Reward Retrospective - 1941 AL MVP - 56 Game Hitting Streak vs. Hitting over 0.400

About seventy years ago two players from two heated rivals dominated the 1941 season. Joe DiMaggio's 56 game hitting streak and Ted William's 0.406 batting average were the lead stories that summer. Both feats have not been equaled since then. While other players had good seasons in 1941, they could not even come close to the seasons these two achieved.
First, let's look back at the AL MVP voting from 1941 (pitchers placed much higher in the MVP voting because there was no Cy Young award yet):
| Rank | Name | Team | Points | 1st Place Votes | Vote Share |
| 1 | Joe DiMaggio | NYY | 291 | 15 | 87% |
| 2 | Ted Williams | BOS | 254 | 8 | 76% |
| 3 | Bob Feller | CLE | 174 | 0 | 52% |
| 4 | Thornton Lee | CHW | 144 | 1 | 43% |
| 5 | Charlie Keller | NYY | 126 | 0 | 38% |
| 6 | Cecil Travis | WSH | 101 | 0 | 30% |
As it can be seen, the big two that year ran away with the voting. These six vote getters were the top 4 hitters and top 2 pitchers in 1941according to Rally's historical WAR data set. Here is a comparison of the rate stats and WAR totals for the six:
| Name | Team | WAR | H | HR | RBI | BA | OBP | SLG | OPS |
| Ted Williams | BOS | 11.3 | 185 | 37 | 120 | 0.406 | 0.553 | 0.735 | 1.287 |
| Joe DiMaggio | NYA | 9.4 | 193 | 30 | 125 | 0.357 | 0.440 | 0.643 | 1.083 |
| Cecil Travis | WS1 | 6.8 | 218 | 7 | 101 | 0.359 | 0.410 | 0.520 | 0.930 |
| Charlie Keller | NYA | 6.6 | 151 | 33 | 122 | 0.298 | 0.416 | 0.580 | 0.996 |
| Name | Team | WAR | W | L | ERA | IP | HR | BB | SO |
| Thornton Lee | CHA | 8.2 | 22 | 11 | 2.37 | 300 | 18 | 92 | 130 |
| Bob Feller | CLE | 7.5 | 25 | 13 | 3.15 | 343 | 15 | 194 | 260 |
DiMaggio and Williams were definitely the top two players in the AL that season. Here is a comparison of the individual WAR components for Williams and DiMaggio (thanks to Justin Bopp for the graphic).
Click to enlarge
DiMaggio's defense was not even close enough to make up for the almost 40 extra runs Williams' offense created. Williams' OBP and SLG were each about 100 points higher than DiMaggio's. Just looking at the hitting component of WAR, Williams had the 7th greatest offensive season ever. A couple guys named Ruth and Bonds were the only ones to have better offensive seasons.
The problem Williams faced was that hitting 0.400 was seen then as an achievable feat with Bill Terry in 1930 (thanks to mooksta2 for the correction). Just two season for these two clashed, DiMaggio led the league with a 0.381 average. Since 1941, no player qualified for the batting title has hit 0.400. Tony Gwynn came the closest in 1994 by hitting 0.394.
A 56 game hitting streak at the time seemed out of this world and is still unbelievable. The record at the time was 45 games by Willie Keeler. The closest anyone has come to breaking the record was when Pete Rose got to 44 games in 1978.
With both players having a great season, voters might have been persuaded by the 17 games that the Yankees won the division by over the Red Sox. 1998 was a great example of winning team bias in MVP voting. Sammy Sosa got the nod over Mark McGwire for the MVP even though McGwire hit more home runs than Sosa when both broke Roger Maris's home run record. Sosa ran away with the MVP vote, getting 30 of the 32 first place votes, by leading the Cubs into the playoffs (and of course losing once there).
I was wondering how voters today would vote if two players would have similar type seasons. I think they might be more inclined to vote for person hitting 0.400, vice the long hitting streak because there is some better understanding of advanced metrics. Also it has been a while since either milestone has happened so both will catch the public's attention. I hope one day to see just one of these feats, but for both to happen in the same year is extraordinary.
29 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great Piece (and a correction)
I love this series!
Not to nitpick, but Rogers Hornsby wasn’t the most recent .400 hitter in 1941; Bill Terry did it in 1930 (and Harry Heilmann, Lefty O’Doul, and Babe Herman had all hit over .390 in the previous 15 seasons)
Thanks for the correction -- will note in article
Jeff Zimmerman - Protecting the world from RBI's and Wins from my mom's guest house.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Jan 6, 2010 2:56 PM EST up reply actions
Excellent stuff Jeff.
Marlin Maniac, a Florida Marlins blog
Come attend Intro to Sabermetrics 101!
Check me out at Beyond the Box Score as well.
I would like a less obvious poll.
Who would we vote for if they both went to the playoffs and both had the same WAR?
To erase the concern of East Coast Bias, let’s pretend they both play on the same team.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
Sounds like a another post for another day.
Put up a bunch of different examples, with just one change (city, playoffs, etc) and see how the vote would go.
Jeff Zimmerman - Protecting the world from RBI's and Wins from my mom's guest house.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Jan 6, 2010 3:04 PM EST up reply actions
One other change
How about using someone other than A Rod. He is an admitted steroid user. I wouldn’t vote for him if he hit .600.
