The Baseball Hall of Fame announced the results of this year’s voting and four players are headed for Cooperstown. Pitchers Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and John Smoltz go in the first year their names appeared on the ballot and second baseman Craig Biggio is in after falling two votes short last year. The four new members represent the biggest single-year expansion of the Hall of Fame since 1955.
No thinking baseball fan can take umbrage with any of these selections and neither should the majority of fans. Johnson got a late start in his career, pitched until he was 45, won 303 games, and struck out 4,875 batters in 4,1351/3 innings. His winning percentage is .646 and he has five Cy Young Awards in his trophy case. My only question about Johnson getting into the Hall of Fame is, who are the 15 writers who left him off their ballots?
Martinez pitched 18 years and his 219-100 record computes to a winning percentage of .687. Here is a list of pitchers since 1900 with a better winning percentage than that: Whitey Ford (.690). Martinez is an eight-time All-Star and won three Cy Young Awards. He struck out 3,154 batters in 2,8271/3 innings. In 1999, he was 23-4 with a 2.07 earned run average and he struck out 313 batters in 2132/3 innings. That’s quite a dominating year right in the middle of the steroid era. Still, 49 writers could not bring themselves to vote for Pedro. My only question is, did Don F. Zimmer have a vote?
Smoltz got into the Hall of Fame because of his impressive record as a starting pitcher, a relief pitcher, and big game pitcher. He won 213 games and had 3,084 strikeouts. Smoltz won the Cy Young Award in 1996 when he won 24 games. He became a relief pitcher halfway through the 2001 season and by the end of 2004, he had racked up 154 saves.
Smoltz returned to duty as a starting pitcher in 2005 and went 14-7. He led the league in wins with 16 in 2006 and won 14 more games in 2007. I’m not usually a big fan of the save as an indicator of how valuable a pitcher is, but the fact that Smoltz was first a dominant starter, then the most dominant reliever, and returned to be a dominant starter puts him in a class by himself.
As for being a big game pitcher, Smoltz pitched in 25 postseason series, including five World Series; his postseason record is 15-4. With his relatively low win total, I can see how some writers chose not to vote for Smoltz. My only question is, did Chris Lincecum (Tim’s dad) have a vote?
Biggio has 3,060 career hits; Hall of Fame case closed. Biggio becomes the first definitive member of the Houston Astros to make it to the Hall of Fame. Sure, Joe Morgan made it, but let’s face it. If Morgan were judged on his years in Houston, he’d have to buy a ticket to get into the Hall of Fame. Nolan Ryan had some dominant years in a Houston uniform, but his work with the California Angels made him a household name.
Besides Morgan and Ryan, the only other players with any time in an Astros’ uniform who are in the Hall of Fame are Nellie Fox, Ed Mathews, Robin Roberts, Don Sutton, and Leo Durocher. Again, case closed. I’m glad Biggio is going into the Hall of Fame; he was a fine player and a good guy. My only question is, why did it take three ballots for him to get in?
Crime Dog Should Have His Day
Finally, it’s time for my annual rant about Fred McGriff. He was on the ballot for the sixth time, but received just 12.9% of the vote. If there’s a silver lining for the power-hitting first baseman I suppose it’s that he got more support this year than the 11.7% of the vote he received last year. Still, his highest total was 23.9% in 2012, so he has never gotten the support I feel he deserves.
McGriff played for six different teams over 19 years in the major leagues. He hit 493 home runs, drove in 1,550 runs, and finished with a .284 batting average. McGriff was the first player to lead each league in home runs and he hit 30 or more homers for five different teams; he had 10 seasons in which he hit 30 or more home runs.
McGriff’s 1,550 runs batted in are more than many players already in the Hall of Fame, including Willie Stargell (1,540), Mickey Mantle (1,509), Billy Williams (1,475), Ed Mathews (1,453), Jim Rice (1.451), Orlando Cepeda (1,365), and Duke Snider (1,333). McGriff’s 493 home runs tie him with Lou Gehrig and are more than Stan Musial (475), Stargell (475), Dave Winfield (465), Carl Yastrzemski (452), Williams (426), and Snider (407).
Stargell had a .282 batting average to go along with his 475 homers and 1,540 RBIs; McGriff topped all of those numbers. Stargell made it into the Hall of Fame on the first ballot. If Stargell was such an obvious choice, then it seems to me that McGriff should be in by now.
The only explanation I can come up with for McGriff’s low vote totals is that the writers want to have it both ways. On the one hand, they don’t want to vote for players suspected of using performance-enhancing drugs, while on the other hand they seem to be saying that 493 home runs aren’t what they used to be. Well, the reason the measly 493 homers that McGriff and Gehrig hit aren’t what they used to be is because of those players who used PEDs. It’s way past time to bring the Crime Dog in from the cold.
(all statistics are from Baseball-Reference.com)
In its December 15, 2014 issue, Sports Illustrated features pitcher Madison Bumgarner of the San Francisco Giants as the Sportsman of the Year. Bumgarner was the Most Valuable Player in the World Series this year, going 2-0 with a shutout, a save, and an earned run average of 0.43. In the postseason, he was 4-1, struck out 45 batters, and had a 1.03 ERA. Given Bumgarner’s performance, it would be difficult for anyone to argue with Sports Illustrated for their selection.
Tom Verducci wrote the Sportsman of the Year article on Bumgarner for Sports Illustrated. Verducci provides a wonderful profile of Bumgarner’s simple country upbringing and points out that his heart is still in rural North Carolina. But Verducci veers way off course early on in the article by proclaiming that Bumgarner is the “greatest pitcher in the history of the World Series.”
Verducci’s claim–and he isn’t the first to make it–is based primarily on one statistic: Bumgarner’s career ERA of 0.25, which is the lowest of any pitcher with at least 30 innings in World Series competition. To have the lowest ERA of any pitcher in the history of the World Series is very impressive, as is his 4-0 record. But does that make him the greatest pitcher in World Series history? Not by a long shot. And it’s not even close.
