Editor's note: Longest entry yet. This blog is going to be the end of me.
Several of you of emailed and asked me to name the guy who shoved his Baseball Writers' card in my face at my first Major League game. I thought long and hard about naming him (I actually had his name in the original version of the blog entry). He deserves to be named. But in the end I decided that I simply can't do it -- I'm just not a good whistle blower. I'd probably have been the tobbacco guy on 60 Minutes saying: "Oh there's no proof cigarettes are unhealthy."
I will tell you this: He's not Furman Bisher. And he no longer works in Atlanta.
I will offer one Furman Bisher story: We were at the Masters one year, and Jack Nicklaus was being interviewed, and someone asked a question and made some sort of reference to Ancient Rome or the Bible or something like that. Nicklaus without missing a beat said: "Well, I'm not old enough to remember Ancient Rome. What was it like Furman?"
OK, now for something really different: In the last entry we came up with a list of the greatest five-year pitching peaks in baseball history. So now, we offer the 25 greatest hitting peaks in baseball history.
Here are the rules:
1. We're talking about players since 1900. I realize that in this blog I really discriminate against the 19th Century and guys like Dan Brouthers. So it goes.
2. We're talking five-year peak -- five years consecutively -- except when war interrupts.
3. A few players had TWO good five year peaks in their careers. I'm only including their highest peak ... with one exception.
4. Once again, I'm not going to explain the homemade formula I use to rank these seasons because you will laugh at me and pick it to shreds. I'll tell you that once again I'm using 100 as a baseline. Willie McCovey from 1966-70 he hit .295 with 187 homers and a .997 OPS -- great peak and it scores exactly a 100 . ... Joe Morgan from 1973-77 (.303, 114 homers, 781 runs, 301 steals -- more steals than strikeouts! -- .940 OPS, two MVPs ... he also rates a 100 peak score.
5. I will tell you I that we're adding a little something extra to this contest -- as you all know first prize is a Cadillac El Dorado. Anybody want to see second prize? Second prize, set of steak knives. Third prize you're fired. ... Wait, I had a bad Alec Baldwin flashback there. Sorry. I did add a little something to the formula this time, a subjective category to give a little extra credit to players for playing great defense or playing in a bad hitters ballpark or some other winning quality while taking away a little credit for players who played awful defense (or in a couple of cases, none at all) or were clubhouse monsters. When I say a LITTLE credit, I mean it -- nobody in the Top 25 changed because of this additive. The order did change slightly.
OK, here we go:
25. Ralph Kiner (1947-51).
Key stats: 234 homers, 586 walks, 1.029 OPS.
Peak score: 105.
In 1947, the Pirates actually changed the shape of their park for two players -- Hank Greenberg (who was purchased for 75K) and Kiner. They moved in the left field fences in 30 feet. Greenberg was pretty much done by then -- in fact 1947 was his last season -- but he still hit 25 homers and walked more than 100 times in 125 games. Kiner, meanwhile, jumped from 23 homers in 1946 (that did lead the league) to 51. He would lead the league in homers for seven straight years.
The fence move was actually a stroke of genius. In that crazy-good hitters' park, the Pirates drew more than a million fans for the first time ever in 1947 and actually led the league in attendance in '48.
24. Manny Ramirez (1999-03)
Key stats: .331, 193 homers, 623 RBIs, 1.072 OPS.
Peak score: 105
I still, for the life of me, cannot figure out how MannyBeingManny did not win the 1999 MVP award. Everybody knows by now that was the year when Pedro got jobbed because two writer decided to take the rules into their own hands and left Pedro entirely off their MVP ballots. That's been rehashed. But once you take Pedro out of the running, how in the heck did MBM lose?
What do MVP voters care about? RBIs. It doesn't seem particularly fair all the time, but it is understandable: I think most writers would say that the hitting statistic which best describes VALUE to a team is the ribbie. You're driving in your teammate. You're helping the club. You're doing for others. The RBI!
Manny had 165 of them thar RBIs in 1999. One ... hundred ... and ... sixty ... five. That would be the most RBIs by any player in a season since 1938. What's more, he did it for a team that won 97 games. What's more, he hit .383 with runners in scoring position. What's more, he hit .500 with the bases loaded and hit two grand slams. What's more, he hit .375 with runners in scoring position and two outs. I mean, these are exactly the things MVP voters love.
Now, I'm not saying that Manny was robbed of the MVP award. He wasn't. PEDRO was robbed of the MVP award. What I'm saying is that it's almost impossible to believe MBM did not win. The kicker is: He didn't really come close to winning. Pudge finished first because he had one helluva year and MVP voters like rewarding catchers (except Joe Mauer). Pedro finished second because a couple of people apparently missed the memo that they had witnessed the greatest pitching season since Bob Gibson in '68. Roberto Alomar and MannyBeingManny finished tied for third.
23. Mel Ott (1934-38)
Key stats: .316 average, 595 RBIs, .424 OBP.
Peak score: 105
At 5-foot-9, Ott was the shortest man to hit 500 homers. He was the shortest to hit 450 homers and the shortest to hit 400. He was the shortest man to hit 390, 385, 380, -- lower Bob! Lower! -- 370, 365, 360. Yogi Berra was shorter. He hit 358 home runs. ... Ott also weighed 170 pounds -- he and Willie Mays are the only players to hit more than 300 home runs at that weight (the Toy Cannon, Jimmy Wynn, weighed 160 and hit 292 homers).
