Discovering the True Home Run Champs: Single Season and Career

by Timothy Moreland(Bball3345)

Over the 100+ year span of MLB, a lot of factors have changed in the game. The season has been lengthened, the league has been expanded, ballparks have changed size, etc. This makes comparing players from one era to another using stats a difficult job. Luckily, the guys over at BaseballProspectus have created Translated Statistics. These "convert the player's batting statistics into a context that is the same for everybody." Here are the details:

1. the translated EQA should equal the original, all-time adjusted EQA (within some margin for error)
2. all seasons are expanded to a 162 game schedule
3. the statistics are adjusted to a season where an average hitter would have, per 650 PA: 589 AB, 153 H, 31 DB, 3 TP, 19 HR, 56 BB, 5 HBP, 113 SO, 10 SB, 5 CS, 79 R and 75 RBI. His rates would be a .260 batting average, .330 onbase average, .420 slugging average, and a .260 EQA with 76 EQR.

Is it perfect? Probably not, but it is the best we've got. Since this exercise is mainly just for fun, who cares?

Obviously, today's sluggers have created much controversy by rewriting the history books. However, they have had many advantages (and disadvantages) not available to earlier generations of players. Using Translated Statistics, let's look at how the record books would look with a level playing field.

Single Season Home Run Record

The single season record long belonged to Roger Maris, then McGwire, Sosa, and Bonds obliterated the mark in a short span of time. Fans yelled, "Steroids!" However, could there seasons have actually been less impressive, from a home run standpoint, than earlier years?

Let's look at these players one at a time to view there best home run years. Notice: some of their seasons have been excluded from the viewable data because they lacked significance.

Babe Ruth

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 23 1918 BOS-A  416  119   24    0   51   73   3  144    3    1   300   83  108 .286 .396 .712    62   .340  102
 24 1919 BOS-A  503  161   30    2   69  120   8  121    3    1   345  137  157 .320 .458 .799   116   .377  155
 25 1920 NY_-A  474  167   32    3   74  157   3  156   15    8   318  143  133 .352 .516 .901   173   .409  178
 26 1921 NY_-A  537  182   36    5   73  142   4  163   19    9   366  142  142 .339 .480 .832   185   .388  178
 27 1922 NY_-A  416  118   17    0   52   88   1  162    1    2   302   90   97 .284 .410 .700   104   .342  105
 28 1923 NY_-A  531  192   32    3   70  170   4  176   21   15   355  140  130 .362 .519 .829   182   .400  184
 29 1924 NY_-A  552  188   24    1   73  142   4  173    9    7   375  131  119 .341 .479 .784   170   .382  173
 30 1925 NY_-A  384   96   14    0   34   59   2  148    1    1   293   59   64 .250 .353 .552    71   .296   70
 31 1926 NY_-A  507  181   22    1   70  140   4  155   10    6   338  133  142 .357 .499 .819   163   .394  169
 32 1927 NY_-A  535  180   26    1   75  133   0  183    3    2   366  133  139 .336 .469 .809   176   .381  170
 33 1928 NY_-A  540  167   25    1   73  139   4  171    2    2   380  146  133 .309 .454 .765   157   .369  161
 34 1929 NY_-A  506  164   22    1   61   72   4  121    3    1   352  111  137 .324 .412 .733   131   .351  130
 35 1930 NY_-A  504  168   22    3   59  130   1  105   11    8   360  117  121 .333 .471 .740   165   .368  150
 36 1931 NY_-A  507  180   26    0   58  116   1   93    5    3   330  120  130 .355 .476 .750   164   .380  149
 37 1932 NY_-A  444  148   21    0   50  117   3  111    2    1   297  102  115 .333 .475 .718   143   .374  129
 38 1933 NY_-A  456  133   17    0   49  104   3  166    5    4   327   87   92 .292 .426 .651   115   .342  112
 39 1934 NY_-A  370  102   14    0   35   94   3  107    1    3   271   73   79 .276 .426 .597    91   .332   87

Ruth, in real life, set the bar at 60 home runs in 1927. He did this in a shorter season than today's 162-game schedule. Looking at his translated stats, his best year was 1927, but he would have 75 home runs. This would be a mark Bonds didn't even reach. In addition, Ruth has 6 other seasons with at least 70 HRs. For this article, Ruth again sets the bar first, at 75.

Barry Bonds

Now for the most controversial figure and the actual record-holder.