A line from Verducci’s article provides the explanation of how he and many other baseball experts jumped to the misguided conclusion that Bumgarner is the greatest pitcher in the history of the World Series. Verducci writes, “His (Bumgarner’s) performance this year is the stuff of instant legend.” And that’s the problem; the term “instant legend” is an oxymoron. Without time, there can be no legend.
If not Bumgarner, then who?
Here’s the thing. It really doesn’t take much effort or research to dispel the myth that Bumgarner is the greatest pitcher in the history of the World Series. There are at least four pitchers whose performance in a single World Series was more impressive than Bumgarner’s career record. I contend that Mickey Lolich, Bob Gibson, Lew Burdette, and Christy Mathewson all were greater pitchers in the World Series than Bumgarner.
In 1968, Mickey Lolich led the Detroit Tigers back from a three-games-to-one deficit against the St. Louis Cardinals. After the Tigers dropped the opening game of the Series, Lolich pitched a complete game and earned the win in Game 2. The Cardinals won the next two games and headed back home to St. Louis needing to win only one more game to wrap up the Series.
Lolich pitched another complete game in Game 5 to keep the Tigers’ hopes alive and they evened the Series by winning Game 6 behind 31-game winner Denny McLain. Then on only two days’ rest, Lolich earned his third win of the Series by pitching another complete game.
Lolich’s ERA for the Series was 1.67 as compared to Bumgarner’s 0.43 in this year’s Series, but there is no question that Lolich’s overall performance was much more impressive. And it’s not even close.
In 1967, Bob Gibson was 3-0 with three complete games and a shutout against the Boston Red Sox; he also hit a home run in Game 7. In 27 innings, Gibson limited the Red Sox to just 14 hits and he struck out 26 batters. His ERA was 1.00–again, higher than Bumgarner’s in this year’s Series–but Gibson’s overall performance was easily more impressive.
From a career perspective, Gibson also pitched in the World Series in 1964 and 1968. Had he received more offensive and defensive support in Game 7 in 1968, he likely would have had consecutive Series with three wins. He lost Game 7 to Lolich and the Tigers when center fielder Curt Flood misplayed a fly ball in the top of the seventh inning that led to three runs. The Cardinals managed only one run against Lolich, so Gibson took the loss. For the Series, he pitched 27 innings, allowed only 18 hits, and struck out 35 batters. In possibly the most dominating single-game performance in World Series history, Gibson struck out 17 batters in his shutout in Game 1.
Gibson was 2-1 in the 1964 World Series against the New York Yankees with two complete games, 27 innings pitched, and 31 strikeouts. Even with two World Series losses in his career, Gibson was a much better pitcher in the Fall Classic than Bumgarner has been. And again, it’s not even close.
In 1957, Lew Burdette was 3-0 with three complete games and two shutouts against the Yankees. Burdette was not a power pitcher, so he only had 13 strikeouts in the three games, but that takes nothing away from his dominance. He gave up single runs in the second and third innings of Game 2 and then tossed 24 consecutive scoreless innings en route to winning Games 5 and 7.
Burdette’s 0.67 ERA is higher than Bumgarner’s 0.43 in this year’s Series, but there is no question that Burdette was more dominant. If Verducci and the instant-legend crowd want to disqualify Burdette for comparison against Bumgarner as the greatest pitcher in the history of the World Series because Burdette was 1-2 with a 5.64 ERA in the Series the following season, then so be it. But I maintain that Burdette’s 1957 performance gives him the nod over Bumgarner anyway. And again, it’s not even close.
Any argument over who was the greatest pitcher in World Series history begins and ends with Christy Mathewson. Matty. Big Six. In the 1905 World Series, the New York Giants beat the Philadelphia Athletics in five games and Mathewson won three of them. That’s right; Mathewson won three games in a five-game Series.
Not only did Matty win three games, he pitched three shutouts. That’s three starts, three complete games, three shutouts. That’s an ERA of 0.00. Big Six pitched 27 innings and gave up just 13 hits. I don’t think even Joe Buck, who stopped just short of saying Bumgarner walked on water from the bullpen to the pitcher’s mound in Game 7 of this year’s Series, would argue that Mathewson had the greatest single pitching performance in World Series history.
Mathewson appeared in four Fall Classics; after 1905, he was with the Giants for the World Series in 1911, 1912, and 1913. Even though his record in his final three World Series is 2-5, he still pitched very effectively. He completed 10 of his 11 World Series starts and his ERA in 101 2/3 innings pitched is 0.97.
Given his performance in 1905 and the quality of his overall volume of work, Mathewson was a better pitcher in the World Series than Bumgarner has been. And for the fourth time, it’s not even close.
The Level of Play
Nowhere in Verducci’s Sportsman of the Year article does he point out that Bumgarner’s performance in the World Series this year came at the expense of the team with the fourth-best record in the American League.
The Kansas City Royals finished the season with a record of 89-73. Lorenzo Cain led the team with a .301 batting average and Alex Gordon was tops in home runs with 19 and runs batted in with 74. The Royals were a decent team, but the ’27 Yankees they were not.
In the years that Mathewson, Burdette, Gibson, and Lolich had their phenomenal World Series performances, they faced the team with the best record from the opposing league. It’s not Bumgarner’s fault that the Los Angeles Angels didn’t make it to the World Series, but his pitching line may have been a whole lot different against the best team from the American League.
In fact, Bumgarner’s entire World Series career has come against teams that did not come close to having the best record in the league. In 2012, Bumgarner appeared in one game, pitched seven shutout innings, and got the win. His opponents that year, the Detroit Tigers, won 88 games and had the fifth-best record in the American League.
In 2010, Bumgarner appeared in one game, pitched eight shutout innings, and got the win. His opponents that year, the Texas Rangers, won 90 games and had the fourth-best record in the American League.
