The 20-Year Rule
Posted: December 8th, 2008 | Filed under: Baseball | 62 Comments »
So, I made it to Las Vegas for the Winter Meetings, and I’ve already seen Tommy Lasorda, Bobby Valentine and a cocktail waitress who looks almost exactly like Elizabeth Hurley. I did not see them together, alas, but the Winter Meetings have only begun. There’s plenty of time for Vegas and baseball to collide.
The first thing they give you when you arrive at the Winter Meetings is a very large credential that you wear around your neck like it’s an Olympic gold medal. This has always interested me because the Winter Meetings are not like other events … you don’t actually get to GO anywhere. Sure, if you’re going to, say, the Olympics, of course, you have to wear a credential around your neck, that’s what will get you into the venue to see what you’re trying to see.
But there’s nothing to see at the Winter Meetings. Basically, the job is all about standing in the hotel lobby and seeing baseball people you recognize and saying to them, “So, you hear anything?†I’m really not sure why you would need a special PASS to do that. I think mostly we wear these passes so people can see us coming.
ANYWAY, in addition to giving us badges, they also give us this very official looking three-ringed binder with the label: 2008 Winter Meetings, December 8-11, Las Vegas, NV. The binder LOOKS like it would have all sorts of great, official information in there, trade rumors, photographs of baseball people we should keep our eyes on, etc. It really doesn’t. It had a welcome letter, Rule 5 Draft Worksheets, all the 40-man rosters … I mean, good stuff, but not quite what you would expect considering the James Bond look of the binder.
One great thing it has in there is the “All-Time Leaders.†I realize that this is easily found on Baseball Reference, but, I don’t know, it’s just kind of a cool thing to look at while having a panini at a restaurant in the Bellagio. They have the Top 50 or 100 in games, walks, at-bats, stolen bases, runs, hits, doubles, triples, home runs, RBIs, wins, strikeouts, saves and so on. It’s a good reminder that there have not been THAT many great players in baseball history. For instance, Vinny Castilla, Ron Gant and Chili Davis are all in the Top 100 in home runs. They were good players, but I don’t know, I’m just not sure I would have known that.
While looking over the Top 100, I was trying to determine which player had the most impressive career record in baseball, and I brought out what I like to call the “20-Year Rule.†The rule goes like so: Anytime you want to demonstrate how impressive a career record is, you always divide that record by 20 years. For instance, Barry Bonds has 762 home runs. The way to give the reader a real sense of this is to write it like so:
Bonds has hit 762 home runs — that’s like hitting 38 home runs every year for TWENTY CONSECUTIVE YEARS.
See how it works? So, in trying to determine the most amazing records, I pulled out the 20 Year Rule. And here’s what I came up with:
Walks: Barry Bonds, 2,558
That’s like: Walking 128 times every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: Very high. The last person to walk 128 times in a season, not including Bonds, was Jason Giambi in 2003. In fact, only 31 players in baseball history have walked 128 in a season EVEN ONCE. So yeah, that’s an astonishing record. It might stand for a long, long time.
Stolen bases: Rickey Henderson, 1,406
That’s like: Stealing 71 bases every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: Off the charts. Only Jose Reyes has stolen that many bases in a season this decade — and only three players (Reyes, Tony Womack and Kenny Lofton) have stolen 71 bases since the strike. The speed game has fundamentally changed since Henderson’s time, of course, and it might come back around again someday. But I doubt it. I suspect Rickey will have that record for the rest of his life.
Runs: Rickey Henderson, 2,295
That’s like: Scoring 115 runs every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: Eh. Obviously, it’s impressive, but comparatively, 115 runs is not a mind-boggling total. Last season four guys matched that, and a few others were around the numbers. Albert Pujols has averaged 118 runs per season for his eight seasons; Carlos Beltran is averaging 113 runs per 162 games. But I don’t think it will be Rickey’s record when either of them get there anyway … A-Rod has 1,605 runs scored already, so he’s about six years away from breaking it should he stay motivated and healthy.
Hits: Pete Rose, 4,256
That’s like: Banging out 213 hits every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: Pretty high. I like what Pete says: The first 3,000 are easy.
Doubles: Tris Speaker, 793
That’s like: cracking 40 doubles every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: High. Think about how long Pete Rose played, how many doubles he stretched out, and he STILL finished 47 doubles short of Speaker. But here’s another record Albert Pujols might think about down the road. He’s averaged 43 doubles per season his first eight years.
Triples: Sam Crawford, 312.
