During a recent trip through the pages of baseball-reference.com, I came across a very interesting anomaly.
It was a stark and obvious statistical aberration that I had never noticed before, and it led me to similar discrepancies that in turn led to some questions. Before I pose them, let me present the information.
Cal Ripken, Jr. is a career .276 hitter. During the 1990s, he progressed through his 30s with numbers that were fairly consistent with his overall totals:
Year Age PA AVG OPS
1990 29 695 .250 .756
1991 30 717 .323 .940
1992 31 715 .251 .689
1993 32 718 .257 .748
1994** 33 484 .315 .823
1995 34 613 .262 .745
1996 35 707 .278 .807
1997 36 686 .270 .703
1998 37 659 .271 .721
1999 38 354 .340 .952
2000 39 339 .256 .763
2001 40 516 .239 .637
*OPS= On base % + Slugging %
**strike-shortened season
In looking at these numbers, there is one exception that stands out. In 1999, at the advanced age of 38, Cal Ripken Jr. posted career highs in batting average and OPS.
His average took a 70 point leap from the previous season, and his OPS skyrocketed by more than 200 points. At an age where most players are retired or serving as reserves, Ripken had the best offensive output of his entire career. A .340 average!
Now the first thing that should come to mind is,
"Yeah, but he only had about half of the typical number of plate appearances."
That's correct- 1999 was the first season in which Ripken sustained serious injuries. It marked the end of "the streak" as he sat out most of April, half of May, and all of August. And it could be that the diminished sample size (i.e. fewer plate appearances) accounts for why he was able to sustain such a high output.
However, a discrepancy of this size is pretty unusual, even for a guy like Ripken who had previously enjoyed a handful of "boom seasons" where his totals spiked to exceed his typical performance (e.g. 1991).
Moreover, the man was 38 years old with an unprecedented amount of mileage on him. It was by any measure an odd time to have the best performance of one's life.
And there's more. Looking at Ripken's splits for 1999, an interesting pattern emerges.
April: .179 avg/ .457 OPS
May: .279 avg/ .897 OPS
June: .352 avg/ .945 OPS
July: .413 avg/ 1.179 OPS
Sept/ Oct: .365 avg/ .961 OPS
(To put this perspective, an OPS of greater than .900 is typically the realm of elite hitters like Albert Pujols.)
Ripken was hobbled in April and early May, during which he played a combined 24 games. Yet when he returned from injury he almost immediately began performing at a level that exceeded anything he had previosuly done at the plate.
Just as suddenly, he was injured again, missing all of August. And yet his second return, in September, was just as successful.
___________________________________
What's my point?
In looking at these numbers, I found myself asking this question:
How does a 38 year old man with a lot of wear and tear suddenly bust out his best offensive showing ever, despite being seriously injured for the first time in his career?
Thinking about that question led me to this one:
Is it meaningful that this happened in 1999, the year after McGwire and Sosa combined for 113 home runs?
I know, I know...to even consider that a baseball Golden Boy like the Ironman did something to aid his performance or recovery is tantamount to blasphemy...but nevertheless, the increase in production is pretty damn large to be accounted for by a "hot streak" or some other natural variance.
In an attempt to explain it, I began looking at other players. In the same year, Rickey Henderson, another future Hall of Fame superstar, turned 40. Despite reaching that milestone, Henderson enjoyed an amazing offensive resurgence of his own as evidenced by the numbers below:
Year Age OPS
1996 37 .754
1997 38 .742
1998 39 .723
1999 40 .889
2000 41 .673
2001 42 .717
2002 43 .721
2003 44 .627
With the exception of the final two years, Henderson had 400+ plate appearances in each season, providing large enough sample sizes for comparison purposes. Note that his OPS in 1999 was his highest since the end of his "prime" (age 34) in 1993.
Rickey's OPS jumped more than 160 points from 1998 to 1999, yet immediately dropped back down the following year.
Again, I was forced to ask myself a question:
How does a 40 man suddenly elevate his offensive production to a level not seen since his prime?
