Walk-off Championship Hits

What do Joe Carter and Bill Mazeroski have in common? They are of course the only players in World Series history to win a World Series with a walk-off home run. I read Glory of Their Times last week, and Goose Goslin's account of his walk-off single in the 1935 World Series brought me to think. What players have won World Championships for their team with walk-off hits of any sort?

1912: Down 2-1 in the 10th inning of the 8th and deciding game (one game was a tie), the Boston Red Sox rally to score two runs off Christy Mathewson and the New York Giants. Larry Gardner's sacrifice fly with the bases loaded and one out wins the game, scoring Steve Yerkes. This inning featured "Snodgrass's muff," which saw Giants' center fielder Fred Snodgrass drop a fly ball, allowing the tying run to reach base.

1924: Earl McNeely hits a double in the 12th inning of game seven, scoring Muddy Ruel and winning the Series for the Washington Senators over the New York Giants. This game saw Walter Johnson enter in relief in the ninth inning to hold the tie. An error on a foul pop by Hank Gowdy and a fielding error by Travis Jackson doomed the Giants.

1927: The Pittsburgh Pirates had dropped three straight games to the New York Yankees. In game four, with the game tied at three in the ninth, reliever Johnny Miljus issued a leadoff walk to Earle Combs. Mark Koenig bunted a single. Miljus then threw a wild pitch with Babe Ruth at the plate, advancing runners to second and third. With first base open, Miljus intentionally walked Ruth. Bases loaded, none out. Miljus proceeded to strike out Lou Gehrig, then Bob Meusel. However, with Tony Lazzeri at the plate, Miljus threw another wild pitch, and Earle Combs scored the series ending run.

1929: The Chicago Cubs' hard luck series. In game four, the Cubs held an eight run lead going into the seventh inning, but gave up ten runs to the Philadelphia Athletics. In game five down three games to one, the Cubs held a two run lead in the ninth, three outs away from taking the series back to Chicago. Pitcher Pat Malone struck out pinch-hitter Walt French for the first out. Max Bishop followed with a single, and Mule Haas struck a game tying home run. Mickey Cochrane grounded out for out number two. Al Simmons doubled, and Jimmie Foxx was then walked intentionally. Bing Miller followed up with a double, scoring Al Simmons and winning the World Series for the Athletics.

1935: Game six of the 1935 World Series saw the Detroit Tigers and Chicago Cubs tied in the ninth. Mickey Cochrane singled with one out. Charlie Gehringer's ground out moved Cochrane to second, and Goslin scored him on a single.

1953: One of the most overlooked classic World Series of all time. Down three games to two in New York and down 3-1 in the ninth, Carl Furillo hit a game tying, two run home run for the Brooklyn Dodgers. In the bottom of the ninth however, Hank Bauer walked, Mickey Mantle hit a single, and Billy Martin followed with a single, scoring Bauer and winning the World Series.

1960: Bill Mazeroski hits a lead-off home run in the ninth to lead the Pittsburgh Pirates over the New York Yankees, 10-9. Perhaps one of the greatest World Series games of All-Time, the Pirates produced a five run eighth, and the Yankees countered with a two run ninth to tie the game and temporarily stave off elimination.

1991: Most are doubtless familiar with game seven of the 1991 World Series. Jack Morris pitches ten innings of shut-out ball. Dan Gladden leads off the tenth for the Minnesota Twins with a double. Chuck Knoblauch bunts him to third base. The Atlanta Braves walk the next two batters intentionally. Gene Larkin follows with a deep single to score Gladden and win the game.

1993: Stop cringing Philly fans. They still would have needed to trot out that bullpen in game seven. With a one run lead in the ninth, closer Mitch Williams walks Rickey Henderson and gives up a single to Paul Molitor. Joe Carter blasts a hanging slider over the left field fence to win the World Series for the Toronto Blue Jays.

1997: Game seven of the World Series between the Florida Marlins and Cleveland Indians. The Indians held a 2-1 lead in the ninth, but the Marlins tied it on a sacrifice fly. With two outs and the bases loaded in the 11th, Edgar Renteria lines a single just past the glove of pitcher Charles Nagy, scoring Craig Counsell.

