Quote Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg View Post
Wrong. just wrong. It isn't unheard of for players to be better in the 30s than in their 20s at all. In fact, a lot of players will tell you they didn't find their best hitting until their late 20s. Look at 2 of the best - Aaron and Mays. Hank Aaron had 253 HR thru 8 seasons at age 27 (31.6 a season). He hit 301 over his next 8 seasons to age 35 (37.6 a season). Then he had his best HR season at age 37 when he hit 47 bombs. He even had 1 more 40 HR season in '73 at age 39. Mays was the same way - 216 HR in 7 seasons to age 27 (30.9). He hit 326 over his next 8 (40.75), then tailed off his last decade.

Bonds numbers thru 1999 (age 34) track pretty well with Aarons - especially in a juiced ball era, which was just as responsible for the HR surge as steroids (and don't say MLB didn't juice it, hell they got caught juicing the ball this season!). From what I've read about Bonds and BALCO, the '98 McGuire/Sosa race plus him being injured in '99 are what led him to going "all in" while also moving to a new park that was 309 ft down the RF line in 2000. He wanted the record and went for it with juice.

But the take about players not improving after 27 is just way off base.
I didnt say players dont improve after age 27. But you are also comparing guys that werent the norm being called up to the Big League as boys. Bonds played 3 years of college baseball and was much more mature than Mays or Aaron. Had more modern training than they did coming up. 27-33 is probably some of your best baseball years. I dont dispute that. But the jump we started seeing out of Bonds was ridiculous.