I.                  Baseball

A few days ago I had the following exchange in Hey, Bill:

If there is any reason to issue an intentional walk, should the determining factor be the overall quality of the hitters at the plate and on deck, or should it be the batting averages of those players? Aren’t you generally trying to minimize the chances of giving up one important run? But a lot of IBB are issued to low-average power hitters, who aren’t particularly likely to drive in a runner from second base.

Asked by: macthomason

Answered: 11/6/2011

In general a batting average test would be more useful (in an IBB situation) than an overall-hitting ability test, although, to an extent, this buys into the logic of the intentional walk by assuming that you can ignore the overall quality of the hitter you are dodging. One of the reasons that you shouldn’t walk the 8^th hitter is that, in the big picture, this tends to cause at bats to go to BETTER hitters, rather than worse. Let’s say it’s the 8^th inning, you’re down 3-2, first base open, 8^th place hitter at the plate. You MAY walk him to dodge the immediate danger, but then what does that do to you in the 9^th inning? It is very probable that, by walking the 8^th place hitter, you are bringing to the plate in the 9^th inning the cleanup hitter, so then you have taken an at bat away from an 8^th place hitter and handed it to the cleanup hitter. So it’s not an absolute truth that the overall ability of the hitter is less relevant than his batting average, UNLESS you buy into the immediate, short-term logic of the intentional walk.

It would be an interesting study whether high-average hitters are intentionally walked more often than low-average power hitters of the same overall quality. I would bet that they ARE, but. . .haven’t actually done the study.

      OK, I decided to study the issue of whether high-average hitters are in fact intentionally walked more often than low-average power hitters of the same overall quality.    To study this issue, I took all hitter/seasons with 500 or more plate appearances since 1955, the year that IBB data begins.    There are 6,904 such seasons.   I figured the Runs Created per 27 outs for every hitter, and sorted the players top to bottom in RC27.   Then I looked for "matched sets" of hitters in which

a)      Both hitters had the same Runs Created per 27 outs, but

b)      One player had a batting average at least 50 points higher than the other. 

For example, Rod Carew in 1977 (.388 average, 239 hits, 14 homers, 100 RBI) was matched with Derek Lee in 2005 (.335 average, 50 doubles, 46 homers) because each player created 10.75 runs per 27 outs, but Carew’s batting average was 53 points higher than Lee’s.   Joe Mauer in 2009 (.365, 28 homers, 97 RBI) was matched with Carlos Pena in 2007 (.282, 46 homers, 121 RBI) because both players created 9.76 runs per 27 outs, but Mauer’s batting average was 83 points higher than Pena’s.  Tony Gwynn in 1987 was matched with Jim Thome in 1995, Wade Boggs in 1988 was matched with Dick Allen in 1972, George Brett in 1983 was matched with Jason Giambi in 2003, Rod Carew in 1974 was matched with Mickey Tettleton in 1995, Pete Rose in 1979 was matched with Harmon Killebrew in 1962, etc., etc.   By this method I was able to form 352 matched sets of players, with high-average hitters in one group and power hitters in the other.    

I will post the raw data files with this article, but here is the data from a few more of the matched sets:

Overall, the high-average hitters averaged .315 with 10 homers, 68 RBI, 179 hits, 42 walks, 57 strikeouts, 82 runs scored.   The power hitters averaged .248 with 27 homers, 82 RBI, 126 hits, 81 walks, 116 strikeouts, 80 runs scored.   The "Group B" hitters averaged twice as many walks, twice as many strikeouts, 53 fewer hits but almost three times as many home runs.   The "Group A" hitters had just short of twice as many triples and stole almost twice as many bases, although, interestingly enough, the power hitters actually had a higher stolen base percentage (.689 to .682).   The "Group B" hitters were taller and heavier (18 pounds heavier on average), and slightly older (29.1 average vs. 28.5).  The two groups of hitters were very, very different, but overall one was not better than the other.

OK, to jump ahead now to the answer:  Do the high-average hitters in fact draw more intentional walks, as Mr. Thomason speculated that they should, and I speculated that they would?

No, in fact, they do not.   In fact, the power hitters were intentionally walked more often than the singles hitters—22% more often, per plate appearance.   It appears, given this much data, that the intentional walk is used more often in fear of the long ball than in fear of a single. 

We shouldn’t make too much out of this.   It is possible, even likely, that this data makes complete sense if you understand it better.   The real situations in which intentional walks occur are more complicated than our generalizations about them.    But still. ...if the question is limited to who gets walked more often, high-average hitters or power hitters, the answer is power hitters.

* * * * * * * * *

      The greatest 40-homer season of all time was by Hank Greenberg in 1937--.337 with 49 doubles, 14 triples, 40 homers, 183 RBI.   The worst 40-homer season was by Darrell Evans in 1985--.248 with 40 homers, 17 doubles, no triples, 94 RBI.

