Will We See Another 70 Homerun Hitter?
RJ’s post about the next .400 hitter got me thinking – are we ever going to see another 70 home run hitter?
Certainly, hitting 70 homers is quite difficult - only two players have ever done this, and only two players even managed 40 homers in 2008. But one player comes to mind as having perhaps the most reasonable chance to smack 70 homers: Rangers slugger Chris Davis.
Let’s take a look at Chris Davis, and see what would have to happen for this young star-in-the-making to reach the 70 homer milestone. It would take quite the confluence of events (this formula can generally be applied to other hitters, too).
Here are some necessary steps:
Get a lot of plate appearances. The best way to do this is to hit the near the top (ideally first or second, but more realistically third) of one of the best lineups in the game. This would get you a lot of PAs.
Michael Young got 700 plate appearances for the Rangers last year. Let’s use this as a starting point, and assume that, as the #3 hitter in a very good offense,
Minimize the strikeouts…and the walks.
But in order to hit so many homers, you have to minimize the amount of walks as well. While
Hit lots of fly balls. In 2008,
If
Hit those fly balls a long way. In order for
If
Thus,
120 non-HR hits + 70 homers = 190 hits in 651 at bats (700 PAs minus 51 walks) for a batting average of .292.
190 hits + 51 walks = 241 times on men in 700 plate appearances, for an on-base percentage of .344.
70 homers, three triples, 41 doubles, 76 singles for 447 total bases, good for a slugging percentage of .687.
Obviously, this would be a perfect storm of events – lots of plate appearances, relatively few walks or strikeouts, lots of fly balls, and a high rate of fly balls becoming homers. However, none of these assumptions are terribly far-fetched.
Hitting 70 homers is an extremely difficult feat that may never happen again. But Chris Davis may have as good of a chance as any current player in baseball.
1 recs |
20 comments
|
Comments
But in order to hit so many homers, you have to minimize the amount of walks as well.
It’s funny, because the two guys who hit 70 walked at a pretty impressive clip, and two if a guy is hitting 50, 60 homeruns he going to get fear walked anyway. Plus to be that good of a homerun hitter, typically you have to have a good eye at the plate. It’d be very unlikely for someone to reach 70 and not get walked 100 times.
Furcal
by JI on Nov 18, 2008 4:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Which is part of the reason why it’s so difficult to get to 70.
by Peter Bendix on Nov 18, 2008 4:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The answer to almost everything in life is Pujols.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 18, 2008 4:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Who will be the first latin-american president?
What happens when you divide by zero? How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
I could be wrong though
by staplemaniac on Nov 18, 2008 4:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Seems like he's more concerned with getting hits+walks than home runs recently.
Dunno how much the elbow has to do with it, but he has altered his approach nonetheless.
I’d vote A-Rod, Fielder and Howard. Carlos Quentin as a sleeper…
by Daniel Berlyn on Nov 18, 2008 5:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
a-rod seems like as good as bet as any.
though the point about needing to be batting third or earlier in the order is a good one.
free chris getz!
by larry on Nov 18, 2008 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He was a different hitter for the first part of 2006
Then he got hurt and went back to hitting crappy line drives.
Furcal
by JI on Nov 18, 2008 5:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A player with 300 major league PAs to his name
strikes you as the most reasonable bet to get to 70? Really? That’s a pretty specious premise imo and I’m by no means a fan of “veteraness”.
by azruavatar on Nov 18, 2008 7:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
As an addendum,
Ryan Howard strikes me as the most likely to fluke into a 70 HR season.
I’m looking over this again and I’m kinda wondering where the strikeout/walk part is even coming from. When Sosa hit 66, he walked in ~10% of his PAs and struck out in ~24. McGwire’s 70 HR season had him walking or King 46 of the time. Bonds was over 40% combined during his HR campaign. I don’t see the correlation between NOT walking and striking out and hitting 70HR.
by azruavatar on Nov 18, 2008 7:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
“Doesn’t walk or strike out much” strikes me as the last kind of player who would actually hit 70 HR based on what we know about hitters who hit lots of HR. I mean, Ryan Howard is Mr. Three True Outcomes in the NL and he’s led the league in HR since he arrived on the scene.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 18, 2008 9:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
my thoughts exactly
I mean, is he really already better than Wieters?
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Nov 18, 2008 8:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This topic made me happy.