The point of all of this is: Ott was a small guy. He generated his power with that famous batting motion -- the one where he lifted his right foot high in the air and then used the weight shift to drive the ball. Many people have talked about how odd it was, but: Wouldn't you think someone else would try this? The style now, of course, is not to stride at all because the players are so much bigger and stronger and more powerful. But you would think some of the smaller guys who can't hit would at least try Ott's style. It's obvious no one in baseball history has ever used his size and weight better than Ott.
Addendum: Royals catcher John Buck is trying a new exaggerated stride this year. It's certainly not as pronounced as Ott's, but it he definitely lifts his leg pretty high. If you're a fantasy baseball owner wondering why in the heck a catcher in KC is hitting about .300 with eight homers, well, that might be why.
22. Duke Snider (1953-57)
Key stats: .311, 207 homers, 585 RBIs, 581 runs, 1.025 OPS.
Peak score: 105
Did you know: Duke Snider went to high school with former NFL commissioner Pete Rozelle? I wouldn't know this except my friend Michael MacCambridge was writing the NFL history book "America's Game," and we were together at the Super Bowl in San Diego, and he said, "I have to drive out and interview Duke Snider." I asked him why in the world he needed to talk to Duke Snider, and he told me that little tidbit. I'm still not sure it was worth the drive.
Now, I'll be the first one to say that all the corny "Wow, baseball was never better than in New York in the 1950s" talk makes me just a bit ill. New York is one of my three favorite cities on earth, but no group of people anywhere I've been can romanticize their past (and present) quite like New Yorkers. The sewers used to smell better. Times Square hookers used to look better. The quality of fake Rolexes used to be better. ... I remember the 1996 World Series, and I was reading the Daily News, and the front page headline was something like "Win it for Frank!" That was when Frank Torre had some sort of heart condition. Really, one of the two toughest papers in America's toughest city had "Win it for Frank" on their cover.
"Doesn't that make you sick?" Wally Matthews asked me. "This is New York City." At the time Wally was working for the New York Post. I nodded and agreed that it made me sick. Then I picked up the Post -- the front cover was a gigantic Yankees logo.
So yes, New Yorkers overdo it. But, you almost cannot overrate those New York centerfielders of the 1950s. I don't want to ruin it for you, but I'll let it slip that Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays and Duke Snider all made this Top 25 list. And they all make it during this general time period. In other words, you could make a good argument that the three greatest center fielders in baseball history -- we're talking the best at their very peak -- were all playing in New York City from 1953-58 (and Joe DiMaggio had just retired). Someone should write a book about that. Have there been any books on those three guys?
21. Hank Greenberg (1937-45, including war years)
Key stats: .323, 187 homers, 663 RBIs, 1.073 OPS.
Peak score: 106.
Well, we talked about it with Manny Ramirez. In 1937, Hank Greenberg drove in 183 RBIs, third all-time. He finished third in the MVP balloting. They gave it instead to his teammate Charlie Gehringer -- that was sort of Gehringer's "Color of Money" Oscar. Joe DiMaggio finished second in the balloting with his famous rookie year.
I love this: Greenberg is member of the National Jewish Sports Hall of Fame, the International Jewish Sports Hall of Fame and the Jewish American Hall of Fame. Kevin Youkilis, play hard.
20. Frank Thomas (1991-95)
Key stats: .323, 175 homers, .450 OBP.
Peak score: 106
I was on an All-Star Game shuttle bus with a fellow sportswriter and Frank Thomas. Well, Frank was sitting a few rows behind us. It was late at night ... probably close to 11 or midnight. The sportswriter was going on and on about how athletes should sign all autographs. He said it was just ridiculous that these guys who make millions and millions of dollars could not sign every single autograph -- so what if a few people were selling them in autograph shops (I think this was before eBay)? Are you going to punish little kids because of a few con-men and sharks? Just sign the autographs and be done with it. The sportswriter was on a roll.
Then the bus pulled up to the hotel. And there had to be, no exaggeration, a thousand people standing between the bus and the door, all of them with baseball cards and sharpies, all of them with that hungry, "Who is on that bus," look in their eyes.
Frank Thomas walked slowly to the bus exit, and then he turned around to us and said: "You guys just don't get it. The autographs never end. Never."
I'm not sure what the moral of the story is -- if there even is one -- except that things are almost always more complicated than we make them out to be.
19. Ken Griffey (1996-00)
Key stats: 249 homers, 685 RBIs, 4 gold gloves, 3 home run crowns.
Peak score: 106
When did he officially stop being known as Ken Griffey Jr.? ... I remember when Griffey won the MVP award in 1997, everybody made a big deal about how it was about time that the Kid -- the acknowledged best player in baseball -- finally won his award. But you know what? He never really came close to winning an MVP before 1997. And I'm not sure he ever had a particularly compelling case before 1997.
He finished second in the 1994 strike year -- and he had a terrific year, led the league in homers -- but that was the year Frank Thomas was sickeningly good. Big Hurt had a 1.210 OPS that year. Over the last 50 years, only Bonds, Williams and McGwire in the 70-home year had higher OPS years than Thomas in 1994.
In other years, Griffey never finished higher than fourth, and I'm not sure he ever really deserved to finish higher than fourth. He won the MVP in 1997, and everybody said "Finally." But he hasn't come close to winning the MVP award since. I'm not saying Griffey was overrated. He was an absolutely fabulous player -- hit for power, took his walks, played great defense, stole a few bases. I am saying this: For the guy most people considered the best player in baseball throughout the 1990s, he wasn't often the best player in any given year.
