DrungoHazewood

Oh, I don't know. I thought when accusing someone of wild malpractice over possibly, maybe, slightly speeding up highlights that kind of opened the door to a little goofy exaggeration.

Hollocher hit almost exclusively 2nd in the order. The Cubs' 3rd hitters (and it was the Cubs, not the Indians as I previously stated) were mostly Marty Krug, Zeb Terry, and John Kelleher. Krug was awful for a 1922 3rd-place hitter, with an 83 OPS+ in his only season as a MLB regular, but he only struck out 43 times in 524 PAs. Terry was worse, OPS+ing 74, but with just 16 Ks in 571 PAs. And Kelleher was the worst of the bunch, OPS+ing 60, while striking out 14 times in 222 PAs. Cubs manager Reindeer Bill Killefer stuck hard and fast to the old rule of thumb that the catcher should bat 8th, even if it's Bob O'Farrell and he hit .324 with an .880 OPS. Ray Grimes had a 1.014 OPS and batted cleanup. But Hack Miller and his .899 OPS batted mostly 6th. Statz wasn't a terrible leadoff hitter, was one of only a couple players who had a SB% higher than 50%, but was 6th among their regulars in OBP. That's as bad a bunch of #3 hitters as I've seen in a while, yet the Cubs finished 80-74-2. Just goes to show you batting order doesn't really matter. Anyway, back to the main point... yes, I'm sure some of Hollocher's CS were busted hit-and-runs. But nobody that regularly batted behind him struck out in even 7% of PAs so they shoulda been putting the ball in play the vast majority of the time.

Hangover from the teens, where it wasn't a matter of if you were going to bunt, steal, or hit-and-run, but when. The 1915 Baltimore Terrapins had 36 homers, slugged .325 as a team, and had 178 sac hits. They were shut out 16 times and had another 28 games where they scored a single run, and were 0-44 in those games. One-run strategies? Hell yes!

I'm sure that I've read that both Boileryard Clarke and Bill Hoffer were present for the festivities surrounding the Orioles' return to the majors in April of 1954. Clarke and Hoffer were the last living members of the Champion 1894-95-96 Orioles, both passing away in July of 1959. It's probably pretty unlikely that Schallock met Clarke or Hoffer, neither were from Baltimore and probably just returned in '54. But it's possible an old Oriole born in 1868, shortly after the end of the Civil War, watched Schallock play.

BB:K ratio is the sexy number, but Indians shortstop Charlie Hollocher has a mark that may never be beaten: In 1922 he had five strikeouts and 29 caught stealing. That's 5.8 CS for every K. He had a BB:K ratio of 11.6:1, but a stolen base percentage of 40% on 48 attempts.

You should totally sue them. What gall they have to kinda, sorta imply that their baseball replays are accurate to the tenths of a second when they might not actually be that. That's exactly what leads to distrust of all institutions, chaos, revolution, and then we're living in some kind of post-apocalyptic hellscape, boiling our own shoes for the meager nutrition in the leather.

I always thought that if you weren't around 10:1 you weren't trying hard enough.

Adley was a nearly finished product when picked, if not for tradition and service time stuff he could have been in the majors shortly after he left college. Gunnar needed 1000+ minor league plate appearances as a high school pick. Ask this same question about the 1990-2017 Orioles with their development system. They certainly could have found a way to screw up Gunnar, would have been harder with Adley.

If we're talking about doing things with low likelihood of success and minimal utility they could see if he could become a serviceable AAA 5th starter. Will be interesting to see if he can violate the axiom that rightward shifts on the defensive spectrum rarely work. The only two cases off hand I can think of where a full-time OF moved to 2B/SS and succeeded were Betts and Honus. And that truly weird Mickey Stanley experiment where Mayo Smith took his starting CF and moved him to shortstop just in time for the postseason and they won the WS with him there.

No clue. My guess is that if there's any effect at all, it's that getting kicked out is pretty highly correlated to currently losing the game (you don't argue as much if you're winning). And most teams that are losing at some point in the game eventually lose.

I don't really have a strong opinion on the original question beyond what typical projection systems and MLEs would say. But it is kind of funny that you could go back through threads from 2, 3, 4 months ago and there would be no shortage of people wondering if either of these guys was going to ever establish themselves as solid MLB regulars.

Different times. The Champion 1894 Orioles averaged about 165-170 pounds a man, and Big Dan Brouthers weighed in at 207. At least according to bb-ref.

If we're going to use n=1 samples, I see your Chris Davis and raise you a Roy Thomas.

It was easier to do when there were fewer teams. We should start counting triple crowns in just AL teams east of the Mississippi and north of Tennessee. I mean, when Ty Cobb was doing it he only had to beat the dudes on seven other teams.

Knowing Twitter I'm surprised it's not 90-10 under. Isn't purpose of Twitter to convince us that the world has already ended and we're all too stupid to notice?