<$BlogRSDURL$>

Sunday, August 08, 2004

Part II - The Single Biggest Non-Trade In White Sox History

In the first post concerning the proposed trade of Joe Jackson for Babe Ruth prior to the 1920 season, I considered the relative merits of that trade. I was hesitant to come to a conclusion that Charlie Comiskey was dumb for not making that trade because it's so hard not to see the trade through the distorting effect of knowing that Ruth was the greatest hitter of all time and Jackson would be suspended after the 1920 season.

But what if Comiskey had made the trade? How would the fortunes of the White Sox and Yankees have changed? This thought experiment is simply fascinating, and I've spent a good deal of time on it.

First, obviously, you have to consider that Ruth would replace pretty much whoever was playing right field for the White Sox, or would have moved the right fielder to left field. Joe Jackson himself was a left fielder, so it seems more likely that the Sox would have shifted right fielder Nemo Liebold to left field at least for the year 1920.

After 1920, when Jackson was banned, the calculus changes somewhat. In 1921, the White Sox replaced their outfield wholesale, having acquired Harry Hooper from the Boston Red Sox for Shano Collins and Nemo Lebold prior to that season in response to the suspensions of Jackson and Happy Felsh. Hooper was an established (but not a star) player at the time, and would prove to be productive for the White Sox during his time in Chicago. Centerfield would be manned by Johnny Mostil, who also had a pretty good career for the White Sox. Bibb Falk, essentially a rookie, would play left field. This was the White Sox outfield for several years. Needless to say, adding Ruth to this outfield (and dropping Bibb Falk) would have made a dramatic improvement.

Continuing on this theme, I figured that Ruth would have replaced the following Sox outfielders during the 1920-1930 time period, and added in their (basic) runs created statistics:

YearPlayer HitsBB TB At BatsRunsCreated
1920Jackson21856336

570

147

1921Falk16737235

585

77

1922Falk14427209

483

70

1923Falk*8425129

274

87*

1924Falk18547256

526

104

1925Falk18151246

602

87

1926Barrett*11325170

368

86*

1927Barrett15952224

556

78

1928Falk*8325112

286

69*

1929Hoffman*8724122

337

57*

1930Barnes*662695

266

56*

Some of these players played fewer than a full schedule, so the Runs Created values with asterisks are adjusted to a 550-plate appearance season.

Now, for comparison, here are Ruth's 1920-30 basic runs created statistics:

Year Player Hits BB TB At Bats Runs Created Diff.
1920 Ruth 158 150 388

458

197

49

1921 Ruth 177 145 457

540

215

138

1922 Ruth 94 84 273

406

99

29

1923 Ruth 151 170 399

522

185

99

1924 Ruth 143 142 391

529

166

62

1925 Ruth 61 59 195

359

56

-31

1926 Ruth 139 144 365

495

162

76

1927 Ruth 158 137 417

540

182

104
1928 Ruth 163 137 380

536

169

101

1929 Ruth 121 72 348

499

118

60

1930 Ruth 150 136 379

518

166

109

The last column indicates how many runs Ruth would have added over the Sox players in the last chart. You can see that having Ruth in the lineup would have added an absurd number of runs to the White Sox's offense over the decade. How much difference would these runs have made to the Sox? Quite a few. I added in these runs to the White Sox's runs scored over the period, then calculated the Sox's Pythagorean record with the added runs. Over the course of the decade, I calculated the following number of additional wins for the White Sox:

Year Run Diff. Wins Diff.
1920

49

4

1921

138

13

1922

29

3

1923

99

13

1924

62

6

1925

-31

-3

1926

76

7

1927

104

10

1928

101

10

1929

60

6

1930

109

13

I did the same with the Yankees (assuming they would replace Ruth with someone of the White Sox-level of production) to calculate their wins as well. Based on this analysis, I determined that, had the trade been made, all other things being equal, the White Sox would have won the 1920 and 1923 AL pennants. The net wins/losses generated by the trade would have had the leagues look like this:

