Tm | Lg | YEAR | G | AB | R | H | BB | SO | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | SB | CS | BA | OBP | SLG | BB% | SO% | BABIP | G/L/F % | $4x4 | $5x5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NY1 | NL | 1951 | 121 | 464 | 59 | 127 | 57 | 60 | 22 | 5 | 20 | 68 | 7 | 4 | .274 | .356 | .472 | 11 | 11 | .279 | n/a | ||
NY1 | NL | 1952 | 34 | 127 | 17 | 30 | 16 | 17 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 23 | 4 | 1 | .236 | .326 | .409 | 11 | 12 | .245 | n/a | ||
NY1 | NL | 1954 | 151 | 565 | 119 | 195 | 66 | 57 | 33 | 13 | 41 | 110 | 8 | 5 | .345 | .411 | .667 | 10 | 9 | .325 | n/a | ||
NY1 | NL | 1955 | 152 | 580 | 123 | 185 | 79 | 60 | 18 | 13 | 51 | 127 | 24 | 4 | .319 | .400 | .659 | 12 | 9 | .282 | n/a | ||
NY1 | NL | 1956 | 152 | 578 | 101 | 171 | 68 | 65 | 27 | 8 | 36 | 84 | 40 | 10 | .296 | .369 | .557 | 10 | 10 | .281 | n/a | ||
NY1 | NL | 1957 | 152 | 585 | 112 | 195 | 76 | 62 | 26 | 20 | 35 | 97 | 38 | 19 | .333 | .407 | .626 | 11 | 9 | .324 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1958 | 152 | 600 | 121 | 208 | 78 | 56 | 33 | 11 | 29 | 96 | 31 | 6 | .347 | .419 | .583 | 11 | 8 | .344 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1959 | 151 | 575 | 125 | 180 | 65 | 58 | 43 | 5 | 34 | 104 | 27 | 4 | .313 | .381 | .583 | 10 | 9 | .299 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1960 | 153 | 595 | 107 | 190 | 61 | 70 | 29 | 12 | 29 | 103 | 25 | 10 | .319 | .381 | .555 | 9 | 10 | .319 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1961 | 154 | 572 | 129 | 176 | 81 | 77 | 32 | 3 | 40 | 123 | 18 | 9 | .308 | .393 | .584 | 12 | 12 | .296 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1962 | 162 | 621 | 130 | 189 | 78 | 85 | 36 | 5 | 49 | 141 | 18 | 2 | .304 | .384 | .615 | 11 | 12 | .286 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1963 | 157 | 596 | 115 | 187 | 66 | 83 | 32 | 7 | 38 | 103 | 8 | 3 | .314 | .380 | .582 | 10 | 12 | .309 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1964 | 157 | 578 | 121 | 171 | 82 | 72 | 21 | 9 | 47 | 111 | 19 | 5 | .296 | .383 | .607 | 12 | 11 | .268 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1965 | 157 | 558 | 118 | 177 | 76 | 71 | 21 | 3 | 52 | 112 | 9 | 4 | .317 | .398 | .645 | 12 | 11 | .286 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1966 | 152 | 552 | 99 | 159 | 70 | 81 | 29 | 4 | 37 | 103 | 5 | 1 | .288 | .368 | .556 | 11 | 13 | .279 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1967 | 141 | 486 | 83 | 128 | 51 | 92 | 22 | 2 | 22 | 70 | 6 | 0 | .263 | .334 | .453 | 9 | 17 | .283 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1968 | 148 | 498 | 84 | 144 | 67 | 81 | 20 | 5 | 23 | 79 | 12 | 6 | .289 | .372 | .488 | 12 | 14 | .302 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1969 | 117 | 403 | 64 | 114 | 49 | 71 | 17 | 3 | 13 | 58 | 6 | 2 | .283 | .362 | .437 | 11 | 15 | .313 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1970 | 139 | 478 | 94 | 139 | 79 | 90 | 15 | 2 | 28 | 83 | 5 | 0 | .291 | .390 | .506 | 14 | 16 | .303 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1971 | 136 | 417 | 82 | 113 | 112 | 123 | 24 | 5 | 18 | 61 | 23 | 3 | .271 | .425 | .482 | 21 | 23 | .339 | n/a | ||
SF | NL | 1972 | 19 | 49 | 8 | 9 | 17 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | .184 | .394 | .224 | 25 | 8 | .205 | n/a | ||