I agree that Madison Bumgarner has done excellent work in the World Series. But anyone who says he is “the greatest pitcher in the history of the World Series” has not spent enough time looking at the record book. And, in the words of Hamlet, “Ay, there’s the rub.”
Time is an essential element when deciding whether or not someone’s deeds are legendary. That’s why, no matter how many people claim to have seen one, the “instant legend” is just a myth.
(all statistics are from Baseball-Reference.com)
The Atlanta Braves got busy this week making changes for 2015. On Sunday they traded second baseman Tommy La Stella to the Chicago Cubs and on Monday they traded popular right fielder Jason Heyward and relief pitcher Jordan Walden to the St. Louis Cardinals. It’s not even Thanksgiving and it already has been an eventful off-season in baseball.
Sending La Stella to the Cubs should not have much of an impact on the Braves next season. La Stella performed fairly well after taking over at second base when the Braves jettisoned Dan Uggla. He hit .292 in his first 50 games, but his hitting dropped off significantly after the All-Star break; he hit only .212 in his final 43 games.
Uggla set a very low bar for success for the player who succeeded him; but the bottom line is that, while La Stella was better than Uggla, he did not perform well enough for the Braves to feel as if he was going to be their long-term solution at second base. In return for La Stella, the Braves received pitcher Arodys Vizcaino from the Cubs. If that name sounds familiar it’s because the Braves traded him to the Cubs in July 2012 for Paul Maholm and Reed Johnson. Viscaino supposedly is healthy and likely will be in the Braves’ bullpen in 2015.
Say it Ain’t So
As innocuous as the La Stella trade is, the Heyward deal hit like bombshell. Heyward burst onto the scene in Atlanta with a tape-measure home run to the back wall of the Braves’ bullpen in his first big-league at-bat in 2010. He hit 27 home runs in 2011 and then regressed in 2012 and suffered through an appendectomy and severe beaning in 2013. After a slow start last season, Heyward finished strong, hitting .298 after the All-Star break. At the plate, he had the look of a hitter who had finally figured things out. He was turning on inside pitches and driving anything away from him to the opposite field. No doubt the Cardinals’ scouts took notice of Heyward’s approach.
But one cannot fully evaluate the value of Jason Heyward based on his offensive production alone. He is the best defensive outfielder in baseball today–and there is a big gap between him and whoever the second best might be. In addition to winning his second Gold Glove Award this year, Heyward was honored as the Wilson Defensive Player of the Year, an honor that goes to the best defensive player in Major League Baseball.
Heyward has five seasons under his belt and he just turned 25 years old. The Braves must have felt they had little chance of signing him to a long-term deal at the end of the 2015 season. But the Heyward deal signals that the Braves have chosen to take the path of least expense rather than the path that puts the best possible team on the field. Of course, the Braves will never know whether they could have afforded Heyward because, according to reports in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, they never even made him an offer. That’s a surefire way to guarantee you can’t sign a player.
The Braves received a very promising pitcher in return for Heyward. Shelby Miller was 10-9 last season and won 15 games in 2013; he is only 24 years old. He will help round out a strong starting rotation that already includes Julio Teheran, Alex Wood, and Mike Minor. The Braves also received Tyrell Jenkins, a 22-year-old pitching prospect who likely will start 2015 in Double-A.
I’m not sure Miller and Jenkins constitute enough return in a straight-up trade for Heyward, but the Braves didn’t just trade Heyward in the deal; they also tossed in right-handed reliever Jordan Walden. Walden’s 62 strikeouts in 50 innings this past season show how overpowering he can be. He is a valuable eighth-inning pitcher and he also could close in a pinch; he saved 32 games for the Anaheim Angels in 2011.
I hope Shelby Miller proves to be a big winner in Atlanta for years to come. But I’ll be surprised if Jason Heyward doesn’t have a breakout season in St. Louis this year. And I’ll be even more surprised if the Braves don’t wind up regretting this deal before the 2015 season is in the books.
As much as I regret the Heyward deal, I don’t think it’s the worst transaction of this young off-season. The New York Mets, Miami Marlins, and the Toronto Blue Jays have made worse deals than the Braves did this past week. The Mets gave outfielder Michael Cuddyer, lately of the Colorado Rockies, a two-year deal worth $21 million. I know Cuddyer led the National League in hitting with a .331 average in 2013. He hit .332 this past season, but injuries limited him to just 49 games. Cuddyer, who will be 36 years old before the 2015 season starts, is a career .279 hitter. But before he got to Colorado, his highest average was .284 and his career average prior to playing for the Rockies was .272. The Mets may be paying for the fool’s gold Cuddyer mined in his three seasons at Coors Field.
The Blue Jays will dole out $82 million over the next five years to catcher Russell Martin. In nine seasons, Martin has hit .259 with 119 home runs. Those are not the numbers that command $16.4 million a season. And I don’t see how a five-year deal for a 31-year-old catcher who isn’t named Johnny Bench makes any sense.
As for the Marlins, they will pay outfielder Giancarlo Stanton $325 million over the next 13 years–that’s $25 million a season. I am of the mindset that no professional athlete is worth $25 million a season, but Stanton has the potential to be one of the top two or three hitters in the game. In his first five seasons, he averaged 31 home runs; but his .271 average is nothing to write home about. He also is prone to stretches where he does nothing but strike out. But my problem with the Stanton deal is not so much the amount per season as it is the length of the contract.
No matter how well Stanton performs, his huge contract will affect every other deal the Marlins try to make during for the next 13 seasons and, in their market, that could have a huge effect on which other players they sign–and perhaps, more importantly, the players they don’t sign. Too many things can go wrong over the course of 13 years for this deal to make any sense.
