Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Events in Rained Out Games

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Events in Rained Out Games

    Reading the thread on leading the league in hits, singles, doubles, triples and home runs, I saw reference to the fact that Stan Musial lost the 1948 home run title (& the Triple Crown) to a rained out home run. It made me think that AL Kaline missed the 400 HR mark by losing 3 HR to rain over his career and that Lou Gehrig once hit 2 or 3 triples in a rained out game.

    I'm sure there are other rained out games that caused great performances to be lost. I'm sure pitchers (Dean Chance rings a bell here for some reason) had no hitters or perfect games halted, probably a lot of times (I'm not advocating counting 3 inning perfect games or no-hitters just for clarity here. But if a pitcher goes 2 innings gives up 3 hits and a walk, fans 4 and yields 2 runs, why not count all of that?). I understand that for spectator purposes the game should have to go a certain length for value reasons and the same holds true for won-lost purposes. But why not count the statistical records of games that were called prematurely in the season record? The games were played, the competition was legit and it seems like even if there is no official decision, the at bats, PA's, their results etc should all still count.

    I am wondering what other great performances were lost to rain. Also, whether any milestones were missed like Kaline or any batting titles, or other statistical leaderships might be different today? Just as an example: Did Al Rosen lose a 1 for 1 or a 2 for 2 at any time during 1953 to rain? If he did, thats a Triple Crown and a batting title for him.
    Last edited by Calif_Eagle; 05-12-2012, 02:06 PM.

  • #2
    I remember reading that in 1938 Hank Greenberg lost two home runs to rain outs that would have given him 60 for the year.
    Lets Go Yankees, Valley Cats, Dutchmen, UT Spartans and ECU Pirates.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Biggtone23 View Post
      I remember reading that in 1938 Hank Greenberg lost two home runs to rain outs that would have given him 60 for the year.
      Could not find any rain outs for Greenberg in 1938.

      One that was costly, lost home run but not a rain out.
      April 6, 1931, Griffith Park Washington.
      Yankee Lyn Lary on base, Lou Gehrig line drive homer to centerfield.
      The ball hit so hard bounced back to Senator centerfielder.
      Lary thought the ball was caught on the fly, rounds third and heads to dugout.
      Gehrig did not see that and rounds the bases, called out at home for passing the runner.
      I place some of the blame on the third base coach.
      Gehrig loses homer and it cost him the American League home run championship, ties with Babe Ruth with 46 homers.

      Comment


      • #4
        I thought this thread was going to be about tarp sliding and stuff.
        531414_427325607286287_147262525292598_1504266_1558477671_n.jpg

        Comment


        • #5
          Unless it's the last day of the season, you can never say how things would have turned out. On a random example, take Bonds' 73 HR year. If one in early June that was barely caught at the warning track had went out of the park, people should not assume he would have wound up with 74. He might have wound up with 80. Or 67. One even can change everything in the future.
          Lou Gehrig is the Truest Yankee of them all!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ipitch View Post
            I thought this thread was going to be about tarp sliding and stuff.

            (Photo taken June 14, 2008. © Gary Dunaier. Link to upload on Flickr.com: here.)
            X
            What's THAT guy doing?
            - one of the YES Network broadcasters, after the camera cut to me doing the thumbs-down after Todd Frazier's home run

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ipitch View Post
              I thought this thread was going to be about tarp sliding and stuff.
              [ATTACH=CONFIG]108563[/ATTACH]
              With Josh Hamilton's history of injuries, I would think the Rangers' brain trust would have a problem with this activity.
              They call me Mr. Baseball. Not because of my love for the game; because of all the stitches in my head.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by White Knight View Post
                Unless it's the last day of the season, you can never say how things would have turned out. On a random example, take Bonds' 73 HR year. If one in early June that was barely caught at the warning track had went out of the park, people should not assume he would have wound up with 74. He might have wound up with 80. Or 67. One even can change everything in the future.
                This is very true. One has no way of knowing that had Musial's rained out homer counted in the official record when it was hit, even though the game was called and washed out, that that might not have affected his subsequent play throughout the season.

                I read in a book called "The American League", which was the story of the history of each MLB club up until about 1965 or so, (I think Lee Allen edited it) in the Kansas City (Philadelphia) A's chapter; that the year Jimmie Foxx cracked 58 home runs he also hit the newly screened pavilion at Sportsman's Park in games against the St Louis Browns five times. The season before, the pavilion was unscreened and those balls would have been scored as home runs. In this season they were all either GR Doubles or balls in play, I forget which. But even if all 5 had been home runs and scored as such, there is no guarantee that Foxx would have poled 63 home runs that season. Media attention and pressure from them, and from the fans might have really influenced him in late season at bats as he approached the popular Babe Ruth. He may well have had a "Roger Maris" type experience.

