Wild Card and Division Series Musings

We’re through the wild-card round and almost through the division series. A brief snapshot of some of the more notable performances is after the jump.

Wild Card

Three of the series went the distance and the fourth was, as expected, a bit of a mismatch.

The Guardians made an historic late season charge to overtake the faltering Tigers, a run that included winning 5 of 6 against Detroit. Their reward for claiming the AL Central title – one more series against the Michigan side. When it mattered most, the Tigers arrested their swoon to advance to the division round.

  • Tarik Skubal‘s 14 K’s in game 1 set an MLB record for a wild card game and tied Joe Coleman‘s Tiger record for any post-season game. The Tigers capitalized on Guardian errors for their two runs, but Cleveland failed to do so when a Tiger 9th inning miscue put the tying run at 3rd with nobody out.
  • Cleveland blew open a tied game with a pair of eighth inning homers to take game 2, the kill shot a 3-run blast by catcher Bo Naylor; it was the Guardians first ever 3 or 4-run homer in the 8th inning or later when facing elimination. For the Tigers, it was a case of deja vu, as the Guardians also beat them with a monster blast (Lane Thomas‘s grand slam) to clinch Cleveland’s triumph in game 5 of last season’s ALDS.
  • Despite his top bullpen arms being used in both of the preceding games, Guardian manager Stephen Vogt had a quick hook for Game 3 starter Slade Cecconi, pulling him from a scoreless game with one out in the 3rd and runners at the corners. The game stayed close until the 7th when Cleveland’s Hunter Gaddis, pitching for the third straight day, couldn’t get out of a bases loaded, one out jamb, allowing three straight knocks to plate four and send Detroit to the ALDS.

The Yankees and Red Sox renewed their perennial rivalry, meeting for the 6th time in the post-season, and the second time in the wildcard round. The teams split the first two games, both tight and low-scoring, with the Yankees claiming the rubber match with a 4-0 whitewash.

  • Staff aces Garret Crochet and Max Fried dueled in the opener, with Fried leaving after six innings with a 1-0 lead. But, three batters into the 7th and that lead was gone, as Boston rallied against the Yankee bullpen for a 3-1 win. Crochet’s 11 K’s and zero walks marked just the third post-season start against the Yankees with double-digit strikeouts and nary a walk allowed; curiously, all three games were series openers at Yankee Stadium.
  • Jazz Chisholm Jr. channeled his inner Enos Slaughter, scampering home from first on a long single to break an eighth inning 3-3 tie, as the Yankees evened the series with a taut 4-3 win.
  • The finale matched two starters making their post-season debuts, the third such winner-take-all game, but the first in which those pitchers were both rookies. Boston’s Connelly Early (the only major leaguer with his first and last names both ending in “ly”) didn’t make it out of the 4th inning, as four hits, a walk and an error in that frame plated four for the home side. Yankee Cam Schlittler shut down the Red Sox over eight innings, whiffing a dozen with nary a walk or run allowed to tie the post-season record for strikeouts in such a start.

In a series with only eleven runs scoring in three games, the Cubs prevailed over the Padres, by 6-5 in runs and 2-1 in games, to advance to an NLDS matchup against the division rival Brewers. Batters were mostly subdued by bullpen arms, as only one of the six starters lasted even five innings, with the Padre bullpen covering 15⅔ of 25 innings in the series, and Cub relievers pitching 17⅔ of 27 frames.

  • Back-to-back jacks leading off the fifth inning put the Cubs ahead 2-1, en route to a 3-1 victory in the opener. That start to an inning was a post-season first for both clubs.
  • The fifth inning again proved decisive in game 2, as a two-run blast by Manny Machado extended the Padre lead to 3-0 and ended scoring for the game. With that result the Padres recorded their fourth consecutive wild card series with a team shutout.
  • In the finale, the Cubs jumped out to an early 2-0 lead, and the teams exchanged leadoff home runs late for a final 3-1 tally. Alas, the key play in the game may have been made by an umpire. After Jackson Merrill‘s leadoff jack in the 9th put the Padres on the board, Xander Bogaerts next worked a full count before getting punched out on a dubious 3rd strike call by home plate umpire D.J. Reyburn. Had a ball been called instead, and the inning played out as it did, the Padres would have tied the game with two out and the go-ahead run in scoring position.

The best-of-three wild card format was adopted to prevent a one-and-done matchup between two mismatched opponents, as had occurred in 2021 when the 106 win Dodgers faced the 90 win Cardinals. So, this year the 93 win Dodgers had to twice beat the 83 win Reds, which they did with dispatch in a pair of one-sided contests.

  • Five Dodger blasts powered the home side to a 10-5 victory in the opener. Included were two apiece by Shohei Ohtani and Teoscar Hernandez, the Dodgers’ second post-season game with two players having multi-home run games. But, it was the first time for any team with two such players in the opening game of any post-season series.
  • In game 2, the Reds scored the first two and last two runs of the game. In between, LA plated eight, led by three doubles from Mookie Betts, tying the NL post-season record now shared by 13 players. (Quiz: which player holds the AL record for doubles in a post-season game?) The Reds issued intentional walks to three different Dodger hitters, tying the post-season record for games with the DH rule in effect; the only other such game in which a team has clinched a series was Jack Morris‘s 10-inning shutout of the Braves to win the 1991 World Series for the Twins.

Watch this space for a future recap of the four Division series.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

141 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago

The sustained drama of this baseball postseason, still only a little more than halfway through, has repeatedly led me to think about what has been lost and gained since the era when the “postseason” was simply a best-of-seven World Series. There’s no possible question that the 29 games played so far have generated far more excitement for far more fans in far more cities than the old seven-game Series ever did, and with luck (for ticket sales and media revenues) the count may still climb as high as 50 games, and with multiple themes of high drama. But there are… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Hey! Why not a round robin double elimination tournament to prolong the excitement? Thirty teams! Anything might happen! We’ve already pretty much abandoned the idea of deciding who’s the better in each league based on a grueling 162 games to decide that particular point. Maybe those White Sox and Rockies will get hot!

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago

The playoff system began the year of the Miracle Mets, and having endured the slapstick of the Mets’ early years I was incensed that despite having recorded (with or without Divine intervention) by far the best record in the NL, they had to win a best-of-five playoff with the Braves — a far more powerful team. From the first day of that series I became an implacable foe of the “postseason” (even though the Mets swept that series and achieved what I believed to be the acme of all that could be wished for that season: winning one World Series… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob, NSB, You’re preaching to the choir. The bye killed the Phillies’ bats this year and the Braves suffered as well for winning the division in prior years. The Wild Card(s) is supposed to be a ‘good’ thing that keeps fans interested (and buying tickets) in their .500 teams into September. I understand the 17-game season of the NFL necessitating expanded playoffs but logic indicates 162 games should determine the singular most playoff-worthy team (or two). Bud Selig expanded this fiasco and, if there is any justice, the Dodgers sweep his beloved Brewers in four 🙁 Interleague play stinks as… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul and nsb, I’m beginning to feel like we’re at a table, the only customers left in a Rust Belt bar with a black-and-white TV by the jar of pickled eggs . . . . Hey, Doug — can we get some beer over here! Obviously, there’s no going back. The old format with its sleek tensions building up to the pennant race stretch and the Series was fine for two eight-team leagues, but expansion in some form was a moral necessity (although overshadowed by a business opportunity), and now two insular fifteen-team leagues has obvious fatal defects. There is… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob
4 x 8 teams makes for 2 expansion teams…. AL / NL 2 divisions each. 7 x 14 = 98 games in your own division, 8 x 8 = 64 games versus your league’s other division. Four division champions…. and, to satisfy MLB’s need for expanded playoffs, best of 9 LCS, 9 game WS.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Yes, two more teams need to be added to make this work. I have no doubt MLB will add them sooner or later. But I envision no “divisions” in this utopia. Just as the Continental League would not have been a division of any league, just a league, I’m envisioning four 8-team leagues with the type of limited autonomy that used to exist for the AL and NL from 1920 until the dissolution of league presidencies. (An MLB superstructure would remain for things like labor contracts, player drafts, most personnel rule enforcement or league-rule appeals, overall media and licensing contracts,… Read more »

Last edited 2 months ago by Bob Eno
Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,
Yes, I believe the phrase that best fits our musings is, “From your lips to God’s ears”. But, we can always dream…….

