Comments on: July 11, 1941: Game 50 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2012/07/11/july-11-1941-game-50/ Development site for Bronx Banter Blog's upcoming look and feel Thu, 23 May 2013 20:03:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: monkeypants http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2012/07/11/july-11-1941-game-50/#comment-284131 monkeypants Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:55:19 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=88316#comment-284131 [3] <i>indeed perhaps a shade higher</i> Actually, looking over the numbers, the average OBP of the top ten, minus Williams, appears to be a bit lower. [3] indeed perhaps a shade higher

Actually, looking over the numbers, the average OBP of the top ten, minus Williams, appears to be a bit lower.

]]> By: monkeypants http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2012/07/11/july-11-1941-game-50/#comment-284130 monkeypants Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:51:44 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=88316#comment-284130 [1] OK, so looking at the top OBP guys from 1941: Williams (.5528) Cullenbine (.4519) DiMaggio (.4396) Fletcher (.4212) Hack (.4169) Keller (.4164) Foxx (.4121) Grace (.4104) Travis (.4100) Camilli (.4066) Williams stands out, of course, but he was really an outlier. But compare that to some recent random year. I'll pick 2009 before looking: Mauer (.4439) Pujols (.4429) Johnson (.4258) Helton (.4155) Votto (.4136) Youkilis (.4133) Fielder (.4117) Ramirez (.4101) Gonzalez (.4074) Jeter (.4059) without a Williams or Ruth or Bonds, the more recent top ten OBP are more or less in line, indeed perhaps a shade higher, yet the top BAs today tend to be lower. The entire approach to hitting and pitching has evolved. In the old days, hits were simply more valued, I think. [1] OK, so looking at the top OBP guys from 1941:

Williams (.5528)
Cullenbine (.4519)
DiMaggio (.4396)
Fletcher (.4212)
Hack (.4169)
Keller (.4164)
Foxx (.4121)
Grace (.4104)
Travis (.4100)
Camilli (.4066)

Williams stands out, of course, but he was really an outlier. But compare that to some recent random year. I’ll pick 2009 before looking:

Mauer (.4439)
Pujols (.4429)
Johnson (.4258)
Helton (.4155)
Votto (.4136)
Youkilis (.4133)
Fielder (.4117)
Ramirez (.4101)
Gonzalez (.4074)
Jeter (.4059)

without a Williams or Ruth or Bonds, the more recent top ten OBP are more or less in line, indeed perhaps a shade higher, yet the top BAs today tend to be lower. The entire approach to hitting and pitching has evolved. In the old days, hits were simply more valued, I think.

]]> By: monkeypants http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2012/07/11/july-11-1941-game-50/#comment-284129 monkeypants Thu, 12 Jul 2012 02:45:16 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=88316#comment-284129 [1] Getting at the answer lies, I think, in looking at OBP, excepting freaks like Ted Williams and Babe Ruth. Were OBPs generally higher? i suspect not. Rather, I suspect that hitting philosophy was greatly different from today, with more emphasis placed on BA and contact and not striking out, and less emphasis placed on walks. At the same time, I suspect that pitchers tended to pitch much more to contact. So my guess is that overall, the best hitters tended to be those with high averages, while overall the average OBP was probably not much different from today. Anyway, that's my guess. [1] Getting at the answer lies, I think, in looking at OBP, excepting freaks like Ted Williams and Babe Ruth. Were OBPs generally higher? i suspect not. Rather, I suspect that hitting philosophy was greatly different from today, with more emphasis placed on BA and contact and not striking out, and less emphasis placed on walks. At the same time, I suspect that pitchers tended to pitch much more to contact. So my guess is that overall, the best hitters tended to be those with high averages, while overall the average OBP was probably not much different from today.

Anyway, that’s my guess.

]]> By: RIYank http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2012/07/11/july-11-1941-game-50/#comment-284128 RIYank Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:01:39 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=88316#comment-284128 How were batting averages so much higher then? I know Joe never struck out, but his BABIP was also phenomenal. Oh, and I shouldn't get all excited about <a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/yankees/mo_surprise_ogf4OfTJP19NBdvzfDZPQK" rel="nofollow">this, right?<a> How were batting averages so much higher then? I know Joe never struck out, but his BABIP was also phenomenal.

Oh, and I shouldn’t get all excited about this, right?

]]>