      The greatest 39-homer season was by Rogers Hornsby in 1929--.383 with 39 homers, 149 RBI, 156 runs scored, 229 hits, 47 doubles.    The worst 39-homer season was by Mark McGwire in 1990--.235 with 39 homers, 16 doubles, no triples, 123 hits, 87 runs scored.

      The greatest 38-homer season was by Chuck Klein in 1932--.348 with 50 doubles, 15 triples, 38 homers, 137 RBI, 226 hits, 152 runs scored.  The worst 38-homer season was by Gorman Thomas in 1980--.239 with 38 homers, 170 strikeouts, .774 OPS.

      The greatest 37-homer season ever was by Ted Williams in 1941.    The worst 37-homer season ever was by Dave Kingman in 1982--.204 with 9 doubles, 1 triple, 37 homers, 156 strikeouts.   With one more hit Williams’ average would have been twice Kingman’s.

      The greatest 36-homer season ever was by Al Simmons in 1930--.381 with 41 doubles, 16 triples, 36 homers, 165 RBI.    The worst 35-homer season ever was by Tony Armas in 1983--.218 with 36 homers, 29 walks, 31 grounded into double play. 

      The greatest 35-homer season ever was by Babe Herman in 1930--.393 with 35 homers, 241 hits, 48 doubles, 11 triples.   The worst 35-homer season ever was by Dave Kingman in 1986--.210 with 35 homers, 33 walks, 94 RBI.

      The greatest 34-homer season ever was by Lou Gehrig in 1932--.349 with 34 homers, 151 RBI.   The worst 34-homer season ever was by Lee May in 1970--.253 with 34 homers, 94 RBI, strikeout/walk ratio of 125 to 38.

      The greatest 33-homer season ever was by Todd Helton in 2003--.358 with 49 doubles, 33 homers.    The worst 33-homer season ever was by Cory Snyder in 1987--.236 with 33 homers, 82 RBI, 166 strikeouts, 31 walks.

      The greatest 32-homer season ever was by Lefty O’Doul  in 1929--.398 with 254 hits, 152 runs scored.    The worst 32-homer season ever was by Ron Kittle in 1984--.215 with 32 homers, 74 RBI, 100 hits, 15 doubles, no triples.

      The greatest 31-homer season ever was by Joe Medwick in 1937--.374 with 31 homers, 154 RBI, 237 hits, 56 doubles, won the Triple Crown.   The worst 31-homer season ever was by Jeromy Burnitz in 2003--.239 with 31 homers, 77 RBI.

      The greatest 30-homer season ever was by Joe DiMaggio in 1941.  The worst 30-homer season ever was by Dave Kingman in 1985.   This was very much like his seasons in 1982 and 1986.

      The greatest 29-homer season ever was by Edgar Martinez in 1995--.356 with 52 doubles, 29 homers, 116 walks.    The worst 29-homer season ever was by Mark McGwire in 2001--.187 with 29 homers, 4 doubles, no triples. 

      The greatest 28-homer season ever was by Earl Averill in 1936--.378 with 232 hits, 39 doubles, 15 triples, 28 homers, 126 RBI.   The worst 28-homer season ever was by Tony Armas in 1982.

      The greatest 27-homer season ever was by Lou Gehrig in 1928--.374 with 27 homers, 142 RBI.   The worst 27-homer season ever was by Joe Pepitone in 1969--.242 with 27 homers, 70 RBI.

      The greatest 26-homer season ever was by Rogers Hornsby in 1927--.361 with 26 homers, 205 hits, OPS of 1.037.   The worst 26-homer season ever was by Aaron Hill in 2010--.205 with 26 homers, 68 RBI.

      The greatest 25-homer season ever was by Rogers Hornsby in 1924, when he hit .424.   The worst 25-homer season ever was by Rob Deer in 1991, when he hit .179.

      The greatest 24-homer season ever was by John Olerud in 1993, when he hit 54 doubles and had an on-base percentage of .473.    The worst 24-homer season ever was by Steve Balboni  in 1987, when he hit 11 doubles and had an on-base percentage of .273.

      The greatest 23-homer season ever was by Bill Terry in 1930, when he was the last National Leaguer to hit .400.    The worst 23-homer season ever was by Ruben Rivera in 1999, when hit .195 with 23 homers, 48 RBI.     No mention of The Glove would be appropriate at this point.

      The greatest 22-homer season ever was by Al Simmons in 1931, when he hit .390.  The worst 22-homer season ever was by Darrell Evans in 1988.

      It is interesting that when you look at it this way, the worst seasons ever are concentrated in the years 1970 to 1990—but when you look at it this way (follows) you get the opposite effect. 

