Very few people seem to consider context when speaking about baseball records.  Bob Gibson (arguably the finest right-hander ever to take the mound) posted a 1.12 ERA in 1968, which was and is fantastic.  But in the late 1960's pitching ruled baseball.  There was no DH yet, the pitcher's mound was higher, and advances in weight training and nutrition (which benefit all players, but which give a greater advantage to the hitter) were still in their infancy.  The best hitters in either league could barely manage a .300 average.

When Pedro Martinez posted a 1.90 ERA in 1997, it should have been considered a greater achievement than Gibson's stellar performance 29 years earlier.  In the late 90's it was common for dozens of players to post averages over .300 every year.  Go take a look at the top twenty ERA's from 1968, and then the top twenty from 1997.  Then go take a look at the top twenty batting averages, slugging percentages, and on-base percentages from the same two years.  Go ahead and do it right now by clicking here.

In 1968 the top twenty pitchers allowed 1180 earned runs over the course of 5102.2 innings, which works out to an ERA of 2.08.  The top twenty hitters managed a paltry .298 batting average.

In 1997 the top twenty pitchers allowed 1391 earned runs in 4503 innings, which equals an ERA of 2.78.  The top twenty hitters posted an impressive .329 batting average.  Everyone looking at those statistics can see there's a difference, even if they can't quite put their finger on what that difference is.  Even so, statistics and records from one year are constantly being compared to statistics and records from other years, and in a context suggesting that all years are equal.

Let's say that in the fictional 2002 season of the Northern Arkansas American Legion League, first baseman John "The Hitman" Doe of the Mudville Woodchucks batted .867, with 110 home runs and 400 runs batted in.  If I were to take those statistics and seriously try to compare them to Barry Bonds' numbers for the same year (.370 batting average, 46 home runs, 110 RBI) everyone would tell me I was nuts.  The leagues are totally different, the caliber of the pitching is different, the level of play is different, etc...  Everyone would immediately see that any comparison would not be valid.  But if everyone can see that, why do so many people make the same invalid comparisons with professional baseball statistics?  Does anyone not recognize the difference steroids have made to hitters?  Is anyone unaware of the increase in hitting (for both average and power) that occurs at Coors Field?

Click on Rant: Artificial Turf Base Stealing Batting Order Closers O.P.S. Records Salaries