Shaking Up Baseball’s History: Part I
In 2004, Carlos Beltran was playing what may have been the best baseball of his life. As a member of the Houston Astros, he nearly single-handedly propelled the team from fifth to first in the NL Central. Beltran dominated the playoffs, batting .435 with eight homeruns, fourteen RBIs, six stolen bases, and a 1.558 OPS in twelve games. His performance during the postseason earned him a five-year, $119 million dollar contract (as well as other bonuses)1 from the New York Mets in the offseason. In 2008, Carlos Beltran made more money than any player in the National League2. If Beltran had not performed as well as he did in the ’04 Playoffs, he would not have been making $119 million dollars in the next five years. The ironic thing is that his stats, the homeruns, the RBIs, the hits, none of it, count toward his career totals.
In baseball, postseason performances end up more abstract than concrete. There are dozens upon dozens of homeruns hit each October in baseball yet none go down into the record books along side the players’ names. The same rings true for any stat you can imagine. If you think about it, the players on the leaderboards have better (or worse with stats like averages) numbers than what meets the eye. ESPN has been highlighting some of the most memorable homeruns in postseason history, none are added into the player’s career total. Luis Gonzalez ended his career with 1,439 RBIs. His walk-off RBI single in game seven of the 2001 World Series, one of the most meaningful RBIs of the decade, is not included in that 1,439 total.
Some of the most meaningful plays in baseball history are not counted into the player’s career stats – which should be composed of the stats composed by a player during games that count towards a team’s win-loss record for a season or during their pursuit for the World Series Championship. Since these stats are not counted, players are cheated out of accomplishments, some meaning more than others.
In this series, I will look at some of the stats that change in baseball if you take into account postseason stats. Some change a player’s career while some shake up the record books. I will start with hits and work my way through the rest.
Only twenty-seven players in baseball history have collected three-thousand hits in their careers. Currently all but three of those twenty-seven are not in the Hall of Fame3. As an obvious benchmark for the Hall of Fame, three-thousand hits are something players dream about collecting. A handful of players in baseball history have fallen just short of their quest to three-thousand as a main result of a diminishing body.
The closest player to three-thousand hits without accomplishing the feat is Sam Rice, an outfielder primarily with the Washington Senators who played from 1915 to 1934. He collected 2,987 hits in his career, retiring at the age of 44 after finding it progressively harder to play an entire season. “The truth of the matter is that I did not know how many hits I had,” said Rice. “A few years after I quit, [Senator's owner] Clark Griffith told me about it, and asked if I’d care to comeback with the Senators and pick up those thirteen hits. But I was out of shape, and didn’t want to go through all that would have been necessary to make the effort.”4
During fifteen playoff games with the Washington Senators, Sam Rice had a .302 batting average, earning him nineteen hits. In meaningful games in his Major League Baseball career, Sam Rice collected 3,006 hits. Sam Rice only earned 0.4% of votes in his first appearance on the Hall of Fame ballot in 1938. Since he did not receive 5% of the votes, he was removed from the ballot and didn’t reappear until 1948. He appeared on every ballot from then until 1960 (except 1959), failing to receive the proper amount needed to be elected to the Hall of Fame in each attempt. It wasn’t until 1963, over 25 years after he first appeared on the ballot, that he was voted in by the Veteran’s Committee. A player with 3,006 hits and a .322 career average would not have received as few votes as Sam Rice did over the course of 25 years.
As the captain of the New York Yankees, Derek Jeter easily goes down in history as one of the best players in the decade whether as a result of being overrated or not. Currently, Derek is sitting with 2,926 hits, the most all time in a Yankee’s uniform. Jeter also sits with the possibility of 2010 being his final season in Yankee uniform as his contract ends after this year’s playoffs. The chances are slim that the Yankees decide to let Jeter walk in the offseason and it is equally as slim that Jeter decides to leave a franchise that means so much to him. However, the possibility remains that Jeter could have played his last regular season game as a Yankee.
Over fourteen seasons in the playoffs, Jeter has collected 185 hits and counting, the most all time. In meaningful games, Jeter has therefore compiled 3,111 hits and takes a huge leap forward from his current ranking on the all-time hits board. On June 12th of this season in the Bronx, Derek Jeter collected his 3,000th hit in a meaningful game. It would come on a lead-off homerun in the bottom of the first inning, giving the Yankees a 1-0 lead over the Astros.
Jeter appeared to hit a wall in 2010 at the age of 36, batting only .2705. If he decided to retire after this year’s playoffs6, he would fall short of the 3,000 hit mark that is well within his grasps; depriving his resume of an impressive credential. As the all-time playoff hit leader, Jeter should already have 3,000 hits in his career and be the only player to ever collect that many as a Yankee.