18. Todd Helton (2000-04)
Key stats: .349, 615 RBIs, 627 runs 1.093
OPS Peak score: 106
Could somebody hit .400 in today's game? I think so. It would take a few special qualities:
1. He would need to be somebody who hardly ever strikes out. The last two guys to make a real run at .400 -- George Brett and Tony Gwynn -- hardly struck out at all. Brett struck out 22 times in 1980. Gwynn struck out 19 times in 1994. You've got to put the ball in play.
2. He would need to walk a lot. Neither Gwynn nor Brett walked a great deal, but both had their at-bats artificially lowered -- Brett got hurt, and Gwynn's season ended with the strike. I think it would be very, very hard for anyone to hit .400 with more than 500 at-bats. Even Ted Williams in '41 only had 456 official at-bats (he walked 147 times).
3. He would need to play in a good-hitting ballpark with a massive outfield. Gwynn and Brett both played in big ballparks; they were both terrible home run parks, but that doesn't matter. The big outfields left a lot of open spaces, especially for guys who could hit to all fields.
4. He would need to hit to all fields.
5. He would need to be a slightly older player who can handle the immense media pressure that would collapse on a .400 hit candidate.
I think Todd Helton (if he's healthy) has all five qualities. He's about the right age (maybe a year or two old, but close enough), he doesn't strike out much (5th in the NL right now in K per at-bat), he walks, he hits the ball all over the field, and he has the .400-hitters dream ballpark. He's hitting .361 now, and he has always been an especially good summer hitter. I'm not predicting that Todd Helton will hit .400 but ... OK, what the hell? It's a blog. Maybe this will make me famous. I'm predicting that Todd Helton will hit .400.
17. Jason Giambi (1999-03)
Key stats: .311, 196 homers, 1.030 OPS.
Peak score: 107
What would have happened had Mark McGwire just admitted taking steroids in front of the congressional committee? What if he had explained that he just wanted to stay healthy after a few injury-plagued years? What would have happened if he had said, "Look, a lot of people were taking them, and it was more or less accepted, and I should have been stronger, I should have said no, but baseball is competitive, I'm competitive, and I wanted an edge." What if he then became an anti-steroid advocate, speaking out to kids about how it will wreck your body?
Many people would tell you that had McGwire done all that, people would have forgiven him by now. More, they would love him -- America loves a repentant sinner -- and he would definitively go into the Hall of Fame. He would be a hero again. Really.
You know, I'm not cynical about most stuff. But I'm pretty cynical about forgiveness talk. I remember for years everybody told Pete Rose: "Just admit you gambled on baseball. Just admit it. People will forgive you. That's your ticket to the Hall of Fame." Well, Pete is a street hustler, and I think he suspected that if he ever admitted to gambling on baseball people would NOT forgive him ... that's why he held out for so long. But at some point he realized his Hall of Fame case was going nowhere, and he supposed that he had nothing to lose. So he admitted gambling on baseball in his book. He admitted it in interviews. He signed a few baseball saying, "I'm sorry I bet on baseball," which were available in eBay.
What happened? Well, people did not forgive him. Quite the opposite. The fans who had supported him mostly left his side. The people who felt it was a sham that Rose was barred from the Hall of Fame mostly lost interest in the whole thing.
Now, Pete's signing autographs in Las Vegas and his Hall of Fame chances are about as dead as professional boxing. ... Of course, many people say that the reason they don't forgive Pete is because he did not REALLY apologize, he did not REALLY admit everything, he handled it BADLY, he was not GENUINE -- but what did they expect? Did they think he would wear a Scarlet G on his chest? He's Pete Rose. He played baseball with ferocity, he got more hits than anyone ever, he ran to first base on walks ... "genuine" was never really in his toolbox. This is how he does things. He's going to make a buck. He's going to do things on his terms. Besides, now we are trying to judge HOW people admit and apologize?
The truth, I think, is that people always ASSUME that America will forgive if you just come clean and admit what you did. I don't think it always works that way.
This all comes up because Jason Giambi just admitted taking steroids and he probably made the strongest statements by any player except maybe Jose Canseco or Ken Caminiti. He said: "I was wrong for doing that stuff. What we should have done a long time ago was stand up - players, ownership, everybody - and said: 'We made a mistake.' We should have apologized back then and made sure we had a rule in place and gone forward." That seems to reflect how most people feel. He seems pretty genuinely sorry.
So far, though, his statement has gotten him a meeting with the commissioner, a leaked report that he failed an amphetamines test and all sorts of rumors that he will be traded or his contract will be voided. I'm just not sure we're a particularly forgiving society at the moment when it comes to sluggers and steroids. I do believe we as a nation have forgiven Wynona Ryder for shoplifting. I know I have. I've had a crush on her since I was a kid.
16. Hank Aaron (1959-63)
Key stats: .323, 202 homers, 627 RBIs, .984 OPS
Peak score: 108
Remember that old TV show "Home Run Derby?" For a while there, they were replaying it on ESPN Classic pretty all the time, and frankly I wish they would again instead of showing the 1987 World Series of Poker every single freaking day with Mr. Kotter wearing short shorts and announcing that pocket aces is a good thing. You know I like poker as much as the next guy -- probably more than the next guy in fact -- but isn't this poker phase finally over? I mean, let's face it: In the end we're just watching people play cards. And we know what their cards are. You would think that the thrill would run out sooner or later.
ANYWAY, Home Run Derby was that awesome black and white television show from 1959. The show was hosted by the great Mark Scott (more on him in a minute) and before the home-run hitting began, Scott would explain that Home Run Derby was being played at a specially selected stadium (he never said it was Wrigley Field in LA) because it did not favor either right-handed hitters or left-handed hitters. He always made it sound like the Home Run Derby producers had spent weeks scouring the country in search of the one baseball stadium that would be precisely fair to batters on both sides of the plate. I guess it was better than saying that it was the stadium closest to the studio, and that the show had a $23 working budget.