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 21 1986 PIT-N  411   95   29    3   22   63   3  104   28    6   326   78   55 .231 .338 .477    64   .280   68
 22 1987 PIT-N  541  142   37    7   30   52   4   89   24    9   411   99   62 .262 .332 .523    90   .283   88
 23 1988 PIT-N  530  158   36    3   39   76   3   87   13   10   384  113   74 .298 .389 .598    96   .316  108
 24 1989 PIT-N  577  161   40    5   29   94   1   96   28    9   430  112   72 .279 .381 .516    96   .302  109
 25 1990 PIT-N  507  163   34    3   45   93   4   85   48   14   364  115  126 .321 .430 .667   123   .345  128
 26 1991 PIT-N  493  159   32    2   35  105   5   72   41   12   358  101  123 .323 .446 .609   119   .341  124
 27 1992 PIT-N  463  152   33    3   51  128   6   71   37    8   325  125  120 .328 .479 .743   131   .377  144
 28 1993 SF_-N  522  178   38    3   58  125   2   81   26   12   362  130  126 .341 .470 .759   156   .373  155
 29 1994 SF_-N  555  172   24    1   61  106   9   59   42   14   401  133  122 .310 .428 .686    99   .347  142
 30 1995 SF_-N  566  169   39    7   44  132   6   88   31   12   413  127  123 .299 .436 .625   124   .340  140
 31 1996 SF_-N  509  158   29    3   49  147   1   71   36    8   365  125  132 .310 .466 .668   146   .361  143
 32 1997 SF_-N  526  156   28    4   47  138   7   82   34    8   383  124  104 .297 .449 .633   139   .349  138
 33 1998 SF_-N  528  162   40    7   43  120   7   86   27   12   385  116  118 .307 .441 .653   139   .345  135
 34 1999 SF_-N  344   92   20    2   35   64   3   60   13    2   257   84   77 .267 .387 .642    84   .327   79
 35 2000 SF_-N  463  148   28    4   49  100   3   73   10    3   325  116   97 .320 .443 .715   137   .360  127
 36 2001 SF_-N  467  165   35    2   73  171   8   86   13    3   307  128  136 .353 .533 .906   189   .426  186
 37 2002 SF_-N  397  157   28    2   50  188   8   45    9    2   244  118  111 .395 .595 .854   172   .453  173
 38 2003 SF_-N  382  131   19    1   50  143   9   56    7    0   253  111   91 .343 .530 .791   143   .411  138
 39 2004 SF_-N  355  127   27    3   47  216   8   39    6    1   232  122   97 .358 .606 .848   174   .456  162
 40 2005 SF_-N   42   12    2    0    5    9   0    6    0    0    31    8   11 .286 .412 .690    11   .342   11
 41 2006 SF_-N  364   98   20    0   30  116   9   48    3    0   267   76   79 .269 .456 .571    98   .343   92
 42 2007 SF_-N  368  102   16    0   37  149   2   57    6    0   268   91   81 .277 .487 .622    98   .366  108

Bonds' 2001 season comes in at 73 home runs, just like real life. His next highest numbers was a run from 1992-1994, in which he hit 51, 58, 61. According to these stats, Bonds would have broken Maris' record in 1994, with a full season. Still, he falls short of Ruth's 75.

Hank Aaron

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 20 1954 MIL-N  493  141   37    4   17   25   4   56    3    2   363   64   76 .286 .326 .481    63   .271   69
 21 1955 MIL-N  632  212   48    6   33   48   4   84    4    1   432  112  114 .335 .386 .587   113   .317  124
 22 1956 MIL-N  635  227   46   10   33   40   3   70    4    4   424  118  105 .357 .398 .617   117   .326  131
 23 1957 MIL-N  623  216   37    4   54   61   0   73    1    1   411  129  144 .347 .405 .679   130   .342  143
 24 1958 MIL-N  623  219   41    3   37   62   1   61    5    1   408  122  108 .352 .411 .605   120   .332  132
 25 1959 MIL-N  642  246   51    5   50   53   5   63   10    0   405  127  135 .383 .434 .712   149   .362  163
 26 1960 MIL-N  607  196   29    6   54   64   3   70   20    7   430  117  143 .323 .390 .657   119   .330  136
 27 1961 MIL-N  625  214   48    7   45   59   3   73   25    9   430  127  134 .342 .402 .658   132   .334  139
 28 1962 MIL-N  584  189   39    4   55   65   3   79   14    7   408  131  134 .324 .394 .687   133   .336  134
 29 1963 MIL-N  617  213   35    3   55   84   0   98   34    4   413  135  147 .345 .424 .679   138   .351  153
 30 1964 MIL-N  543  189   38    2   31   69   0   49   24    4   360  105   99 .348 .422 .597   113   .335  118
 31 1965 MIL-N  561  186   41    2   42   65   1   83   25    4   387  117   99 .332 .402 .636   119   .334  125
 32 1966 ATL-N  580  166   27    1   54   85   1  101   22    2   424  125  136 .286 .378 .616   119   .321  124
 33 1967 ATL-N  596  191   41    2   55   70   0  101   18    5   416  132  131 .320 .392 .673   120   .335  136
 34 1968 ATL-N  596  183   41    3   47   74   1   65   29    4   422  111  115 .307 .385 .622   104   .325  128
 35 1969 ATL-N  542  161   36    2   56   84   2   49   10    8   392  107  105 .297 .393 .681   118   .333  125
 36 1970 ATL-N  503  146   25    1   45   66   2   67    8    0   363  102  116 .290 .375 .612   109   .319  104
 37 1971 ATL-N  490  154   27    2   59   72   2   66    1    1   342  106  130 .314 .404 .739   116   .350  124
 38 1972 ATL-N  453  118   17    1   42   92   1   64    4    0   337   85   88 .260 .386 .581    87   .316   95
 39 1973 ATL-N  376  108   15    1   46   63   1   58    1    1   273   83   95 .287 .391 .699    91   .337   90
 40 1974 ATL-N  338   86   15    0   28   36   0   35    1    0   255   53   75 .254 .326 .547    54   .286   56
 41 1975 MIL-A  469  116   23    2   17   69   1   61    0    1   361   51   67 .247 .345 .414    61   .265   65
 42 1976 MIL-A  272   64   11    0   16   37   0   47    0    1   211   29   44 .235 .327 .452    34   .265   38
 

Hank Aaron was the career home run record-holder, but he never hit more than 47 in one season. With translated stats, Aaron tallied up 59 in '71. This is a strong total, but he clearly lags behind Ruth and Bonds in single-season home run dominance.

