Triple Crown winners, plus is this Albert Pujols’ worst season?
Posted by Andy on September 10, 2010
Thanks to reader BSK for the post idea. See, sometimes we agree!
The Triple Crown (leading the league in batting average, home runs, and RBI) is in the news as a few players have a legitimate shot at doing it this season. Let's investigate...
Here are the last 10 winners along with their OPS+ and WAR values in their Triple Crown seasons. In parentheses, I've added the career ranking for that stat among that player's batting-title qualified seasons. In other words, when Lou Gehrig had a 208 OPS+ in 1934, that was the second-best OPS+ he posted among all of his qualified seasons.
- Carl Yastrzemski, 1967, 193 OPS+ (1st), 12.2 WAR (1st)
- Frank Robinson, 1966, 198 OPS+ (1st), 8.3 WAR (2nd)
- Mickey Mantle, 1956, 210 OPS+ (1st), 12.9 WAR (1st)
- Ted Williams, 1947, 205 OPS+ (6th), 10.3 WAR (4th)
- Ted Williams, 1942, 217 OPS (3rd), 11.0 WAR (3rd)
- Joe Medwick, 1937, 180 OPS+ (1st), 8.9 WAR (1st)
- Lou Gehrig, 1934, 208 OPS+ (2nd), 10.7 WAR (2nd)
- Chuck Klein, 1933, 176 OPS+ (1st), 6.9 WAR (1st)
- Jimmie Foxx, 1933, 200 OPS+ (2nd), 10.7 WAR (1st)
- Rogers Horbsby, 1925, 209 OPS+ (2nd), 10.0 WAR (6th)
What we see is that most of these Triple Crown seasons were career years. Of the 20 ranked numbers above, 15 were either 1st or 2nd-place finishes.
In the National League so far this year (as of Thursday before games) we have the following Triple Crown candidates:
- Carlos Gonzalez: 1st in BA, 1st in RBI, T3rd in homers (4 behind Pujols)
- Joey Votto: 2nd in BA (.014 behind Gonzalez), 2nd in RBI (1 behind Gonzalez), and T3rd in homers (4 behind Pujols)
- Albert Pujols: 7th in BA (.029 behind Gonzalez), 3rd in RBI (2 behind Gonzalez), and 1st in homers
Pujols is a longshot at this point, not only because he's nearly 30 points behind Gonzalez but because he'd have to pass SIX other players to take the batting title.
Another interesting thing is how Pujols' OPS+ and WAR rank this year. His OPS+ of 164 is 7th out of 10 career seasons, a lower ranking and lower number than anybody on the list above. His WAR is 5.4 and if we project it to the end of the season he might get to 6.2, which would be 9th highest out of 10 seasons, beating only his second year in 2002. The title of this post suggests that 2010 is Pujols' worst season--that's probably a bit strong, but it would be pretty astonishing to see him win the Triple Crown in a season that's clearly in the lower half of his career. The only guy on the Triple Crown list to do anything like that was Ted Williams, who did it in 1947 with just his 4th-best WAR and 6th-best OPS+.
In Williams' case, those low rankings in his Triple Crown year (well, one of his Triple Crown years) is because the guy just raked and raked and raked. He put up piles of big numbers in his entire career, and just didn't lead in all three categories every single time. He won 4 other batting titles, 2 other HR titles, and 2 other RBI titles. He led the league in OPS+ a total of 9 times, including his two Triple Crown years.
I think the same phenomenon is at work with Pujols this year. The fact that he can compete for a Triple Crown while posting some of his worst career numbers simply means that the rest of his career has been astonishing. He, like Ted Williams, is far an away the best position player of his era, hands down. (I'm discounting Barry Bonds as retired at this point...)
Such an analysis is tougher for the other two candidates since they have had short careers so far. Votto is going to finish this year with his own career highs in OPS+ and WAR, as will Gonzalez. This is more what I'd expect--to have an extraordinary season resulting in three league-leading performances usually requires an extraordinary performance at a personal level.
No so for Pujols, though, who can do it with just a so-so year, for him.
September 10th, 2010 at 8:03 am
Yeah! A post celebrating two of my favorite players! Teddy Ballgame was the freakin' man, and Pujols is the best hitter of the last fifty years.
September 10th, 2010 at 8:11 am
Frank Robinson won only 1 Batting title, 1 RBI Title, and 1 HR Title in his career...they just happened to come in his magical 1966 season.
September 10th, 2010 at 8:24 am
Another amazing little tidbit is Pujols has yet to lead the league in RBI's.
September 10th, 2010 at 8:30 am
What's truly surprising about him never leading the league in RBI is that he's been in the top 5 every year of his career except 2007:
Runs Batted In
2001 NL 130 (5th)
2002 NL 127 (2nd)
2003 NL 124 (4th)
2004 NL 123 (3rd)
2005 NL 117 (2nd)
2006 NL 137 (2nd)
2008 NL 116 (4th)
2009 NL 135 (3rd)
2010 NL 99 (3rd)
September 10th, 2010 at 8:36 am
Am I reading something wrong, or was Pujols' worst year by WAR so far his 2nd year and not his rookie year? I see that he has 5.8 WAR for his 2nd year and a 6.9 for his rookie year. Is the WAR posted under Player Value---Batters not the right number to use?
