Cubs finish tied for 3rd best OPS differential since 1914 & tied for best since 1939

They had an OPS of .772 and allowed .633. So that is a .139 differential. The .633 allowed is the lowest of any team since 1988 when the Mets had .620 and the Dodgers had .626. 

The Cubs actually edge out the 1998 Braves. It only looks like a tie at first glance due to rounding. Here are their numbers to more than 3 decimal places

Cubs Braves OBP 0.343397 0.341638 SLG 0.428675 0.452772 OPS 0.772073 0.79441 OBPA 0.285158 0.303487 SLGA 0.348276 0.353226 OPSA 0.633434 0.656712 Diff 0.138639 0.137698

Here are the leaders that I had previously compiled.

Team	Year	OPS	OPSA	DIFF
NYY	1927	0.872	0.676	0.196
NYY	1939	0.825	0.667	0.158
ATL	1998	0.795	0.656	0.139
BAL	1969	0.756	0.620	0.136
NYY	1936	0.864	0.733	0.131
STL	1944	0.745	0.615	0.130
STL	1942	0.717	0.590	0.127
CLE	1948	0.792	0.665	0.127
NYY	1998	0.825	0.699	0.126
SEA	2001	0.805	0.679	0.126
PHA	1929	0.816	0.692	0.124
NYY	1937	0.825	0.704	0.121
CLE	1995	0.839	0.718	0.121
BRO	1953	0.840	0.722	0.118
CLE	1954	0.744	0.626	0.118
NYY	1932	0.830	0.714	0.116
NYY	1931	0.840	0.726	0.114
PHA	1928	0.799	0.685	0.114
ATL	1997	0.769	0.655	0.114
STL	1943	0.725	0.611	0.114
NYY	1921	0.838	0.725	0.113
BRO	1941	0.752	0.641	0.111
LAD	1974	0.743	0.633	0.110
PHA	1931	0.789	0.680	0.109
BOS	2003	0.851	0.742	0.109

Players With An OPS+ Of 150 Or Higher At Each Of The Following Ages: 20, 21, 22, 23, 24

From the Baseball Reference Play Index. Just Cobb and Trout

Player	OPS+	Year	Age
Ty Cobb	167	1907	20
Ty Cobb	169	1908	21
Ty Cobb	193	1909	22
Ty Cobb	206	1910	23
Ty Cobb	196	1911	24
Mike Trout	168	2012	20
Mike Trout	179	2013	21
Mike Trout	168	2014	22
Mike Trout	176	2015	23
Mike Trout	177	2016	24

Seasons When Two Players Under Age 25 Had 9+ WAR

Data from the Baseball Reference Play Index. This has only happened 7 times, including 2015 & 2016 (an only once between 1912 and 2014 with Mays and Mantle in 1955). If Betts can make it to 10, then we would have only the second time 2 guys made it that high. That won't be easy and, of course, the season is longer than it used to be, so maybe we should use 9.5 for 154 game seasons. That would still be rare.

Player	WAR	Year	Age
Ty Cobb	9.8	1909	22
Eddie Collins	9.7	1909	22
Ty Cobb	10.5	1910	23
Eddie Collins	10.5	1910	23
Ty Cobb	10.7	1911	24
Shoeless Joe Jackson	9.2	1911	23
Tris Speaker	10.1	1912	24
Shoeless Joe Jackson	9.6	1912	24
Mickey Mantle	9.5	1955	23
Willie Mays	9	1955	24
Bryce Harper	9.9	2015	22
Mike Trout	9.4	2015	23
Mike Trout	10.3	2016	24
Mookie Betts	9.5	2016	23

Cubs have allowed an historically low BAbip

Data from the Baseball Reference Play Index. Here are the lowest 25 since 1913

Team	Year	BAbip
CLE	1968	0.244
BAL	1968	0.245
BAL	1969	0.246
BRO	1941	0.249
BAL	1972	0.249
DET	1981	0.249
CHW	1967	0.249
DET	1968	0.250
CLE	1954	0.250
LAD	1975	0.250
NYY	1955	0.251
BRO	1942	0.251
CHW	1966	0.252
CHW	1964	0.252
OAK	1972	0.252
STL	1942	0.252
NYY	1960	0.253
CIN	1942	0.253
MIN	1965	0.254
CIN	1944	0.254
CHC	2016	0.254
CAL	1968	0.254
BAL	1961	0.254
OAK	1970	0.255
BOS	1917	0.255

They are the only team in the top 25 since 1981 (also the only team in the top 50 since 1981). This is probably due to their fielding (they lead the NL in DER with .732). Top 3 teams since 2006 in defensive efficiency rating are the 2016 Cubs .732, 2011 Rays .724, 2013 Reds .715. Cubs might be highest going even farther back but I stopped checking at 2006.