Roger Maris

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 22 1957 CLE-A  372   89   14    5   17   57   1  106   11    4   292   65   55 .239 .342 .441    49   .271   56
 23 1958 CLE-A  190   43    7    1   11   17   0   43    6    2   152   28   29 .226 .290 .447    21   .252   24
 23 1958 KC_-A  428  104   19    2   24   28   3   69    0    0   328   67   59 .243 .294 .465    48   .255   54
 24 1959 KC_-A  447  122   29    6   20   56   4   69    2    1   330   72   76 .273 .359 .499    70   .288   74
 25 1960 NY_-A  523  153   23    6   50   65   4   85    2    2   378  105  119 .293 .375 .646   100   .322  112
 26 1961 NY_-A  590  163   25    3   67   82   8   81    0    0   434  128  138 .276 .372 .669   128   .326  132
 27 1962 NY_-A  576  151   34    1   37   77   7   93    1    0   429   88   96 .262 .356 .517    96   .292   98
 28 1963 NY_-A  312   86   17    1   26   35   2   45    1    0   228   56   56 .276 .352 .587    53   .304   58
 29 1964 NY_-A  507  146   27    3   24   59   7   82    3    0   364   88   73 .288 .370 .495    79   .293   85
 30 1965 NY_-A  159   40    8    0   10   29   0   31    0    0   121   25   32 .252 .367 .491    24   .290   27
 31 1966 NY_-A  355   89   18    1   15   37   4   65    0    0   270   43   51 .251 .328 .434    39   .262   47
 32 1967 STL-N  400  112   26    5   14   56   5   64    0    0   294   70   63 .280 .375 .475    59   .290   67
 33 1968 STL-N  309   84   23    3   10   29   1   40    0    0   230   34   58 .272 .336 .463    34   .272   44

Some fans still regard Maris as the single-season home run record-holder. His 61 home run season gets translated to a 67 mark with these translations. This still leaves him below Bonds and Ruth, who each passed 70. Maris' top three seasons were 67, 50, 37. None of his other seasons were over 30.

Mark McGwire

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 23 1987 OAK-A  546  172   33    4   53   70   6  130    1    1   384  100  122 .315 .399 .681   137   .338  129
 24 1988 OAK-A  534  150   24    1   42   78   4  126    0    0   389   95  108 .281 .377 .566   102   .309  104
 25 1989 OAK-A  479  117   19    0   46   86   4   99    1    1   375   87  109 .244 .364 .572    92   .303   95
 26 1990 OAK-A  511  133   17    1   53  110   8  119    2    1   390  102  124 .260 .399 .609   114   .324  117
 27 1991 OAK-A  471  106   20    0   32   94   3  117    2    1   372   71   84 .225 .357 .471    78   .283   80
 28 1992 OAK-A  447  135   22    0   59   90   5  110    0    1   322  103  120 .302 .424 .747   123   .357  125
 29 1993 OAK-A   84   31    7    0   12   20   1   19    0    1    55   19   27 .369 .495 .881    30   .403   29
 30 1994 OAK-A  191   52    5    0   15   50   0   56    0    0   139   38   37 .272 .423 .534    32   .322   41
 31 1995 OAK-A  349  103   18    0   51   93  13   83    1    1   255   88  104 .295 .459 .785   109   .374  110
 32 1996 OAK-A  412  131   21    0   59  109   8  108    0    0   282  103  111 .318 .469 .799   154   .385  130
 33 1997 OAK-A  356  105   22    0   41   56   4   90    1    0   257   54   84 .295 .397 .702    96   .340   87
 33 1997 STL-N  175   44    9    0   24   42   5   58    2    0   133   39   43 .251 .410 .714    47   .346   47
 34 1998 STL-N  496  146   27    0   72  153   6  150    1    0   354  126  142 .294 .466 .784   163   .380  157
 35 1999 STL-N  517  140   23    1   65  120   2  137    0    0   382  112  137 .271 .410 .696   145   .344  133
 36 2000 STL-N  229   68   10    0   31   67   6   75    1    0   163   54   65 .297 .467 .747    79   .375   70
 37 2001 STL-N  293   55    7    0   27   54   3  109    0    0   244   45   60 .188 .320 .488    49   .271   47

Mark McGwire was the first man to touch the 70-HR barrier. In translated stats, he not only touched it, but he surpassed it on his way to 72 home runs. Unfortunately for him, Bonds still wins. Big Mac had a 65-homer year and 5 other seasons over 50 translated HRs.

Ted Williams

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 20 1939 BOS-A  568  171   28    0   53   96   3  109    2    1   400  114  125 .301 .405 .630   145   .332  128
 21 1940 BOS-A  555  185   36    4   42   89   5   83    5    3   373  123  108 .333 .430 .640   145   .344  130
 22 1941 BOS-A  445  179   28    1   53  129   5   43    3    3   269  124  114 .402 .541 .827   172   .421  157
 23 1942 BOS-A  526  183   27    0   63  135   6   90    3    1   344  143  142 .348 .486 .759   157   .386  161
 27 1946 BOS-A  507  175   27    0   65  145   3   63    0    0   332  144  130 .345 .493 .783   163   .393  164
 28 1947 BOS-A  537  184   28    1   61  145   3   75    1    1   354  132  123 .343 .485 .739   157   .383  162
 29 1948 BOS-A  508  180   32    1   43  103   4   68    4    0   328  111  113 .354 .467 .675   151   .368  136
 30 1949 BOS-A  571  186   29    0   63  125   3   80    1    1   386  134  141 .326 .449 .708   171   .363  155
 31 1950 BOS-A  329   96   19    1   33   64   0   34    3    0   233   66   75 .292 .407 .657    94   .338   78
 32 1951 BOS-A  533  161   30    2   41  124   0   72    1    1   373  102  116 .302 .434 .597   138   .338  125
 33 1952 BOS-A   10    4    0    0    2    2   0    3    0    0     6    2    3 .400 .500 ****     3   .431    4
 34 1953 BOS-A   94   36    6    0   14   17   0   15    0    1    59   17   31 .383 .477 .894    31   .399   31
 35 1954 BOS-A  395  127   22    1   37  120   1   49    0    0   271   91   88 .322 .481 .663   108   .369  113
 36 1955 BOS-A  326  107   24    2   31   77   2   35    2    0   223   69   74 .328 .459 .699    94   .366   92
 37 1956 BOS-A  402  129   31    1   27   84   1   54    0    0   273   64   73 .321 .439 .604   102   .343   94
 38 1957 BOS-A  424  157   27    1   44  111   6   59    0    1   270   93   85 .370 .506 .750   130   .395  134
 39 1958 BOS-A  418  133   27    2   31   96   5   65    1    0   289   83   87 .318 .451 .615   100   .348  104
 40 1959 BOS-A  277   69   14    0   13   50   2   35    0    0   213   32   43 .249 .368 .440    45   .281   44
 41 1960 BOS-A  321   99   16    0   36   70   4   54    1    1   225   61   76 .308 .438 .695    81   .355   84
 