Doug
Doug
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Two games into the two LCS series and the likely pennant winners have already been determined. Guess what – it’s the two teams with the better starting pitching!

The playoff system puts a lot of obstacles in the way, but cream usually still finds a way to rise to the top.

Voomo
Voomo
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

100% agree. I’ve no longer even committed the WS winners to memory.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Voomo

Long time no see, Voomo. Good to hear from you and to know that I’m not alone in this failure of character. (Unfortunately, in my case it’s probably equally a failure of neurons.)

Voomo
Voomo
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Seriously, I can rattle off every WS winner until about 2012. Since then? Just a diluted product. Who cares? A better product, yes. A more entertaining product, yes. But the WS winner? Usually an undue amount of luck/randomness involved. The best records after six months of playing every day are supposed to mean more, particularly in a sport where the best teams win only 60% of the time. I think this year we actually got the best 2 teams in the WS. But that’s become the anomaly. 2023? The Arizonas had the 5th best record in the NL and 13th… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago

Last year there was talk of Shohei Ohtani’s six-hit, three-HR, two-SB ten-RBI game against the Marlins as the greatest offensive game ever. Arguable, but just having an argument to make for it signals a major accomplishment for Otani. What players have had games that complete with Ohtani’s two-way game yesterday (putting aside that it was in the postseason . . . among postseason games it was about as low-stakes as a game can get)? One name that comes to mind is the immortal Tony Cloninger. On July 3, 1966, Cloninger pitched Atlanta (35-45) to a 17-3 win over the first-place… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Well, here another: Rick Wise, June 23, 1971 against the Cincinnati Reds, which the Phillies won 4-0: Pitching: 9 IP / 0 H / 0 R / 1 BB / 3 K / 89 GSc Batting: 4 PA / 4 AB / 2 R / 2 H / 3 RBI / 2 HR / 8 TB Wise came within one walk (6th inning, to Dave Concepcion!) of a perfect game. He was facing a line-up that included Bench, Rose, Foster, and Perez. I remember reading about the game but not that Wise hit two HRs. (Surprising — I liked Wise… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,

A friend of mine won a charity auction for a spring training “Dream Week” with some retired Phillies in Clearwater Florida one spring in the early 1990’s. While at dinner, Rick Wise observed something along the order of, “If they like you, they’ll give you every chance to succeed. If they don’t like you, they’ll give you one chance to fail.”

Pretty much sums up the politics of baseball………..

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,
Five times Ferrell hit 2 HRs in a game. The link below is probably his best pitching performance of the five:

https://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1934/B08220BOS1934.htm

I didn’t check Newcombe or Drysdale…

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

10 inning complete game and a walk off home run? Gets my vote.

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Carlos Zambrano goes 8 innings, drives in four while surrendering a single hit:

https://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/2006/B06050HOU2006.htm

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Let’s take stock of our candidates so far, in chronological order: Ferrell [8/22/1934-score 3-2]: 10 IP / 7 H / 2 R – 1 ER / 1 BB / 5 K / 76 GSc 5 PA / 4 AB / 2 R / 3 H / 2 RBI / 2 HR / 9 TB …..(Includes 10th inning 2-out walkoff solo HR) …..Opponent, CWS 41-76 (8th) [season, 53-99, 8th of 8] Cloninger [7/3/1966 – score 17-3] 9 IP / 7 H / 3 R – 3 ER / 2 BB / 5 K / 64 GSc 5 PA / 5 AB / 2 R… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,
I don’t believe it tops Ohtani or Wise but I forgot how well Earl Wilson hit…. how about 3 for 4 with a HR, BB, and 5 RBI while surrendering a single run in this CG performance:

https://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1966/B08130BOS1966.htm

He led the AL in WAR (7.7) and pWAR (5.9) that same year. Yes, that 7.7 WAR performance topped Triple Crown MVP-winning Frank Robinson

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

more Wilson – or, a very similar performance of 4 RBI with a HR while surrendering a single run in a CG:

https://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1968/B08300DET1968.htm

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Bob,
Earl Wilson homers in the 3rd inning and goes on to throw a no-hitter:

https://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1962/B06260BOS1962.htm

This is pretty close to the Rick Wise game….IMNSHO

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

No question, Paul. This is the closest performance to Wise we’ve found so far (GSc 88 no-hitter + HR vs. Wise’s 89 + 2HR). It would fall into a class with no-hit games where, as they used to say, a pitcher “contributed to his own cause” with a significant AB. There have been three instances of pitchers hitting a single home run while pitching a no-hitter. In addition to Wilson, two familiar names: Tobin and Ferrell. Tobin (4/27/1944 – score, 2-0) vs. BKN: GSc 91 (one solo HR). Ferrell (4/29/1931 – score, 9-0 vs. SLB; GSc 92 (2-run HR, 2-run… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Regarding Wise’s performance, the 1971 Reds weren’t contenders but did appear in the 1970 and 1972 World Series and did lead the NL in runs scored in 1968 & 1969. I believe the issue in 1971 was the loss of the BT Express to an achilles tendon tear while playing hoops in the off season. A somewhat rushed George Foster was inadequate replacement in CF and at the plate at that point in his career. Tolan returned in ’72 and they took the pennant…….

Doug
Doug
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Jack Harshman drove in all of his team’s runs with 2 HRs and a double in a 3-2 CG win in this game. He allowed 9 hits (all singles; only three after the 2nd inning), struck out 9 and walked none.

Doug
Doug
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

The only other 3 HR game by a pitcher was by Jim Tobin in this 1942 game. His 3rd blast, a two-run shot, broke a 4-4 tie with two out in the 8th, and was the top WPA event of the game. His .665 WPA for the game is the 5th highest by a starting pitcher in any game with PBP data.

Like Ohtani, Tobin walked only three (in 9 IP, compared to Ohtani’s 6 IP), Unlike Ohtani, Tobin whiffed nobody.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Cool detective work, Doug. So let’s see how they stack up: Harshman [9/23/1958 – score, 3-2] 9 IP / 9 H / 2 R – 2 ER / 0 BB / 9 K / 70 GSc 3 PA / 3 AB / 2 R / 3 H / 3 RBI / 2 HR / 10 TB ….(3 XBH; no XBH allowed) ….Opponent, WAS 61-87 (8th) [season, 61-93, 8th of 8] Tobin [5/13/1942 – score, 6-5] 9 IP / 5 H / 5 R – 3 ER / 3 BB / 0 K / 57 GSc 4 PA / 4 AB / 3 R / 3 H / 4 RBI / 3 HR / 12… Read more »

Doug
Doug
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Agreed on Wise. Just mentioned those two games, as they caught my eye as close contests. Harshman was actually extremely fortunate to get out of the second inning only two runs down, as 3 hits in each inning, even though all were singles, usually does more damage. To his credit, he found something after that inning, shutting out the Senators on three hits the rest of the way. Frankly, I was surprised that Tobin’s game was (and still is, actually) the only 3 HR game in which the player’s defensive position was pitcher for all three blasts. Ohtani’s one regular… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Doug

That’s a good distinction to make on Tobin’s game, and I’m happy he retains distinctive with a unique accomplishment. On the general issue of “greatest two-way game,” however, I don’t think it has any bearing (and I don’t read your comment as suggesting that it does).

