Bailey had good awareness, he knew he pieced it up and was going to admire it, then he remembered where he plays and started to run hard almost immediately.
BaseballReference.com oddities
78,252 Views |
517 Replies |
Last: 5 hrs ago by W
The Original Houston 1836
Joined:
Feb 6, 2025
Posts:
2,919
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I used to have a big book of funny sports stories with cartoons for the art as a kid and I was thinking about it the other day and had to look this one up.
In 1919, the Giants and Phillies played a 9-inning game that took 51 minutes.
It was the end of the season, and neither team was going to make the World Series (no playoffs back then). The Giants were 87-53, the Phillies were 47-90.
If the Phillies got done by a certain time, they could make the last train from NYC back to Philly and go home to their families. If they didnt, they would have to stay the night in NYC and would get gouged on the price of the whole team staying in a hotel for another night plus dinner plus breakfast the next day.
So the two team decided to start the game early and play as fast as they could. Neither the pitchers nor the fielders warmed up each half inning, the players SPRINTED on and off the field when the third out was made, everybody threw strikes, and every hitter swung at the first itch.
The Giants won 6-1. The Phillies' starter went the distance despite giving up 13 hits and 6 earned runs. Fans who had tickets for the game got there for what they thought was the start of the first game and it was already the 7th inning. The Giants swept the doubleheader with a 7-1 win in the second game and the Phillies made their train.
In 1919, the Giants and Phillies played a 9-inning game that took 51 minutes.
It was the end of the season, and neither team was going to make the World Series (no playoffs back then). The Giants were 87-53, the Phillies were 47-90.
If the Phillies got done by a certain time, they could make the last train from NYC back to Philly and go home to their families. If they didnt, they would have to stay the night in NYC and would get gouged on the price of the whole team staying in a hotel for another night plus dinner plus breakfast the next day.
So the two team decided to start the game early and play as fast as they could. Neither the pitchers nor the fielders warmed up each half inning, the players SPRINTED on and off the field when the third out was made, everybody threw strikes, and every hitter swung at the first itch.
The Giants won 6-1. The Phillies' starter went the distance despite giving up 13 hits and 6 earned runs. Fans who had tickets for the game got there for what they thought was the start of the first game and it was already the 7th inning. The Giants swept the doubleheader with a 7-1 win in the second game and the Phillies made their train.
Yeah, I saw that...he starts with a brief moment of "Oh yeah, I got all of that one" then quickly realizes where the ball is headed and starts running. Then the ball hit the bricks and takes a hard bounce off the wall.
And how often do you see a stand-up inside the park homer?
And how often do you see a stand-up inside the park homer?
Not BaseballReference specifically but I saw a video last night that Pete Crow-Armstrong just made a catch last Friday that had a 0% catch probability. The catch itself didn't look all that outstanding but it was because of his initial read off the bat, his jump, and his speed that made it so improbable.
Since they started tracking in 2016, the most catches made with a <5% catch probability is 6 in a season.....PCA is at 5 already this season.
He has 18 career catches with a <25% probability which is tied for the most since they started tracking - but he has the fewest opportunities with only 32 (since he is only halfway through his second big league season), so it is a 56% success rating which is head and shoulders above the rest of the defenders.
He is fun to watch!
https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/leaderboard/catch_probability?type=player&min=q&year=ALL&total=5&sort=3&sortDir=desc
Since they started tracking in 2016, the most catches made with a <5% catch probability is 6 in a season.....PCA is at 5 already this season.
He has 18 career catches with a <25% probability which is tied for the most since they started tracking - but he has the fewest opportunities with only 32 (since he is only halfway through his second big league season), so it is a 56% success rating which is head and shoulders above the rest of the defenders.
He is fun to watch!
https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/leaderboard/catch_probability?type=player&min=q&year=ALL&total=5&sort=3&sortDir=desc
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Every so often I look at Jack Morris to try and figure out why he is as highly regarded as he is.....and I'm still stumped.
No CY
Never had an ERA below 3.00
Didn't win 300 games
Didn't strike out 3,000
Did his performance in the '91 World Series just completely alter the perception of him and change his entire legacy?