Williams started off running. In his first 8 seasons, he surpassed 50 six times. He also went over 60 four times. Sixty-five home runs was Williams' peak.

Ken Griffey Jr.

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 19 1989 SEA-A  452  122   24    0   24   47   2   88   15    7   342   68   68 .270 .341 .482    70   .278   70
 20 1990 SEA-A  585  185   35    5   32   63   2   82   16   10   414  104   93 .316 .385 .557   113   .308  110
 21 1991 SEA-A  536  190   39    2   32   72   1   80   19    6   366   86  110 .354 .432 .614   131   .339  123
 22 1992 SEA-A  561  185   42    3   42   45   6   70   10    4   383  100  121 .330 .386 .640   118   .327  118
 23 1993 SEA-A  569  180   38    3   58   93   6   91   17    7   403  120  117 .316 .418 .699   157   .347  144
 24 1994 SEA-A  606  198   36    5   66   74   3  101   14    4   415  132  127 .327 .403 .729   123   .349  150
 25 1995 SEA-A  282   73   10    1   21   54   0   58    4    2   213   55   45 .259 .378 .525    55   .301   53
 26 1996 SEA-A  511  155   27    2   51   69   7   98   15    1   366  111  123 .303 .394 .663   148   .334  119
 27 1997 SEA-A  576  181   34    3   63   72   8  109   14    4   412  122  140 .314 .398 .712   162   .342  141
 28 1998 SEA-A  607  177   33    3   64   76   7  111   19    5   440  121  144 .292 .377 .672   157   .328  136
 29 1999 SEA-A  592  164   25    3   51   86   7  104   24    7   437  115  124 .277 .375 .588   143   .313  119
 30 2000 CIN-N  510  133   21    3   37   82   8  110    5    4   389   88  104 .261 .372 .531   109   .299   95
 31 2001 CIN-N  363  102   21    2   21   43   4   67    2    0   266   55   63 .281 .363 .523    68   .296   64
 32 2002 CIN-N  195   50    7    0    9   27   3   36    1    2   151   17   23 .256 .356 .431    30   .270   29
 33 2003 CIN-N  167   42   12    1   14   27   5   42    1    0   127   35   27 .251 .372 .587    34   .311   35
 34 2004 CIN-N  297   75   16    0   21   42   2   64    1    0   224   49   60 .253 .349 .519    51   .289   50
 35 2005 CIN-N  479  142   24    0   40   53   3   89    0    1   345   85   91 .296 .370 .597    96   .311   93
 36 2006 CIN-N  417  103   18    0   26   39   2   73    0    0   317   59   68 .247 .314 .477    65   .266   58
 37 2007 CIN-N  533  148   26    1   37   99   1   89    6    1   395   87  100 .278 .392 .538   100   .310  106

Griffey's career is still in progress, but his best homer days are behind him. In 1994, Griffey had 66 translated home runs, his career-high. Five other times he has gone over 50; however, he has not done so since 1999. His best in the new millennium was 40 in 2005.

Sammy Sosa

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 20 1989 TEX-A   83   20    2    0    2    0   0   20    0    2    69    9    4 .241 .241 .337     5   .195    6
 20 1989 CHI-A   97   29    5    0    4   12   2   27    7    3    74   20   11 .299 .387 .474    17   .294   18
 21 1990 CHI-A  533  130   33    9   24   33   7  149   36   17   429   83   82 .244 .297 .475    71   .260   74
 22 1991 CHI-A  307   65   13    1   12   13   2   96   14    6   254   41   35 .212 .248 .378    29   .221   30
 23 1992 CHI-N  263   70   12    3   10   21   5   64   15    7   206   50   31 .266 .332 .449    33   .267   38
 24 1993 CHI-N  591  152   28    4   39   39   4  141   35   11   451   94   95 .257 .308 .516    89   .275   89
 25 1994 CHI-N  598  176   26    8   40   36   3  125   31   20   449   87  102 .294 .338 .565    72   .289  101
 26 1995 CHI-N  628  165   26    4   42   63   5  145   36    9   474   98  130 .263 .335 .518    95   .286  104
 27 1996 CHI-N  496  132   22    2   43   33   5  127   16    6   374   82   97 .266 .318 .579    88   .289   84
 28 1997 CHI-N  646  156   29    3   40   43   2  163   20   12   507   91  119 .241 .291 .481    88   .257   85
 29 1998 CHI-N  626  187   27    0   65   69   1  162   16    9   453  125  146 .299 .369 .653   138   .320  132
 30 1999 CHI-N  624  174   26    2   63   69   3  163    5    8   464  109  133 .279 .353 .630   133   .309  123
 31 2000 CHI-N  602  191   34    1   52   80   2  159    6    4   423  103  132 .317 .399 .636   141   .329  132
 32 2001 CHI-N  568  189   36    5   65  112   5  139    0    2   393  143  157 .333 .447 .757   169   .368  161
 33 2002 CHI-N  562  165   23    2   54  100   3  139    2    0   401  131  116 .294 .403 .630   123   .331  127
 34 2003 CHI-N  516  142   22    0   42   61   4  138    0    1   380   99  103 .275 .356 .562    96   .300   94
 35 2004 CHI-N  473  116   18    0   35   54   2  128    0    0   360   66   76 .245 .325 .505    77   .277   72
 36 2005 BAL-A  371   84   18    0   15   44   2   81    1    1   292   40   46 .226 .312 .396    47   .246   44
 38 2007 TEX-A  441  110   25    1   27   39   3  111    0    0   338   57   91 .249 .315 .494    61   .270   64