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 months ago

Seattle is still the only franchise minus a trip to the World Series. A shame in one way, but not in another, since all-in-all Toronto was and is the best team in the AL, equalling the Dodgers in the NL, despite Milwaukee’s hot July and August. The Phillies had a better season record, too, but LA put them away 3 games to one and the Brewers 4-0. I’d call that decisive. The Dodger W-L record is deceptive anyway. Their pitching staff was full of holes due to injury, and the day to day lineup suffered that way, too, with Smith,… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
2 months ago

NSB, Fellow grouch here chiming in. I believe the NYY from a batting (11.2 WAA) and pitching (3.8 WAA) perspective had a total of 15 WAA which would, theoretically, give them 96 wins. Probably a few blowout wins effected the difference (94 actual Wins versus 96 projected Wins). To be honest, I have no idea if this is a correct observation on my part. I am suspecting that “average” is 81 wins…. In the case of the Brewers, it’s even closer. Milwaukee had 7.2 batting WAA and 7.7 pitching WAA for a total of 15 WAA. They had 97 wins… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago

I think there’s no straight line between the sum of individual WAR (or WAA) and team wins. Actual wins involve both “brute” performance (OPS+/ERA+ production in general) and clutch performance (WPA), and clutch performance is heavily influenced by opponent strength in context (which specific pitchers/batters a player faces), which no stat currently measures. And the Pythagorean projection is meant to be a best approximation: a divergence of a couple of wins may have no statistical significance. I expect that one use of emergent AI for MLB is going to be the ability to scan full data sets of all situational… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob: If “there’s no straight line between the sum of individual WAR . . .and team wins”—which there obviously isn’t, might it not follow that the same is true for a connection between individual WAR and individual “wins” generally? I am more and more convinced that WAR as a descriptive phrase is nonsense. The metric gauges individual performance as defined by a set of assumptions about what is optimal, not by whether or not any winning results. But your expectation that AI will someday boil it all down to a perfect analysis and as a result that will be a… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 months ago

Well, nsb, to answer your second question first, I have no idea whether it would be a good or bad thing for AI to facilitate the type of statistical data crunching I envision, but I can say without fear of error that AI will not be playing baseball (it lacks the essential feature that even Class D players uniformly share: opposable thumbs). I don’t see AI in this respect as any more intrinsically threatening than Bill James’ Baseball Abstract was in its context. It had enormous impact on the course of the game — certainly not all for the better,… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Briefly, as I only have access to my phone for a few days, my point about the robots was not about evaluating past performance but programming them to behave in games on the basis of the perfected AI analytics, minus the human factor, thus producing the statistician’s paradise. Or hadn’t you noticed that the numbers mean far more than the game, which only exists for too many to generate the stats. Just to pick one player who comes to mind, Lou Brock: he changed the game of his time and had a great post-season career, was a shoe-in for the… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

I wish the whole world had access to a phone for only a few days! It would be a better place. You can have it both ways, nsb. Brock was an electric player (although I’d say that Wills, a lesser player, was the one who changed the game of his time) and certainly had a great post-season career. And we can also see from our perspective that he actually provided less value than we realized primarily because his fielding was a liability (plus he didn’t know how to draw a walk). There’s no contradiction there: both perspectives are valid and… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Reflecting further on nsb’s objections, I think my response missed an important distinction: that is, the difference between advanced metrics and advanced technology. Here are the key phrases in nsb’s comment, as I re-read it: “. . . programming [players] to behave in games on the basis of the perfected AI analytics, minus the human factor, thus producing the statistician’s paradise.” For fans the purpose of metrics is to create a secondary level of entertainment beyond the ballfield, but for teams, coaches, and players their main purpose is to increase the quality of their play so they win more games.… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago

Saw a headline after Game 3 of the Series saying that the Jays were going to walk Ohtani henceforth, which they did not do in game 4, incidentally, and Ohtani went 0 for 3. Brought to mind last year’s Series when Ohtani went 2 for 19. Meanwhile Freeman, last year’s Series MVP, put an end to the misery after 17.5 innings in Monday’s affair.

Does anyone really care about this Series away from the fan base and Bob Eno?

Tom
Tom
1 month ago

Last year, Ohtani was playing with a separated shoulder.
Sounds like someone is jealous….

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Tom

Tom, NSB, I don’t know if Ohtani is the greatest baseball player of all time, but he certainly appears to be the best of the last 60 years. 50 homers, 50 steals, 125+ Runs, 400 total bases, AND 11+SO/9 IP? If this guy was born in southern California and had access to superior exercise and nutrition and played 12 months of the year, he’d be even better (by the same token, somebody in the American ‘system’ would probably have discouraged his pitching). He’s a guy who can only be stopped by serious injury. Regardless of whether the Dodgers win the… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

When I see Ohtani in the outfield for a season and can assess his defensive capabilities there, I’ll tell you whether I agree. Meanwhile, he isn’t the best pitcher in baseball, although he’s been very good in limited applications, except for the one qualifying season. But frankly, Trout for a few years, Judge currently, Bonds, despite his baggage, Schmidt, A-Rod . . . certainly if Ohtani continues another couple of years at the same approximate level as a hitter he’ll join those guys as an offensive force, but just DH-ing alone? Frank Thomas, in a different game environment, strikes me… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago

NSB, I don’t believe we’re ever going to see him in the OF again. Unless, of course, he never pitches again. But, then again, he’s much more valuable as a SP than a RF, right? Right field might be the least valuable defensive spot on the field. I dunno…..I imagine the Dodgers don’t want to risk his arm in RF As far as all-round ability, I just don’t believe Trout, Thomas, Schmidt, Bonds, or A-Rod could have ever gotten major league hitters out. FWIW, Ohtani’s 2022 season of a mere 166 innings pitched resulted in the second highest pitching WAR… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

I’m very much in agreement that the DH position places a serious limit on both subjective and objective measures of “greatness.” Although it is probably true that extremes of batting/pitching excellence are of far greater value than fielding excellence, in more general terms every base saved or allowed by an above/below-average fielding play is worth an equivalent batting event, and there are many opportunities for poor fielders (particularly those with low range factors who are not even in position to attempt many plays that average players execute) to almost invisibly erase the visible contributions they make at the plate. The… Read more »

Doug
Doug
1 month ago

World Series game 5 was the 19th post-season game (and third this season) with the DH rule in effect in which all 9 starters on a team struck out at least once. But, it was only the third such World Series game, the first two coming in the 2020 series (one by each team). This is the only such post-season game with all 9 starters on both teams striking out.

Doug
Doug
1 month ago

Most team games in a World Series with 8 or more starters getting a hit. 3 – 2014 Giants, 2005 White Sox, 1978 Yankees, 1960 Yankees 2 – 2025 Blue Jays*, 2011 Rangers, 2007 Red Sox, 1997 Marlins, 1993 Blue Jays, 1987 Twins, 1986 Mets, 1980 Phillies, 1979 Pirates, 1971 Pirates, 1965 Dodgers, 1965 Twins, 1953 Yankees, 1951 Yankees, 1933 Giants, 1925 Pirates, 1923 Yankees, 1919 Reds, 1912 Giants, 1910 Athletics, 1909 Tigers, 1903 Americans *active The bolded teams lost the series, so teams with two or more such games in a World Series have won the series 20 out… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Doug
no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago

(My count may be off by one or two, but) with Friday’s game result this becomes the 41st 7-game World Series. Again by my blurry-eyed reckoning, the previous 40 match-ups, contrary to what ought to be the sense of things, are almost evenly divided in result between home advantaged and visiting disadvantaged teams. It is a bizarre fact that in the longest string of four games to three outcomes—1955-6-7-8—the team with four home games lost the Series every time. Hardly ever does a team play better on the road than at home, generally much worse—you can look it up—but somehow… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

