From Bill James's site:
About Mick's doubles-per-ball-in-play: Part of why he only hit an average amount is, HE DIDN'T. A lot of what's been said on here is mistaken, or at least misleading, because it's right only to the extent that it compares him to all of history rather than to his own time and place. His own % of doubles-per-ball-in-play was 5.9%; the league average, for the period of his career, was somewhere between 4.8-4.9%. So, whatever answer we try to give for why Mick 'only hit an average % of doubles' is whatever the answer is for the 1950's-60's in general (and to a slight extent also, the AL in particular, since it had a few percent fewer doubles than the NL).
Asked by: MarisFan61
_________________________
See my previous post:
Mickey Mantle hit few doubles ... or did he? Thursday, December 31, 2015
I tried the Bill James method on batters with at least 350 home runs...
Mantle's rank with the James method is 77... out of 93. Mick's rank is not high enough for James to conclude that Mantle was in the middle of some reasonable pack of peers...
2B/BIP percent (James method); Mantle 5.83%
2B/Hits percent (my method); Mantle 14.24%
James/mine:
Ave | 6.85% | 18.51% |
Min | 4.39% | 13.24% |
Max | 9.70% | 25.36% |
Bottom line: which method makes more sense:
Mine: 2B/Hits
James: 2B/BIP
________________________
Ten contemporary sluggers with worse doubles rates than Mantle using the James method:
Willie McCovey, Al Kaline, Billy Williams, Eddie Mathews, Rocky Colavito, Gil Hodges, Ernie Banks, Harmon Killebrew, Yogi Berra, Norm Cash
Using my method, the only three worse than Mantle: Killebrew, Cash, Howard.
However, 13 contemporary sluggers with better doubles rates than Mantle using the James method:
Ted Williams, Willie Stargell, Stan Musial, Dick Allen, Reggie Jackson, Tony Perez, Frank Robinson, Johnny Mize, Duke Snider, Orlando Cepeda, Carl Yastrzemski, and just a little behind Hank Aaron and Willie Mays.
I'm not sure what point James is making by comparing Mantle to all batters, including pitchers who batted in both leagues in the years Mantle played: 1951-1968.
Mantle's career splits for doubles/hits:
home: 13.5%
road: 15%
It wasn't Yankee Stadium.
Mick's highest rates were in his first three seasons. Obviously, as he matured doubles turned into home runs but that would tend to be true for other home run hitters, too. Then in decline, home runs might turn into doubles ... or outs.
I think around 1958 Mantle just stopped trying to stretch, either on orders or on his own.
Since 1936 players with at least 350 home runs:
- 47 hit more home runs than doubles
- 42 hit more doubles than home runs.
Players between 1936 and 1975 with at least 350 home runs:
More home runs than doubles:
Rk | Player | HR | 2B | From | To | Age | G | PA | AB | R | H | 3B | RBI | BB | IBB | SO | HBP | SH | SF | GDP | SB | CS | Pos | Tm | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Hank Aaron | 745 | 616 | 1954 | 1975 | 20-41 | 3213 | 13633 | 12093 | 2152 | 3709 | 98 | 2262 | 1367 | 292 | 1345 | 32 | 21 | 119 | 320 | 240 | 72 | .307 | .375 | .559 | .934 | *9783DH/45 | MLN-ATL-MIL |
2 | Willie Mays | 660 | 523 | 1951 | 1973 | 20-42 | 2992 | 12496 | 10881 | 2062 | 3283 | 140 | 1903 | 1464 | 192 | 1526 | 44 | 13 | 91 | 251 | 338 | 103 | .302 | .384 | .557 | .941 | *8H/39675 | NYG-SFG-NYM |
3 | Frank Robinson | 583 | 528 | 1956 | 1975 | 20-39 | 2772 | 11663 | 9939 | 1824 | 2928 | 72 | 1802 | 1409 | 218 | 1520 | 198 | 17 | 101 | 267 | 204 | 77 | .295 | .389 | .538 | .928 | 973DH8/5 | CIN-BAL-LAD-CAL-CLE |
4 | Harmon Killebrew | 573 | 290 | 1954 | 1975 | 18-39 | 2435 | 9833 | 8147 | 1283 | 2086 | 24 | 1584 | 1559 | 160 | 1699 | 48 | 0 | 77 | 243 | 19 | 18 | .256 | .376 | .509 | .884 | 357DH/49 | WSH-MIN-KCR |
5 | Mickey Mantle | 536 | 344 | 1951 | 1968 | 19-36 | 2401 | 9907 | 8102 | 1676 | 2415 | 72 | 1509 | 1733 | 126 | 1710 | 13 | 14 | 47 | 113 | 153 | 38 | .298 | .421 | .557 | .977 | *8397H/645 | NYY |