Sosa, like Griffey, won't be challenging the home-run record like he used to. Sosa never had more than 43 translated homers before hitting a career-high 65 in 1998. He followed this with two more 60+ and two more 50+ years. Sosa had a quick rise and a quick fall.

Jimmie Foxx

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 17 1925 PHI-A    9    6    0    0    0    0   0    2    0    0     3    2    0 .667 .667 .667     3   .489    3
 18 1926 PHI-A   34   10    2    0    0    1   0   12    1    0    25    7    5 .294 .314 .353     4   .240    4
 19 1927 PHI-A  130   37    5    1    8   14   1   24    1    0    93   19   18 .285 .359 .523    24   .295   22
 20 1928 PHI-A  402  115   18    1   30   61   1   82    3    4   299   76   73 .286 .381 .560    82   .307   78
 21 1929 PHI-A  522  163   24    3   44  101   3  139    8    4   375  103  101 .312 .427 .623   133   .337  124
 22 1930 PHI-A  556  159   24    2   49   90   0  117    6    4   414   99  119 .286 .385 .601   138   .317  118
 23 1931 PHI-A  506  127   18    0   46   69   1  154    4    2   384   79   96 .251 .342 .559   103   .294   90
 24 1932 PHI-A  569  193   26    0   70  105   0  171    4    5   381  122  134 .339 .442 .754   181   .364  156
 25 1933 PHI-A  570  192   26    0   68   87   2  174    2    1   379  111  137 .337 .426 .740   158   .359  149
 26 1934 PHI-A  558  173   23    2   62  102   2  131   11    2   387  113  121 .310 .418 .692   144   .348  140
 27 1935 PHI-A  555  179   27    2   56  107   0  180    7    3   379  116  114 .323 .432 .681   144   .352  140
 28 1936 BOS-A  596  173   25    3   51   92   1  216   13    4   428  109  119 .290 .386 .599   148   .319  124
 29 1937 BOS-A  571  148   22    2   48   89   2  152   11    7   434  102  115 .259 .361 .557   124   .299  106
 30 1938 BOS-A  562  185   26    1   66  103   0  128    5    3   380  120  145 .329 .433 .731   177   .359  150
 31 1939 BOS-A  469  156   23    3   51   80   3  121    4    3   320  110   94 .333 .433 .721   138   .357  122
 32 1940 BOS-A  510  145   20    1   51   94   0  131    5    6   372  101  113 .284 .396 .627   125   .325  112
 33 1941 BOS-A  474  138   23    0   35   81   0  166    3    4   341   81   97 .291 .395 .561   103   .313   94
 34 1942 BOS-A  100   26    2    0    8   17   3   27    0    0    74   17   14 .260 .383 .520    19   .303   19
 34 1942 CHI-N  213   48   10    0    7   23   0   91    1    0   165   31   25 .225 .301 .371    18   .236   22
 36 1944 CHI-N   20    2    0    0    0    2   0    9    0    0    18    0    1 .100 .182 .100    -1 -0.095    0
 37 1945 PHI-N  237   61   10    0   15   24   0   74    0    0   176   36   45 .257 .326 .489    30   .274   34

Jimmie Foxx hit 58 un-adjusted home runs in 1932, which translates to 70. Add another man to the 70-HR club.

Alex Rodriguez

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 18 1994 SEA-A   76   16    0    0    0    3   0   27    4    0    63    5    3 .211 .241 .211     3   .176    4
 19 1995 SEA-A  154   36    7    2    6    5   0   46    4    2   121   15   19 .234 .258 .422    16   .232   16
 20 1996 SEA-A  563  202   42    2   43   51   4   96   14    4   379  124  110 .359 .416 .670   162   .343  131
 21 1997 SEA-A  557  172   39    3   27   38   5   90   30    6   396   94   80 .309 .358 .535   111   .299   97
 22 1998 SEA-A  654  210   35    5   48   44  10  108   49   14   466  121  122 .321 .373 .610   152   .316  131
 23 1999 SEA-A  491  135   21    0   46   52   5  102   21    7   373  103  104 .275 .350 .599   114   .304   95
 24 2000 SEA-A  528  176   35    2   44   91   7  114   16    4   368  126  123 .333 .438 .657   154   .349  133
 25 2001 TEX-A  601  191   31    1   56   77  14  122   17    3   423  126  127 .318 .408 .652   162   .337  140
 26 2002 TEX-A  599  176   25    2   60   88   9  117    9    4   432  119  133 .294 .392 .643   156   .328  133
 27 2003 TEX-A  588  171   30    5   50   90  13  123   18    3   427  118  113 .291 .397 .614   151   .326  130
 28 2004 NY_-A  567  168   29    3   35   79   9  121   34    5   412  105   99 .296 .391 .543   131   .313  114
 29 2005 NY_-A  564  191   32    1   53   97  14  133   25    8   384  123  128 .339 .447 .681   167   .357  147
 30 2006 NY_-A  532  156   27    1   38   91   7  129   16    5   386  106  113 .293 .403 .562   131   .319  111
 31 2007 NY_-A  547  175   28    0   63   92  19  103   31    3   386  140  145 .320 .435 .717   152   .359  150

Many fans and experts are predicting Bonds' career mark to someday be surpassed by ARod. Rodriguez has a translated season of 60. This year, he is on pace for 66. If he picks up the pace, which is hard to imagine, he could join the 70-HR club in Translated Stats world.