2001: Game seven of the 2001 World Series sees the Arizona Diamondbacks come back from a 1-0 deficit to defeat the New York Yankees, 3-2. Luis Gonzalez punches the game winning single into VERY shallow center field, scoring Jay Bell.

That gives us a complete list of Larry Gardner, Earl McNeely, Earle Combs, Bing Miller, Goose Goslin, Billy Martin, Bill Mazeroski, Gene Larkin, Joe Carter, Edgar Renteria, and Luis Gonzalez. Three Hall of Famers, some All-Stars, and other fairly obscure players.

Now let's see what pitchers surrendered walk-off hits. Christy Mathewson, Jack Bentley, Johnny Miljus, Pat Malone, Larry French, Clem Labine, Ralph Terry, Alejandro Pena, Mitch Williams, Charles Nagy and Mariano Rivera. One Hall of Famer and one future Hall of Famer. Certainly more obscure pitchers. That makes sense though, because a team on the brink of elimination is likely to have exhausted their pitching resources. For the record, Larry French won 197 games in his career, Pat Malone won 134, Charles Nagy won 129, and Ralph Terry won 107. Mitch Williams was the only pitcher on the list with a losing career record. Most have been lost to memory.

I get the feeling that game winning hits, except for home runs, are far more memorable for the hitter than for the pitcher. We recognize these as an accomplishment on one part, and not a failure on another part.

Hall of Fame Choices

The Hall of Fame announces its inductees tomorrow, and with it will go a subject that provides practically the only discussion fodder we have during these slow winter months. In previous weeks I have stumped for two candidates, Alan Trammell and Bert Blyleven. Both are deserving of the Hall. There are a handful of other players I would support on my hypothetical ballot.

Goose Gossage

Only three closers are in the Hall, Rollie Fingers, Dennis Eckersley and Hoyt Wilhelm. The position of closer is new and the inductees are few, so the Hall voters have yet to establish firm standards on what constitutes a Hall of Famer. Two questions arise for relievers. Do they belong, and if so, who goes? I think the inclusion of three relievers answers the first question, as you can hardly elect a few and then slam the door. Gossage is the best relief pitcher on the ballot, and probably the best eligible relief pitcher not in the Hall. Gossage and Bruce Sutter were both dominating forces, but Gossage is slightly better, and had a longer career. I'm not a big proponent of electing closers en masse.. Sutter's too close to Dan Quisenberry to gain my outright support. He wouldn't drag down the Hall however.

Enough theory. Gossage was a nine time All Star. Gossage retired second on the All-Time saves list, behind Hall of Famer Rollie Fingers. He's 52nd on the All-Time Adjusted ERA list. And his two most similar pitchers are Fingers and Hoyt Wilhelm, two of the three Hall of Fame relievers.

Andre Dawson

Ask most stat-heads about Dawson and they point to his .323 career On Base Percentage. Certainly that is low. However, that is just about the only negative on Dawson's resume. The numbers are overwhelming. 438 home runs, 314 stolen bases, eight All Star appearances, and eight Gold Glove awards. Four of those came while Dawson played center field. Five of Dawson's ten most comparable players are in the Hall. Remember Carlos Beltran in 2004? For seven years in Montreal, that was roughly Andre Dawson. A gold glove center fielder who could hit for power and steal bases, and moreover compiled impressive career totals. That's a Hall of Famer.

On the Fence

Bruce Sutter I mentioned. Dale Murphy won two consecutive MVP awards and was a top performer in his heyday. But he fell off the cliff mid-career. I usually do not select Murphy, but on a good day he is a very tempting candidate.

B.J. Upton

Last season, the Tampa Bay Devil Rays' front office received criticism for leaving highly touted prospects in the minor leagues. B.J. Upton and Delmon Young did not see any time in the Major Leagues last season despite outstanding play. The general assumption is that the front office was cheap. Calling up players would mean their arbitration clocks would run, making them expensive sooner.

