47 Responses to “Lots of RBI; Not So Many Runs Scored”

1. Dr. Doom Says:
   March 2nd, 2011 at 12:08 pm

   Here's a weird one: Pedro Guerrero, 1989.

   60 XBH; 60 Runs.

2. Anon Says:
   March 2nd, 2011 at 12:12 pm

   Sheesh - poor Del Ennis is all over this list. He has another season that just misses the 1st list with 119 RBI and 73 runs (1954). In fact, he drove in 100 7 times and 95 2 other times and never topped 92 runs in any season. You can't even blame it on playing for the phillies because they were actually decent in the early 50's. . . . .

3. aweb Says:
   March 2nd, 2011 at 12:40 pm

   I'm assuming that almost all of these guys were #5 or #6 hitters on teams with terrible hitters at the bottom of the lineup and good ones at the top, since that would make the most sense in terms of how this can be done, but...

   How did Rodriguez manage it hitting cleanup on the Yankees? Cano had a huge year hitting behind him without a noticeable problem with RISP, drove in 109 (scored 103), and Posado hit pretty well out of the 6-spot most of the year. Did any of the other guys on the list have a 100 RBI guy hitting behind them?

4. Morten Jonsson Says:
   March 2nd, 2011 at 12:55 pm

   With ARod, it looks like it's the rbi's, not the runs scored, that's out of line. He only played in 137 games, and his OBP wasn't that great, so 74 runs is about what you'd expect, even with good hitters behind him. But 125 rbi's on 264 total bases is pretty exceptional--that's the benefit of hitting cleanup for the Yankees.

5. DavidRF Says:
   March 2nd, 2011 at 1:18 pm

   Hitting a lot of SF's also helps. You get an RBI and no chance to score.

   There's so much data on this site, some of it might help to color some of the stories above. Looking at the baserunning stats for A-Rod:

   http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/rodrial01-bat.shtml#batting_baserunning::none

   It does appear that he "took extra bases" (XBT%) at a much lower rate last year than the rest of his career. His scoring percentage (RS%) is down the past two years as well. His injuries have turned him into a much more station-to-station player. I don't know how to read the last columns (1stS, 1stS2, etc). Anyone know what they mean?

6. Larry R. Says:
   March 2nd, 2011 at 1:27 pm

   @4

   Also, 125 ribbies on 141 hits is pretty exceptional as well. But why the lack of runs? I thought perhaps lack of foot speed might play a part, and it does with the others in ARod's company on this list with lots of RBIs on not so many hits (Fielder, Wilson, Killebrew, York). ARod has good speed...why does he stick out on this list? I don't get it.

7. dukeofflatbush Says:
   March 2nd, 2011 at 1:27 pm

   @1
   Pedro was on base 260 times. Subtract his HRs from his TOB and Rs and you have 43 Rs while on base 243 times, not counting errors or fielder's choices. Not a good ratio.
   He and Kilebrew come closest to a 2-1 ratio of RBI to RUN
   In 1971 Kilebrew knocked in 119 and scored 61.
   And what about Vic Wertz in 1960, 103 RBI/ 45 R.

8. dukeofflatbush Says:
   March 2nd, 2011 at 1:29 pm

   @ 5,
   Didn't A-rod loose Cano hitting behind him last year?

9. Wine Curmudgeon Says:
   March 2nd, 2011 at 1:31 pm

   The one that gets me is Harmon Killebrew in 1962 -- 48 home runs and a .912 OPS, yet just 85 runs scored. I guess the team's 98 OPS+ might have had something to do with that. And yet the Twins won 91 games.

10. dukeofflatbush Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 1:34 pm

    The reciprocal of this post, Luis Catillo's 2000 season. 101 Runs scored, 17 RBIs. Lowest total of RBIs for a century scorer. He also had 180 hits. Less than 10 hits per RBI.

11. dukeofflatbush Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    @ 9 Wine,

    Adam Dunn had the same problem in '08 & '09.
    He averaged 39 HRs, 119 BBs, a .913 OPS and just 80 runs.
    Nearly half his runs scored were done so by himself.

12. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 1:41 pm

    It's hard to pinpoint a simple explanation for A-Rod's high RBI rate last year. He did hit better with men on base than with bases empty, but the actual numbers RISP were not that impressive. (His bases-empty numbers were poor.)