Lou Gehrig

AGE YEAR TEAM    AB   H    2B   3B   HR   BB HBP   SO   SB   CS   OUT  RUN  RBI  BA   OBA  SA   UEQR   EQA   EQR
 20 1923 NY_-A   27   10    2    0    4    2   0   10    0    0    17    7    9 .370 .414 .889     7   .382    8
 21 1924 NY_-A   13    6    1    0    0    1   0    6    0    0     7    2    4 .462 .500 .538     3   .360    3
 22 1925 NY_-A  466  120   18    2   37   45   2  105    4    1   356   70   68 .258 .326 .543    78   .285   78
 23 1926 NY_-A  584  168   37    7   46  101   1  149    3    2   430  126  112 .288 .394 .611   125   .323  128
 24 1927 NY_-A  578  200   33    3   76  105   3  169    7    4   396  130  148 .346 .449 .808   181   .374  174
 25 1928 NY_-A  566  195   32    1   57   96   5  130    4    6   388  131  135 .345 .444 .707   146   .357  148
 26 1929 NY_-A  562  154   20    1   57  121   7  138    2    1   418  115  115 .274 .409 .617   132   .330  131
 27 1930 NY_-A  565  196   33    4   60   96   4  109   15   12   394  116  138 .347 .445 .738   167   .359  153
 28 1931 NY_-A  586  186   24    7   63  106   0  101   19    9   410  132  146 .317 .422 .705   162   .349  149
 29 1932 NY_-A  576  190   31    1   54   97   4   68    6    8   394  118  128 .330 .430 .668   152   .346  139
 30 1933 NY_-A  586  186   38    5   54   83   2   78   13   11   411  124  126 .317 .404 .676   135   .336  134
 31 1934 NY_-A  583  205   30    2   71   97   3   53    9    4   382  122  150 .352 .447 .775   171   .372  164
 32 1935 NY_-A  544  171   26    4   48  121   7   68   10    6   379  118  114 .314 .445 .642   142   .349  136
 33 1936 NY_-A  568  186   27    1   61  111  10   83    3    4   388  128  119 .327 .446 .701   174   .358  151
 34 1937 NY_-A  564  191   30    1   59  114   6   78    4    3   376  126  143 .339 .455 .709   173   .365  153
 35 1938 NY_-A  586  165   27    2   45   94   8  127    6    1   422  102  102 .282 .388 .565   132   .314  117
 36 1939 NY_-A   28    5    0    0    0    4   0    2    0    0    23    2    1 .179 .281 .179     1   .166    1

In actual stats, Gehrig hit 49 home runs twice, but never surpassed this mark. Looking at translated stats, we have a new Home Run champ. At 76 translated homers in 1927, Gehrig would have beaten out Ruth's 75 translated homers in the same season. In 1934, Gehrig would have had another 70+ season.

All-Time Home Run Record

The actual top 5 in career home runs looks like so:

1. Barry Bonds 762
2. Hank Aaron 755
3. Babe Ruth 714
4. Willie Mays 660
5. Sammy Sosa 606

Looking at the Translated Stats, we get:

1. Babe Ruth 1070
2. Hank Aaron 971
3. Barry Bonds 930
4. Mel Ott 861
5. Willie Mays 856

For those who have some sort of issue with Bonds, they will be glad to see him fall out of the top. Although, the man who comes out on top is the original King: Babe Ruth.

Final Results

Single-Season Home Run Champ: Lou Gehrig 75

Career Home Run Record-Holder: Babe Ruth 1070

WrmjrRed-Shirting

813 days ago

Score 1

Very interesting work. Thanks.

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

Thank you!

Permalink

Falcon02520Legend

813 days ago

Score 1

Good read. Nicely done.

Permalink | Reply

Falcon02520Legend

813 days ago

Score 3

Question: How (or would) you suggest making up for all the homeruns Willie Mays would have had if they had not been lost in the winds of Candlestick Park?

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 2

Good question. I am about 95% sure that Park Factors are accounted for in the numbers. During Mays' career in Candlestick, the park ranged from a severe pitcher's park to a mild hitter's park. The wind probably had something to do with that, but I don't know enough to know for sure. Anyways, in the years where Candlestick played like a pitcher's park, Mays would get more HRs tacked on. In the years where hitting was easier, he probably lost a couple, or there wasn't much of an adjustment. Deciding exactly how much harder it was for players to hit HRs in Candlestick and adjusting it accordingly seems like the best way to do things. The only better way would require going back to every HR and making a judgement individually, which isn't feasible.

Permalink

InterMatAll-American

813 days ago

Score 0

Anyone remember Kevin Maas and his 10 homers in his first 77 at-bats? Yeah, he was "supposed" to be the next great slugger.

Permalink | Reply

Falcon02520Legend

813 days ago

Score 0

Jeremy Hermida ring a bell???

Permalink

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 1

Maas finished with 89 Translated Homers. Just a tad behind Ruth.

Permalink

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

Hermida has time to make up for it at least.

Permalink

Steel TownDraft Pick

813 days ago

Score 3

Excellent article. I'll be sure to show this to all of my friends who are bonds fans, you know, since I LOATH him.

