If Rollins hits in 21 straight this season.../It's Over

[scootermojo]

If Jimmy Rollins hits in 21 straight games to break DiMaggio's record of 56 how would you view it and where would you rate it in regards to "importance" in comparison to other records?

I've been reading a few stories on this lately and practically unamiously they all rated DiMaggio's 56 game hitting streak as one of the "unbreakable" records and one of the most impressive and easily recognizable records.

The reason I'm asking this is because obviously DiMaggio's was set in the one season in 1941 whereas Rollins would be a continuation of the 36 game hitting streak he had to end the season last year. Would you guys consider it to be more impressive, less impressive and if Rollins breaks it but the streak is stopped relatively close to DiMaggio's...say, anywhere from 57 to 60 games...whenever anyone mentions or talks to you about hitting streaks are you going to immediately think or bring up Dimaggio's 56 as you probably do now or Rollins if he breaks the record this year?

[Mattingly]

Probably less impressive, since the parks were bigger and the ball was less lively back then. A deep double in the gap could've been gone in a smaller park.

If you go to ballparks.com, this is the dimensions of Citizens Bank Park:

Dimensions: Left field line: 329 ft.; power alley: 369 ft. (2004), 374 ft. (2006); LF corner: 385 ft. (2004), 390 ft. (2006); inner corner: 381 ft.; left of CF: 409 ft.; center field: 401 ft.; right of CF: 398 ft.; RF power alley: 369 ft.; right field line: 330 ft.

Here are the dimensions of Yankee Stadium over the years (DiMaggio played from 1936-1951):

Dimensions: Left field: 280.58 (1923), 301 (1928), 312 (1976), 318 (1988); left side of bullpen gate in short left-center: 395 (1923), 402 (1928), 387 (1976), 379 (1985); right side of bullpen gate: 415 (1937); deepest left-center: 500 (1923), 490 (1924), 457 (1937), 430 (1976), 411 (1985), 399 (1988); left side of cente-field screen: 466 (1937); center field: 487 (1923), 461 (1937), 463 (1967), 417 (1976), 410 (1985), 408 (1988); deepest right-center: 429 (1923), 407 (1937), 385 (1976); left side of bullpen gate in short right-center: 350 (1923), 367 (1937), 353 (1976); right side of bullpen gate: 344 (1937); right field 294.75 (1923), 295 (1930), 296 (1939), 310 (1976), 314 (1988); backstop: 82 (1942), 80 (1953), 84 (1976); foul territory: large for the catcher behind home plate, but small for fielders down the foul lines.

[DoubleX]

If Rollins does it, it will certainly be amazing in its own right. But I don't think there's much of a chance that Rollins will do it. It's not that easy to have just 21 game hit streak, and that's what Rollins is looking at now.

[Mattingly]

If Rollins does it, it will certainly be amazing in its own right. But I don't think there's much of a chance that Rollins will do it. It's not that easy to have just 21 game hit streak, and that's what Rollins is looking at now.

The thing is, he'll not only have to do this, but from the very first game. Unless he's walked, HBP, he'll have to get a hit in that game.

If he goes as high as 44, I say that the media will hound him to no end.

[Go Bravos!!!#1]

I'd be very suprised if he put together a streak as long as 5 games. It usually takes a hitter a few games to get his head into that this is the real season. So if he got to 21 I'd be shocked. But I'd probably base hitting streaks against Joe more than Jimmy.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

It's a tough one, one that has been chalenged many times and yet never matched, 56 consecutive games.

You've got to be good and catch some breaks along the way. One more thing almost all who have come close to Joe's 56 had a low rate of strikeouts per game, per at bat. In 1941 Joe had 13 strikeouts for the entire season and I believe around 6 or 7 during the streak. Makes sense, strike out one or two times in a game and thats two at bats in one game with no contact, no chance of hitting safely.

Rollins has cut down on strikeouts in his last two seasons.


Full seasons.
-------------------At Bats-----------SO
2001---------------656-------------108
2002---------------637-------------103
2003---------------628-------------113
2004---------------657--------------73
2005---------------677--------------71

Not a bad rate in todays game, still a tough task, 56 has stood a long time.

[RedSoxVT92]

This feat will be hard to duplicate, especially trying to get it starting of a season. Hitting streaks also carry alot of pressure which usaully makes the player not perform as well. There usaully relieved when a streak is over. So the probability of it happening is slim. A record that probably wont be duplicated anytime soon.

[wamby]

I think it would be a lot less impressive because DiMaggio didn't have his streak postponed by the off-season. DiMaggio didn't have the off-season to rest up and regroup.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I think it would be a lot less impressive because DiMaggio didn't have his streak postponed by the off-season. DiMaggio didn't have the off-season to rest up and regroup.

I am of two minds on this:

1) Rollins does have the the advantage of starting fresh with not quite the same pressure if he had continued. On the other hand...

2) Rollins is disadvantaged because he was on an incredible hot streak last September. He was really "dialed in" during the streak, great pitch recognition, driving the ball, etc. He will not be "dialed in" like he was last September so it will be harder for him to extend the streak.