      The greatest season ever by a player with a batting average of .200 to .204 was by Dave Kingman in 1982--.204 with 37 homers, 99 RBI.    The worst season ever by a player with a batting average in that range was by George McBride in 1914--.203 with no homers, 24 RBI in 156 games.  

      The greatest season ever by a player hitting .205 to .209 was by Yank Robinson in 1888; Yank had 94 hits but scored 97 runs because he drew 118 walks and stole 39 bases.    The worst season in this range was by Hal Lanier in 1968--.206 with no homers, 27 RBI in 151 games, 12 walks giving him an on base percentage of .222.

      The greatest season ever by a player hitting .210 to .214 was by Gene Tenace in 1974--.211 with 26 homers, 73 RBI, 110 walks.   The worst ever was by Ollie O’Mara in 1918--.213 with 8 doubles, 1 triple, 1 homer and 7 walks.   And he was a regular.

      The greatest season ever by a player hitting .215 to .219 was by Hugh Nicol in 1887.  Nicol drew 86 walks, stole 138 bases, and had twenty more runs scored (122) than hits (102).   The worst ever was by Sparky Anderson—yes, that Sparky Anderson—in 1959.   He hit .218 with 9 doubles, no homers, 34 RBI.    

      The best season ever by a player hitting .220 to .224 was by Mark Reynolds this year, 2011.   Reynolds hit .221 with 196 strikeouts, but had 37 homers, 27 doubles and 75 walks, leading to 80+ runs scored and RBI.   The worst season ever by a player hitting .220 to .224 was by Luke Boone in 1914.   Boone had 8 doubles, no homers and was 10-for-28 as a base stealer. 

      The best season ever by a player hitting .225 to .229 was by Carlos Pena in 2009, and the second-best ever was by Carlos Pena this season.  Pena in 2009 hit 39 homers, drove in 100 runs, and drew 87 walks.    The worst season ever by a player hitting .225 to .229 was by Hal Lanier in 1969.

      The best season ever by a player hitting .230 to .234 was by Adam Dunn in 2006--.234 with 40 homers, 112 walks.    The worst was by Horace Clarke in 1968--.230 with 6 doubles, 1 triple and 2 homers in 579 at bats. 

      The best season by a player hitting .235 to .239 was by Adam Dunn in 2008.   The worst was by Del Unser in 1972.

      The best season by a player hitting in the low .240s was by Harmon Killebrew in 1962.  Killebrew led the league in homers (48) and RBI (126), and also drew 106 walks.   The worst was by Don Kessinger in 1968.

      The best season by a player hitting in the upper .240s was by Adam Dunn in 2005.   The worst was by Curtis Wilkerson in 1984.

      The best season by a player hitting .250 to .254 was by Mike Schmidt in 1979.  The worst was by Mike Caruso in 1999.   You know, I hate to confess this, but I honestly don’t remember Mike Caruso.   He batted 529 times, had a .577 OPS, and was 12-for-26 as a base stealer.     I can’t remember ever hearing the name.

      The best season by a player hitting .255 to .259 was by Howard Johnson in 1991, hitting 38 homers, stealing 30 bases, and driving in and scoring well over 100 runs.    The worst was by Pinky Pittenger in 1922, but Pittenger played only 66 games.   The worst by a regular was by Rafael Santana in 1985. 

      The best season ever by a player hitting .260 to .264 was by Jose Bautista last year, 2010, and the second-best was by Curtis Granderson this year.   The worst was by Joe’s hero, Duane Kuiper, in 1976.   Kuiper hit .263 but with no homers, 30 walks, and 10-for-27 as a base stealer.

      The best season by a player hitting in the upper .260s was by Roger Maris in 1961.  The worst was by Bob Lillis in 1964--.268 with no homers, .604 OPS. 

      The best season by a player hitting in the low .270s was by Mark McGwire in 1997, the 58-homer warmup to his 70-homer 1998.  McGwire was traded from Oakland to St. Louis in mid-season.  The worst season by a player hitting in the low .270s was by Joe Girardi in 1992. 

      The best season by a player hitting in the upper .270s was by McGwire in 1999.  The worst season by a regular player hitting .275 to .279 was by Mario Guerrero in 1978.   Guerrero hit .275 but with only 15 walks, 3 homers, and no stolen bases.

      The best season ever by a player hitting in the lower .280s was by Ken Griffey Jr. in 1998.  The worst by a regular was by Doc Cook in 1914.   Cook was 26-for-58 as a base stealer.

      The best season by a player hitting in the upper .280s was by David Ortiz in 2006.   The worst was by Felix Millan in 1968 (.289 but with a .661 OPS, leading to 49 runs scored, 33 RBI in 149 games.)   I don’t know if you guys remember Felix Millan; he was a "good" singles hitter in the vein of Glenn Beckert.    He had the bad judgment to start a fight with Ed Ott, who picked him up and body-slammed him, leading to an injury that, as I recall, pretty much ended his major league career.