Let me first address Delmon Young. Young dominated AA and was probably the best player in the Southern League. He held his own in AAA, but posted a less than stellar 33/4 K:BB ratio at the plate. Young has 52 games of AAA ball under his belt, and is certainly not at the point where he can reasonably claim he is held back.

B.J. Upton is another matter. Upton performed well in AAA in 2004 and earned a mid-season call-up to Tampa Bay, where again performed. In 2005 however, Upton spent the entire season in AAA Durham. Upton led the International League in games played, runs scored, hits, total bases, and walks. Upton hit .303 with a .392 OBP, and stole 44 bases in 57 tries. The problem? He made 53 errors, more than any player in organized baseball.

Two questions arise in this type of situation. One, how indicative are the errors of his fielding ability? Two, does his poor play in the field negate his offensive contributions? Fielding percentage has problems as an overall gauge of defensive ability. It only measures how often a player screwed up in the field. It does not recognize the distinction between a player who makes many plays and one who can only field balls directly to him.

Defensive statistics in general are a mine field. One mut account for opportunites, since even the best fielder can only field balls in his area. An unusual number of groundball pitchers, left or right handed pitchers, can skew our numbers. Even direct observations have their problems. Only the most eagle-eyed baseball observer can observe invisible range, how a fielder positions himself before the pitch is thrown. A routine play may not have been possible without a player anticipating the play and positioning himself properly.

So what do we do? The best we can do is gather as much information as possible. One statistic that is useful because of its ease is range factor. The statistic has its problems, but it is the best fielding statistic that does not require college math. Range factor simply measures the number of plays a fielder makes. Twenty-five players in the International League last season played 30 or more games at shortstop. Of those 25, Upton rates fifth in range factor. Clearly, Upton collected quite a few outs in the field despite his miscues.

Could something have skewed those numbers in Upton's favor? Baseball America thankfully started printing Groundball/Flyball ratios on their website. If the Durham Bulls saw an unusual amount of groundballs, that would effect Upton's statistics. The Bulls had a G/F ratio of 1.17, which ranked fourth in the International League. That is somewhat elevated, but probably not enough to significantly throw off the numbers (although the Red Barons' abnormally high G/F ratio explains Danny Sandoval's high range factor). I also looked at pitchers. If the Bulls had many left handed pitchers, that would create more fielding opportunities for the right side of their infield. In fact, the Bulls had a lower than usual number of innings pitched by lefties.

The ultimate measure of fielding is a team's pitching record. If a team gives up a high number of runs, then they probably do not enjoy good fielding. The Durham Bulls surrendered 865 runs, along with an astounding 147 unearned runs. Both figures led the International League by a substantial margin. However, this comes with a few caveats. One, the Bulls did have poor pitchers. The Tampa Bay Devil Rays trot out an amazing collection of bad starters each season, and any pitcher with a morsel of talent is going to the big club to try and right the ship. Second, the Durham Bulls committed 198 errors as a team. If B.J. Upton had not made any of his 53 errors, they still would have led the league. In fairness, I will point out that the Bulls' first basemen made 25 errors, and it is possible errant throws caused some of them. Let's put this into context. The Toledo Mud Hens had the best ERA in the International League. Their first basemen committed 15 errors, and their shortstops committed 31 errors. Remember it's 25 for the Bulls' first basemen, and 53 for Upton.

Setting range factors aside for now, we have 32 extra errors over the course of the 144 game season. That is an extra error about once every four games. Compare that with Upton's offensive contributions. Is a .303 hitter likely to make up for those errors? Almost certainly. There is a lingering suspicion however. The big problem with range factor is that it measures defensive outs. Every team makes 24-27 outs a game, regardless of defensive quality. It is possible that Upton missed quite a few plays, and still had terrific fielding numbers because each missed opportunity creates a new opportunity. That is a major pitfall of fielding statistics, and there is no easy answer for it.

If Upton is a fielding liability but a great hitter, why don't the Devil Rays just make him their DH? Quite simply, Upton can not improve his fielding percentage by not fielding? If there is any shot at making him a less error prone player, he needs to play in the field. The Devil Rays have a more than capable shortstop at present in Julio Lugo, so there is no pressure in making Upton the starting shortstop. The Devil Rays leaving Upton in AAA to work on his defense is a defensible decision, and most criticism is unwarrented.