NYN | NL | 1972 | 69 | 195 | 27 | 52 | 43 | 43 | 9 | 1 | 8 | 19 | 1 | 5 | .267 | .402 | .446 | 18 | 18 | .306 | n/a | ||
NYN | NL | 1973 | 66 | 209 | 24 | 44 | 27 | 47 | 10 | 0 | 6 | 25 | 1 | 0 | .211 | .303 | .344 | 11 | 20 | .242 | n/a | ||
Career | 22yrs | 2992 | 10881 | 2062 | 3283 | 1464 | 1526 | 523 | 140 | 660 | 1903 | 338 | 103 | .302 | .384 | .557 | 12 | 12 | .299 | n/a |
Welcome! You are invited to wander around and read all of the comments that have been posted here at Patton & Co., but as soon as you register you can see the bid limits that Alex, Peter and Mike propose for each player, and you can post your own comments. Registering is free, so please join us!
That said, there was lots of weather at Candlestick, and it wasn't always the same. The wind was mostly (though not always -- ask Ed Lynch, who once had his hat blown to the fence in a night game) in the summer afternoons, when the fog would roll in around 2:30, 3:00. At night, more often it was just cold. And wet. Seems plausible that homers would be depressed in that kind of weather.
They built the stands all the way around in 1971/72 (when the 49ers moved from Kezar) -- then the wind just swirled, instead of blowing in from left. I went a lot more often once it was enclosed, but I suspect it was always a pitchers' park. The game we always played was, what if Mays and Aaron had switched home parks?
Oh, and re 1962 -- there was a little forgettable movie called the Steagle, where Richard Benjamin played a teacher who cracks up during the Cuban missile crisis. It manifested with him putting Mays's numbers on the chalkboard and wondering how he could have been cheated out of the MVP award. (Which of course wouldn't have been awarded yet in October . . .)
Mar 1 '10
Say what?
The Stick, which I only had the masochistic pleasure of experiencing once, was certainly the worst stadium in baseball. But was it the worst hitter's stadium -- specifically, for Willie Mays?
My impression was that he learned to ride the trade winds out to right center. The switch from the Polo Grounds to Candlestick may have been a blessing.
If it was, in this day and age it doesn't have to be disguised. Bill James or Pete Palmer or Baseball Prospectus or someone at SABR could quickly get to the bottom of this. And maybe already has.
My down and dirty search finds that Willie slugged .619 in the Polo Grounds and .563 at Candlestick, but that clearly isn't the final word.
If you're wondering, he slugged .903 -- .903! -- in Ebbets Field. In 165 AB he had 25 homers! Four doubles and two triples.
In 3044 AB in Candlestick, he had 19 triples. In 1374 AB in the Polo Grounds, he had 28 triples. Such a shame, really, that the Giants moved.
Playing in Seals Stadium in 1958, he slugged .585. The next year, the last in Seals, he slugged .535.
In 1960, the first year in Candlestick, he slugged .509.
Then .582.
Then .683.
Willie was getting the hang of it.
But that was 1962, an expansion year.
On the other hand -- bizarrely enough -- the NL slugging average was actually lower in 1962 than in 1961.
As I say, we need Pete Palmer.
For now, let's just leave it that Willie was not robbed of one hundred career homers by playing in Candlestick. No way. Not possible.
But suppose he was?
Barry Bonds would be two ahead of him right now on the career homer list.
That would hurt.
Mar 1 '10