Best Single Season Ever (Statistically) for a Player

[JP]

I've often wondered what single season performance should be considered the best ever, keeping in mind the relation to peers' performance and the era in which the numbers were produced. (No, I don't want to hear a bunch of garbage about how Bonds shouldn't be considered because of the doubt around whether he had "help", etc.) Numbers only.

Just off the top of my head (though I had to look up the specific years) I'd rank them:

#1 Ty Cobb - 1911
#2 Jimmie Foxx - 1932
#3 Rogers Hornsby - 1922
#4 Babe Ruth - 1921
#5 Hack Wilson - 1930
#6 Joe DiMaggio - 1937

I'm ignoring things like Ted Williams in 1941 (when he hit .406) because it wasn't THAT impressive in relation to his peers, he had the 5th most hits, 4th most RBIs, 3rd most total bases, etc.

Anyone have a list of their own?

[PolarBear]

How about George Sisler in 1922.

[toppcat]

How about Lefty Grove, 1931?

[dennis]

mantle in 1956
bonds 2001-2004

[JP]

Originally Posted by PolarBear

How about George Sisler in 1922.

I don't think that he can be considered at all, not even close. In fact, I've got Hornsby in 1922 already on my list. Sisler had 128 points less in slugging %, 102 less total bases, 47 less RBIs, and on and on.

Hornsby led the majors (both leagues combined) that year in slugging %, OBPS, runs, hits, total bases, home runs, runs created, adj. batting runs, adj. batting wins, extra base hits, times on base, off. win %, and was SECOND in batting average, doubles and RBIs. Sisler is miles behind in most of those categories.

Originally Posted by dennis

mantle in 1956
bonds 2001-2004

Mantle 1956 is a great one...definitely belongs on the list. Bonds 2001 or 2002 maybe, but not all 4 years...

[drc]

I agree with JP. Bonds and his personal trainer should be eligible for this thread.

[CW]

Lou Gehrig in 1934 deserves consideration, and possibly Gehrig, 1931 as well.

edit: Just checked his stats for 1934 and it shows Lou led the league in games,
HR, RBI, BA, OBP, SLG, TB (total bases), and was 2nd in hits with 210. And
he only finished 5th in MVP voting that year!

[Bridwell]

Ruth's numbers in 1920 and 1921 are awesome. In 1920 he hit 54 homers, and the 2nd best player had only 19. No other American League Team hit more than 50 homers, so Ruth out-homered every other TEAM.

In 1921, he bumped it up to 59 homers. 2nd place had only 24.

Wow.

Ron

[fkw]

#1 will always be

1920 Babe Ruth ........ Out Homered every other team in baseball except 1.

[rhettyeakley]

Where's the love for Ruth beng only #4? How in the world do you have Foxx in '32 ahead of Ruth in any of the following 3 years...1920, 1921, and 1923? Especially when considering the performance of their peers during those same years with the 1930's being known as being especially friendly to hitters.
-Rhett

[Robextend]

Some good ones were already mentioned, but how about:

Walter Johnson - 1913
Babe Ruth - 1926-1931
Lou Gehrig - 1927
Joe Medwick - 1937
Hank Greenberg - 1938
Bob Gibson - 1968

[timber63401]

Pedro in 1999.

[hunterdutchess]

1911 21 CLE AL 147 641 571 126 233 45 19 7 83 41 56 .408 .468 .590 1.058
Hit .400 in first full season in the big leagues. Best season ever!!!!!!!!!!!

[M's_Fan]

Just a suggestion: list the player's stats for the year, so we don't have to look up what each player did that year. Or if it is non-statistical, briefly make your argument.

[hunterdutchess]

On this topic I just wanted to give a little love to a ball palyer who is mostly forgotten, look at Tommy Holmes 1945 season....

Year Age Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB BB SO BA OBP SLG
1945 28 BSN NL 154 636 125 224 47 6 28 117 15 70 9 .352 .420 .577

9 strike outs in 634 at bats.....WOW! There is alot of talk abot Dimaggio, Ripken, and Aaron's records but 1so per 70ab's that will never happen again!

