The greatest eye of all time

[PepperMartin]

Who had the greatest batting eye in the history of the game? The answer is obvious but not well-known: Max "Camera Eye" Bishop.

Camera Eye batted leadoff for the Philadelphia Athletics dynasty of the late 1920s and early 1930s.

Consider the following:

Bishop hit only 41 HR in his 12-year career and was a lifetime .271 hitter. Not exactly dangerous. Moreover, during his prime years, the 3-4-5 hitters in his lineup were future Hall of Famers Mickey Cochrane, Al Simmons and Jimmie Foxx, and perennial .300 hitter Mule Haas was in the 2-spot.

With this in mind, the last thing a pitcher wanted to do was walk Max Bishop. And yet, almost unbelievably, over his career Camera Eye drew 1 walk per 5.01 plate appearances - the third highest rate in MLB history! Ahead of him are only Ted Williams (1 BB per 4.84 PA) and Barry Bonds (1 BB per 4.97 PA).

But Williams and Bonds drew their walks not only because of a good batting eye but because they were pitched around. In Bishop's case his batting eye was the sole reason for his walks, and so he indisputably had the greatest batting eye in the history of the game.

He is 13th on the career OBP list, and 2nd among leadoff hitters behind Eddie Collins. Although he did not steal bases, it is now generally accepted that OBP is a more important indicator of leadoff hitters than base stealing. Base stealing is even less important when the next three guys in the lineup combine for 119 doubles, as was the case with Haas, Cochrane and Simmons in 1929. So it's probably fair to say that Camera Eye Bishop is the most underrated leadoff man of all time.

[Wade8813]

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing the info. I wouldn't say it's undisputed, but it's certainly a reasonable case if everything you said is true.

[west coast orange and black]

28. gimme the three players with the all-time best bases-on-balls percentages.

ted williams
barry bonds
max “camera eye" bishop

very nice work, pepper.

[TRfromBR]

My brother played ball for the Naval Academy, home of Max Bishop Field.

I'm not absolutey positive, but I think Bishop was also Roger Staubach's Baseball Coach. Staubach was a great collegiate baseball player, too.

But I had no idea he was that great at setting the table for all those studs on the A's.

REALLY interesting & informative post, Pepper. Shows how sabermetrics makes such great contributions to baseball history.

[flash143817]

I agree completely with the choice of Bishop. He was the name that came to mind as soon as I saw the thread title, and for the reasons you mentioned.

Another name to throw out there is Eddie Yost, aka "The Walking Man". He was a career .254 hitter with only decent power of 11 HR per 162, yet he managed to average 124 walks per 162 games for his career. One of those rare players like Bishop whose walking made up a gigantic portion of his offensive value.

A third name to consider is Donie Bush. He led the league in walks 5 times and averaged 96 per 162 despite being a .250 hitter with all of 9 career HR and a whopping .300 SLG.

The final name that comes to mind is Eddie Stanky. Here was a 5'8" career .268 hitter that walked once every 5.45 PA. He hit a random 14 HR in one year but other that that fluke year averaged about 1 HR a season. No reason whatsoever for pitchers to fear him, yet he averaged 128 walks per 162.

Honorable mention goes to Roy Thomas and to the original Moneyballer...Jack Crooks, he of the .240 career BA and the 124 walks per 162...in the 1890s!

[Paul McCartney]

I've heard a story that Frank Thomas when he was younger would bet his batting coach a soda that he could get within one mile per hour of how fast the pitches thrown to him were. Big Hurt and Bonds are the modern guys I immediately think of when this topic comes up.

[iPod]

I am continually perplexed by players like Max Bishop, for the exact reason you mention. There seems almost no reason to pitch around them, since there is virtually no risk of being homered upon, yet somehow they got huge numbers of walks. You'd think after a while, pitchers would have gotten fed up with this and started throwing them nothing but fastballs down the middle: after all, worst case scenario is he singles off me. Roy Thomas, Miller Huggins, Eddie Stanky, Donie Bush, and Eddie Yost (Kerry's favorite Red Sock) also fit this description; in other words, this player model isn't totally unique, it's been done several times.

Donie Bush may be a good challenger. His walk rates aren't as high as Bishop's, but he was regularly among the league leaders in stolen bases, which Bishop wasn't. This seems like it would be even further incentive not to walk him, as if consistently slugging under .300 and being on the same team as Cobb and Crawford weren't enough.

[MadHatter]

I am continually perplexed by players like Max Bishop, for the exact reason you mention. There seems almost no reason to pitch around them, since there is virtually no risk of being homered upon, yet somehow they got huge numbers of walks. You'd think after a while, pitchers would have gotten fed up with this and started throwing them nothing but fastballs down the middle: after all, worst case scenario is he singles off me.

