|
| St. Louis Sports Online |
One of the magical aspects of baseball is the degree to which its most important statistics are ingrained in the minds of its fans.
In the wake of Mark McGwire's staggering accomplishments in the just-completed 1998 regular season, the number "70" now takes on new significance.
So, too, with the number "66" (Sammy Sosa's '98 HR total).
In fact, not only will the numbers "1998", "70",
and "66" be linked forevermore (at least in the minds
of the world's baseball fans), so will the names McGwire and Sosa.
But Mac and Sammy provided the world's baseball fans with more
than just memorable numbers.
Together, their efforts in 1998 provided even the most blase of sports fans with a drawerful of recollections that will last well into the next century.
But one of the unpleasant side effects of the McGwire-Sosa home run derby was the unfortunate talk that racism played a role in media coverage that, in the opinion of some, was slanted Mac's way.
And it wasn't just the nation's baseball media that was accused of racial and/or ethnic bias in the home run derby of 1998.
Heck, it was written (and said) on more than one occasion that fans, and even players, also chose up sides (Mac or Sammy?) mainly on the basis of race and/or ethnicity, in what some referred to as "The Chase for Maris".
For example, late in the season, Cardinals CF Ray Lankford was asked if he had a preference in the home run derby...Mac or Sammy.
Ever-polite, Lankford refused to favor his teammate McGwire,
saying--
"Well, I'm not in it. I think what Sammy and Mark are
doing...is good. You know, it's kind of like the best man wins...you're
supporting both of them...if it ends up a tie...I think Sammy
would be just as happy because they both made this season an exciting
season."
Do those statements indicate some sort of bias against McGwire, on the part of Lankford, a black man?
You make the call.
Or how about LHP Donovan Osborne, a white man, sitting within two feet of Lankford, stating his own preference just seconds after Lankford said his piece?
"I would like Mac to get it."
Is Osborne's statement indicative of bias against Sosa, a black Latino, on his part?
Once again...you make the call.
The fact of the matter is, most folks decide these sorts of things on their own, anyway.
But just as trying to decide whether a Greg Maddux pitch at the knees and "on the black" is a strike or a ball can be a difficult matter, where fair-minded Americans stand on a specific issue that has a racial component is at once personal, complicated, and at times impossible to describe.
In fact, it is likely that not even Lankford and Osborne know, or could even adequately explain, for sure, how they themselves feel about these subjects.
After all, most issues pertaining to race, in these United States, in 1998, are very complicated...and in some senses, outside the lines of what your average sports columnist is qualified to tackle.
Cardinals manager Tony La Russa probably agrees with that assessment, especially in the context of the McGwire-Sosa "controversy".
La Russa, when made aware of it all, chimed in early and often on the Mac/Sammy bias subject.
Ever forceful, La Russa said that those who felt that there were racial motivations behind, for example, the fact that Mac's image graced more magazine covers than Sammy, didn't know what they were talking about.
Said La Russa: "People know Mark as a home run hitter. Sammy is the better all-around player, and this year, should probably be MVP. This talk...by people who should know better...is wrong...and unfair to both players..."
At the time he made those statements, it seemed that La Russa was acutely aware of how even a tiny whiff of racism could diminish what he felt was the purity of the Maris chase.
In other words, the Cardinals manager desired that the attention of the world's baseball fans be focused on the accomplishments of the two players involved--and not diluted by various issues that, in the minds of many, are hard to qualify, and even harder to quantify.
Consider Tony La Russa's explanation for the media coverage--that "People know Mark as a home run hitter".
Indeed, that assertion was backed up by both Lankford (" Mark...he's always hit for power. This year he's just hitting more home runs than he has [before]") and Osborne ("[Mac's] a power hitter...he's a home run hitter...and he always has been").
Can the statement that Mark McGwire is known as a home run hitter--can that be backed up with statistics?
Statistics, the facts of baseball, are, for the most part, unarguable numbers.
Are there any Mark McGwire statistics that provide unambiguous evidence for the assertion that people know him, and remember him, as a home run hitter?
Well, you can start with his one homer for every 7+ at-bats in 1998...but let's go in a slightly different direction.
In 1998, Mac clubbed 70 homers but managed but 61 singles.
If you must, read those numbers again. And ponder them.
70 HRs; 61 singles...meaning that, when Mac came to the plate in 1998, he was more likely to hit the ball over the fence than he was to hit a single.
No wonder concession stands were virtually empty when Mac came to the plate in '98.
Such a homer-to-single ratio was accomplished only one other time in baseball history (by a player appearing in more than 100 games).
That other occasion?
Mark McGwire, in 1995, had 39 homers and only 35 singles.
And when combined with his stats in 1996 (52 homers; 59 singles) and 1997 (58 homers; 63 singles), a four year trend is clear: in the past four baseball seasons combined (1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998), Mark McGwire hit more home runs (219) than singles (218).
In other words, over a four year stretch, Big Mac was able to accomplish something that no other player could accomplish even for a single season.
Roger Maris, in 1961, came closest, when his 61 homers were "blemished" by 79 singles--a homer-to-single ratio of 0.77.
And in their career home run years, Babe Ruth (60 HRs in 1927), Jimmie Foxx (58 HRs in 1932), Hack Wilson (56 HRs in 1930), and Hank Greenberg (58 HRs in 1938), could only manage HR-to-single ratios of 0.63, 0.51, 0.50, and 0.64, respectively,
As for the four year comparison, beginning with the 1961 season, Harmon Killebrew's 188 homer/312 single ratio (0.60) is closer to McGwire's HR-to-single ratio of 1.0 than any other slugger, whether it be Henry Aaron (0.50; 1970-3) , Ruth (0.56; 1927-30), Willie Mays (0.46; 1962-5), or Ralph Kiner (0.55; 1947-50).
Slammin' Sammy?
In 1998, his 66 homers were outnumbered by his 112 singles...and for the four seasons beginning in 1995, Sosa's 178 homers were more than doubled by his total of 370 singles.
And what about Mac's other slugging contemporaries, Ken Griffey and Albert Belle?
For the four seasons beginning with 1995, the HR-to-single ratios compiled by Griffey and Belle (0.57 and 0.48, respectively) pale in comparison to McGwire's.
As do everyone else's.
So Mark McGwire's reputation as the single season home run king, of all time, is deserved.
That reputation, and all that goes with it, should not be sullied by the thorny issue of race.
Long live the king.
|