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 3

I guess I'll take votes from Bonds-haters too. A vote is a vote ;)

Permalink

Falcon02520Legend

813 days ago

Score 0

This article deserves the votes from everyone. But, it was nice when Bonds wasn't the all time statistical leader in homeruns.

Permalink

Steel TownDraft Pick

813 days ago

Score 1

Sorry, I'm from Pittsburgh, He gets respect but not my appreciation as a fan. I have never been able to root for him since he left and his pisspoor attitude only makes it easier to LOATH him.

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

813 days ago

Score 4

Nice job. Two questions though:

Where is Hank Greenberg? (he and Foxx were the closest to Ruth's record before Maris, Greenberg hit 58 in 1938)

What about an expansion factor? Is it easier to hit a homerun today in a 30 team league with talent diluted? It'd be hard to statistically pin this one down, which demonstrates that these mathematical exercises are good conversation pieces, but don't really do much else beyond that.

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

Greenberg had 69 in 1938 and a few other 60s. Career total: 492. I think basing everyone on the same "average hitter" helps to take care of expansion.

Permalink

RomiezzoLegend

813 days ago

Score 1

Those are 2 very good points. High 5 Rawbeezeitz.

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

813 days ago

Score 0

I'm not going to lie, I don't fully understand the theoretical statistical stuff. I guess basing it on "average players" makes sense. But what about the mean player, and I don't mean the guy who refuses to sign autographs.

Permalink

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

If you look at #3 in my intro above, you will see the assumed mean player for each season. If Bonds hit 40 more home runs than the mean player in 2001, and the mean player was at 10 HR, then Bonds hit 300% more home runs than the mean player. If you use the 19 HRs from #3 and assume Bonds hit 300% more than this new mean, you translate Bonds to 57. Since Bonds was hitting in a league where the mean player hit fewer home runs than the all-time mean, he gets adjusted upwards. That is roughly how it works.

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

813 days ago

Score 0

Is it the homerun rate of the mean player, calculated over a constant number of plate appearances?

Permalink

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

Yes.

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

812 days ago

Score 0

Well that makes sense. But, in the NL, are pitchers included in the mean player homerun rate?

Permalink

Bball3345Draft Pick

812 days ago

Score 0

Yes, pitchers batting stats are included.

Permalink

Kwitt11Varsity Captain

812 days ago

Score 0

By the way, I just want to make a point on the "diluted talent" thing. In 1920, there were basically 120 million people living in the US. People from outside the US didn't really play in the league (I believe), and African-Americans and dark-skinned Latinos were excluded (as well as possibly some other minorities). There were 16 teams in MLB. Today, the US population is roughly 300 million, and no citizens are excluded from the game; also, there are plenty of people from Latin America and the Far East. There are 30 teams. Which league's talent is more "diluted"?

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

812 days ago

Score 0

In 1920, MLB was the only major professional sports league. Baseball and boxing were the only 2 major sports. If you were athletic, you played baseball. Now, you can play basketball or football. My point wasn't necessarily that talent now is more diluted than in 1920, just that I didn't know if the figures took into count any difference in talent dilution.

Permalink

SeanlahmanJV Squad

813 days ago

Score 2

I'm trying to understand how these adjustments work, and I'm not getting it. How, for example, does Gehrig get adjusted from 47 to 76 homers in 1927 while his teammate, Babe Ruth, only goes from 60 to 75? If all that you're doing is adjusting for the context of the era, I would expect the rate of change to be the same for two guys in the same season.

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

That one caught my eye too. My best explanation is, that it gives everyone the same number of plate appearances. Ruth walked considerable more than Gehrig. So, Ruth ends up with fewer at bats. So Ruth has a better HR/AB ratio, but Gehrig has more total HRs.

Permalink

RomiezzoLegend

813 days ago

Score 2

I guess that makes sense, but that wouldn't actually happen. If Lou Gehrig got that far, I'm pretty sure they'd walk him just as much as Babe Ruth would've in any of those seasons.

Permalink

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

That's a very good point point Romiezzo. But just keep in mind that Gehrig hitting 47 in the amount of at bats he did it in was high for 1927. Still, if he were to play today and he started getting up into the 50s and 60s, he would definitely start getting walked more.

Permalink

MetsJetsDevilsDraft Pick

813 days ago

Score 5

As always, I find this mathematical attempt to ruin baseball to be total bullshit. How do you compensate for the relative change in temperature that would affect the balls trajectory? How do you compensate for the fact that the pitchers and outfielders were "better" back then due to less teams? How do you compensate for loss of talent due to war? How do you compensate for the fact that Babe Ruth never faced Satchel Page? How do you compensate for the way that the Designated hitter changes the way that pitchers approach a lineup? How do you compensate for advances in medicine and travel that impact upon a player's physical and mental health?

Permalink | Reply

RomiezzoLegend

813 days ago

Score 1

I understand what you mean MJD. People say that he COULD've done something, or he had the opportunity to beat a record. You never know what might happen though. Maybe a player could get in a slump. Maybe he could get injured. Who knows? Take a look at Pujols from last year for an example. People said that he might've acutually had a chance to beat Barry Bonds' single season home run record in mid June, until he got injured. Stuff like that happens in baseball, and you can't change that. You can't always be thinking about the "what ifs" in the game, but I really liked how Bball3345 put his effort in trying to see where people from the old days are compared to players right now.

Permalink

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 1

MJD, I understand your objections, but I have never once tried to "ruin baseball." I just try to understand the game more, both by watching and by analyzing.

Change in temperature is taken into account by park factors to an extent, but temperature doesn't affect the overall numbers in any considerable way.

The comparison to an average takes into account talent level.

Some of the factors are accounted for, others average out in the long run, and others probably can't be determined by numbers. That's why you need both numbers and observation to absolutely determine an answer.