There is usually a pretty high correlation between BAbip allowed and DER for all MLB teams. Here is the correlation in some years

2015) -.97
1960) -.97
1920) -.98

But it was only -.73 in 1913. It was -.89 in 1914. I don't know why it was so low in 1913.

It might be worthwhile to do BAbip relative to the league average. It looks like the other teams on the list are from years that will have a relatively low league BAbip. The 2016 NL is 16th highest since 1913.

Update 9-20-2016: The Cubs are .046 below the league average and that appears to be the best ever (although I was having a bit of a problem for some years in finding the league average using the Excel VLOOKUP tool-if anyone is good at that, please comment here or email me)

Here are the best teams (I think I solved the VLOOKUP issue). Let me know if this formatting does not work. The third number is that team's BAbip allowed, then the league average and then the difference.

Why are the Cubs doing so well? Fielding? Something about their pitchers? Park effects? Just luck?

CHC    2016    0.254    0.300    -0.046
NYY    1939    0.256    0.293    -0.037
SEA    2001    0.262    0.297    -0.035
LAD    1975    0.25    0.284    -0.034
CIN    1999    0.267    0.300    -0.033
OAK    1980    0.258    0.288    -0.03
OAK    1990    0.258    0.287    -0.029
BRO    1941    0.249    0.277    -0.028
BAL    1979    0.258    0.286    -0.028
CHW    1991    0.26    0.288    -0.028
DET    1983    0.258    0.286    -0.028
NYY    1919    0.261    0.289    -0.028

Here is a comment someone left at Fangraphs. See The Most Extraordinary Team Statistic by Jeff Sullivan

"When I saw this headline, I was hoping you’d land on the Cubs’ ability to squash balls in play. But how about these other options for ways to quantify it?

BIP-Wins. Cubs are #1 all-time (since 1871):
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=6&season=2016&month=0&season1=1871&ind=1&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=4,d

…and they have derived 9.5 more wins from this ability than the #2 team this season:

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=6&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=1&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=4,d

BP’s Park-Adjusted Defensive Efficiency. The 2016 Cubs are #1 by a wide margin, but this stat only goes back to 1950:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1960231

OPS+ allowed. B-R only has solid data going back to 1923 for this stat. During that period, the 2016 Cubs are #1 by three percentage points:

http://bbref.com/pi/shareit/HKbXG"

Trout Now Leads In WAR Through Age 24

Here is the top 10

Rk	Player	WAR
1	Mike Trout	46.9
2	Ty Cobb	46.7
3	Mickey Mantle	40.9
4	Alex Rodriguez	38
5	Ken Griffey	37
6	Mel Ott	36.8
7	Rogers Hornsby	36.1
8	Jimmie Foxx	36
9	Arky Vaughan	34.3
10	Ted Williams	34.2

Now the leaders in WAR per 648 plate appearances for everyone with 20+ WAR through age 24. It looks like the WAR for Ruth does not include pitching.

Rk	Player	WAR	PA	Per 648PA
1	Babe Ruth	20.2	1332	9.83
2	Mike Trout	46.9	3441	8.83
3	Ted Williams	34.2	2613	8.48
4	Willie Mays	24.8	1978	8.12
5	Ty Cobb	46.7	3730	8.11
6	Rogers Hornsby	36.1	2902	8.06
7	Stan Musial	24	1953	7.96
8	Eddie Collins	28.1	2312	7.88
9	Mickey Mantle	40.9	3491	7.59
10	Tris Speaker	30.1	2623	7.44
11	Lou Gehrig	22.3	1952	7.40
12	Dick Allen	22.7	2040	7.21
13	Jimmie Foxx	36	3270	7.13
14	Alex Rodriguez	38	3515	7.01
15	Arky Vaughan	34.3	3180	6.99
16	Albert Pujols	29.2	2728	6.94
17	Joe DiMaggio	26.3	2545	6.70
18	Ken Griffey	37	3606	6.65
19	Eddie Mathews	31.5	3141	6.50
20	Barry Bonds	23.4	2388	6.35
21	Cal Ripken	27.9	2855	6.33
22	Rickey Henderson	28.1	2891	6.30
23	Johnny Bench	30.7	3229	6.16
24	Hank Aaron	29.9	3173	6.11
25	Frank Robinson	29.7	3155	6.10