Just the Beginning
When the free agent signings really heat up, I predict there will be plenty of other teams paying way too much for players. The leading candidates to get more money than they are worth are Pablo Sandoval, Max Scherzer, and Jon Lester. Don’t get me wrong; Sandoval, Scherzer, and Lester are very good baseball players, but I don’t believe they are worth what they likely are to command in the free agent market.
The Hot Stove League is heating up, so let the insanity begin. Come to think of it, it already has.
More than a month has passed since baseball’s regular season ended. The San Francisco Giants topped the Kansas City Royals in the Wild Card World Series and now 121 players are free agents. Most teams are well into the off-season evaluation process, trying to decide what went wrong in 2014 and how they will prepare for 2015. The Atlanta Braves entered September with a strong chance to make the postseason, but then went into a collective slump at the plate and won only seven games in the entire month.
When a team wins 96 games one season and follows it up with only 79 wins as the Braves did in 2013-14, there usually is plenty of blame to go around. Such is the case with the Braves.
The Braves’ pitching staff was solid in 2014, especially considering the fact that Kris Medlen and Brandon Beachy missed the entire season due to injuries and Gavin Floyd pitched in only nine games before his season ended due to an injured pitching arm. The Braves’ 3.38 earned run average was the third best in the National League, so any assessment of what went wrong with the Braves this past season must focus on the offense.
The Brothers Upton
If the comments from Braves fans on the various baseball websites are to be taken seriously, the blame for the Braves’ dismal 2014 season falls primarily on the Upton brothers. At least half of any such argument for the Braves’ 17-game drop-off from 2013 makes absolutely no sense.
In 2013, Justin Upton hit .263 with 27 home runs and 70 runs batted in. This past season he hit .270 with 29 homers and 102 RBIs. Justin Upton led the Braves in slugging percentage and on-base plus slugging percentage. Last week, he won a Silver Slugger Award for his performance at the plate in 2914. Like most players, he had an occasional slump, but he played virtually every day and, at times, was the hottest hitter in the National League. A better case can be made that Justin Upton is the main reason the Braves finished as well as they did.
B.J. Upton had his second miserable year in Atlanta; he hit just .208 with 12 home runs and 36 RBIs. But how much blame does B.J. Upton deserve for the Braves’ reversal of fortune in 2014?
The Braves fielded essentially the same team in 2014 as the team that won the National League Eastern Division in 2013. Catcher Brian McCann departed for the New York Yankees and Evan Gattis took over as the starter. McCann had a decent season for the Braves in 2013; he hit .256 with 20 home runs and 57 RBIs. Despite missing several games with injury and illness, Gattis proved more than adequate as a replacement, hitting 22 homers with 52 RBIs and a .263 average. McCann was never a stellar defensive catcher so the Braves didn’t miss a beat with Gattis behind the plate. But as I will point out later, McCann’s departure had a huge impact on the Braves’ in 2014.
First baseman Freddie Freeman had a great year in 2013 when he hit .319 with 23 home runs and 109 RBIs. He didn’t have a bad season this year; he hit 18 homers, drove in 78 runs, and batted .288. But those numbers represent a 22% drop in home runs, a 28% drop in RBIs, while dropping 31 points off his batting average.
Second base continued to be a problem for the Braves in 2014. Dan Uggla hit .179 with 22 home runs and 55 RBIs in 2013. This year he had two homers, 10 RBIs, and was hitting just .162 when the Braves cut him loose. His replacements – Tommy La Stella and Philip Gosselin – combined to hit two homers and drive in 34 runs, while batting .255. So the Braves netted four homers, 44 RBIs, and a .234 average from their second basemen. It’s difficult to see that as any real improvement over 2013.
Andrelton Simmons continued to play great defense for the Braves in 2014 and won his second consecutive Gold Glove Award. But at the plate, he dropped from 17 home runs to seven (53% decrease); 59 RBIs to 46 (22% decrease); and dropped from .248 to .244 in batting average.
Chris Johnson made a run at the National League batting title in 2013 when he finished the year at .321; he hit 12 homers and drove in 68 runs. In 2014 he dropped to 10 home runs (17% decrease) and 58 RBIs (15%) and his batting average fell 58 points to .263. Johnson’s on-base percentage also dropped from.358 to .292.
In right field, Jason Heyward had a magnificent defensive season, which resulted in his second Gold Glove Award. At the plate, he dropped from 14 home runs to 11 (21% decrease), but he drove in 20 more runs (53% increase) and added 17 points to his batting average (.254 to .271).
I already mentioned the increased production from Justin Upton in 2014 and the weak offensive production from B.J. Upton. But compare B.J. Upton’s performance in 2013 to what he did in 2014. B.J. hit 12 homers in 2014 vs. nine in 2013; that’s a 33% increase. He drove in 35 runs in 2014 vs. 26 in 2013; that’s a 35% increase. He also raised his batting average 24 points from .184 to .208.
The Braves suffered from a significant drop-off at the plate by their infielders, but that isn’t the only place the Braves saw a huge loss of production. The Braves had their biggest offensive drop-off from their bench.
In 2013, the Braves’ bench hit a collective .251 with 13 home runs and 92 RBIs. In 2014, the bench hit .213 with nine homers and 57 RBIs. While these numbers are significant, the gap was actually much wider because the numbers I’ve cited for 2013 don’t include the 21 home runs and 65 runs batted in from Evan Gattis.
In 2013, Braves’ pinch hitters batted .245 with six home runs and 27 RBIs. This year, they hit .178 with two homers and 10 RBIs. In 2013, Gattis himself hit four homers and drove in 11 runs as a pinch hitter while going six for 10.
While it may be easy to blame B.J. Upton for all of the Braves’ woes in 2014, the offensive drop-off came from the infielders and the bench. And while Evan Gattis adequately replaced Brian McCann, the Braves did not replace Gattis after he replaced McCann. So the loss of McCann hurt the Braves more than most fans realize.