Does Upton have a career as a shortstop or is he a defensive liability there? I've presented the evidence as best I can, and you can draw your own conclusions.

Houston Astros

In the hot stove talk, some teams are neglected. The Houston Astros won 89 games and the NL pennant last year, but since they have made virtually no moves, they are forgotten. Where do they stand? Are they potential pennant repeaters, or are they declining?

The big news of the offseason has been the temporary departure of the Astros' star pitcher, Roger Clemens. Clemens posted a 1.87 ERA in 211.3 innings, one of the most impressive seasons in baseball history. However, the Astros decided they could not wait for Clemens' annual retirement decision, and declined to offer arbitration. As a result, they can not re-sign Clemens until May 1st. In his place, the Astros still hold Andy Pettitte and Roy Oswalt. Both pitchers enjoyed fantastic seasons last year, and are good bets to repeat their performance. The only concern is that Pettitte's backloaded contract comes due this season, as Pettitte is owed $17 Million for 2006.

Andy Pettitte has not garnered serious talk for the Hall of Fame. He is making a charge. Pettitte's record stands at 172-91, a nifty .654 winning percentage. That is not a Hall of Fame record, but it a good base for a pitcher to build a late-career run on. Andy Pettitte's list of comparable players are unpromising, as none of the first eight are in the Hall. However, only the top two (Mike Mussina and Jimmy Key) are truly comparable, and Mussina will be a serious candidate in his own right.

The concern for the Astros is that their rotation is thin after Oswalt and Pettitte. Brandon Backe receives notice as a good pitcher, but his peripherals are underwhelming, as was his 4.76 ERA last season. Backe's posted great statistics in the postseason. He may very well be a great postseason pitcher, but the team needs to get to the postseason first. Wandy Rodriguez and Ezequiel Astacio both posted ERAs north of five, again with unspectacular peripherals. Astacio surrendered 23 home runs in just 83 innings.

Still, the Astros led the league in least runs allowed. Minute Maid Park has earned a reputation as a good hitters' park, but overall it plays neutral. While it is a great park for right handed home runs, it is one of the league's most difficult parks for left handed home runs. This gives right handed power pitchers like Oswalt and Clemens a tremendous advantage. It also makes Andy Pettitte look all the more impressive. What led the Astros beyond their big three were their three best relievers, Chad Qualls, Russ Springer and Brad Lidge. The big issue for the Astros is that relief pitching is probably the most volitale aspect of a club. If that relief pitching is not as good next season, especially if Clemens does not return, they could find themselves in trouble.

The Astros' offense was extremely weak for a pennant winning club. The team finished 11th in runs scored last year. A few of their core players, Brad Ausmus, Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio, are nearing the end of their careers. The team contains two true impact hitters, Lance Berkman and Morgan Ensberg. Jason Lane hit 26 home runs, but his .316 OBP limits his overall value. The team last year contained four well below average offensive players in Ausmus, Chris Burke, Adam Everett and Willy Taveras.

Burke and Taveras might cause a double take. Burke is an acceptable hitter, but he is a below average hitter playing left, where most teams carry big bats. Taveras hit for a good enough average, but he does not walk and he does not hit for power. Taveras' main asset is his glovework, well apparent to those who watched the 2005 Playoffs.

The Astros surprised observers by reaching the playoffs in 2005, and they did so on the strength of their pitching staff. If they do not re-sign or replace Clemens, there is simply no way their staff can be as effective as last year. The Phillies will be back, the Mets have acquired big guns, and the young Brewers are gaining steam. The Astros will have a difficult time repeating.

Alan Trammell for the Hall

This time of year is awfully slow for baseball fans. The occasional free agent signing or trade trickles out, but it can only sustain interest for a short while. Hall of Fame discussions always generate interest, and they are good fallback for baseball discussion. When I am asked who I would pick on the HOF ballot, one of the names I mention is Alan Trammell. Trammell does not merit a great deal of interest, positive or negative. Yet he is one of the greatest shortstops in baseball history.

