Linkletter Was Right
Posted by Steve Lombardi on June 23, 2010
This is the year that my youngest child, who's six, has really gotten into baseball. As such, while we're watching games on TV together, he's been peppering me with questions.
Now, keep in mind - he's six. So, sometimes the questions are a little wacky...like one of his latest ones, coming during a recent Mets-Yankees game: "Has everyone who played for the Yankees hit a homerun for them?"
This, of course, was an easy one. But, when I told him "No" he followed up with this one: "How many players have hit homeruns for the Yankees?"
And, that's where Play Index really comes in handy! Using the Batting Season Finder and setting it for "Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1876 to 2010, (requiring HR>=1), sorted by greatest number of players matching criteria" today I came up with this list:
.
What Dad's did before Play Index, well, I dunno...
June 23rd, 2010 at 12:14 pm
This is great. If my son ever asks me about the Wilmington Quicksteps or the Cincinnati Kelly's Killers, I'll have a ready answer. Thanks!
June 23rd, 2010 at 12:23 pm
Apparently GOD didn't let the apostles swing away on 3-0. That team actually OUT PERFORMED their pythag.
June 23rd, 2010 at 12:33 pm
It's interesting to see the logical groupings (8 original NL franchises, followed by 8 original AL franchises, followed by the expansion franchises), but there are a couple of exceptions. Both the Padres and Expos / Nationals (1969-pres) have more players than the Astros (1962-pres), and the Mariners (1977-pres) have almost as many as the Royals (1969-pres) and could sneak ahead this season.
June 23rd, 2010 at 12:42 pm
I want to see Minnesota get a second team just to see the St. Paul Apostles playing again.
Thanks for telling us the settings on the query. That is really very useful.
June 23rd, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Very simple and neat idea, Steve.
I'd like to see this same list, but normalized to games played by the franchise.....anybody? anybody? Bueller?
June 23rd, 2010 at 1:58 pm
I love that Arizona isn't yet ahead of a team that doesn't play anymore.....
June 23rd, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Just off the top of my head I would have thought the numbers would be greater...really lets you know just how few people have hit a home run in the big leagues. Great post.
June 23rd, 2010 at 6:06 pm
Steve - Did you ask your son if he considered the '01-'02 Orioles as part of the Yankees history? 🙂
June 23rd, 2010 at 6:43 pm
I'd like to see this same list, but normalized to games played by the franchise.
There's really not that much to see. Among current teams, all the expansion teams are clustered at the top, with the Cubs and Braves next, followed by the Astros, then all the rest of the Original Sixteen. The Yankees are next to last, ahead of only the Twins.
Most of the defunct franchises are ahead of all the current teams because so few players were used in nineteenth-century baseball.
One unrelated note: If B-Ref's tally of each franchise's total games played is accurate as of today, this coming Saturday the Cubs will become the first big-league team to play 20,000 games when they visit the White Sox. Let the drinking begin!
June 23rd, 2010 at 8:06 pm
I wonder if the Yankees are so low on the list (7th out of the original 8 AL franchises) because they've just had fewer players than the others, on account of how they've had good players who stay with them for years rather than constantly replacing one lot of mediocrities with another. So it would be interesting to see what happens if you drop the HR >= 1 condition.
June 23rd, 2010 at 8:18 pm
OK, I took my own suggestion. If I did it right, the Yankees are also 7th in the AL in total number of players, 1514, just 4 more than the Twins. Curiously, the Athletics and Indians have had more players than the Dodgers and the Giants. The Orioles have also had more players than the Giants.
June 24th, 2010 at 8:40 am
@3 - I'm not that surprised at the Mariners being ahead of the Royals--the Kingdome was very hitter-friendly. However, haven't the Padres spent their entire existence in pitcher's parks? I can't believe they're ahead of the Astros.
June 24th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Well, it only takes one to get on the list. If you cranked it up to something like 15, park effects might be more pertinent. Heck, any of these players could have hit their shots on the road.
June 24th, 2010 at 7:24 pm
How close are the Cubs to 10,000 losses? It's lonely for the Phillies at the top! Or did the Cubs quietly pass that figure at some point since July 2007, with no big deal made over it because they weren't the first?
June 25th, 2010 at 10:54 am
DD - The Phillies stand alone. The Braves are second with 9914.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/