It’s the top of the sixth inning in a scoreless game in Philadelphia. Cincinnati has a runner on third with two outs and their cleanup hitter is in the batter’s box. And then the unthinkable happens; the runner on third breaks for home. When the dust settles, the Reds lead 1-0. That would be the final score of the game.
It was September 21, 1964–50 years ago this week. The batter was Frank Robinson and the runner at third was Chico Ruiz. Robinson stepped to the plate with 27 home runs, 87 runs batted in, and a .303 average for the year. The loss should have been insignificant; but the steal of home by Ruiz ignited the biggest collapse in the history of baseball.
Things were looking great for the Phillies going into the three-game series at Connie Mack Stadium against the Reds. The Phillies were comfortably in first place by six and a half games with just 12 left to play; the Reds and St. Louis Cardinals were tied distantly in second place. Even after Ruiz stole home, the Phillies had a five-and-a-half-game lead over the Reds and led the Cardinals, who were idle that day, by six. Then the slide began.
From an offensive standpoint Dick Allen (known in those days as Richie) and Johnny Callison led the Phillies’ attack in 1964. Allen hit .318 with 29 home runs and 91 RBIs to win the National League Rookie of the Year Award. Callison hit 31 homers and drove in 104 runs.
Jim Bunning anchored the pitching staff with a 19-8 record, a 2.63 earned run average, 219 strikeouts, and a perfect game against the Mets on April 21.
On September 22, the Reds beat the Phillies 9-2 to narrow the lead to four and a half games; the Cardinals kept pace by beating the New York Mets, but remained five games out with 11 to go.
The Reds completed the sweep on September 23, handing the Phillies their third straight loss and cutting the lead to three and a half games; the Cardinals failed to take advantage, losing to the Mets and remaining five games out. It was shaping up to be a two-team race between the Phillies and the Reds.
The big bats of the Milwaukee Braves came to Philadelphia and continued the Phillies’ misery. On September 24, the Braves handed the Phillies their fourth straight loss, beating Bunning 5-3. The Reds were idle, so the Phillies lost only half a game in the standings and still led by three. But the Cardinals swept a doubleheader against the Pittsburgh Pirates to pull within three and a half of the Phils.
On September 25, the Braves beat the Phillies 7-5 in 12 innings to run Philadelphia’s losing streak to five. Meanwhile the Reds swept a doubleheader from the Mets and cut the Phillies’ three-game lead in half. The Reds also gained a half game on the Cardinals, who again beat the Pirates and were now only two and a half games out of first place.
The Phillies lost their sixth straight game on September 26 as they fell to the Braves 6-4. Cincinnati beat the Mets and St. Louis beat the Pirates so the Phillies lead was down to half a game over the Reds and a game and a half over the Cardinals. It would be the Phillies’ last day at the top of the standings.
September 27, 1964 is a day that lives in infamy for Philadelphia Phillies fans. The Phillies had their ace, Jim Bunning, on the mound and Callison hit three home runs. But Milwaukee out slugged Callison and beat the Phillies 14-8; it was Philadelphia’s seventh straight loss. Meanwhile, the Reds swept a doubleheader from the Mets and the Cardinals shutout the Pirates. In the span of a week, the Phillies had blown a six-and-a-half-game lead. The Reds were in first place by a game, the Phillies were in second, and the Cardinals were a game and a half back in third.
With five games left the Phillies still had time to win the pennant heading into a crucial three-game series with the Cardinals. On September 28, the losing streak reached eight as the Phils lost 5-1. The Cardinals slipped past the Phillies and trailed the idle Reds by only a game.
On September 29, the Cardinals beat Philadelphia 4-2, handing the Phillies their ninth straight loss. The Pirates shutout the Reds 2-0, leaving Cincinnati tied with St. Louis in first place with the Phillies in third place a game and a half back.
On September 30, the Cardinals beat the Phillies 8-5 to complete a series sweep; the Phillies’ losing streak was now at 10. The Pirates shutout the Reds 1-0 in a 16-inning affair, so the Cardinals held a one-game lead over Cincinnati and led Philadelphia by two and a half. Even after a 10-game losing streak, The Phillies still had a shot at finishing the season in a tie with St. Louis. But the Phils needed to win their last two games against the Reds and hope the Cardinals lost their final three games.
On October 1, the Reds finally beat the Pirates and pulled to within a half game of the Cardinals, who like the Phillies, were idle that day. The next day, the misery finally ended as the Phillies beat the Reds 4-3. The Cardinals lost to the Mets 1-0, so Philadelphia was still breathing. They had to win their one remaining game and hope the Mets could keep beating the Cardinals.
On Saturday October 4, for some reason, the Phillies and Reds were idle. The Cardinals did their part to keep hope alive in Cincinnati and Philadelphia as they got trounced 15-5 by the Mets. Going into the last day of the season, the Cardinals and Reds were tied for first, one game ahead of the Phillies. If the Phillies could beat the Reds and the Mets could knock off the Cardinals one more time, there would be a three-way tie for first place.
The Phillies did their part and beat the Reds 10-0 on a shutout by Bunning. But the Cardinals beat the Mets 11-5 to win the pennant. The collapse was complete.
Anytime a team goes into a losing streak there is plenty of blame to go around, but Richie Allen certainly had nothing to do with the Phillies’ downfall; he hit .429 with three home runs and 11 RBIs in Philadelphia’s final 12 games. Callison hit four homers and drove in 10 runs down the stretch, but he hit just .250 and three of his four home runs came in one game. Jim Bunning was the losing pitcher in three of the 10 straight games the Phillies lost. In those three losses he gave up 24 hits and 15 earned runs in only 12 1/3 innings.
The collapse of 1964 kept the Phillies out of the World Series, which has to still bother Allen and Bunning since they never made it to the Fall Classic. (Callison, who died in 2006, never made it to the World Series, either.)
As the current baseball season comes to a close, Phillies fans should be commemorating the 50th Anniversary of a National League pennant. Instead they likely are remembering the worst collapse in baseball history.