That’s like: Hitting 16 triples every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: Off the charts. The thing is, the game has changed … here are the Top 5 Triples guys of all time:
1. Sam Crawford, 312
2. Ty Cobb, 297
3. Honus Wagner, 252
4. Jake Beckley, 244
5. Roger Connor, 233.
OK? Here are the Top 5 triples guys since 1940:
1. Stan Musial, 177
2. Roberto Clemente, 166
3. Willie Wilson, 147
4. Lou Brock, 141
5. Willie Mays, 140
OK? And here are the Top 5 triples guys the last 25 years:
1. Brett Butler, 128
2. Steve Finley, 124
3. Lance Johnson, 117
4. Kenny Lofton, 106
5. Juan Samuel, 102
The triple may be, as so many claim, the most exciting play in baseball. But it has been dying slowly for 100 years.
RBIs: Hank Aaron, 2297
That’s like: Driving in 115 RBIs every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: Sure, it’s impressive, but I just cannot get excited about RBIs anymore. The stat has done more harm than good.
Wins: Cy Young, 511
That’s like: Winning 25 or 26 games every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: Unimaginable. Of course, Cy Young was simply playing a different game than baseball now. Look:
– He 72 games before the pitcher’s mound was moved back to 60 feet, 6 inches.
– He won 267 games back when home plate was still a square.
– He won 351 games before foul balls were considered strikes.
– And, of course, he won all 511 games before the spitball was abolished, and most of those games when scuffing the ball was pretty common practice.
Frankly, it’s pretty ridiculous, considering all the changes, that Young’s record is considered the official one. It would probably be more realistic to consider Walter Johnson’s 417 wins (21 wins ever year for 20 years) as the official record, and that record, while it would be very, very hard to break to it now, it would at least be POSSIBLE to break. Greg Maddux announces his retirement today with 355 victories — 62 victories short.
Strikeouts: Nolan Ryan, 5,714
That’s like: Striking out 286 batters every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: Hugely impressive, of course — only 16 pitchers in baseball history have struck out 286 batters in a season. Randy Johnson actually did it NINE times, which is the most in baseball history, three more than Nolan Ryan.
I must admit I’m not entirely sure why everyone is so quick to name Clemens or Maddux or Pedro as the greatest pitcher of all time and yet seem fairly unexcited by Unit’s career. He won five Cy Young Awards, could have won it twice more at least. He’s the greatest strikeout-per-nine-inning pitcher in baseball history. HIs career 137 ERA+ is one of the best of all time, and even though it’s not quite as good as Clemens (144) and not nearly as good as Pedro (154), the truth is that Unit did not figure things out until he was 29 years old.
After he turned 29:
– His ERA+ is 149, almost as good as Pedro’s, up there with Lefty Grove.
– He led the league in adjusted ERA+ six times.
– He struck out more than 11 batters per nine innings, and nobody comes close to that.
– He won 246 games, which is more than Cy Young.
His 10-year peak — from 1995-2004 — is almost identical to Pedro, and I think Pedro over those 10 years is the greatest pitcher in baseball history. Look:
1995-2004:
Pedro Martinez: 161-65, 2.67 ERA, 2,384 Ks, 512 walks, 15 shutouts, 173 ERA+.
Unit: 165-66, 2.70 ERA, 2,831 Ks, 612 walks, 25 shutouts, 172 ERA+.
Everyone knows Unit was a great, great pitcher. But I still think he’s probably underrated — he has his claim as the best ever.
Shutouts: Walter Johnson, 110
That’s like: Throwing 5.5 shutouts every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: Well, it’s darned hard to to throw half a shutout — but I didn’t want to round up. No pitcher has thrown more than five shutouts in a season since 1989, and here’s a trivia question: Name the pitcher who led the National League with eight shutouts in 1989. Don’t go peeking at Baseball Reference either … I gave you the year AND the league, you should be able to get it.
Saves: Trevor Hoffman, 554
That’s like: Saving 28 games every year for 20 consecutive years.
Impressiveness quotient: That does not seem especially impressive, to be honest. Obviously, the thing is that closers do not last very long. Goose Gossage is the only closer in baseball history to have even one save in 20 different years. If you move that up to 10 saves, you get John Franco and Rollie Fingers, who did it 15 times.
And then you go up to 28 saves, and obviously Hoffman has done it most often (13 times), followed by Mariano and Lee Smith (12 times).
Point is, it’s hard to be even a DECENT closer for more than a decade or so. Maybe that’s because, like a cornerback, you are being tested time after time, and there are only so many years your body can come through. Maybe it’s because the closer is still so relatively new that there just hasn’t been enough time for them to evolve. Whatever the reason, I suspect that Hoffman’s record will last for a while (assuming Mariano doesn’t break it in the next couple of years), but it would not surprise me if a few years down the road we have two or three pitchers challenging for it.*
*The AFLAC trivia answer: Tim Belcher had eight shutouts in 1989.
Loading ...