6 | Ernie Banks | 512 | 407 | 1953 | 1971 | 22-40 | 2528 | 10394 | 9421 | 1305 | 2583 | 90 | 1636 | 763 | 198 | 1236 | 70 | 45 | 96 | 229 | 50 | 53 | .274 | .330 | .500 | .830 | 36/H57 | CHC |
7 | Eddie Mathews | 512 | 354 | 1952 | 1968 | 20-36 | 2391 | 10100 | 8537 | 1509 | 2315 | 72 | 1453 | 1444 | 107 | 1487 | 26 | 36 | 58 | 123 | 68 | 39 | .271 | .376 | .509 | .885 | *53/H7 | BSN-MLN-ATL-HOU-DET |
8 | Willie McCovey | 458 | 287 | 1959 | 1975 | 21-37 | 2092 | 7977 | 6676 | 1081 | 1840 | 44 | 1296 | 1169 | 224 | 1251 | 66 | 5 | 59 | 134 | 22 | 20 | .276 | .386 | .538 | .923 | *37H/9 | SFG-SDP |
9 | Duke Snider | 407 | 358 | 1947 | 1964 | 20-37 | 2143 | 8237 | 7161 | 1259 | 2116 | 85 | 1333 | 971 | 104 | 1237 | 21 | 52 | 32 | 166 | 99 | 50 | .295 | .380 | .540 | .919 | *89H/7 | BRO-LAD-NYM-SFG |
10 | Frank Howard | 382 | 245 | 1958 | 1973 | 21-36 | 1895 | 7352 | 6488 | 864 | 1774 | 35 | 1119 | 782 | 135 | 1460 | 33 | 7 | 43 | 219 | 8 | 9 | .273 | .352 | .499 | .851 | 793H/D | LAD-WSA-TEX-DET |
11 | Norm Cash | 377 | 241 | 1958 | 1974 | 23-39 | 2089 | 7914 | 6705 | 1045 | 1820 | 41 | 1104 | 1043 | 112 | 1091 | 90 | 17 | 55 | 139 | 43 | 30 | .271 | .374 | .488 | .862 | *3H/97D | CHW-DET |
12 | Rocky Colavito | 374 | 283 | 1955 | 1968 | 21-34 | 1841 | 7559 | 6503 | 971 | 1730 | 21 | 1159 | 951 | 58 | 880 | 29 | 16 | 60 | 182 | 19 | 27 | .266 | .359 | .489 | .848 | *97/H31 | CLE-DET-KCA-CHW-NYY-LAD |
13 | Gil Hodges | 370 | 295 | 1943 | 1963 | 19-39 | 2072 | 8102 | 7030 | 1105 | 1921 | 48 | 1274 | 943 | 31 | 1137 | 25 | 56 | 50 | 165 | 63 | 31 | .273 | .359 | .487 | .846 | *3/H275984 | BRO-LAD-NYM |
14 | Ralph Kiner | 369 | 216 | 1946 | 1955 | 23-32 | 1472 | 6256 | 5205 | 971 | 1451 | 39 | 1015 | 1011 | 1 | 749 | 24 | 9 | 7 | 126 | 22 | 2 | .279 | .398 | .548 | .946 | *7/83H | PIT-CHC-CLE |
15 | Willie Stargell | 368 | 336 | 1962 | 1975 | 22-35 | 1753 | 7006 | 6164 | 955 | 1750 | 49 | 1197 | 718 | 177 | 1497 | 58 | 9 | 56 | 114 | 12 | 12 | .284 | .361 | .533 | .894 | *73H/98 | PIT |
16 | Yogi Berra | 358 | 321 | 1946 | 1965 | 21-40 | 2120 | 8359 | 7555 | 1175 | 2150 | 49 | 1430 | 704 | 49 | 414 | 52 | 9 | 44 | 146 | 30 | 26 | .285 | .348 | .482 | .830 | *2H79/35 | NYY-NYM |
More doubles than home runs:
Rk | Player | HR | 2B | From | To | Age | G | PA | AB | R | H | 3B | RBI | BB | IBB | SO | HBP | SH | SF | GDP | SB | CS | Pos | Tm | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Ted Williams | 521 | 525 | 1939 | 1960 | 20-41 | 2292 | 9788 | 7706 | 1798 | 2654 | 71 | 1839 | 2021 | 86 | 709 | 39 | 5 | 20 | 197 | 24 | 17 | .344 | .482 | .634 | 1.116 | *79H/1 | BOS |
2 | Stan Musial | 475 | 725 | 1941 | 1963 | 20-42 | 3026 | 12717 | 10972 | 1949 | 3630 | 177 | 1951 | 1599 | 127 | 696 | 53 | 35 | 53 | 243 | 78 | 31 | .331 | .417 | .559 | .976 | 3798H/1 | STL |
3 | Billy Williams | 415 | 422 | 1959 | 1975 | 21-37 | 2368 | 10106 | 8999 | 1374 | 2637 | 88 | 1434 | 987 | 167 | 1002 | 43 | 7 | 70 | 196 | 86 | 47 | .293 | .363 | .498 | .861 | *79D/3H8 | CHC-OAK |
4 | Al Kaline | 399 | 498 | 1953 | 1974 | 18-39 | 2834 | 11596 | 10116 | 1622 | 3007 | 75 | 1582 | 1277 | 131 | 1020 | 55 | 45 | 104 | 271 | 137 | 65 | .297 | .376 | .480 | .855 | *98HD3/75 | DET |
5 | Orlando Cepeda | 379 | 417 | 1958 | 1974 | 20-36 | 2124 | 8698 | 7927 | 1131 | 2351 | 27 | 1365 | 588 | 154 | 1169 | 102 | 4 | 74 | 218 | 142 | 80 | .297 | .350 | .499 | .849 | *37D/H95 | SFG-STL-ATL-OAK-BOS-KCR |
6 | Joe DiMaggio | 361 | 389 | 1936 | 1951 | 21-36 | 1736 | 7673 | 6821 | 1390 | 2214 | 131 | 1537 | 790 | 369 | 46 | 14 | 130 | 30 | 9 | .325 | .398 | .579 | .977 | *8/79H3 | NYY | ||
7 | Johnny Mize | 359 | 367 | 1936 | 1953 | 23-40 | 1883 | 7370 | 6443 | 1118 | 2011 | 83 | 1337 | 856 | 524 | 52 | 20 | 99 | 28 | 1 | .312 | .397 | .562 | .959 | *3H/9 | STL-NYG-NYY |
Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Play Index Tool Used
Generated 12/31/2015.