This is a very interesting phenomenon, nsb, and there is a sub-group that is even stranger. In 1955 the Dodger-Yankee Series looked like it was going to be a home-team-takes-all affair through six games, but the Dodgers won the finale in Yankee Stadium and thereby became the first team ever to lose the first two games of a seven-game Series and yet prevail. The Home/Away patter for the Series was HH-HHH-HA (which the Yankees didn’t think was as funny as it looks). Among the first 51 Series this had never happened before. It didn’t take long for it to happen… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Bob Eno
Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,

I believe this series was watched by more people worldwide than any in recent memory due to the international interest in foreigners from Japan and Latin America playing preeminent roles as well as a Canadian Club (hahaha) potentially drowning in their sorrows or champagning it up in victory.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

I was just channeling nsb’s humor from a few days ago, Paul. It was an almost barbarically gripping Series, and I’m sure you’re right or close to it for that reason and for the ones you named. I’ve been a Dodger fan first and foremost for over seventy years (albeit with strong secondary loyalties to the Mets and Tigers that emerged in the ’60s). I feel good that the Dodgers won. But I feel unusually bad that the Blue Jays lost. I don’t just mean I feel empathy for Toronto fans, though I do. I mean I feel bad myself,… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob: For the second year running the Dodgers have gotten their talent together postseason after injury and lackluster performance made one wonder whether this collection of stars might not be getting in each other’s way during the regulation 162 games. Can’t miss teams have crashed before in that manner. And unlike the Boys of Summer, who were also the best team on paper, this crew has come through at the end, partly due to superior pitching by a staff so deep that injuries weren’t catastrophic to the cause, one pitcher coming off the DL to compensate for another’s going down.… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

As in many things, nsb — though by no means all — you and I differ in our approaches to season outcomes. Perhaps it’s a product of all those years sitting in the Polo Grounds rooting for sad-sack Mets teams, but I feel a lot of pleasure seeing teams that have good reason to be underdogs upset the odds. After all, what does justice have to do with the 1969 World Series, my touchstone for happy thoughts on gray days? In 1968, as a devoted NL fan, I rooted for the St.L Cardinals (completely inconsistent — I’d rooted for the… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,
“….- for many years I had occasion to recall that game publicly and in some detail during an annual lecture I gave to students on an ancient Chinese divination text.”

Congratulations to you, Robert! You must be thrilled to see the most improved program in the recent history of NCAA football return to the glory days of Johnny Pont and John Isenbarger (1967 Cinderella) and maybe even Pete Pihos and Ted Kluszewski (1945 9-1 Western Conf champs)! Cignetti is a genius!

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

Ah. Google has outed me. It’s more of a chill than a thrill, Paul. College and professional sports have entirely different missions, and the school I retired from has dramatically lost the distinction. Moreover, while it currently is second-ranked in football among all public (and non-public) universities, it has fallen from a strong position to the worst-ranked public college/university in America for academic freedom. This not a trade-off that I can feel good about. I don’t want to get on a non-MLB soapbox on HHS, but since you unintentionally offered the platform . . . I spent fifteen years trying… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

It’s in the hands of the administration…. from Day 1, it’s been the “Ivory Tower” versus “Boosters & Alumni”. A fascinating history of the sport can be found in “College Football, History, Spectacle, Controversy” by John Sayle Watterson. (ca. 2000). As far as Cignetti, similar ironclad contracts were given to James Franklin at PSU and Brian Kelly at LSU. They weren’t hired to lose and now they’re getting paid to do nothing….about $100M together over the next six years or so. The history of Pitt football has been a see-saw of “we’re athleticly competetive’ and “we’re a leader in academics”… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul, on the specifics of Cignetti’s contract, I’m not talking about longstanding tensions between academics and athletics, highlighted by exorbitant contracts and buyouts. The clause I’m referring to works the other way. Cingetti’s contract, proposed and negotiated by the university president and AD, specifies that were Cignetti to move to another school he would pay the university damages ($15m the first year). This is not in itself novel but those damages would be reduced by 50% if either the current president or AD were no longer employed by the university. This is not a matter of protecting the university; it… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Understood. I guess the UI trustees dropped the ball on that one? Forgive my mention of the ‘academics vs. athletics’ flux. I thought you were intimating the same with: ” I spent fifteen years trying to build support and create a blueprint for the reorientation of college sports to the academic mission of its schools — with the active support of the NCAA leadership — and we were overwhelmed by the massive new revenue sources that began to pour in from conference and external sports networks.” I am, too, dumbfounded how mens tennis/student athletes can make a trip from New Brunswick… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul, At the beginning of the century there seemed to be a lot less gold and a lot more deficits. It was a prisoners’ dilemma: almost all college presidents were dying to throttle back, but antitrust laws and alumni pressure constrained them and competitive forces prevented any from acting on their own. (If you’re interested in why the pie-in-the-sky seemed possible to bake at the time, this NYT story captured the moment.)

Doug
Doug
1 month ago

The team with the home field advantage has also lost the last five 7-game World Series (2014, 2016-17, 2019, 2025); in those 35 games, the home team (in each game) is a collective 12-23 (.343).

Conversely, the team with the home field advantage has a 6-1 record in the other seven World Series in that period (since 2014), with the home team (in each game) posting a .500 record in the 38 games of those series.

Last edited 1 month ago by Doug
Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Doug

Doug, I think you are mixing game and Series home-field advantages in a way that doesn’t work. In terms of Series victories (as opposed to game victories), the home field advantages vary depending on the length of the Series, not on the initial seven-game schedule. The only games that count for a Series home-team advantage are the fifth game of a Series that is 3-1 after four games, with the leading team playing at home (which has not happened in the time frame you’re looking at), and the seventh game of a seven-game Series. (In four and six game Series’… Read more »

Doug
Doug
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Yes, I’ve mixed apples and oranges. However, what I mean by “the team with the home field advantage” is the team with that advantage at the outset of the series (i.e. the team starting the series with two home games). So, since 2014, those teams are 0-5 in 7 game World Series, but 6-1 in World Series decided in fewer than 7 games. As to what the heck is going on, it would appear it’s tough to beat a league champion, no matter where you play the game. That’s especially true for a game 7 since such series have already… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Doug
Tom
Tom
1 month ago

Freddie Freeman is the Dodger party MVP. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gUjvRHaSmwk

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

I was about to introduce a new topic — and will a bit later — but as I prepared to type it my eye was caught by the first comment in this string, which I posted four weeks ago. It concerned the downsides of the extended playoff format MLB has adopted, and other curmudgeons (nsb and Paul E) joined in. I made two basic observations about the 50-game playoff format. The first concerned the way that regular season records and dramatic finishes were effectively washed from history by the contemporary postseason. The second concerned the necessarily waning intensity of postseason… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

The new topic I wanted to discuss concerns an ancient and now little celebrated statistic: championship batting averages. As an NL fan I grew up at a time when BA was the gold-standard stat, and took great pleasure in the fact that it was the AL that held the record for lowest championship batting average: Elmer Flick’s .306 average in 1905, which has since been revised to .308 (presumably through some Russian disinformation campaign). That year, the AL as a league batted a dismal .241 with only three .300 hitters (Wee Willie Keeler hit .302 and the celebrated Harry Bay… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Advanced Batting League Totals:

AL 1968  WPA  -10.1%
NL 2025  WPA  -55.6%

AL 1968  RE24  (+) 35.1%
NL 2025  RE24  -103.3%

Win Probability Added: Given average teams this is the change in probability caused by (this) batter during the game. A change of +/- 1 would indicate one win added or lost.

RE24 (Base Out Runs Added): Given the bases occupied/out situation, how many runs did the batter or baserunner add in the resulting play. Compared to average, so 0 is average and above 0 is better than average.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

This is quite striking, nsb. I’m not sure how you tie these measures, which relate to game-context, to the apparent height of the BA Bell Curve, which is what I was commenting on. (Or perhaps you’re just introducing a different interesting topic.) The 1968 AL and 2025 NL are playing substantially different games: ’68 AL: R/G 3.41 … .230/.297/.339 ’25 NL: R/G 4.47 … .247/.317.402 To use “clutch” measures may miss the fact that in a run-starved environment there may be many more clutch situations (fewer lopsided blowouts) than in a run-rich environment. But, more basically, I’m unclear how “average”… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Just guessing, but TTO probably comes into play a lot in explaining these differences.