[JP]

I don't give a lot of love to Ruth for 1920-1921 because HRs was really the only category where he was destroying people (and teams). At the time it wasn't something people were really going for. Small ball was king.

[rhettyeakley]

That's the wierdest rationale I've ever heard, so no love for Ruth in 1920-21 for doing everything better than Foxx did in 1932 because Ruth was doing things nobody else had ever done (and that is a bad thing)?

Year Age Tm Lg G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ TB
1920 25 NYY AL 142 616 458 158 172 36 9 54 137 14 14 150 80 .376 .532 .847 1.379 255 388
1921 26 NYY AL 152 693 540 177 204 44 16 59 171 17 13 145 81 .378 .512 .846 1.359 239 457
1923 28 NYY AL 152 699 522 151 205 45 13 41 131 17 21 170 93 .393 .545 .764 1.309 239 399
1932 24 PHA AL 154 701 585 151 213 33 9 58 169 3 7 116 96 .364 .469 .749 1.218 205 438

[rhettyeakley]

Chris, that AB to K ratio is great! Check out Joe Sewell--he did that essentially for his entire career! Then check out what he did after he "got the hang of Major League pitching" from seasons #6-14!!!
-Rhett

[ChiefBenderForever]

Originally Posted by timber63401

Pedro in 1999.

Mn star trib writer La Velle E. Neal refused to vote for him out of spite and cost Pedro the MVP , he was so proud and openly bragged about his vote being the difference I have hated him ever since.

[hunterdutchess]

Wow! Joe Sewell's strike out numbers are just awsome. I have heard of him but had no idea of his eye at the plate! Thanks Rhett, I think I will be looking out for a Sewell card in the near future for my collection!

[Bridwell]

I'm with you, Rhett. Ruth's numbers are amazing. JP, take a look at Ruth's runs, RBI, walks, slugging avg. and total bases for 1920-21 & 1923. Better than Foxx during a lower scoring decade.

I love the small ball, too, but Ruth's domination is hard to ignore.

Ron

[Baseball Rarities]

Originally Posted by JP

I don't give a lot of love to Ruth for 1920-1921 because HRs was really the only category where he was destroying people (and teams). At the time it wasn't something people were really going for. Small ball was king.

Wow, that is a weird way to look at it. Even if you ignore HRs, he batted over .370 in both seasons, led the League in On Base %, Slugging %, RBIs, Walks and Runs. In 1921 his On Base % was 60 points higher than anyone else, his Slugging % was 240 points higher than #2, he scored 45 more runs than the next guy, knocked in 32 more runs and walked 42 more times! Besides SBs (he was tied for 8th), what category would you have liked him to excel in?

[alanu]

I'd look at all the triple crown winners and start there

[Robbie]

Steve Carlton - 1972
27 wins on a lousy team that won only 59 games. Oh...he also led the league in ERA (1.97) and strikeouts (310)! Easily the Cy Young winner.

[glchen]

Yea, I was thinking of Carlton too since he practically won half of his team's games.

[deadballpaul]

1908 for Ed Walsh was a great year. Not saying it was the best, but pretty amazing.

[JP]

You can't even automatically consider triple crown winners. Most of them beat the next guy by just a couple rbis, hrs, or runs. The greatest statistical performance has to standout above and beyond everyone else by a wide margin. So maybe a pitcher is more likely than a player?

[barrysloate]

Ruth in 1921- best offensive season ever.

[wpeters]

I interviewed Joe Sewell years ago at a Hall of Fame induction ceremony. He said he learned to play by hitting rocks with a broomstick. So hitting baseballs with a bat was a piece of cake.

[obcbobd]

Originally Posted by JP

I don't give a lot of love to Ruth for 1920-1921 because HRs was really the only category where he was destroying people (and teams). At the time it wasn't something people were really going for. Small ball was king.

