Beyond facing tired starters and relievers who were mostly third rate starters on the way down, another advantage Maris had was never having to worry about being pitched around or intentionally walked, not when he batted in front of Mickey Mantle. With the entire rest of the Yankees offense in a deep funk, managers are going to be wary of even pitching to Judge in any potential game-altering situation. He got two IWs yesterday, and he's likely to see a lot more of them as the season winds down.

Hank Greenberg

1961: Maris hit 61, league avg was 152 per team
2022: Judge has 55, league avg of 146 per team
1920: Babe Ruth hits 54, league avg of 30 per team.

1961: Maris hit 61, league avg was 152 per team
2022: Judge has 55, league avg of 146 per team
1920: Babe Ruth hits 54, league avg of 30 per team.

1920: AL Games 1234 / Complete Games 700 (57%)
1961: AL Games 1622 / Complete Games 417 (26%)
2022: MLB Games 4094 / Complete Games 27 (0.66%)

2022: AL Games 1234 / Complete Games 700 (57%)

meant 1920 I'm sure.

Right. Corrected.

For every reason someone can give that it's easier or hard, someone can give a reason that it was harder or easier.

From the article, the travel day issue is really not an issue, it was in the past, and as the article mentioned, it was because of how the travel was done. Nowadays, these players grew up with the travel, it's a minor inconvenience etc.

The big issue is of course integration, population growth, opponent training and development, at the same time, much better equipment, smaller ballparks, many more scrubs to face etc. Ultimately it's an accomplishment, pure and simple.

In the years at issue, Ruth got 35% of his PA facing the starting pitcher the 3rd time or more in a game, Maris 30% & Judge just 17%, and I’d bet the starting pitchers Judge faces 3 or more times were having a better game than many that Ruth faced. If one believes it’s familiarity, more than fatigue, that produces the 3rd time through the order effect, Judge does have the tougher path, although it’s an interesting question as to what degree, if any, video can produce comparable familiarity with the opposing pitchers.

Probably doesn't make much difference, but shouldn't we be looking at 1927 rather than 1920?

The big issue is of course integration

Absolutely! Working in the opposite direction is the increasing popularity of other professional sports and therefore the inevitable lessening of MLB's share of US top male athletes. This also is part of the reason for the increase of Latin American ballplayers, as baseball's status there is similar to its status here a century ago. It's a complex issue, and good at generating discussions.

Just in the most seat-of-the-pants empirical way … a thing would seem to be harder to do, the fewer people do it. (Why, is a separate issue.)

If we posit that you need to hit 55 or more to have had a realistic shot at 60 — that occurred five times between 1921 and 1938. Then 23 years till Maris; then 36 years till there were a dozen ≥55 seasons 1997-2006; then Stanton in 2017, then Judge this year.

That reckoning makes Maris' feat stand out. Yes, 1961 was an expansion year, but 1969 saw an even bigger expansion and nobody got to 50 that year.

OTOH, 55 is arbitrary. Drop it to 54 and you pick up Ralph Kiner in 1949 and Mickey Mantle on Maris' own team. 52 brings in Mantle in '56 and Mays in '65 – along with some more from the 1920s, the c1998 era, and the early 21st century.

I have no strong argument, just that Maris' 61 comes very slightly more out of nowhere.

One thing I always thought was interesting; despite some sentiments at the time seemingly considering it an unbreakable record, Ruth's 60 actually faced 3 serious challenges by 3 different players in just 11 years (56 by Wilson in 1930, 58 by Foxx in 1932, and 58 by Greenberg in 1938). Until the offensive nuttiness of the late 1920's and 1930's ended, Ruth's record seemed much more vulnerable than Maris' or Bonds' did. Roger's 61 wasn't even challenged for 36 years (1997, when McGwire had 58 and Griffey had 56). Before that, the closest anyone came was 52 (Mays in 1965 and Foster in 1977).

Edit: a watered down, half empty Coke Zero to BDC.