Unless the player with the good batting-eye just starts wearing out the pitcher by fouling off good pitch after good pitch looking for a ball.

[Seattle1]

But Williams and Bonds drew their walks not only because of a good batting eye but because they were pitched around. In Bishop's case his batting eye was the sole reason for his walks, and so he indisputably had the greatest batting eye in the history of the game.


That's pretty cool!

:nod:

[varybarry]

Bishop was a good hitter, as well as Cobb, but I don't believe anyone can say there is one greatest hitter or the best eye of all time, because each player brings something to the table that the other doesn't.

[Yankwood]

Gotta be Eddie Gaedel.

[leftypitcher934]

how do i start my own bulletins bout my own topic i only know how to reply

[TonyK]

Fouling off pitches and having great eyes made me think of Joe Sewell. He was never a leader in walks, but he led the AL nine years in a row in the Most At Bats Per Strikeouts. He only struck out 114 times in his career (7,132 career AB's) while walking 842 times. I'm not sure if his Walks to Strikeouts ratio is the all-time best or not.

You need a great pair of eyes and excellent bat control to be able to avoid striking out. In 1925 Sewell struck out only 4 times in 608 At Bats.

[LouGehrig]

I am continually perplexed by players like Max Bishop, for the exact reason you mention. There seems almost no reason to pitch around them, since there is virtually no risk of being homered upon, yet somehow they got huge numbers of walks. You'd think after a while, pitchers would have gotten fed up with this and started throwing them nothing but fastballs down the middle: after all, worst case scenario is he singles off me. Roy Thomas, Miller Huggins, Eddie Stanky, Donie Bush, and Eddie Yost (Kerry's favorite Red Sock) also fit this description; in other words, this player model isn't totally unique, it's been done several times.

Donie Bush may be a good challenger. His walk rates aren't as high as Bishop's, but he was regularly among the league leaders in stolen bases, which Bishop wasn't. This seems like it would be even further incentive not to walk him, as if consistently slugging under .300 and being on the same team as Cobb and Crawford weren't enough.

I watched or listened to many of Yost's games. What is significant is that Bishop, Yost, and a few others went to the plate with the sole objective of getting a walk. I saw or heard games in which Yost would continually foul off strikes, not trying to hit them fair but just trying not to miss them, in order to get the walk.

Most players, and probably ALL players today do not want a walk. When Yost played, few batters would swing 2-0 or 3-1, regardless of the situation. They would take, and no one mentioned, if they were even aware, of how many pitches a batter saw in his at bat.

Richie Ashburn walked a lot, but he also hit a lot of singles. He went up there trying to reach by a walk or single. Bishop and Yost went up trying to walk.

[Dodgerfan1]

When Yost played, few batters would swing 2-0 or 3-1, regardless of the situation. They would take, and no one mentioned, if they were even aware, of how many pitches a batter saw in his at at.

I would imagine the main reason that pitch counts weren't kept in those days is because pitchers were capable of completing a game throwing 130 pitches or more, if necessary, without blowing out an elbow or shoulder. In this day and age of short relief specialists, pitchers and coaches don't seem to feel the need to properly train in order to go beyond 90-100 pitches without getting injured or missing a day or two in the rotation.

[bluezebra]

When Ted Williams joined the Navy's Flight Training program in WWII, the doctors said that he had the greatest vision of anyone they had ever tested.

Just before the 1946 Spring Training season started, Ted met with Joe Cronin, the BoSox manager, at Fenway Park. While standing at home plate, he told Cronin that the plate was 1/4" off-line. The next day, Cronin brought in a surveyor, who verified the variance.

Bob

[THE OX]

The largely forgotten Roy Cullenbine, whose career was only about 10 years in length back in the late 1930s-1940s had about one walk every 5.5 PA's!

[Chisox]

Fouling off pitches and having great eyes made me think of Joe Sewell. He was never a leader in walks, but he led the AL nine years in a row in the Most At Bats Per Strikeouts. He only struck out 114 times in his career (7,132 career AB's) while walking 842 times. I'm not sure if his Walks to Strikeouts ratio is the all-time best or not.

You need a great pair of eyes and excellent bat control to be able to avoid striking out. In 1925 Sewell struck out only 4 times in 608 At Bats.

I don't have my notes in front of me, but I can assure you that he is. He's also the leader in just about everything/strikeout, including walks/strike-outs by a very large margin. I think his average is about 33 (H+BB+HBP) for every k.

[Chisox]

how do i start my own bulletins bout my own topic i only know how to reply

If you're asking how to start your own thread, up in the upper-left corner of the forum is a button called "New Thread."