Hi Bali - thanks for the response.
1) You are referring to the part of the article that said:
According to the book, Bonds gulped as many as 20 pills at a time and was so deeply reliant on his regimen that he ordered Anderson to start "cycles" -- a prescribed period of steroid use lasting about three weeks -- even when he was not due to begin one. Here, the authors could be referring to any pills, I don't think they were all in reference to illegal substances. They most likely used it for shock effect (like you said conflating). For example, a normal dose of glucosamine could be 3 pills, depending on the brand. Yup, it's possible that he could have reached 20 pills with orals but we really don't know the doses and how many different compounds that was. It could be anything ranging from legal to illegal, from Winny to aspirin to ephedrine to Dbol but the fact is that he was poppin 20 pills.
2) Yes, it says he started with Winny and then added "such drugs as" Deca, HGH, Clomid, and Modafinil for the 2000 season. My point is that the language is clearly citing examples, and not a thorough/complete description of what he took. Anderson isn't a fool, he would have probably given Bonds something to restore the HPG axis. But to make a conclusion off such language is presumptious IMO.
3) I don't think it's a bad analysis of stats to take Bond's first 12 years pre steroid (although I think his rookie season should be omitted) and then compare it to his next 6 when he has done steroids. I agree with what you said, that things like opposing pitchers, batting order, playing conditions, game tactics, etc. all affect statistics. So let's look at something a little more in depth, OPS+. This normalizes variables such as opposing pitchers, batting orders with other sluggers who had to face the same NL pitching and managers, and hitter's parks by comparing Barry with his peers.
For the 11 years before Bonds took steroids, his best two years, he posted a 205 and 206 in 1992 and 1993. Those 2 years were good enough to land him 39th and 40th on the all time Single Season Adjusted OPS+ list. However, from 1999 - 2004 (took out 2005 b/c he only had 14 AB) he
averaged a 230 OPS+. Three of those years were the
best OPS+ years ever posted by a baseball player. So basically, his best pre-drug offensive seasons were good enough for 39/40th all time; after drugs, he posted the greatest 3 offensive seasons in history. Note that OPS+ takes PA's into account and is widely regarded as one of the most definitive statistical measurements of offense (even though it could add it some other variables like weather conditions). One thing I might add is that OPS+ doesn't take into account the fact that after 2001, managers definitely gave Barry less pitches to hit when he wasn't walked. He simply posted the best OPS+ season ever (2002) and 3rd best (2004) after that. A further testament to the unfair advantage BALCO's drugs provided.
I wish they could somehow quantify Barry's "distance" of a HR and identify exactly how much further he could hit the ball with his extra 30lbs of muscle. For example, prior to 2000 (when his doping become more mature), what were his 20 longest HR's hit? After 2000, what were his 20 longest HR's hit? Take a average of the two, subtract them, and that could give you a very rough estimate of how much farther he could hit a ball after doping and obtaining his "new" body. Want to break it down even farther? Get a record of all of his HR's hit and the distance traveled, gather to where the wall was in relation (i.e. 350 ft wall to left field, 400 ft wall dead center, etc) to where the ball landed, and subtract his added distance number (from roids). That would be interesting to see how many homeruns would truly have been "homeruns" just by distance alone.
Of course we do also know that more strength equates to around a <.5 second difference in reaction time, but that can still be significant for someone who already has a good eye like Barry, so that plays into his "true" HR total as well. You could maybe penalize opposite field HR's because that
may mean he was late on his swing, but overall it's too hard to quantify [unlike distance].
4) My HGH italisized excerpt, I pulled it right out of an article by SI, I didn't make that up. There
are definitive studies on HGH, however not many. They prove that HGH does increase muscle mass and exercise capacity while decreasing adipose fatty tissue (although I couldn't find any studies on joints). For example: In 20 adults with growth hormone deficiency: exercise capacity increased in 11, was unchanged in 6, and declined in 3 after four months of treatment with growth hormone.
Link1. Also: In highly conditioned exercising men and women 22 to 33 years of age, pharmacologic doses of growth hormone produced a 12% decrease in body fat and a 4% increase in fat-free weight.
Link2. Keep in mind these studies were done in the late 80's as well.
5) You claim that Barry hit better over 3 year overlapping epochs which meant he got better and better, not sure how you are coming to this conclusion. Barry's best 2 offensive years were 1992 and 1993, with a 205 and 206 OPS+. He never even came close to those years, offensively speaking, until the year 2000. That was when he started his monster cocktail mix and posted a 191 and then proceeded to post the best three offensive years ever (whopping 262, 275, 260).
6) 1999, I agree, it's quite evident he was swinging for the fences and experimenting with a suitable drug stack that would work for him. He had a very subpar year OPS wise, but still posted an impressive AB/HR ratio.
Facebook
Twitter