More magical/special milestone to you: 3,000 hits or 500 HR?

[theshowandme]

PAs | Hits | HRs | BBs

Aaron: 13,941 | 3,771| 755| 1,402
Mays: 12,545 | 3,293 | 660 | 1,468
Mantle: 9,910 | 2,415 | 536 | 1,733
Williams: 9,792 | 2,654 | 521 | 2,021


Just imagine Mickey and Williams with 3000-4000 more PAs and less discipline

[f2tornado]

Originally Posted by MiamiMarlinsFan

Did you guys see Altuve got another single today?!!!!! Yeah, baby! So exciting! #RoadTo3K

Point taken but bad choice of player to make it. 10+% of Altuve's hits are bombs and 31% are XB. Luis Arráez might be the most boring hit collector ever.

Originally Posted by THE(NEXT)LEVEL

Tell that to Jim Thome.....

He has collectors but his rookie card values are definitely the victim of peak junk wax in 1991. Also, he was vastly overshadowed by several others who had bigger peaks in the 90s and occasionally players on his own team (Lofton, Belle, Baerga).

[JoshMN]

Originally Posted by theshowandme

PAs | Hits | HRs | BBs

Aaron: 13,941 | 3,771| 755| 1,402
Mays: 12,545 | 3,293 | 660 | 1,468
Mantle: 9,910 | 2,415 | 536 | 1,733
Williams: 9,792 | 2,654 | 521 | 2,021


Just imagine Mickey and Williams with 3000-4000 more PAs and less discipline

Regarding some matters, it’s hard to imagine Mickey Mantle with less discipline, but I get your point otherwise and fully agree.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by TBTC Baseball

If we are doing qualifiers, take out the 500 HR hitters that had help.

I am not using qualifiers. I am eliminating the period of time when it was impossible to get 30% of 500 HRs. Besides, you don't know who used steroids and how many HRs they would have hit had they not. Are you eliminating the 3000 hit club members who used steroids or amphetamines too? "Had help" is most players on both lists.

[mfw13]

Originally Posted by theshowandme

PAs | Hits | HRs | BBs

Aaron: 13,941 | 3,771| 755| 1,402
Mays: 12,545 | 3,293 | 660 | 1,468
Mantle: 9,910 | 2,415 | 536 | 1,733
Williams: 9,792 | 2,654 | 521 | 2,021


Just imagine Mickey and Williams with 3000-4000 more PAs and less discipline

In the Splendid Splinter's case, it was because he missed roughly five full seasons to serve in the military (1943-45, 1952-53).

If he doesn't serve in the military, he likely finishes his career with around 700 HR and 3500 hits.

[ReggieBush22]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

I don't think anybody active is a shoo-in for 500 HRs.

Well, anytime when projecting for the future, nothing is a guarantee but these guys have great shots.

Stanton - 447 HR (35)
Trout - 398 HR (33)
Machado - 364 HR (32)
Harper - 359 HR (32)
Judge - 358 HR (33)
Schwarber - 333 (32)

There's also Suarez who is also lurking at 318 HR. And obviously, Ohtani assuming he stays healthy. So that's a good chunk of guys expected to surpass it in the next 5-7 years.

[ReggieBush22]

Originally Posted by mfw13

In the Splendid Splinter's case, it was because he missed roughly five full seasons to serve in the military (1943-45, 1952-53).

If he doesn't serve in the military, he likely finishes his career with around 700 HR and 3500 hits.

Still arguably the GOAT hitter. And I've said this before but given his greatness, his cards are still so undervalued, something I've never quite understood. Yeah, his military service years were age 24, 25, 26, 33 and 34.

.344/.482/.634

[JoshMN]

Originally Posted by rats60

I am not using qualifiers. I am eliminating the period of time when it was impossible to get 30% of 500 HRs.

It was never impossible to get 30% of 500 HRs in the dead ball era. Babe Ruth started in the dead ball era and proved that wrong. Prior to Babe Ruth, the players either weren't good enough or didn't take the right approach to hit HR. The strongest men of that time trended towards boxing or riding horses, which were more popular sports than baseball back then.

Based on your comment history, you likely started watching baseball in the dead ball era, so you should know this already.

[Bosoxfan5990]

Originally Posted by ReggieBush22

Well, anytime when projecting for the future, nothing is a guarantee but these guys have great shots.