Take a closer look at what he did against the rest of the league in for examle 1920
http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...-leaders.shtml

His Slugging was 200 points higher than the 2nd place finisher, his On Base % was 50 points higher than anyone else. He scored 21 more runs than anyone else and had 15 more RBIs. He offensively dominated the league.

[tedzan]

Joe P says......

" I don't give a lot of love to Ruth for 1920-1921 because HRs was really the only category where he was des-
troying people (and teams). At the time it wasn't something people were really going for. Small ball was king."

Tell us what you are smoking ?


Ruth combined "Small Ball" with "Big Ball" in 1921. If the opposition hadn't WALKED him 145 times, who knows
what else Ruth would have accomplished in 1921 ?

Check-out these numbers......

AB's........540
HITs........204
BA......... .378
BB's.........145
HR's..........59
2B's..........44
3B's..........16
Runs........177
RBI..........171
SlAvg...... .846

And, he only struck-out 81 times.

Single season STAT's like these are unequalled in the history of BB.


TED Z

[barrysloate]

I'm with Ted all the way. Just look at the runs and RBI's- it ends right there!

P.S.- Ruth hit .378, not .387.

[Abravefan11]

I agree with Ted and Barry, definitely Ruth.

[bbcard1]

What about 1963 Buster Narum with 1-1 and a homer (1.000 BA).

[tedzan]

The best single-season pitching performance has to be Chesbro's 1904 season. Here are the STAT's......

Games.........55

WON...........41
LOST...........12
W/L %..... .774

ERA..........1.82

K's............239
BB's............88


Unfortunately, Chesbro blew the game against Boston on the last day of the 1904 season. This resulted
in no World Series that year, since McGraw and his NY Giants refused to play it vs. Boston.


TED Z

[scooter729]

I know stats from this era don't compare apples to apples now, but I will forever be amazed by Ol' Hoss Radbourn's 1884 stat line. Although when did his win total get changed from 60 down to 59?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...adboch01.shtml

Year 5 Age Tm Lg W L W-L% ERA G GS GF CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO HBP BK WP BF ERA+ WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB Awards
1884 29 PRO NL 59 12 .831 1.38 75 73 2 73 11 1 678.2 528 216 104 18 98 441 0 34 2672 207 0.922 7.0 0.2 1.3 5.8 4.50

W-L: 59-12
W-L%: .831
ERA: 1.38
Games: 75
Complete Games: 73
Innings: 678.2
Strikeouts: 441

[martyogelvie]

It's hard for me to wrap my brain around what Ruth was doing in 1920/21. It's hard to argue he put up the greatest statistical season ever, but for me.. the seasons that made a more lasting impact on me are the ones I witnessed.. like;
Foster in '77 - 52 HRs
Guidry in '78 - 1.74 ERA, 25-3 win/loss
Brett '80 when he hit .390
Hershiser in '88 with 59 scoreless innings

at the time, watching Big Mac and Sosa in the HR chase in '98 was the greatest baseball event I had witnessed..

[milkit1]

Lets not forget Joe Wood's 1912 season

[judsonhamlin]

Going old school - how about Ross Barnes in 1876? Led the league in almost all offensive categories and scored 1.91 runs per game. In context of the league and year, he was as dominating as anyone.

[Robextend]

I still don't think Walter Johnson's 1913 season is getting enough recognition in this discussion:

W L W-L% ERA G GS GF CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO
36 7 .837 1.14 48 36 10 29 11 2 346.0 232 56 44 9 38 243

36 Wins, 1.14 ERA and 124 less hits than IP. Definitely has to be in the discussion.

[Al C.risafulli]

While I think it's romantic to discuss the people in this thread, and that it shows adequate respect for the history of the game that we all love, I honestly don't think there's a question that Barry Bonds' 2004 season is the best statistical season of all time for a hitter.

Bonds' OPS that season was 1.4217 - the highest of all time (Bonds actually had three of the top five and four of the top 10 of all time). His on base percentage that year was .609 - the only time in any season in the history of baseball that a player got on base more than 60% of the time.