The most common reason a deserving player eludes the Hall is that he contributed by doing many things well, rather than something specific that impresses voters. Nothing on Trammell's resume screams Hall of Famer. But when you take the full scope of Trammell's career, it comes into view. One of the big problems is that the voting block has never truly developed a pattern for considering players who contributed on both offense and defense. Pure offensive stats will get a player into the Hall, and defensive marvels have a shot, but split players will struggle. In the last fourty years, the writers have voted in only four shortstops (Ozzie Smith, Ernie Banks, Robin Yount and Lou Boudreau).

On offense, Trammell usually hit in the #2 slot, and he was as good a hitter as you could find in that slot. Trammell's .352 career OBP rates higher than Banks, Yount or Cal Ripken, all Hall of Fame caliber players. Trammell drew walks and hit for mid-range power. Also, he almost never grounded into a double play. Trammell hit 185 home runs and stole 236 bases. But many players can make the same claim. What makes Trammell special?

Trammell was an unusually good hitter for his position, for his time. People forget that prior to the 1980s, it was not at all common for a middle infielder to hit well. Many teams punted offense in favor of glove men. Trammell ironically suffers because he came up around the same time as two similar but superior players, Ripken and Yount. Trammell was not as good a hitter as those two, but he was a better defensive player. Trammell won four gold gloves, compared to two for Ripken (and those won on reputation), and one for Yount.

Trammell's rate stats suffer from entering the Majors early and sticking around as a reserve two years too long. In his prime, he was a terrific offensive force, regularly posting OPS's 30% above average. Trammell's 318 win shares rate favorably among Hall of Fame shortstops, and better than almost all veteran committee selections, including Phil Rizzuto, Rabbit Maranville, Joe Tinker, Travis Jackson, Pee Wee Reese, and Joe Sewell. I think Trammell's a more than deserving choice.

Jim Rice vs. Will Clark

Two interesting names appear on this year's Hall of Fame ballot. Jim Rice is a perennial contender, usually collecting a little more than half the available votes. In Hall of Fame discussions, Rice is often mentioned as a candidate whom clearly deserves induction. Will Clark makes his first appearance on the ballot this year. He had a fine career but is not seriously considered for the Hall.

Neither are strong candidates in my opinion. However, if you wish to endorse Jim Rice for the Hall of Fame, you need to first reconcile him against the career of Will Clark. When you study the careers of both men, Clark comes through as a better player, both in his prime and overall.


Rice played in 2,089 games, while Clark played in 1,976. These are careers of similar length, with less than one season's difference. The only advantages Rice has in playing time are his cup of coffee in 1974, and that Clark missed several dozen games due to the 1994-95 labor dispute. Both players retired at the age of 36. Will Clark was a career .303 hitter, with a .497 slugging percentage. Rice hit .297, and slugged .502. Jim Rice collected 382 home runs and 1,451 RBIs, compared to 284 home runs and 1,205 RBIs for Clark.

Those "triple crown" statistics, batting average, home runs and RBIs, tend to sway the argument towards Rice. Here is where we need to dig deeper into the statistics. First, walks. Will Clark collected 937 walks in his career, compared to 670 for Rice. That amounts to 267 times Clark reached base while Jim Rice racked up outs. What value do 267 walks have that erases the effect of 100 home runs? They do not solve everything, but they close the gap. Here is a more eye-popping statistic however. Jim Rice grounded into 315 double plays in his career. Rice ranks 6th all-time in grounding into double plays, and the five players above him all played at least 800 more career games (Cal Ripken, Carl Yastrzemski, Hank Aaron, Eddie Murray and Dave Winfield, for those interested). Will Clark, by comparison, grounded into exactly 100, less than a third of Rice's total. That adds up to a great deal of outs used by Rice. Each player's On Base Percentage reflects the difference in walks. Clark beats Rice, .384 to .352, a significant advantage.

Clark played first base and won a gold glove. Rice played left field and was not regarded as a particularly adept fielder. Both were not defensive marvels. Neither player possessed a great deal of speed, but Clark was a great percentage base stealer in his prime, at one point snagging 25 bases in 31 tries in a three year period.