Maris's 61 looks "out of nowhere" compared to all the years that came immediately before and after, but 1961 was an expansion year, and actually featured several other homerun records in addition to #61:

- Teams hit 0.95 homers per game, an all time record that lasted until 1987

- 8 players reached 40 homers, a record that stood until 1996 (17!)

- 2 players topped 50, tying a record (1938, 1947) that wasn't surpassed until 1998 (4)

- The Yankees hit 240 homers, an all time record for a team that lasted until 1996 (when 3 teams surpassed it)

- Maris and Mantle are still the only 50 homer teammates in MLB history, and their 115 combined dingers is still the all time record: 110 for Bonds (73) and Rich Aurillia (37) in 2001 is 2nd

- Mantle's 54 were the most homers without leading the league until Sosa in 1998

Those are just ones I remember hearing about off the top of my head. There might have been more. 1961 was similar to 1987, in that it was a high offense blip season in the middle of an otherwise relatively low offensive era.

That's certainly a good point. A single season can be an "era" of sorts if enough weird things combine.

Plus, the offensive environment today hardly resembles the high-flying—and controversial, to put it mildly—turn-of-the-21st-century times that saw home run records regularly shattered.

2022 2.9% HR/PA 8.5% HR/FB 152 ISO 329/541 fair ball split
1998 2.7% HR/PA 7.8% HR/FB 154 ISO 335/535 fair ball split
2001 2.9% HR/PA 8.0% HR/FB 163 ISO 331/541 fair ball split

Night and Day.

What's changed?

2022 22.3% K/PA
1998 16.9% K/PA
2001 17.3% K/PA

League averages

1998 169 HR/team
2001 169 HR/team
2021 198 HR/team
2022 174 HR/team (pro-rated to 162 games)

This season is down a bit (although still on par with most the "steroid-era" seasons and actually higher than 1998), but homeruns are actually HIGHER in recent years than they were in the sillyball era. The top 4 homer happy seasons of all time were 2019, 2020, 2017, and 2021. It's contact/batting averages that have plummeted (due to K's) since the "high flying, controversial, turn of the 21st century days."

That said, one thing about today's HR rates though, is they're spread out more than they used to be. Totals are high now because everyone and their mother has adjusted their launch angle and hits 20-30. In the sillyball era there was more of a gulf between the top stars like McGwire and Sosa who might hit 60, while other stars like Gwynn and Ichiro were still in the single digits. Despite more homeruns overall, the top individual seasons today really are lower than they were 20-25 years ago, which makes what Judge is doing stand out more starkly:

1995-2007 (13 seasons)
50+ = 23 times
55+ = 12 times
60+ = 6 times

2008-2022 (14 seasons, excluding 2020)
50+ = 6 times
55+ = 2 times
60+ = 0 or 1 time (projecting Judge)

That's a pretty clear difference...

Totals are high now because everyone and their mother has adjusted their launch angle and hits 20-30.

Or 10 or 15, accompanied by 125 to 150+ strikeouts. There are way too many players who are trying to be something they don't have the natural ability to be.

The 92-win 2021 Yankees had 7 players with 100+ Ks, and 2 more who would've easily made it if they'd played more than 113 or 117 games. And only 3 of them had more than 15 home runs.

OTOH the 87-win 2000 Yankees had but 1 player with 100+ Ks (Posada), with Jeter at 99 in 148 games. I doubt if this is all that atypical.

I was thinking Duane Kiper's run at the season record would have been harder, but OK.

2022 2.9% HR/PA 8.5% HR/FB 152 ISO 329/541 fair ball split
1998 2.7% HR/PA 7.8% HR/FB 154 ISO 335/535 fair ball split
2001 2.9% HR/PA 8.0% HR/FB 163 ISO 331/541 fair ball split

May I ask: why is it relevant to this discussion what the HR flyball ratio is? Either HRs are easier to hit or harder to hit in a given season, what difference does the HR/fb ratio make?