September 10th, 2010 at 8:36 am
Looks like Ted just missed a 3rd triple crown in 1949, though he and Kell had the same avg .343. Guess a decimal point did him in. He also tied Stephens in ribbies that year with 159. And...he missed yet another one in '41 by 5 ribbies. That's sick. Oddly, his '47 crown he was only 32-114-.343.
September 10th, 2010 at 8:46 am
#5, you're right. I fixed that. Thanks.
September 10th, 2010 at 8:51 am
Pujols has also been in the top 10 in MVP voting every year (top 5 every year but the aformentioned '07). I can't imagine he won't finish in the top 10 again this year. I took a quick look at the three guys I could even imagine having a similar run (Williams, Musial, Bonds) and Stan the Man also had a run of ten years in the top 10 (48-57). None of the others come close.
September 10th, 2010 at 8:59 am
Is Carlos Gonzalez going to end up being the next Dante Bichette, considering he is in the top 3 in all 3 tripple crown categories (1 avg - 1 rbi - t3 hr), but his 4.4 WAR is only 9th in the NL.
I think the only thing that helps CarGo (vs. Bichette's sub-2 WAR in similar seasons with Rockies) is that he is a CF (with only -3 Rpos) and a much better defender for his position. But his overall rating seems to take a pretty good Colorado beating.
September 10th, 2010 at 9:46 am
If Pujols comes up an RBI or 2 short this year, one of the "What if..." games will be the August 23rd game against the Pirates:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PIT/PIT201008230.shtml
Pujols was due up in the 9th with the bases loaded and two outs against a struggling pitcher. He already had a home run, double and a single in 5 ABs, but La Russa chose to pinch hit for him with a rookie catcher, ostensibly so as not to run up the score. I believe the comments at the time were along the lines of having him bat there is not the way to play the game. Obviously he could have just as easily made an out there.
I know that Pujols has been removed from blowouts (winning or losing) on several occasions this season to give him rest and to nurse injuries. I'm not as familiar with how Votto and Gonzalez have been used this season. This strategy is probably good for the team overall in the season, but is might be harmful for a player seeking a triple crown as lopsided games are often an opportunity to put up stats, especially for a player who has been pitched around as much as Pujols has been this year and others. It basically comes down to a similar debate as the one with Ripken of whether additional rest would have improved his performance in the other games enough to offset the missed time.
September 10th, 2010 at 9:47 am
I never liked the "Triple Crown" because of the RBI aspect in the award. RBI's are too dependent on other variables like batting order and the strength of your team-mates. Players who walk a lot are also at a disadvantage.
RBI's are such an overrated statistic anyway. Willie Mays, Tris Speaker and Albert Pujols are three of the greatest offensive players in baseball history and none of them has ever led the league in RBI's.
Joe Jackson, George Brett, Rod Carew, Tony Gwynn, Wade Boggs, Al Kaline, Rickey Henderson, Joe Morgan, Eddie Mathews, Eddie Collins, Paul Molitor, Charlie Gehringer, Vladimir Guererro, Mike Piazza, and Roberto Clemente never led the league in RBI.
Barry Bonds, A-Rod, and Mel Ott only led the league once.
You know who did lead the league in RBI? Vinny Castilla, Preston Wilson, Bret Boone, Andres Gallaraga (twice), Dante Bichette, Darren Daulton, Cecil Fielder (3 times), Ruben Sierra, Howard Johnson, George Bell, Joe Carter, Tony Armas, Hal McCrae, Don Baylor, Larry Hisle, Lee May, George Scott, Jeff Buroughs, Greg Luzinski, Ken Harrleson, Rocky Colavito, Deron Johnson, Dick Stuart, Jim Gentile, Jackie Jensen (3 times), Roy Sievers, Ray Boone, Gus Zernial, Del Ennis, Hank Sauer, Rudy York, Hal Trosky, and Don Hurst.
I prefer a triple crown be the leader in BA./On Base/Slugging, that to me is a more significant version of the triple crown.
Modern players are also at a disadvantage because there are almost twice the number of teams in major league baseball than there were pre-Expansion. It's a lot harder to lead the league in a category when there are 16 teams rather than 8 teams in a league.
September 10th, 2010 at 9:54 am
Being first in just about any stat isn't too important. Take Pujols and his consistent 2nd to 5th RBI finishes.
September 10th, 2010 at 10:03 am
John Q @11 in his final paragraph makes a statement that I have seen made several times on this blog and elsewhere (not meaning to get on John, just wanting to discuss this oft-repeated point) which I believe to be a common misperception:
"Modern players are also at a disadvantage because there are almost twice the number of teams in major league baseball than there were pre-Expansion. It's a lot harder to lead the league in a category when there are 16 teams rather than 8 teams in a league."
Whether there are 8 teams or 16 teams in the league really shouldn't be an issue here. With two leagues - AL and NL - the best talent is split, roughly speaking, equally between the two leagues, with some variation year to year for varying league strength. Whether there are 8 teams or 16 teams, any player good enough to lead the league in a major category is likely to be on a roster somewhere (exceptions might be a player having an unexpectedly good season, especially a young player).