-- We'll note here that Scott was right -- Wrigley Field LA was a bandbox for everybody. The Los Angeles Angels played there one year -- their first year -- and a rag-tag team of expansion veterans (Ken Hunt! Earl Averill! Big Klu! Steve Bilko!) finished second to the M&M Yankees with 189 home runs. They hit 122 of those at home. The Angels rag-tag team of expansion veteran pitchers (Art Fowler! Ken McBride! Eli Grba!) gave up more homers than any team in baseball -- 180 homers allowed, and 126 of those were at home.
We're coming back to Hank Aaron, I promise. Mark Scott, the Home Run Derby announcer, was an actor. He was, from what I can tell, a struggling actor -- though he did have three roles on Dragnet. He had uncredited roles in "The Kid From Left Field" (he was the announcer) and "The Harder They Fall" (he was a reporter). He also played "Man" on Celebrity Playhouse. It is not easy to play "Man." But he was so good, three years later he played "Man" in the TV show "The Millionaire." He also narrated "Killers From Space."
So, you could argue that Home Run Derby was a big break for Mark. And he was great on the show -- good voice, proper respect for the competition, friendly. His only real liability as an announcer I would say was that he seemed to have no prior knowledge about the game of baseball. Seriously, it often seemed like he had just arrived from some non-baseball playing country like Lithuania, only without the accent. Every show, he would introduce the players, call the action, ("there's a long fly ball and, yes, it's gone,") and do the most amazing interviews between innings.
Mark: "So Mickey, how do you hit all those home runs?"
Mickey: "Well, you swing hard, Mark."
Mark: "I'll bet you do. ... There's a long fly ball and, yes, it's gone. ... So you swing hard?"
Mickey: "You sure do, Mark."
(Silence)
Mark: "I'll bet it takes more than just swinging hard, though, and you are one of the best."
Mickey: "Thanks Mark."
(Silence)
Mark: "How hard do you swing Mickey?"
Mickey: "Pretty hard."
Mark: "I know you do."
Hank Aaron was the all-time king on Home Run Derby (I told you we would get back to him). He won six straight weeks and collected $13,000, which I would guess wasn't significantly less than he made during the season (in 1957 -- the only year I could find Aaron's salary -- he made $22,500). But the thing that was great was someone must have told Mark Scott that Aaron had amazingly strong wrists because for six consecutive episodes that was all he talked about. Every inning, he would say to the player he was interviewing: "Hank Aaron really has amazing wrists, doesn't he?" or "He really is a good hitter because of his wrists, isn't he?" And the player would always say, "You're right Mark, Hank has great wrists."
Bill James has suggested that Aaron might have developed those great wrists by hitting cross-handed throughout his early baseball life. I'm not sure if that's true, but it's a good theory ... and I wonder if maybe we should all teach our kids to hit cross-handed until they're like 12. ... Yep, if I was a hitting coach, I'd have kids lifting their legs like Mel Ott and hitting cross-handed like Hank Aaron. Maybe this is why I'm not a hitting coach.
15. Ty Cobb (1909-13)
Key stats: .396, 337 stolen bases, 1.018 OPS
Peak score: 109
I wonder how Ty Cobb might feel about being the designated jerk in the Hall of Fame. Here was undoubtedly baseball's most driven player, a guy who hit .400 three times in his career, a guy with more than 4,000 hits and almost 800 stolen bases and 11 batting crowns.
And how is he remembered? As the worst guy in the Hall of Fame. Any time someone wants to make a point about some shunned player who isn't in the Hall of Fame -- Joe Jackson, Pete Rose, Mark McGwire, Dick Allen -- they will first point out that the Hall is filled with bad guys, and they ALWAYS use Ty Cobb as Example No. 1. That's the lasting role for the Georgia Peach, baseball's all-time jerk, just as Rhode Island is always used in demeaning size example such as, "The new Taj Mahal Casino is roughly the size of Rhode Island" or "Israel is tiny, smaller even than Rhode Island" or "The par-5 17th hole is slightly longer than Rhode Island."
I've always loved Cobb's famous quote about hitting. The way I always heard it: Some interviewer asked an old Cobb what he would hit against modern pitchers. He said, "Oh about .290."
"Really?" the questioner asked.
"Oh yes," Cobb said. "Well, I am 72 years old."
So, I'd always heard it as a funny quote -- one that made Cobb seem human, lovable even. But in the movie "Cobb," the same scene went like so:
Man: "With all the great players playing ball today, how well do you think you would do against today's pitchers."
Cobb: "Well I figure against today's pitchers I'd hit about .290."
Man: .290? Well, that's amazing because you batted over .400 a whole bunch of times. Why do you think you'd hit only .290.
Cobb: "Well I'm 72 (bleeping) years old you ignorant son of a bitch."
For me, the story loses a bit of its charm in that telling.
14. Barry Bonds (1990-94)
Key stats: .310, 175 homers, 192 stolen bases, 1.035 OPS, 4 Gold Gloves.
Peak score: 110
I mentioned in the intro that I would only include each player once. Willie Mays actually had two five-year peaks that placed in the Top 25, and so did Lou Gehrig and Babe Ruth. But I'm including Bonds twice because Bonds was two different players.