Ruth's 60 actually faced 3 serious challenges by 3 different players in just 11 years (56 by Wilson in 1930, 58 by Foxx in 1932, and 58 by Greenberg in 1938). Until the offensive nuttiness of the late 1920's and 1930's ended, Ruth's record seemed much more vulnerable...

there's many ways to interpret that but to me, while Ruth was a physical outlier vs the rest of the league, part of his overwhelming success was also because no one had thought to focus on power until that time. So it would take a few years for teams to develop power hitters.

So we look at Ruth as having the ability to out homer entire teams, and then if we were to project him into the future, well how does that work exactly? Is it really fair or intelligent to project him in that way or it more realistic to assume that teams will develop strategies to combat power hitters and/or develop their own power hitters. And so the Ruth of the 1920s is some sort of aberration basically an accident, who doesn't really project to be say 13 years of roided up Barry Bonds. Although still a really good power hitter. its really an interesting question.

..From the article, the travel day issue is really not an issue, it was in the past,

why would it ever be an issue? Does travel not affect pitchers? It only effects batters so no one could be a 50 HR hitter until teams started to charter airplanes? Is that the conclusion I am supposed to draw from that?

....another advantage Maris had was never having to worry about being pitched around or intentionally walked, not when he batted in front of Mickey Mantle.

First of all there's no study I am aware of that shows much of a correlation that you are suggesting. I think thats pretty well established but go ahead find me something.

Second of all why wouldnt Ruth have the same advantage batting in front of Gehrig?

In the years at issue, Ruth got 35% of his PA facing the starting pitcher the 3rd time or more in a game, Maris 30% & Judge just 17%...

BUt what does that really prove? HRs are far more prevalent today then they were in Ruth's day. So what do we conclude from that? Pitchers of yore were iron men who could go 9 inn and still only give up 0.3 HR/game.

That said, one thing about today's HR rates though, is they're spread out more than they used to be. Totals are high now because everyone and their mother has adjusted their launch angle and hits 20-30. In the sillyball era there was more of a gulf between the top stars ...

This is actually what I find the most interesting in all this and its not easy to draw conclusions. One statistic that was striking was I think it was last year the league set a record for opposite field HRs. Opposite field HRs had I think doubled over a season or two. Its really quite striking, someone doesnt really make a great swing and the ball still goes out. I was trying to track them during the playoffs last year but I really didnt watch enuf games.

Another thing is I think if pitchers "pitch around" power hitters more, are we more likely to see this "compression" (the less of a gulf between top HR hitters and the normal guys)? But Im not sure the strategy of baseball has changed all that much for that to make a difference.

You mention the silly ball era. But I think the gulf you are talking about mostly existed the entire history at least since the lively ball era. Its not a phenomenon of the 90s, at least I dont think. It was always inherent in the game with the exception of very low power eras like WW II years. Its basically a recent thing right? I dont know how to explain it.

#24 - Well, I don't know if there's any studies that definitively prove anything, but Maris did have zero intentional walks in 1961, which seems odd for someone in the midst of a 60 homer season. 1927 was Gehrig's big breakout season, so maybe pitchers weren't scared of him yet the way they were for Mantle, who was already an established super star by 1961 with a 52 homer Triple Crown season under his belt.

Intentional walks in 60 homer seasons:

37 - Sosa 2001
35 - Bonds 2001
28 - McGwire 1998
21 - McGwire 1999
(14+ - Judge 2022)
14 - Sosa 1998
8 - Sosa 1999
?? - Ruth 1927 (intentional walks weren't recorded until the following season, when Ruth led the league with 8)
0 - Maris 1961

That zero does stand out a bit, although we're still likely talking about a 10-20 AB difference, so it's not a huge advantage. Maris is towards the bottom of the total walk chart too though, by a lot in some cases:

Total walks in 60 homer seasons:

177 - Bonds 2001
162 - McGwire 1998
137 - Ruth 1927
133 - McGwire 1999
116 - Sosa 2001
94 - Maris 1961
(85+ - Judge 2022)
78 - Sosa 1999
73 - Sosa 1998

One statistic that was striking was I think it was last year the league set a record for opposite field HRs.

