24 Responses to “The Oldest Member of the 40-10 (HR-3B) Club”

1. Hartvig Says:
   September 12th, 2011 at 10:24 pm

   Amazing how many current or future Hall of Famers are on the first 2 lists. And of the handful that aren't only Granderson and Ken Williams don't have a significant number of advocates for their inclusion.

2. Johnny Twisto Says:
   September 12th, 2011 at 11:01 pm

   Fascinating. I was aware that Granderson's XBH mix was somewhat unusual, but didn't know it was this rare especially in combination with his age. (And it's worth reminding people that triples are much more rare these days than in the first half of the 20th century -- and no, not because today's players don't hustle.) (But of course, HR are more common, and not just because everyone juices, so maybe it's a wash.)

   Another slice of an interesting season for Grandy (our esteemed Duke has been keeping us informed of his superb run-to-hit ratio).

3. Jimbo Says:
   September 13th, 2011 at 1:10 am

   The Babe wins both lists!

4. Jimbo Says:
   September 13th, 2011 at 1:15 am

   You have to draw the line somewhere Raphy. It's just convenient to draw them at nice, round numbers.

5. nightfly Says:
   September 13th, 2011 at 3:27 am

   Yeah, the Babe could play a little. I just stared at his 1921 until my brain cracked. .846 slg (following the .847 he had in 1920). 119 xbh. Great googly moogly.

6. groundball Says:
   September 13th, 2011 at 4:52 am

   It is kind of funny to think how close Ken Williams was to 40-40 in 1922 considering how much hoopla Jose Canseco would get many years later for it.

7. DaveKingman Says:
   September 13th, 2011 at 7:42 am

   I also stole 4 bases and only grounded into 7 DPs in 1979.

   If you look at the tape, I shortened up my stroke that year and hit a lot more balls to the opposite field. Don't know why I couldn't keep it up in the following seasons. Maybe it was the booze.

8. jiffy Says:
   September 13th, 2011 at 10:44 am

   Gotta figure some of Kong's triples were ivy-assisted, or something.

9. Doug Says:
   September 13th, 2011 at 11:19 am

   @5.

   "Yeah, the Babe could play a little."

   There have only been 12 qualifying seasons of OPS over 1.250. The Babe has 6 of them, in a span of 7 years. Barry Bonds (4) and Ted Williams (2) have the others - Bonds' seasons were consecutive, Williams' were separated by 16 years !

10. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 11:23 am

    A more precise way of evaluating the best combination of triples and HR would be modifying Bill James' "Power-speed" number, which does the same thing for stolen bases and HR. The formula would be:

    2X (3B X HR)/(3B + HR)

    This rewards players doing very well in both categories. Granderson's current season would rate as the lowest in the first two charts, since he has the minimum number needed in both catagories (assuming one more HR for #1). Still, it's a mighty impressive season.

    Without running a P-I search, I'm guessing that Babe Ruth's 1921 season that Nightfly mentioned in #5 would top the HR/3B list, followed by Lou Gehrig's 1927 (47 HR/18 3B).

    BTW, Ruth also set the all-time single-season record for Total Bases (457) in 1921, as well as in advanced stats such Runs Created and
    Offensive WAR.

    @6/ Groundball - If Ken Williams thought it was that big a deal to go "40/40" in 1922, he probably could've managed another one HR and three SB; that's what Willie Mays said when Canseco was the first to do it in 1988.

11. BSK Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 12:27 pm

    "(And it's worth reminding people that triples are much more rare these days than in the first half of the 20th century -- and no, not because today's players don't hustle.)"

    What is the reason for this? Improved fielding? Field configuration? Stronger arms? Less risk-taking on the basepaths?

12. The Original Jimbo Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 12:33 pm

    Less risk taking on the bases for sure biggest factor.

13. Johnny Twisto Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 12:42 pm

    I think the park dimensions is easily the biggest factor.

14. Tmckelv Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 1:20 pm

    @11 - 13, I think positioning is also responsible since OFs probably play a little deeper now. If a dead ball guy got a "hold of one" he could hit it over the OF head or shoot it up the gap a little easier (without the "problem" of it going out of the park for a HR).

15. Marc Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 2:59 pm

    Granderson has some crazy stats! A few years ago he and Jimmy Rollins became two of the few members of the 4 X 20 club (20+ 2B, 3B, HR, and SB).