Hope you put together a good Chiefs post soon
Was it Orel? Or was that ‘88 not ‘89?
I had to cheat and go look at baseball-reference. I had the right team, but I couldn’t decide between two pitchers on that team. Turns out it was a third one I didn’t even think about.
Orel did it in his amazin’ ‘88.
I think it was Tim Belcher who did it in ‘89.
I would have sworn it was Orel but it’s Tim Belcher. Orel only had 4 that year. He had 8 in 1988.
To add a sabr-stat, how about Babe Ruth’s 756 career win shares (38 a year for 20 years)? Only one player was credited with 38 for 2008. . . .
Maybe that was Elizabeth Hurley? She hasn’t been in any big movies or shows recently has she? I don’t know if she’s still the face of Estee Lauder anymore either.
Randy Johnson’s underratedness… East Coast Bias? Other than those two below average (for him) years with the Yankees, he’s almost exclusively played for west coast teams. I think any fan would identify him with the Mariners and Diamonbacks (which hat will be on the HOF plaque?), with the Yankees as an afterthought. That ten-year stretch you mention was Seattle, an 11-game stop in Houston, then Arizona.
I don’t like just anything that Pete Rose says.
P.S. No offense to Freddy Garcia, Carlos Guillen, or John Halama, but I think that 1998 trade for 1/3 of a season of Johnson was well worth it for the Astros. 10-1 with a 1.28 ERA (321 ERA+), WHIP below 1, and 116 Ks in 84 1/3 innings in the regular season. 0-2 in the playoffs, but a 1.93 ERA with a WHIP of exactly 1.0 and 17 Ks in 14 innings. If the Astros could have scored any runs against the Padres, it might have been Houston getting demolished by that Yankees team.
How to break Bonds’ walks record:
Step 1: Appoint Jim Bowden as Dictator/GM for life of the Washington Nationals; this will assure that they never again acquire a good position player.
Step 2: Push Ryan Zimmerman out of a moving airplane.
Step 3: Get John Mozeliak really drunk, coerce him into trading Albert Pujols to the Nationals for Lastings Milledge, Nick Johnson, Matt Chico and Elijah Dukes.
There you go. Pujols gets 200 walks a year, easily.
Don’t understand downgrading Cy Young’s record on the basis of the changes listed, which were all in favor of the hitter except for the toleration of the spitball (which became popular about 8 years before he retired), and, according to everything I’ve ever read, Young never moisturized or scuffed. Surviving the move to 60′ 6″, which amounted to about 3 feet, required a capability that 20th and 21st century pitchers have not had to demonstrate. Many of Young’s contemporaries couldn’t do it. Would have expected to see larger rosters, which permitted relief pitching and 4-and-5 man rotations, on that list, by the way.
Great post, Joe. 16 losses a year for 20 years to equal Cy’s loss record. That’s a fact that drives Greg Smith each and every morning.
After last year, I’m certainly glad Greg Smith doesn’t drive himself anyplace.
Well, I for one have always felt that Randy Johnson was the #1 strikeout pitcher in history. I mean, the guy didn’t make his major league debut until 5 days after his 25th birthday. The only other pitcher to make it to 3,000 strikeouts despite making his major league after his 25th birthday was Phil Niekro.
Anyways, Joe Gordon was the only player to make the Hall of Fame from the Veteran’s Committee this year. The fact that Ron Santo missed out again brings up the question as to whether or not the post-1942 voting rules is any different than the old one.
I think that the point of the 20-year rule is to take the incomprehensible numbers and reduce them to something we know how to judge. But I think that the 20 year rule minimizes these achievements.
Doing ANYTHING in the majors for 20 years is incredibly impressive. Doing anything at even an average level almost gets you to the hall of fame. For example, bang out 150 hits and 25 HR a year a for 20 years, and you’ve got 3000 hits and 500 HR. Don’t tell me that that’s not a Hall of Famer.
An average number for 20 years is hall of fame. An All-Star number for 20 years is inner circle hall of fame. An MVP number for 20 years…well, those numbers are probably from a differenct game (e.g. Cy Young).
The thing about a 20 year run is that there’s a ramp up phase for most players. Maybe not for Pujols and Pedroia, but for most. And then there’s the decline phase. The very very long decline phase, if the career is 20 years long (Bonds, Nolan Ryan and Clemmens excepted, of course).
So, let me get to the point: runs scored. Look at that leader board:
Player (age) Runs
1. Rickey Henderson 2295
2. Ty Cobb+* 2246
3. Barry Bonds* 2227
4. Hank Aaron+ 2174
Babe Ruth+* 2174
6. Pete Rose# 2165
7. Willie Mays+ 2062
8. Cap Anson+ 1996
9. Stan Musial+* 1949
10. Lou Gehrig+* 1888
What about active players?