                My main purpose with the thread was to see what people thought about why these fractional performances arent counted in the season stats. I think they ought to be. Plus I was looking for more things like the Gehrig event or the purported Greenberg story above, (even if another poster disproved it ) knowing full well that HAD Greenberg had 2 more that counted, he still may not have wound up with 60, for the same reasons Foxx didn't, (or may not have.)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Calif_Eagle View Post
                  This is very true. One has no way of knowing that had Musial's rained out homer counted in the official record when it was hit, even though the game was called and washed out, that that might not have affected his subsequent play throughout the season.

                  I read in a book called "The American League", which was the story of the history of each MLB club up until about 1965 or so, (I think Lee Allen edited it) in the Kansas City (Philadelphia) A's chapter; that the year Jimmie Foxx cracked 58 home runs he also hit the newly screened pavilion at Sportsman's Park in games against the St Louis Browns five times. The season before, the pavilion was unscreened and those balls would have been scored as home runs. In this season they were all either GR Doubles or balls in play, I forget which. But even if all 5 had been home runs and scored as such, there is no guarantee that Foxx would have poled 63 home runs that season. Media attention and pressure from them, and from the fans might have really influenced him in late season at bats as he approached the popular Babe Ruth. He may well have had a "Roger Maris" type experience.

                  My main purpose with the thread was to see what people thought about why these fractional performances arent counted in the season stats. I think they ought to be. Plus I was looking for more things like the Gehrig event or the purported Greenberg story above, (even if another poster disproved it ) knowing full well that HAD Greenberg had 2 more that counted, he still may not have wound up with 60, for the same reasons Foxx didn't, (or may not have.)
                  Am I reading that part wrong. Are you saying that numbers in rained out game should be counted in a players season totals and be recorded in the book.
                  On Greenberg, I checked Retrosheet's list of rained out games and found no lost home runs in that season for Hank. Now it's possible Retrosheets rained out games list missed some.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Calif_Eagle View Post
                    This is very true. One has no way of knowing that had Musial's rained out homer counted in the official record when it was hit, even though the game was called and washed out, that that might not have affected his subsequent play throughout the season.

                    I read in a book called "The American League", which was the story of the history of each MLB club up until about 1965 or so, (I think Lee Allen edited it) in the Kansas City (Philadelphia) A's chapter; that the year Jimmie Foxx cracked 58 home runs he also hit the newly screened pavilion at Sportsman's Park in games against the St Louis Browns five times. The season before, the pavilion was unscreened and those balls would have been scored as home runs. In this season they were all either GR Doubles or balls in play, I forget which. But even if all 5 had been home runs and scored as such, there is no guarantee that Foxx would have poled 63 home runs that season. Media attention and pressure from them, and from the fans might have really influenced him in late season at bats as he approached the popular Babe Ruth. He may well have had a "Roger Maris" type experience.

                    My main purpose with the thread was to see what people thought about why these fractional performances arent counted in the season stats. I think they ought to be. Plus I was looking for more things like the Gehrig event or the purported Greenberg story above, (even if another poster disproved it ) knowing full well that HAD Greenberg had 2 more that counted, he still may not have wound up with 60, for the same reasons Foxx didn't, (or may not have.)
                    Not to take anything away from one of the games greatest sluggers, Jimmie Foxx.
                    Beginning to doubt 5 balls striking that screen in right field at Sportsmans Park.
                    In 1932 Jimmie at Sportsmans Park.........42 at bats----12 hits. Two of the hits were home runs, that leaves 10 hits that possibly hit that fence.
                    Of the 10 remaining hits only one was a double, leaving 9 singles. Was that double off the RF screen, we don't know, Jimmie was a RH batter more likely hit to left but possible to RF.
                    Lets give Jimmie that one double off the screen. That would mean of his remaining 9 hits, 4 of them would have to be off the RF screen giving him 5 that hit the RF screen and "only singles."
                    It was 310 to RF not deep but you would think if he hit 5 off that screen odds are he would have more than one double at Sportsmans in 1932.
                    Also, remember we are "giving him" that one double off the RF fence, that may not even be the case, that double could have been in one of the gaps.
                    I'm doubting out of 10 hits at Sportsmans, the RH hitting Foxx hit 5 of those hits off the fence in right field.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      [QUOTE=SHOELESSJOE3;2012030]
                      Not to take anything away from one of the games greatest sluggers, Jimmie Foxx.
                      Beginning to doubt 5 balls striking that screen in right field at Sportsmans Park.
                      In 1932 Jimmie at Sportsmans Park.........42 at bats----12 hits. Two of the hits were home runs, that leaves 10 hits that possibly hit that fence.

