DiMaggio request line, shameless rip version three

[DiMag4Life]

So, with the recent Ruth thread, I thought I would do the same for another baseball icon. Any questions, requests, etc. etc, about DiMaggio?

Ask away........

[Bill Burgess]

Well, OK, then. Thank you for starting a Joe Request Line. Great idea.

I have a question that I don't know. It seems like the hitters were dominant with huge offensive numbers up to 1938. Joe posted his monster year in his soph season of 1937, and was never again able to scale such majestic heights. I'd love to know why.

Why couldn't Joe ever again post such monster numbers?

Bill

[DiMag4Life]

Well, OK, then. Thank you for starting a Joe Request Line. Great idea.

I have a question that I don't know. It seems like the hitters were dominant with huge offensive numbers up to 1938. Joe posted his monster year in his soph season of 1937, and was never again able to scale such majestic heights. I'd love to know why.

Why couldn't Joe ever again post such monster numbers?

Bill

Good way to start off the ballgame, thanks.

It seems like the main reason is that he just couldn't avoid a bad break near the end of the season. Joe was hitting .358 at the all-star break in '36. He played awfully for the Americans, going zero for five, and slipped in the grass going after a flyball that resulted in an extra base hit. He kept hitting for a period of time after that, but he finished off the season with a .240 average and only 8 extra base-hits in his final 25 games.

In '38, the year he held out because of salary conflict up to the early portion of the season, he was hitting .341 coming into September. The fans were riding him all year, but it was less so because Joe was catching up to Foxx (.347 BA) in the batting race. Joe wanted a quick-fix, something to distract the fans and stop the booing, so he set out to win the batting race. But he was pressing. The Yankees had again clinched the pennant early, so most of the games were meaningless from a team standpoint, but Joe fell off, hitting around .270 in the final three or so weeks to plummet to .324. '39 was a different animal. Joe tore a ligament in his knee very early in the year, and missed a month of action. He came back with an inspired bat, torching the league in June and July, and in August, posted his most admirable month ever, hitting well over .400 with 14 homers and 53 RBI. He was hitting .408 coming into September, and hit homers in consecutive games to start off the final month. Then his eye became infected. Again, the Yankees clinched the pennant early, on the first of September. He couldn't see out of his left eye, his lead eye, and McCarthy was too proud to bench him. That year though, he was known almost as much with his glove as his bat. In front of me I have an expert from the book, DiMaggio; An Illustrated Life:

With his average hovering close to .400, Joe was playing perhaps the best baseball of his career. He inadvertently became involved in a controversy when Tris Speaker, to whom DiMaggio was often compared, allegedly claimed there were fifteen outfielders in the major leagues he considered better than DiMaggio. While DiMaggio never commented on Speaker's outburst, his play in back-to-back games against Detroit provided an answer. In a 5-2 loss to the Tigers at the Stadium in August 1, DiMaggio kept the game close by recording a remarkable ten putouts, one short of the major league record. Arthur Patterson in the Herald Tribune wrote "Tris Speaker should have seen DiMaggio in Centerfield yesterday. He may not play in close enough to suit 'Old Spoke', but don't tell that to [Detroit batters] Averill, Higgins and Fox. He robbed each of a hit, coming in and going out." The next day, DiMaggio made a catch that many observers believe was the best of his career. With the Yankees behind 7-2 in the ninth inning and Mike Higgins on first, Hank Greenberg drove the ball high and deep to left center. Playing the left-handed Greenberg to pull, DiMaggio stood in right-center. At the crack of the bat, he took off on a full run toward the deepest part of Yankee Stadium. Higgins ran for home, thinking that DiMaggio didn't have a chance to catch the ball, and the slow-footed Greenberg later admitted "I figure it's going to hit the wall and maybe I can get an inside-the-park home run on it." DiMaggio glanced once at the ball and kept running. Just to the left of the monuments, behind the flagpole and in front of the "461" sign, he looked up, stretched out his glove, and somehow caught the ball. Greenberg was nearing second and Higgins was rounding third when DiMaggio made the catch. But DiMaggio lost track of the outs and started to trot toward home before he realized he had a chance for the double play. He threw the ball in, but Gordon's relay hit Higgins in the back and he made it back to first. Greenberg's description of the play indicates that DiMaggio ran over 200 feet for the ball, and those who saw both DiMaggio's catch and Willie May's famous snag in the 1954 World Series claim DiMaggio's was the better catch. Unlike May's catch, DiMaggio's grab was not captured on film, and exists only in the memory of those who saw it.