16. The Original Jimbo Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    @6

    I'm sure tons of players could've been 40/40 men, if they just went to the trouble of trying to steal bases at a rate doesn't help the team.

    That year Ken Williams went 37/57 stealing bases. He'd have been better off never running. With a rate like that, guys like Ken Griffey Jr, Chipper Jones, Vlad (extremely close) Guererro etc, could all have been 40/40 men, and Brady Anderson surely could've stolen more bases that year if he wanted to.

    50/50 could've happened if Eric Davis wasn't so injury prone.

17. The Original Jimbo Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 6:31 pm

    Also, amazing how strongly this list correlates with leading the league in RBI's.

18. Dvd Avins Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 8:06 pm

    @10, The power-speed number (which is really just the harmonic mean) gives far more weight to the rarer category, when one is more rare than the other. A better measure would be a weighted harmonic mean, where the denominator would be something like (2*3B + 0.5*HR).

    @everybody, among the several reasons triples have decreased in existence of the DH. Most left fielders these days have more in common with pre-HGH Barry Bonds as fielders than with Greg Luzinski. That was not always the case.

19. Johnny Twisto Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 8:57 pm

    That year Ken Williams went 37/57 stealing bases. He'd have been better off never running.

    You see a lot of big caught stealing numbers back then. I may be mistaken, but I think that is due to the hit-and-run being used a lot. So his SB% is not necessarily representative of the value his running gave the team.

20. Johnny Twisto Says:
    September 13th, 2011 at 9:00 pm

    among the several reasons triples have decreased in existence of the DH. Most left fielders these days have more in common with pre-HGH Barry Bonds as fielders than with Greg Luzinski. That was not always the case.

    I don't understand this, because by that logic, there should be more triples (if there are now more fast LFers than there used to be). Regardless, I think any effect this would have one way or the other is miniscule.

21. Dvd Avins Says:
    September 14th, 2011 at 6:35 am

    Why would moving slow hitters from LF to DH increase the number of triples? It seems pretty clear to me it would decrease them, as outfielders are more able cut off balls in the gap before they get to the wall. The slow players are still in the lineup, there may even be a few more of them, but that, as you say, is minor.

22. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    September 14th, 2011 at 10:46 am

    @18/ Dvd Avins Says:
    "@10, The power-speed number (which is really just the harmonic mean) gives far more weight to the rarer category, when one is more rare than the other..."

    Dvd Avins - Yes, technically, you are correct, but I actually want the rarer event (the triple) to get far more weight, as the triple _is_ far rarer, especially for a big HR hitter.

    @20/ Johnny Twisto - Yes, I don't think we can judge pre-WWII SB percentages by the same standards we have nowadays. We expect a 70%+ SB% nowadays, but back than even the greatest base-stealers such as Ty Cobb, Eddie Collins, and Clyde Milan were under two-thirds. Of course, all these players CS records are quite incomplete.

    Max Carey seems to be one of the few exceptions to this - it makes you appreciate his 51-for-53 SB season in 1922 even more...

23. Johnny Twisto Says:
    September 14th, 2011 at 10:40 pm

    Yes, one almost wonders if some of Carey's CS just got missed and omitted from the official record. But he did have very good percentages in the surrounding seasons too.

    WAR rates him 16 runs above average as a baserunner that season (1922). I'm not sure if those pre-1950 seasons, with no PBP data, are solely based on base stealing or if they somehow estimate other baserunning as well. If it is solely base stealing, then in actuality it is probably the most valuable baserunning season ever. The top seasons post-1950 (which include all baserunning events) are only +18 (Willie Wilson in '79-'80, Maury Wills '62).

    Carey has the 4th most Rbaser for a career. Again, if that's based only on base stealing, my guess is he'd move up to 2nd (behind Rickey Henderson) if we could account for all his baserunning.

24. Johnny Twisto Says:
    September 14th, 2011 at 10:47 pm

    I wondered, *if* hit-and-runs accounted for so many CS at that time, maybe Carey's great SB% had something to do with managers who didn't like to hit-and-run as much as their peers. But he played for so many different managers during his years as a Pirate it seems doubtful. I checked 1920-25, when there was CS data, and Pittsburgh did have much better SB% than the rest of the NL in each of those seasons. Then again, a lot of that is due to Carey himself. If I subtract him out (which I was too lazy to do), it's a lot closer.