Here, he was the young Bonds who hit homers, got on base, stole bases, played brilliant defense (except when Sid Bream was rounding third) ... I've sometimes wondered which Bonds was better, this Bonds or the later, two-hat-sizes-bigger Bonds who hit every other ball into the Bay. It's a lot like the question: Which Elvis was better, young hip-swinging Elvis or fat, cape-wearing Elvis? I really don't think there's much of an argument in Bonds case -- he clearly was more valuable later in his career. But I think he was a lot more fun to watch when he was young.
(Interestingly, it's the opposite in Elvis' case. He was clearly much better when he was young. But I think he was a lot more fun to watch at his Vegas, sweating-like-a-pig, singing "In the Ghetto" peak).
13. Willie Mays (1961-65)
Key stats: .308, 226 homers, 72 stolen bases, 613 runs, 590 RBIs, .994 OPS.
Peak score: 111
Mays actually had a similar -- though certainly not nearly as dramatic -- career shift as Bonds. Mays from 1954-58 (during that centerfield heyday) hit .328 with 192 homers, 141 steals and actually had a slightly higher OPS of 1.019. And, of course, he played otherworldly centerfield. That peak is among the Top 25 ever too.
But Mays in his 30s stopped stealing bases and started hitting for more power. He stole about half the bases but averaged 45 homers per season, drove in and scored more runs in a tougher offensive environment. For whatever reason, the older Mays ranks slightly better in my system. I don't know why. I don't even understand my system.
12. Albert Pujols (2002-06)
Key stats: .333, 213 homers, 213 doubles, 628 RBIs, 636 runs, 1.054 OPS.
Peak score: 112
Albert Pujols went to high school and college in Kansas City, and yet the Royals did not draft him. I've often wondered how much heat the Royals should take for that.
On the one hand, the draft is a crapshoot, especially in the later rounds. Nobody was high on Pujols, not even the Cardinals who waited until the 13th round to take him. I think the feeling on Pujols was that he had no defensive position and he had not hit against any real competition. Heck, as mentioned here before, he was not even first-team all-Metro in my own Kansas City Star. What nobody knew then (what nobody could know) was that Pujols was utterly driven to become the best player in the game, and that he would not stop until he had become a brilliant hitter, a Gold Glove first baseman, a terrific base runner and the guy who drives everyone around him to succeed. The Royals didn't see it, but nobody else did either. So I'm not sure you can single out the Royals just because he was in Kansas City at the time.
On the other hand, though, Pujols WAS playing in Kansas City, and it isn't like a great young baseball player can get lost in the Kansas City -- this isn't exactly California or Florida. Hell, I WAS getting calls about Pujols (though I never did see him) so you know the Royals were getting a million calls.
Also Pujols had to be something close to a finished product because he only played one year in the minor leagues. He crushed the ball right away. It wasn't like the Cardinals made him into a player. He came to his first spring training and in the first few days was so good he had already wowed Tony LaRussa and everyone else (I can remember St. Louis columnist Bernie Miklasz in early March that year telling me -- hey, your boy from Kansas City is really impressing people. He might make the club). He then had one of the great rookie years ever -- just two years after he was playing ball at Maple Woods Community College in Kansas City (I've heard that he did not strike out one time that year, though I find that hard to believe).
Point is, if a scout was watching Pujols, he probably should have seen something special. And you would think the Royals' scouts would have seen Pujols mroe than any other team.
All things considered, I'll say the Royals blew it.
11. Sammy Sosa (1998-02)
Key stats: .306, 292 homers. 705 RBIs, 1.046 OPS.
Peak score: 114
How about Sammy? He's got 10 homers already this year. He's just two shy of 600 now. It's kind of fun to watch him too -- he's sitting dead-red and swinging for the fences every swing. He's here for one reason and one reason only -- to hit long balls. Sosa's hitting .266 now, but I'll bet that average tumbles. The homers might keep flying, though, which is all right with me. It seems like in the 1980s when I was a kid, there used to be more a bunch of guys who were in the big leagues for one reason and one reason only -- to hit home runs. There was Dave Kingman, Rob Deer, Ron Kittle, well, let's take a look.
Most home runs with batting average .230 or less.
1. Dave Kingman, 1982: .204 average, 37 homers.
2. Kingman, 1986: .210, 35 homers
3. Tony Armas, 1983*: .218, 35 homers
4. Gorman Thomas, 1985: .215, 32 homers
5. Ron Kittle, 1984: .215, 32 homers
6. Jose Valentin, 2004: .216, 30 homers
7. Ken Harrelson, 1969: .221, 30 homers
8. Mark McGwire, 2001: .187, 29 homers
9. Jeff Burroughs, 1975: .226, 29 homers
10. Kingman, 1972: .225, 29 homers
11. Darryl Strawberry, 1989: .225, 29 homers
12. Steve Balboni, 1986*: .229, 29 homers
Honorable mention: Rob Deer, 1990 (.209, 27 homers); Gene Tenace, 1974 (.211, 26 homers), Rob Deer, 1991 (.179, 25 homers).
10. Joe DiMaggio (1937-45, including war years)
Key stats: .350, 169 homers, 691 RBIs, .420 OBP, 1.058 OPS.
Peak score: 114
He'll live in Baseball's Hall of Fame
He got there blow by blow
Our kids will tell their kids his name
Joltin' Joe DiMaggio
And now they speak in whispers low
Oh how they stopped our Joe
One night in Cleveland. Oh. Oh. Oh.
Goodbye streak DiMaggio.
-- lyrics to Joltin Joe DiMaggio. By Ben Homer and Alan Courtney.
