Jim Palmer’s HR allowed
Posted by Andy on January 3, 2008
Yesterday, Chris mentioned that Jim Palmer never allowed a grand slam, an apparently famous baseball fact that had previously escaped me.
Checking out Palmer's career home run log confirms it: of the 303 HR he allowed, 193 (63.7%) came with the bases empty, 83 (27.4%) came with one runner on, and 27 (8.9%) came with 2 runners on.
Off the bat, those numbers seem amazing to me, i.e. such a high fraction of homers coming with the bases empty and so few with runners on. But, remembering the era in which Palmer pitched, it might not be so overwhelmingly impressive.
Let's look at the pitchers most similar to Palmer.
1. Bob Gibson - 257 career HR: 138 (53.6%) bases empty, 85 (33.1%) with 1 on, 31 (12.1%) with 2 on, and 3 (1.2%) with the bases loaded.
2. Bob Feller - unfortunately since his entire career came before 1957, the PI doesn't have Feller's data
3. Juan Marichal - 320 career HR: 190 (59.4%), 97 (30.3%), 31 (9.7%), 2 (0.6%)
4. Lefty Grove - same problem as Feller
5. Jack Morris - 389 career HR: 223 (57.3), 122 (31.3%) , 39 (10.0%), 5 (1.3%)
6. Carl Hubbell - same problem
7. John Clarkson - same problem
8. Amos Rusie - same problem
9. Vick Willis - same problem
10. Luis Tiant - 346 career HR: 208 (60.1), 97 (28.0%), 38 (11.0%), 3 (0.9%)
So of the four we have data on, two of them (Gibson and Marichal) started a little before Palmer and pitched during only some of the same years, one (Morris) started a little after Palmer, and one (Tiant) was contemporaneous to Palmer.
In any event, Palmer comes out better than all of these guys. Palmer had no baserunners on more than 63% of his homers, and only Morris breaks 60%. Palmer also had the fewest homers allowed with 2 runners on, and of course the fewest grand slams.
Amazingly, it's Gibson who comes out the worst here. Considering the era he pitched in, that's really surprising.
I'm not going to list out the math, but take my word on this one. If Gibson, across his 257 career homers, allowed the same fraction breakdown of runners on as Palmer, he would have allowed 40 fewer runs in his career, and (if all earned) that would have shaved nearly 0.10 off his career ERA. Wow!
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Allow me to throw out a crazy thought: Everyone's favorite broadcaster, Tim McCarver, is known for being very reverent of former teammate Bob Gibson and his nasty slider. That same Mr. McCarver also repeatedly claims that sliders are the easiest pitch to make a mistake with and thus see hit a long way. Perhaps Gibson relied on that slider with runners on, trying for big strikeouts, and ultimately gave up a few more homers than he would have liked. Carlton and Guidry were also well-known for their sliders; did they give up more HR with men on than we might expect to see?
More likely, there is no precise reason we can identify.
Andy, Palmer might be an interesting guy to look at closer, in some way. He's just before my time, so all my anecdotal knowledge is second-hand. He's a guy who had a reputation for being somewhat of a primadonna, and not wanting to pitch if he felt a little sore. Yet he threw over 300 IP/season repeatedly. He had great defenses behind him, and his numbers with the bases loaded are so impressive. Did he usually coast a bit, relying on his defense, and therefore manage to rack up IP despite a "soft" rep? Maybe he was capable of always pitching like he did in "clutch" situations, but he knew he would break down sooner/more often. So rather than being Seaver he was a tier below, but plenty effective enough for those teams. Dunno...just babbling.
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I also had similar thoughts, particularly about the defenses that played behind Palmer. Teams can "avoid" loading the bases under a variety of sccenarios, including:
A. Overall bad offense -- Palmer had the ability to make many teams look like they fit this category
B. Hitting into double plays -- I suspect that the Orioles turned more of these than the average teams in those years, given their stellar infield defense.
C. Stealing bases -- Palmer pitched much of his career in years when stolen bases were a very fashionable approach to offense.
D. Taking extra bases on outfield hits -- I'm no expert here, but with the possible exception of Ken Singleton, I don't recall too many Baltimore outfield regulars of those years who were known to have exceptional throwing arms.
