So a lot has changed then ...

[johnnya24]

I haven't really followed baseball intently for 5 years or more now. I won't say it was the steroid issue that drove me away because that would be much too simplistic, and frankly not true. Probably a combination of factors: work commitments meant no more studenty late nights, the retirement and decline of my favourite players (Pedro, Randy etc), obviously the steroid issue, the Red Sox finally winning the WS removed one of my favourite recurring sub-plots, Vintage Drafting being much more interesting than fantasy baseball ... lot's of factors.

I have occasionally tried dipping back in, especially near the end of the season, but it didn't really feel like the old pre-steroid-scandal days, when there were legends past, present and future all over the place.

After being away so long, you do notice the differences much more sharply: the top producing players don't seem to have the wow factor any more, and obviously, the power and production numbers seem way down, pitching numbers seem way up.

What do the stats say on the difference between the 90's and early 00's? +/- 20%? More? Anyone got any good links to articles etc?

2000 19 hitters got 120+ RBI's
2005 7 hitters got 120+ RBI's
2010 3 hitters got 120+ RBI's

2000 16 hitters got 40+ HR's
2005 9 hitters got 40+ HR's
2010 2 hitters got 40+ HR's

That is quite a shocking decline for me having been away (which incidentally also makes the numbers Pedro posted even more insane). The games have also changed ... a little bit more boring and ordinary. Possibly due to the loss of much of the star quality, but also the decline in hitting.

2000 53 hitters hit .300+
2005 33 hitters hit .300+
2010 23 hitters hit .300+

The SB numbers have also declined ... although I suppose that could be attributed to the lower OBP.

Pitching by contrast (and obviously):

2000 4 pitchers with an ERA of 3.00 or below (4 all-time great pitchers: Pedro, Randy, Brown, Maddux)
2005 9 pitchers with an ERA of 3.00 or below
2010 15 pitchers with an ERA of 3.00 or below

Are we talking about mediocre pitchers (relatively speaking) shutting down teams here due to the decline is hitting? Or is this decline in hitting being exacerbated by a golden crop of pitchers?

[Teenwolf]

I feel like pitching is improving for a number of reasons. First, organizations are concentrating more on drafting and developing pitchers. Once teams started to see the Oakland A's draft and develop aces, then trade them away for blue-chippers that would later turn into studs, it suddenly became pretty appealing to lean towards pitching in the draft.

I think the attrition rate for pitchers is also going down because of an increased awareness of workload. 10 years ago you would never hear that pitchers would be shut down at the beginning of september due to workload. These days it's pretty commonplace. Then when the pitchers do break, it seems like the surgery and rehab methods have improved. Look at Strasburg starting in the big leagues barely over 1 year since breaking.

You could also get into what types of pitches are being thrown, and the way the trends have evolved. Kevin Seitzer would be much more knowledgeable in that area than I would be, given his research into pitchFX.

Lastly, new ballparks being built are generally more pitcher friendly than hitter friendly. The new Yankee Stadium is the exception, but Comerica and Safeco are definitely deflating hitting stats. I can`t get into researching this, but I`m sure park factors are part of the equation.

[revo]

I feel like pitching is improving for a number of reasons. First, organizations are concentrating more on drafting and developing pitchers. Once teams started to see the Oakland A's draft and develop aces, then trade them away for blue-chippers that would later turn into studs, it suddenly became pretty appealing to lean towards pitching in the draft.

I think the attrition rate for pitchers is also going down because of an increased awareness of workload. 10 years ago you would never hear that pitchers would be shut down at the beginning of september due to workload. These days it's pretty commonplace. Then when the pitchers do break, it seems like the surgery and rehab methods have improved. Look at Strasburg starting in the big leagues barely over 1 year since breaking.

You could also get into what types of pitches are being thrown, and the way the trends have evolved. Kevin Seitzer would be much more knowledgeable in that area than I would be, given his research into pitchFX.

Lastly, new ballparks being built are generally more pitcher friendly than hitter friendly. The new Yankee Stadium is the exception, but Comerica and Safeco are definitely deflating hitting stats. I can`t get into researching this, but I`m sure park factors are part of the equation.

While I agree with all of this, you'd make for a better case if the argument was today versus 20 or 30 years ago. But in such a short a period of time as 10 years, you'd have to look at the more obvious -- that steroids has largely evaporated and that it affected hitting far more than it did pitching.

[dannahann]

While I agree with all of this, you'd make for a better case if the argument was today versus 20 or 30 years ago. But in such a short a period of time as 10 years, you'd have to look at the more obvious -- that steroids has largely evaporated and that it affected hitting far more than it did pitching.

Last winter I took a cursory look back at big HR seasons (45 or more) and it's not news that there was an explosion of such seasons throughout the steroid era. While big HR seasons haven't completely died back to pre-roid levels, I suspect they might once HGH are effectively eliminated, given the recent focus on improved pitching. When I looked at these numbers last winter I only went back to 1970 and I suspect 45+ HR seasons also spiked just prior to that. There was of course that epic 1961 season highlighted by Maris and Mantle. But as a young fan I remember Killebrew Mays and Aaron always seemed to be in the 40s during the 1960s. Then again they lowered the mound in the late 60's to help the batters but (it doesn't appear to have led to more big HR seasons tho?).