Think about that. 60% of the times Bonds got up to bat, he got on base.

Bonds hit a whopping .362 that season, with a slugging percentage of .821 - fourth best of all time. He drew a ridiculous 232 walks that year - the only time a player has ever drawn more than 200 walks in a season. Of those 232 walks, 120 of them were intentional. ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY INTENTIONAL WALKS. As far as single seasons go, that's 75 more walks than anyone not named Bonds ever received in a season. That should speak to the utter dominance of the man, and how feared he was as a hitter - one hundred and twenty times, opposing managers decided it would be less damaging to give him a free pass and put him on base than to take the risk of having him swing the bat.

Bonds racked up 303 total bases that year, hitting 45 home runs and driving in 101. He scored 129 runs, and only struck out 41 times in 617 plate appearances.

I'd go as far as to say that Bonds' 2002 season is probably the second-best statistical season ever, his 2001 season and 1993 seasons were also outstanding.

Is he my favorite player? No. Did he use steroids? Sure, but so did all the rest of the competition he faced. He's impossible to like, and acknowledging his greatness flies in the face of everything that vintage baseball fans love about the game, but his 2004 season was magic.

-Al

[Peter_Spaeth]

I agree with Al -- if we are talking pure statistics, especially from the Bill James school, Bonds' two seasons are unrivaled.

There are lots of candidates for pitching, but for me it's hard to top Gibby's 1.12. How the hell did he lose 9 games?

[insidethewrapper]

I think Hack Wilson must have been on more than just alcohol in 1930. 191 RBI's with 56 Home Runs, 208 hits, 105 walks with a .723 slugging percentage. That was a good year.

[barrysloate]

I also thought of Bonds' prime seasons but the asterisk next to his name is too large. But if he is in contention, I would have gone with 2002 as his best season, with 2001 and 2004 a close second.

Clearly he had a string of seasons that were statistically unrivalled, although the king for a five year stretch is probably Hornsby from 1921-25, when he averaged .403 for half a decade!

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by Al C.risafulli

While I think it's romantic to discuss the people in this thread, and that it shows adequate respect for the history of the game that we all love, I honestly don't think there's a question that Barry Bonds' 2004 season is the best statistical season of all time for a hitter.

Bonds' OPS that season was 1.4217 - the highest of all time (Bonds actually had three of the top five and four of the top 10 of all time). His on base percentage that year was .609 - the only time in any season in the history of baseball that a player got on base more than 60% of the time.

Think about that. 60% of the times Bonds got up to bat, he got on base.

Bonds hit a whopping .362 that season, with a slugging percentage of .821 - fourth best of all time. He drew a ridiculous 232 walks that year - the only time a player has ever drawn more than 200 walks in a season. Of those 232 walks, 120 of them were intentional. ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY INTENTIONAL WALKS. As far as single seasons go, that's 75 more walks than anyone not named Bonds ever received in a season. That should speak to the utter dominance of the man, and how feared he was as a hitter - one hundred and twenty times, opposing managers decided it would be less damaging to give him a free pass and put him on base than to take the risk of having him swing the bat.

Bonds racked up 303 total bases that year, hitting 45 home runs and driving in 101. He scored 129 runs, and only struck out 41 times in 617 plate appearances.

I'd go as far as to say that Bonds' 2002 season is probably the second-best statistical season ever, his 2001 season and 1993 seasons were also outstanding.

Is he my favorite player? No. Did he use steroids? Sure, but so did all the rest of the competition he faced. He's impossible to like, and acknowledging his greatness flies in the face of everything that vintage baseball fans love about the game, but his 2004 season was magic.

-Al

And a few people, including the OP, didn't even have that season in their top-6. I know this is a vintage forum, but come on.

