Originally Posted by ct55
Remember Hammerin Hank hit all those homers when typical games were 3-2 and 2-1 unlike today when so many more runs get scored. The mound was higher too.
For part of his career, yes. Not for all it.
Otherwise, your points are well taken. So many things change from era to era that comparing records for different players from different times has always been problematic. For example, how about 1930, when the entire National League hit .303? Or 1968, when the entire American League hit .230? (I mean, Ray Oyler, more or less the starting shortstop for the world champion Tigers, hit .135 that year.) Steroids in baseball are not a good thing, but it's hard to say what their real statistical impact has been. Certainly, not all of the home run orgy of the late 90s, early 2000s can be attributed to steroids.