BUT, would anyone disagree that Ruth was the most dominant home run hitter compared to his era of anyone in the game?

Permalink

MetsJetsDevilsDraft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

But it is so limited as to be completely worthless. You can't just add a factor to Ruth's numbers unless you can come up with someway of quantifying how the absence of black players impacted Ruth's numbers. How do you quantify that from 1942-1946, Warren Spahn was overseas and not throwing fastballs?

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

813 days ago

Score 6

I tried to ruin baseball in 1995. I gave Conseco a bunch of steroids and told him to pass them along to his friends.

Permalink

RomiezzoLegend

813 days ago

Score 1

You must be Greg Anderson then. Nice to meet you. I've been waiting to kick your @$$ for a long time now.

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

813 days ago

Score 1

I also tried to steal Christmas in 1988.

Permalink

RomiezzoLegend

813 days ago

Score 0

Greg Anderson is the Grinch?

Permalink

RomiezzoLegend

813 days ago

Score 1

This is very good work. The thing I'm surprised about is the fact that someone actually looked up Mel Ott. He is definitely one of the most underrated players to EVER play the game. 511 homers, and would've had a shot at 3000 hits in his career had he played in 162 game seasons. But then, I forgot that Bball3345 was in the group, so I have second thoughts about my "shocked" emotion.

Permalink | Reply

SeanlahmanJV Squad

813 days ago

Score 2

I wanted to follow up on my earlier comment to say two things. First, I realized after a careful re-reading that the methodology was created by the guys at Baseball Prospectus, not by BBall345. Frankly, I don't think their approach is the correct way to adjust for differences in context. BBall345 asks a very interesting question, but the BP data just muddies the water. Secondly, just to clarify, Baseball Prospectus may have invented this particular formula, but the concept of adjusting player stats for cross-era comparison dates back at least 25 years, to the work of Pete Palmer and John Thorn in their groundbreaking book "The Hidden Game of Baseball." And of course, Bill James was doing similar stuff by the mid-80s as well.

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

That's true, BP didn't start this, but it was there method I was using. Good point.

Permalink

KelsdadAll-Star

813 days ago

Score 1

Now I know what you did with your summer, Tim.

While I enjoy "projections" as a way to visualize how certain players would look compared to those of other eras, I despise Baseball Prospectus and some of these other so-called statisticians. MJD's reference to "ruining" baseball is dead on, these guys grab a twelve pack and sit around trying to invent the new "stat of the year" just so they can sell whatever book they're writing, or worse, subscriptions to their worthless website.

No one can quantify certain factors. Pitching today is the worst its been in the history of baseball. Parks are smaller. Baseballs are made by Titleist it seems, not Rawlings. Steriods. Its nice to see the numbers and this article was fun to read, but in the scope of things is just the work of someone (not you, Tim) trying to sell a book, which makes the report meaningless.

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

813 days ago

Score 0

Fair enough.

Permalink

Kwitt11Varsity Captain

812 days ago

Score 0

Pitching today is the worst its been in the history of baseball.

What do you mean by that? The best pitchers are worse? The worst pitchers are worse? The average pitcher is worse? Bullpens are ruining baseball? Pitching stats such as ERA are at an all-time high, but that's due to the other things you mentioned. I'd argue that pitching today is at or near as good as it's ever been, due to the increased specialization of pitches and relievers, and due to the better delivery techniques that are taught to minimize injury risk and maximize velocity/movement.

If you want to say that the hitter-pitcher balance is swung towards the hitters more than ever before, that's fine. But a) that's directly related to the other factors you mention, and b) that's accounted for by this system.

Permalink

Confessions Of A FanaticDiv-I Stud

812 days ago

Score 0

Extremely impressive work Tim. One of the best reads I've had in awhile.

Permalink | Reply

Kwitt11Varsity Captain

812 days ago

Score 0

Great article. Don't let Manny see it though, he'll throw a fit...

Permalink | Reply

KelsdadAll-Star

812 days ago

Score 0

The average pitcher is worse? Yes, actually. Look at a guy like Byung Hyun Kim. Guy's been released or DFA'd three times this year, yet he keeps finding a job. You think if pitching was good, he would have a job? I think not. Bullpens are ruining baseball? Not in the sense of their value, but in the sense of how they are used. Lefty specialists, set up guys only pitching the eighth and closers the ninth. If a reliever gets out of a bases loaded jam in the fourth inning, why can't he get the save? Pitching stats such as ERA are at an all-time high,(thus why pitching is the worst its ever been) but that's due to the other things you mentioned. I'd argue that pitching today is at or near as good as it's ever been, due to the increased specialization of pitches and relievers, (another reason)and due to the better delivery techniques not true, there are more injuries now than ever and its due to poor mechanics that are taught to minimize injury risk and maximize velocity/movement.

Permalink | Reply

Kwitt11Varsity Captain

812 days ago

Score 0

Sorry. I forgot that there was no such thing as a journeyman pitcher before 2000 - every pitcher pitched their entire career for one team, because every pitcher was great. Give me a break - there's been poor pitching for all of baseball history. You can argue that the save statistic is bad for baseball, although I'd argue that teams that hire managers who manage to the save deserve what they were getting...but you can't argue that you'd rather have a fresh Pat Neshek pitching the eighth than a tired Boof Bonzer. And you said that pitching is at an all-time worst because they're allowing fewer runs, while completely disregarding everything you mentioned and I restated - smaller ballparks, "Titlest baseballs", steroids, etc. If you can show me proof that there are more pitching injuries than ever before, I'd like to see it, but although people mention it often, I don't think it's actually true. Even if it is true, I don't think it's related to the mechanics that young pitchers are learning.

Permalink