40. Ken Griffey* (38) 1612
42. Alex Rodriguez (32) 1605
45. Gary Sheffield (39) 1592
55. Kenny Lofton* (41) 1528
66. Frank Thomas (40) 1494
70. Sammy Sosa (39) 1475
72. Derek Jeter (34) 1467
74. Manny Ramirez (36) 1444
How many of them have a shot? All those great run scorers from the steroid era and maybe two of them? Maybe.
A-Rod is amazing. He might actually do it. He only needs 690 more runs. If he plays the next five years (ages 33-37) like he did the last five (agees 28-32), he’d only need one more year.
Wait. Stop and think about that. The typical peak season is around 27 or 28, right? Well, he’s alrady give years out from that. And you expect that he’ll have another five years without more decline? So, maybe it’ll take him eight years. If he plays out his current contract, he’ll probably get there. But it’ll be in the closing years.
And then we get to Beltran. Beltran has played 10 seasons, is 31 years old and is not yet halfway there (1035). Even if he could have 10 more seasons like the first ten, he’s STILL not getting there. You see, Joe’s mistake is that he went by the 162 game average, not the seasonal average. Beltran will play perhaps 150 games a season, and that’s only 103 runs scored. He’s not getting to 2295.
And Pujols? Well, his approach to 28 has been amazing. Give him just as much after 28 as he got on the way there, and he’s still only scored 1896. But what if he actually has a decline phase? What if if the next 8 years is only 80% of the last 8? He’d then be 36 years old and need to score 590 more runs. Even if he had the same 8 years again, he’d be 36 and need to score 300 more runs. Would he be able to do that?
The most powerful force is baseball might be the decline phase. That’s what Pete Rose meant when he said that the first 3000 hits are easy. 27 players have 3000 hits. Only 4 beat it by 20%. 24 players have 1700 runs scored. Only seven beat it by 20%. Mays, Rose, Ruth, Aaron, Bond, Cobb and Henderson. Can you really project ANYONE to have to have career like theirs, no matter how good their first ten years were?
Of course not. Even ARod should be expected to fall short, but let’s hope we’re pleasantly surprised. Pujols and Beltran? Oh, please.
Home plate used to be square? I never knew that. How was that an advantage for the pitcher? Was it positioned like second base, so that the pitcher would have the width of the diagonal to work with?
I’ll answer my own question since I should have looked it up in the first place. Apparently, home plate started as a 12″ diameter circle, switched to a marble 16″ square slab (positioned as I guessed earlier, that’s 16″ across the diagonal), then switched to a rubber material before going to the current shape, which is now 17″ across. Not much of a change but the progression of home plate has always favored the pitcher, meaning we shouldn’t knock CY Young’s record on that point.
I’m a little surprised not to see “9/09/09″ in the Pete Rose bit of the post.
CEOLAF:
Raffy Palmiero will tell you that 3000 hits and 500 HRs do not always a HOFer make.
Egads I am talking like Yoda today.
The triples record really is stellar, but considering Jose Reyes’ youth, he might set some sort of modern era standard when all is said and done.
Hey Joe, I bet you already know about this one but ……
The 1976 Cincinnati Reds: Last Hurrah for the Big Red Machine (Paperback)
by Doug Feldmann (Author)
Paperback
Publisher: McFarland (January 12, 2009)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0786438541
ISBN-13: 978-0786438549
Maybe you can get them to move the date up for your book.
Joe,
Love the blog it’s my first read every day.
One pet peeve though, since it drives me crazy every time I read it:
“Driving in 115 RBIs”
That’s redundant Joe, you drive in runs, you don’t drive in Runs Batted In! So either say “Driving in 115 runs” or just “115 RBI”.
For Jamie Moyer, all lifetime stats should really by divided by at least 30.
Of course, I’m pretty sure he came pitchers were required to throw underhand to a spot asked for by the batsman, so many of Cy Young’s caveats probably also apply.
Nothing funnier than old jokes.
I like Unit a lot, but all in all he can’t touch Pedro in his prime.
The 20 year rule isn’t meant to minimize the records, and I don’t think it does… just a way to put the records in perspective. To steal 71 bases in a year is great, but every year for 20 is baffeling.
Lyle S,
Home plate started as a circle, but not 12″. At the time, balls and strikes weren’t called (the rules required the pitcher to throw it where the batter could hit it, not that that was done religiously), so the plate, usually 9″, was just there for baserunning. When it was a 12″ square, one corner pointed toward the pitcher; when it was made a pentagon, the front corners we just filled in. What I’ve read is that the change was made to help umpires call strikes more accurately.