Cubs OPS differential of .147 would be highest since 1939 if they finish with it

They have a team hitting OPS of .778 while their pitchers have allowed .631. In their last 32 games of 2015, the differential was .186 (.757 - .571). They have played 131 games this year (through Tuesday). Their differential over the last 163 games (including the last 32 from 2015), is .155, weighted by number of games played. That is almost as good as the 1939 Yankees, who have the second highest OPS differential since 1914.

Here is the top 25. Compiled from the Baseball Reference Play Index and Retrosheet

Team	Year	OPS	OPSA	DIFF
NYY	1927	0.872	0.676	0.196
NYY	1939	0.825	0.667	0.158
ATL	1998	0.795	0.656	0.139
BAL	1969	0.756	0.620	0.136
NYY	1936	0.864	0.733	0.131
STL	1944	0.745	0.615	0.130
STL	1942	0.717	0.590	0.127
CLE	1948	0.792	0.665	0.127
NYY	1998	0.825	0.699	0.126
SEA	2001	0.805	0.679	0.126
PHA	1929	0.816	0.692	0.124
NYY	1937	0.825	0.704	0.121
CLE	1995	0.839	0.718	0.121
BRO	1953	0.840	0.722	0.118
CLE	1954	0.744	0.626	0.118
NYY	1932	0.830	0.714	0.116
NYY	1931	0.840	0.726	0.114
PHA	1928	0.799	0.685	0.114
ATL	1997	0.769	0.655	0.114
STL	1943	0.725	0.611	0.114
NYY	1921	0.838	0.725	0.113
BRO	1941	0.752	0.641	0.111
LAD	1974	0.743	0.633	0.110
PHA	1931	0.789	0.680	0.109
BOS	2003	0.851	0.742	0.109

Cubs OPS differential of .141 would be 3rd best since 1914 if they finish with it

They have a team hitting OPS of .772 while their pitchers have allowed .631.

Here is the top 25. Compiled from the Baseball Reference Play Index and Retrosheet

Team	Year	OPS	OPSA	DIFF
NYY	1927	0.872	0.676	0.196
NYY	1939	0.825	0.667	0.158
ATL	1998	0.795	0.656	0.139
BAL	1969	0.756	0.620	0.136
NYY	1936	0.864	0.733	0.131
STL	1944	0.745	0.615	0.130
STL	1942	0.717	0.590	0.127
CLE	1948	0.792	0.665	0.127
NYY	1998	0.825	0.699	0.126
SEA	2001	0.805	0.679	0.126
PHA	1929	0.816	0.692	0.124
NYY	1937	0.825	0.704	0.121
CLE	1995	0.839	0.718	0.121
BRO	1953	0.840	0.722	0.118
CLE	1954	0.744	0.626	0.118
NYY	1932	0.830	0.714	0.116
NYY	1931	0.840	0.726	0.114
PHA	1928	0.799	0.685	0.114
ATL	1997	0.769	0.655	0.114
STL	1943	0.725	0.611	0.114
NYY	1921	0.838	0.725	0.113
BRO	1941	0.752	0.641	0.111
LAD	1974	0.743	0.633	0.110
PHA	1931	0.789	0.680	0.109
BOS	2003	0.851	0.742	0.109

When Carl Reynolds Hit A HR In Each Of The First Three Innings

It was in game 2 of a double header against the Yankees in New York on July 2, 1930. No one did it again until Manny Machado did it yesterday.

Before looking at Reynolds's game, I want to mention that George Kelly hit a HR in three consecutive innings (4th, 5th, 6th) in a game in 1923 and that Mike Cameron had three HRs in the first three innings of a game in 2002, with two in the first inning and one in the third (he hit 4 HRs in the game).