Not to go all "back in my day", but when I was a kid you just didn't see that many oppo's hit. It really took a noted home run hitter like Schmidt or Stargell to really muscle one out. You just never saw good glove, no hit SS or 2B go oppo.

The comparisons are fascinating, however it's just been an amazing achievement thus far as he's so far ahead of the guy who's #2 this year in homers.

Well, I don't know if there's any studies that definitively prove anything, but Maris did have zero intentional walks in 1961, which seems odd for someone in the midst of a 60 homer season.

first of all thanks for a nice piece of research there. And maybe there is a little bit of an advantage for hitting in front of Mantle. But what I wanted to add was that arent there all sorts of other effects that are helping and hurting these same hitters?

Take for example, playing on a bad team. Say Wally Berger playing in BOS or Dale Murphy in ATL or Trout. So playing on a bad team wouldnt you come to bat more often when you're behind by a few runs so that its better to pitch to contact? So you throw the ball over the plate to Berger or Trout or whomever more, because even if they do hit one out the odds are still in your favor that he's going to make an out anyhow? But no one ever tries to track that and say "Oh Trout hit 45 HRs but he's playing on a bad team you know so most of those were in garbage time."

Right? no one looks at stuff like that, they focus on one thing that they think makes for some huge advantage, but there must be all sorts of little things that tilt the scales one way or the other and no one's really done a study like that.

Opposite field HRs had I think doubled over a season or two. Its really quite striking, someone doesnt really make a great swing and the ball still goes out.

Trying to pull everything wouldn’t necessarily meet every definition of a ‘great swing’. Some players are strong enough to hit the ball out of the park ‘going the other way’ on pitches over the outside part of the plate.

I tend to think that it's the situation in front of a given hitter that dictates IBBs, not the batter on deck (unless that's the pitcher).

But looking up 1961 splits, that wasn't the case. Maris was hitting behind Richardson and Kubek most of the time, and you wouldn't figure them to get to second base much; but Kubek hit 38 doubles that year. Maris came up with men on and first base open 94 times, no IBB.

By contrast in 1961, Norm Cash came up with men on, first base open 89 times and was intentionally walked 19 times. Cash tended to bat in front of Steve Boros, Reno Bertoia, and Dick McAuliffe (who was a rookie and had not shown much power yet).

The difference really does look like a "Mantle Effect" to me.

why would it ever be an issue? Does travel not affect pitchers? It only effects batters so no one could be a 50 HR hitter until teams started to charter airplanes? Is that the conclusion I am supposed to draw from that?

It affected pitchers and batters, but pitchers had days of rest to recover, and of course the issue with travel day is for the person doing the travel, which since we are talking about hitters, that means we are talking about hitters having to deal with travel and facing pitchers who have been sleeping in their home beds.

In the past, travel was a real issue. (and I would argue it also affected how players handled their night life, when you are travelling 8 hours for a trip, you just might feel the need to take a night cap on the road trip, something that may not be as prevalent of a need, when it's just a hop skip and a jump.)

Judge has only batted 64 times with a base open. He has walked in 24 of those. Batting in the #2 spot gives fewer of those I presume. Plus it gives Judge more PA; who would've guessed going into 2022 that he would be 3rd in the AL in times coming to the plate??

#29 That kind of thing was one of the first things that Bill James got a lot of attention for. Specifically Bob Horner missed a lot of time and it'd be routine for the media to say that this would (did) hurt Murphy. So James checked and found that Murphy actually hit better when Horner was out. (This was before retrosheet or anything of that nature -- it was a lot of work)

Again this is all stuff that we (on rec.sport.baseball) spent a lot of time looking into. Bottom line, weak protection (more IBBs for an unprotected hitter) is real. Zero evidence of strong (hitters do worse when not protected by a good hitter on deck) protection.

