Greatest Home Run Hitter

[AstrosFan]

Just a series of polls, in the Bill Burgess tradition, in which we will vote for the greatest home run hitters of all time. Any baseball player is eligible, not just MLB players. Let the voting begin for number one.

[Bill Burgess]

Alright, I'll bite. I'll go with the obvious choice, Babe Ruth. The only hitter to hit more HRs than Babe per PA, Mark McGwire, had 3,000 less PAs than Babe. And that makes a big difference. Decline ordinarily lowers one's rate stats.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/ABpHR_career.shtml

[Blackout]

AT THEIR PEAKS:

babe ruth
lou gehrig
josh gibson
alex rodriguez (3 50 home runs seasons)
hack wilson (when sober)
barry bonds*
hank aaron
ralph kiner
mickey mantle
ty cobb (when he wanted to ofcourse)

[frehleyscomet]

They say Willie Stargell probably would have had 600+ home runs if he wouldnt had played half his years at forbes field, which had the longest outfield in baseball.

[KCGHOST]

As I like to say there is only one Babe.

[2Chance]

Wow, how many years have I been here and you finally got me to vote Babe Ruth for something!

Sure, I thought about Josh Gibson, but in this area, Ruth is the man.

[whoisonit]

Of course it's Ruth, but I voted for Hammerin Hank anyway. This guy needs some respect !

[White Knight]

Big Mac by a full at-bat.

[White Knight]

AT THEIR PEAKS:

babe ruth
lou gehrig
josh gibson
alex rodriguez (3 50 home runs seasons)
hack wilson (when sober)
barry bonds*
hank aaron
ralph kiner
mickey mantle
ty cobb (when he wanted to ofcourse)

If you're going to list Bonds, why not McGwire?

[Blackout]

If you're going to list Bonds, why not McGwire?

beacuse i wanted to make room for Ty Cobb

[White Knight]

beacuse i wanted to make room for Ty Cobb

You can list both. With the POSSIBE exception to Babe Ruth, I personally believe Mac is far greater a HR hitter than anyone on any list.

[AstrosFan]

Just so you know, you can nominate players for the next round. It looks like Ruth is running away with this one, so I may ask a mod to close it before 2/18 so we can move on.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Big Mac by a full at-bat.

I assume your speaking of AB/HR ratio. Mac at 10.61 and Babe at 11.76.
I would think that one stat can't settle the issue, there is more to look at.

Some other numbers that have a bearing on the matter.
-----------------At bats-------------Plate appearance
Ruth--------------8399----------------10,616
Mac--------------6187------------------7,660
Difference...........2212......................... 2,956

You can see that Ruth maintained his AB/HR ratio over a far longer period. Ruth has more at bats than Mac has plate appearances.

Also Ruth spent his first 3 seasons (1915-1917) as a pitcher only batting every 4th or 5th day not the best for maintaining a hitters timing. Add to that his first 6 seasons (1914-1919) in the dead ball era also hitting against trick deliveries and hitting a ball that was left in the game for many innings.
We may omit 1914 since he played so little in MLB.

If you look at his AB/HR ratio from the time he became an everyday player 1920-1935 he is at 10.96.

Mac hit 65 and 70, Ruth's highest 59 and 60. In the mid 1990s baseball changed, the ball, the strike zone and home runs were flying out of parks like never before 50 and 60 home runs were hit like never before. Mac made his biggest gains in that time period starting in 1996. before that he topped 40 in only two other seasons.

Seasons with 50 or more....Mac---4 seasons.....Ruth---4 seasons
Seasons with 40 or more....Mac---6 seasons.....Ruth---11 seasons a record.

Consider this Ruth never hit 40 until his 7th season yet he hit 40 more times than any other hitter, Killebrew, Aaron and Bonds all with 8 seasons.

Ruth never hit 50 until his 7th season and he hit 50 four times, as many as any other hitter.

After his first 6 seasons in MLB he had only 49 career home runs and yet he is only the third hitter to hit 700+.

Two flukes cost him another 50 and 60 home run season.

1921 A fan deflected a ball hit into the stands back on to the field. Ruth was sent back to second base. He hit 59 that season, could have been 60. Today the ground rule is fan interference, a home run.
1930, twice at shibe Park he hit balls that cleared the wall but struck speaker supports, he was given a double. That season he finished with 49 home runs and it could have been 51.