Click here to see the box score of the Kelly game from Baseball Reference

Click here to see the box score & play-by-play of the Cameron game

Click here to see the box score & play-by-play of the Reynolds game

Here is what The Baseball Page says about his feat

"On July 2, 1930, in the second game of a doubleheader against New York in Yankee Stadium, Reynolds smashed three homers. Hundreds of players have hit three homers in one game, but the amazing thing about Reynolds' trifecta was that they came in the first three innings. Reynolds hit homers in each of the first three innings, including two of the inside -the-park variety. According to newspaper accounts, Reynolds lined two balls over the head of Yankees' center fielder Earl Combs and circled the bases before the relay throws made it back to the plate. His other homer was a blast off Red Ruffing into the left field seats. Reynolds' White Sox defeated the Yanks 15-4."

I will put the link to that page at the end since the link was not working and I had to use the cached page. Another website says the non-inside the park HR was to RF. It is from the book '30: Major League Baseball's Year of the Batter by Ray Zardeito.

Two of the HRs were off of Hall of Famer Red Ruffing. Ruffing was a righty as was Reynolds, so he had no platoon advantage. Ruffing did not give up alot of HRs. In 1929, pitching for the Red Sox, he allowed 17 HRs in 244 IP. In 1930, it was 11 in 221 IP (with 1 in 24 IP with Boston) and in 1931 it was 11 in 237 IP. The other HR Reynolds hit was off of Ken Holloway, another righty. 

Reynolds was 5 for 6 in the game, adding two singles later and he had 8 RBIs.

Here is the cached page from The Baseball Page

Hitting And Scoring Down In July

Data from Baseball Reference

AL	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS	R/G
April	0.245	0.312	0.399	0.711	3.97
May	0.260	0.324	0.427	0.751	4.74
June	0.270	0.332	0.446	0.779	4.91
July	0.254	0.318	0.416	0.734	4.41
NL	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS	R/G
April	0.253	0.327	0.410	0.737	4.50
May	0.249	0.315	0.401	0.715	4.16
June	0.256	0.323	0.418	0.741	4.52
July	0.250	0.317	0.409	0.727	4.29

Rangers Still In First Place Despite Only A +2 Run Differential And A Negative OPS Differential

They have scored 483 runs while allowing 481. Their hitting OPS is .751 while they have allowed .768. They are 21-7 in 1-run games. All data from Baseball Reference.

They do better in High Leverage Situations. Here is what their hitters do in all three cases in OPS

High Lvrge	0.793
Medium Lvrge	0.764
Low Lvrge	0.726

Now what the pitchers allow

High Lvrge	0.751
Medium Lvrge	0.757
Low Lvrge	0.788

So you can tell their differential is much better in High cases. But it is not like the bullpen is doing great. They allow an OPS of .796 while the starters allow .752. The bullpen also allows a higher SLG, .453 vs. .421.

They allow a .727 OPS in close and late cases while their hitters have .731. So no big deal there. Neither the hitters nor the pitchers do much different with runners on versus none on. But somehow they ramp things up in High cases.

The Rangers have grounded into 72 DPs while their opponents have 114. That gives them a good edge and maybe some of those are in key situations. On stealing and reaching on errors, there is not much difference between the Rangers and their opponents.

The Rangers have turned 50 DPs in High leverage cases. That leads MLB while the next highest has 42. The Rangers have grounded into 37 DPs in these cases. So they have a net of 13 here. That probably helps, but only a little.

Rangers also take the extra base running 45% of the time while the average in the AL is 40%

Sam Dyson, who has the most saves on the Rangers, has a save% of 90.9%. That is good, but it is only 7th in the AL for guys with 20+ saves (Dyson has 20). He has a 2.53 ERA and has allowed a .657 OPS. Those are good numbers but not great.

Time to reconsider Honus Wagner's and Lou Gehrig's greatness? (Part 2)

This is an article at espn.com by Christina Kahrl. Here is the link

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/page/mlbrank100_wagnergehrig/mlbrank-exploring-greatness-honus-wagner-lou-gehrig

She points out that Gehrig did not have to face the good pitchers on the Yankees, and, of course, no black or Latin pitchers. But although those things are true, I wonder how much they would or should change our estimate of Gehrig. My guess is not much.

Yesterday I pointed out that Hank Aaron only faced black/latin pitchers about 13% of the time and that Gehrig not facing his own pitchers would lower his OPS+ by just 3 points, leaving him still 4th best all-time.