And as for the good hitter on bad team thing there's an odd factor in play. Bad teams spend more time behind. So the team with the lead doesn't really want to intentionally walk a hitter with a lead -- even if he's the only good hitter in the lineup. You can try nibbling but almost without exception good hitters can't be dealt with that way. So in the end, good hitters on bad teams probably get pitched close to "normal".

It affected pitchers and batters, but pitchers had days of rest to recover, and of course the issue with travel day is for the person doing the travel, which since we are talking about hitters, that means we are talking about hitters having to deal with travel and facing pitchers who have been sleeping in their home beds.

I dont know where to start, since hitting or offense in general is a function of BOTH hitters and pitchers Im not sure what you mean by "we are talking about hitters" As if the pitcher part of this equation doesnt matter. So I have no idea why you wouldn't say something like:

BOTH hitters on visiting teams AND pitchers on visiting teams have an issue when traveling and so should perform worse after a travel day. Because of course BOTH pitchers and hitters that travel are tired.

Right? WHy aren't you saying that?

2nd. There is a home field advantage that seems to most strong early in a game and/or early in a series. This is based on recent articles Ive read and does seem to make some sense. However, that advantage exists currently and presumably existed in the past, so again why do you think travel was only an historical issue? ALso if what you're saying is true, then there should be some study suggesting that the HFA was stronger back in the day, because you think travel was an issue back then. So e.g in the 1920s the home team won say 58% of the first game of a series and today its only 54%.

I cant imagine that's ever been shown because someone would have thought of that by now.

3. Also hitters have a day or rest to recover too. That's kind of how jet lag works. So I get that pitchers only pitch every fifth day, but its not like hitters are zombies by game 3 of a series. They're not.

Bad teams spend more time behind. So the team with the lead doesn't really want to intentionally walk a hitter with a lead -- even if he's the only good hitter in the lineup. You can try nibbling but...

OK that's kind of what Im saying, yes.

So in the end, good hitters on bad teams probably get pitched close to "normal".

How did we get to this conclusion? You just said they probably get pitched to contact more. Then you must say they get pitched normal.

Bottom line, weak protection (more IBBs for an unprotected hitter) is real. Zero evidence of strong (hitters do worse when not protected by a good hitter on deck) protection.

I believe this is the case, yes.

Trying to pull everything wouldn’t necessarily meet every definition of a ‘great swing’. Some players are strong enough to hit the ball out of the park ‘going the other way’ on pitches over the outside part of the plate.

OK I tried to use some sort of placeholder phrase for: did not pull the ball on a good swing. So I said not a great swing. Sue me.

Yes some players are strong enuf to go the other way but you seem to have completely disregarded my overall point. The number of opposite field HRs has jumped recently (although this year it down again). This is what I was referring to. Opposite field HRs jumped 55% from 2018 to 2019

https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/d7b7fo/2018_pulled_hr_3621_opposite_field_hr_677_2019/

Incidentally, the best place to hit a pitch for a HR is TEN INCHES IN FRONT of the plate:

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/power-hitters-should-make-contact-out-in-front/

Ok so you can argue all you want about what is a great swing but most power comes from meeting the ball out in front of the plate.

Unrelated but interesting. This article is from early May but has to do with added humidors affecting HR rate. Apparently in parks that installed humidors this year HR rate was down .8% at least in early May:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/33848888/what-heck-going-baseball-everything-need-know-mlb-scoring-drought

NOTE: Walt should be happy, it has HR/FB rate, yay!

#36 "Normal" in this context mans neither pitching to contact nor nibbling but whatever works best for the pitcher's skills. There are pitchers who can pitch to contact and these will.

Hello CFB: Using this site

https://gregstoll.com/~gregstoll/baseball/stats.html#V.0.1.0.1.0.0.2010.2020

I did decade by decade analysis for winning pct when the score is 0-0 1st inn, 0 outs. Ie. the HFA. This is for all games its not sorted by first game in series, to see if there were any historical trends in the HFA:


decade win pct home team

1920s...54.5
1930s...55.3
1940s...54.5
1950s...54.2
1960s...54
1970s...53.8
1980s...54.1
1990s...53.5
2000s...54.4
2010s...53.6

if you take the last 30 years and compare them to previous decades its about 0.5% difference. It would be interesting to see if there was any variance in the first game of the series, I cant imagine it would be much.

