Bonds vs. Aaron: the nth comparison

My personal contention is that Henry Aaron played primarily in an era, the better part of the '60s, when pitching was as dominant as it has been since the day of the Dead Ball. Much of Barry Bonds' career has been during a period of unprecedented bounty for the long ball.

I started thinking about how Aaron fared against the rest of the National League while he played, compared with Bonds. Of course, the two played radically different types of schedules: Aaron started when the league had only eight teams, while Bonds now faces 15 other NL foes (not to mention that interleague stuff).

Anyway, to level the field for a comparison, I adjusted league home run totals for each year of both players' careers to reflect the number 12 teams would have hit. In other words, the 1,255 home runs National League hitters belted in 1955, when the NL had eight teams, is adjusted upward to 1,895; the actual NL total of 2,595 in 2002 is adjusted downward to 1,946.

Then I measured each player's home run total against the teams-per-league adjustment. And as I suspected, Aaron comes out ahead for his 21-year career in the National League, 2.22% to Bonds' 2.05%.

Both players were remarkably healthy throughout most of their careers, until Bonds missed most of the 2005 season, which is not included here. His playing time was limited in 1999, as well, but was comparable to Aaron's final NL season, when he was reduced to part-time status.

I've included Bonds' performance so far in 2007, as he has played nearly full-time. Plus, if we throw out '05, that gives him 21 seasons to equal Aaron.

Here is the comparison (click on the chart for a larger view):



Some aspects I find interesting:

• When Bonds set his single-season record in 2001, he accounted for 3.30% of the adjusted league total. But the highest figure on the chart is Aaron's 3.41% in 1971, when he hit a career-high 47. By the way, both players happened to be 37 years old at the conclusion of their top home run seasons.

• Bonds topped 2.5% in four seasons. Aaron did so in 10, and came very close to an 11th in 1957, the year he won his sole MVP award.

• Aaron's percentages increased markedly after the Braves moved to Atlanta. But his top five seasons in Milwaukee are bested by all but four of Bonds' 21 seasons.

• Aaron played in 1968, the Year of the Pitcher, when the adjusted home run total was 1,069. Bonds played during three seasons (1999-2001) that more than doubled that total, plus another two (2004 and '06) that nearly did.

Certainly, it's difficult to compare different eras. But say you had your choice of facing Warren Spahn, Sandy Koufax, Bob Gibson, Juan Marichal, Tom Seaver, Ferguson Jenkins and Steve Carlton on a regular basis. Or your choices were … well, there are so many teams nowadays, no one faces opposing pitchers on a regular basis. Some of Bonds' recent blasts have been off the likes of Will Ohman, Ted Lilly, Aaron Harang, Livan Hernandez, Scott Proctor, Tim Wakefield, Josh Towers … you get the drift.

When Bonds breaks Aaron's record, keep the quality of Hammerin' Hank's pitching nemeses in mind.

---

Trivia question 54: What Hall of Fame pitcher surrendered Henry Aaron's 600th home run? (Hint: It probably still was wet when it landed in the stands.)

Barry's blues

DATE	AB	R	H	TB	HR	RBI	BB	SO	SB
07/01	2	2	1	2	0	2	2	0	0
07/03	3	1	1	4	1	2	2	0	0
07/05	4	1	1	1	0	0	0	1	0
07/06	1	1	0	0	0	0	3	0	0
07/07	2	0	0	0	0	0	2	1	0
07/08	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0
07/13	2	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0
07/14	5	1	0	0	0	0	1	2	0
07/15	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0

Those are Barry Bonds' numbers since the start of July. Not only is he making no progress toward Hank Aaron, he's hitting nothing at all. And he's being his usual cheery self in dealing with his slump, peppering his postgame comments with profanities before telling media types to go away and get out.

Sounds good. And they can stay away while he staggers toward the record. Maybe we'll be well into the NFL season by the time he hits five more home runs, and even less attention will be paid to his accomplishment.

In the meantime, how about those 0-for-5's!