Was Rice a better player in his prime? After all, much of his Hall of Fame argument rests on a three year run where he hit .320 with 124 home runs and 383 RBIs. Those are very impressive numbers. However, Clark even surpasses him. Clark hit .333 in 1989, his best season. 23 home runs is not nearly as impressive as 46 home runs in a season for Rice. But then we consider that Clark walked 74 times, hit 38 doubles, stole 8 bases in 11 tries, and only grounded into six double plays all season. And all of that is before we consider that Clark played in a pitchers' park while Rice played in Fenway, the prevailent hitters' park before the ballpark boom.

But Rice was a feared hitter, wasn't he? Just take a look at the intentional walks. Rice was intentionally walked 77 times in his career, including ten times in a single season. Clark was intentionally walked 155 times, twice as often as Rice. In fact, Clark had seven seasons where he was intentionally walked more often than in Rice's top season.

Postseason. Clark hit .333 in 31 postseason games, including 5 home runs, a .409 On Base Percentage and .547 slugging percentage. Clark's performance in the 1989 NLCS (13 for 20, 3 doubles, one triple, two home runs, 2 walks) ranks as perhaps the most dominant single series hitting display in baseball history. Rice hit .225 in 18 postseason games, with a .312 On Base percentage and .366 slugging.

If you support Rice for the Hall, you need to take a good, long look at Will Clark.

Bert Blyleven For the Hall

The Hall of Fame ballots are out to members of the Baseball Writers' Association of America. Results will be announced in a few weeks. Once again, the writers will likely overlook the candidacy of pitcher Bert Blyleven. The knock on Blyleven is generally that he does not "feel" like a Hall of Fame pitcher. He only once won 20 games, played in just two All-Star games, and lost 250 games. If you take time to look at the numbers however, I think you will find Blyleven a worthy candidate.

25th All Time in wins (287)

13th All Time in Innings pitched (4,970)

5th All Time in Strikeouts (3,701)

9th All Time in Shutouts (60)

22nd All Time in Pitchers' Win Shares (339)

Those shutout totals are particularly noteworthy. If you exclude dead-ball pitchers, Blyleven ranks fourth behind only Warren Spahn (63), Nolan Ryan (61) and Tom Seaver (61). Nolan Ryan was considered the dominant pitcher of his era, and while making almost 100 more starts, earned just one more shut-out than the supposively not dominant Blyleven.

Blyleven's ERAs are very good. In his rookie season, Blyleven posted an ERA of 3.18. It would be eight years before Blyleven posted another ERA higher than 3. His adjusted ERA totals rate above Nolan Ryan, Don Sutton, and many other Hall of Fame pitchers. Blyleven saw six seasons with an adjusted ERA better than another candidate touted as a dominant ace, Jack Morris.

What about the argument that Blyleven was not a big game pitcher? Retrosheet.org keeps split statistics dating back to 1960. Blyleven's career ERA improved later in the season. While Blyleven posted a career 3.31 ERA, it fell to 2.89 in August and 2.93 in September. Blyleven pitched extremely well in the postseason, posting a 2.47 ERA in eight games. Blyleven compiled a 5-1 postseason record, along with 36 strikeouts and eight walks. Blyleven's teams won two World Championships, one in 1979 with the Pirates, and another in 1987 with the Twins.

Another puzzling aspect of Blyleven's reputation is that he struck out many batters, and did so with a curveball commonly referenced as the greatest of all time. Rob Neyer rated Blyleven's curveball third behind only Sandy Koufax and Mordecai "Three Finger" Brown. Blyleven is listed fifth above in career strikeouts, but he finished third at the end of his career, only recently surpassed by Roger Clemens and Walter Johnson.

Overall we have a candidate with 287 wins, excellent peripherals, longevity, and a famous pitch. Of all pitchers with more career wins, only Tommy John and Bobby Mathews are not in the Hall (and Mathews' totals were helped by playing in the National Association, a marginal major league). I refer again to the shutout totals. Every pitcher with more than 50 shutouts is in the Hall, with the exception of Blyleven. Ultimately, his selection would not disparage the Hall in any way. He deserves it.