Hey what the hell is going on in the 1930s! Weird. It was 58% in 1930-31! and remained over 55% from 1932-36 then it dropped right back to the normal 54% or so. Does anyone know what the hell was happening then? perhaps tied to the depression?

I guess room service must have really sucked in the depression.

"Normal" in this context mans neither pitching to contact nor nibbling but whatever works best for the pitcher's skills.

well the issue is: would you not pitch differently if you are ahead by 3+ runs? Do you not see that? It seems like you understood that at first then go right on ignoring it.

googling something, this is from Hotelier website, its not clear if this applies just to Canada or to the US and Canada, its clear that hotel occupancy rates dropped precipitously at the start of the depression:

Then, at the top of the ’30s, occupancy levels dropped from 71 per cent in 1928 to 50 per cent in 1932. It was clear the hotel industry was struggling when Eddie Cantor, an American actor and comedian, famously commented on the situation. He said: “Nowadays, when a man walks into a hotel and requests a room on the 19th floor, the clerk asks him, ‘for sleeping or jumping?’”

BOTH hitters on visiting teams AND pitchers on visiting teams have an issue when traveling and so should perform worse after a travel day. Because of course BOTH pitchers and hitters that travel are tired.

The (starting) hitters would've played the day of/before traveling, the SP essentially never. That may or may not be a significant difference.

Well, I don't know if there's any studies that definitively prove anything, but Maris did have zero intentional walks in 1961, which seems odd for someone in the midst of a 60 homer season.


first of all thanks for a nice piece of research there. And maybe there is a little bit of an advantage for hitting in front of Mantle.

After getting zero IBB in 1961, Roger Maris received 11 in 1962. Five came in mid-May, a few days after Mantle went on the DL with the hammy strain that made him collapse while running to 1st. The next 5 came late in games after Mantle had been replaced by a fielder or pinch runner. The last was when Maris was pinch-hitting for Jim Bouton with the bases loaded, Mantle on 3rd. A balk scored Mickey and Maris was then put on the open base. Therefore, not one came with Mantle batting after him.

Further Maris trivia: He received 4 IBB in 1960, a season in which he usually batted 4th with Mantle 3rd, another 3 in 1963 and one the next year, his last with NY. None of those 8 came with Mantle next up.

The (starting) hitters would've played the day of/before traveling, the SP essentially never. That may or may not be a significant difference.

But I thought the idea was that travel itself was inherently fatiguing?


Gawd you really didnt want to be playing on the road in 1930 or 31. Although in the 1931 world series the away team did win 4 games

Jayson Stark did a nice piece at The Athletic on Judge's season. My favorite factoid: Eight teams haven’t had anyone hit 22 home runs, period. And Aaron Judge leads the league by 22.

#41 Never found any evidence that this actually happens. It's the logic behind pitching to score and there's no evidence that this actually happens. There's a pattern that works best for any given pitcher and best I can tell they actually stick to it pretty consistently.

Who knows? Maybe a deeper dive with the better pitch by pitch data would show something, but when we looked we never found anything -- beyond the weak protection issues which disappear if the lead gets above 2 runs.

OK Ron, thanks. You always answer every single thing and that's great .

****

Hey since you do a lot of this number crunching: have you ever seen a correlation between TOOTBLANs (typically outfield assists) when the score is close and/or double plays when the score is close?

nice article on historical trends on opposite field HRs. Written in 2007 though. Huge uptick in oppo field HRs with the steroid era of the 90s.

https://tht.fangraphs.com/going-the-other-way/

also LHB hitters hit way more oppo field doubles. Suggesting that LFers are somewhat worse defenders than RFers.

hmm.. when a LHB hits an opp-field double, there is less chance he goes to 3rd, right?