Night of a bunch of stars

Today, I heard sports commentators lamenting the relative lack of long balls during last night's home run derby, particularly the fact that none reached the water of McCovey's Cove. I guess the folks at ESPN were upset because they stuck anchorman Kenny Mayne out in the cove in a kayak with a helmet-cam on his head. With no balls headed his way, he had no opportunity to get into a fracas out there.

Some of the talk the past few days has implied that the home run derby is becoming the main attraction of the All-Star break, eclipsing the interest of the game, itself. I'm assuming that's a lot of hype on the part of people with a vested interest in having viewers tune in to watch the sluggers.

Frankly, the home run derby is interesting to watch for about half an hour or so. When it drags on past my bedtime ... well, I really don't care that Vlad Guerrero hit one more over the fence than Alex Rios.

Then again, the All-Star Game isn't the thrill it once was. It used to be an opportunity to see American Leaguers face National Leaguers, something that only happened otherwise in October. Now, interleague play takes up an inordinate part of the regular-season schedule, negating the All-Star impact.

The large volume of televised games also detracts from the erstwhile Midsummer Classic. When I was growing up, you could watch Saturday afternoon broadcasts featuring Curt Gowdy and Tony Kubek. And for a while, ABC did Monday night baseball, inexplicably with noted baseball nonfan Howard Cosell calling the games. Otherwise, you could tune in the Braves after Ted Turner started putting them on his cable network, but they really stunk in the '70s.

These days, we have networks televising games nationally several days of the week, and if you don't catch the contests in their entirety, you certainly can see the highlights.

What's so special about seeing Alex Rodriguez in the All-Star game when he's constantly on television, pictured in newspapers and magazines, and talked about ad infinitum on the radio.

And why would anyone want to tune in to see anything in which Barry Bonds is involved?

Oh, yeah. It counts. Home-field advantage in the World Series goes to the winner of whichever league proves victorious in the All-Star game.

Let's see ... since that went into effect in 2003, the American League has won home field each time. Since then, an AL team has won the Series twice, and the NL entry, twice.

My wife's birthday is tonight, so I'm taking her out to dinner instead of worrying about parking myself in front of the TV set. Sure, I'll probably tune in for the later stages of the game.

Just as long as Barry Bonds already has been removed for a pinch-runner.

The chase

It's amazing that sports talk shows lately have stirred up far more of a buzz about the finale of "The Sopranos" than the imminent fall of Henry Aaron's career major-league home run record.

I'm still trying to figure out what "The Sopranos" has to do with sports, but the lack of interest in Barry Bonds is easy to explain. Outside of San Francisco, no one seems to like him. (Pittsburgh's top-rated sports-talk host, Mark Madden of ESPN radio, professes on the air to love Barry, but I suspect that has more to do with riling his audience.)

The atmosphere certainly was different at the start of the 1974 season, with Aaron just one homer behind Babe Ruth. Even in those days before pervasive sports/entertainment, Hank's chase was right up there with Watergate on the news front. True, Aaron received quite a bit of hate mail from racists, but most clear-minded American sports enthusiasts were genuinely excited about him setting the record.

As far as Bonds is concerned, a lot of the talk about him passing Aaron has to do with the reassurance that the new record probably won't last long.

Exhibit A is Alex Rodriguez, who is far more likable than Bonds but still seems to have plenty of PR problems. Maybe that will change if he gets away from New York. In the meantime, he is putting up power numbers that have no precedent. He doesn't turn 32 until next month, by which time he very well might be sitting on 500 career home runs. Aaron had 442 homers at a comparable age and Bonds, 334.

Exhibit B is Albert Pujols, who started hitting well during his very first major-league series at Coors Field at the start of 2001, and hasn't stopped. (He's supposed to be having an "off" year in '07, but is up over .300 and is on pace for 38 round-trippers.) At 27, he also is ahead of Aaron and Bonds at the same age.

---

Click here for cumulative home run totals by age for Aaron, Bonds, Rodriguez and Pujols.