Who's the newest guy in town
Go Joe Charboneau
Turns the ballpark upside down
Go Joe Charboneau
Who's the one to keep our hopes alive
straight from seventh to the pennant drive
Raise your glass, let out a cheer
For Cleveland's rookie of the year
-- lyrics to Super Joe Charboneau. By somebody or other.
Hey, both songs mention Cleveland.
9. Stan Musial (1948-52)
Key stats: .350, 156 homers, 200 doubles, .441 OBP, 1.058 OPS
Peak score: 115
I once wrote a column where I referred to Willie Mays as the "greatest living ballplayer." I wasn't really making a judgment -- I was using the title more for effect than anything else -- but I got a few emails from St. Louis people who wondered if I had forgotten Stan Musial.
I have to be brutally honest. I had forgotten him. I don't mean I forgot him in that particular case -- I still think Willie Mays is the greatest living player -- but when I think about the greatest players of all time, I often simply overlook Musial. I think a lot of people do. And it's a mistake. In his prime, Musial was about as good as anybody, ever. He's also the ultimate gentleman, a real role model. It's amazing that there have been so many books written recently about DiMaggio, Mantle, Koufax, Gehrig, Robinson, Ruth, Aaron, but I haven't seen any on Musial.
8. Mark McGwire (1995-99)
Key stats: .287, 284 homers, 620 RBIs, 1.140 OPS, 1 triple.
Peak score: 115
The McGwire pregame batting practice show in 1998 remains among the most amazing things I've ever seen in sports. First of all, people -- thousands and thousands of people -- would fill the stadium just to watch a guy take batting practice. That was amazing in itself. More amazing, though, I never saw him let people down that whole summer. He always hit huge home runs. Every day. It was always a great show.
I can't really think of any sports equivalent. I mean, people would not come out all around the country to watch Joe Montana throw bombs to uncovered receivers. Thousands of people would not come out all around the country to watch Michael Jordan shoot warm-up jump shots or to see Tiger Woods hit 340-yard drives on the driving range. But for one summer, McGwire needed only a bat, a bucket of balls and a BP pitcher to set off the imagination.
Best batting-practice hitters I ever saw:
1. Mark McGwire
2. Darryl Strawberry
3. Ken Griffey
4. Kevin Mitchell
5. Barry Bonds
7. Mickey Mantle (1954-58)
Key stats: .325, 192 homers, 630 runs, .451 OBP, 1.070 OPS.
Peak score: 120
OK, sure, here's one more story about me as a young reporter. I was an intern at The Charlotte Observer when Bob Costas brought a baseball All-Star team to Salisbury, N.C. for an exhibition. Costas had been named the National Sportscaster of the Year for like the third for fourth time -- they give out the award in Salisbury -- and he liked the old-fashioned baseball stadium they had (have?) at Catawba College.
So, he brought down a baseball team that included Jim Valvano, Robert Klein, Gymkata star Kurt Thomas, Chris Elliott and a few others I can't remember. He also brought down Mickey Mantle. I begged the paper to send me to the game, and since nobody else had any interest at all in going, they agreed. It was my very first "big" assignment.
It was big for me because I was getting to meet Costas, who was my absolute idol. I arrived at the Holiday Inn (on Holiday Inn Blvd.) about nine hours before the game -- I was there when Costas and Mantle arrived. Bob was impressed with my punctuality, if not my hero worshipping, and he was really nice to me. Then he said to me, "Hey, why don't you sit on the bench with us during the game."
How about that? I ended up sitting right next to Mickey Mantle, which would have been a better experience except The Mick was in a lot of pain that day. I don't know if it was his knees or the night before -- probably both -- but he just kind of sat there most of the game and groaned a lot. It was still a thrill for me, of course. I talked to Mantle a bit, talked to Costas a lot, and went back to the paper to write my first major front page story (it was a major front page story because the photographer had a classic photo of Costas and Mantle sitting next to each other in the dugout -- and I think both of them were yawning).
Anyway, that story is well known in the sportswriting community for being the single most overwritten story to appear in a newspaper since 1917. I think I may have called it a "sun dappled day." I might have had Costas hitting a "three-ply swat." I remember my ending was something like "And the great Mantle limped off the field."
It was not a great story, no.
But I was proud of it, of course. I had given it my all, that's for sure. I called Costas the next day at the hotel to thank him for giving me such great access, and he said, "Yeah, it was great meeting you and actually, I'd like to talk to you about that story, but I don't have time now, and I'll call you next week." I said, "Sure." I knew he wouldn't call the next week, but I was in the clouds. My hero liked me. He really liked me.
He did call the next week. I was stunned. I picked up the phone, we had a couple of seconds of talk, and then there was silence on the other end. I said, "Um, yeah, did you say you wanted to talk to me about that story?"
And he said: "Well, I wasn't going to say anything. But you asked me."
Those are not good words, in case you are wondering. For 20 minutes, my hero Bob Costas proceeded to absolutely rip me. He hated the story. He thought I missed the whole point. He thought I wasn't respectful enough to Mantle. He thought I had overwritten. He really hated that story. He said: "You seem like a nice kid but ..." and he started all over again.
When we hung up, I was a shattered mess. I was 20 years old. I had just been torn to shreds by the best sportscaster in America. My hero. I thought, "OK, well, what am I going to do with my life now?" Nothing really came to mind. I had a standing job moving boxes in the factory where my Dad worked. I had once worked for a mortgage company where I called people who were delinquent on their payments.