My first thought was that perhaps offense in general was up that year. Many of you may recall discussions about the baseball being "juiced". Could there have been an overall increase in offensive production?
In the National League (where Rickey was playing), both runs and home runs did increase substantially from 1998 to 1999. However, those global totals stayed higher in 2000 and 2001 as well...Rickey's individual performace did not.
This seems to suggest that his offensive spike was not necessarily a result of league-wide production.
In the American League, there was no significant increase in offense at all. 1999 run and home run totals were consistent with the numbers throughout the 90s, as well as the totals posted in 2000 and 2001.
Again, this suggests that Ripken's numbers cannot be attributed to some larger phenomenon.
So if Ripken's and Henderson's aberrant performance cannot be accounted for by overall trends, and if they're too extreme to be reflective of random variations in performance, how can they be explained? Two players, both at ages that typically involve substantial declines, suddenly bust out. And there may be others beyond these two- I'm still checking through the numbers.
To be clear, I'm not accusing Ripken or Henderson of using PEDs. But the numbers are very interesting. Could it be a coincidence? Sure. But the timing, the patterns, the ages...it makes me wonder. We're in a time where every "power hitter" is under suspicion and scrutiny. Should we not examine other players as well? At the least, it's an interesting phenomenon worth a long look.
Danica Patrick
Chelsey Buhler
Yankees World Series Parade
Notable Cuban Defectors 
Comments (39) Add A Comment
You will burn in hell Porkins for even mentioning that the Great Cal Ripken Jr. did anything underhanded or devious!
How dare you try to besmeerch the greatest shortstop to ever play the game!
rstowe
Newport News , VA
Total Comments (47606)
On a serious note - I didn't realize this either and does bring up an interesting question.
What was one of the reasons PEDs were being used? To overcome injury quicker. And Ripken was injured in 1999, so I wouldn't be surprised if he used them "to get healthy quicker" ala Andy Pettite.
rstowe
Newport News , VA
Total Comments (47606)
If...and it's a huge IF...he did use something:
-He didn't want to mess with his body during the streak
-He had never been injured before, and thus never had the need
-Was a declining 38 year-old player at a tough position.
It wouldn't be too far fetched to see why he might consider it.
Porkins: I stole…
The Triangle, NC
Total Comments (30249)
agreed
rstowe
Newport News , VA
Total Comments (47606)
Wow Porkins you got big ones made of brass to put this out there in front of a bunch of morons. But it is very interesting and compelling ndeed and I liked it. I want to believe it is what stowe suggests, maybe, hopefully, they just pulled an Andy Pettite.
iB4e: Happy…
Austin, TX
Total Comments (8532)
That takes a different spin on some things...
Was his "Iron Man" streak just too much for him?
And since he played every game that he wasn't injured for in 1999... June and July were months that really stood out.
But look at the next year- when Ripken was 40.
1999 - 86 games/332 AB/113 hits/.340 BA/.368 OBP/.952 OPS
2000 - 83 games/309 AB/79 hits/.256 BA/.310 OBP/.763 OPS
So he is just going to have that big of a drop off when he played in 3 LESS games with 23 LESS at-bats?
I doubt it.
With looking at the stats for Ripken- I'm suspicious that he DID take a performance-enhancer... but in 1999- they were legal...
Dyhard
Germantown, WI
Total Comments (77811)
As fans, we're all so selective in who we deem worthy of suspicion.
I just think that a jump like that has to be due to something. 200 points of OPS? Come on.
Porkins: I stole…
The Triangle, NC
Total Comments (30249)
they were still illegal by law
and if bonds, clemens, Arod are going to be ripped for their use when it was "legal by baseball" then so should the golden boy ripken.
rstowe
Newport News , VA
Total Comments (47606)
I used the term "legal" as in it was legal in baseball...
But Bonds/Clemens/A-Roid used them at this time and is getting shot down by the media and by everyone... then Ripken- if he DID use them- should get the same reaction by the media
Dyhard
Germantown, WI
Total Comments (77811)
Aaaaannnnddd I hate you. Not because you dissed Cal, because I hate baseball. But because you made me read and interpret a baseball blog.
