000 doubles in his career and 100 HR no one would say he was a great power hitter.

Here's another thing to ponder. Most scouts when looking at young players look at doubles as a sign of future "power" or HR potential. Not current power.

 

[Mozzie22]

I think the question is a bit misleading. When I read it I assumed you meant who had the longest HR's or the ability to hit them far because of power and strength. That is what i'll go with then. Bonds did hit some impressive shots (although hitting a ball into McCovey isn't as far as the t.v makes it look), Sosa hit hundreds of "basket" home runs in Chicago that wouldn't have been hr's any place else.

For pure POWER, nobody, and I mean nobody, could hang with McGwire...Period. He hit absolute moon shots. I saw him hit #55 in 98 and it went over 500 ft!

Bonds was the better player by far and I don't think any intelligent person would argue this. That being said, McGwire was, and is, the greatest power hitter that anyone on this board has ever, or will ever see in their lifetime.

 

[Bornagaincollector]

Bonds in my opinion.

But the only person who could hit Longer hr's then Thome on that list is Mac,Jim Thome has hit some LONG hr's in his day,I was at the game when he hit the longest hr at Jacobs Field.

 

[NerfXerks]

This is sorta off subject, but it got me thinking about the HR Derby this year. At least for a one time outing Hamilton showed some crazy power.

Also, I don't think anyone really considers doubles or triples "power". Most double and triples are line drive shots. Generally no where near the wall when they land, but end up there on the roll. Also, speed does factor into those as well. I can't tell you how many times Cabrera or Ordonez hit balls for singles that Granderson turns into doubles easily.

If there were a guy who hit 1000 doubles in his career and 100 HR no one would say he was a great power hitter.

Here's another thing to ponder. Most scouts when looking at young players look at doubles as a sign of future "power" or HR potential. Not current power.

Anything above singles is a power hit. Actually, I think that McGwire is a slightly better power hitter than Bonds because of isolated SLG. I misread the question at first. McGwires ISO is crazy, .325. That's higher than Juan Pierre's SLG, period. Barry's is .309. That's a 16 point difference, which is not insignificant.

 

[sportscardtheory]

I don't understand why people think "anything above a single" is a power stat. Doubles and triples are speed stats as well... but there is no denying that a homerun is strictly a power stat (other than inside the parkers). I guess they would consider Dustin Pedroia a power hitter because he hit 54 doubles last season? I guess Jose Reyes is a power hitter because he consistently hits close to 40 doubles and 15 triples a year?

 

[nborton]

I don't understand why people think "anything above a single" is a power stat. Doubles and triples are speed stats as well... but there is no denying that a homerun is strictly a power stat (other than inside the parkers). I guess they would consider Dustin Pedroia a power hitter because he hit 54 doubles last season? I guess Jose Reyes is a power hitter because he consistently hits close to 40 doubles and 15 triples a year?

I agree. Although, technically I guess they do fall into slugging according to stats. Still, when people talk about power hitters they mean HRs.

This whole argument is not even on the same subject. Some people are talking distance and height of HRs. While others are talking slugging. The original term of "power" is unsettled.

 

[Randy Shields]

Pure, Raw, Power? Big Mac by far IMO.

I was fortunate enough to attend the '97 pre-All Star festivities the day before the All-Star game. It included the celebrity softball game, AL and NL batting practice, and the Home Run Derby.

When the NL all-stars were taking batting practice, McGwire stepped to the plate. Prior to this all-star BP, McGwire had been in a game against Cleveland earlier in the year. There was a HUGE raucous over the fact that he had hit a homerun which hit the Budweiser sign in left centerfield. The swing is located above the fans, and this accomplishment even made ESPN news.

During his round of at bats, Big Mac hit that sign at least 3 or 4 times that I remember. I was watching from the "home run porch" in Cleveland and I noticed that people in the bleacher seats actually had they're back to the plate and were looking for baseballs ricocheting off the bleacher wall which also contains the Budweiser sing. It was the best, most awesome power show put on by anyone I've ever seen. And I'll never forget it. Lots of oooohs, and ahhhhs as well. Everyone was too impressed.

 

[predatorkj]

I guess you can call a double a speed stat if you want but for a bigger guy its more of a power stat.Just as an example...take a gander at players like Carlos Lee and Manny.They are no doubt power hitters but they produce a good number of doubles too.Its because when they hit the ball they are more inclined to drive it further.Even if it is a line drive shot...its still power.