---

Before we go anointing either Rodriguez or Pujols as a sure thing, let's think this through:

• Aaron was remarkably durable for two decades, never suffering a major injury and not dropping to part-time status until he was over 40. He also was remarkably consistent after finding his power stroke and continued to be among the league's top sluggers into his late 30s. While neither Rodriguez nor Pujols have lost significant time to injury yet, keep one name in mind: Ken Griffey Jr.

• Bonds was very durable, as well, until his knees derailed him for most of 2005. As far as consistency, he became a productive hitter in 1990 and remains so, comparatively, today. But as far as his power numbers go, he started to catch up with Aaron during an era that -- for whatever reason -- produced far more home runs than any other point in baseball history. The pendulum might start swinging the other way by the time the careers of Rodriguez and Pujols start to wind down.

(Aaron, by the way, played much of his career under conditions that favored pitchers. His power numbers apparently were helped, though, when the Braves moved from Milwaukee's County Stadium to Atlanta's Fulton County "Launching Pad.")

• Rodriguez is the highest-paid player in baseball history. One day, Pujols might be. With so much money in the bank, will they want to extend their careers as long as Aaron and Bonds? Again, if Rodriguez gets out of the spotlight of the New York tabloids, he might want to hang around a little while longer.

Then again, we can do some simple extrapolation to come up with future totals for Rodriguez and Pujols.

Let's say A-Rod plays until 2015, when he turns 40. And let's say he matches his career high with 57 home runs in 2007 (which, by the way, would tie him with Ted Williams at 521). If he were to average 35 home runs during his final eight seasons, he'd finish with 801.

Let's say Albert plays until 2020, when he's 40. And let's say he does finish 2007 with 38 home runs (which, by the way, would tie him with Del Ennis at 288). If he were to average 38 per year the rest of the way, he'd rack up 782 for his career.

If all goes as expected, both those totals should rank ahead of Bonds when all is said and done.

---

I'd like to add my own nomination for a potential all-time home run king.

Prince Fielder turned 23 last month and so far has 56 home runs, which doesn't even put him on the charts with the other four I've mentioned. But he is on pace to hit nearly 60 this year, and he has the pedigree: His father, Cecil, was the only American Leaguer between Maris/Mantle and the '90s homer surge to hit more than 50 dingers in a season.

Dad tended to put on quite a bit of weight around the middle, though, and Prince is already listed at 260 pounds. If he keeps that as muscle, he might be making a run for the record around 2025.

---

Trivia question 42: Society for American Baseball Research trivia gurus Bruce Brown and Scott Brandon send out a weekly list, and I thought I'd share a few. This week's theme, by the way is All-Star third basemen.

Which player hit the most HR in the decade of the 1980s? (Answer at bottom right)

(Bruce, by the way, says: "We believe that the word 'trivia' is misleading. Quality trivia is never trivial, but meaningful; symmetrical; unique, where possible; poetic; but most of all, interesting. We might not always do THAT well every time, but everybody seems to have fun."

Bonds swap?

Midseason trade talk has started in earnest, and one of the names that has come up is Barry Bonds. The theory has been put forth that the Giants, who are mired in last place in the NL West, will ship Bonds out of San Francisco shortly after he breaks the career home run record, which should occur within the next month or so.

Certainly, the Giants could use some prospects in exchange for Barry. They've been trying to win with a lineup that features the likes of Omar Vizquel, age 40; Ryan Klesko, 36; Ray Durham, Dave Roberts and Rich Aurilia, all 35; Randy Winn, 33; and Bengie Molina and Pedro Feliz, both 32. That approaching obviously isn't working. Just ask Matt Cain (2-7 despite a 3.15 ERA).

Bonds leads the team in home runs and, of course, leads everyone in drawing bases on balls. But he'll turn 43 on July 24, and his contract calls for him to be paid more than $19 million this season. Then there's the talk about a possible indictment hanging over his head, along with the fact that he's being booed mightily by fans in every ballpark he plays besides his home AT&T Park. What other team is going to take on all that baggage?

Then again, historical precedent exists for Bonds moving. The top three career home run hitters prior to Barry's insinuating himself among them - Hank Aaron, Babe Ruth and Willie Mays - all has this in common: They ended their major-league careers in the cities where they began them, but for different teams.