E. Not drawing walks -- Palmer had good control, and I have a perception of Earl Weaver as a manager who hated to call for intentional walks.
So, in a nutshell, perhaps part of Palmer's success in avoiding grand slams came from a relative lack of opportunities. But I'll still put my strongest faith in the idea that it's probably just a statistical quirk.
January 3rd, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Any data on whether Palmer gave up an usually high number of bases loaded walks? As an announcer for the Orioles he insists that is better to walk in a run than throw a fat one to a dangerous hitter.
January 3rd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
With the bases loaded, Palmer had 213 PAs against, giving up 36 hits, 13 walks, 40 Ks, 16 sac flies, and 12 GIDP. Averages of .196/.230/.234
Gibson had 283 PAs against, 44 hits, 10 walks, 64 Ks, 19 sac flies, and 19 GIDP. Averages .174/.191/.257
Marichal 190 PAs, 46 hits, 4 walks, 29 Ks, 16 sac flies, 9 GIDP. Averages .272/.268/.355
Morris 244 PAs, 50 hits, 14 walks, 39 K, 21 sac flies, 19 GIDP. Averages .240/.263/.370
Tiant 210 PAs, 37 hits, 13 walks, 47 Ks, 15 sac flies, 14 GIDP. Averages .204/.239/.326
Palmer and Tiant were contemporaneous and had virtually identical numbers with the bases loaded, except that more of Tiant's hits were for extra bases.
Palmer's career walk rate in all situations EXCEPT bases loaded was 14,156 PAs with 1091 walks (1 BB per 12.97 PAs.) With the bases loaded, it was 210 PAs with 13 walks (1 BB per 16.15 PAs.) So that suggests he certainly did not give in (as in giving up a walk) with the bases loaded, nor did he give up many extra base hits, nor did he benefit from a lot more double plays than other guys. It seems that he mainly befitted from A) not giving up a lot of hits or times on base with the bases loaded and B) when he did give up a hit, usually keeping to a single.
It's stuff like this that makes us believe that pitchers have the ability to "buckle down" in key situations. It seems that Palmer really did do that.
January 3rd, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Toward the end of this article (WARNING: Mets fans don't read) http://www.slate.com/id/2151273
there is a baseball prospectus chart ranking pitchers from 1946-2005 based on the difference in their peripheral ERA and actual ERAs. Essentially it is trying to rank a pitchers ability to spread out his hits so they don't produce runs (or to not give up hits when they will produce runs). Palmer ranks second to Whitey Ford. (In the PIable part of his career 1 out of 228 homers went for a grand slam.)
January 3rd, 2008 at 8:34 pm
"Palmer’s career walk rate in all situations EXCEPT bases loaded was 14,156 PAs with 1091 walks (1 BB per 12.97 PAs.) With the bases loaded, it was 210 PAs with 13 walks (1 BB per 16.15 PAs.) So that suggests he certainly did not give in (as in giving up a walk) with the bases loaded"
Not necessarily. Of the comps you listed above, his isolated walk rate with bases loaded is the same as Tiant's, but much higher than the others. All pitchers will of course give up many fewer walks with the bases loaded. That Palmer's walk-rate drops only a bit makes me think perhaps he did indeed pitch like it was "better to walk in a run than throw a fat one."
Let's see...last season the major league BB rate with bases loaded was 1 per 14.2 PA. In all other situations it was 1 per 11.7. Hmm. Not nearly the difference I expected, and similar to the change in Palmer's rate. Marichal is the interesting guy. He obviously refused to walk anyone with bases loaded.
***
Oscar, before I clicked your link, I was wondering what it would say about Glavine. I had no idea he was the main subject. To me he's been the modern posterboy for that...people always predicted his downfall was imminent, based on mediocre stuff and uninspiring peripherals. But he was always someone who would walk a guy he didn't feel like pitching to to gain what he felt was a better situation. BTW, am I blind? I don't see where it says he ranks among the pitchers who most outperformed their peripherals.
January 4th, 2008 at 7:39 am
Well you might have made your point, Johnny. If Palmer's walk rates with and without the bases loaded are just league average, then maybe he really didn't excel in that area.