I may be more biased than I realize, but Davis would be my pick, too. I don’t think he will, but I think of current players he has the best odds.
And I really do think he’ll do something special as a home run hitter in his career, and I’m excited.
by philkid3 on Nov 18, 2008 7:49 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I'm finding it very hard to temper the excitement this post gives me.
My head realizes it’s a perfect-world, lots-of-luck, best-case time of scenario, but the fanboy in me is overwhelming at the moment.
by philkid3 on Nov 18, 2008 8:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I seriously doubt we'll have one for a while
as the short term trend seems to be towards fewer home runs. That being said, baseball has been trending in the long term (as in since 1900) towards more strikeouts, walks, and home runs, so I don’t think it’s reasonable to say that it won’t happen again.
by BraveBronco0121 on Nov 18, 2008 9:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Regarding the .400 hitter
Check out “Full House” by the late Stephen Jay Gould. In the book, Gould uses the concept of the normal distribution (or the “full house” of possible outcomes) to argue that we may never see another .400 hitter not because players are getting worse, but precisely because players are getting better. With less variation in the skill levels of major leaguer players and teams now versus the game’s infancy (due to a larger talent pool, improved training methods, better understanding of strategy, etc.), it is near impossible for any one player to stand out so much relative to everyone else that he can put up such a statistical anomaly of a season so as to hit .400. Bonds is such a statistical anomaly that we may not likely see anyone put up his kind of numbers any time soon. Of course, there is the (as yet unsubstantiated) possibility that he needed chemical enhancement to do so (as did McGwire and possibly Sosa), which actually boosts Gould’s argument by showing that the natural distrubition of talents inhibits such anomalous seasons.
70 home runs is far more likely to happen again than a .400 hitter for several reasons. One, home runs are a true outcome, and thus not as dependent on external factors and luck as something like batting average (yes, these factors would come into play, but not to the extent that they would to make a run at .400). Two, it is easier to put up big numbers in counting stats without a correspondingly overwhelming talent advantage over one’s competitors. As noted in the post, maximizing plate appearances, balls in play, and fly ball rate would go very far towards allowing one to hit 70 home runs, so someone who can optimize these factors would make his road to 70 much easier. Conversely, rate stats require one to be consistently great over an entire season and are not helped by simply increasing opportunities to hit. For someone to hit .400, he would need a much larger talent and luck advantage over his peers than a player trying to hit 70 home runs would need.
For those who are interested, in “Full House” Gould also uses the same statistical arguments to demonstrate that evolution has no direction, and that highly complex organisms (like humans) and less complex ones (like bacteria) are at different ends of the distribution of complexity. It’s a great book for anyone interested in baseball, biology, both, or just some interesting mathematical and scientific investigations into life.
by SuckaMD on Nov 18, 2008 11:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I know this is obvious, but it hasn't been mentioned yet.
A return to the high-offense environment of the “Steroid Era” (or an even higher level of offense) would be critical for a .400 hitter or a 70 HR season to occur.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Nov 19, 2008 5:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Line drives go for home runs too
granted, on average it’s just 2.5% of the time (using 2008 AL numbers- coincidentally, 2008 texas numbers were exactly 2.50% as well) but it happens. With a 25% LD/PA rate, a 2.5% HR/LD rate, and 700 PA’s, that is 4.375 HR’s, so it isn’t even trivial.
For the great HR seasons, it’s even more important. McGwire had a 20.9% HR/LD rate in 1998, when he hit 70 – he hit 91 LD’s, and had 19 of them left the park. He had a 21.4% HR/LD (15/70) in 1999, when he hit 65. HR/LD data is apparently not available for bonds in 2001, when he hit 73 (this is strange…) but 7 of Howard’s 58 in 2006 were on LD’s, and 7 of Ludwick’s 2008 HR’s were on LD’s. 17 of Pujols 49 in 2006 (15.7% HR/LD) were on LD’s (6/32 in ’07, 10/37 in ’08).
Not so much for Davis, apparently, with zero LD HR’s in 2008 despite way above average luck on LD’s in play. Maybe he was just saving up the LD HR’s for next year ;)
god, i love baseball. -roy hobbs
by SleepyCA on Nov 20, 2008 4:22 AM EST reply actions 1 recs

by 









BtB on Facebook
