Respect to Mac and all the other great sluggers but Ruth is in his own world when it comes to all around home run hitting. Never anyone as consistent over a whole career. The bulk of his home run hitting came after the 1919 season when he became an every day player.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Respect to Mac and all the other great sluggers but Ruth is in his own world when it comes to all around home run hitting.

Well put. Not even a question. Even a non-clean Mac isn't very close.

[Blackout]

You can list both. With the POSSIBE exception to Babe Ruth, I personally believe Mac is far greater a HR hitter than anyone on any list.

sure but it was SO much easier to hit home runs inthe late 90s and early 00's than at ANY point in time, even 1920

[White Knight]

I assume your speaking of AB/HR ratio. Mac at 10.61 and Babe at 11.76.
I would think that one stat can't settle the issue, there is more to look at.

Some other numbers that have a bearing on the matter.
-----------------At bats-------------Plate appearance
Ruth--------------8399----------------10,616
Mac--------------6187------------------7,660
Difference...........2212......................... 2,956

You can see that Ruth maintained his AB/HR ratio over a far longer period. Ruth has more at bats than Mac has plate appearances.

Also Ruth spent his first 3 seasons (1915-1917) as a pitcher only batting every 4th or 5th day not the best for maintaining a hitters timing. Add to that his first 6 seasons (1914-1919) in the dead ball era also hitting against trick deliveries and hitting a ball that was left in the game for many innings.
We may omit 1914 since he played so little in MLB.

If you look at his AB/HR ratio from the time he became an everyday player 1920-1935 he is at 10.96.

Mac hit 65 and 70, Ruth's highest 59 and 60. In the mid 1990s baseball changed, the ball, the strike zone and home runs were flying out of parks like never before 50 and 60 home runs were hit like never before. Mac made his biggest gains in that time period starting in 1996. before that he topped 40 in only two other seasons.

Seasons with 50 or more....Mac---4 seasons.....Ruth---4 seasons
Seasons with 40 or more....Mac---6 seasons.....Ruth---11 seasons a record.

Consider this Ruth never hit 40 until his 7th season yet he hit 40 more times than any other hitter, Killebrew, Aaron and Bonds all with 8 seasons.

Ruth never hit 50 until his 7th season and he hit 50 four times, as many as any other hitter.

After his first 6 seasons in MLB he had only 49 career home runs and yet he is only the third hitter to hit 700+.

Two flukes cost him another 50 and 60 home run season.

1921 A fan deflected a ball hit into the stands back on to the field. Ruth was sent back to second base. He hit 59 that season, could have been 60. Today the ground rule is fan interference, a home run.
1930, twice at shibe Park he hit balls that cleared the wall but struck speaker supports, he was given a double. That season he finished with 49 home runs and it could have been 51.

Respect to Mac and all the other great sluggers but Ruth is in his own world when it comes to all around home run hitting. Never anyone as consistent over a whole career. The bulk of his home run hitting came after the 1919 season when he became an every day player.

There are lots of counter-arguements to be made. Sure the game changed with the strike zone and all. But it can also be argued that pitchers were far greater in the 90's than the 20's or 30's. Would Ruth have been able to hit 60 HR's if he went in a time warp in '27 and came out in '98? Not without serious adjusting.

You also ignore the fact that Mac his 50+ four years in a row. No one's ever done that before. He also had 49 as a rookie. One more dinger and he'd have hit 50 five times. He also hit 39 twice. His best two HR years are also far ahead of Ruth's best. Even when you take away Ruth's years as a pitcher, his ratio is still below Mac's.

Did those "flukes" you mention in 1921 and 1930 happen when Ruth already had 59 and 49 HR's? Because if they happened mid-season or something, it means nothing at all. For example, let's say a player finishes the season with 53 HR's. On August 1st, one of his HR's was wrongly mistaken for a fowl. Next pitch he grounds out. Now, there is no way to prove that because of that robbed HR, he would have ended the season with 54. Little things in life can change an entire course of things. He may have still ended up with 53 if that ball was ruled. Or he may have hit 60. Or even 48. Him getting pissed off for the bad call may have made him try harder. When you try harder to hit more HR's, you either hit more or less. Of course, if Ruth's bad HR calls were when he already had 49 and 39, then my arguement is invalad. Only then would he have definatly hit 50 and 40.

BTW, how many multi-HR games did Ruth and Mac have? Anyone know?

[SHOELESSJOE3]

BTW, how many multi-HR games did Ruth and Mac have? Anyone know?