A Brief Aside…
There may be some debate about which team actually suffered the worst collapse in baseball history. There are those who will tell you that both the Atlanta Braves and Boston Red Sox experienced worse collapses in 2011, but that just isn’t so. The Braves led the race for a National League Wildcard spot by four and a half games with 12 games left in the season, which is the point at which things started to roll downhill for the Phillies in 1964. The Red Sox held a four-game lead for the American League Wildcard with 12 games remaining. Besides the fact that the Braves and the Red Sox held smaller leads than did the Phillies at the time of their respective collapses, the Braves and Red Sox were trying to hold onto Wildcard spots; the Phillies collapse cost them the National League pennant and a trip straight to the World Series.
To compare missing out on a Wildcard spot in the postseason to not making the World Series is like saying Albert Pujols, Reggie Jackson, and Mickey Mantle all hit 18 postseason home runs without noting that Mantle hit every one of his homers in the World Series. It just isn’t the same thing. In fact, it’s not even close.
On August 14 Major League Baseball selected Rob Manfred as its 10th commissioner. He will succeed current commissioner Bud Selig on January 25 of next year. Manfred will receive plenty of advice and suggestions between now and the time he takes office, most of which he probably will ignore. If I were to be the next commissioner of Major League Baseball, I would have five items on the agenda for the first day I walked into the office.
Fix the All-Star Game
The first thing I would do as commissioner would be simple to accomplish. I would discontinue the moronic practice of giving the league that wins the All-Star Game home-field advantage in the World Series. Selig came up with this cockamamie idea after the 2002 Midsummer Classic ended in a 7-7 tie after 11 innings.
In the first year of this travesty, the National League was leading the American League 6-4 going into the bottom of the eighth inning. Greg Gagne of the third-place Los Angeles Dodgers was on the mound for the NL and he gave up a pair of doubles sandwiched between two outs to make the score 6-5. Hank Blalock of the last-place Texas Rangers came on to pinch hit and blasted a monster home run to give the AL a 7-6 lead, which wound up being the final score.
The National League was to have the home-field advantage in the World Series in 2003. But a home run by a player on a last-place team in an exhibition game in the middle of the season changed all of that. For the record, the Florida Marlins beat the New York Yankees four games to two in the Series that year.
The folly of such a decision was especially glaring this year when the All-Star Game turned into the Derek Jeter Farewell Tour. Adam Wainwright of the St. Louis Cardinals admitted to serving up hittable pitches to Jeter as if Jeter were entitled to be the star of the game. Jeter took advantage of Wainwright’s generosity by cracking a double that started a three-run rally from which the National League never recovered. Wainwright later back pedaled on his story, but by that time the damage was done; if the Cardinals make it to the World Series this year, they can thank Wainwright for having to open the Series on the road.
The Midsummer Classic is an exhibition game and, as such, it should have no bearing on the World Series – or anything else, for that matter. Until 2003 the home-field advantage in the World Series alternated annually between the two leagues. If I were commissioner, it would again.
Eliminate Interleague Play
If I were commissioner of Major League Baseball I would do away with interleague play. Proponents of interleague play (casual fans, I call them) make arguments such as, “Without interleague play, fans in Atlanta would not get to see Derek Jeter play.” Fans in Atlanta who want to see Derek Jeter play can do what baseball fans in Cheap Hill, Tennessee do whenever they want to see Jeter play; they can travel to a city where the Yankees are playing and buy a ticket.
The main argument for continuing interleague play is that it boosts attendance; and as long as the numbers show that attendance increases for interleague games, there will very little movement toward ending it. But many factors affect attendance. Before interleague play became a daily occurrence, it usually started in June right about the time school let out for the summer. I hate interleague play but we have attended several interleague games over the years. It wasn’t because we wanted to see a team from both leagues; it was because we always timed our vacations based on the school calendar.
Eliminating interleague play also would fix the problem of the 15-team leagues. If I were commissioner I would send the Houston Astros back to the National League where they belong. And if I couldn’t get support for eliminating interleague play, I at least would sent the Astros back to the National League and make the Milwaukee Brewers go back to the American League where they were for so many years.
As a baseball traditionalist, I believe the two leagues should meet only during the World Series. This season the Atlanta Braves will play 20 interleague games, which amounts to over 12% of their schedule. That seems like a lot to me.
Eliminate the Designated Hitter
The designated hitter has been around since the afternoon of April 6, 1973 when Ron Bloomberg of the Yankees stepped in the batter’s box at Fenway Park as the game’s first one-dimensional player. This strategy-killing phenomenon needs to go and both leagues need to play by the same rules. I would give teams three years to get ready for the change. In that time current designated hitters could either play out their careers or learn to field; either way I’d be happy.
Restore the Players from the 1919 Black Sox Scandal
On August 3, 1921 Commissioner Kennesaw Mountain Landis banished the players involved in the 1919 Chicago Black Sox Scandal for life. The banished players were pitcher Eddie Cicotte, center fielder Oscar “Happy” Felsch, first baseman Arnold “Chick” Gandil, right fielder “Shoeless” Joe Jackson, infielder Fred McMullin, shortstop Charles “Swede” Risberg, third baseman George “Buck” Weaver, and pitcher Claude “Lefty” Williams. Landis also banished second baseman Joe Gedeon of the St. Louis Browns, who learned of the fix from Gandil and then placed bets on the games.
I believe Landis did the right thing by banishing the players involved in the fix. For years various experts have cited Jackson’s .375 batting average in the Series as evidence that he was not in on the fix. But Jackson took $5,000 from the goons who fixed the Series, so that makes him guilty. If Landis was too harsh on any of the players, it was Weaver, whom he banned for knowing about the fix and not doing anything about it.