    During the season, I got the impression that pitchers were far less afraid of A-Rod than in the past, which probably reflects both his own decline and Cano's red-hot start. A-Rod got just 1 intentional walk (that can't be ALL due to Cano!), and he walked in just 11.8% of RISP chances; Mark Teixeira drew 6 IBB and walked in 19.7% of RISP chances. With RISP and first base open, A-Rod drew just 11 walks in 89 PAs, 12.4% -- less than half of Teixeira's walk rate in those situations (25.9%, 28 of 108).

    Also, with the bases loaded, A-Rod batted 28 times and produced 34 RBI, going 9 for 20 with 3 HRs and 2 doubles (1.000 SLG). Teixeira batted 19 times and produced 22 RBI, going 8 for 15 with 1 HR and 1 double.

13. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 1:43 pm

    #11/... If you are interested in high ratios of runs to RBI, check out Roy Thomas, Richie Ashburn, and Vince Coleman. Roy Thomas is an interesting case - he had a .413 OBA, but only a .333 SA, probably the largest positive difference of {OBA-SA} for a quality offensive player.

14. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 1:54 pm

    A-Rod's declining Runs rate last year reflects not only his career-low OBP (as noted), but also:
    -- a decline in running speed (7 steal attempts, half his prior career low); and
    -- relatively poor performance by the Yankees' #6-#7 hitters.

    Cano did have a great year in the #5 spot. But the Yankee #6-#7 hitters were way off from the year before, with a combined .254 BA (down from .294), 42 HRs (down from 57), and .420 SLG (down from .506). Even their #8 hitters declined, from 23 HRs/82 RBI in 2009 to 12/63 last year.

15. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 2:35 pm

    Looking at the first list, I would cite various factors that have nothing to do with poor hitters coming up behind them:

    -- Four of these 22 players were "RBI men" in the dead-ball era, when one-run strategies dominated. Their runs scored were not low, given the context. It was common in those days for one player to get the lion's share of the team's RBI. Cap Anson in 1891 had 120 RBI; no teammate had more than 76. Buck Freeman in 1902 had 121 RBI; next-best was 63. Sam Crawford in 1910 had 120 RBI; Cobb had 91, no one else more than 60. Gavvy Cravath in 1913 had 128 RBI; next-best was 86.

    -- About 1/3 of the group had a poor or mediocre OBP, "led" by Garret Anderson's .314 in 2001.

    -- At least half the list were very slow runners, and none were fast; 15 of 22 had 4 SB or less. Steve Brodie (1895) had 35 SB, but that wasn't much for an OF of that time; he was 5th on his own team and 28th in the league. Sam Crawford's 20 SB were low for a regular in 1910; he was 6th on the Tigers, and 56th in the AL. Rusty Staub was a full-time DH; Gabby Hartnett a catcher; Luzinski and several others were famously slow.

16. Richard Chester Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 2:57 pm

    @5
    1stS is the number of times A-Rod was on base when a batter behind him singled. 1stS2 is the number of times he advanced to second on that single and1stS3 is the number of times he advanced to third on that single. 1stS2 and 1stS3 add up to 1stS. (There is no column for scoring from first on a single.)

    Another reason contributing to the lack of RS by the players on the list may be because they were pinch-run for in late innings of a close game.

17. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    Wine @9 -- On the 1962 Twins' 98 OPS+ as a team, I think you're making a natural but still false assumption. The '62 Twins were actually a very good offensive club, 2nd in the AL in scoring and in OPS+.

    The confusion comes from the fact that 100 is not the average OPS+ for a league in which pitchers bat. The "100" point for OPS+ is based on the park-adjusted average OPS of all non-pitchers. That is because the primary purpose of OPS+ is to compare (non-pitcher) hitters against one another; if pitchers were included in the average, then the majority of "real" hitters would have an OPS+ over 100.

    For consistency, that same average is used when OPS+ is applied to teams and leagues. Thus, every league (and almost every team) in which pitchers bat comes out with an OPS+ below 100. In 1962, for example, the AL OPS+ was 93, and only the Yankees were over 100.

18. ottoc Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    @10

    I was thinking about the reciprocal of this also but in my case I was thinking of Lloyd Waner's rookie season in 1927 when he scored 133 times and had 27 RBI on 233 hits.

