You wish you were as good as this Hack

Here are a few:

Hank Greenberg's 58-homer season (1938) was very much an outlier for him, although he was still a great player otherwise. He didn't hit more than 44 in any other season.

Arky Vaughn hit .385 in 1935. His second-highest batting average was .335.

Darin Erstad's 2000 season — .355/25/100 and 240 hits is a pretty big blip as well. I could be wrong, but I've never heard any PED allegations about him.

George Foster hit 52 homers and drove in 149 runs in 1978, with a .631 SLG. His career highs otherwise were 40/120 and .561.

George Bell hit 47 homers and drove in 138 in 1987. His career highs otherwise were 31 and 112.

Lou Brock stole 118 bases in 1974. His career high otherwise was 74.

Dwight Gooden posted a 1.53 ERA in 1985, his second year. His second-best was 2.60 as a rookie.

Bob Welch won 27 games in 1990. His career-high otherwise was 17 (twice).

Bobby Thigpen had 57 saves in 1990. His career-high otherwise was 34.

I'm sure I'm missing some obvious ones, even ignoring the steroid guys ...

 

Likely on a cocktail of roids at the time, but Bonds at his best was ridiculous:

2001: 328/515/863
2002: 370/582/799
2003: 341/529/749
2004: 362/609/812

 

Hack Wilson was probably a better writer than I am, no doubt.

Full of fail,

rb

 

Al Simmons hit .381 with 36 homers, 41 doubles, 16 triples, 166 RBIs, 211 hits and 152 runs in 1930. He only struck out 34 times. That was pretty good.

 

I struck out 22 with Bob Welch on Tecmo Super Baseball, which came out in 1994 and was based on the 1993 season stats. One of my greatest accomplishments.

 

Hack Wilson looks HUGE in that picture! Was he one solid mass of muscle?

 

Here's a blip ...

Kevin Elster
1996 - .252-24-99
Career highs otherwise
.241-14-55

 

Let's not forget Brady Anderson's 1996:

296/396/637(?!?!?)

Career SLG: 425

 

Of course, there's a good reason for that...so let's consult Wikipedia:

Well then.

 

That doesn't work. Trust me, I've tried.

 

The thing I find interesting about the picture is how close to Hack that the photographer is. Keeping in mind that there were no zoom lenses in 1930, the photog must have been about 20 feet away or so. He's lucky Hack didn't take his head off with a line drive.

 

Damn, I thought this was a Peter King discussion.