I think Joe's most impressive year, at least to me, was 1948. He produced at an MVP level despite the various foot problems that hobbled him for the whole year (though he missed only one game.) Also led the league in homers, RBI, total bases, HR per AB, and was 2nd in RC and OPS+, 2nd in SLG, and 7th in OBP, and 7th in BA. In '41 it was him and Ted, with a comfortable drop-off after that. Interestingly enough, Joe hit in all of his spring training games in '41 (19 in total), and opened with a first-week rampage, hitting over .500 with 4 homers and 14 RBI in his first 8 games. He slumped horrendously for two weeks, and his average dropped a cool 200 points. After the hit streak, he hit over .330 with 10 homers in the remaining 57 games he played in that year (also spent two weeks on the disabled list.) In the 83 games outside of May 15 - July 17th, he hit .321/.424/.591 with 15 home runs and 70 RBI. He was, on a per-game basis, the best hitter in the league in '40, but he also missed 22 games with injuries. However, when you take ballpark and defense/baserunning into consideration, I believe he had an obvious case as MVP, perhaps maybe even should have won it over Greenberg, even though his Tigers won the pennant.

So, while he never again equaled the impressive Triple Crown Stats he did in '37, he still held his own quite well, in a ballpark not exactly noted for it's generosity towards Right-handers. Hope that helped.

[yanks0714]

Hank Greenberg drove the ball high and deep to left center. Playing the left-handed Greenberg to pull, DiMaggio stood in right-center. At the crack of the bat....

I'll bet even Hank didn't know he was a switch hitter.

If JoeD was playing Hank Greenburg in right-center he was waaaay outta position. This whole story sounds like DiMaggio worship.

[DiMag4Life]

I'll bet even Hank didn't know he was a switch hitter.

If JoeD was playing Hank Greenburg in right-center he was waaaay outta position.

Hmmmm..... you seem to be right, the description is a bit off. Maybe it was meant the other way around, as in shading the rightie to right, rather than shading the leftie to left. Could've been so, but I'll try to get back to you on that.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Hank Greenberg drove the ball high and deep to left center. Playing the left-handed Greenberg to pull, DiMaggio stood in right-center. At the crack of the bat....

I'll bet even Hank didn't know he was a switch hitter.

If JoeD was playing Hank Greenburg in right-center he was waaaay outta position. This whole story sounds like DiMaggio worship.

Sounds to me that the author of those words may not have known what he was talking about, who was it.

[DiMag4Life]

Sounds to me that the author of those words may not have known what he was talking about, who was it.

It was written by Dick Johnson and Glen Stout.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Hank Greenberg drove the ball high and deep to left center. Playing the left-handed Greenberg to pull, DiMaggio stood in right-center. At the crack of the bat....

I'll bet even Hank didn't know he was a switch hitter.

If JoeD was playing Hank Greenburg in right-center he was waaaay outta position. This whole story sounds like DiMaggio worship.

I'm not sure about worship, could be a mistake and it may have been exaggeration. Not excusive to Joe only, we hear accounts like this at times. I rule out worship, I have no idea why the account was not accuate but I know it was a hell of a catch.

[Bill Burgess]

So, while he never again equaled the impressive Triple Crown Stats he did in '37, he still held his own quite well, in a ballpark not exactly noted for it's generosity towards Right-handers. Hope that helped.

Yes, that is a very detailed, nuanced answer. Thanks for that. But almost none of the other great hitters of the 1930's were able to duplicate their former monster numbers either, not just Joe. Prior to 1938, RBI numbers of over 150 were common, but rare after that.

I thought it might be a change in the sacrifice fly rule, or the ball, or something like that. Foxx, Simmons, Gehringer, Greenberg, Joe D., Mize, Cronin, Dickey, Averill, Medwick, Vaughan, all saw their glory numbers plummet, permanently.

The lone exception was Ted Williams. He alone was able to post monster numbers in the 1940's. Of course he didn't have his homepark disadvantage him like Joe did.

[DiMag4Life]

Yes, that is a very detailed, nuanced answer. Thanks for that. But almost none of the other great hitters of the 1930's were able to duplicate their former monster numbers either, not just Joe. Prior to 1938, RBI numbers of over 150 were common, but rare after that.

I thought it might be a change in the sacrifice fly rule, or the ball, or something like that. Foxx, Simmons, Gehringer, Greenberg, Joe D., Mize, Cronin, Dickey, Averill, Medwick, Vaughan, all saw their glory numbers plummet, permanently.

The lone exception was Ted Williams. He alone was able to post monster numbers in the 1940's. Of course he didn't have his homepark disadvantage him like Joe did.