19. Hartvig Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 4:42 pm

    I wasn't surprised to see Garret Anderson on the list but I was a little shocked that Joe Carter didn't make either list since he had so may 100+ RBI seasons and was so awful at getting on base. Tony Armas was another I expected to see but amazingly enough in his 1984 season when he drove in 123 runs he also scored 107, in spite of an OBP of 0.300.

20. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 5:32 pm

    Hartvig @19 -- Fascinating point about Armas scoring 107 runs in '84 with a .300 OBP. That's just 1 run less than the "record" for most runs with an OBP of .300 or lower.

    In 1930, Hughie Critz scored 108 runs with a .292 OBP, 4 HRs and an OPS+ of 55. But of course, that was in probably the best run environment in modern history, as the NL averaged 5.68 R/G, and the Giants (for whom Critz led off) averaged 6.23 R/G. Their #3 and #4 spots both hit at least .383, their #5 spot hit .346, and even their #8 spot hit .307. Their team BA of .319 sounds like a modern record. (BTW, Critz in '30 and Jimmy Rollins in '09 are the only modern players to score 100+ runs with a sub-.300 OBP.)

    Anyway ... I was surprised to note Wade Boggs, leading off most games for those '84 Red Sox, scored "just" 109 runs, despite a .407 OBP. The club averaged 5.0 R/G, 2nd in the AL but hardly historic. (Dewey Evans led the team with 121 runs, hitting #2.)

    P.S. I've always found it ironic that Tony Armas, Sr., would not take a walk, averaging just 25 unintentional walks per 162 games -- whereas his son, the pitcher, tended to walk the ballpark (4.2 BB/9 in his 10-year career).

21. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 5:56 pm

    @18, Ottoc -- I believe Waner is the only "modern" player with at least 100 more Runs than RBI.

    P.S. But if we use 1893 as the "modern" cutoff instead of 1901, then John McGraw takes the prize, with a 1899 season that included 140 runs and 33 RBI, a difference of 107, one more than Waner. (Also, McGraw's 140 runs came in 117 games; his average of 1.2 R/G has not been matched since.)

22. Doug Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    Age and speed seem to be relevant factors.

    On the second list, only 3 are guys under 30. And the most recent of those 3 is from 1953.

23. Morten Jonsson Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 6:41 pm

    @20--Boggs might hold the record for times left on base in a season. In 1985 he was on base 340 times (240 hits, 96 walks, and 4 HBP) and scored 107 runs. (Rickey Henderson scored was on base 275 times that year and scored 146 runs. Now imagine if Boggs could run like Rickey.)

    @21--In 1894, Billy Hamilton scored 198 runs and drove in 90, a difference of 108.

    About Killebrew--that really is a remarkably low number of runs. When he didn't hit a home run, he scored less than one out of five times he was on base. That's Ernie Lombardi territory. But notice that he's first on the list in walks (106), last in doubles (21), and next to last in triples (1), meaning that, homers aside, he was starting from first base more than anyone else on the list. The Twins' fifth-place hitters were actually pretty good, but trying to score Harmon Killebrew from first is a lot to ask.

24. SocraticGadfly Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 7:12 pm

    On Wertz, I think he was incredibly slow by that time, too.

25. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 7:28 pm

    @23, Morten -- Thanks for the correction re: Slidin' Billy. I based my McGraw assertion on a Play Index search of Runs > 2.5 * RBI, which I wrongly assumed would take in all possible seasons where (Runs - RBI) > 100. I forgot about Hamilton's astounding 198 runs in the offensive explosion of 1894. My bad.

    BTW, Boggs does not own the season record for times left on base. Barry Bonds was stranded 247 times in 2004 and 239 in 2002; Boggs's high was 233 in '85. Other notably stranded seasons:

    -- 228, Babe Ruth, 1923: Led the league with 151 runs, but was on base 379 times.
    -- 220, Luke Appling, 1943: On base 283 times, led the league with a .419 OBP and .328 BA ... but scored just 63 runs.
    -- 220, Ted Williams, 1947: 345 TOB, 125 runs (led AL).
    -- 219, Carlos Delgado, 2000: 334 times on base (#15 in modern history), 115 runs.

26. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 8:28 pm

    Flipping around my search from #25 ... In modern history, who was left on base the fewest times in a season of 100+ runs?

    Pepper Martin, in 1935, scored 121 runs with 196 times on base, scoring at a rate of 61.7% of his times on base.

