Funny how ingrained the numbers are that you learn when you're young. When I read 630 for "fifth" I started wondering what the category was.

630, in my mind, is fourth and closer to third than fifth. A few beats into the article and I'm like, "oh, yeah" despite watching Bonds hit 661, 715 and 756 live on TV. Still hasn't really sunk in.

It also seems so odd that AROD is already far enough along and old enough to be tied w/ Griffey, who seems somehow from a different era entirely, yet just retired.

Probably has something to do with Griffey having 4.1 WAR after 2000. Sure, he hit another 192 home runs, but the last decade of his career he was an okay* player who was famous for having previously been a superstar.

* More like occasionally good, usually okay, and occasionally bad, to be more precise.

Was passing Griffey one of the milestones that ARod has a contract incentive for? Or was it just Aaron and Bonds?

If I'm not mistaken ARod's first bonus is for passing (tying?) Mays.

Cots says this:
$30M marketing agreement based on home run milestones ($6M each for reaching 660, 714, 755 and tying and breaking major league HR record)

Funny how ingrained the numbers are that you learn when you're young. When I read 630 for "fifth" I started wondering what the category was.

I remember taking a Sporcle quiz on HR leaders by first letter of the player's last name and getting mad that the quiz wasn't taking Gehrig, because I couldn't imagine a G player with more HR than him.

Griffey is fifth all-time in home runs? My memory tells me that during the years 2001 to 2010 he missed about 140 games per year with injuries and made the highlight reel about once every three months. I guess he was accomplishing something in all those years out of the spotlight.

he has to do 26/yr for 5 yrs to get to 760.

ruth's last five yrs. (assuming arod has five to go): 46,41,34,22,6.

ruth avgd. 29+. but he was babe ruth and all that.

He's got (essentially) six years on his contract, not 5, so that would be 22 a year to tie the record.

Well, if he stays healthy and has a couple of 30 HR seasons, he's probably going to get it. Maybe not in this contract, but if he's 10 away or something, someone will give him the ABs.

Well, Willie should be safe until about the ASB 2013

Most HR, age-36 season to retirement:

MLB and King Bud's original plan was to chant A-Rod A-Rod A-Rod, wheeling him up to the plate while strapped to a gurney Lecter-style if necessary, until he got his 763rd and gloriously cleansed the pastime so that the record book t'would shine and babies might laugh again. Don't know what their plan is now.

Pray that Albert stays healthy and is really only 32 ?

Most HR through age 31. By the way, interesting to note that of all the players on this list, Albert got the latest start.

By the way, with Albert needing 319 more HR to break the record......here is the list from age 32 to retirement, players with 319 or more

MLB and King Bud's original plan was to chant A-Rod A-Rod A-Rod, wheeling him up to the plate while strapped to a gurney Lecter-style if necessary, until he got his 763rd and gloriously cleansed the pastime so that the record book t'would shine and babies might laugh again. Don't know what their plan is now.

Hilarious.

It also seems so odd that AROD is already far enough along and old enough to be tied w/ Griffey, who seems somehow from a different era entirely, yet just retired.

Of course Griffey cocked blocked AROD from the 1996 MVP.

Of course Griffey cocked blocked AROD from the 1996 MVP.

Juan "Griffey" Gonzalez?

Most HR through age 31. By the way, interesting to note that of all the players on this list, Albert got the latest start.

Rk Player HR Age PA AB
1 Alex Rodriguez 518 18-31 8482 7350
2 Jimmie Foxx 464 17-31 7858 6583
3 Ken Griffey 460 19-31 7736 6716
4 Albert Pujols 445 21-31 7433 6312
5 Eddie Mathews 422 20-31 7799 6549
6 Mickey Mantle 419 19-31 7412 6068
7 Frank Robinson 403 20-31 7651 6582
8 Hank Aaron 398 20-31 7855 7080
9 Juan Gonzalez 397 19-31 6374 5824
10 Mel Ott 388 17-31 8455 7080


Seeing Juan Gone's name on lists like this always makes me shake my head in amazement. Overrated or not, the dude had 397 homers at age 31, and since he was coming off a .325-35-140 season in the triple crown categories he wasn't just a lock for 500, but he looked very likely to top 600. But he never had a healthy season again and hit only 37 more homers for the rest of his career. His 2005 season pretty much tells the story perfectly, when he suffered a season (and career) ending injury in his very first at bat. Stuff of legends, I tell ya.

Of course Griffey cocked blocked AROD from the 1996 MVP.


Juan "Griffey" Gonzalez?

Griffey got four first place votes, if any of those had gone to ARod he would've won the MVP. He "split the team vote", so to speak. Of course, Griffey was as good as ARod that year.

The Gonzalez MVP is just stunning. I was too young to realize how vastly stupid it was at the time (although I really wondered how the shortstop hitting .356 with 36 homers wasn't the MVP). Look at the voting from that year. Every other player who got any MVP votes - 20 of them - had a higher WAR than Juan Gone. And one of them was a closer.

The Gonzalez MVP is just stunning. I was too young to realize how vastly stupid it was at the time (although I really wondered how the shortstop hitting .356 with 36 homers wasn't the MVP). Look at the voting from that year. Every other player who got any MVP votes - 20 of them - had a higher WAR than Juan Gone. And one of them was a closer.

While I agree the 1996 MVP voting results were stupid back then and look even worse today in hindsight, it is a little unfair to use stats like WAR that didn't exist at the time to prove it. The legitimacy of Juan Gone's MVP can be shot down even using traditional stats like OBP, walks, runs scored, and games played. Plus that whole pesky defense thing.

Yeah, there was no WAR, but WAR can still be used to illustrate how bizarre the selection was. People should have known in 1996 that Juan Gonzalez wasn't close to the best player in the AL that year, with or without WAR or VORP or even park factors, really.

Here's another fun one: Albert Belle had more homers and more RBI than Juan Gonzalez, and his batting average was just three points lower, and his team also won its division, with a better record. There's gotta be at least seventeen different ways of expressing the upfuckery.

If I remember my stupid-reasons-for-MVPs correctly, the explanation would probably be that Belle's Indians won the central too easily.

If I remember my stupid-reasons-for-MVPs correctly, the explanation would probably be that Belle's Indians won the central too easily.

Belle was on the White Sox that year.

edit: never mind. I was confusing 1996 with 1998, Juan's other misguided MVP, when Belle beat him in HR and AVG (and WAR, by a lot), but fell 5 RBI short.

If I remember my stupid-reasons-for-MVPs correctly, the explanation would probably be that Belle's Indians won the central too easily.

Or that he had more help from teammates (Manny, Thome, Lofton, etc).

Or that he was an a$$hole and voters just plain didn't like him.

Every other player who got any MVP votes - 20 of them - had a higher WAR than Juan Gone. And one of them was a closer.

Not that the rest of the comment wasn't correct, but this is a knock on the way War is figured out, and the absurdity of using pitchers war in comparison to position players.