I guess I have to plead ignorance here, I'm not entirely sure. Perhaps it had something to do with the introduction of the nightgame.......?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I guess I have to plead ignorance here, I'm not entirely sure. Perhaps it had something to do with the introduction of the nightgame.......?

Night baseball, with perhaps fluke exceptions, does not hinder players in any way, shape or form. In fact, most I know and have talked to, myself included, prefer to play under the lights. No air conditioning and playing double headers on sweltering hot days, in heavy uniforms, could not have been much fun for players in the past. They often had to go outside and try to sleep because it was so hot. The ball seems to glow at night. Great atmosphere imo.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Yes, that is a very detailed, nuanced answer. Thanks for that. But almost none of the other great hitters of the 1930's were able to duplicate their former monster numbers either, not just Joe. Prior to 1938, RBI numbers of over 150 were common, but rare after that.

I thought it might be a change in the sacrifice fly rule, or the ball, or something like that. Foxx, Simmons, Gehringer, Greenberg, Joe D., Mize, Cronin, Dickey, Averill, Medwick, Vaughan, all saw their glory numbers plummet, permanently.

The lone exception was Ted Williams. He alone was able to post monster numbers in the 1940's. Of course he didn't have his homepark disadvantage him like Joe did.

Difficult to really know why Bill, the high number in the 1930s RBIs and the drop in the 1940s and even after.

I don't think it was the sac fly rule. Maybe the ball, never can tell if it was tampered with. For one thing the war years, understandable offense really dropped off from 1942 to 1946 home runs really dropped in those years.

Some numbers.

Both leagues home runs.
1940-----------1571
1941-----------1331 off to war but late in 1941 effect shows in 1942
1942-----------1071
1943------------905
1944-----------1034
1945-----------1007 The boys come back home mid season
1946-----------1215 numbers on the rise.
1947-----------1565
1948-----------1555
1949-----------1704
1950-----------2073

Still your point is made even with home runs up in the late 1940s individual RBI seasons in the 1940s do not match those of the 1930s.

Could be some park changes not sure. But in the 1930s decade there was only one season with less than 4000 doubles and that was 1933 there was 3946 doubles. Some highs in the 1930s, 4756-4579-4471-4508

From 1940 to 1950 there were no seasons with 4000 doubles. Some highs in the 1940s, 4101 and that was in 1940, other highs 3958-3714-3654-3686.

Think of all those doubles, the higher numbers in the 1930s, doubles hitting in runners and that hitter with the double now he's in scoring position.

I'm sure the could be other reasons but I'm looking at the drop in doubles and triples. Home runs near the end of the 1940s match those of the 1930 decades......but what happened to the high individual RBI seasons.

[Bill Burgess]

Difficult to really know why Bill, the high number in the 1930s RBIs and the drop in the 1940s and even after.

I don't think it was the sac fly rule. Maybe the ball, never can tell if it was tampered with. For one thing the war years, understandable offense really dropped off from 1942 to 1946 home runs really dropped in those years.

Home runs near the end of the 1940s match those of the 1930 decades......but what happened to the high individual RBI seasons.

RBIs With Respect to Era; 1920's - 1930's vs. Other Era's

Mantle and Musial's highest RBI totals were respectively, 130 & 131, while the following lesser hitters recorded these RBI totals in the hit-happy '20 & '30's.

I once did a little chart to show how high the RBI totals were, and that in later times, better hitters couldn't compete with them.

Mantle/Musial couldn't post the RBI numbers of Ken Williams, Hal Trosky or Earl Averill. Strange, but true.

Klein, -----------170, 1930
Hal Trosky, ------162, 1936
Ken Williams,---- 155, 1922
Joe Medwick,----- 154, 1937
Mel Ott,--------- 151, 1929
Klein,----------- 145, 1929
Earl Averill,---- 143, 1931
Don Hurst,------- 143, 1932
Hal Trosky,------ 142, 1934

Convinced of stat deception? No?! Well, consider the following comparitively 
low numbers of RBIs in other eras by MUCH better hitters.

Top RBI seasons
Aaron,-------- 132, 130, 128, 127
Mays,--------- 141, 127, 123
Mantle,--------130, 128, 111, 102, 99
Clemente,----- 119, 110, 94, 91
Kiner,-------- 127, 127, 123, 118, 116, 109, 87
F. Robinson,---136, 125, 124, 122, 113, 100
Rose,-----------82, 81, 76
Oliva,---------107, 101, 98, 94
Yaz,-----------121, 111, 102, 102, 95
B. Williams,---129, 122, 108, 98
Musial---------131, 126, 123, 113, 109
Williams-------159, 145, 137, 127, 126, 123