Comments on: Wins Without Homers 2010 This and that about baseball stats. Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:01:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: Chuck Mon, 04 Oct 2010 14:33:07 +0000 I wonder, who has the best record while hitting no home runs in a game? Is any team even at .500 when hitting no home runs?

By: barkfart Sat, 02 Oct 2010 14:44:02 +0000 # 21 Neil.

No, you're right. There can't be an algorithm for humiliation. And that shows the limit of sabremetrics- at its extreme, some people believe that you don't have to have seen a player play to analyze his worth. That can't be true.

You can't measure the way that Ichiro makes everybody stand on their toes a little higher for every second he is at bat or on base, but if you watch the game it is an unmistakeably large impact on the game.

By: DoubleDiamond Sat, 02 Oct 2010 03:01:56 +0000 @4 - I read the question and before looking up the answer thought it was a game I recall reading abour in 1994 before the strike ended the season. I thought that Bret Saberhagen pitched a game for the Mets against the Giants in which the only player who reached base safely was someone who hit a home run. Thus, Saberhagen or whoever the pitcher was never had to pitch from the stretch because there was never anyone on base.

I found the game at - My memory was slightly off. Two Giants, neither of whom was named Barry Bonds, hit solo home runs. Darren Lewis broke up the perfect game bid with a lead-off homer in the 7th. Dave Martinez added one in the 8th. This game was in San Francisco. With only a 3-2 lead, the Mets pinch hit for Saberhagen in the top of the 9th. This led to one more run for New York. John Franco pitched a 1-2-3 bottom of the ninth for the save.

@9 - So that is one more game in which the winning team's home runs equaled its Times on Base.

@9 - I see that the two pitchers who started and got the decisions in that game whose link you posted were both guys who had perfect games in their future (Buehrle and Halladay).

By: Neil L Fri, 01 Oct 2010 23:46:37 +0000 @12 @16
Barkfart, I get what you meant by your original post. Thank you for clarifying.

Your hypothesis about the demoralizing effect of doubles on the defense is really interesting. I wonder how one would about investigating your idea sabermetrically?

Still is a little hard for me to believe that an upper-deck shot like Bautista crushed last night at the Target Centre isn't more demoralizing to the opposition than a double!

By: Kahuna Tuna Fri, 01 Oct 2010 21:21:59 +0000 I remember . . . asking if John McDonald was only player on winning team to ever have only 2 plate appearances despite playing 9 innings in field.

Maybe not quite what you meant, but Sandy Koufax pitched all nine innings on September 9, 1965 and batted only twice.

By: Kahuna Tuna Fri, 01 Oct 2010 17:59:21 +0000 As of today, the Twins are 34-34 in games in which they don't hit any home runs. If they finish .500 or better in such games, they'll be the first team to do so since the 2004 Cardinals (24-21).

For end-of-season high drama, this is every bit the equal of the race between the Red Sox and Blue Jays to determine which team will finish with more (homers + doubles).

By: Mark G Fri, 01 Oct 2010 14:41:06 +0000 To Kahuna Tuna, On the BlueJays/WhiteSox game, I remember reading boxscore and asking if John McDonald was only player on winning team to ever have only 2 plate appearances despite playing 9 innings in field. Incidentally, they were shut out next game. He was ph for in bottom of 8th and again only 2 plate appearances.

By: Friday Links (1 Oct 10) – Ducksnorts Fri, 01 Oct 2010 14:39:04 +0000 [...] Wins Without Homers 2010 (Baseball-Reference). Hey, look, there at the top… it’s a bird, it’s a plane, it’s… the Padres. [...]

By: barkfart Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:48:25 +0000 @ 13 Neil

What I meant was, since these teams won without home runs, they must've won with doubles (or singles, etc).

Doubles are a funny thing. They defy, in many respects, statistical analysis. If a team hits a single and then a homer, that's a second or two of misery. But a team that hits two singles, a double and maybe another single to get the run really grinds on the defensive team. A double takes longer to unfold, maybe there's an unsuccessful throw to second. The inning takes forever, and it really can suck the life out of the defensive team.

Same way for triples. I think a triple is far more humiliating to the defense than a homer.

Then, putting that into numbers, a doubles hitter draws a much lower salary than a home run hitter.

By: BSK Fri, 01 Oct 2010 04:38:47 +0000 I think to make this stat a little more meaningful would be to look at a team's record in HR-free games. This would give us data on the frequency of HR-free games for a given team, while also a potential look at how effective their offense is without HRs (there are obviously better ways to get at that and reasons why a team would lose a HR-free game for reasons outside of the offense).

Intuitively, it would seem that every team would have a worse record in HR-free games. I'd be curious to see if A) that is backed up statistically, B) if so, if anyone bucks that trend and, C) if anyone did, is there anything to make of that.