      The best season in the low .290s was by Barry Bonds in 1997—40 homers, 145 walks, 37 stolen bases.    The worst was by Lee Magee in 1912, who had no homers and was 16-for-49 as a base stealer. 

      The best season by a player hitting just short of .300 was by Mark McGwire in 1998, .299 with 70 homers.    The worst season by a regular player hitting in that range was by Kirby Puckett in 1984--.296 but with no homers and 16 walks.

II.               Not Baseball

If the NBA lockout ever ends, I’ll bet one of the first things we’ll see will be a huge changing of the guard among the league’s best players.   Don’t you just know that there are a bunch of young players out there who are working, working, working, using this time to develop their skills, while there are other players who are having the longest off-season of their lives and are just laying around eating and getting fat.    When the games begin again there are going to be guys who are 10% better and guys who are 10% worse, and if the norm is 500 and the standard deviation is 100, you move up 10% and you’ve jumped a class.  

* * * * * * * *

            Did any of you see the testimony of Kenneth Dunlap in front of the Senate Aviation Security Committee on C-Span?   All I can say is "THANK GOD".   At last, we appear to have somebody with a modicum of common sense taking control of transportation security.   Questions and answers like … these are not exact quotes … "Q.  If you don’t scan everybody’s luggage, wouldn’t there be a certain number of guns that accidentally slip through?"  "A. You can scan everybody’s luggage for guns without scanning everybody for scissors and toenail clippers."   "Q.  This new technology that can detect explosives walking around through the airport … won’t that be expensive?"  "A. The cost of new technology is nothing compared to the money we’re currently wasting searching people who aren’t any threat to the system for weapons that aren’t dangerous to anybody." We’re probably three, four years away from making real progress and I’m 62 years old, but still … I can’t wait.

* * * * * * * *

            Speaking of age, who exactly is still watching the Lawrence Welk re-runs that PBS insists on broadcasting 4 hours a week?   My mother-in-law is 88, and lives in a retirement community with other people in their 80s and 90s. I asked her if she watches Lawrence Welk.   "Oh, no," she said, with the exact same look she would give me if I had asked her if she voted for Abraham Lincoln. Does anybody in the place she lives watch?   She didn’t think so.

            Who is watching it, then?   What PBS is missing is that this was a show for old people when it was part of the regular TV schedule. 45 years ago.  It’s not a show for old people anymore; it’s now a show for dead people. I think Andy Rooney was the last person watching.

* * * * * * * *

            I once hit a bicyclist with my car. Wait a minute; it was raining, and I couldn’t have been driving five miles an hour, and this college student on a bicycle whipped out in front of me, and my car pushed him down.  I pulled the hand brake and hopped out to ask him if he was OK, but before I could get to the front of the car he was back on his bike riding away, waving to me in what I suppose was a signal that he was fine. It was nothing; nothing happened there. But I did hit a bicyclist with my car, and hitting a bicyclist with your car is a very serious event. 

            I mention this incident with regard to Herman Cain’s sexual harassment charges. Until this last woman came forward, Ms. Bialek (or, as Herman would call her, Ms. Bialek-a-deck-a-leck-i-stan) … until she stepped forward I have been arguing that the sexual harassment charges against him were going to blow over and would, in the main, help Herman Cain, rather than hurt him.  Why?

            Because people are deeply skeptical about sexual harassment charges, and people are deeply skeptical harassment charges because sometimes, they’re just bullshit. I remember the Clarence Thomas struggle. At that time the concept of "sexual harassment" was pretty new to the law, and feminists would spend a fair amount of time trying to get people to take the concept seriously. "This is a serious matter," they would say; "sexual harassment is a serious crime."

            Well … sometimes it’s a serious crime. Hitting bicyclists with your car is serious. If you’re drunk, driving 70 in a 30 MPH zone and you kill a kid on a bicycle, that’s really, really serious.   If you’re not drunk but you’re driving 40 in a 30 MPH zone and you kill somebody, that’s serious. If you’re obeying the speed laws and the kid only has a crushed pelvis but will recover and be fine in a couple of months, that’s still very serious. If you’re driving as carefully as you possibly can and there’s a very minor incident in which no one is hurt and the bicycle is not scratched, not so much.  

            The problem with the concept of "sexual harassment", so far, is that it fails to distinguish between serious events with serious consequences and trivial events with no real consequence.   Everybody knows this on some level except the lawyers and the journalists, so people generally ignore sexual harassment charges unless they actually know what happened. Ms. Bialek’s appearance changes the ball game, for Cain, because she has a face and she has a story.