But, as you many of you may know, the Yankee pitchers were not quite as good as they look since they did not face the great Yankee hitters. So that decline for Gehrig is probably not that big.

I calculated Gehrig's OPS+ using the formula they have at Baseball Reference. Then I assumed that the Yankees staff is 1/8th of the league and took them out and got a slightly higher league average OBP & SLG and then recalculated Gehrig's OPS+ (I did all this without park effects). His OPS+ fell from 183 to 180. As far as I can tell, BR does not account for not facing your own pitchers.

Now to the question of not black/latin pitchers. This math may get gory. About 10 years ago I estimated that from 1947 to 2006 or so about 15% of innings were pitched by black/latin guys. I also determined that collectively those guys were about as good as the remaining white guys (white guys who did not get replaced).

So, I tried to figure out how many HRs this cost Ruth. I removed the bottom 15% of pitchers (by innings or batters face, not sure which). Then I calculated the HR rate for the remaining pitchers. It was, collectively, about 5% lower than for all pitchers. So I declared that if Ruth had faced black/latin pitchers 15% of the time, his HR rate would fall by 5%. I assumed that the HR rate for those black/latin guys who were now in baseball would have been the same as the best 85% of white guys.

I did something similar with Gehrig. I tried to estimate how much to decrease his OBP and SLG to recalculate his OPS+. The first thing I did was rank all AL pitchers over the years 1925-38 by runs per game (per 9 IP). Then I removed the bottom 15% (by batters faced).

The top 85% allowed 4.92 runs per game while the whole group allowed 5.20. So we have runs per game falling by about 5.6%. That means OBP & SLG would be lower. But by how much?

Using all MLB teams from 1925-38 (this was easiest using the Baseball Reference Play Index since there was no option just to get AL teams, you have to use all MLB teams), I ran a regression with team runs per game as a function of OBP & SLG. Here is the equation

R/G = 11.82*SLG + 18.37*OBP  - 6.12

Using that formula, to get runs per game to go down 5.6%, both OBP & SLG would have to go down about 2.545% each (assuming they each go down by the same %).

That is what Gehrig would face with the better pitching in the league from black/latin guys (remember, as a group they are about as good as the remaining white guys). Runs go down 5.6% so we have a corresponding drop in the league in OBP and SLG.

The formula for OPS+ at BR is 100*[OBP/lg OBP + SLG/lg SLG - 1]

Gehrig had a career OBP & SLG of .447 & .632. Lowering those by 2.545% each gets us .436 & .616. The league averages (taking out Yankee pitchers) were .353 & .411. That gets me a 173 OPS+. I started with 183 (recall I am not doing park effects here-also recall that maybe the Yankee pitchers were not that good since they never faced the great Yankee pitchers). So Gehrig falls 10 points in OPS+ (maybe less).

At BR's leader list

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/onbase_plus_slugging_plus_career.shtml

Gehrig would fall from 179 to 169, and be in a tie with Trout for 9th best ever (but probably a bit higher).

But, if these good black/latin pitchers are added to the league, the league OBP & SLG go down, then Gehrig's OPS+ is calculated with a lower league average and it would come back up. In fact, it would all cancel out. He goes down 2.545% and the league average goes down 2.545% .

But (yes, another one), there is one potentially big factor left out so far. If blacks/latins are added to the league, many of them, as we know, will be position players and that should raise the league average for things like OBP and SLG (think of it as a 2 stage process-first black/latin pitchers come in and league OBP & SLG go down a bit-then black/latin hitters are added to the league and that would bring the league OBP & SLG back up).

Maybe we end up an even higher league OBP & SLG than we started with (I think this likely since black/latin position players have been a bigger % of the total than in pitching) and that would lower Gehrig's OPS+. That means we need some estimate of how much league OBP & SLG would be affected if you added in all the good black/latin hitters, who would generally replace the worst white hitters (not entirely since some weak hitting guys who were good fielders would stay).

So I need to come up with that estimate to adjust Gehrig's numbers again.

Time to reconsider Honus Wagner's and Lou Gehrig's greatness?

This is an article at espn.com by Christina Kahrl. Here is the link

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/page/mlbrank100_wagnergehrig/mlbrank-exploring-greatness-honus-wagner-lou-gehrig

She points out that Gehrig did not have to face the good pitchers on the Yankees, and, of course, no black or Latin pitchers. But although those things are true, I wonder how much they would or should change our estimate of Gehrig. My guess is not much.