    To give that some perspective ... If Babe Ruth had scored at that same rate in 1923, when he set the all-time record of 379 times on base, he would have scored 234 runs, or 83 more than his actual total.

    The '35 Cardinals were a good offensive team, but nothing historic; they were 2nd in the NL at 5.4 R/G. But their offensive style seems a throwback to the dead-ball era: Get the leadoff man on base, move him up with the #2-3 hitters, and let the #4-5 men drive him in. Their #2 and #3 hitters combined for 45 sacrifice hits, twice as many as the rest of their hitting spots combined. Their #2-3 men each slugged under .360; the #3 men (mostly Frankie Frisch) hit just 2 HRs and 87 RBI, and were last in the NL in slugging from that spot, and below average in OBP.

    This strategy produced a historic rate of runs scored for Pepper Martin, but probably cost them runs overall. Despite playing specifically for the #4 man to drive in runs, and although they got a league-best .352 BA and .572 SLG from that spot (occupied by Joe Medwick), their cleanup RBI total was just 3rd in the NL.

    The '35 Cards lost the pennant by 4 games to the Cubs, who led the NL in scoring (5.5 R/G) with a balanced attack that had no 100-RBI man.
    __________

    P.S. The only other player in modern history with 100+ runs who scored in at least 60% of his times on base was Al Simmons in 1930 -- 152 runs, 251 TOB. Those 1930 A's led the AL at 6.2 R/G; Simmons had 165 RBI, Jimmie Fox 156; five regulars had an OBP of at least .414.

27. Morten Jonsson Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 8:28 pm

    Great list. Thank you. My information, as usual, is twenty years out of date. I knew that Boggs had the record, but didn't notice that the Bonds kid broke it.

28. Richard Chester Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 8:44 pm

    @23

    Also imagine if Boggs hit ahead of Don Mattingly in 1985.

29. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 8:45 pm

    Dr. Doom @1 noted that Pedro Guerrero had 60 extra-base hits and 60 Runs in 1989.

    But 5 times, a player has had at least that many XBH and actually had more XBH than Runs. Two of those seasons were by our old friend, Garret Anderson, including the most recent and the biggest numbers.

    In 2003, Anderson had 82 XBH (29 HRs, 49 doubles, 4 triples), and scored 80 runs. He had 201 hits, 345 total bases. Every other player with more than 330 total bases has scored at least 85 runs, and his TB:R ratio of 4.31 was the highest ever for a season of 300+ TB.

    In 1998, Anderson had 63 XBH and 62 runs.

    Others who exceeded Guerrero's "60-60":
    -- Kevin Millar, 2001 (64 XBH, 62 R)
    -- Albert Belle, 1991 (61, 60)
    -- Jim Morrison, 198 (62, 58)

    P.S. I am not here to rip the recently retired Anderson, who was a fine big-league player for a long time and helped his team win a championship. He's not the first All-Star player whose raw numbers masked a weakness or two.

30. Mr. Dave Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 9:56 pm

    Cravath's 1913 season was absolutely amazing. OPS+ of 172?! He then followed that up with an OPS+ of 169 and 171 in the next couple seasons. How this man wasn't a regular player before 1912 amazes me, especially how some of the teams he was on could have used the outfield help.

31. sansho1 Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 10:32 pm

    I once looked through Mike Piazza's 2006 game log and determined that he scored on a base hit something like 9 times in 439 PAs.

32. John Autin Says:
    March 2nd, 2011 at 11:03 pm

    If I were Brian Cashman, the 2nd list (highest ratio of RBI to Runs) would make me very, very nervous. For 10 of the 15 players listed above A-Rod, it was their last good season. Here are the 10, numbered as on the list above:

    1. Danny Tartabull, 1996: 27 HRs, 101 RBI, 58 Runs, 111 OPS+, age 33: He played just 3 more games in his career.

    2. Vic Wertz, 1960: 19 HRs, 103 RBI, 45 Runs, 111 OPS+, age 36: Got just 536 more PAs over 3 seasons.

    3. Del Ennis, 1957: 24 HRs, 105 RBI, 61 Runs, 117 OPS+, age 32: Got 466 more PAs in 2 seasons.

    4. Ernie Banks, 1969: 23 HRs, 106 RBI, 60 Runs, 92 OPS+, age 38: The RBI masked the fact that Banks was already just about done; he got 339 more PAs in 2 seasons.