6 comments:
Your analysis of Mantle's doubles is based on the erroneous assumption that there is a positive correlation between hitting home runs and hitting doubles, as though a double, like a home run, is a function of a batter's power. But this assumption is obviously incorrect. A double is usually nothing more than a well-placed single - a line drive or a one hopper over the third or first base bag that an outfielder has to run a ways to pick up. It could be just a pop fly that lands near the foul lines. Sometimes, it is a line drive in the alley between the outfielders. So comparing Mantle's double production to that of other sluggers just makes no sense at all. His double production should be compared to the league average in the era in which he played, 1951 - 1968. Also, in order to negate the impact of Yankee Stadium on the totals, one should consider only his production in road games. That is true for any player. During that period of time, approximately 17 per cent of all major league hits were doubles. In games played on the road, Mantle's average was 15 per cent. The difference between Mantle's road game production and the league average for that time does not seem to me to be statistically significant. Mantle's hitting power did not diminish over the years, he just connected less frequently. But he could still crush home runs into the upper deck at Yankee Stadium even in his final season. Of course, his extra-base hits diminished as his legs deteriorated - that only makes sense. But for the first 10 years of his career, his production of extra base hits and stolen bases prove that he could still run pretty well despite his many injuries. In fact, his lifetime stolen base per centage is remarkable - quite a bit better than that of Willy Mays, for instance. If the Yankees were trying to avoid Mantle injuring his legs, as you suggest, then he would not have been stealing bases like he did. Of course, in the last few years of his career, Mantle did not even try to steal bases - but up until then, he did, and his success rate proves that he could still run very well.
In a previous reply I mentioned that Mantle's home/road splits for doubles are pretty even. That's easy to check. His homers as a percent of his hits declined with age; see below. Considering his speed, Mantle stole relatively few bases; fewer attempts tends to yield more success. He also bunted much less in the second half of his career. Most hitters are not sluggers, who hit home runs. I'm working on those with at least 350 homers. Look for it.
HR/H Year
14.29% 1951
13.45% 1952
15.44% 1953
16.56% 1954
23.42% 1955
27.66% 1956
19.65% 1957
26.58% 1958
20.13% 1959
27.59% 1960
33.13% 1961
24.79% 1962
27.78% 1963
24.82% 1964
20.65% 1965
23.96% 1966
20.37% 1967
17.48% 1968
True about speed---'fewer attempts tend to yield more success.' Most stolen bases for Mantle was 21 (caught only 3 times); Mays had 23 or more Stolen bases 7 seasons. His most was 40 (caught 10 times--that's still a 4 to 1 ratio). At age 40, Mays stole 23 bases (caught only 3 times). Mantle had only one season with at least 20 doubles (37 in his second season). Mays had 5 seasons with over 30 doubles.
True about speed---'fewer attempts tend to yield more success.' Most stolen bases for Mantle was 21 (caught only 3 times); Mays had 23 or more Stolen bases 7 seasons. His most was 40 (caught 10 times--that's still a 4 to 1 ratio). At age 40, Mays stole 23 bases (caught only 3 times). Mantle had only one season with at least 30 doubles (37 in his second season). Mays had 5 seasons with over 30 doubles.
Correction: Mantle had only one season with more than 30 doubles, not 20.
He had 2 seasons with more than 10 triples; Mays had 5. That says a lot about speed.
Mantle played with badly damaged knees. It makes sense that he would not risk injury by running at full speed and trying to steal bases any more than he had to. If I was Yankees manager, I would have kept him from trying to steal bases except on rare occasions. Mickey was much to valuable to risk injuring his legs. Besides, the Yankees did not depend on speed to win games. They did not steal many bases. They relied on home runs to win. They were called the Bronx Bombers for a reason. Bunts and stolen bases did not figure much in the Yankees success.
Post a Comment