Jump to content

Doubles Machine 2.0


tinamodotti

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 148
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Double #27 today in team game 63.

Thru 63 Red Sox games in 1931, Earl Webb had 30 doubles. Doubles 28, 29, & 30 of that year came against "us", during a 5 game series in late June against the Browns in St. Louis.

Manny is still on pace to break the record due to the different season lengths. I'll continue to update as long as MM is on pace for a 60 double season. After all, a 60 double season is rarer than a 60 homer season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Double #27 today in team game 63.

Thru 63 Red Sox games in 1931, Earl Webb had 30 doubles. Doubles 28, 29, & 30 of that year came against "us", during a 5 game series in late June against the Browns in St. Louis.

Manny is still on pace to break the record due to the different season lengths. I'll continue to update as long as MM is on pace for a 60 double season. After all, a 60 double season is rarer than a 60 homer season.

No thanks to illegal drugs!

...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No thanks to illegal drugs!

...

Actually, doubles shot up from about 1.5 per game to almost 1.9 per game in the early-to-mid 90s, and peaked in 2007, before slightly dropping off the last few seasons. The 1930s were the only time in baseball history that approached the "steroid era" in frequency of doubles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, doubles shot up from about 1.5 per game to almost 1.9 per game in the early-to-mid 90s, and peaked in 2007, before slightly dropping off the last few seasons. The 1930s were the only time in baseball history that approached the "steroid era" in frequency of doubles.

Do you have any way of knowing whether the '30s were a result of poor defense or good hitting? Just curious, as that seems somewhat random, but then again, baseball tends to be somewhat random to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have any way of knowing whether the '30s were a result of poor defense or good hitting? Just curious, as that seems somewhat random, but then again, baseball tends to be somewhat random to begin with.
My guess would be that after Babe Ruth, the change in approach to hitting in general lead to more 2BH as well as HR. Think Ichiro switching from being a slap hitting speedster to the HR guy he can be in BP.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have any way of knowing whether the '30s were a result of poor defense or good hitting? Just curious, as that seems somewhat random, but then again, baseball tends to be somewhat random to begin with.

My guess is that the general increase in offense due to a) no more soggy, wet, dark balls after the spitball ban and b) Ruth showing that driving the ball wasn't a fool's errand led to more extra base hits of all types. The better players did take advantage of poorer quality of play, and larger outfields than today. Primitive equipment and groundkeeping probably helped, too.

So you know people sometimes still say "you better get to the starter early or you'll never get to him"? I'm pretty sure this comes from the spitball era, when they used one ball all game and it got progressively harder to hit as the fielders and pitcher rubbed tobacco juice and licorice spit and dirt and crap all over the ball for nine innings. You have to figure that by the 5th or 6th inning it was near impossible to hit a ball like that 300 feet. You had to get lucky and have the ball bust open or get stolen by a kid to get a fresh ball in the game. Just stopping that and putting fresh balls constantly in the game had to have been the driving factor in increasing offense in the 20s and beyond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you know people sometimes still say "you better get to the starter early or you'll never get to him"? I'm pretty sure this comes from the spitball era, when they used one ball all game and it got progressively harder to hit as the fielders and pitcher rubbed tobacco juice and licorice spit and dirt and crap all over the ball for nine innings. You have to figure that by the 5th or 6th inning it was near impossible to hit a ball like that 300 feet. You had to get lucky and have the ball bust open or get stolen by a kid to get a fresh ball in the game. Just stopping that and putting fresh balls constantly in the game had to have been the driving factor in increasing offense in the 20s and beyond.

Do the scoring records from that era show a noticeable decline in scoring as games progressed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could probably email BBR or someone they could probably tell you.

Maybe, maybe not. Retrosheet doesn't have the complete play-by-play data prior to WWII, and that's who feeds the bb-ref data. You would think inning-by-inning league/team splits wouldn't be that hard to come by, but it's not available at either Retrosheet or bb-ref right now.

What I will do is send a message to Bill James on his site. He might have some insight, he's done a ton of research into stuff like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • Yeah, basically this, that Westburg's underlying numbers (EV, barrel %, xwOBA) seem to point at this being pretty real, or at least that there's nothing 'undeserved / lucky' about this hot streak, if it's just that. 
    • The problem with a Cowser/Kjerstad/Stowers/Bradfield outfield roster is there are no right handers to handle LHP. I don't think and completely left handed outfield is the destination for an organization the values versatility.
    • Looks maybe concussion related. 
    • How can you not be romantic about baseball? This seems slightly poetic. I enjoyed reading, and correlated your experience in the stands back to what I watch in Game 1 on MASN.  It was also pretty cool to hear Jim Palmer give you a shout out in Game 2 of the series on Live TV.
    • I am not worried.  It just doesn’t remotely meet the eye test.  He has been great in the field . I can think of at least 3 outstanding plays he has made and not any that I thought he should have gotten but didn’t. Meanwhile Holliday is 3 OAA and I can’t think of an outstanding play and can think of a number I thought he should have made. 
    • Nicely stated Roy. Every since I was 9 years old and saw the O's vs. the Tokyo Giants in Tokyo in 1971, I've been infected with the Orange/Black virus. There is no cure and I don't want one. You and I sat at the lunch table with Jim Palmer at the 1970 World Series Champs reunion, and its still one of my enduring baseball memories. You said I looked like Carlton Fisk! I was at all 3 games in this Angels series, right behind the O's dugout. I got to see all our boys, and just simply love to watch this team play. And in true baseball fashion, the one game on paper we should have dominated (GRod vs. 8+ ERA Channing), we end up down 7-0 and lose. But watching Gunnar's homers, his electric triple, and he made a fantastic play today on a ball that went under Westburg's glove, Adley do Adley things, Cowser, holy crap. Kimbrel v. Trout with bases loaded, bottom of 9th, 2 outs, down by 2? That was fun. Next game Trout bats leadoff and torches a GRod fastball for a homer to the opposite field.  An observation.... If you didn't know anything about the team, and you only watched game 1 batting practice, you'd think Cowser and O'Hearn were the studs of the team. Mountcastle was taking BP with the reserves and he put on a show as well.  Home after 3 straight days watching this O's team, so jealous of the Balt fans in Balt that get to see the team with regularity. It's a special bunch.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...