    5. Smead Jolley, 1932: 18 HRs, 106 RBI, 60 Runs, 117 OPS+, age 30: Played 1 more year, with an even 100 OPS+.

    7. Lee May, 1976: 25 HRs, league-best 109 RBI, 61 Runs, 127 OPS+, age 33: Played 3 more years as a regular but never got his OPS+ above 101.

    9. Luis Olmo, 1945: 10 HRs, 110 RBI, 62 Runs, 127 OPS+, age 25: The regular players came back from the war, and Olmo was never again a regular; he had 40 more RBI over parts of 3 seasons.

    11. Gus Bell, 1959: 19 HRs, 115 RBI, 59 Runs, 100 OPS+, age 30: What looked like a bounce-back year for the former All-Star turned out to be his last OPS+ over 86, though he spent 3 more years in the lineup.

    13. Pedro Guerrero, 1989: 17 HRs, 117 RBI, 60 Runs, 145 OPS+, age 33: Had 2 more years as a regular, with a combined 102 OPS+ (previous career average 147), combined negative WAR, and an alarming 83 runs scored in 251 games, over 1,000 PAs.

    14. Dave Kingman, 1984: 35 HRs, 118 RBI, 68 Runs, 132 OPS+, age 35: Kong never did stop hitting HRs (30 and 35 in his final 2 years), but his OPS+ plummeted into the red, and he went unwanted after batting .210 with a .255 OBP in '86. (BTW, why some people think a 38-year-old pure DH with a .255 OBP was still worth a flyer is beyond me.)

    The "exceptions" (only 1 really had a rosy future):

    6. Mo Vaughn, 1999: 33 HRs, 108 RBI, 63 Runs, 119 OPS+, age 31: Vaughn had 2 more seasons at about the same level, separated by a year lost to injury -- but he was already a shadow of the hitter he'd been over the previous 6 years in Boston. And the end came quickly.

    8. Andy Pafko was 24 in 1945, just starting his career. He didn't really have any speed, but he had several good years with the bat.

    10. Ray Jablonski, age 26, was a rookie in 1953; it's not so much that he had more good years ahead, as it is that he never really was a good hitter, no matter the RBI total. His OPS+ in the year listed here was 89; he had 104 RBI the next year with a 99 OPS+; his career OPS+ was 94, with just one season over 100.

    12. Ray Boone, 1955: 20 HRs, AL-best 116 RBI, 61 Runs, 122 OPS+, age 31: Had a 141 OPS+ the next year, 108 the year after (though his defensive value was plummeting), then a 93 OPS+ in his last year as a regular.

    15. Harmon Killebrew, 1971: 28 HRs, league-best 119 RBI, 61 Runs, 138 OPS+, age 35: Harmon repeated his 138 OPS+ the following year, though with just 74 RBI and 53 Runs. But that was it; he spent 3 more years as a regular but had no real value.
    _______________________

    I shouldn't make too much of an unscientific comparison group. And it's far too soon to stick a fork in A-Rod. But the trend lines for A-Rod are negative no matter where you look: 3 straight years playing 138 games or less; an average of 76 Runs over the past 2 years (after 13 straight years at 100+); and career lows in BA, OBP and SB last year. And he's under contract for 7 more years, totaling $174 million, even before the "milestone" bonuses kick in.

33. Doug B Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 12:07 am

    some of these guys may have lost a few runs due to pinch runners.

    example: Rusty Staub in 1978

    Steve Dillard as a reserve reached base via hit, walk, or HBP only 35 times all year. Yet he scored 21 times. I imagine a half-dozen or so of those runs were pinch running for Staub. Just a guess. I have no way to know.

34. Richard Chester Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 12:59 am

    @33

    Go to Steve Dillard's game log for 1978 and look for games where he scored a run and did not have an at bat. Then click on the date of the game and the box score will come up and you can determine if he pinch-ran and for whom. You should also check games where he had one or two at bats.

35. Morten Jonsson Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 2:22 am

    @34

    It's actually a little easier to check than that, since you can also sort by position. For the record, Steve Dillard scored six runs as a pinch runner in 1978: two running for Staub; two running for John Wockenfuss (whose name in German means "Rock Foot"); one running for Milt May, a catcher; and one running for Lou Whitaker (who must have pulled a hamstring or something, since he didn't play again for two weeks).