Current players do face the hurdle of a wider talent base because the league is no longer excluding players based upon race and is drawing from more parts of the world. I would characterize this as an advantage that older players received in leading the league in various categories by playing in a segregated league, rather than a disadvantage that modern players face.
September 10th, 2010 at 10:11 am
I would imagine Pujols would have led the league in RBIs a few of those years if the Cardinals had put their high OBP hitters in front of him. Edmonds, Drew, and Rolen were the only regulars who had a .390 or higher OBP and they typically hit 4th ot 5th behind Pujols 3-spot. Such low-OBP players as Vina, Eckstein, Womack, and Renteria dominate the lineups ahead of him.
September 10th, 2010 at 10:48 am
@14 I was under the impression that Pujols was the Cardinals high OBP hitter!
September 10th, 2010 at 11:15 am
The only thing about the triple crown is that it seems the real luck aspect is not the team based RBI stat but the other players in the league, for example Frank Robinson won with only a .316 BA, rarely good enough to lead the league. Starting in 1920, the average ML hitting leader hit .354, the average HR leader hit 43 and the average RBI leader had 133 RBI. If you consider these to be the triple crown standards, the only players to surpass all 3 marks were:
1920 Ruth
1921 Ruth
1926 Ruth
1927 Gehrig
1927 Ruth
1929 Klein
1930 Wilson
1930 Ruth
1931 Ruth
1932 Foxx
1933 Foxx
1934 Gehrig
1936 Gehrig
September 10th, 2010 at 11:32 am
First off, thanks for the post, Andy. You are indulging my curiosity in a way rarely seen.
One of my big questions about this had to do with how impressive we'll consider a Triple Crown performance this year, by anyone. On the one hand, it's the freakin' Triple Crown! On the other, it would pale in comparison to just about any other season one of the competitors is having (among other seasons by other folks). Quite a bizarre situation.
Speaking of Albert, I noticed that with a few more seasons at his typical level, he'll vault into 2nd place all time on MVP Shares. He could do it as quickly as this year, I believe, with a unanimous win (he might be a few decimals short though) and could easily do it in 2 years. What a true beast he is.
As the previous poster said, it also seems as if the "winners" in each category might be lower than we've seen lately. Part of that is due to some, ahem, changes in the sport recently. But otherwise, it's a bit of a fluky year. Does that take anything away from it?
September 10th, 2010 at 11:38 am
Wow Mike, that is shocking, if those are the average numbers to lead the league in each category, that they were all surpassed 12 times in 17 seasons, and never in 75 seasons since.
September 10th, 2010 at 11:40 am
For it to 'take anything away' we'd have to be giving the Triple Crown something first. I don't view it as a particularly amazing achievement. The 10+ WAR seasons are awesome, but whether a guy happens to get the triple crown or not isn't the meaningful thing to me.
Pujols' currently has 5.7 WAR, tied for 6th-best in baseball. Nobody is getting a WAR of 10 this year. This just seems to be a strong year for pitchers, perhaps part of a trend over the coming years. Pujols' down year seems to have more to do with overall offense than a 'poor' performance on his part.
September 10th, 2010 at 12:05 pm
Interesting, Andy (19) that you point out that the Triple Crown isn't an "amazing achievement." I would agree. That doesn't mean, though, that it's not an interesting thing, or that it's not something historic that's fun to talk about. It's actually a lot like hitting for the cycle: sure, a three-homer game is better, but the cycle is neat, and it's fun. Same thing with the TC, only on a season-long scale.
September 10th, 2010 at 12:10 pm
Agreed, David, and your comparison with the cycle is apt. Both the cycle and Triple Crown are rare feats that are very good, but necessarily better than a number of roughly-equally rare events that don't happen to involve round numbers or sets of numbers (such as 1st, 1st, 1st, or 1B, 2B, 3B, HR).
September 10th, 2010 at 12:18 pm
@13, Evan
I have to disagree with your comment. When you double the amount of teams you double the amount of players in the league. It might not necessarily mean that it's twice as hard because but it's going to be harder to lead the league in any category with twice as many players.
Let's look at the last 5 years before expansion and see how many players qualified for the "Batting Title" in the National League and then compare that to 2005-2009.
1956-43 players qualified
1957-41 players qualified
1958-34 players qualified
1959-36 players qualified
1960-38 players qualified
..
..
2009-77 players qualified
2008-73 players qualified
2007-75 players qualified
2006-80 players qualified
2005-67 players qualified
..
So the Median from 1956-1960 was 38 players compared to the median in 2005-2009 of 75 players. Roughly twice as many players compete for a batting title today in the N.L. as they did pre-1961. All it takes is One player from the roughly extra 35 players to knock you out of the lead.
September 10th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
The "Average" triple crown is a little misleading because the 20s-30s had much higher levels than some later eras and they bring the numbers up a bit to the point that only players from that era surpass them.
So, just from 1939-1960, Ted Williams' career, the average triple crown was .348/39/128 for both leagues. Using these standards Williams still never won the triple crown, coming closest in 1949 when he went .343/43/159. The 2 average triple crown winners during Williams career were Musial in his monster 1948 season .376/39/131 and Mantle's actual triple crown win in 1956 .353/52/130.