I will stick by my points either way and I think everyone has had some decent ones but its kind of hard to continue this discussion because like posted before...we can't all really agree what constitutes as power.Until we can do that its kind of not going to go much further.


I mean...even with the stats provided with the ab/hr ratios...your still trying to compare two guys with a mega different amount of at bats and a mega different amount of walks.I liked the idea of shaving off the years Bonds played past Mac.I would be willing to concede then but if your comparing career stats against career stats...I am not too sure you could come up with Mac as your favorite in this category.
There are so many variables to consider and I don't think they are all being considered by everyone.Whether or not that makes a persons opinion right or wrong I couldn't say but its hard to argue with someone who is looking at things from a completely different angle.And I still find it hard to believe people will vouch for Mac just because they saw him hit some monsters.I have seen Bagwell do the same thing in the dome and I still wouldn't say he is one of the best power hitters ever but he had a hell of a swing and when he connected just right I personally don't feel anyone else looked quite as explosive as he did while driving it out.I also don't, like I said before, consider the length of a homer or the height of one to be in proper context in this conversation.It doesn't seem to have much to do with it.

 

[onionring9]

There is no question Bonds was by far the better athlete of the two, but when it comes to power, McGwire was the guy hitting BOMBS, not just HR's. Since this is about sheer power, McGwire I have to go with McGwire.

On another note, I've always been against the Hits/AB or in this case HR/AB comparison unless the two people being compared played in the same stadium. In this particular case you can't compare HR/AB because

a) Bonds had a stadium built to allow him to hit HR's, McGwire didn't:

Bonds in SF: 309 feet in right field
McGwire in OAK: 330 in left field
McGwire in STL: 336 in left field

b) McGwire also lost a huge amount of AB to the extremely large foul territory he had for most of his career

 

[fengzhang]

There is no question Bonds was by far the better athlete of the two, but when it comes to power, McGwire was the guy hitting BOMBS, not just HR's. Since this is about sheer power, McGwire I have to go with McGwire.

On another note, I've always been against the Hits/AB or in this case HR/AB comparison unless the two people being compared played in the same stadium. In this particular case you can't compare HR/AB because

a) Bonds had a stadium built to allow him to hit HR's, McGwire didn't:

Bonds in SF: 309 feet in right field
McGwire in OAK: 330 in left field
McGwire in STL: 336 in left field

b) McGwire also lost a huge amount of AB to the extremely large foul territory he had for most of his career

That was post-2000. And Pac Bell is only a hitter's park if you hit it straight down the line. It gets deep in a hurry in right center. The fact Bonds has more homeruns into McCovey Cove than all of the rest of the Giants AND the opponents combined should tell you something about his power.

Pre Pac-Bell, I don't think Candlestick was built for anyone to hit homeruns. It was estimated that Mays lost 5-6 homeruns per year to the winds. And if you want to talk about factors influencing HR/AB and hitting in general, how about the lack of protection Bonds has had for years? If you want to nit-pick about stats, you would find it very very difficult to suggest that Bonds somehow had an advantage over any hitter.

 

[onionring9]

There is no question Bonds was by far the better athlete of the two, but when it comes to power, McGwire was the guy hitting BOMBS, not just HR's. Since this is about sheer power, McGwire I have to go with McGwire.

On another note, I've always been against the Hits/AB or in this case HR/AB comparison unless the two people being compared played in the same stadium. In this particular case you can't compare HR/AB because

a) Bonds had a stadium built to allow him to hit HR's, McGwire didn't:

Bonds in SF: 309 feet in right field
McGwire in OAK: 330 in left field
McGwire in STL: 336 in left field

b) McGwire also lost a huge amount of AB to the extremely large foul territory he had for most of his career

That was post-2000. And Pac Bell is only a hitter's park if you hit it straight down the line. It gets deep in a hurry in right center. The fact Bonds has more homeruns into McCovey Cove than all of the rest of the Giants AND the opponents combined should tell you something about his power.

Pre Pac-Bell, I don't think Candlestick was built for anyone to hit homeruns. It was estimated that Mays lost 5-6 homeruns per year to the winds. And if you want to talk about factors influencing HR/AB and hitting in general, how about the lack of protection Bonds has had for years? If you want to nit-pick about stats, you would find it very very difficult to suggest that Bonds somehow had an advantage over any hitter.