To illustrate over a longer timeframe the 45+ HR surge in the steriod era here's all the big HR seasons since 1970:
1970 - Stargell 48, Aaron 47
1971 - Bench 45
1972 - None (Bench-40)
1973 - None (Stargell-44)
1974 - None (Schmidt-36)
1975 - None (Schmidt-38)
1976 - None (Schmidt-38)
1977 - Foster 52
1978 - Rice 46
1979 - Kingman 48, Schmidt and GThomas 46
1980 - Schmidt 48
1981 - None (strike shortened)
1982 - None (GThomas and RJackson-39)
1983 - None (Schmidt-40)
1984 - None (Armas-43)
1985 - None (DEvans-40)
1986 - None (Barfield-40)
1987 - Dawson and McGwire 49, Bell 47
1988 - None (Canseco-42)
1989 - Mitchell 47
1990 - CFielder 51
1991 - None (CFielder and Canseco-44)
1992 - None (JGonzalez-43)
1993 - JGonzalez and Bonds 46, Griffey Jr 45
1994 - None (MWilliams-43)
1995 - Belle 50
1996 - McGwire 52, BAnderson 50, Griffey Jr 49, Belle 48, JGonzalez and Galarraga 47
1997 - McGwire 58, Griffey Jr 56, Walker 49
1998 - McGwire 70, Sosa 66, Griffey Jr 56, GVaughn 50, Belle 49, Canseco and VCastilla 46, JGonzalez and MRamirez 45
1999 - McGwire 65, Sosa 63, Griffey Jr 48, Palmeiro 47, GVaughn and CJones 45
2000 - Sosa 50, Bonds 49, Bagwell and Glaus 47
2001 - Bonds 73, Sosa 64, LGonzalez 57, ARodriguez 52, Helton SGreen and Thome 49, Palmeiro 47, Sexson 45
2002 - ARodriguez 57, Thome 52, Sosa 49, Bonds 46
2003 - Thome and ARodriguez 47, Bonds and Sexson 45
2004 - Beltre 48, Pujols and Dunn 46, Bonds 45
2005 - AJones 51, ARodriguez 48, Ortiz 47, DLee 46, MRamirez 45
2006 - Howard 58, Ortiz 54, Pujols 49, Soriano 46, Berkman 45
2007 - ARodriguez 54, PFielder 50, Howard 47, CPena 46
2008 - Howard 49
2009 - Pujols 47, PFielder 46, Howard 45
2010 - Bautista 54

[johnnya24]

What are the general thoughts on the depth of the steroid abuse? The big names have gotten all the headlines.

The question I have at the back of my mind (as someone slightly out of the loop) was how deep the steroid abuse went, and whether the teams/management themselves could have been complicit. What are the thoughts on the mid-level power hitting numbers? The guys hitting 15-25 HR's? Was there a huge spike / decline in those numbers also (will run numbers when I get home ...).

[Erik]

I don't know how deep the steroid abuse went, and speculation has ranged from a few guys per team to almost everyone.

But I do think a big factor in the decline of offense that hasn't been discussed is the ban on amphetamines ("greenies"). They were a staple of the game since the '50s. Now they're gone from the game, and I suspect energy, concentration, and bat speed have suffered as a result. Especially energy -- 162 games is a long season.

[dannahann]

I don't know how deep the steroid abuse went, and speculation has ranged from a few guys per team to almost everyone.

But I do think a big factor in the decline of offense that hasn't been discussed is the ban on amphetamines ("greenies"). They were a staple of the game since the '50s. Now they're gone from the game, and I suspect energy, concentration, and bat speed have suffered as a result. Especially energy -- 162 games is a long season.

When were greenies eliminated? Did players during the prime steroid years benefit from BOTH? 162 can be grueling but the accelerated healing, feeling of freshness, and energy derived from roids helped during that era too. Were these guys still doing greenies when 45+ HR seasons rarely occurred from the 70s into the mid 90s? I honestly don't know when greenies were eliminated, just asking. Guys are probably still getting much of the greenie 'benefits' still via energy drinks and expresso. That huge HR spike can be mostly attributed to the roids IMO. What a shame.

[Bodhizefa]

When were greenies eliminated? Did players during the prime steroid years benefit from BOTH? 162 can be grueling but the accelerated healing, feeling of freshness, and energy derived from roids helped during that era too. Were these guys still doing greenies when 45+ HR seasons rarely occurred from the 70s into the mid 90s? I honestly don't know when greenies were eliminated, just asking. Guys are probably still getting much of the greenie 'benefits' still via energy drinks and expresso. That huge HR spike can be mostly attributed to the roids IMO. What a shame.

Greenies were banned at the same time as steroids. So yes, the steroid era also had the benefit of greenies to help aid them in alertness.

[revo]

When were greenies eliminated? Did players during the prime steroid years benefit from BOTH? 162 can be grueling but the accelerated healing, feeling of freshness, and energy derived from roids helped during that era too. Were these guys still doing greenies when 45+ HR seasons rarely occurred from the 70s into the mid 90s? I honestly don't know when greenies were eliminated, just asking. Guys are probably still getting much of the greenie 'benefits' still via energy drinks and expresso. That huge HR spike can be mostly attributed to the roids IMO. What a shame.

I agree. Amphetamines were around in baseball from as early as the 1950s. Tom Seaver said as much today on ESPN radio, about being offered them in '66. And steroid abuse in baseball (besides one or two players in the late 1980s) didn't become rampant until the early to mid 1990s. So totally agree that steroids, and not amphetamines, led to the power increase.

Remember when the power surge was attributed to "lively balls from Mexico?" LOL.