I get that is is the most for an NL team, but 62 only gets him to 7th all time for the MLB as a whole. Sure, the 73 by Bonds is suspect, but this is 11 less.
Is it because this is the first time someone has eclipsed 60 HRs since 2001? Is it because he’s part of the Yankees? Is it because he is probably not on “the juice?” The wall to wall coverage is just ridiculous on ESPN. Is it just because ESPN has nothing else to report on and they need to invent “history making” like this to get attention for their floundering network?
In: 0
Baseball writers can be real sticklers about tradition (for decades Marris’ 61 was asterisked because the season was extended between Ruth’s record and his so he broke the record with more games), and some writers always vote down every nomination to the HoF because Ruth didn’t get a unanimous ballot.
Those same traditionalists don’t count the juiced home run numbers that exceeded Marris’ totals, so they’re excited about someone who they judge as “clean” breaking Marris’ total, plus most of them love the Yankees.
Latest Answers