No CY
Never had an ERA below 3.00
Didn't win 300 games
Didn't strike out 3,000
Did his performance in the '91 World Series just completely alter the perception of him and change his entire legacy?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Me being a kid of the 80s, he was basically the model of consistently delivering and winning. Threw a ton of innings, and at a time when W-L record meant a lot more, he had 10 straight winning seasons and led the league in wins a few times. He had more wins in the 1980s than any other pitcher in baseball. Even though his peak was not Cy Young level, in a way, he was still basically viewed as the pitcher of the decade because he was consistently so solid for so long. Then two World Series where he was a key - his 1984 appearances were dominant too - 3-0 in 3 starts where he threw 25 innings with a 1.80 ERA. I definitely get the debate and that debate is why it took until 2018.
The Original Houston 1836
Joined:
Feb 6, 2025
Posts:
2,919
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think for the older reporters, he was a guy who most modeled the pitchers from the 50s-70s they had grown up with and held the gold standard of what a starter should be.AgRyan04 said:
Every so often I look at Jack Morris to try and figure out why he is as highly regarded as he is.....and I'm still stumped.
No CY
Never had an ERA below 3.00
Didn't win 300 games
Didn't strike out 3,000
Did his performance in the '91 World Series just completely alter the perception of him and change his entire legacy?
As far as I can tell from early 1979 until 1989, he didn't miss a single start. Excluding the strike year of 1981 - when he led the majors with 14 wins ( a pace of 21) - his win totals from 1979-1988 were: 17, 16, 17, 20, 19, 16, 21, 18, 15.
Then 90-92: 15, 18, 21
That is insane consistency.
7-4 in the post-season, 4-2 in the World Series. Unreal in 2 different World Series (84/91).
44th all time in wins
50th all time in innings
43rd all-time in strike outs
40th all-time in starts
Led the majors in wins in the 1980s with 162. Dave Stieb a distant second with 140.
Thanks. Its still a very strange scenario to me.
Here is another one I came across today that is interesting.
Ralph Kiner - only played 10 years in the big leagues, never finished higher than 4th in the MVP balloting.....but he led the league in HRs SEVEN years in a row.
Here is another one I came across today that is interesting.
Ralph Kiner - only played 10 years in the big leagues, never finished higher than 4th in the MVP balloting.....but he led the league in HRs SEVEN years in a row.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If helping your team win baseball games as a starting pitcher is most important, it's not that strange. The dude basically did it 15-20% better than anyone else in baseball for a decade
Sabathia just went in on the first ballot. Similar career era. 3 fewer career wins but essentially the same (251 vs Morris' 254). Similar All Star games (6 vs 5). Fewer world series (1 vs 3). One cy young vs 0 for Morris. Jack Morris waited 25 years
Sabathia just went in on the first ballot. Similar career era. 3 fewer career wins but essentially the same (251 vs Morris' 254). Similar All Star games (6 vs 5). Fewer world series (1 vs 3). One cy young vs 0 for Morris. Jack Morris waited 25 years
The Original Houston 1836
Joined:
Feb 6, 2025
Posts:
2,919
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AgRyan04 said:
Thanks. Its still a very strange scenario to me.
Here is another one I came across today that is interesting.
Ralph Kiner - only played 10 years in the big leagues, never finished higher than 4th in the MVP balloting.....but he led the league in HRs SEVEN years in a row.
Kiner didn't debut until age 23 in 1946 because he was in the Army during WWII.
The Pirates offered Kiner to the Yankees for Mickey Mantle before Mantle had played 1 game in the majors back in 1951 when Mantle was 19. That was when Kiner was coming off a 47-50 streak of 51, 40, 54, 47 HR. Would have been like the Yankees offering Judge for a minor leaguer.
Mantle had hit .383 at age 18 in C Level ball wwhere the average guy was 4 years older.
They jumped him to Triple A to start 1951 and he played 40 games at age 19 hitting .361 with a 1.096 OPS. Called him up to the bigs in '51 at age 19 and he won World Series in his first 3 seasons.
DannyDuberstein said:
If helping your team win baseball games as a starting pitcher is most important, it's not that strange. The dude basically did it 15-20% better than anyone else in baseball for a decade
Sabathia just went in on the first ballot. Similar career era. 3 fewer career wins but essentially the same (251 vs Morris' 254). Similar All Star games (6 vs 5). Fewer world series (1 vs 3). One cy young vs 0 for Morris. Jack Morris waited 25 years
We're just going to fundamentally disagree about the value of the "win" statistic.
I agree Sabathia had a similar career but he hit the magic number 3,000 Ks and was a Yankee....frankly, I think his path in was BECAUSE of Morris.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
In 2025, the value is less. In 1985, the game was different. W-L matters when a bad mofo is going out there and throwing 25 innings across 3 starts to win 3 games.