1920 Actual1920 Ruth Effect 1
CLE98 56 CHI 100 54
CHI 96 58 CLE 98 56
NYY 95 59 NYY 91 63
STL 77 77 STL 77 77
BOS 72 81 BOS 72 81
WAS 68 84 WAS 68 84
DET 61 93 DET 61 93
PHA 48 106 PHA 48 106


1926 Actual1926 Ruth Effect 1
NYY91 63 CHW 88 65
CLE 88 66 CLE 88 66
PHA 83 67 PHA 83 67
WAS 81 69 NYY 82 72
CHW 81 72 WAS 81 69
DET 79 75 DET 79 75
STL 62 92 STL 62 92
BOS 46 107 BOS 46 107

Now, mind you, the 1926 White Sox would have had to make up the game that was rained out that year to decide the AL pennant, but you can see the difference Ruth would have made.

But Ruth's effect on the Sox would likely have transcended his own production on the field. Ruth would have drawn hordes of people to Comiskey Park. This level of attendance would have warranted, nay, demanded that Comiskey try to obtain additional pitching and hitting help for the White Sox. As was seen by the sale of Ruth (and before that, the sale of the 1915 Philadelphia A's star players) players could be bought from other teams in that era with relative ease. There is no reason to believe that the Sox couldn't have picked up additional talent (perhaps by trading a young player like Bibb Falk, etc.). By the same token, the Yankees would not have had Ruth as a draw, thereby limiting their own ability to purchase additional players.

So I ran the analysis again assuming that the White Sox would have added players who would have (a) created 40 more runs per year; and (b) allowed 40 fewer runs per year. This is a relative reasonable upgrade in production - it's the equivalent of having Carlos Lee in the outfield instead of Timo Perez, or upgrading two positions half as much. On the pitching side, the analysis would probably be about the same. Again, after adding Ruth and the +40/-40 differential to the White Sox, I calculated the number of wins they would have using the pythagorean method. I did the same for the Yankees.

In the aggregate, the "Ruth plus" factor dramatically affects the fortunes of the White Sox and the rest of the American League in the 1920's. Instead of winning the AL Pennant in 1920 and 1926, the Sox also win it in 1923, meaning the Sox win the AL pennant in 3 of the 11 years. The Philadelphia A's, who won the Pennant in 1929 and 1930 anyway, win it through the course of 1928-30. The St. Louis Browns, of all teams, claim the 1922 pennant, and the Cleveland Indians pick up the 1921 flag. The Senators keep the AL pennants in 1924 and 1925. The Yankees' sole pennant comes in 1927, when they manage to squeak out a victory by 5 games over the Philadelphia A's.

Here are the actual and hypothetical Ruth-adjusted standings for the entire period of 1920-1930:

1920 Actual 1920 Ruth Effect 2
CLE 98 56 CHI 100 54
CHI 96 58 CLE 98 56
NYY 95 59 NYY 91 63
STL 77 77 STL 77 77
BOS 72 81 BOS 72 81
WAS 68 84 WAS 68 84
DET 61 93 DET 61 93
PHA 48 106 PHA 48 106

1921 Actual 1921 Ruth Effect 2
NYY 98 55 CLE 94 60
CLE 94 60 CHW 82 72
STL 81 73 NYY 81 72
WAS 80 73 STL 81 73
BOS 75 79 WAS 80 73
DET 71 82 BOS 75 79
CHW 62 92 DET 71 82
PHA 53 100 PHA 53 100

1922 Actual 1922 Ruth Effect 2
NYY 94 60 STL 93 61
STL 93 61 CHW 88 66
DET 79 75 NYY 83 71
CLE 78 76 DET 79 75
CHW 77 77 CLE 78 76
WAS 69 85 WAS 69 85
PHA 65 89 PHA 65 89
BOS 61 93 BOS 61 93