I actually pick Arod for his polarization
Ted Williams was hated by the media and fans. Was looking for someone today to fit that mold.
Jeff Zimmerman - Protecting the world from RBI's and Wins from my mom's guest house.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Jan 6, 2010 3:05 PM EST up reply actions
Yup, Me Too
But then, I’m a Mariners fan. We love Ichiro and are, at best, ambivalent about ARod. And we hate the F***ing Y***ees.
Obviously the rules don't apply to you...
“You can disagree with everything and everyone, as long as you don’t make it personal and you back up your arguments with logic.”. I would say calling my opinion “dumb” is making it personal.
Slow down there, sparky.
Your opinion isn’t dumb.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
OK... I must have misunderstood your earlier comment
by B H on Jan 6, 2010 3:11 PM EST up reply actions
I think that what Justin meant
is that not voting for a hitter who batted .600, essentially the greatest year imaginable for a baseball player, because he was an admitted steroid user that’s likely no longer using, isn’t particularly sound logic.
It’s the MVP award, and any player that bats .600 would be the most valuable player in the league.
Baseball and Satchels, the dynamic duo.
You can find me at http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/
by Satchel Price on Jan 6, 2010 3:24 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
you said it all
I think you really said it all in your comment… “likely no longer using”. How do we know. To me, once a cheater always a cheater.
by B H on Jan 6, 2010 3:28 PM EST up reply actions
Satch is correct.
It would be different if he hit 80 homers, but there’s little correlation between steroid use and average. Voting against him based on homeruns would make sense, since there’s some chance that his steroid use would have powered those stats up, but just an anti-vote based on his stupid mistakes doesn’t really make sense.
But eventually we’re going to descend into what MVP really means, when the point of the article was to make you question if rare counting-stat occurences are greater than rare averaged stat occurences.
The very question we’re addressing in these comments is whether one can overcome hatred/loathing/dislike for a particular player to make the correct vote. If we are to think like sabermetricians, we have to drop our preconceptions at the door and come to logical conclusions.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
I personally don't see how you could penalize someone for steroid use
There isn’t remotely definitive proof on what steroids even do to help a ballplayer. It’s such a difficult to gauge subjuct, since we don’t only know exactly who was using and for what time period, and frankly, nobody has any idea exactly to what extent steroids help.
Yeah, A-Rod’s a cheat, and I don’t particularly like him as a person from what I’ve gathered, but baseball awards aren’t given out based on character, but performance.
If you’d like to harp on bad guys in baseball, focus on guys like Brett Myers, who beat his wife and was charge with assault.
Baseball and Satchels, the dynamic duo.
You can find me at http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/
by Satchel Price on Jan 6, 2010 3:56 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
No doubt.
There’s little point in debating whether or not the roids, HGH, et. al., help hitting homeruns. Whether that would help one get on base two out of every three at bats is another thing entirely (discounting intentional walks and literally killing infielders with line drives, of course.)
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
ok... I guess enough isn't enough :-)
I agree that the award to go to the person with the best stats, but not if those stats were achieved through cheating. If someone got the best batting average because they used a bat that was a little bit bigger round than everyone else, would you give that person the MVP? I don’t think so. I think once you cheat you should not be eligible for any awards like this and probably shouldn’t still even be playing the game. It is unfair to all those players that didn’t cheat. In A Rod’s case, who knows what else he may have (and may still be) taking to improve his performance. He just can’t be trusted to be playing the game within the rules. And I agree, what Brett Myers did is worse than what A Rod did (or is doing). Maybe they should both be out of the game.
Here's my problem with what you're saying
If a player is using a bigger bat, then it’s abundantly clear how he benefits from that in terms of production. When a player takes steroids, we have absolutely no idea how he benefits from that, excluding the ackowledgement that he’s likely to hit some balls a bit farther.
There are a billion things that go into baseball that all the steroids in the world wouldn’t help a player with. Certainly, Rodriguez’s accomplishments are substantially less impressive now, but when talking about who deserves to win the MVP, if MLB deemed that he was allowed to play, then I don’t think that he should be demerited to the extent that you competely ignore his accomplishments, that’s MLB’s fault for not taking a stronger stance.
Baseball and Satchels, the dynamic duo.
You can find me at http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/
by Satchel Price on Jan 6, 2010 5:06 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Old, valid arguments.
STILL VALID. +1 REC
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
All this being moot because the MVP has been a superficial award for at least six decades.
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
(superficial because of things your post illustrates)
;)
See Data Differently.
beyondtheboxscore.com | Twitter: @ justinbopp
Depends on if Tommy is talking about who deserves to win or who would actually win, because as we've seen those can be very different questions
Presumably, Ichiro would get some bonus points for all of the extra attention that he would garner. People get excited about hit streaks once they reach the 20 game plateau. Once he hits 40? 50? 55? Hell, I’d be glued to those games.
Baseball and Satchels, the dynamic duo.
You can find me at http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/
by Satchel Price on Jan 7, 2010 9:37 AM EST up reply actions

by 



