3000 K's is a far more meaningless stat than wins if the point of the game is to win baseball games
3000 K's is a far more meaningless stat than wins if the point of the game is to win baseball games
I made my mind up about this when I was in middle school and was looking at the back of a Nolan Ryan card.
With the Angels he lost 16 games four times in five years....he had sub-3.00 ERAs in each of those seasons. In 1981 he only won 11 games with a league leading 1.69 ERA. In 1987 he was 8-16 with a league leading 2.76 ERA.
But Andy Pettitte and David Wells each had 18 different seasons with a winning record.
The win statistic has too much variable that is out of the pitchers control for me to put any stock in it - especially when there are other statistics that can show how much a pitcher does directly contribute.
Like I said initially, we're just going to fundamentally disagree about it.....and that's OK.
With the Angels he lost 16 games four times in five years....he had sub-3.00 ERAs in each of those seasons. In 1981 he only won 11 games with a league leading 1.69 ERA. In 1987 he was 8-16 with a league leading 2.76 ERA.
But Andy Pettitte and David Wells each had 18 different seasons with a winning record.
The win statistic has too much variable that is out of the pitchers control for me to put any stock in it - especially when there are other statistics that can show how much a pitcher does directly contribute.
Like I said initially, we're just going to fundamentally disagree about it.....and that's OK.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
He also had a winning record in 3 of those 4 seasons. Different game then
There has been exactly one bases loaded triple hit in an All Star game, by Pablo Sandoval off Justin Verlander in 2012. (Which is extra impressive since the Kung Fu Panda wasn't exactly known for his speed.)
Sandoval apparently owned Verlander that year, as he would go on to hit two HRs off Verlander in Game 1 of the World Series.
Sandoval apparently owned Verlander that year, as he would go on to hit two HRs off Verlander in Game 1 of the World Series.
AgRyan04 said:
I made my mind up about this when I was in middle school and was looking at the back of a Nolan Ryan card.
With the Angels he lost 16 games four times in five years....he had sub-3.00 ERAs in each of those seasons. In 1981 he only won 11 games with a league leading 1.69 ERA. In 1987 he was 8-16 with a league leading 2.76 ERA.
But Andy Pettitte and David Wells each had 18 different seasons with a winning record.
The win statistic has too much variable that is out of the pitchers control for me to put any stock in it - especially when there are other statistics that can show how much a pitcher does directly contribute.
Like I said initially, we're just going to fundamentally disagree about it.....and that's OK.
Looking just at ERA alone can be a bit misleading, too. Throughout the 70s league average was much lower than today. Several of those seasons he had 16 loses, his ERA was below (or in this case, above) league average.
Also worth noting that the Astros only played 110 games in 1981 due to the strike. Maybe Ryan would've had another 5 or 6 wins.
and going back in time with Nolan...
he was a great pitcher, but for some reason or reasons...
he wasn't considered on the same level as Tom Seaver or Steve Carlton or Jim Palmer -- they were the golden arms of the 70's. Perhaps Catfish Hunter with the great A's teams too.
maybe there was some east coast bias.
Nolan also walked a ton of hitters compared to his peers
he was a great pitcher, but for some reason or reasons...
he wasn't considered on the same level as Tom Seaver or Steve Carlton or Jim Palmer -- they were the golden arms of the 70's. Perhaps Catfish Hunter with the great A's teams too.
maybe there was some east coast bias.
Nolan also walked a ton of hitters compared to his peers
1981 was Fernando-mania in L.A.
Cy Young was his to lose
although Tom Seaver, who else, made it a close race for 1st
Cy Young was his to lose
although Tom Seaver, who else, made it a close race for 1st
The Original Houston 1836
Joined:
Feb 6, 2025
Posts:
2,919
How long do you want to ignore this user?
W said:
and going back in time with Nolan...
he was a great pitcher, but for some reason or reasons...
he wasn't considered on the same level as Tom Seaver or Steve Carlton or Jim Palmer -- they were the golden arms of the 70's. Perhaps Catfish Hunter with the great A's teams too.
maybe there was some east coast bias.
Nolan also walked a ton of hitters compared to his peers
Jim Palmer was a media pretty boy playing on some phenomenal Orioles' teams. During his prime of 69-80, Palmer never played for a team that finished with a losing record.
Nolan's 1973 season is the wire to wire tour de force of destroying hitters and making legends look like kid at the plate.