                      Of the 10 remaining hits only one was a double, leaving 9 singles. Was that double off the RF screen, we don't know, Jimmie was a RH batter more likely hit to left but possible to RF.

                      Lets give Jimmie that one double off the screen. That would mean of his remaining 9 hits, 4 of them would have to be off the RF screen giving him 5 that hit the RF screen and the 4 were "only singles."

                      It was 310 to RF not deep but you would think if he hit 5 off that screen odds are he would have more than one double at Sportsmans in 1932.

                      Also, remember we are "giving him" that one double off the RF fence, that may not even be the case, that double could have been in one of the gaps.
                      I'm doubting out of 10 hits at Sportsmans, the RH hitting Foxx hit 5 of those hits off the fence in right field.[Quote]

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Good work Shoeless

                        The screen extended from the foul pole out to straight away right and slightly beyond. It extended verticall To the roof of the RF pavillion, drastically changing what it took to hit a HR to right or near right center.

                        33 foot tall, extending more than 150 feet from the foul pole towards right center.


                        "Herman Franks to Sal Yvars to Bobby Thomson. Ralph Branca to Bobby Thomson to Helen Rita... cue Russ Hodges."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
                          Am I reading that part wrong. Are you saying that numbers in rained out game should be counted in a players season totals and be recorded in the book.
                          On Greenberg, I checked Retrosheet's list of rained out games and found no lost home runs in that season for Hank. Now it's possible Retrosheets rained out games list missed some.
                          No, you arent reading it wrong. I dont see any reason why legitimate competitive effort shouldnt count, even if the won-loss portion of a rained out game (which seem to be getting fewer all the time anyway in the modern day) doesn't count.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
                            Not to take anything away from one of the games greatest sluggers, Jimmie Foxx.
                            Beginning to doubt 5 balls striking that screen in right field at Sportsmans Park.
                            In 1932 Jimmie at Sportsmans Park.........42 at bats----12 hits. Two of the hits were home runs, that leaves 10 hits that possibly hit that fence.
                            Of the 10 remaining hits only one was a double, leaving 9 singles. Was that double off the RF screen, we don't know, Jimmie was a RH batter more likely hit to left but possible to RF.
                            Lets give Jimmie that one double off the screen. That would mean of his remaining 9 hits, 4 of them would have to be off the RF screen giving him 5 that hit the RF screen and "only singles."
                            It was 310 to RF not deep but you would think if he hit 5 off that screen odds are he would have more than one double at Sportsmans in 1932.
                            Also, remember we are "giving him" that one double off the RF fence, that may not even be the case, that double could have been in one of the gaps.
                            I'm doubting out of 10 hits at Sportsmans, the RH hitting Foxx hit 5 of those hits off the fence in right field.
                            Thats a very nice bit of research. The books "The American League" and its counterpart "The National League" were edited (I believe) by Lee Allen and each book contained a chapter for each of the 20 MLB teams that existed at that time, appx in 1965. Each chapter was written by either a baseball beat writer or else a man that was once the beat writer for the teams, or was a sports editor etc.

                            These writings would pre-date even the Macmillan Baseball Encyclopedia, and I would guess that the writers relied on their newspaper morgue, or Sporting News publications for their stats and probably their own anecdotal memories for stories like Foxx hitting the screen 5 times, to add color to the histories. It would appear you have pretty conclusively cast doubt on the probability that he did it. In my OP that referenced the story, I recalled reading it as a kid, and so used it here without giving it a second thought. Never even occurred to me that today, in a far more advanced era of media and data availability, using BB Ref it would be easy to check on it.

                            But, the point of the tale still stands. Even if Foxx had done it, (and I would readily concede that its unlikely he actually did) and all 5 had been scored as home runs, its no guarantee he would have wound up with 63.
                            Last edited by Calif_Eagle; 05-15-2012, 05:59 PM.

                            Comment

                            Ad Widget

                            Collapse
                            Working...
                            X