Once again, I think the premise of the Jenkinson book is misinterpreted. The book is not intended to prove or even advocate that Ruth would have hit that many home runs either in a season or a career if todays fences existed back then, or if Ruth were playing today. The premise is that ANY PLAYER who hit that particular long ball would have had a home run under average modern stadium layouts. These statistics were intended merely to highlight Ruth's unparalleled power. This is done by the time-honored "all-other-things-being-equal" method. And as we all know, such things can never really be "equal" because of so many variables being in play. Any player on a pace to hit 104 home runs in a season today would certainly inspire creative pitching tactics in an attempt to neutralize such an offensive onslaught, not the least of which would be the intentional walk. Once again, the book is intended to highlight Ruth's power quotient in a statistically intelligent and understandable way. Not to be an accurate predictor of the truly unpredictable!
Originally posted by pheasant
View Post
Comment