While Chipper Jones is teetering on retirement, Fred McGriff has been retired since 2004. These two players don’t have much in common besides their bond shared in career hits; both have 2,490 and are tied for 98th all time. Both players have had outstanding careers in baseball but collecting 2,500 hits would have added a cherry on top of the Hall-of-Fame sundae. McGriff collected 57 hits over his postseason career, giving him 2,5477. Chipper Jones has 96 in postseason play, giving him 2,586. McGriff’s 2,500th career hit in a meaningful game would have occurred on May 17th of 2003 as a Dodger in a home game against the Florida Marlins. Chipper’s 2,500th would have come on September 28th of 2009 at Turner, giving him yet another milestone in a Braves’ uniform that he may not be able to accomplish.
With a gun to your head, would you be able to tell me which uniform Pete Rose was wearing when he collected his 4,000th hit? Your guess would probably be Phillies’ or Reds’, right? Bang! You’d be gone. On April 13th, 1984, Rose doubled, putting himself in the very exclusive 4,000 hit club while wearing a Montreal Expos’ uniform. Instead, when counting the postseason hits, Rose knocks his 4,000th hit as a member of the Phillies playing at Montreal.
In the big picture, nothing changes. Pete Rose remains the hits leader but with 4,342 hits and there isn’t any significant jumps on the leaderboard. Let’s face it, all we care about with hits is the hits leader and those who have 3,000 hits as well as the occasional guy who is on a chase for 4,0008.
Footnotes
1 – He got the common no-trade clause along with a hotel suite on all road trips, a fifteen-person luxury suite for all home games, the lease of an ocular enhancer machine (which is a fancy way to describe a machine that shoots out colored tennis balls at 150 miles per hour), and a lifetime supply of hair gel. Surprisingly, I only made up the last thing.
2 –Alex Rodriguez was still making ten-million more. He also had ownership to the devil’s soul and nineteen ocular enhancers.
3 – The all-time hit leader Pete Rose was banned from baseball for life for betting on games during the time he was a player and manager. Craig Biggio is yet to be eligible for the Hall of Fame but will appear on the ballot in 2012. The third not in the Hall is Rafael Palmeiro who is eligible next season but will most likely not make it in due to something called “steroids” (sp?).
4 – Yes, I got my quote from Wikipedia who got the quote from a baseball hall of fame website. Did you know Sam Rice shot Tupac? Also from Wikipedia…
5 – The .270 average was the lowest qualified batting average of Jeter’s fifteen full seasons in the majors and the first year since 2004 that he failed to hit at or above .300. He also saw a low in OBP, SLG, OPS, WaR (Wins above Replacement), and many other various statistics. I hate the Yankees and hate Jeter the most; but it is sad to see a talented player start a fast downward spiral.
6 – It wouldn’t be far fetched to think that if the Yankees take the 2010 World Series that Jeter would call it quits. It would give him six rings for his career, something no one playing in the 70′s or beyond can say they have accomplished.
7 – McGriff received 21.5% of the votes in 2010, falling short of the 75% needed. It is doubtful the 2,500 hits would change anything, but more on McGriff later.
8 – We haven’t seen this since 1984 when Rose collected his. A healthy Alex Rodriguez is the only chance we have to witness it in the foreseeable future. Sady, Rodriguez has endured hip injuries that makes him about as mobile at third as Heather Mills.
TAGS: 2001 World Series, 2010 World Series, Alex Rodriguez, Atlanta Braves, Baseball, Carlos Beltran, Chipper Jones, Craig Biggio, Derek Jeter, Fred McGriff, hall of fame, Houston Astros, Luis Gonzalez, mlb, MLB Hall of Fame, Montreal Expos, New York Mets, New York Yankees, Pete Rose, Philadelphia Phillies, playoffs, Rafael Palmeiro, Sam Rice, Washington Senators







8 Comments
Very nice idea. It's tough to account for post-season stats in a fair way because some of the best players may not even get a chance to be in the playoffs in the first place.
I don't support using post-season performance as a criterion for judging a player's career, but I absolutely consider the numbers if they're available.
That said when I hear suggestions such as Curt Schilling and Andy Pettitte should be in the Hall of Fame, I cringe a little. If not for their playoff numbers neither would be nearly the candidate he is. Should they be rewarded for playing on good teams? Those teams already helped their numbers.
And how do we address this historically? For decades, only 2 teams made the playoffs…all those other all-star caliber players were sitting on the sidelines.
I think the emphasis on reaching various hits milestones is misplaced, as would be the emphasis on any particular cumulative stat. It is simply unfair to give Derek Jeter and people like him effectively an entire extra season's worth of at-bats in which to accumulate stats and then use those accumulated stats as a way of proving that the player is somehow better than we thought he was or better than some other player who didn't have that opportunity.