Don’t ask me how.

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago

And yes, this doesn’t directly connect to your major query. I just started fishing around trying to find some startling difference between the two (league) seasons, and there weren’t any others that weren’t pretty self-explanatory and so unhelpful. But these leapt off the screen as being indicative of some major difference in the way the game was being played that might account for the lack of high average hitters in NL 2025.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

nsb, Can you guide me to the stat page you used for these figures? Somehow I can’t find it. The relevant comparison would be the two leagues in 2025 (or any year since the effectual merger of leagues was complete). Conceptually, on WPA, it seems to me that on the league level the WPA sum of all plays in every given game should be 100% and 0%, depending on the team, with responsibility for the totals allotted among batters, pitchers, and fielders: league totals +/- would indicate the variation from average in each of the three categories and should total… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Go to 2025 (or any year) NL (or Al or MLB) Team Statistics. Draw down the Batting Menu and click on Advanced Batting.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

Ah. I see it, nsb. I’m going to try to figure out the meaning of these figures, but I have a serious complaint to make. As soon as I saw your comment I realized that you have explained this to me before. I am distressed to learn that on a fine site like HHS there are participants who lack the ability to teach very simple techniques effectively. I encourage you to do better in the future!

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

nsb, Here’s some interesting data from the pages you pointed towards. I chose two random years prior to interleague play (1990 and 1996) and checked for WPA figures in MLB. For both years, MLB batters had negative WPA almost perfectly matching pitchers’ positive WPA. (A brief look at one example of RE24 showed the same result.) In 2025, that held true for MLB as well. Batting WPA was -107.5 and pitching WPA totaled +107.4. Because of interleague play that symmetry breaks down within each league: AL Batting WPA -52.0; Pitching WPA +59.0 NL Batting WPA -55.6; Pitching WPA +48.4 Perhaps… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Replying to my own reply to nsb: On 2025 League WPA, I calculate that the imbalance between total (batting plus pitching) AL and NL WPA figures is indeed nothing more than an artifact of the W-L records of the two leagues in interleague play, with a small fractional divergence. Because every play generates complementary +/- values for batters and pitchers the total batter+pitcher WPA for each game will be 200, while in fact each team only adds or subtracts 50% to/from its initial 50% chance of winning. So the counting stat of WPA needs to be halved when converting batter+pitcher… Read more »

Doug
Doug
1 month ago

The 1968 Indians pitchers were the first staff to strike out more batters than hits allowed. There wouldn’t be another such team until the 2003 Dodgers and Cubs, and there wouldn’t be another such AL team until the 2012 Rays. The 2018 NL was the first league to whiff more than it hit, while that was first true in the AL in 2020. As a league this season, the NL had more hits than whiffs for the first time since 2017. Ten of the fifteen NL teams were in positive territory compared to only three AL teams. Offensively since 2018,… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Doug
Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

nsb, After working more with WPA I’m coming to the conclusion that it may not tell us much, at least on a league level. Batting and pitching WPA are in an inverse relation, so if league WPA is meaningful we would expect it to have some sort of correlation with overall quality of pitching and hitting in a particular league (or, since interleague play began, with MLB overall). If we look at two years of extremes this doesn’t seem to be borne out. The 1930 NL was a hitter’s league, with an insane .303 league BA and teams averaging 5.68… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob, Not for anything but, these stats (WPA and Sabrmetrics in general) don’t seem to work well at the extremes (you know, like Larry Walker in Denver and Chuck Klein in Baker Bowl). What are the WPAs for pitchers and hitters in reasonably normal contexts of, say, 4.00 to 4.30 runs per game? I’m guessing the pitchers and hitters come close to “zeroing” out. Also, perhaps the extreme hitting and pitching environments that you used might explain Yaz’ great home stats, Walker’s ridiculous splits and Klein looking like Ruth, Gehrig and Hornsby prior to his trade to Chicago and our… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul, although nsb has commandeered the title, I, in my modest way, am also no statistician (no buts about it). But, I want to push back on your premises. In the case of league WPA, I think extremes related to player home/away splits or park effects are, in principle, entirely irrelevant. WPA and RE24 concern only batter and pitcher performances in game-situational contexts, where there is a zero-sum or inverse relation between batter and pitcher performance. At the league level there are no splits (every game is equally home and away) and park factors cancel out because equal numbers of… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,
I was implying that at the extremes (Baker Bowl, Coors Field, 1930 NL, 1936 AL, 1968 MLB) the SABR adjustments are insufficient. This applies to league WPA and it further, bleeds into individual calculations of ballpark adjustments. I think everyone, by now, understands the traditional stats should be taken with a grain of salt. I’ll attempt to see if the WPA “balance” between pitching and hitting works more adequately in the “center”/median of historical run scoring (as opposed to the extremes). Hopefully, before we move onto another topic

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul, Generally speaking, WPA can only be a zero sum. It measures how and how much each event moves the probability of a team winning in a +/- direction, with (so far as I can tell) the batter and pitcher rewarded in equal and opposite measure. For example, look at the team batting/pitching WPA totals for the seventh game of this year’s World Series: LA Batters………+0.125 Tor. Batters……..-0.375 LA Pitchers…….+0.375 Tor Pitchers…….-0.125 Every percent that LA batters increased the Dodgers’ win probability was at the expense of Toronto pitchers, and every percent LA pitchers increased the Dodgers’ win probability was… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,
“……in fact, in 1930 pitching WPA was net positive and batting WPA was net negative (!)

Perhaps the nature of WPA (making a difference in game situations) is the root of the mystery. If everybody is hitting the cover off the ball (1930), the guys who make the difference are the guys who stop all the hitting. In a 9-8 game, everybody’s hitting-the batters don’t stand out. The difference maker (WPA’s basis) is the guy who gets the outs. Hence, pitching is positive, batting is negative in 1930

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

That could well be true, Paul. But I wouldn’t phrase it as “the guys who stop all the hitting” so much as “the guys who are on the mound when the hitting runs out.” Take a look at this game: StL 11, Phil 10 on 6/3/1930. Cardinal pitchers gave up ten runs (all earned) on 23 hits. But the two-man pitching staff had a positive WPA (0.027, precisely matching the Phillie batters’ -0.027). The Cardinal starter, Syl Johnson, gave up 9 runs in 8.1 IP. His WPA was -0.106 (precisely because he left when the hitting was still going on).… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

I’ve got a couple more bright ideas about WPA: I’m sorry. I promise not to post again tonight, unprovoked. First, I decided out of curiosity to look at this game: the 6th game of the ’86 Series (Bill Buckner’s sad moment). I was interested in looking at how great the magnitude of the last play was in WPA terms (the answer: +/- 0.40). What happened on that play? Bob Stanley threw a 3-2 pitch that fooled batter Mookie Wilson, who dribbled it to first for an easy inning-ending third out. Stanley did his job; Mookie couldn’t do his. End of… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

It’s a new day, warm and breezy with the scent of autumn leaves, and I have a new gripe with WPA. Actually, it’s not a gripe with WPA, it’s a gripe with how it is interpreted and integrated in player records. WPA (Works Progress Administration Win Probability Added) measures the increased likelihood with each play that the team that ultimately wins a game will win it. I have no reason to doubt that the formulas that calculate these figures are anything but valid, so in that sense WPA is an interesting and informative stat. But the way it is interpreted… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,

Sorry for just seeing this. Re WPA and the evolution (hahaha) of sports minutia calculation, I don’t know where it ends. Perhaps AI will put an end to all the calculating and derivatives of the derivatives? Or, maybe AI will never cease reinventing itself and evolving and we’ll have to change the channel or go back to reading the classics?