What to do? I wrote a letter to Bob Costas. I'm certain that if I saw that letter today, I would die in shame right on the spot -- but it was filled with all the passion, idealism and desperation of a 20-year-old kid who didn't really want to move boxes in a factory again. I wrote that I wanted to make it in this business someday.
Months later, I got a call from ... Bob Costas. He told me that my letter was on his refrigerator door. And many years later, Bob Costas was one of the people who wrote a blurb on the back of my book. Of course, Bob has a quote on the back of 93.7 percent of all sports books published in America. But that's OK.
6. Rogers Hornsby (1921-25)
Key stats: .402, 144 homers, 598 RBIs, 615 runs, .690 SLG, 1.164 OPS
Peak score: 122
Bill James made this point -- a lot of people confuse Honus Wagner and Rogers Hornsby. There really doesn't seem to a logical reason for this since Wagner was about as classy a player as there has ever been and Hornsby was, by most accounts, an astonishing jerk. Wagner played great shortstop, Hornsby was a below-average second baseman. Hornsby played out of the Deadball Era and hit for immense power. Wagner retired in 1917, having never hit more than 10 homers a year.
It would be like people confusing, say, Albert Belle and Tony Gwynn.
Hornsby was the second hitter to have an MVP award taken away by a pitcher (in 1913, Shoeless Joe hit .373, but that was the year Walter Johnson went 36-7 with a 1.14 ERA). In 1924, Hornsby was by far the best hitter in baseball -- it's one of the great seasons in baseball history. He hit .424 that year -- his 222 OPS+ led the league (as usual ... Hornsby led the league in OPS+ 11 of 12 years). But he lost the award to Dazzy Vance, who went 28-6 with a 21.6 ERA and 262 strikeouts. That same year, Eddie Collins also had his MVP season taken away by Walter Johnson.
Other hitting years not rewarded because of a pitcher:
1939: Johnny Mize (.349, 28, 108 ... lost to Bucky Walters)
1950: Stan Musial (.346, 28, 109 ... lost to Jim Konstanty)
1963: Hank Aaron (.319, 44, 130, 31 SB ... lost to Sandy Koufax)
1984: Kent Hrbek (.311, 27, 107 ... lost to Willie Hernandez)
1986: Don Mattingly (.352, 31, 113, 53 doubles ... lost to Roger Clemens)
1992: Kirby Puckett (.329, 19, 110, 210 hits ... lost to Dennis Eckersley)
5. Jimmie Foxx (1932-36)
Key stats: .348, 227 homers, 720 RBIs, 1.129 OPS.
Peak score: 123
You probably know that the Tom Hanks character Jimmy Duggan in the movie "A League Of Their Own" was loosely based on Jimmie Foxx.
"Mr. Harvey, I hit 487 home runs for your baseball club, three in the World Series, two in Game 4 alone."
Foxx actually hit 534 home runs. And he hit four homers in the World Series. He did not hit two in any one game. And he didn't do it for one team. Duggan led the league in home runs six times, Foxx four times.
Foxx did stop hitting when he was 32 -- perhaps because of his drinking -- and he did fall on hard times. He did manage the Fort Wayne Daisies in the All-American Girls Professional Baseball League. Most of the rest of the stuff in the movie was made up, including this classic exchange, one of the best-written in baseball movie history:
Harvey: "Let me be blunt. Are you still a fall-down drunk?"
Duggan: "Well, that is blunt. No sir, I have quit drinking."
Harvey: "You've seen the error of your ways."
Duggan: "No, I just can't afford it." (laughs).
Harvey: "That's funny Jimmy. Your drinking is funny. You're a young man Jimmy. You still could be playing. If you just would have laid off the booze."
Duggan: "It's not exactly like that. I hurt my knee."
Harvey: "You fell out of a hotel. That's how you hurt it."
Duggan: "There was a fire ..."
Harvey: "Which you started. Which I had to pay for."
Duggan: "Well, I was going to send you a thank you card, Mr. Harvey, but I wasn't allowed anything sharp to write with."
4. Lou Gehrig (1927-31)
Key stats: .354, 72 triples, 196 homers, 801 RBIs (yikes), 1.135 OPS
Peak score: 130
Gehrig from 1933-37 was just about as good -- those five years scored a 127 peak score. ... I love how Baseball Reference lists two nicknames for Gehrig. There's "The Iron Horse." And then there's "Biscuit Pants." Weird how Iron Horse has lasted longer.
Here's a strange thing about that 1927 Yankees team -- we're talking about the greatest offensive force baseball had ever seen, right? Nobody on that team got hit by more than three pitches all season long. Gehrig was the one guy in the lineup who was hit three times. Babe Ruth was not hit by a single pitch all year. Don't we think that's weird? The guy hit 60 homers. Don't you want to at least brush him back.
Most home run by players hit by zero pitches:
1. Babe Ruth, 1927, 60.
2. Jimmie Foxx, 1932, 58
3. Mickey Mantle, 1961, 54
4. Willie Mays, 1965, 52
5. Jimmy Foxx, 1938, 50
6. Babe Ruth, 1931, 46
7. Lou Gehrig, 1931, 46
8. Johnny Bench, 1970, 45
9. Hank Greenberg, 1946, 44
10. Hank Aaron, 1947, 44
And an unrelated list: Most home runs by players who were not intentionally walked.
1. Roger Maris, 1961, 61.
Hitting behind him: Mickey Mantle.
2. Alex Rodriguez, 1998, 48.
Hitting behind him: Ken Griffey.
3. Tony Armas, 1983, 36.
Hitting behind him: Lots of guys, mostly Wade Boggs and Dwight Evans.