    That means, by the way, that not including pinch running, Dillard scored 15 runs in 35 times on base. Still pretty damn good. If only he'd been better at the getting on base part.

    And to get back to Doug B's original question, Staub was lifted for a pinch runner eight times that year. Dillard scored twice, as mentioned; all the other times the runner was stranded. Give Dillard's runs to Staub, and he still only scored 77. Rusty's wheels were, well, rusty.

36. Doug B Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 3:20 am

    I stand amazingly well corrected.

37. stan cook Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 10:02 am

    There should be a correlation between RBIs and total bases. In Arod's case he got 125 RBIs on 262 total bases. I wonder if anyone has done that. Incidentally, shouldn't Dawson 1987 be on this list.

38. John Autin Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 10:27 am

    @37, Stan -- Dawson '87 misses both lists pretty comfortably. He scored 90 runs along with his 137 RBI. The first list ends at 85 runs scored. The second list ends at a RBI:Runs ratio of 1.689; Dawson's ratio was 1.52.

39. John Autin Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 10:43 am

    @37, Stan -- You're right that A-Rod's ratio of RBI to Total Bases was fairly historic, at least for a minimum of 120 RBI. A-Rod's ratio was 0.473 RBI per TB, which is the 8th highest in modern history for 120+ RBI. (Note: He had 264 TB, not 262.) The highest such ratio was 0.488 by Zeke Bonura in 1936: 138 RBI on 283 Total Bases.
    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bonurze01.shtml
    (Also, with just 12 HRs, Bonura had the highest RBI total ever in a season of 18 HRs or less.)

    If we drop the minimum to 100 RBI for the RBI:TB competition, the highest ratio was 0.513 by Harmon Killebrew in 1971 (see #15 on the 2nd list atop this blog).

    (All stats cited are for 1901-present.)

40. stan cook Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 10:50 am

    @39
    John thanks for looking into that for me. I suspect as somebody said above, ARod's high RBI total was a fluky/lucky distribution in an otherwise normal year. Does any one know how Henry Bonura came to be called "Zeke"

41. John Autin Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 11:14 am

    Stan @39 -- According to Bonura's page on the Louisiana Sports Hall of Fame website:

    "He got his nickname “Zeke” from Notre Dame football coach Knute Rockne, who checked out Bonura's broad shoulders and narrow waist and exclaimed, “What a physique!” It was shortened to “Zeke.” Bonura also was called “Bananas,” because his family was in the fruit produce business."
    http://www.lasportshall.com/index.php?src=directory&view=inductee&srctype=detail&back=inductee&refno=389

    BTW, re: "Bananas" -- I think both that nickname itself and the attribution are euphemisms. I've read elsewhere that he was called "Banana Nose," and the photos show why. (But it's perhaps to be expected that the Louisiana Sports Hall of Fame would not go down that road...)

    Also ... the quote might leave the impression that Bonura went to Notre Dame, but no, he attended Loyola University in New Orleans, as a good local boy should.

    (The link is worth a read, containing some amusing quotes about his defensive struggles, as well as notes on his historic track-and-field feats during high school.)

42. Lawrence Azrin Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 11:22 am

    #39/#40... A-rod's high RBI total: 2010 was the first full year that he was not all over the Top-10 offensive leaderboards, with the notable exception of RBI and HR:

    RBI - 2nd (one behind the leader)
    HR - 8th
    AB her HR - 8th
    SF - 2nd (11)

    A-ha! 11 sacrifice flies isn't a huge total, but it certainly boosts his RBI total. I think this (once again) shows how relatively useless RBI totals are in evaluating a player's performance, as aside from 125 RBI, he had a good but by no means outstanding year.

43. Douglas Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 11:38 am

    How about Terry Kennedy, 1983? 98 RBI, 47 runs.

    You would think the all-time champions in this category would be slugging catchers (Gary Carter, Ted Simmons, etc.)

44. John Autin Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    @30, Mr. Dave re: why Gavvy Cravath wasn't a MLB regular before 1912 (when he was 31):

    1. His first MLB trial came in 1908, when he was already 27 years old. Cravath was in the PCL for the previous 5 seasons (at least), but without making a terrific impression until 1907, when he hit .303 and was named the league MVP (according to a source cited by Bill James). He never hit over .274 before that.