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

I’m all for the classics, Paul, back to the first pre-Socratic, Thales. But I doubt even he would throw out the baby with the bath just because all the world is ultimately water. The fact that our enthusiasm may dampen for one advanced stat doesn’t mean that the others are necessarily all wet. I think OPS+ and ERA+ are clear advances over OPS and ERA. I’m a fan of Range Factor and Rtot for fielding, and I’ll keep defending bWAR and pWAR as excellent guides for insightful analysis (not fWAR). There are many others I think are valuable and more… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

In the words of Otto von Bismarck, ” Laws, sausage,…..WPA”

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago

From the micro to the macro, or— Not a lot to do with stats, but interesting from a baseball history standpoint, at least to me: Steve Balboni. He was a low average, poor fielding slugger, evidently regarded as good enough to start at first base for the Royals, Yankees, and Mariners back in the Nineteen-Eighties.  Anyone remember? As far as I can tell, he is the last player with a bona fide big-league career as a starter to return to the American minors and carry on playing baseball full time for a significant period at his general level of performance.… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago

Lefty O’Doul part-timed it back in the PCL as a manager (i believe)?

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

I don’t know of anyone quite comparable to Balboni post 1990, nsb, but Pete Incaviglia comes pretty close. Went directly to the Majors in 1986 without stopping in the Minors and hit 183 HR by 1994. He went to Japan for a (disastrous) year and then returned to MLB, winding up in 1998 with 206 HR and 104 OPS+. He started 1999 in the Mexican League, finishing up that season in the PCL. He played in the Minors from 2000-2002, with solid half–time season totals in 2001-2. So he wasn’t a full-time player in those last years, like Balboni (and… Read more »

caramba
caramba
12 days ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Didn’t the Expos have Raines and Shines on the roster at the same time?

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
12 days ago
Reply to  caramba

They did indeed, caramba! Nice catch.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
1 month ago

I remember reading somewhere that Buzz Arlett was rated as the best minor league player ever.

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago

Arlett began his career as a spitball throwing pitcher, winning 95 games in a four year stretch. When his arm failed, he switched to the outfield and produced big numbers at the plate, averaging over 30 HRs, 130 RBIs, 125 Runs, and a.350+ BA for the next eight years. After his year with the Phillies he destroyed IL pitching with Baltimore for two years banging 54 HRs in 1932, and somewhat later at Minneapolis in the AA, he dinged 44 in only 110 games. His lowest BA as a full-timer was .321, and his lifetime BA of .341 is deceptively… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago

IIRC, Julio Franco went back down to the minors after returning from Japan ca 1995 (had the foresight to see the strike was going to limit MLB opportunities) and played in Mexico, got signed by Atlanta, went to Mexico, Korea, and (Taiwan?). Franco may have topped 4,000 professional hits….

Tom
Tom
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

Franco had 4463 pro hits. He is 6th all-time, just ahead of Ty Cobb.
See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lwFzvM8240

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago
Reply to  Tom

Nice! Thanks!

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
1 month ago

Richard, you may be recalling Bill James. James has several positive assessments of Arlett in his New Historical Baseball Abstract. He identifies him as one of the best players in baseball at any level over a twenty year stretch (93), the best Minor League player of the 1920s (128), and perhaps the greatest minor league slugger of all time (133).

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

According to his SABR bio, he was named in 1984—by SABR—as the greatest all-time minor leaguer.

Voomo
Voomo
1 month ago

I certainly remember Balboni. We went to the same college. I also remember him having the unique skill of hitting balls completely out of stadiums… foul.

As for playing after The Show, Rickey did it for three years at the end, paying for the San Diego Surf Dawgs of the Golden league at age 46.

Manny also did it for three years, including playing in the Chinese league, batting .352 for the EDA Rhinos of Taiwan.

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago

How could we forget George Brunet?! He spent ~ age 37 thru 47 seasons in Mexico

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul, Tom, Bob, Voomo:

Thanks for the input, although none of these guys beat Balboni in terms of 1) playing full time or at least half; 2) in the American minors; 3) later than 1990; 4) for a continuous run. I really had the high minors in mind, too, though I didn’t specify that.

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago

NSB, Most of these guys that want to linger in the sport nowadays are playing in Independent Leagues (equivalent of A+; AA might be a stretch) and, if they play well, make the jump to AAA when they get signed by a ML organization. Whoever signs them doesn’t give them too long of a trial to prove themselves (with the goal of being a ML’er again). Then the Independent League cycle resumes. I don’t believe any ML teams are ever again going to tie up AA and AAA roster spots with 33-35 year olds who never were exceptional players or… Read more »

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
1 month ago

Let’s not forget pitcher Earl Caldwell. He played in the Majors and the Minors for 29 seasons from 1926 to 1954. His first year in the Majors was with the Phils in 1928. In 1929 it was back to the Minors. Then he was with the Browns in 1935, 1936 and 1937. Then back to the Minors and resurfaced again 1945 with the White Sox for 1945, 1946, 1947 and 1948. Also played with the Red Sox in1948. Then back to the Minors from 1949 to his career end in 1954. In his final years with the B, C and… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
1 month ago

Never heard of Earl Caldwell. I heard of Ray (lightning struck) Caldwell.Thanks for posting this

Tom
Tom
1 month ago

Billy Hamilton is still playing. And he’s up to 856 steals in pro ball.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
29 days ago
Reply to  Tom

That’s almost as many as Billy Hamilton had!

Paul E
Paul E
29 days ago
Reply to  Tom

If he was able to hit major league pitching, Billy would have been dangerous 🙁

Paul E
Paul E
11 days ago

If these two teams played 162 games against each other, what’s the season-end tally? Does the Giants’ superior pitching win out?

LF Bonds
2B Frisch
3B Ott
CF Mays
1B McCovey
RF Bonds
C Posey
SS Jackson

Mathewson
Hubbell
Marichal
McGinnity
Perry
Rusie

LF Mantle
SS Jeter
RF Ruth
1B Gehrig
CF DiMaggio
C Berra
3B ARod
2B Cano (Gordon? Lazzeri?)

Ford
Pettite
Guidry
Stottlemyre
Raschi
Chesbro
Hoyt
??????

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
10 days ago
Reply to  Paul E

It’s tough to figure this one Paul, and there are several levels why. One has to do with the line-ups. For example, it seems strange to me to put Bobby Bonds in the Giants’ OF (his career was very good but not outstanding) — I get that you want to find room for Bonds by putting Ott at 3B, but that’s not Ott’s position (and he was not very good at 3B), and rather than put a defensive liability on the field to make room for a less-than-great player it makes more sense to move Ott where he belongs and… Read more »

Tom
Tom
8 days ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

You do know that pitching isn’t just about velocity?
Chesbro’s most effective pitches were a spitball and a changeup. He threw with a roundhouse sidearm style, and relied on command.
McGinnity was also known for his spitball. And for brushbacks and beanballs. In 1900, McGinnity hit 40 batters. This season, the high was 13.

21st century players would pee themselves if they had to face the oldtimers under oldtime conditions and rules.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
7 days ago
Reply to  Tom

Hi Tom, Yes, this is actually a point I make rather frequently, as is the idea that contemporary players would have trouble in an old time environment, just as vice versa applies. However, I also argue that contemporary ball players are basically far superior ball players for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with natural talent or dedication. They are healthier due to medical advances; they are stronger, due to advances in nutrition and exercise training; they are baseball-smarter, due to a century of advances in technique, strategic innovation, and youth training; they are 12-month professionals, whereas… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
6 days ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

A factor you may be overlooking in your vaunting of modern things is the reality of the prevalence of injuries—especially to pitchers’ arms—that results from throwing at 90+ MPH all the time. The 100 pitch and out philosophy, as has been discussed briefly here a few months ago, really doesn’t compensate for the stress, and so now we see rosters overloaded with pitchers from season’s end to season’s end to shore up rotations riddled by visits to the DL. Modern medicine, meaning surgeries, sometimes fixes that, but more often it doesn’t. Having a year or two or three (Chris Sale?)… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
6 days ago

I think we’re talking about two different things, nsb. One is how old time players and modern players would match up in a game context; the other is whether the changes that lead modern players to prevail are good things for the players and the game. I doubt we disagree on either.