September 10th, 2010 at 12:36 pm
Andy-
I agree. I was talking about this more from the "fan perspective" than the statistical analytical perspective. Ultimately, the Triple Crown is a quirky coincedence and can be achieved in conjunction with a truly remarkable season or absent one. I think it is kind of cool, only because of the history of it, but realize it doesn't really mean anything at all.
If you had to choose three new Triple Crown stats that weren't particularly advanced statistics, what would you go with? That would be an interesting debate! Of the advanced, I would assume we'd go with WAR, WPA, and OPS+, but leaving those aside, what stats would we use that a fan at home could calculate on his own? OBP? SLUG? OPS? A counting stat like TBs or HRs?
September 10th, 2010 at 12:41 pm
I'd love to see the list of players who led in OPS+, WAR, and WPA....those would be some truly historic seasons.
September 10th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
As a kid, I was a bit disappointed to never had witnessed a triple crown year. This was before Sabermetrics really took off, and mostly before I could understand them anyway. So, the big THREE (HR/RBI/BA) seemed like the perfect player, having the perfect season.
I then devised a formula to award the "triple crown" winner my own way. Which was simple, to take the players rank in all 3 categories and divide by 3. The guy with the lowest number, was the triple crown winner.
In 1923:
1. Heilman : .403
2. Ruth: .393
3. Speaker: .380
4. Collins .360
5. Williams .353
1. Ruth 41
2. Williams 29
3. Heilmann 18
4. Speaker 17
Hauser 17
1. Ruth 131
2. Speaker 130
3. Heilmann 115
9. williams 91
So My "TRIPLE CROWN" numbers would look like this:
1. Ruth 4
2. Heilmann 7
3. Speaker 9
4. Williams 16
I realized along the way, that this system, developed by a much younger (8year) old me, was flawed in that Heilmann finished 3 in HRs that season, but Ruth had 2.3 times his amount, while Ruth received a 2 in average, while only trailing Heilmann by .01.
I started doing the math, which would place a players value in each category, not as the place in which they finished, but by what percentage they were off the leader.
So, in 1923, Ruth would have a full share for his HR and RBI leads, his BA would not be a 2, but a .975, putting his "Triple crown total at 2.975. Giving him a 99% share of the triple crown. Heilmann would have a 77% share, the biggest disparity coming in his HR totals, which were just 43% of Ruth's. Speaker would have 78% share, just nudging out Heilman, due to his high RBI total and nearly identical HR total.
I think it would be fun to give out a TRIPLE CROWN SHARE each year.
But, of course, I'd like all the credit.
And I think Pujols wins every year... except maybe this year.
September 10th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
it does not surprise me that pujols has never won an rbi title, he primarily bats 3rd and obviously gets less chances than a clean up hitter. this is probably more prevalent in the NL where the pitcher is turning over the lineup. matt holliday is the only recent 3 hole hitter that i can remember that won the rbi title and he needed a playoff/163rd game to win it, getting 2 ribs and beating howard 137 to 136. otherwise howard would be working on his 5th straight rbi title.
September 10th, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Albert did the OPS+/WAR/WPA TC in 2006 (178/8.3/9.5)
September 10th, 2010 at 1:19 pm
JoeT-
You did all that at 8??? You must have a collection of nerd hats. And black eyes. :-p
September 10th, 2010 at 1:25 pm
A couple of random thoughts (do I have any other?).
John Q is right that it is more difficult due to more players since expansion. I remember James doing something on this in on of the BB Abstracts. While I remember it not being terribly sicentific, it did illustrate that it was much less likely to happen because of expansion.
And I do think the TC is significant, if only for the historical rarity. It also got me to thinking, when did it become the Triple Crown? What I mean is, when Hornsby led the league in those three categories in 1925, was it referred to as the triple crown? When Medwick did it in '37? I don't know, but it would be interesting to know a little more of the history.
And the third random thought is, did “winning” a triple crown become such a big deal because it happened in back to back years where the individuals who won it pressed their teams to surprising (or somewhat surprising) pennants? I am pretty sure that if someone went back, that Robinson’s TC in ’66 was made out to be a much bigger deal than Mantle’s just a decade earlier. I wonder how much of that was due to Robinson changing teams and leagues (a much more rare occurrence for a player of his stature in those days) and that team winning the pennant after being on the edge of it for a few years? And then the following year, Yaz wins it in dramatic fashion in an even more dramatic pennant race, taking a team that hadn’t sniffed .500 for several years to what was probably the most surprising championship in 50 years.
September 10th, 2010 at 1:30 pm
Bonds won the "Andy Crown" in 1990-93, and again a few years after he reported putitng extra wheatgrass on his pancakes. Or something.