    2. Bill James wrote (in his New Historical Baseball Abstract) that Cravath "failed trials with Boston, Washington and Chicago in the American League due to illness, injuries, and competition from other new acquisitions like Tris Speaker and Clyde Milan." "Failed trial" seems an odd term for his 1908 season in Boston -- a 136 OPS+ in 94 games, 327 PAs -- but the fact remains that Boston sold him to the White Sox that winter, who gave him but 19 games before throwing him into a deal with Washington, who in turn sold him down to Minneapolis in the American Association after just 6 hitless ABs.

    3. Cravath spent the rest of 1909 with Minneapolis, batting .291 and slugging .409 -- which looks ordinary, but actually was 2nd among league regulars in both categories. (It was the dead-ball era in the minors, too.) In both 1910 and '11, Cravath led the A.A. in total bases and slugging, after which several teams put in offers and the Millers sold him to the Phillies. I have no direct explanation for why it took two full years of Cravath's slugging exploits for him to earn his way back to the majors. All I can say is that, in those days, it was not uncommon for a player to get hung with a bad rap after a fairly short time in the majors, keeping him stuck in the minors far longer than would happen in today's game. Many players in that era waited even longer than Cravath to get their second chance.

45. Dr. Doom Says:
    March 3rd, 2011 at 3:32 pm

    @29

    I recall us (not necessarily just you and me, but a lot of us here) having a conversation in a different thread about Garrett Anderson's 82XBH/80R season. It's just amazing to me that that can ever happen. With Anderson, it's especially puzzling, because he wasn't even on a bad team. I love baseball - it's so interesting!

46. Steve Says:
    March 4th, 2011 at 9:07 pm

    What were the numbers for Bonds in his big HR seasons?He seemed to score remarkably few runs other than when he drove himself in.I know he had noone behind him but it still stood out as odd to me.

47. John Autin Says:
    March 5th, 2011 at 10:45 pm

    @46, Steve -- Compared to the other big HR hitters of the day, Bonds actually scored more non-HR runs than most of them -- far more than some. In his big 5-year stretch, Bonds scored at least 111 runs every year and 129 three times. I could only find two contemporary big-HR guys who scored more non-HR runs in his own biggest 5-year stretch than Bonds did.

    Look at the biggest 5-year stretch for these guys:

    Pujols, 2002-06: 636 Runs - 213 HRs = 423 non-HR runs.
    A-Rod, 1999-2003: 626 Runs - 239 HRs = 387 non-HR runs.
    Bonds, 2000-04: 615 Runs - 258 HRs = 357 non-HR runs.
    Giambi, 1999-2003: 549 Runs - 196 HRs = 353 non-HR runs.
    Delgado, 1999-2003: 550 Runs - 199 HRs = 351 non-HR runs.
    Griffey, 1996-2000: 593 Runs - 249 HRs = 344 non-HR runs.
    Vladdy, 1998-2002: 524 Runs - 197 HRs = 327 non-HR runs.
    Belle, 1994-98: 538 Runs - 213 HRs = 325 non-HR runs.
    Manny, 1998-2002: 508 Runs - 201 HRs = 307 non-HR runs.
    Thome, 2001-04 & 2006*: 518 Runs - 232 HRs = 286 non-HR runs.
    Dunn, 2004-08: 491 Runs - 206 HRs = 285 non-HR runs.
    Palmeiro, 1998-2002: 493 Runs - 219 HRs = 274 non-HR runs.
    Ryan Howard, 2006-10: 495 Runs - 229 HRs = 266 non-HR runs.
    Sexson, 2001-04 & 2006*: 450 Runs - 192 HRs = 258 non-HR runs.
    Sosa, 1998-2002: 622 Runs - 292 HRs = 230 non-HR runs.
    McGwire, 1996-2000: 513 Runs - 284 HRs = 229 non-HR runs.

    * Omitting an injury year from the 5-year stretch for Thome & Sexson.

    I do think a case can be made that Bonds scored fewer runs than might be expected given his massive number of times on base. But comparing strictly HRs and Runs, Bonds is well above average for his peers.

    P.S. Juan Gonzalez had 3 different 40-HR seasons in which he scored fewer than 90 runs. In his 5 biggest HR years (non-consecutive), JuanGon scored 468 Runs and hit 223 HRs, for a total of 245 non-HR runs.