I can tell you that in regular season play Babe Ruth had 72 multiple home run games. In second place is Barry Bonds not sure but I believe he has 70 or 71, I am sure he does not have 72, Ruth still has the most. Mac just a guess, probably some where in the high 50s.

As a Red Sox he hit only 3 multiple home run games which means he had 68 in only 16 seasons( 1920-1935) as a Yankee.

Again this is what separates Ruth from all home run hitters, he did little in the dead ball era as a pitcher and part time pitcher 1914-1919 most of his HR hitting was done in his last 16 seasons, for that matter almost all of 1914 was in the minor leagues.

Only 3 multiple HR games after 6 seasons------his 72 is the most.
No 40 HR sesaons after his first 6 seasons-----his 11 is the most.
No 50 HR seasons after his first 6 seasons-----his 50 is tied for the most.
Only 49 career HRs after 6 seaons in MLB------Only 3 have reached 700

It's not even close when you look at the whole picture.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

[QUOTE=White Knight;1113292]There are lots of counter-arguements to be made. Sure the game changed with the strike zone and all. But it can also be argued that pitchers were far greater in the 90's than the 20's or 30's. Would Ruth have been able to hit 60 HR's if he went in a time warp in '27 and came out in '98? Not without serious adjusting.

[QUOTE]


It's certainly not a stretch to believe a big strong guy, by the way with great reflexes and powerful wrists like Ruth could hit as many as the big guys in todays game. It's not only a smaller strike zone but a different ball and overall smaller parks.

Before you thow out the "short porch' in right field at Yankee Stadium I ask you to look at the rest of that park on the right side to center field.

RF---------------------------------------297 Ft
Deep right center power ally area---------429 Ft
Center field------------------------------487 Ft
Just to the left of center field------------493 Ft

He may have poked some down that line, very few most were hit deep( NY Times archives) but for sure many long drives to RCF and CF turned in to long fly outs.

[MadHatter]

Ruth is running away with this poll. Would be interesting to me to see if people think Hank Aaron or Barry Bonds was a bettr Home Run hitter.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

There are lots of counter-arguements to be made. Sure the game changed with the strike zone and all. But it can also be argued that pitchers were far greater in the 90's than the 20's or 30's. Would Ruth have been able to hit 60 HR's if he went in a time warp in '27 and came out in '98? Not without serious adjusting.

You also ignore the fact that Mac his 50+ four years in a row. No one's ever done that before. He also had 49 as a rookie. One more dinger and he'd have hit 50 five times. He also hit 39 twice. His best two HR years are also far ahead of Ruth's best. Even when you take away Ruth's years as a pitcher, his ratio is still below Mac's.

Did those "flukes" you mention in 1921 and 1930 happen when Ruth already had 59 and 49 HR's? Because if they happened mid-season or something, it means nothing at all. For example, let's say a player finishes the season with 53 HR's. On August 1st, one of his HR's was wrongly mistaken for a fowl. Next pitch he grounds out. Now, there is no way to prove that because of that robbed HR, he would have ended the season with 54. Little things in life can change an entire course of things. He may have still ended up with 53 if that ball was ruled. Or he may have hit 60. Or even 48. Him getting pissed off for the bad call may have made him try harder. When you try harder to hit more HR's, you either hit more or less. Of course, if Ruth's bad HR calls were when he already had 49 and 39, then my arguement is invalad. Only then would he have definatly hit 50 and 40.

BTW, how many multi-HR games did Ruth and Mac have? Anyone know?

I didn't ignore the fact that Mac's 50 hr seasons were consecutive, I saw no reason to make that distinction.

Look at the figures, the time period. Most of Mac's gains came after 1995 when MLB hitters began hitting home runs out of parks like never before. There was talk of bringing balance back to the game, the ball was suspect and some lab tests showed the 1990s ball to be out of MLB specs. There was talk about the shrinking strike zone, lower than ever. Of course nothing was done, Bud Selig was not only the commisioner but also an owner. Why would he end the phony home run derby, attendance was up and baseball is not only a game it's a busine$$.

Mac 1986-1995------AB 3659----HR-277----AB/HR 13.20
Mac 1996-2001------AB 2528----HR-304----AB/HR 8.3

Evident Mac cashed in after some changes in the game in the mid 1990s. Not to take away from him a great home run hitter and he wasn't the only one to benefit.

From 1980-1989 an entire decade there were 13 hitters with 40 or more home run seasons.

In one season in the 1990s decade--1996 there were 17 hitters with 40 or more.