I think you missed the point. You can't compare apples and oranges. Two different leagues (for most of their careers), two different stadiums, two different cities, two different climates, two entirely different sets of away stadiums to play in, two different sets of pitchers, etc

If you are a man of science, you should understand that with that many variables, you cannot compare the two numbers one to one.

 

[predatorkj]

There is no question Bonds was by far the better athlete of the two, but when it comes to power, McGwire was the guy hitting BOMBS, not just HR's. Since this is about sheer power, McGwire I have to go with McGwire.

On another note, I've always been against the Hits/AB or in this case HR/AB comparison unless the two people being compared played in the same stadium. In this particular case you can't compare HR/AB because

a) Bonds had a stadium built to allow him to hit HR's, McGwire didn't:

Bonds in SF: 309 feet in right field
McGwire in OAK: 330 in left field
McGwire in STL: 336 in left field

b) McGwire also lost a huge amount of AB to the extremely large foul territory he had for most of his career

That was post-2000. And Pac Bell is only a hitter's park if you hit it straight down the line. It gets deep in a hurry in right center. The fact Bonds has more homeruns into McCovey Cove than all of the rest of the Giants AND the opponents combined should tell you something about his power.

Pre Pac-Bell, I don't think Candlestick was built for anyone to hit homeruns. It was estimated that Mays lost 5-6 homeruns per year to the winds. And if you want to talk about factors influencing HR/AB and hitting in general, how about the lack of protection Bonds has had for years? If you want to nit-pick about stats, you would find it very very difficult to suggest that Bonds somehow had an advantage over any hitter.

I think you missed the point. You can't compare apples and oranges. Two different leagues (for most of their careers), two different stadiums, two different cities, two different climates, two entirely different sets of away stadiums to play in, two different sets of pitchers, etc

If you are a man of science, you should understand that with that many variables, you cannot compare the two numbers one to one.

So can we just call it a draw and say they were both equal in terms of power?

Seriously I don't hold one higher than the other.

 

[Mozzie22]

There is no question Bonds was by far the better athlete of the two, but when it comes to power, McGwire was the guy hitting BOMBS, not just HR's. Since this is about sheer power, McGwire I have to go with McGwire.

On another note, I've always been against the Hits/AB or in this case HR/AB comparison unless the two people being compared played in the same stadium. In this particular case you can't compare HR/AB because

a) Bonds had a stadium built to allow him to hit HR's, McGwire didn't:

Bonds in SF: 309 feet in right field
McGwire in OAK: 330 in left field
McGwire in STL: 336 in left field

b) McGwire also lost a huge amount of AB to the extremely large foul territory he had for most of his career

That was post-2000. And Pac Bell is only a hitter's park if you hit it straight down the line. It gets deep in a hurry in right center. The fact Bonds has more homeruns into McCovey Cove than all of the rest of the Giants AND the opponents combined should tell you something about his power.

Pre Pac-Bell, I don't think Candlestick was built for anyone to hit homeruns. It was estimated that Mays lost 5-6 homeruns per year to the winds. And if you want to talk about factors influencing HR/AB and hitting in general, how about the lack of protection Bonds has had for years? If you want to nit-pick about stats, you would find it very very difficult to suggest that Bonds somehow had an advantage over any hitter.

I think you missed the point. You can't compare apples and oranges. Two different leagues (for most of their careers), two different stadiums, two different cities, two different climates, two entirely different sets of away stadiums to play in, two different sets of pitchers, etc

If you are a man of science, you should understand that with that many variables, you cannot compare the two numbers one to one.

So can we just call it a draw and say they were both equal in terms of power?

Seriously I don't hold one higher than the other.

You may not hold one higher than the other, but you should. Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds were not equal in terms of power. As I wrote earlier, McGwire is, and will always be, the most powerful HR hitter anyone on this board has ever, or will ever, see.

 

[onionring9]

There is no question Bonds was by far the better athlete of the two, but when it comes to power, McGwire was the guy hitting BOMBS, not just HR's. Since this is about sheer power, McGwire I have to go with McGwire.

On another note, I've always been against the Hits/AB or in this case HR/AB comparison unless the two people being compared played in the same stadium. In this particular case you can't compare HR/AB because

a) Bonds had a stadium built to allow him to hit HR's, McGwire didn't:

Bonds in SF: 309 feet in right field
McGwire in OAK: 330 in left field
McGwire in STL: 336 in left field

b) McGwire also lost a huge amount of AB to the extremely large foul territory he had for most of his career

That was post-2000. And Pac Bell is only a hitter's park if you hit it straight down the line. It gets deep in a hurry in right center. The fact Bonds has more homeruns into McCovey Cove than all of the rest of the Giants AND the opponents combined should tell you something about his power.