I expect the difference could be that RHB hit more opp-field triples

Jayson Stark did a nice piece at The Athletic on Judge's season. My favorite factoid: Eight teams haven’t had anyone hit 22 home runs, period. And Aaron Judge leads the league by 22.

Judge leads the league in many other hitting categories, and by margins not seen that often. He’s up 2.5 in Position Player WAR, 3.0 in Offensive WAR, 118 points in OPS, 29 in Runs, 73 in Total Bases, 30 in OPS+, as well as large leads in the various win-probability categories. The season isn’t over, so Judge could increase his margins in some categories if he continues his current pace - .342/.493/.826, 1.319 OPS, since the All-Star Game, although that may be more difficult in a line-up missing 5 of his team’s top hitters.

hmm.. when a LHB hits an opp-field double, there is less chance he goes to 3rd, right?

I expect the difference could be that RHB hit more opp-field triples

thats interesting idea. But I think triples are so rare (8% of the number of double) these days that they arent a big part of the reason but I dunno for sure.

since there is no Omnichatter I can find to post this, it's close enuf here:

Will MVP voters punish Judge if the team collapses but he stays strong?

What if the Yankees lose the division, becoming the team to blow the biggest lead EVAH (15+ games)? Does Judge lose the MVP to Shohei, even if he hits 643 dingers and the next best hitter has 40?

Suggesting that LFers are somewhat worse defenders than RFers.

They definitely have weaker arms, so that would make legging out a double to left a little easier (as would, to a lesser extent, the slight baserunning distance advantage lefties have out of the box).

What if the Yankees lose the division, becoming the team to blow the biggest lead EVAH (15+ games)? Does Judge lose the MVP to Shohei, even if he hits 643 dingers and the next best hitter has 40?

A long time ago, but it didn't cost Rice, who didn't have a wildcard berth to fall back on.

#48 I've honestly never looked. Back when I was doing a lot of studies we were only starting to get baserunning information.

My seat of the pants take is that at least a certain percentage of players (and coaches) are aware of how score influences break even points (not that they think in terms of break even points). I'd expect there to be more aggression late/close if only because you get a selection bias (nearly all pinch runners are in late/close situations) to faster, more aggressive baserunners.

What if the Yankees lose the division, becoming the team to blow the biggest lead EVAH (15+ games)?

yes, 15 1/2 would be the largest blown lead in divisional play dating back to 1969.

if the Yankees win tonight and tomorrow, however, that idea gets close to being put to bed for the season.

Largest lead since ... forever. 1871?

The Red Sox are often quoted as having lost a 14 game lead in 1978. This is not true; they led the Yankees by 14, but at that moment their division lead was about 9 over the Brewers and possibly someone else.

The famous 1951 Dodgers lost a 13-game lead to the Giants.

And yes, the Yankees are still very likely to win the AL East. SO this is premature speculation on my part.

It's not just "largest lead", it's also the point in the season -- obviously the more games there are left the greater the chance of losing it.

That 1951 lead was on August 11. The Giants had 44 games left at that point (they went 37-7).

Hey, what number comment is this?

Will MVP voters punish Judge if the team collapses but he stays strong?

What if the Yankees lose the division, becoming the team to blow the biggest lead EVAH (15+ games)? Does Judge lose the MVP to Shohei, even if he hits 643 dingers and the next best hitter has 40?

From June 29 to July 23, the Angels went 3-15. Ohtani produced a .738 OPS over that time (Bad for him, but well above the AL average of .700).

The Angels other two best hitters, Trout and Ward, posted .508 and .558 OPS' during that time. Trout also went on the IL for the second part of that stretch, because he's always going on the IL

Ohtani was producing at an above league average rate for an already bad offense whose other two best players were performing terribly.

AND OH YEAH, Ohtani was also the winning pitcher in those three wins, posting an 0.48 ERA over 18.2 innings, with a 33/6 K/BB rate.

Of course, to the Judge contingent, none of that individual production and near complete lack of help from teammates mattered.