• Ruth: Boston Red Sox, 1914-19; Boston Braves, 1935. The Braves of that year, incidentally, were the worst National League team of the 20th century in terms of winning percentage, even poorer than the 1962 Mets.

• Mays: New York Giants, 1951-52 and 1954-57; New York Mets, 1972-73. Willie ended his career on a high note, sort of, by playing in the 1973 World Series, although at age 42 his skills had diminished to the point where it was painful to watch him. I'd rather have seen him in his prime, certainly.

• Aaron: Milwaukee Braves, 1954-65; Milwaukee Brewers, 1975-76. Atlanta at least waited until the end of the season in which he broke Ruth's record to send him packing. Then-Brewers owner Bud Selig was happy to take Aaron aboard at age 41 to draw more fans to see a struggling franchise.

Bonds, of course, began his career in Pittsburgh, back when the Pirates actually drafted some useful players; they were savvy enough to grab Barry with the sixth overall pick in 1985. A case can be made that the Pirates are a "different" team today compared to when Bonds left after '92. Back then, management actually made an attempt to put a competitive team on the field.

But the odds of Bonds returning to the Steel City are about as remote as those of Commissioner Selig suddenly enjoying the inevitability of Barry setting the home run record.

---

Trivia question 41: Despite the 1935 Boston Braves' horrible performance, the team managed to have two future Hall of Fame players, and the manager also was eventually enshrined. Besides Ruth, who were the other two to make it to Cooperstown? Answer at bottom right

Cold Rain and Snow

It hasn't been quite as bad weather-wise here in Pittsburgh compared with up the turnpike in Cleveland. But this sure isn't spring, and it sure isn't baseball weather.

Somehow, the inconsistent (a kind way of putting it) Pirates pitching managed to give up two home runs to Barry Bonds on Friday night, aiding and abetting the inevitable. That might end up being the last game in Pittsburgh for the guy who started his career here 21 years ago as a skinny kid.

With a chilly, miserably drizzle starting Saturday afternoon and persisting for the foreseeable future, the Pirates decided against playing last night, opting instead for the dreaded (from a team profit standpoint) doubleheader Sunday afternoon.

Well, the weather is even worse this morning, and the Pirates have decided there won't be any baseball at PNC Park this afternoon, either.

According to the Pirates' Web site, "The doubleheader will be rescheduled for a date later in the season." When will that be? San Francisco was scheduled for just this one visit in Pittsburgh this season. If the Giants can't swing by this neck of the woods again, it shouldn't have any bearing on the standings. I have both these teams finishing last in their respective divisions. The Associated Press report on the situation give some vague possibilities about rescheduling the games, but it looks like it can't be done without major inconveniences.

So, is that it for Barry Bonds playing in Pittsburgh?

If so, too bad. I enjoyed hearing the booing.

• • •

Today is Jackie Robinson Day, a full-fledged celebration of the 60th anniversary of the Hall of Famer's major-league debut. Of course, in today's world of baseball, even the most well-intentioned plans generate some controversy, and the beef this week seemed to be who was entitled to wear Robinson retired No. 42. Whole teams offered to wear the uniform number in tribute, including the Dodgers, which is entirely appropriate.

If the Pirates would have played today, they were to have been among the all-42 teams. That also is appropriate. In 1971, Pittsburgh fielded the first starting lineup of exclusively African Americans.

Philadelphia also is on the list as "all players" wearing No. 42 today.

Huh?

History books usually cite the Phillies as being on the major instigators in the backlash against Robinson's breaking the color barrier, with manager Ben Chapman, a Southerner, supposedly a particular thorn in Jackie's side.

Then again, no one playing for today's Phillies have anything to do with that unfortunate situation. So if those guys want to honor Jackie Robinson, go for it!

Trivia question 19: Who was Jackie Robinson's manager when he made his major-league debut 60 years ago? (This is straight from the list of "opening day" trivia questions presented at yesterday's meeting of the Forbes Field chapter of the Society for American Baseball Research. Joe Elinich, the chapter's president, called it a "geek" question. That is, anyone who got it right has studied far too much baseball history!)