Palmer shouldn't have beat Fidrych for the '76 Cy Young either.
The Original Houston 1836
Joined:
Feb 6, 2025
Posts:
2,919
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Before the 1969 season, in which the Mets won the World series by going 100-62, their combined franchise record was
394-737-5. That's a winning percentage of .349.
By starting their franchise 343 games under .500 in the first 7 years, the Mets have never made it up to a .500 record all-time. They are currently 4873-5192-8, 319 games under .500.
The ties come from the 60s and 70s before everything was on TV. If they had a game that got rain delayed to the end of the season and it wasn't going to decide the pennant, they wouldn't finish it.
394-737-5. That's a winning percentage of .349.
By starting their franchise 343 games under .500 in the first 7 years, the Mets have never made it up to a .500 record all-time. They are currently 4873-5192-8, 319 games under .500.
The ties come from the 60s and 70s before everything was on TV. If they had a game that got rain delayed to the end of the season and it wasn't going to decide the pennant, they wouldn't finish it.
One thing the Mets couldn't do was beat the Astros that year, finishing 2-10 against them and losing their last 9 games.
This was kind of a big deal to a kid who used to wait for the Houston Post every morning to check the standings and see where the Astros stood in their annual race for 9th place against the Mets.
This was kind of a big deal to a kid who used to wait for the Houston Post every morning to check the standings and see where the Astros stood in their annual race for 9th place against the Mets.
One reason those Orioles didn't have a losing record was because Jim Palmer was great.
I've been going to MLB games for 61 years. 1969 was the greatest season ever. The Cubs collapsing and the Mets coming absolutely out of nowhere was beyond belief. Beating the Orioles in the WS was the craziest thing I've ever seen in my life and I am a die hard long time sports fan.
Ruth only won one MVP because of league rules for the majority of his career that restricted a player from winning the award more than once.
Without that rule, how many times do you think he would have won it?
Once they lifted the rule in 1929, he never finished higher than 5th.
But look at 1929...Lou Fonseca won the MVP with Cleveland
L.Fonseca
5.6 WAR, 97 R, 207 H, 6 HR, 103 RBI, .369/.427/.532
B.Ruth
8.2 WAR, 121 R, 172 H, 46 HR, 154 RBI, .345/.430/.697
Ruth finished NINTH in the voting. The Yankees finshed 2nd in the AL but the A's won the pennant, not Cleveland.
Was there Ruth fatigue with the sports writers?
Without that rule, how many times do you think he would have won it?
Once they lifted the rule in 1929, he never finished higher than 5th.
But look at 1929...Lou Fonseca won the MVP with Cleveland
L.Fonseca
5.6 WAR, 97 R, 207 H, 6 HR, 103 RBI, .369/.427/.532
B.Ruth
8.2 WAR, 121 R, 172 H, 46 HR, 154 RBI, .345/.430/.697
Ruth finished NINTH in the voting. The Yankees finshed 2nd in the AL but the A's won the pennant, not Cleveland.
Was there Ruth fatigue with the sports writers?
random baseball reference oddity...
in 1990 at age 42...Carlton Fisk posted 4.9 WAR
can't be too many 42-year old position players who have done better
in 1990 at age 42...Carlton Fisk posted 4.9 WAR
can't be too many 42-year old position players who have done better
Looking at Jim Kaat's page today. He played A LONG time (25 years) but still never reached 300 W or 3,000 K.....never led the league in ERA or SOs.....only won 20 games once....only named an AS three times and only finished top 5 in CY once. This was all a big surprise to me.
He did win a mountain of gold gloves though, which I did know.
He did win a mountain of gold gloves though, which I did know.
Jim Kaat had the fortune or misfortune to match up with Sandy Koufax 3 times in the 1965 World Series
beat him in Game 2
but Sandy threw complete game shutouts in games 5 and 7
beat him in Game 2
but Sandy threw complete game shutouts in games 5 and 7
Featured Stories
See All
37:55
1d ago
5.5k
6:42
1d ago
5.2k
25 Players in 25 Days: #16 Terry Bussey
by Billy Liucci
Five takeaways from summer hoops practices under Bucky McMillan
by Luke Evangelist
Snippets from Day 2 of Texas A&M's fall practices
by Olin Buchanan
Concepcion's addi-cion could take A&M's offense to a new dimen-cion
by Olin Buchanan
Ben Puig 97
Five takeaways from summer hoops practices under Bucky McMillan
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
25