I believe players, managers, coaches, owners, etc. who bet on baseball should be banished from the game for life. But all of the players banished for the 1919 Black Sox Scandal have long since passed away. Since they were banished for life, and since they all have passed away, they have served their sentences. As commissioner, I would acknowledge that these players are no longer banished and make them eligible for the Hall of Fame.
Joe Jackson, whose .356 lifetime batting average over 13 seasons, likely would be voted into the Hall of Fame the first year his name appears on the ballot; Eddie Cicotte, who won 209 games and had a career earned run average of 2.38 in 14 seasons, might soon follow. The rest of the gang will never make it in.
Adjust the Record Book
If I were commissioner of Major League Baseball I would convene a panel of experts and charge them with the mission of restoring the records set by players in the Before Steroids (BS) era. The two most obvious records to restore are Roger Maris’ single-season home run mark of 61 and Henry Aaron’s career total of 755.
While the records of Maris and Aaron jump to the front of most fans’ minds, the larceny perpetrated on the sport by the likes of Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, and Palmeiro cheapens the home run numbers put up by sluggers like Frank Robinson (586), Harmon Killebrew (573), and Reggie Jackson (563), as well. It seems that 500 home runs just aren’t what they used to be. Earlier this season when Albert Pujols hit his 500th home run, it received about as much attention as a pitcher throwing a shutout. And while the Baseball Writers Association of America has been harsh on Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, and Palmeiro, come Hall of Fame voting time, they also punish guys like Fred McGriff because he hit “only” 493 home runs.
Selig’s lack of action when baseballs were flying out of the park like golf balls on a driving range should be his lasting legacy; but it shouldn’t have such a lasting effect on the players who played the game fairly. If I were commissioner of Major League Baseball I would at least attempt to adjust the record book.
Since I am not the new commissioner of Major League Baseball, I can only hope that Robert “Rob” Manfred takes a do-no-harm approach to his job. If he does he will be a vast improvement over his predecessor.
Back in March of this year I added a post in which I introduced The Kid: The Immortal Life of Ted Williams by Ben Bradlee, Jr. At the time of that post I had only glanced at the introduction of the book and I took issue with Bradlee’s statement that “nobody combined power and average the way Williams did.” In my post, entitled “The Big Bambino and the Kid,” I posited that Bradlee’s contention completely ignores the fact that Babe Ruth hit 193 more home runs than Ted Williams and that the Babe’s lifetime batting average was only two points lower than Williams’ (.342 vs. .344).
In that post I also said that it was unfair to judge a 775-page book on one sentence on page 22 and that I would follow up with a review once I finished reading it. About a month ago I finally finished wading through Bradlee’s tome of the Splendid Splinter and I have to say that I was disappointed in it.
Bradlee interviewed several of Williams’ Boston Red Sox teammates, including Bobby Doerr, Dom DiMaggio, and Johnny Pesky. Bradlee identifies Doerr as the teammate who told Williams how impressed he would be with Jimmie Foxx. On a train trip across the country to spring training, Doerr told Williams, “Wait til (sic) you see Foxx hit these shots.” Williams replied, “Yeah, wait til (sic) he sees me hit.”
Bradlee includes details that show the Red Sox knew they had a special player right at the onset of Williams’ career and that they were willing to make accommodations for him. For instance, the Red Sox moved the outfield fences in at Fenway Park after Williams’ rookie season to accommodate his left-handed power. The Red Sox shortened the distance down the right-field line from 332 feet to 302. They also moved the fence in right-center from 402 feet to 380.
Bradlee’s book has detail after detail and even more details of Williams’ celebrated feud with the Boston newspaper writers, whom Williams dubbed the “Knights of the Keyboard.” Williams frequently would sound off and then find himself issuing public apologies later. He claimed that criticism by the press actually made him try harder and that the writers inspired him to play at a higher level.
Williams’ feuding with the press likely cost him the American League Most Valuable Player Award in his .400 season when Joe DiMaggio won the award; it certainly cost him the MVP the following season when Joe Gordon, also of the New York Yankees, won it despite Williams winning the Triple Crown with a .356 average, 37 home runs, and 137 RBIs.
Bradlee devotes quite a few paragraphs to the Boudreau Shift, a defense implemented by Cleveland Indians’ manager, Lou Boudreau, in which the infielders shifted to the right side of the diamond to take hits away from the notorious pull-hitting Williams. Williams resisted changing his approach and years later claimed the shift, which other teams also employed, cost him 15 points on his lifetime batting average.
Bradlee is so intent on anointing Williams as the greatest hitter in the history of the game that a glaring error slipped by him and his editors. On page 265, Bradlee says, “…he (Williams) still won four batting titles after the shift was implemented, lost another by just two-tenths of a percentage point, and lost a sixth because he lacked the requisite number of official at-bats–a title he would have won had present rules on a walk not counting as an at bat been in effect.”
At no point in Williams’ career did a walk count as an at bat. Bradlee must have meant that Williams would have won the batting title in 1954 had present rules basing qualification on plate appearances rather than at bats been in effect.
.406 and a Homer in his Final At Bat
Of course, no book on Williams would be complete without the details of the final day of the 1941 season. Williams entered that day with an average of .3995, which rounds up to .400. But Williams put his .400 average on the line, played in both games of a doubleheader, banged out six hits in eight at-bats, and finished with a .406 (.4057) average. It was a truly courageous performance.
Another story that holds almost as much esteem for those who make the case that Williams was the greatest hitter of all time involves Williams hitting a home run in the final at bat of his career. While that is quite an accomplishment, whenever the story of Williams’ final homer is told, rarely, if ever, is it mentioned that the Red Sox still had three games left on the schedule and that Williams sat out the final road trip to New York. Bradlee mentions it in this book, but he does not make a case that Williams skipping the final three games guaranteed that he would end his career with a home run in his final at bat. It seems to me that constantly praising Williams for playing in the season-ending doubleheader in 1941 and not noting the significance of Williams sitting out the final three games of the 1960 season is allowing the Williams legacy to have it both ways.