There was only one or two teams in the AL in the seasons of 1990-91-92-93 with 200 home runs. In only one season in the same decade---1996 there was 7 teams with 200 home runs thats in the AL alone. Evidence changes in the game had swung the balance in favor of the hitters. Hitters do not get that much bigger and stronger in such a short period of time.

Mac had a number of seasons before 1996 where he had close to 500 at bats bit under and over and he never hit 50.

Ruth was far more consistent after he became an everyday player in 1920. Mac was not spectacular before 1995 and he certainly made the most gains like all of baseball did in the mid 1990s.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Did those "flukes" you mention in 1921 and 1930 happen when Ruth already had 59 and 49 HR's? Because if they happened mid-season or something, it means nothing at all. For example, let's say a player finishes the season with 53 HR's. On August 1st, one of his HR's was wrongly mistaken for a fowl. Next pitch he grounds out. Now, there is no way to prove that because of that robbed HR, he would have ended the season with 54. Little things in life can change an entire course of things. He may have still ended up with 53 if that ball was ruled. Or he may have hit 60. Or even 48. Him getting pissed off for the bad call may have made him try harder. When you try harder to hit more HR's, you either hit more or less. Of course, if Ruth's bad HR calls were when he already had 49 and 39, then my arguement is invalad. Only then would he have definatly hit 50 and 40.

BTW, how many multi-HR games did Ruth and Mac have? Anyone know?


Those flukes were before he had 59 in 1921 and before he had 49 in 1930. But now we're trying to get into Ruth's mental state if I read your post correctly and I see no way we could do that. No way to tell how it played on his mind. Impossible to really know.

One thing we can do that can't be debated, the math. He hit 59 in 1921 and lost one home run. He lost two home runs in 1930 and ended up with 49.

[AstrosFan]

It looks like a rout for the Babe. Why don't we close this poll so I can get the next one open. Before that happens, if there is anyone you would like to see on the next poll who wasn't on this one, let me know.

[Captain Cold Nose]

For what they did during their time, I wouldn't mind seeing Gaavy Cravath or the Williams twins, Ken and Cy. Yes, I know Ken and Cy Williams were not really twins.

[csh19792001]

There are lots of counter-arguements to be made. Sure the game changed with the strike zone and all. But it can also be argued that pitchers were far greater in the 90's than the 20's or 30's. Would Ruth have been able to hit 60 HR's if he went in a time warp in '27 and came out in '98? Not without serious adjusting.

You bet your *** he would have been able to hit 60 in the modern game. The average park was 50 feet deeper to center field and the power alleys ON AVERAGE, offsetting the pitching advantage he enjoyed. Add to that, the entire game has shifted in favor of the HR hitter.

Have you read The Year Babe Ruth Hit 104 Home Runs: Recrowning Baseball's Greatest Slugger (http://www.amazon.com/Year-Babe-Ruth-Home-Runs/dp/0786719060)?

The Jenkinson book is a good place to start. Anyone who reads this book, along with the posts from our esteemed members ShoelessJoe3, Sultan1895-1948, and TRfromBR, will gain IMMENSE appreciation for what Ruth did- and more importantly- what he was capable of doing in terms of slugging.



BTW, how many multi-HR games did Ruth and Mac have? Anyone know?


Barry Bonds had his 70th career multi-homer game on Friday. He is two behind Babe Ruth's record of 72. The top 10:


Most Multiple HR Games (Career)
1 Babe Ruth 72
2 Barry Bonds 70
3 Sammy Sosa 68
4 Mark McGwire 67
5 Willie Mays 63
6 Hank Aaron 62
7 Jimmie Foxx 55
8 Frank Robinson 54
9 Ken Griffey 53
10 Eddie Mathews 49
T10. Mel Ott 49

[SHOELESSJOE3]

For what they did during their time, I wouldn't mind seeing Gaavy Cravath or the Williams twins, Ken and Cy. Yes, I know Ken and Cy Williams were not really twins.


Gavvy did put up some good numbers in the dead ball era 19 home runs in 1913 and 1914 and 24 in 1915, career 119 home runs , 1908-1920. I guess the fact that he played in tiny Baker Bowl takes something away from him.

At Baker Bowl 1912-1920 he hit 92 home runs and 25 on the road, two were IPHs. Now Baker was very short in right field 281 but a good distance to left 342. What I'm wondering did he master the art of hitting to right field since he was a RH batter at 186 pounds. However difficult to line one to that short RF with that 60 foot high fence. He would have to put some lift on drives to RF.