September 10th, 2010 at 1:32 pm
Other winners I found (only works since 1950 because of WPA)
Parentheses are OPS+/WAR/WPA
1951: Ted Williams (165/6.5/6.4)
1953: Al Rosen (179/9.7/6.5)
1956: Mickey Mantle (210/12.9/8.4)
1958: Willie Mays (165/10.4/7.8)
1961: Mickey Mantle (206/11.9/8.9)
1962: Mickey Mantle (196/7.1/8.0)
1964: Willie Mays (172/10.2/6.2)
1967: Carl Yastrzemski (193/12.2/8.5)
1969: Willie McCovey (209/8.9/10.1)
1972: Dick Allen (199/9.3/7.3)
1975: Joe Morgan (169/12.0/7.5)
1976: Joe Morgan (186/10.0/7.0)
1977: Rod Carew (178/10.9/6.6)
1978: Dave Parker (166/7.1/6.4)
1979: Dave Winfield (166/8.4/7.2)
1980: Mike Schmidt (171/9.1/5.9)
1980: George Brett (203/9.6/6.2)
1981: Mike Schmidt (199/7.6/5.9)
1986: Mike Schmidt (152/6.6/5.2)
1990: Barry Bonds (170/9.7/5.7)
1990: Rickey Henderson (188/10.0/5.5)
1991: Barry Bonds (160/8.3/8.1)
1992: Barry Bonds (205/10.0/6.1)
1993: Barry Bonds (204/10.6/7.4)
1994: Jeff Bagwell (213/8.9/5.9)
2001: Barry Bonds (259/12.5/11.5)
2001: Jason Giambi (198/10.3/8.5)
2002: Barry Bonds (268/12.2/10.5)
2004: Barry Bonds (263/12.4/12.9)
2006: Albert Pujols (178/8.3/9.5)
2007: Alex Rodriguez (176/9.9/7.5)
So, that is fairly common, though these are all great seasons.
Multiple Winners:
Barry Bonds (7)
Mickey Mantle (3)
Mike Schmidt (3)
Willie Mays (2)
Joe Morgan (2)
September 10th, 2010 at 1:33 pm
LJF... do you mean he won FROM 1990 to 1993??? As in, 4 consecutive years? Holy crap!
September 10th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
Thanks for the full list, Eric. Rod Carew seems the most out of place to me.
September 10th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Random comment, Prince Fielder (2007, 2009) has led the league in WPA more times than Pujols (2006).
September 10th, 2010 at 2:05 pm
Hey, speaking of WPA, I noticed that they used that stat on Sportscenter last night talking about NL SS ( specifically Tulowitski and his game tying hit and the WPA for the hit).
I haven't been watching SC religiuosly this season, but that is the first time I heard it on there...and the commentator took 3 minutes explaining what it was and why it is important, so I would assume they hadn't brought it up much. The other guy was essentially laughing and calling him a nerd (not is so many words), but it was on there at least.
September 10th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
As Tango has written a lot, WPA is truly a fan's stat. It quantifies what we see and "know." What we identify as big hits are recognized as big hits by WPA. The guys we identify as the hero or player of the game are usually recognized as such by WPA. WPA just systemizes all that for us. (With the limitation that it doesn't measure defense.)
September 10th, 2010 at 2:43 pm
I started doing the math, which would place a players value in each category, not as the place in which they finished, but by what percentage they were off the leader.
The only problem with that is that the stats don't really work on the same scale. There will be much greater variance in HR. A player could have a great season while hitting 20 HR, though the leader has 40. But no one is going to bat .175 and keep his job while the leader is batting .350.
September 10th, 2010 at 2:45 pm
BSK,
The original theorem of simply a player's rank in a certain category was at 8. The much grander and eloquent "share" system, was not developed until I was 11 and began using a calculator.
My nerd hats are my business. The propellers are all broken anyway.
I had only one black eye...but did win the little boy triple crown of BLACK EYE, BROKE BONE, and STITCHES one very unlucky summer. (separate incidents)
Andy,
I know the triple crown, when really examined for what it is, does not make you the best hitter that year, but it is a rare and unique thing and I believe are the three things, regardless of what players say, are how players view themselves.
All the math aside, when it comes down to it, that is what the essence of baseball has been for a century. That's how the general public views baseball.
I think we (nerds) all know a little better; that those stats aren't the best determining factor of a player's worth. But its not the worth/value that makes it of interest.
The same way the decathlon winner is not the best athlete at the olympics.
Or the triple crown of horse racing determines the best horse.
The three big horse races of the triple crown are so different than one another - indurance wise, speed and pacing- it takes a very unique horse to win one.
The same applies here.
BTW
How many RBIs and HRs would Bonds of had if not being intentionally walked 120 times?
September 10th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
A big part of what's holding down Pujols's WAR this year seems to be his defense. His Rfield is at -2, his worst TZ rating since a -4 his second year. He's been at +9 or better each of the last seven years, averaging +15 over that span and peaking at +25 in '07.
September 10th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
@ 1
"Pujols is the best hitter of the last fifty years."
Pujols is truly amazing, but let's not jump the gun. I'd argue that Frank Thomas was actually a bit better than Pujols throughout his 20s. I think sometimes people forget just how good a hitter was then.
Pujols in his 20s: 172 OPS+
Thomas in his 20s: 182 OPS+
September 10th, 2010 at 3:11 pm
Another unrelated fact I just noticed that maybe worthy of a post, Manny Ramirez's career OPS just slipped below 1.000 to .999. It seems like this late he wont be able to get that back up, but a more interesting question whether Pujols will retire with his OPS above 1.000. Currently he is at .425/.625 for a 1.050 OPS, so before his career is over will he be able to lose less than 50 points between his OPS and SLG? I would wager that he would finish below 1.000 when he finally retires.
September 10th, 2010 at 3:19 pm
# 11 John Q
I still think RBIs are important, but your post made me laugh my butt off. What a list of mutts that was.