[fkw]

I agree with Bonds, but he was my fav player, so didnt bring it up



Pitchers
Gibson 1968 season, 13 shutouts, 1.12 ERA
Koufax 1963-66 seasons, hard to pick one

[drdduet]

While Ruth had the two greatest offensive seasons ever, Rogers Hornsby was just a lick behind. In 1922 Hornsby hit .401, 250 hits, 46 doubles, and scored 141 runs with 152 RBI, and put up similar numbers in 1925. Talk about your forgotten greats...

[Touch'EmAll]

I know there are no official stats, but:

Satchell Paige must have had some year that was off the chart.

And in 1973, Nolan Ryan had not one, but TWO no-hitters, AND broke Koufax's single season strikeout record with 383. Heaven forbid if Ryan played on a winning team - can you say 30 wins to boot?

[PolarBear]

Originally Posted by Al C.risafulli

While I think it's romantic to discuss the people in this thread, and that it shows adequate respect for the history of the game that we all love, I honestly don't think there's a question that Barry Bonds' 2004 season is the best statistical season of all time for a hitter.

Bonds' OPS that season was 1.4217 - the highest of all time (Bonds actually had three of the top five and four of the top 10 of all time). His on base percentage that year was .609 - the only time in any season in the history of baseball that a player got on base more than 60% of the time.

Think about that. 60% of the times Bonds got up to bat, he got on base.

Bonds hit a whopping .362 that season, with a slugging percentage of .821 - fourth best of all time. He drew a ridiculous 232 walks that year - the only time a player has ever drawn more than 200 walks in a season. Of those 232 walks, 120 of them were intentional. ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY INTENTIONAL WALKS. As far as single seasons go, that's 75 more walks than anyone not named Bonds ever received in a season. That should speak to the utter dominance of the man, and how feared he was as a hitter - one hundred and twenty times, opposing managers decided it would be less damaging to give him a free pass and put him on base than to take the risk of having him swing the bat.

Bonds racked up 303 total bases that year, hitting 45 home runs and driving in 101. He scored 129 runs, and only struck out 41 times in 617 plate appearances.

I'd go as far as to say that Bonds' 2002 season is probably the second-best statistical season ever, his 2001 season and 1993 seasons were also outstanding.

Is he my favorite player? No. Did he use steroids? Sure, but so did all the rest of the competition he faced. He's impossible to like, and acknowledging his greatness flies in the face of everything that vintage baseball fans love about the game, but his 2004 season was magic.

-Al

Sorry, 'roid fueled stats don't count.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Babe Ruth, 1921:

In addition to his 59 home-runs in '21, Ruth hit the following home-runs:
4 barnstorming,
5 exhibition,
1 spring tour
7 spring training

At the Polo Grounds in '21, Ruth smacked many (probably more than 20) balls to the monstrous portions of the field that resulted in long fly-outs instead of home-runs. 12 or more dingers were right center to opposite field.

During away games, Ruth bombed 15 or more home-runs ranging from opposite field to right center.

Also, the foul rules were different back then, which eliminated some of his possible home-runs to the short porches...

And don't forget, Ruth was a heck of a bunter during his career, with seven bunt hits in 1921, and nearly 50 in his career. Remember pitchers pitching around Bonds? Imagine what they did with Ruth. I've read that he belted several HR while swinging at pitches well out of the strike zone.

He stole 17 bases in '21, with 59 HR and an .846 slugging %! Babe was a fast runner early in his career and a fine fielder as well. Oh, and one of the best left-handed pitchers during that era.

For this mid-20s, photo, The Babe snatched a tree out of the ground to take his hack! Even with the flaws, it's one of my favorite cards:



Considering the totality of the circumstances, IMO Ruth's '21 season was the best ever for any player, and his career was the best ever for any player. There's a reason anybody and everybody, baseball fan or not, even today, recognizes the name Babe Ruth. It is what it is.

Try this book: The year babe Ruth Hit 104 Home Runs, by Bill Jenkinson
It's a great book with HR charts, field dimensions, spray charts, HR lists, season narratives, generation to generation comparisons, etc.