Ha, I’ve always wondered how the winter meetings kinda worked for journalists. It sounds like a weekend-long cocktail party…with lots of baseball being discussed.
Sign me up!
remember last week when you wrote:
“The Royals have Joakim Soria, who appears to be a 24-year-old version of Mariano Rivera — unless they decide to try him a starter, which I believe more and more they should.â€
YES! Joe, please write this in the Star every day for the rest of the off-season.
With Greinke’s future more and more uncertain, 2009 and 2010 may be our window to make the playoffs.
Greinke. Soria. Meche.
Hudson. Mulder. Zito.
Glavine. Smoltz. Maddux.
Kazmir. Shields. Garza.
Three excellent starters can take a weak/average offense to the post-season. This rotation may not include Lowe and Sabathia, but it may be good enough to win 89 games and take the Central.
Use the power of your mighty pen Joe! Write it. Then Write it Again!
The Pedro vs. Unit thing is pretty damn surprising. One mitigating factor is that the 10 year peak casts Johnson in the best possible light, since his 1995 and 2004 were both awesome. Pedro, on the other hand did not really have a 10-year peak; his peak was 1997-2003 (being a Yankee fan, I like to think of the Aaron Boone game as being the end of Pedro as PEDRO). Before 1997 and after 2003, Pedro was still an ace, but more of a Josh Beckett sort of ace than a Walter Johnson. From 1997 to 2003, Pedro cleared a 200 ERA+ five times; Johnson never did, although he frequently came close; Pedro was slightly, but definitely, a more effective pitcher than Johnson. However, Johnson was just vastly more durable, to the point where I think he probably had the more valuable prime.
Johnson’s other issue as the greates ever is exactly as Joe mentioned — he really wasn;t very good until he was 29. Actually not good at all until 26, then kind of a young lefty Nolan Ryan for a few years (lots of K’s but way too many walks to be great). BY age 29, maddux had 8 consecutive seasons with ERA+ over 110, 4 straight over 150, 2 consecutive over 250. Clemens, similarly, had 8 good to great yearrs by age 29. Hard to argue that Unit was that much bettter after age 29, as good as he’s been.
What were foul balls considered before they were scored as strikes? And how would that provide an advantage to a pitcher before the change? Seems to me it would benefit the pitcher more once they became strikes…
“Frankly, it’s pretty ridiculous, considering all the changes, that Young’s record is considered the official one. It would probably be more realistic to consider Walter Johnson’s 417 wins (21 wins ever year for 20 years) as the official record.”
I’ve been saying this for years, and it’s not because of changes like the mound being moved back, fouls being called strikes and such, nor do I think that was Joe’s point (he’s just pointing out how different the game was. The crucial difference is in pitcher usage; pre-1900 baseball was very, VERY different in that a team’s top starter would start 50 games a year. It was down to 35-40 games a year by Walter Johnson’s time and stayed there until the late 1970s, when it started drifting down toward the 30-35 games a year it is now.
Walter Johnson’s career high in games started is 42, and most years he’s in the mid-high 30s. Cy Young, pitching in what was really a different game, still growing up, started 40-50 games a year for the first 12 years of his career. That’s why his 511 wins (and his 316 losses, which is the most untouchable record in baseball) shouldn’t stand as the official record.
I’m pretty sure if you look up single-season wins in the record book, you get two listings: 59 by Ol’ Hoss Radbourn in 1884, and then the ‘modern’ record of 41 by Jack Chesbro in 1904. (Honestly, the ‘modern’ record should be Johnson’s 36 in 1913.)
Career wins really ought to be the same thing: List Cy Young’s 511, and then list Walter Johnson’s 417 as the ‘modern’ record.
Jeff Sol, please don’t introduce facts into the discussion on Randy Johnson. It’s so much easier just to blame it on East Coast bias.
How about Cy Young’s Loss record: 315, or nearly 16 a year for 20 years. That’s another that will never be broken
Wow…I’ve just come to realize two things:
1. Joe Gordon’s election means that the Royals have had two managers that are in the Hall of Fame as players: him and Bob Lemon.
2. Maddux’s retirement means that both him and Mike Mussina have called it a career this off-season. One thing they have in common is that they both won Gold Gloves in 2008, their final season. I wonder how many other times have Gold Glove winners for the same position in both leagues retired after their win.
I think I mentioned this last time you were in Vegas but the Bellagio has the best buffet in the city, bar none,
Pretty sure your math is wrong on Randy vs. Cy. Young won 344 games from his age 29 season forward.
While I agree totally about how Cy Young was playing a different game, I don’t think creating modern records (like Johnson’s win record) is much better. I mean, the game Walter Johnson played was a lot closer to Cy Young than it is to Greg Maddux.