September 10th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
@37
Johnny is WPA simple enough to ever be an average fan's stat? Look how long it took for the Sportscenter talking head to explain it, presumably to hard core followers.
Why is Chris Nelson's WPA for stealing home last night with the winning run only 0.113? The team's probability went from 11% to 86%! Is the low WPA due to the fact that he did't get on base himself?
September 10th, 2010 at 3:43 pm
Neil, I think JT meant it was a fan's stat not in the sense that it's really easy to understand, but rather in the sense that the results reflect what fans usually think. In 2004-5 when David Ortiz was crushing game-winning home runs, he amassed huge WPA scores, consistent with what fans would expect. When a player hits a lot of solo homers late in games that are already out of reach, fans tend to know it and that guy has a lower WPA.
For what it's worth, WPA is certainly easier for the average fan to understand than WAR.
September 10th, 2010 at 4:03 pm
Good list Eric #32
I was looking at that list and surprised to find that 7 Times the player didn't win the MVP.
Williams-'51
Mays-'58
Mantle-'61
Mays-'64
Winfield-'79
Bonds-'91
Pujols-'06
Mays did it twice and didn't win either years. Williams came in 13!! in the MVP voting in '51. Mantle's team-mate (Maris) beat him out. Winfield got screwed by Jack Murphy stadium in a time period when we didn't know the impact of park factors. I always thought Bonds deserved the MVP back in '91. The Braves and Pendleton were kind of shock in '91 so that helps with the votes. I thought Pujols deserved it in '06. He got hurt by missing a few weeks of the season that year and Ryan Howard's an overrated player helped by Citizen's Bank Park.
September 10th, 2010 at 4:32 pm
#11/ "John Q Says: RBI's are such an overrated statistic anyway. {GROUP #1} Willie Mays, Tris Speaker and Albert Pujols are three of the greatest offensive players in baseball history and none of them has ever led the league in RBI's. {GROUP #1 cont'd:} Joe Jackson, George Brett, Rod Carew, Tony Gwynn, Wade Boggs, Al Kaline, Rickey Henderson, Joe Morgan, Eddie Mathews, Eddie Collins, Paul Molitor, Charlie Gehringer, Vladimir Guererro, Mike Piazza, and Roberto Clemente never led the league in RBI.
You know who did lead the league in RBI? {GROUP #2} Vinny Castilla, Preston Wilson, Bret Boone, Andres Gallaraga (twice), Dante Bichette, Darren Daulton, Cecil Fielder (3 times), Ruben Sierra, Howard Johnson, George Bell, Joe Carter, Tony Armas, Hal McCrae, Don Baylor, Larry Hisle, Lee May, George Scott, Jeff Buroughs, Greg Luzinski, Ken Harrleson, Rocky Colavito, Deron Johnson, Dick Stuart, Jim Gentile, Jackie Jensen (3 times), Roy Sievers, Ray Boone, Gus Zernial, Del Ennis, Hank Sauer, Rudy York, Hal Trosky, and Don Hurst."
JQ, I know you are trying to make the point that the players in group #2 (RBI leaders) are not as good as the HOFers you listed in #1, but several of those RBI leaders WERE legitimately outstanding hitters: Rocky Colavito; Del Ennis; Hal Trotsky (on his way to a HOF-calibre career till migranes derailed him).
Also, in a past "Worst 100-RBI seasons" post, I made a list of great RBI totals that WERE NOT "great" seasons, so I think a lot of us know the disconnect in using RBI totals to evaluate offensive performance.
September 10th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
Interestingly, Pujols has actually led the league in runs scored 4 times and is leading again this year. This despite the fact that he has about 50 more RBIs than runs scored during the course of his career.
September 10th, 2010 at 5:11 pm
"@ 1
"Pujols is the best hitter of the last fifty years."
Pujols is truly amazing, but let's not jump the gun. I'd argue that Frank Thomas was actually a bit better than Pujols throughout his 20s. I think sometimes people forget just how good a hitter was then.
Pujols in his 20s: 172 OPS+
Thomas in his 20s: 182 OPS+"
There was also some guy named Bonds...
September 10th, 2010 at 5:12 pm
@ 1
"Pujols is the best hitter of the last fifty years."
Pujols is truly amazing, but let's not jump the gun. I'd argue that Frank Thomas was actually a bit better than Pujols throughout his 20s. I think sometimes people forget just how good a hitter was then.
Pujols in his 20s: 172 OPS+
Thomas in his 20s: 182 OPS+
There was also some guy named Bonds...
September 10th, 2010 at 5:15 pm
On the issue of whether or not it is easier to lead the league with more teams, I think the real issue with 30 teams vs. 16 teams is that there are some more or less one-dimensional players who would never be given a chance to play if there were only 16 teams.
Take Jose Bautista in the AL this year. It is unlikely anyone catches him in HR this year. But in a 16 team league does Bautista actually get a chance to play?
Similarly in the NL, let's say that Omar Infante gets hot enough so that the extra PAs can be added to his total and he wins the batting crown. In a 16 team league does Infante realistically get this chance?