Meanwhile, the Yankees were, at one point, 61-23. They had a 15.5 game lead in the East, and a 5.5 game lead on the Astros for the best record in the AL.

Now that division lead is down to 3.5, and their lead on a playoff spot is only 5.5 games

And now all of a sudden, the Judge contingent I hear suddenly says one guy isn't responsible for the success of his teammates. LOL please. Voters who would punish Ohtani should absolutely punish him

Judge has hit .346/.495/.818, a 1.313 OPS, since the All-Star Game. Pretty hard to ‘punish’ him for that.

The '78 Red Sox' biggest lead was 10 games, after a DH sweep of Cleveland on July 8...but it was over Milwaukee, not New York (the Yankees were 11 1/2 back at that moment).

Boston wasn't horrible after that; they were 42-39. But the Yankees were 54-26 after July 8...including the famous Boston Massacre, when the Yanks swept four games in Fenway by a combined score of 42-9 (ouch).

Boston wasn't horrible after that; they were 42-39. But the Yankees were 54-26 after July 8...including the famous Boston Massacre, when the Yanks swept four games in Fenway by a combined score of 42-9 (ouch).

Had the Sox had won the playoff game, they would have managed a great collapse and a great comeback that season. They were down 3.5 games to play, then won 12 of their last 14 before the one-game playoff.

They ended up winning 99 games, their highest victory total between 1946 and 2018.

The 78 Red Sox won their last 8 before the playoff game. But the NYY went 6-1 the last week.

Judge has hit .346/.495/.818, a 1.313 OPS, since the All-Star Game. Pretty hard to ‘punish’ him for that.

Pretty hard to punish the guy who is not only his team's best pitcher but also their 2nd best hitter. What else is he supposed to do? Personally stand guard over Trout so he doesn't miss a quarter of the season every year?

Here's a tiebreaker (smile): The only time Ohtani and Judge have gone head-to-head this year, Judge singled and homered in two times at bat against Ohtani, who got knocked around (3 innings, 8 H, 4 ER, 3 HR) and left the mound with a 28 Game Score. In 5 at bats, Ohtani got one hit (a single) along with two strikeouts.

Sorry, lost track of this thread. I don't know if this got answered but in case not ..

May I ask: why is it relevant to this discussion what the HR flyball ratio is? Either HRs are easier to hit or harder to hit in a given season, what difference does the HR/fb ratio make?

The launch angle revolution. HR/PA could go up (or stay the same) just because players are hitting more FBs. It also relates to Ks -- less contact would mean fewer FBs (unless G/F changed) and HRs could go down when HR/FB is the same and what changed was Ks. HR/FB is actually up a bit in the current game suggesting players have as much or more power as in the evil roid days.

A PA is 5 percentage points more likely to end in a K which means it is (give or take with BB rates) 5 percentage points less likely to end in a batted ball. So HRs would be down if nothing else changed. So batters decided that if pitchers were going to turn some FBs into Ks (reducing HRs) then they were going to turn some GBs into FBs (increasing HRs). But apparently they added a bit of strength also (or do a better job of optimizing launch angle) to get the HRs back and then some.

So HR/FB is a more direct measure of "power" than HR/PA.
P(HR | K, BB) = 0
P(HR | GB) = 0
P(HR | FB,LD) > 0
HR/PA = P(HR | FB,LD)*P(FB,LD) = power * non-GB contact

Billy Hamilton, for example, struck out 21.5% of the time and had a 0.74 G/F ratio; Goldschmidt has struck out 22% of the time with a 0.71 G/F ratio. They are about equally likely to make contact and equally likely to hit it on the ground when they do. Goldschmidt has power (13.6 HR/FB), Hamilton does not (2.3 HR/FB).

It also relates to the early speculation that the ball has been restricted this season ... if it has been, imagine what HR/FB might have been without a "standard" ball.

Anyway, while not identical, it is silly for the author to claim that the two eras "hardly resemble" one another.