Meanwhile save records (among others) have the same problems, just in reverse. To me, Bobby Thigpen (and to a lesser degree) K-Rod are the Jack Chesbro’s of our age. These guys who put up numbers that really can’t be put within the context of any other era and so it distorts just how good they really are (were).
Another fun one with Pete Rose…By the 20 year rule, he averaged 300 times on base AND 500 outs per season. Those are a busy 20 years.
“I mean, the game Walter Johnson played was a lot closer to Cy Young than it is to Greg Maddux.”
In terms of pitcher usage, that’s actually not true.
Rickey had almost as many walks & no season when league policy was to walk him no matter what.
Justin:
Well in terms of the fact that Young and Johnson’s careers overlapped for about 5 years, whereas Johnson retired 40 years before Maddux was born, I think my point has some validity.
Walter Johnson completed 80% (Young completed 90, Maddux 15) of his starts and while Johnson’s career high in innings was only 370, he was a contemporary of Ed Walsh, whose 460+ innings in 1908 surpass any of Young’s innings totals.
I’m not saying the game wasn’t MORE different in 1890, I’m saying to argue that stats from 1898 hold no relevance to today, but that stats from 1908 are a different story is difficult for me to buy.
“I mean, the game Walter Johnson played was a lot closer to Cy Young than it is to Greg Maddux.â€
“In terms of pitcher usage, that’s actually not true.”
While there is a “pitcher usage” point to be made, it is also true that from 1907 through 1911, Walter Johnson and Cy Young played what was the same game in the same league. Somewhat analogous to Brandon Webb and Greg Maddux, who may have been used differently, but were playing the same game from 2003-2008.
Brett –
Randy Johnson’s “underratedness” is not due to East Coast bias. As has been proven many times, and mentioned here many times, there is really no East Coast (or New York) bias; to the extent that home town makes a difference, it appears to actually work against East Coast/New York players.
I would say it is a combination of his not being particularly outstanding until age 29 and his seemingly well-earned reputation of being a me-first jerk.
In fact, I would say your citation of his 1/3 of a season in 1998 serves to make the latter point. It appears that the first 2/3 of the 1998 season was one of the great examples of tanking it in modern professional sports. As you may recall, Johnson wanted out of Seattle, badly. His stats would indicate that he was giving somewhat less than 100% effort in Seattle, which is generally not looked on favorably by either fans or the media.
Given that there was no injury and/or recovery period to deal with in 1998, I don’t see any other expanation for the difference in his performance after he went to Houston. Look at these before and after stats:
BEFORE:
Innings/start: 6.96
H/9inn: 8.21
HR/9inn: 1.07
SO/9 inn: 11.98
BB/9inn: 3.38
HBP/9Inn: 0.62
ERA+: 106
AFTER:
Innings/start: 7.67 (+10.2%)
H/9inn: 6.08 (-25.9%)
HR/9inn: 0.43 (-60.1%)
SO/9 inn: 12.38 (+3.3%)
BB/9inn: 2.77 (-17.9%)
HBP/9Inn: 0.32 (-48.4%)
ERA+: 321
In addition, he was coming off a full season in Seattle where he was 20-4, 291K/213IP (12.3/9inn), 2.28 ERA, and 196 ERA+. Basically, he had a great season in 1997, pouted for 2/3 of 1998 to get his ass out of Seattle, and then after the trade went back to pitching the way he had been the year before (and continued to pitch: his ERA+ for his first four full seasons in AZ was 186, 181, 188, 197).
Given the monstrous improvement after the trade, and assuming there isn’t something in the water in either place, I see no other explanation for the difference other than Johnson’s not caring or trying particularly hard while he was in Seattle. And, in my experience, there is very little that will turn off fans and media as much as just not trying.
If Barry Bonds is not a first or second year HOF’er, (I’ll give the writers their one year protest) it will be the biggest crime of exclusion in history. It will be a joke. Those who hold Barry accountable for the steroid era and would use him as a poster boy are just not thinking clearly. I won’t rehash all the reasons here but suffice to say, even if the man had implanted bull testicles and came to the plate with needles in his rear end, his hitting clinics, patience at the plate, plate discipline was so far and above everybody else – it was simply incredible to watch – he was clearly THE best player of all of his generation.
The collusion against Barry in 2008 most likely cost him the All-Time runs records, possibly #2 on the RBI list and other tallies that Mr. Responsible Bud Selig could not afford to cringe through.
What it makes me think is how do we know Pedro didn’t juice? Or Unit? Both were injury prone, Pedro more so and yet seemed to recover remarkably well. Unit’s career picked up when? 95-2002? I’m not accusing them, I’m just suggesting to Barry haters that we don’t know the full truth and never will but my gut tells me 75% of the league was on something, if not more. Pettite? Clemens? Why them and not others you adore?