And so you get players who certainly have talent, but if Infante hits .222 with 9 HR in 121 games (as he did in 2005, albeit at age 23) is he going to remain in a 16 team league? If Bautista hits around .230 with 15 HR for 4 straight years and isn't a tremendous defensive player (which it doesn't look like he is), is he in the league right now leading the AL in HR?
There will always be some one-dimensional type players in the league (even in a 16 team league - Ralph Kiner hit a lot of HR, so he's going to be in someone's lineup), but (in my mind) more teams in the league means that more chances will be taken on these players, making it harder to lead the league in all 3 categories.
September 10th, 2010 at 5:15 pm
By the way, I just through OPS+/WPA/WAR out there as what I would presume is the advanced stats triple crown. If there are other stats that are better suited, those would be worth a look, too. OPS+ and WPA are obviously only hitting stats (as are all the traditional triple crown categories), while WAR takes into account defense and baserunning.
Here's another question, probably too hard to figure out... has a player ever led the league in Rbat, Rfield, and Rbaser? Or, maybe those aren't the exact categories, but basically what I'm asking is, has a guy ever been the best hitter, base runner, and fielder in the same year? My gut tells me this is probably impossible, because the three areas are essentially unrelated so there is more likely to be a couple of extreme outliers in each category. But that would TRULY be something magical.
September 10th, 2010 at 5:16 pm
Why is Chris Nelson's WPA for stealing home last night with the winning run only 0.113? The team's probability went from 11% to 86%! Is the low WPA due to the fact that he did't get on base himself?
You're misreading it. His steal increased the probability of winning by 11% (0.113). With runners on first and third, one out, tie game in the bottom of the 8th, COL already had a 75% chance of winning. His getting that run increased their chance to 86%.
Was it a straight steal? I see the runner on first didn't go to second.
September 10th, 2010 at 5:19 pm
I also see that Nelson somehow went from 1st to 3rd when Mora reached on a groundball error. I don't know what happened there but I'm guessing it's a play on which most runners wouldn't be able to advance two bases. So if WPA were perfectly distributed, Nelson should get some credit for that as well. As is, it all goes to Mora.
September 10th, 2010 at 5:20 pm
@ 1
"Pujols is the best hitter of the last fifty years."
Pujols is truly amazing, but let's not jump the gun. I'd argue that Frank Thomas was actually a bit better than Pujols throughout his 20s. I think sometimes people forget just how good a hitter was then.
Pujols in his 20s: 172 OPS+
Thomas in his 20s: 182 OPS+
There was also this guy named Bonds...
September 10th, 2010 at 5:58 pm
@50 @51
Johnny, you are up to your usual standard of excellence in here. Thank you, I guess I was mis-interpreting the WPA percentages. Be patient with me here. The WPA is based on the probability at the start of the situation, not win possibility after the action is taken?
Intuitively, doesn't that undervalue the action that Chris Nelson took? A steal of home is totally voluntary, under the player's control and his decision-making. Surely, a steal of home is far more valued in WPA than a steal of second or third! Also it was a tie game in the bottom of the eighth. I'm still a little confused about why a daring strategy like stealing home only gets a WPA of 0.113 for the base runner.
September 10th, 2010 at 6:15 pm
@49
Artie, a thought-provoking post. Much food for thought there.
"Take Jose Bautista in the AL this year. It is unlikely anyone catches him in HR this year. But in a 16 team league does Bautista actually get a chance to play?"
I think even in a 16-team major league, in a similar business climate to today, with a team in a rebuilding situation like Toronto's this year, that a cheap player like Bautista gets playing time. Sombody has to eat innings at the positions.
"If Bautista hits around .230 with 15 HR for 4 straight years and isn't a tremendous defensive player (which it doesn't look like he is), is he in the league right now leading the AL in HR?"
Hope you're not saying Baustista is bad defensive player here. He has a cannon for an arm both in RF and at 3B.
September 10th, 2010 at 7:42 pm
@52 Without much looking I thought Willie Mays could have led in Rbat, Rbaser and Rfield, and in 1958 he led in Rbat with 54, Rbaser with 10 but his 15 Rfield was only good enough for and a close 2nd in behind Eddie Mathews' 16. In the AL however Al Kaline posted a 27 Rfield that season.
September 10th, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Johnny Twisto,
Not exactly true.
In 1991, Rob Deer famously hit .178.
The leader that year, nearly doubled him - Julio Franco, .341.
September 10th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
Lawrence Azrin,
It's more of a knock on RBI than a knock on group #2. I agree with you there were some very good hitters in that mix.
It's just if it's supposed to be such an important stat, then why have so few of the greatest offensive players of all time actually led the league in RBI? But on the other hand Willie Mays led the league in ops+ 6 times. Here's a list to compare:
Mays: RBI Titles: 0
Ops+ Titles: 6
Barry Bonds: RBI Titles: 1
Ops+ Titles: 9
Mel Ott: RBI Titles: 1
Ops+ Titles: 5
Mickey Mantle: RBI Titles: 1
Ops+ Titles: 9
Stan Musial: RBI Titles: 2
Ops+ Titles: 6
Frank Robinson: RBI Titles: 1
Ops+ Titles: 4
Yaz: Rbi Titles: 1
Ops+ Titles: 4
George Brett: RBI Titles: 0
Ops+ Titles: 3
Albert Pujols: RBI Titles: 0
Ops+ Titles: 3
September 10th, 2010 at 11:30 pm
@3 Albert has never led the league in RsBI, but he is tied with A-rod for leading the MLs since he came up in 2001.