Paul E
Paul E
8 days ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob, Just an exercise in ‘What If”…. You know, kind of like the circle of greats – “How impressive were they ‘in their day’ ” – not so much, “Could Mathewson, at 88 mph on his fast ball and 82 on his screwball, strike out Aaron Judge?”. With some degree of likelihood, a good college team today could probably defeat the 1929-1931 Phila A’s. But, THAT is not the ‘model’. On another note, by our man Pythagorus’ calculations, a team that scores 5R/game and surrenders 4R/game wins at a .610 clip (99-63) but a team that scores 4 and surrenders… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
7 days ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul, I’m in agreement with your first two paragraphs (very interesting on the Pythagorean math), but I don’t agree with you on McGraw’s 1B preference and I think you need to look at Ott’s career stats at 3B (which are below average), rather than his 1938 record in isolation.

The 1938 MVP picture was unusual. Ott and Vaughn were basically tied in WAR and came in 3rd and 4th. Bill Lee’s pWAR puts him at the same scale, in those pre-Cy Young days. Lombardi won the award with half the WAR, but the catcher’s bonus is a wild card.

Paul E
Paul E
6 days ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob, I see the mediocrity in Ott’s part-time play at 3B prior to 1938. Is it not conceivable that once told, “You’re our 3rd baseman” in spring training 1938, Ott was able to focus and improve without the distraction of an occasional call to play 3B? In the prior two years (1936-1937), the contributions of Travis Jackson and Lou Chiozza at 3B were from hunger. Ott gets the call early and excels playing 106 of their first 108 games at 3B in 1938. I know argument by analogy is week but perhaps thinking of it this way might work: Your… Read more »

Tom
Tom
7 days ago
Reply to  Paul E

Why do people constantly repeat the the myth that nobody threw over 90 until color TV came along? There is no way to definitively say that Mathewson’s top fastball was 88. I submit to you that Mathewson was like prime Maddux, who relied on command, but who could get it up to 95 when necessary. Mathewson did have the advantage of only having a few real threats in any given lineup, and he recommended easing up to preserve energy for tougher spots. But, when he did get to those tough spots, his offerings were just as good as anyone’s not… Read more »

Last edited 7 days ago by Tom
Paul E
Paul E
7 days ago
Reply to  Tom

When asked who throws harder, Clemens or Gooden, Jack Clark responded, “No one throws harder than Nolan Ryan”. I believe Mathewson’s best pitch was the “fadeaway” – some sort pf screwball type of offering. No idea how hard he threw it but probably no harder than Hubbell, right? Sometime in the early 1990’s I remarked to my near 70-years old father, “Geeze, Mulholland throws pretty hard.” He responded, “Yeah, they all throw hard nowadays.” Don’t know how hard Koufax threw but, apparently, he threw noticeably harder than his peers. I have absolutely no idea how hard (exact mph) any of… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
7 days ago
Reply to  Paul E

Koufax probably threw about 100 mph, tops, Paul. Sam McDowell threw harder, but lacked control. Koufax spent half his career gaining control. Once he was able to place his terrific curve consistently where he wanted it after 1961 he became the pitcher we remember. It’s the curve that I believe would set Koufax above many (not all) pitchers today.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
7 days ago
Reply to  Tom

I’m not exactly sure when color TV came along, Tom, but Bob Feller was measured at ~100 mph before and after the War, and it was generally thought then by people who would have seen both that Walter Johnson was at least in Feller’s class, if not his superior, although Johnson was “only” measured in the mid-90s. If there’s a myth that no one hit 90 till the post-War years I’m pretty sure no one has bought into it here. (I didn’t take Paul to be saying that Matty could not exceed 88 mph, but that his fastball — for… Read more »

Tom
Tom
6 days ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Walter Johnson’s speed test was deeply flawed. On 10/06/1912, three days after he threw a complete game shutout to end a season where he threw 369 innings, he went to the Remington Arms Company complex in Bridgeport, CT. The test required Johnson to throw a baseball through a small wooden frame 60’6″ away, with a trip measuring tape that would start the test and a metal plate that would be struck to end the test. This means that the fastball was tested after travelling 75 feet. Johnson wore dress clothes, dress shoes, and stood on flat ground. The plate was… Read more »

Last edited 6 days ago by Tom
Bob Eno
Bob Eno
6 days ago
Reply to  Tom

Tom, when I wrote, “Bob Feller was measured at ~100 mph before and after the War, and it was generally thought then by people who would have seen both that Walter Johnson was at least in Feller’s class, if not his superior, although Johnson was ‘only’ measured in the mid-90s,” I meant to imply that the comparison to Feller was probably more reliable than the mid-90s measurement. I know the flaws in the test and so I don’t credit it as much as eyewitness estimates. We are in agreement. I think you are responding to three separate claims: (1) Matty’s… Read more »

Tom
Tom
5 days ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

I agree with you that tech, training nutrition…and expanded talent pool has developed far superior athleticism, but that doesn’t make for a more entertaining result. As for Mathewson’s speed: a June 7, 1939 Virginia Times-Dispatch article states that, in 1917, “Walter Johnson threw the ball 134 feet a second , Christy Mathewson 127 and Smoky Joe Wood 12-1 . Their speeds were shown by a gravity drop interval recorder.” That translates to 91 mph for Johnson, 86.5 for Mathewson and 84.5 for Wood. The mechanism of the gravity drop interval recorder was described as a mechanical “wire and steel” contraption… Read more »

Last edited 5 days ago by Tom
Bob Eno
Bob Eno
5 days ago
Reply to  Tom

Agree on your initial statement, Tom. I don’t know what to make of the 1939 report you cite. Poking around on the web it appears that the report quotes sponsors of another measurement event in ’39 recalling what they saw in 1917. It is odd that washed up pitchers like Mathewson and Wood would be in a class with one of the fastest pitchers ever in his prime. Maybe . . .? I’m impressed with the detail of your analysis of the measurements since 2014. The article, however, is apparently not graphing the raw results of those different tests. It… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
5 days ago
Reply to  Tom

By pure chance I stumbled across a blog post today that I think may have given me more insight into where Tom has been coming from when he deplores recency bias in MLB historical assessments. The post comes from a blogger named Freddie deBoer, whom I generally read for arguments about education and mental health policy (he’s abrasive and controversial). But he was writing about the NBA today and was right on target for this discussion, reflecting ideas close to Tom’s: “Nothing is more powerful in sports analysis than presentism. Recency bias isn’t just a quirk of fandom, but rather the… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
9 days ago
Reply to  Paul E

Just a quick comment—considering backups and relief pitchers, none of which are designated, I’d give the Yanks the edge by quite a bit. Also, Raschi isn’t a choice anyone would make as a rotation member. Lefty Gomez would be the best choice, probably, but Shawkey, Ruffing,Reynolds, Pennock. At backup catcher there’s Dickey, Schang, Munson; Backup outfielders too numerous to mention beginning with Keller and Combs. Third Base? Nettles. Rizzuto at short. The Giants have the edge in starting pitching, that can’t be denied.