My feeling is that you can't penalize a player for never the at-bats he never had the opportunity to have in the post-season. That said, I don't think we can ignore that the playoffs happened and that the stats that are put up there are relevant for considering a player's historical standing and, most importantly, his Hall of Fame credentials. Obviously small sample size caveats apply, and you're not going to hold Ted Williams's failure in his only post-season against him because a handful of at-bats in one post-season series (to paraphrase Darth Vadar) is insignificant compared to the power of his body of work.
I have to disagree with Matt to a certain extent on Pettitte and Schilling in particular, however. It's not so much that they have performed often in the post-season by itself that helps their Hall of Fame cases, it's the quality of their performances. Presumably, in the post-season you are facing pretty much all above average offenses (and vice-versa for hitters, you're facing disproportionately good pitchers since there are all good teams, no 5th starters, more aggressive bullpen usage, etc.) You would expect, then, that pitchers would have higher ERAs than their career rates in the post-season. Pettitte's career ERA, however, is 3.88, while his post-season ERA is 3.83 in 263 innings, essentially 1+ season's of extra pitching against elite competition in his career in games that mean the most. Similarly, Schilling had a 3.46 career ERA, but a 2.23(!!!) ERA in the post-season, albeit in only only a little more than a half season's IP of 133.1 (hey, not everybody can play for the Yankees and go to the post-season every year).
Now, Pettitte might not belong in the Hall of Fame simply because his regular season stats are not good enough, and his post-season stats don't add enough to the equation, but I believe they add something. Schilling, on the other hand, I think his post-season performance adds a hell of a lot to his resume, particularly given that the primary knock against his Hall of Fame candidacy is going to be quantity of regular season performance, not quality.
Obviously these are some rough stats and conclusions I'm using and making here, but I would say, based on the above, that Schilling's borderline HoF case is pushed over into HoF territory by his post-season performance, while Pettitt'e probably is not. The stats, for me, confirm that Pettitte was a solid regular season pitcher and solid post-season pitcher, and that all was and is very valuable and gets him into the Hall of Solid Players. But Schilling was very good in the regular season and Pedro Martinez in his prime in the post-season, that counts for something, particularly given the even more qualitative fact that, without him, neither the D-Backs nor the Red Sox likely win the 2001/2004 championships.
"I have to disagree with Matt to a certain extent on Pettitte and Schilling in particular, however. It’s not so much that they have performed often in the post-season by itself that helps their Hall of Fame cases, it’s the quality of their performances."
Well, that was the point I was trying to make. The quality of their playoff performances is the best selling point they have as afar as getting into the Hall and that's what I find unsettling.
On the one hand, I can see rewarding them for making the most of their opportunities, but on the other, that reward is based on a team accomplishment.
I'm certainly not suggesting that their quantity of post-season work has any bearing at all; it's clearly that they were good (or great) in the playoffs that's the key issue here.
I'm torn…it happened, and it's hard to ignore the performance when making judgments about the guy's career. But the fact they got there in the first place isn't directly attributable to their own skills.
Post-season stats should not be acccounted for along with regular season stats, because like Matt said, some players never got the chance so some like Jeter would have several seasons worth of numbers added to their totals where others get 0 games or maybe 5 more…
Using them to determine if a player gets in the HOF or not is also tough – you can use them to bolster a borderline HOFer but it's a slippery slope. Don Mattingly was in 1 playoff series and batted over 400 for it – does that really improve his chances?
Playing great for 1 month a year for a couple years doesn't make a HOF career!
I actually think we all agree, notwithstanding our many words that might indicate otherwise. I would certainly never argue that 5 postseason games from one series materially adds to a player's HoF case. But I think there's a big difference between Don Mattingly performing superficially well in a division series while his team loses on the one hand, and Curt Schilling going bananas over and over again during the post-season and, as a result, being a key player in two seperate World Champion runs. Performances in post-season games happen, and are most decidedly the oppposite of exhibition games, so I think they need to be accounted for. They need to be accounted for rationally, which would exclude putting too much stock in a performances over the course of a handful of post-season games, but just because it's difficult to account for them doesn't mean they shouldn't be accounted for. In that sense, there is no slippery slope.
On the flip side, I don't think anybody should be penalized for having either never played in the post-season or having played poorly in a small sample size of post-season games. It may not be "fair" in the sense of all players being evaluated on a level playing field for some guys to get the opportunity to prove themselved on the big stage while others don't, but there are lost of unfair things in evaluating sports players. For instance, it's not fair that AL East pitchers have to face two or three of the best teams in baseball an inordinate number of times in seeking the Cy Young Award, while the AL Central pitchers get to face "hitters" such as those employed by the Royals. Yet that situation exists, is not fair, and must be accounted for somehow by people in deciding who the best pitcher in the AL is.
What I see from skimming through the comments is the fact that not everyone gets to play in the postseason, causing players to have more games played. I have that addressed in the last part of this piece.
Great article. I never thought about this in such great detail. Can't wait for Part Two.