I thought it might be fun to have a thread where we post some of our favorite stat lines. Being the baseball nerds that we are, I'm sure we all have a few.

 

Feel free to post single-game or other short-term lines ala Jayson Stark, but my personal favorites will be about longer stretches.

 

Here are a few true beauties for self-explanatory reasons:

 

1. Albert Pujols Career

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/pujolal01.shtml

 

2. Randy Johnson: 1993-2004, with an emphasis on 1999-2002.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/johnsra05.shtml

 

3. Greg Maddux: 1994-1995

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/maddugr01.shtml

 

4. Pedro Martinez: 1997-2003. Pedro's 2000 campaign may be the greatest of all-time for a pitcher.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/martipe02.shtml

 

 

Feel free to reach as far back into the past or as far into obscurity as you desire. Bottom line: enjoy.

Totally different era of course, but here's a couple decent hurlers. Not only the longevity and domination, but look at the innings pitched column each season. How their arms did not just completely fall off I have no idea.

 

Walter Johnson: For 19 straight years he was below 200 innings just once. Nine times he was over 300.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/johnswa01.shtml

 

 

and to top that, look at:

 

Cy Young: during a 15 season strech he was over 300 innings every year. 5 times he was over 400.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/y/youngcy01.shtml

Today's pitchers are pussies. Or maybe the coaches for taking them out early. Do/did pitchers from the old days have any long term effects after they retired from pitching those crazy amounts of innings I wonder? Like early onset arthritis? Didn't pitchers from the old days throw fewer pitches per game though?

 

 

There was a pitcher who pitched all 18 innings of double header.:blink:

While it is on a FAR smaller scale than those pitching stats linked above, I always liked Cody's 15 RBI in 1 series in Colorado during the 2008 season.

Today's pitchers are pussies. Or maybe the coaches for taking them out early. Do/did pitchers from the old days have any long term effects after they retired from pitching those crazy amounts of innings I wonder? Like early onset arthritis? Didn't pitchers from the old days throw fewer pitches per game though?

 

 

There was a pitcher who pitched all 18 innings of double header.:blink:

 

Today's pitchers are multi-million dollar investments that if they break down most teams cannot afford to replace. Also the game has changed dramatically in how its played, where managers have stat lines and breakdowns of how every batter has done against every pitcher and they play the percentages. Previous managers just went with a hunch, can you imagine a manager today explaining to the press why he went with a pitcher that has given up 5 HR's to a player and how the player hits another one to cost the team the game and he tells the reporters he played a hunch?!?!?

Yogi Berra in 1950 had only 12 k's in 656 plate appearances. That season he batted .322 with 28 HRs, 124 RBIs, and 116 runs scored.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/berrayo01.shtml

The Astros have a .601 OPS so far this season. If they keep it up I bet that's the lowest team OPS in a lot of years if not ever.

The Astros have a .601 OPS so far this season. If they keep it up I bet that's the lowest team OPS in a lot of years if not ever.

 

It's not really anywhere near the lowest ever (deadball era) but it would be one of the worst since then. It'd be the worst since the 1972 Rangers and their .581 OPS (First year in Texas).

 

 

Other non-deadball teams with an OPS under .601:

 

1942 Oakland Athletics .592

1942 Philadelphia Phillies .595

1964 Houston Astros .599

1968 New York Mets .596

1968 Chicago White Sox .595

 

BTW, it's worth noting that .601 was worse than most deadball teams too.

The Astros have a .601 OPS so far this season. If they keep it up I bet that's the lowest team OPS in a lot of years if not ever.

 

It's not really anywhere near the lowest ever (deadball era) but it would be one of the worst since then. It'd be the worst since the 1972 Rangers and their .581 OPS (First year in Texas).

 

 

Other non-deadball teams with an OPS under .601:

 

1942 Oakland Athletics .592

1942 Philadelphia Phillies .595

1964 Houston Astros .599

1968 New York Mets .596

1968 Chicago White Sox .595

 

BTW, it's worth noting that .601 was worse than most deadball teams too.

 

It's also worth noting that the Mets managed to win the World Series the next year (1969).

The Astros have a .601 OPS so far this season. If they keep it up I bet that's the lowest team OPS in a lot of years if not ever.

 

It's not really anywhere near the lowest ever (deadball era) but it would be one of the worst since then. It'd be the worst since the 1972 Rangers and their .581 OPS (First year in Texas).

 

 

Other non-deadball teams with an OPS under .601:

 

1942 Oakland Athletics .592

1942 Philadelphia Phillies .595

1964 Houston Astros .599

1968 New York Mets .596

1968 Chicago White Sox .595

 

BTW, it's worth noting that .601 was worse than most deadball teams too.

 

How does their OPS+ (59) rank among the all-time worst?