Pre Pac-Bell, I don't think Candlestick was built for anyone to hit homeruns. It was estimated that Mays lost 5-6 homeruns per year to the winds. And if you want to talk about factors influencing HR/AB and hitting in general, how about the lack of protection Bonds has had for years? If you want to nit-pick about stats, you would find it very very difficult to suggest that Bonds somehow had an advantage over any hitter.

I think you missed the point. You can't compare apples and oranges. Two different leagues (for most of their careers), two different stadiums, two different cities, two different climates, two entirely different sets of away stadiums to play in, two different sets of pitchers, etc

If you are a man of science, you should understand that with that many variables, you cannot compare the two numbers one to one.

So can we just call it a draw and say they were both equal in terms of power?

Seriously I don't hold one higher than the other.

I grew up in the bay area watching both. Every time Bonds hit a HR, it was just that, a HR. Every time McGwire hit one, they'd have to post up "guess how far he hit that one" questions. Bonds never got that because though he hit HR's, he didn't hit the literal bomb that made everybody go ahhh.

And just to be clear, Bonds is a much better athlete with insane power. There is no question about his power, but if you had to choose who had more power, there is no question McGwire hit with more power. To understand what power the difference between the two, you had to watch them play consistently.

 

[matfanofold]

As touched upon before, there is a clear and distinct difference in what we have deemed as a 'power' HR hitter. To me, power in this context refers to the sheer streignth and muster off the crack of the bat. The overwhelming speed, distance and height of the HR being hit. The ease in which a ball flyes higher, faster and further off a otherwise supernatural swing of brute force. In this context, Big Mac is the clear choice.

Now, if your definition of power lies in how many HR's one can hit and balances force with abundance, then an argument can be made for Bonds as he was a powerful HR hitter and clearly did it better than anyone else. But was he the most powerful HR hitter? Not in my mind...

50 years from now, I may still remember Bonds for his ability on the field and his awesome HR record(s), but nothing can or will ever erase the spectacle of POWER Big Mac put forth with each and every HR hit. Like cannons firing, or the electric clap of thunder right outside your bedroom window, a HR By BIG MAC left you dumbfounded and awe-struck at his power. This is why he gets my vote.

 

[fengzhang]

There is no question Bonds was by far the better athlete of the two, but when it comes to power, McGwire was the guy hitting BOMBS, not just HR's. Since this is about sheer power, McGwire I have to go with McGwire.

On another note, I've always been against the Hits/AB or in this case HR/AB comparison unless the two people being compared played in the same stadium. In this particular case you can't compare HR/AB because

a) Bonds had a stadium built to allow him to hit HR's, McGwire didn't:

Bonds in SF: 309 feet in right field
McGwire in OAK: 330 in left field
McGwire in STL: 336 in left field

b) McGwire also lost a huge amount of AB to the extremely large foul territory he had for most of his career

That was post-2000. And Pac Bell is only a hitter's park if you hit it straight down the line. It gets deep in a hurry in right center. The fact Bonds has more homeruns into McCovey Cove than all of the rest of the Giants AND the opponents combined should tell you something about his power.

Pre Pac-Bell, I don't think Candlestick was built for anyone to hit homeruns. It was estimated that Mays lost 5-6 homeruns per year to the winds. And if you want to talk about factors influencing HR/AB and hitting in general, how about the lack of protection Bonds has had for years? If you want to nit-pick about stats, you would find it very very difficult to suggest that Bonds somehow had an advantage over any hitter.

I think you missed the point. You can't compare apples and oranges. Two different leagues (for most of their careers), two different stadiums, two different cities, two different climates, two entirely different sets of away stadiums to play in, two different sets of pitchers, etc

If you are a man of science, you should understand that with that many variables, you cannot compare the two numbers one to one.

No, I fully understood your point. But, you made your point based on your breakdown of one variable: ballpark size. I broke down all of the other variables for you: protection in the lineup, amount of wind, and even examined ballpark size from another perspective (all of which are just as relevant to the discussion as your point about ballpark size).

I agree with you that McGwire was the better HR hitter but I did not agree with your argument.