Rk Player RBI G Age PA AB R H 2B 3B HR BB IBB SO HBP BA OBP SLG OPS
1 Albert Pujols 1211 1536 21-30 6688 5662 1169 1878 420 15 403 894 232 635 70 .332 .425 .625 1.050
2 Alex Rodriguez 1211 1492 25-34 6593 5617 1115 1683 278 16 416 796 78 1201 121 .300 .394 .577 .971
Nearly identical games, at bats, runs, triples, homers. All of Pujols slash stats are significantly better. But check out Al's lead in doubles and especially intentional walks! Think A-Rod had some better lineups around him? Also, Bonds had 249 IBBs from '02-'04.
Ranks 3-7 on this leader board are between 1041 and 1009 RsBI (Ortiz, Manny, Vlad, Berkman, and Carlos Lee).
September 11th, 2010 at 2:44 am
For those who didn't see it, Chris Nelson's steal was a straight steal of home. Pretty amazing to watch live.
Here's the clip: http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=11901015
Nelson told at least one reporter that the play may have been a busted squeeze, so he may not have *wanted* to take as much of a risk as it looked like he did. But give credit where it's due: he stole that bag like Rod Carew.
September 11th, 2010 at 10:38 am
The WPA is based on the probability at the start of the situation, not win possibility after the action is taken?
It is based on the difference between the two. The Rockies already had a 75% chance of winning the game before the steal. After the steal, it was 86%. (Obviously these are just estimates, there is no way to know that for certain, but if you could somehow play the game out millions of times from those particular situations, the results would probably be near that.)
Intuitively, doesn't that undervalue the action that Chris Nelson took? A steal of home is totally voluntary, under the player's control and his decision-making. Surely, a steal of home is far more valued in WPA than a steal of second or third! Also it was a tie game in the bottom of the eighth. I'm still a little confused about why a daring strategy like stealing home only gets a WPA of 0.113 for the base runner.
It's all about the situation where it came. As the home team, with runners on the corners, 1 out, the Rockies already had a very good chance to win, prior to the SB. Think about it...if he doesn't run, they still have a couple chances to knock him in. There's probably at least a 25% chance of a hit by the next batter, which will score him. A medium flyball will score him.
If COL was down by a run, there were two outs, and Nelson was the only runner on, the WPA for the steal would probably be quite a bit higher. If they were winning by 10, they'd already have a ~99% chance of winning, so the WPA for a steal there would be miniscule.
Anyway, WPA doesn't judge daringness, only the impact on the game. If he scored on passed ball, it's the same impact. But as fans, we can appreciate the difference.
September 11th, 2010 at 11:15 am
@63
JT, at risk of being a huge suck-up, you should write "Sabermetrics For Dummies". I think I'm beginning to get a grasp on WPA. {puts big bill in JT's tip jar}
You've explained how the 0.11 was calculated and why a steal of home appeared to be worth so little. Chris Nelson was probably going to score anyway, although we'll never know. He took matters into his own hands.
But how different the baserunning instincts of his action compared to a Molina coming home on a pass ball, even though both would get the same WPA!
September 11th, 2010 at 11:27 am
I posted this run expectancy chart in another thread: http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html
With runners on the corners and 1 out, an average of 1.243 runs score. Now that's for 1999-2002, and scoring levels are a little lower now. But this game was taking place in COL, where scoring is higher. So I don't know what the "true" run expectancy for that situation is, but it's probably somewhere around 1.2 to 1.3. And that's what WPA is based on. COL has an very good chance of scoring there, and ultimately winning the game. Like I said when I called WPA a "fan's stat," if you're a COL fan watching the game, you're probably already feeling pretty good before the Nelson steal, even though it's still tied. The B-R boxscore says the biggest play for COL was when Tulowitzki led off that inning with a HR, to tie it up. Once they get tied in the bottom of the inning as the home team, they're the favorites to win. Putting runners on adds to that.
Thanks for the nice words Neil.
September 11th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
@52 BSK:
I checked through the league leaders in rbat (adjusted batting runs) and rfield (total zone runs) and the only times I had to check baserunning was Bonds in 1990 and Pujols in 2007/2008.
The offensive and defensive seasons just don't seem to line up all that well. Especially for Mays. He led the NL in rfield 3 times and rbat 5 times, but never in the same season.
Also, at a quick glance at the league leaders in rfield, Pujols has to be either the only one or one of very few to lead their league as a firstbaseman. Most are outfielders, shortstops, and thirdbaseman. If any one else wants to see if they can find a full-time firstbaseman leading the league in rfield, the league leaders are here-->http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/tz_runs_total_tf_leagues.shtml
September 11th, 2010 at 3:00 pm
@65
JT, just added the link to my Favorites, had a peek, and am considering pulling out my credit card for your book. Didn't know you were a "professional" baseball writer. {not a relative or friend of Tom's}
September 12th, 2010 at 10:35 am
I am not a professional writer, I have nothing to do with that site. Sorry for any implication otherwise.
September 13th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Pujols joined Gehrig, Musial, and Mays as the only players with 300+ TB in 10 straight seasons.