Stanton - 447 HR (35)
Trout - 398 HR (33)
Machado - 364 HR (32)
Harper - 359 HR (32)
Judge - 358 HR (33)
Schwarber - 333 (32)

There's also Suarez who is also lurking at 318 HR. And obviously, Ohtani assuming he stays healthy. So that's a good chunk of guys expected to surpass it in the next 5-7 years.

Schwarber has a better shot than Trout.

[theshowandme]

Musial had 3,630 hits and 475 homers.

Unreal

[sickmantz]

For now, I find them equally impressive. I won't know which I find more impressive in the modern game until I see which one becomes more rare. I have a feeling that 3000 hits will become more rare because getting hits is no longer enough to maintain a roster spot. It seems like more leeway is given to guys that can hit home runs.

Each is usually achieved by very different skill sets, so what's truly impressive is someone who achieves both.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by ReggieBush22

Well, anytime when projecting for the future, nothing is a guarantee but these guys have great shots.

Stanton - 447 HR (35)
Trout - 398 HR (33)
Machado - 364 HR (32)
Harper - 359 HR (32)
Judge - 358 HR (33)
Schwarber - 333 (32)

There's also Suarez who is also lurking at 318 HR. And obviously, Ohtani assuming he stays healthy. So that's a good chunk of guys expected to surpass it in the next 5-7 years.

You would be lucky if one of these guys makes it.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by sickmantz

For now, I find them equally impressive. I won't know which I find more impressive in the modern game until I see which one becomes more rare. I have a feeling that 3000 hits will become more rare because getting hits is no longer enough to maintain a roster spot. It seems like more leeway is given to guys that can hit home runs.

Each is usually achieved by very different skill sets, so what's truly impressive is someone who achieves both.

League batting averages and the number of .300 hitters is trending down.

[asujbl]

Neither are magical because I’m not 8 years old

I would say 3,000 is more important

[49ersSF]

Originally Posted by corndog

So, man on first,
next batter walks,
two men on first?

You are obviously correct. A runner can advance from a walk.

However, a man on second or third can score on a hit. They will still be on second and third when someone is walked. This is why a pitcher is always okay with walking a batter when players are in scoring position, as it can be advantageous to the pitcher to give more force-out options depending on the situation.

The ability to put the baseball in play and move runners generally carries an advantage. This is one of the reasons why metrics are wrong in the sport. Metrics never seem to calculate the negative aspect of striking out as a batter. If you can advance a runner by putting the ball in play and still be out, then it should always be seen as more positive then striking out. The current metrics factor both as equal.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by 49ersSF

You are obviously correct. A runner can advance from a walk.

However, a man on second or third can score on a hit. They will still be on second and third when someone is walked. This is why a pitcher is always okay with walking a batter when players are in scoring position, as it can be advantageous to the pitcher to give more force-out options depending on the situation.

The ability to put the baseball in play and move runners generally carries an advantage. This is one of the reasons why metrics are wrong in the sport. Metrics never seem to calculate the negative aspect of striking out as a batter. If you can advance a runner by putting the ball in play and still be out, then it should always be seen as more positive then striking out. The current metrics factor both as equal.

This isn't true. Do you think you are the only one that thought of this.

WAR is built from offensive run values (either wRAA in FanGraphs’ version or Batting Runs in Baseball-Reference’s). These come from linear weights, which estimate how much each event contributes to scoring runs on average.

A single creates more run value than a walk, because besides putting the batter on base, singles also advance runners farther on average.

A walk still has value (roughly +0.33 runs historically), but less than a single (roughly +0.47 runs).

[mfw13]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

A single creates more run value than a walk, because besides putting the batter on base, singles also advance runners farther on average.

A walk still has value (roughly +0.33 runs historically), but less than a single (roughly +0.47 runs).[/I]

Gonna make for some really interesting debates once Joey Votto becomes eligible for the HOF ballot.

Of course, Blowout is ahead of the curve, having already debated his candidacy for several years.....

[mfw13]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

You would be lucky if one of these guys makes it.

Disagree.....

Stanton will be over 450 by the end of this season, and has two more years left on his contract, after which he'll still be only 38, with a net $15 million option for the 2028 season. I'd say his odds of making it are now around 70-80%.