Paul E
Paul E
7 days ago

NSB,
Yes, the NYY are a much-deeper everyday eight but are you going to platoon (or even rest more than occasionally) Gehrig or Ruth or Mantle or DiMaggio to give Tino Martinez, Tommy Heinrich, Combs, or Keller at bats? All very good players but not all-tme greats. But, yeah, it sure would be nice to be able to pinch-hit for Willie Randolph with Keller, let Combs pinch run for Ruth in a tie game

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
7 days ago
Reply to  Paul E

Among players with at least 5000 PA in the lead-off position Earle Combs’ .399 OBP is in 4th place. Also Combs got a hit in his first ML at bat and for the rest of his career his BA after each and every AB was .300. The only other player that I am aware of with such a feat is Jimmie Foxx (2000 PA min.).

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
7 days ago

It should read “was above .300”.

Paul E
Paul E
6 days ago

Richard,
Thanks for the info. Per his SABR bio, looks like Combs gave teaching a try after four years of college. He probably would have scored an additional 350-400 runs and had close to 600 more hits if he had tried professional baseball right out of high school (and wouldn’t have had to wait until 1970 for Cooperstown to call!).

no statistician but
no statistician but
3 days ago

Pick a year at random, say . . . 2007. In 2007 in Major League Baseball seventeen qualifying Rookies each created 2.3 WAR or more, 2.3 WAR seeming (to me) a rational cutoff point for significantly better than average performance for most players. Of those seventeen, eleven were pitchers. Of those eleven pitchers, eight produced fewer than 10 career WAR, and in fact, seven of the eight produced fewer than 5 career WAR. In contrast, of the six position players with 2.3 WAR or more, five produced 26.9 or more career WAR. This does not include the NL ROY, Ryan Braun,… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
3 days ago

Very interesting, nsb, and the amount of research involved must have been enormous. Because I’m not quite sure of the significance of the 2.3 WAR threshold I’m focused more on the ROY calculations: I would not have expected the discrepancy to be so great. Since the general phenomenon you’ve discovered seems to persist throughout the history of modern baseball (1929 being the exception you note) I’m not sure it’s best to call it a “sorry indication of craziness” (although I’m aware you applied that phrase only to the ROY situation since 1947). It appears to be an endemic element of… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 days ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob:

Actually, while your observations come into the overall picture, I’m heading toward a different destination—if that isn’t something of a mixed metaphor, or even if it is.

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 days ago

My previous post on rookies comes as an offshoot of a project I began some weeks ago, namely the idea of extrapolating backwards to judge what players might have won a Rookie of the Year award prior to its inception. As you are certainly aware, the award itself was instituted by happenstance or Divine intention in 1947, a season far more significant for being the one in which the color line was broken. That Jackie Robinson won the voting and went on to have such a remarkable career seems fitting in retrospect, and in fact some years ago the award… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 days ago

Enjoyed this post and appreciate the work behind it, nsb. You threw in a quiz question: “Besides Dennis Eckersley, has any other pitcher than Kinder won 20 games in one season as a starter and had 25 or more saves in another as a closer?” I’m awful at quizzes but I know one answer, at least, so I’m rushing in to win a box of Crackerjacks and dig down for the prize. John Smoltz: 24-8 in 1996, 55 / 45 / 44 saves, 2002-4. I hope my postmark beats the others rushing to claim the prize. Now back to reading… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 days ago

Bold in these posts highlights the WAR leading rookies. An *Asterisk denotes the likely winner of any vote (according to my judgment, anyway. I find twelve contests in which the WAR leader would have lost in a writers’ vote. See my comments in the previous entry on the 1947 vote). Small p denotes pitcher. Capital H denotes probable ROY Hall of Fame member. 1942 NL *Stan Musial 5.3 (128.6)H Johnny Beazley 4.2 p (4.3) Tommy Holmes 3.4 (35.5) 1942 AL *Johnny Pesky 6.2 (34.1) Hal White 5.5 p (10.0) Virgil Trucks 4.1 p (40.5) Roger Wolff 3.8 p (10.2) Les… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 days ago

—continued— 1931NL *Paul Derringer 2.6 p (36.1) Buzz Arlett 2.3 (2.3) 1931 AL *Joe Vosmik 2.5 (18.0) 1930 NL *Benny Frey 3.4 p (8.5) Bud Teachout 2.6 p (2.2) 1930 AL Pat Caraway 4.4 p (1.2) Whit Wyatt 2.5 p (24.1) Clint Brown 2.3 p (20.8) *Smead Jolley 2.3 (5.0) 1929 NL *Johnny Frederick 3.9 (16.6) 1929 AL *Wes Ferrell 6.6 p (60.1) Dale Alexander 5.2 (13.6) Earl Averill 4.4 (51.6) Bill Dickey 3.5 56.4) Roy Johnson 3.4 (17.4) Hal McKain 2.6 p (2.6) 1928NL *Del Bissonette 4.4 (9.3) Pat Malone 3.9 p (18.4) Andy Cohen 2.6 (3.0) Freddie Maguire… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 days ago

—continued— NL 1920 *Mickey O’Neil 2.9 (2.6) 1920 AL *Eddie Rommel 5.4 p (49.8) Bob Meusel 3.2 (28.4) Dave Keefe 2.8 p (2.3) 1919 NL (None at 2.3 WAR) *Verne Clemons 2.2 (6.5) 1919 AL *Dickey Kerr 4.0 p (10.1) Ira Flagstead 3.1 (18.6) 1918—War Year 1917 NL *Leon Cadore 5.5 p (19.4) 1917 AL *Joe Harris 3.6 (26.3) 1916 NL *Rogers Hornsby 4.9 (127.3)H Frank Miller 3.5 p (9.3) 1916 AL *Jim Bagby 3.5 p (30..8) Roxy Walters 3.2 (0.3) 1915 NL *Dave Bancroft 4.2 (49.9)H Tom Long 2.9 (2.8) Wheezer Dell 2.7 p (3.3) 1915 AL *Babe Ruth… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
2 days ago

—continued— 1910 NL *King Cole 5.1 p (5.7) Louis Drucke 4.7 p (5.1) Cy Barger 4.5 p (5.8) Jake Daubert 2.4 (39.4) 1910 AL  *Russ Ford 11.9 p (34.4) Hippo Vaughan 5.0 p (46.9) Duffy Lewis 3.5 (21.2) Larry Gardner 3.1 (48.3) Bert Daniels 2..8 (8.6) 1909 NL Dots Miller 4.6 (18.4) *Babe Adams 3.6 p (52.6) Cliff Curtis 3.5 p (2.7) Al Mattern 3.0 p (4.9) Ed Lennox 2.8 (8.2) 1909 AL *Home Run Baker 5.7 (62.8)H Harry Krause 5.5 p (8.2) Jack Warhop 4.4 p (16.7) Clyde Engel 3.6 (8.8) Smokey Joe Wood 2.9 p (40.4) Ted Easterly… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
2 days ago

nsb, I don’t know whether more to come involves the 19th century or analysis of the years you’ve covered (perhaps linking back up to the theme of your initial post), but this is a terrific gift of data (and potential argument) in itself. Much to go through (and many names new to me).

no statistician but
no statistician but
1 day ago

Where are the HOFers? In the long string of better performing rookies taking up space in the previous posts—numbering 296 over forty-two years—just 32 have made it to Cooperstown. Twenty-two of them, by my reckoning, would have been crowned Rookie of the Year had the award existed, out of 83 imaginary Award winners. How does this outcome square with some others? Well, nineteen of the other putative ROYs 1901-1942 produced fewer than 10 WAR for their careers. Twenty-one HOFers were officially voted in as ROYs between 1947 and 2001 out of 109 total winners, but . . . Eighteen other… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
15 hours ago

So much material to work with! This is really a gift, nsb. Thank you. I was surprised that your most recent post identified the question you wanted to get around to as the nature and relevance of the ROY Award. I’d have thought it was understood that the award was retrospective, not predictive, just because voters and fans understand that an outstanding first year (relative to a player’s entering class) is sometimes followed by many more good years and sometimes not. Let me suggest an alternative question: Do the frequencies with which outstanding first-year performances correlate with career performances match… Read more »