Bradlee’s book has a full account of Williams’ heroic service to our county in both World War II and the Korean conflict. Williams was a Marine flight instructor during WWII and flew 39 combat missions in Korea, including one that ended in a crash landing after his plane was hit by enemy fire.
Williams had a legitimate 3A classification that gave him an exemption from the draft because he was the sole supporter of his mother. But when so many young men were being called up for service, there was an outcry that many able-bodied athletes were not serving. There was a perception that Williams was receiving special treatment because of his status as a superstar athlete. So in response to the criticism, the draft board reclassified Williams to 1A and drafted him. Williams worked behind the scenes to have his legitimate 3A classification restored. He rightly maintained that, while he deserved no special treatment in order to avoid having to serve, his celebrity status should not work against him.
The negative publicity surrounding Williams’ service status caused Quaker Oats to cancel an endorsement contract with him. Williams was so angry at the company for cancelling the contract that he refused to ever eat a Quaker Oats product again. Williams agreed to remain in the Reserves after WWII to help with recruiting with the understanding that he would not be recalled to active duty, so he really resented being called back into service for the Korean conflict and he harbored ill feelings about it for the remainder of his life.
The baseball portions of Bradlee’s book are great, but he tosses in seemingly endless details of Williams’ personal life, including the stormy relations he had with each of his wives and all three of his children. Williams sat out the beginning of the 1955 season because he did not want his first wife to get a percentage of any new contract he signed with the Red Sox. His wife thought Williams would cave and waited until May 9 of that year before agreeing to settle. Williams did not join the team until May28.
I think that up to a certain point, details of Williams’ personal life are necessary to accurately portray the type of person he was. But, at times, it seemed as if I were reading from the pages of a supermarket tabloid. I think Bradlee included far too much on Williams’ personal life.
Bradlee balanced some of the more lurid and uncomplimentary aspects of Williams’ life with stories of his seemingly unlimited generosity, especially in his life-long devotion to the Jimmy Fund, which supports research for new cancer treatments and cures for both adults and children at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. By the way, while most people associate the Jimmy Fund with the Boston Red Sox and former Red Sox players Ted Williams and Mike Andrews, the institution was started as a result of a radio broadcast of several members of the Boston Braves visiting a young cancer patient, alias Jimmy. Funds began to pour in to buy Jimmy a television so he could watch the Braves play.
Williams was ahead of his time in lobbying for inducting great players from the Negro Leagues into the Hall of Fame. In his Hall of Fame acceptance speech, Williams said, “And I hope that someday, the names of Satchel Paige and Josh Gibson in some way can be added as a symbol of the Negro players that are not here only because they were not given a chance.”
Bradlee reserves some of his most unflattering details for the Yankee Clipper, Joe DiMaggio. Bradlee contends that for most of his life, and especially toward the end of it, DiMaggio was arrogant, greedy, and standoffish. DiMaggio frequently was critical of Williams and did his best to perpetrate a myth that he, DiMaggio, was the superior player. Williams, for his part, always took the high road and praised DiMaggio when told of his comments.
One particular story about DiMaggio that Bradlee includes involved the 50th Anniversary celebration of the great 1941 season; that was the year Williams hit .406 and DiMaggio hit in 56 straight games. Williams, DiMaggio, and a few select dignitaries flew to Toronto for the 1991 All-Star Game aboard Air Force One with President George H.W. Bush, who is a huge baseball fan. Before leaving the White House, President Bush, Williams, and DiMaggio posed for a picture together. One hundred autographed copies of the photo were to be split among the three, with one of them receiving 34. DiMaggio didn’t want his share of the photos, so Williams said he would take them. DiMaggio provided them to Williams–for $500 each.
Bradlee’s best work is his treatment of Williams’ son, John-Henry Williams. Bradlee gives all the gory details of John-Henry’s manipulation of his father, which resulted in the older Williams’ body being cryonically frozen and stored for possible reanimation at some point in the future. While most accounts of what happened to the earthly remains of Ted Williams question John-Henry’s motives, Bradlee points out that John-Henry really believed there was a possibility that, through cryonics, he and his father might some day be reunited. John-Henry died shortly after his father passed away and his remains also are cryonically frozen in the same facility as his father’s.
Bradlee doesn’t make John-Henry look like a prince; in fact, John-Henry comes across as the arrogant, spoiled brat that he likely was. But Bradlee makes the case that John-Henry decided that, if his father was going to be exploited for money, then he and his father should be the ones benefiting from it. There is no doubt that John-Henry loved his father and was devoted to him.
The Kid: The Immortal Life of Ted Williams is full of material that many baseball fans will love. However, it is not for the squeamish or for those who are easily offended by foul language. Maybe Bradlee feels that including so much foul language makes the book somehow more authentic. I’m no prude, but I believe Bradlee overdid it; the same goes for the details of Williams’ personal life. I’m not in favor of a return to the sanitized biographies of yesteryear, but I don’t think a book about a baseball player should read like an issue of the National Enquirer.
I didn’t really enjoy this book, but if you are a fan of Ted Williams, then maybe you should give it a read; you also should read Leigh Montville’s Ted Williams: The Biography of an American Hero; at 400 pages it is a more concise account of the life of the Splendid Splinter. And I recently noticed that Williams’ daughter, Claudia, now has a book called Ted Williams, My Father. I’ll probably take a pass on that one.
Finally, Bradlee includes what Williams himself had to say in February of 2000 to those who claim that he was the greatest hitter of all time. He said he never believed it when he was a player. “I didn’t believe it then, and I don’t believe it now. Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, they were so good.”
I will never argue that Henry Aaron was as great a hitter as Ted Williams, but even Ted Williams knew that Babe Ruth was the greatest hitter of them all.
Click on “Teddy Ballgame” to access a review of Ted Williams: The Biography of an American Hero by Leigh Montville that I wrote in November 2006.