Nice job....but you burn in hell.
RobertMenn: You…
San Antonio , TX
Total Comments (22062)
I agree with you. It is odd and he should he held accountable if he did juice himslfl, no matter the reason. It's just human nature to not want to believe players we deem as untouchable could possibly do anything wrong. It would be the same reaction no matter the player or sport. Nonetheless, this is a good piece of investigation on your part. And it is a question that should be posed.
iB4e: Happy…
Austin, TX
Total Comments (8532)
Well, 1998 isn't 1999.
He had 82 walks in '99 while playing a full season with NY.
Porkins: I stole…
The Triangle, NC
Total Comments (30249)
I'm having a hard time following your logic. You're putting nothing in perspective. You obviously had this idea before you wrote it because it's quite biased...and I'm a Yankee fan.
Did the league as whole fair better that year? What's the mean OPS? Did it increase from 98 to 99? Also, did the O's make any significant acquisitions? Did he hit in the same lineup spot in 98 and 99? Or did someone join the time allowing him to maybe see more fastballs?
Was he even playing short in 1999? Or was he playing third? Had he DHed more that year than other years? Maybe he had nagging injuries the previous couple of years? Or maybe not playing every single day had it's benefits? Maybe playing everyday at 80% wasn't better than playing 5x a week at 95%.
By your logic, any time a bench player has a breakout year (Mariano Duncan), subbing for an injured plater (Brady taking over Bledsoe), or older guys performing well (Didn't Gary Gaetti have a huge HR output in like 1995 - 1997 somewhere?) it should be chalked up to PEDs.
There are way too many factors in baseball for you to chalk up an outlier to PEDs. He's not Brady Anderson.
Also, have you compared his career monthly totals? Maybe he likes warm weather. Maybe every year he hits well in July and September. And seeing how he didnt even play much in April or May - what if he historically played poor in these months, like Mark Texeria? Then the diminished plate appearances plays a huge factor because if he got off to a slow start and hit .183 through his first 100 at-bats, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
And you also failed to make any mention of greenies, which helped players get a boost in the dog days of summer. Why not greenies? Because all we can do is speculate. And if that's all we can do, then we can do this for anyone. Everyone has breakout years. Sometimes is on the eve of free agency (Adrian Beltre), and sometimes it's your rookie year (Teemu Selanne).
I'm going to look at his stats and that of the universe on my long commute home. You looked only at his stats compared to his own stats. Tells you nothing of any external factors. Maybe they used a new ball that year. Maybe it was El Nino. You can't decide until you do a complete analysis and even then, maybe he just squared the bat to the ball more often. Maybe his wife took the Carmen Electra stripper dance class.
Gianni_Baseball
New York , NY
Total Comments (3)
Actually, I addressed the issue of league performance. In 1999, there was no significnat change in the American League.
And clearly there are numerous factors that could have impacted his numbers.
However, individually none of those could account for a 200 point surge in OPS, and if multiple factors were acting together it would quite a coincidence.
Remember Occam's Razor.
By the way...interesting that you mention Brady Anderson. No one had a problem attributing his HR spike to PEDs, yet you refuse to even consider the possibility for Ripken.
Why?
Porkins: I stole…
The Triangle, NC
Total Comments (30249)
No they weren't. Steroids have been on MLB's banned substance list since 1991. There was just no way to enforce the ban until 2003.
C-C-C
Total Comments (23608)
Bold post Porkins.
LoveItHateIt
Portland, OR
Total Comments (3163)
Not as bold as this comment!
The Pitt Panther…
Telford, PA
Total Comments (59375)
blasphemer.
DKMF
Total Comments (2515)
You should be banned from baseball forever for proposing such an atrocity. That's like saying Rafael Palmeiro took steroids and the lied about it in front of important people or something!
Nice research, you definitely have some legitimate points to be considered.
0x NBA/NFL Champion
Saint Paul, MN
Total Comments (5072)
Fantastic job Porkins truly fantastic.
The True Joker
Total Comments (11609)
Comment
Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.