Erase every stat from ‘95-2004 – who is still a HOF’er? Bonds would still have 318 Home Runs and 3 MVP’s.
Triples have been dying a slow death ever since owners started building parks with more seats and fences closer to home plate. Back in the dead ball era all you had to do was be a reasonably fast player who hit a gapper and keep on running, and you could get a triple. Now there’s not a single active player with 100 triples (The former Unfrozen Caveman leads with 92), because there are fewer odd wall angles in today’s smaller ballparks (not to mention better groundskeeping).
I would hazard a guess that the only three players with any sort of track record who stand a chance of getting halfway to Sam Crawford’s career record (that would be 156) are Carl Crawford, Jimmy Rollins, and Jose Reyes, currently at 84, 90, and 71, respectively. Rollins is already 30 and plays in a bandbox home park where it’s hard to hit triples if the visiting outfielders are halfway decent. Too bad he can’t play against Pat Burrell, Adam Dunn, and Eric Byrnes every day. Crawford is 27 and averages 12 a year so far, although he’s had as many as 19 in a season. Reyes is the youngest (25) and trending up over the past four seasons (17, 17, 12, and 19), so he probably has the best chance to get halfway to 312, and if he takes care of his legs, maybe even 200. Now that steroids are out and speed and athleticism are making a comeback, maybe triples will return to prominence as well.
What does the 9/09/09 reference mean? I seem to have missed something.
I can’t believe Roger Connor made the triples list. I always knew him as the pre-Babe Ruth leader in career Home Runs. He put up a career 156 OPS+ in the dead ball era. I always think its interesting that he is never remembered as a home run king. I wonder how many home run hitters also excel at hitting triples….
I think the reason closers haven’t had that many years closing is two fold.
As you said it’s a newish stat and position, thus we just don’t have that much time.
Most importantly is the number of IP are so few that probilities get in the way and even a good closer looks bad on paper over 50 IP (one season) now and again. Over the years we haven’t been smart enough to realize this and to look at underlying stats to see how good one is. Therefore they got shoved aside too quickly. It’s still being done in the game today, see Brad Lidge.
Johnson did have several of his best years in the NL. That’s why he never cracked 200 in ERA+ like Pedro or Maddux. Johnson was superb, especially in his mid-30s in Arizona, but he’s not in the best-ever conversation because he didn’t produce historically good seasons. In career ERA+, he’s tied at 19th with…John Franco.
David in NYC – I don’t buy the east coast bias either, but how can you be so certain that Johnson was tanking it? You completely ignore sample size and context. Johnson was plopped into an indeal pitching situation in Houston. He dominated at the Astrodome (2 ER in 43 innings) and he feasted on an easy schedule. Check out the game log on BR. Also, you’re talking about 84 innings! How do you throw all those numbers out there and ignore the competition and sample size?
I think most people that talk about Pedro, Clemens, Maddux being the best of all time, do so with the caveat that we’re talking about the greatest right-handed pitcher of all time.
I doubt there’s anyone who doesn’t consider Unit the best lefthander of all time (well, maybe some people will put Koufax up, but I don’t Sandy was better than Unit.)
I love your idea of the 20 Year rule. It’s absolutely brilliant.
And I agree that top 100 things just aren’t all that impressive, especially in categories that have been massively helped by the offensive explosion of the past decade and a half. (be that through ball manipulation, smaller ballparks, steroids, whatever.)
I thought it’d be a bit more impressive on the pitching side, but meh. For example, the 51st best strikeout pitcher in MLB is… *drum roll* JAVIER VAZQUEZ!
The guy who hardball times (I think) just did an article about how massively underwhelming he’s been throughout his career, compared to his stuff.
Kevin Millwood (!!!) is 30 strikeouts away from going from 109th to 100th, and kicking Bret Saberhagen out of the top 100.
I love top 10s in baseball, and maybe top 20s. Beyond that, ugh. You get guys that just really weren’t all that impressive in my mind. (Which, to be fair, is more of an indictment on my mind than on the player in question.)
I guess we just take excellence on the field for granted nowadays?
That realization actually makes me a little sad.
MP, Joe has a book on the Big Red Machine coming out on September 9th. 09/09/09 is his shorthand way of saying “Did I mention that I have a book on the Cincinnati Reds coming out?” without having to needlessly slaughter extra posterisks in his posts.