Machado has eight years left on his Padres contract, so he only needs to average about 17 HR a year to make it. I'd place his odds also at around 70-80%.

And Trout will be over 400 by the end of this season, with five years left on his deal, during which he'd have to average about 20 HR a season. I'd put his odds at 50-60%.

Harper has six years left on his Phillies deal, during which he'd have to average about 23 HR a year.

Schwarber's fate is likely tied to how long his FA deal that he signs this offseason ends up being.....if it's 4 years or more, he'll almost certainly make it. If he only gets a short-term deal, then he becomes a much iffier proposition.

In fact, I'd say that there's a 20-30% chance that all six of them make the 500 HR club.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by mfw13

Disagree.....

Stanton will be over 450 by the end of this season, and has two more years left on his contract, after which he'll still be only 38, with a net $15 million option for the 2028 season. I'd say his odds of making it are now around 70-80%.

Machado has eight years left on his Padres contract, so he only needs to average about 17 HR a year to make it. I'd place his odds also at around 70-80%.

And Trout will be over 400 by the end of this season, with five years left on his deal, during which he'd have to average about 20 HR a season. I'd put his odds at 50-60%.

Harper has six years left on his Phillies deal, during which he'd have to average about 23 HR a year.

Schwarber's fate is likely tied to how long his FA deal that he signs this offseason ends up being.....if it's 4 years or more, he'll almost certainly make it. If he only gets a short-term deal, then he becomes a much iffier proposition.

In fact, I'd say that there's a 20-30% chance that all six of them make the 500 HR club.

No way they all make it. You are already down to 36% with your stated chances for Stanton, Machado, and Trout. My guess is one or two make it. We can check back in 2030 to see where things stand.

[jhssketchcards]

The fact that you will likely see more than 10 guys hit 500 HR in the next 20 years vs less than 5 players get to 3,000 hits says it all.

500 HR used to be very exclusive, but that’s changing. Seeing a guy get 3,500 hits or more will never be done again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by 49ersSF

That is one of the biggest fallacies. A walk is definitely not as good as a hit. I'd say it's 75% of a hit.

A hit moves runners and scores people in scoring position. A walk does not.

You'd be right -- a walk has a run value of 78.5% of a single this season: https://www.fangraphs.com/tools/guts

But what's not factored in is the number of pitches a pitcher throws in a walk versus a single.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by JoshMN

Notwithstanding my prior comment, a walk actually is the same as a hit for the purposes of OBP.

But if we start counting a walk as only 75% of hit for OBP purposes, where does that leave the WAR totals for players like Babe Ruth and Bobby Bonds and Ted Williams?

It sounds like the BO stat nerds haven’t thought this all the way through.

That's how Fangraphs' version of WAR does, using wOBA: https://library.fangraphs.com/offense/woba/

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by jhssketchcards

The fact that you will likely see more than 10 guys hit 500 HR in the next 20 years vs less than 5 players get to 3,000 hits says it all.

500 HR used to be very exclusive, but that’s changing. Seeing a guy get 3,500 hits or more will never be done again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No chance 10 guys get to 500 homers by 2045.

[Skipscards]

Originally Posted by JoshMN

It was never impossible to get 30% of 500 HRs in the dead ball era. Babe Ruth started in the dead ball era and proved that wrong. Prior to Babe Ruth, the players either weren't good enough or didn't take the right approach to hit HR. The strongest men of that time trended towards boxing or riding horses, which were more popular sports than baseball back then.

Based on your comment history, you likely started watching baseball in the dead ball era, so you should know this already.

In the deadball era, Babe led the league in HRs with 11 and in the final season of the deadball era with 29. While he would have probably exceeded 150 HRs, the All-Time record was 138. Babe is the only player who possibly could have done it during the deadball era.

Regardless of 30%, no one could have joined the 500 club in the deadball era.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

No chance 10 guys get to 500 homers by 2045.

I think 4 of the 6 guys Reggie Bush listed will get there in the next 5 years or so. Another 6 guys in the next 15 years is certainly possible. I think we will be lucky to see one guy get to 3000 over the next 5-10 years.

The last 100 years, there have been more 500 HR club guys than 3000 hit club guys. The last 25 years it has been 12-9 in favor of 500 HRs. With the way analytics is changing the game, you are going to see that gap get wider.