Make no mistake if Rollins gets by Rose/Keeler (44 games) the pressure will be greatly magnified. It will make for great baseball drama. Or the streak could end on Opening Day.

[Astro]

I am of two minds on this:

1) Rollins does have the the advantage of starting fresh with not quite the same pressure if he had continued. On the other hand...

2) Rollins is disadvantaged because he was on an incredible hot streak last September. He was really "dialed in" during the streak, great pitch recognition, driving the ball, etc. He will not be "dialed in" like he was last September so it will be harder for him to extend the streak.

Make no mistake if Rollins gets by Rose/Keeler (44 games) the pressure will be greatly magnified. It will make for great baseball drama. Or the streak could end on Opening Day.

My guess is the streak will probably end within the 1st 2 or 3 games...

[Imapotato]

I am of two minds on this:

1) Rollins does have the the advantage of starting fresh with not quite the same pressure if he had continued. On the other hand...

2) Rollins is disadvantaged because he was on an incredible hot streak last September. He was really "dialed in" during the streak, great pitch recognition, driving the ball, etc. He will not be "dialed in" like he was last September so it will be harder for him to extend the streak.

Make no mistake if Rollins gets by Rose/Keeler (44 games) the pressure will be greatly magnified. It will make for great baseball drama. Or the streak could end on Opening Day.

Exactly!

It is still impressive, as for the person who said smaller ballparks are an advantage...I disagree

Rollins is a slap hitter, the OFers have smaller ground to cover, thus I think in that regard, Rollins is right on par with Joe (since Ofers are horrid on average defensively in this era) it kind of evens out the big spacious gaps Joe could lay a texas leaguer in front of the OFers in his day

I am hoping he does beat Wee Willie, but I am not counting on it

[csh19792001]

If Jimmy Rollins hits in 21 straight games to break DiMaggio's record of 56 how would you view it and where would you rate it in regards to "importance" in comparison to other records?

I've been reading a few stories on this lately and practically unamiously they all rated DiMaggio's 56 game hitting streak as one of the "unbreakable" records and one of the most impressive and easily recognizable records.

For those who haven't seen this...

Joe Dimaggio
2150 Beach Street
San Franciso, CA 94123

January 3, 1985

Dear Joe,
My best wishes to you for a happy 1985. I hop you had a chance to see the NOVA show in which you so kindly participated. I have received so many favorable comments, with unanimous agreement that your appearance mad eth show.

I mentioned to you in San Francisco that my colleague Ed Purcell, a Nobel Laureate and one of the world’s greatest physicists, had determined that your fifty-six-game hitting streak was, statistically, the most unusual and unexpected great event in the history of baseball. Ed recently sent me the enclosed note in which he derives the reason for his statement. The mathematical details need not be perused, but the chart on the back of the second page will give you some idea of how remarkable and unpredictable your achievement was in statistical terms. The top row labeled b represents lifetime batting averages of .400, .380, and .300. The first column, labeled n at the left indicates the number of games in a hitting streak- 40, 50, and 60 in this example.

The nine numbers in the chart itself give you the probability that a batter with lifetime batting averages of b will have a hit streak of number of games n over a career of 1,000 games. Just consider the .0096 value for a .350 lifetime average, and a 50 game hitting streak. This means that a lifetime .350 batter has only nine chances in a thousand to have a 50 game hitting streak in a career of 1,000 games. To make it more likely than unlikely that such a hitting streak would exist, the number in the chart must be great than .5- for a probability of greater than one-half.

Thus, there would have to be fifty-two lifetime .350 hitters in order to make the probability of a 50 game hitting streak more than likely (.0086 times 52 equal the crucial value of one-half). I don’t have my encyclopedia handy, but I think that only 3 people actually have lifetime averages exceeding .350 (Cobb, Hornsby, and perhaps Joe Jackson). But your streak went for 56 games, a value that would only become more likely to happen (than not to happen) if baseball included more than 100 lifetime .350 hitters.

You asked me jokingly if this analysis meant that your record would never be broken. Even us pompous academics wouldn’t dare to make a statement like that. But Ed Purcell’s analysis does suggest that of all baseball records, your hit streak is surely the one least likely to ever be broken.

Thanks again for you time and, especially, for your kindness to my son Ethan.

Sincerely,
Steven Jay Gould

Gould (2003), Triumph and Tragedy in Mudville (p. 188-189).

Dimaggio struck out 13 times in 541 AB's that year, yet hit 30 homeruns in the worst park in baseball for right handed hitters. At his best, he truly was a perfect baseball player.

Of all the longstanding records in baseball, 56 straight has got to be among the top few in terms of sheer insurmountability. I'll cheer for Rollins all the way, but I'd give a 1-500 shot (at best) to pull it off.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

I won't consider Rollins a serious contender until/if he reaches 45 games.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

During the 36 game hitting streak Rollins is hitting:

.379 BA, 18 doubles, 4 triples, 3 HR, 36 R, 22 RBI, 15 SB

[SamtheBravesFan]

To the person who mentioned smaller ballparks, I don't think that's really a factor here. That implies that you're talking about Rollins hitting home runs. All a person needs to do to keep a hit streak going is hit a little single during a game.