Sandy Koufax arguably had the best year of his career the season he retired. ERA+ 190 was an all time high, second in MVP, won the Cy Young. Koufax era Los Angeles Dodger teams won the WS in 1959 (Koufax was just a contributor, ERA+ of 104, 153 IP), 1963 (Koufax was MVP and CYA), 1965 (Koufax was 2 in MVP, CYA), as well as the pennant winning year of 1966 and the pennant tie in 1962. In 1962 and 1964 (both injury shortened) Koufax still gor MVP consideration. And then, having proven everything he needed to prove in baseball, and unwilling to face the agony of pitching again with his prematurely arthritic elbow, Koufax retired, going out on the top. If you want to know what Koufax went through to be able to pitch at all, I suggest you read the recent biography.
Randy Johnson once finished as high as 6th in MVP voting, with the 1995 Mariners. Johnson tended to have much better players around him: Junior, The Martinez “Brothers” (Edgar and Tino), A-Rod, Schilling, Luis Gonzales. He made it to one World Series in his 21 year career, and 8 times into the postseason. In Koufax’s 12 season career he was in a playoff once, in the WS six other times, and in three of them he was far and away the best player on his team if not the league. Koufax has a post season ERA of 0.95. The Unit: 3.50.
No offense to Randy Johnson, who was a great pitcher. But Koufax defined dominant, as was reflected in his higher percentage of postseason appearances, his many high MVP finishes, his titles, and his superior performance in the World Series. I freely admit my bias.
By the way, since a loving parent is allowed to “kvell” on his daughter, my daughter is on faculty with the San Francisco Boys Choir, and the oldest boys will be performing at the Obama inauguration. I don’t know yet whether she will be going (she mostly works with the youngest boys) but it’s still fairly impressive, especially for somebody who just graduated from UC Berkeley a year and a half ago.
Ross: re Roger Connor, I would wager that a decent amount of his homeruns were of the inside-the-park variety. Just like triples, inside-the-parkers were way more common in the pre-deadball, late 19th century. I don’t know where one could find that information, but I would be interested to see how many of his homers were insiders vs. over the wall.
Roger — Before the foul strike rule, foul balls were just that, foul balls. They did not count as balls or strikes, so no matter how many foul balls you hit it would not affect the ball-strike count. That rule change gave an enormous new advantage to the pitcher, so the fact that Young won 351 games before the foul strike rule makes his total more impressive, not less.
Pat –
ERA+ is designed to level the playing field with regard to quality of opponents, nature of ballpark, etc. A 100 ERA+ for a Rockies pitcher in 2000 (most offensive team and year in history) is exactly the same (within the limits of the available data) as a 100 ERA+ for a pitcher on the LA Dodgers in 1968 (least offensive team in history). That’s why I used it instead of ERA or even W-L (which really tells you next to nothing).
As for sample size, I am well aware of the Central Limit Theory and regression to the mean, etc. Yes, the sample size is important. Is a sample size of 84 innings/160 innings large enough to make the conclusions I did? Absolutely. Especially given the amount of discrepancy (ERA+ is 3x as good in Houston as it was in Seattle).
I don’t remember enough of my statistics to calculate a level of confidence (chance of randomly generating these numers) to quantify, but I do remember enough of statistical theory to say that an sample size of 84/160 innings is more than enough to state without qualification that an ERA+ 3x as a previous ERA+ in the same season is statistically significant.
Does it mean that Johnson was exactly 321/106 times better in Houston? Probably not. Does it mean that he was somewhere between 2x and 4x as good? Absolutely.
Aside from the statistical evidence, there is also a large volume of words and actions from 1998 to indicate the same thing. For instance, Johnson had a clubhouse fight with his Seattle teammate David Segui.
Quite honestly, I think the burden of proof is on those who say he DIDN’T tank, given the evidence.
So Sabathia was tanking it this year?
QUESTION FOR JOE:
For all of us who love baseball, love your posts, read this blog, but have no more than a passing knowledge of sabermetrics, newer stats, etc., I have a question:
In your opinion, what are the 3 or 4 important stats they should show at a game on the stadium scoreboard instead of BA, RBI, ERA, etc., both for pitchers and hitters? In other words, what are the 3 or 4 stats that, if we understood them, would let us have a good idea how the player who’s at the plate or on the mound is doing this particular year?
(I’ve noticed they’re showing OBP for hitters at the K now, and that’s an improvement.)
Thanks,
Greg
Greg:
This doesn’t directly answer your question, but a while back Joe did a post on baseball stats he approves of:
http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2008/03/10/stats-i-like/
Personally, I’m a big fan of the hitters’ stat trio (BA / OBP / SLG) — would love to see that displace the standard BA – HR – RBI mess.
Hey, Jack Morris had a career ERA of 3.90! That’s like having an ERA of 0.20 for 20 years! How can he not be in the HOF?
Just kidding. Just kidding.
If you want to go by the 20 Year Rule, I’d say Warren Spahn was the best lefty ever.
[...] The 20-Year Rule ” Joe Posnanski [...]