Baker Bowl LF 342--LCF-359--CF-408--RCF-300--RF-281

[csh19792001]

Moreover...

Average MLB wall distances from home plate for the 1910's-30's, when Ruth hit his homers.

Left Field Line: 345
Left Center: 401
Center Field: 453
Right Center: 371
Right Field Line: 318

2007
Left Field Line 331.6
Left Center 371.5
Center Field 403.7
Right Center 371
Left Field Line 328

Where it counts- and where most HR are hit (in the power alleys and to CF), it's a joke looking at Ruth's parks vs. those of today.

Even more importantly, consider that Babe's home park dimensions from 1923 on were 490 to center and 460 to left center. 99% of MLB players could EVER hit a ball for a HR in those confines.

I know I've posted this several times before, but consider that Ruth was NOT a dead pull hitter, and consider what he had to face at Yankee Stadium in light of the facts below regarding Yankee Stadium:



From: The Year Babe Ruth Hit 104 Home Runs, by Bill Jenkinson:

For example, Joe DiMaggio was acutely handicapped by playing at Yankee Stadium. Every time he batted in his home field during his entire career, he did so knowing that it was physically impossible for him to hit a home run to the half of the field directly in front of him. That's right! If you look at a baseball field from foul line to foul line, it has a 90-degree radius. From the power alley in left center field (430 in Joe's time) to the fence in deep right center field (407 feet), it is 45-degrees. And Joe DiMaggio never hit a single home run over the fences at Yankee Stadium in that 45-degree graveyard. It was just too far. Joe was plenty strong; he routinely hit balls in the 425-foot range. But that just wasn't good enough in cavernous Yankee Stadium. Like Ruth, he benefited from a few easy homers each season due to the short foul line distances. But he lost many more than he gained by constantly hitting long fly outs toward center field. Whereas most sluggers perform better on their home fields, Joe D hit only 41 percent of his career home runs in the Bronx. In his day, DiMaggio recorded 148 homers at Yankee Stadium. If he had hit the same exact pattern of batted balls with a typical modern stadium as his home, he would have belted about 225 homers during his home field career.

Which would bring his total to roughly 440 homeruns in 13 seasons.

Author/statistician Michael Schell confirms this with his research in this book:

Baseball's All-Time Best Sluggers: Adjusted Batting Performance from Strikeouts to Home Runs (http://www.amazon.com/Baseballs-All-Time-Best-Sluggers-Performance/dp/0691115575)

Consider that it took nearly 70 years- including 43 years with the 162 game schedule and drastically reduced left field dimensions in 1976- for another right handed Yankee hitter to hit 40 homeruns (Dimaggio hit 46 in 1937, Rodriguez hit 48 in 2005).

Michael Schell calculated (based on the right handed park effects for Yankee Stadium) that ceteris paribus, Dimaggio would have had about 429 career homeruns. Obviously it's a projection, but clearly a very well substantiated one based on all of the information available on Yankee Stadium and right handed hitters in the old Yankee Stadium. Not coincidentally, according to Schell (p. 289), from 1946-73 Yankee right handed hitters hit only 37% of their homeruns at home.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

AT THEIR PEAKS:

babe ruth
lou gehrig
josh gibson
alex rodriguez (3 50 home runs seasons)
hack wilson (when sober)
barry bonds*
hank aaron
ralph kiner
mickey mantle
ty cobb (when he wanted to ofcourse)

One of these things is not like the others...

Why in the world would you consider Ty Cobb a great "home run hitter"??? Oh, I see! You clarified by saying "when he wanted". Well Ty Cobb never "wanted" to hit more than 12 home runs in a season, including the eight seasons he played after Babe Ruth's first 50 homer campaign. Best pure hitter ever? He has a good case. Best baserunner ever? Perhaps. But best home run hitter ever? Ty Cobb belongs nowhere near this discussion. I might have let it slide if you had said Honus Wagner (although probably not), simply because he retired before anyone had ever hit 30 home runs in a season, but, if you absolutely have to list a dead ball era guy, then Frank "Home Run" Baker is your man.

Dave Kingman had the best plate discipline of all time (when he wanted, of course).

PS - Like everyone else has already said, the answer is Babe Ruth and the real question is "who's number two?" My answer would be either Mark McGwire, Barry Bonds, or perhaps Hank Aaron, if you're looking for durability/consistency.

[Frank]

1.Babe Ruth
2.Ralph Kiner

[AstrosFan]

Thanks for reminding me. I need to get the second poll open.