1923 Actual 1923 Ruth Effect 2
NYY 98 54 CHW 89 65
DET 83 71 DET 83 71
CLE 82 71 CLE 82 71
WAS 75 78 NYY 77 75
STL 74 78 WAS 75 78
PHA 69 83 STL 74 78
CHW 69 85 PHA 69 83
BOS 61 91 BOS 61 91

1924 Actual 1924 Ruth Effect 2
WAS 92 62 WAS 92 62
NYY 89 63 DET 86 68
DET 86 68 CHW 78 75
STL 74 78 NYY 76 76
PHA 71 81 STL 74 78
CLE 67 86 PHA 71 81
BOS 67 87 CLE 67 86
CHW 66 87 BOS 67 87

1925 Actual 1925 Ruth Effect 2
WAS 96 55 WAS 96 55
PHL 88 64 PHL 88 64
STL 82 71 CHW 83 71
DET 81 73 STL 82 71
CHW 79 75 DET 81 73
CLE 70 84 CLE 70 84
NYY 69 85 NYY 64 90
BOS 47 105 BOS 47 105

1926 Actual 1926 Ruth Effect 2
NYY 91 63 CHW 95 58
CLE 88 66 CLE 88 66
PHA 83 67 PHA 83 67
WAS 81 69 WAS 81 69
CHW 81 72 DET 79 75
DET 79 75 NYY 74 80
STL 62 92 STL 62 92
BOS 46 107 BOS 46 107

1927 Actual 1927 Ruth Effect 2
NYY 110 44 NYY 96 58
PHA 91 63 PHA 91 63
WAS 85 69 CHW 88 65
DET 82 71 WAS 85 69
CHW 70 83 DET 82 71
CLE 66 87 CLE 66 87
STL 59 94 STL 59 94
BOS 51 103 BOS 51 103

1928 Actual 1928 Ruth Effect 2
NYY 101 53 PHA 98 55
PHA 98 55 CHW 90 64
STL 82 72 NYY 83 71
WAS 75 79 STL 82 72
CHW 72 82 WAS 75 79
DET 68 86 DET 68 86
CLE 62 92 CLE 62 92
BOS 57 96 BOS 57 96

1929 Actual 1929 Ruth Effect 2
PHA 104 46 PHA 104 46
NYY 88 66 CLE 81 71
CLE 81 71 STL 79 73
STL 79 73 NYY 75 79
WAS 71 81 CHW 73 79
DET 70 84 WAS 71 81
CHW 59 93 DET 70 84
BOS 58 96 BOS 58 96

1930 Actual 1930 Ruth Effect 2
PHA 104 50 PHA 104 50
WAS 94 60 WAS 94 60
NYY 86 68 CHW 81 73
CLE 81 73 CLE 81 73
DET 75 79 DET 75 79
STL 64 90 NYY 70 84
CHW 62 92 STL 64 90
BOS 52 102 BOS 52 102

As you can see, my analysis (which I'm sure has about 1000 holes, like any counterfactual analysis) suggests that had the White Sox trade Joe Jackson for Babe Ruth, they would have had a terrific decade of the 1920's. They would have won back-to-back pennants in 1919 and 1920, then gone right back to the World Series in 1923 and 1926 - four pennants in eight seasons from 1919 to 1926. In the other years, they would have been competitive for the league title, finishing second in 1921 and 1922. They would have faded in the late 1920's, and perhaps Ruth would have been ripe for a trade by that time.

This whole thought experiment has been very interesting to me, and I hope you, dear readers, got a kick out of it, too. We are so pennant-starved as White Sox fans that it's nice even to think about adding hypothetical flags in the past. Who knows, the success of the 1920's, with Ruth as a drawing card, may have built up the Sox organization and they could have been, if not the Yankees, the St. Louis Cardinals. A team competitive throughout the years and with many legends and memories.

But we have what we have. Broken dreams and two pennants in 85 years.


// posted by SuperNoVa @ 5:22 PM
Comments-[ comments.]
Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?