Baseball; the Last Great American Pastime by Edward Drobinski - HTML preview

Baseball; the Last Great American Pastime

Page 334

#23- A Dead Ball?

Allow me to start this subject with the recognition that

while they were playing, if you asked any of the players in the

“dead ball era” if they were playing with a dead ball they

wouldn’t know what you were talking about. The ball became

officially dead only in retrospect.

I was amazed at the relative run production during the

“Dead ball” era which is said to have ended around 1920. That

the ball was indeed dead in some manner, shape, or form, is the

overwhelming expert opinion; though there is a minority case; a

small one anyway. Just re-consider the average runs per game

recorded in the 1910’s and 1920’s. Yes, they are lower than most

decades, but not as much as one might have expected. Especially

on the high end, the 5.21 RPG of the 1910’s is second only to

the 5.55 of the 1930’s. Look at the “Decade Highs and Lows of

Runs and Home Runs” chart in the “The Stats” chapter, and you’ll

see that average runs scored in the 1890’s is higher than any

other decade.

What happened? Nobody was hitting home runs; yet more runs

were scored in this “Dead ball” decade than in any other, and by

a handsome margin. The low pitcher’s ERA’s of the time have to

have more to do with the “errors” scored, which was previously

discussed, than the actual run production.

Baseball; the Last Great American Pastime

Page 335

As a curiosity I’ll merely mention that the highest number

of runs per game occurred in 1871. The 10.47 average was

recorded in the same season as one of the lowest recorded

average home runs per game of .19; .10 being the lowest. That

means there was one home run hit every ten games which involved

twenty teams.

In addition the later hitting slowdown did not occur in the

1970’s. It started in the 1960’s when Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Frank

Robinson and Killebrew were still in their good years and aging

Ted Williams and Musial were still around. There is another

apparently inescapable conclusion which surprised me. Run

production has some degree of a relationship with home runs; but

it is a weak one.

Compounding matters, there is a legend which says that a 38

year old Ty Cobb, forgotten in the power of Babe Ruth, said;

“There’s not a lot to hitting home runs. Practically anyone can

do it.” He then proceeded to hit five over his next two games,

on May Fifth and Sixth, 1925; a record which has not been

eclipsed, though it has been tied. On May 7 he reverted to being

the king of scientific form. The record is documented. The

verbiage is conjecture, and has been quoted in different ways.

Baseball; the Last Great American Pastime

Page 336

Once when asked to evaluate Ruth; Cobb said; “He doesn’t

run too bad for a fat man.” Though that statement may be viewed

as harsh, it is also consistent with someone evaluating what is

to come in terms of what they have experienced.

So what is this “dead ball?” What is its truth and

relevance in the Great American Pastime? Let me begin this by

saying that no baseball ever found has been proven to be more

“dead” than its 2016 counterpart. Sure, there are differing

rates of wear and tear, but there are no meaningful differences

which can be clearly attributed to the original state of the

ball. Yet, the overwhelming preponderance of expert baseball

opinion has concluded that prior to 1920 the ball was “dead.”

The believers in simple answers have what they consider an

open and shut case in the fact that so few home runs were hit

before the magical date of 1920. Succinctly worded attestations

to that would provide a compelling bumper sticker. However, a

minority opinion suggests that the only change made was in how

often an umpire threw a ball out of the game. Coupled with the

humanly demonstrated desire to be social, players comported

themselves toward the “scientific” game of chop-chop, as it

preceded them; and no doubt entered their minds as the most

significant of the bases upon which they would be evaluated

prior to and during pro play.

Baseball; the Last Great American Pastime

Page 337

Then along came the Babe. Initially, he was a pitcher with

serious Hall of Fame credentials. As a pitcher he wasn’t

expected to hit much, so he took the swing which he preferred;

wailing and totally unscientific. When, in later years, he was

asked where he came up with the swing, he said; “I copied it off

Shoeless Joe Jackson.”

All of a sudden towering shots were leaving the parks.

............... Hmnnnn. Either, this “dead ball” had suddenly

developed a propensity for lengthy voyages, thereby newly

adopting the moniker of Lazarus, or it was just waiting for some

innovator to give it a little bit of giddyup.

Factually, the ball got its cork center in 1910; and in the

“magic” year of 1920, it is said that the umpires started to

throw beat up balls out of the game. However, playing in 130

games, the Babe hit 29 beat up balls out of the park in 1919,

establishing a new record.

I'm no expert, but here is my best shot at an explanation

of the “Dead ball” phenomenon. Prior to 1920 the balls were

changed infrequently. A nick or a scuff on a ball will increase

its movement, but will not have any effect on its ability to

travel long distances. In all sports, the styles of play evolve

from era to era. In a more recent past, football was once almost

Baseball; the Last Great American Pastime

Page 338

entirely a running game, and pro basketball disdained breaking,

and played a “set-up” offense. So too, pre-1920 baseball played

this running, “inside” game. Fans like scoring and after peaking

in the 1890’s scoring was falling off in the next two decades.

At 215 pounds, as opposed to a “big guy” of the time weighing in

at 175, Babe just bashed ‘em and they went out when he got the

sweet spot of the bat on them. Fans loved it. It’s hard to say

if they more loved the temporarily increased scoring or watching

the long smashes fly; but I strongly suspect that it was the

latter. So, they did what they could to encourage more home runs

by more frequent changes of the ball, which likely had minimal

effect; as at first Ruth and Gehrig had virtually zero

competition. Most likely the “Dead ball” Era was based on

strategy, style of play, and player size; not the ball. Few were

hit out because no one was trying to. A home run hitter’s swing

is markedly different from that of a contact hitter.

Having said that, in fairness, here are other opinions. I

believe that the most significant come from the people who were

actually there at the time.