4. Andruw Jones, 2000, 36.
Hitting behind him: Chipper Jones
5. Geronimo Berroa, 1996, 36.
Hitting behind him: Mark McGwire
3. Ted Williams (1941-48, including war years)
Key stats: .362, .508 OBP, 168 homers, 621 RBIs, 667 runs, 1.166 OPS.
Peak score: 137
Sportswriters will have arguments about everything, of course, and one of my favorite argument is: "What is the best sports magazine story every written?" I rank them like so:
(If you're here for the baseball blog, you might skip to the next guy):
1. John Updike, "Hub Fans Bid Kid Adieu."
-- The classic line: "Gods do not answer letters."
2. Richard Ben Cramer, "What Do You Think of Ted Williams Now?"
-- Cramer is now working on a book on Alex Rodriguez.
3. Frank Deford, "The Boxer and the Blonde"
-- The story of Billy Conn -- the story that made me want to be a sportswriter.
4. Tom Wolfe. "The Last American Hero."
-- Junior Johnson, moonshine, the South and a sport that's now made-for-TV.
5. Gay Talese, "The Silent Season of a Hero."
-- Talese on DiMaggio with the amazing story about Marilyn Monroe returning from a performance for U.S. troops and gushing: "You never heard such cheers." "Yes I have," DiMaggio said.
6. Gary Smith, "Ali and His Entourage."
-- "What happened to the circus?" ... Picking one Gary Smith story is tough, but that's my favorite one.
7. Scott Raab, "Asphalt Junkie."
-- The story of Kevin Mackey, Cleveland State coach and crack addict. Raab also did one amazing story on Pete Rose. He's brilliant and, of course, a Cleveland guy. Raab, I mean. I can't believe I've never met him. Raab, I mean.
8. Steve Rushin, "Forty years."
-- I can't remember the name of it, but Steve wrote a retrospective when SI turned 40. It's absolutely brilliant. Then, Steve is brilliant. I can't think of a sportswriter who has made me laugh harder.
9. Rick Reilly on the Mexican wrestling priest.
-- I can't find the title for the article, but if you Google "Rick Reilly" and "wrestling priests" you get 122 hits. If you can find the story (it's in one of the old Best Sportswriting Books), it's good enough to change your life. Or at least get you through breakfast.
10. W.C. Heinz. The Ghost of the Gridiron.
-- Red Grange and the wild days of Pro Football.
I actually have a lot more, but I'll stop here. I've got to finish this blog.
2. Babe Ruth (1920-24)
Key stats: .370, 235 homers, 656 RBIs, 721 runs, .511 OBP, 1.288 OPS.
Peak score: 143
I was really curious to see who would score higher on my system, Ruth or Bonds. But for me the more interesting race was actually between Ruth from 1920-24, just out of the Deadball Era, and Ruth from 1926-30, when he played with Gehrig and played on those legendary Yankees teams (I'm sure you know this, but the Yankees were sort of viewed as chokers before 1927 -- they had played in four World Series and lost three of them).
As it turns out, my system ranks the younger Ruth as a more dominant player -- though we're just talking degrees here. The system rates Ruth from 1920-24 as the second greatest player ever and Ruth from 1926-30 as the third greatest.
As you probably know, in 1920 Ruth hit more home runs than every single other team in the American League. He hit 54 that year. George Sisler was second with 19.
But what I find interesting is that it took more than a decade for the American league catch up. The next year, Ruth his 59 home runs, only two American League teams hit more homers than he did. The next year, Ruth only played 110 games -- and Ken Williams actually led the league with 39 homers. Even so, Ruth still hit more than homers than one team.
Here's how Ruth did vs. AL teams:
1920: Hit 54 homers (more than any team in AL)
1921: Hit 59 homers (more than five teams)
1922: Hit 35 homers (more than one team)
1923: Hit 41 homers (more than two teams, tied one)
1924: Hit 46 homers (more than five teams)
1925: Hit 25 homers (fewer than all teams, but he missed 50 games)
1926: Hit 47 homers (more than five teams)
1927: Hit 60 homers (more than any team in AL)
1928: Hit 54 homers (more than four teams)
1929: Hit 46 homers (more than two teams, tied one)
1930: Hit 49 homers (more than one team)
1931: Hit 46 homers (more than two teams)
1932: Hit 41 homers (more than one team)
1933: Hit 34 homers (Finally ... fewer than all teams)
That's pretty impressive.
1. Barry Bonds (2000-04)
Key stats: .339, 258 homers, 544 RBIs, 615 runs, .535 OBP, 872 walks, 1.316 OPS.
Peak score: 145
OK, so why did Barry Bonds finish ahead of Babe Ruth? I have absolutely no idea. It's really about impossible to compare the two. Ruth, of course, played in a time when fewer runs were scored and when there were fewer teams. But he played when African Americans were barred from the game, and long before the infusion of Latin American players. Bonds played in a time when performance enhancing drugs were probably very common, but he also played when most games were played at night and he played in a lousy hitters' park. Ruth played when bats were tree trunks and baseballs were undoubtedly harder to drive than 18 wheelers. Bonds played in a time with specialty relievers and longer seasons.
For every one point, you can bring up a counterpoint. So in the end, I think, the numbers judge. Bonds in his prime had a higher OBP than Ruth, higher slugging percentage, walked more and hit more home runs. And also there's this: We have no idea how Babe Ruth, transplanted from 1920, would do in today's game. I suspect most of us believe he would be one helluva player. But you just don't know how his game from 90 years ago would play today.
I don't think that anyone doubts that Barry Bonds, placed in 1920, would have been dominant beyond words.