Take a look at the pitchers that Hank Aaron faced at Baseball Reference. Rank them by PAs. I did that recently and after a good chunk of them (the top 100 in PAs vs. Aaron) it looked like 13% of those PAs were against black/latin pitchers. That is the kind of thing that has to be taken into account in these discussions. If Ruth & Gehrig had to face about the same proportion of black/latin pitchers that guys today do (or post 1947), we need to put a number on it and then try to figure out how many HRs they lose from facing, on average, better pitchers. Remember, that Ruth & Gehrig would still hit some HRs against those guys.

But suppose that you did have them in about the same proportions that we have had them since 1947? I estimated about 10 years ago that would be about 15%. Then I estimated that it would have reduce Ruth's HRs by 5%. See

http://cybermetric.blogspot.com/2009/04/how-many-home-runs-would-ruth-have-hit.html

Sure, Gehrig did not have to face the good Yankee pitchers. But in the original Total Baseball, if I recall correctly, Pete Palmer said that in OPS+ (that is what we call it now-he called it adjusted production), they took into account that you did not have to face the pitchers on your own team. In the 2nd edition of TB, Gehrig ranks 3rd all-time in adjusted production with 182. Ruth had 209, Williams had 186. At Baseball Reference right now, Gehrig now ranks 4th in OPS+ (I don't think it takes into account not facing your own pitchers but I am not sure). OPS+ is Ruth 206, Williams 190, Bonds 182, Gehrig 179. So my guess is that taking into account not facing your own pitchers is not a big deal. Maybe Sean Forman can say something about this (I have asked BR about this).

From 1928-31, Gehrig had a 1.040 OPS against the A's. The A's had 2 good lefties, Grove and Walberg and the A's led the AL in ERA+ 3 times with a 2nd. They led once in FIP ERA and were 2nd 3 times.

Gehrig did have an OPS of 1.109 overall in those 4 years. So he did not do quite as well against the A's. But remember, this was the best or 2nd best staff over those 4 years and he did not drop off by much and it was in about 380 PAs.

I also estimate that, if we take the Yankees pitchers out of the league averages for OBP & SLG, and then recalculate the league OBP & SLG, so that we can recalculate Gehrig's OPS+, I get it going down 3 points. If it falls from 179 to 176, he is still in 4th place. See

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/onbase_plus_slugging_plus_career.shtml

Bryce Harper Is Having An Historically Large Dropoff This Year But It Might Not Be A Long Term Concern

Last year, at age 22, Bryce Harper had an OPS+ of 195. The only player to ever have a higher OPS+ at age 22 or younger with 400+ PAs was Ted Williams who had 235 in 1941, the year he batted .406.

But so far this year, Harper's OPS+ is just 134, a drop of 61. To see how this ranks historically, I used the Baseball Reference Play Index to call up all the seasons since 1900 when a player 23 or younger had an OPS+ of at least 170 (I first tried a cutoff of 180 and using players 22 or younger, but that was a short list). Again, a minimum of 400 PAs was used.

Then I found their OPS+ the next year and ranked them by how much their OPS+ changed, with the biggest losers listed first. That is all in the table below. Harper does not have the biggest decline ever, but he is close.

Player	OPS+	Year	Age	Next Yr.	Change
Boog Powell	176	1964	22	112	-64
Reggie Jackson	189	1969	23	127	-62
Bryce Harper	195	2015	22	134	-61
Arky Vaughan	190	1935	23	148	-42
Mel Ott	174	1932	23	138	-36
Eddie Mathews	170	1955	23	143	-27
Eddie Collins	171	1909	22	152	-19
Ted Williams	235	1941	22	216	-19
Albert Pujols	187	2003	23	173	-14
Jimmie Foxx	173	1929	21	161	-12
Mike Trout	179	2013	21	168	-11
Ty Cobb	206	1910	23	196	-10
Mike Trout	176	2015	23	169	-7
Frank Thomas	180	1991	23	174	-6
Stan Musial	177	1943	22	174	-3
Eddie Mathews	172	1954	22	170	-2
Shoeless Joe Jackson	193	1911	23	192	-1
Ted Williams*	216	1942	23	215	-1
Willie Mays	175	1954	23	174	-1
Ken Griffey	171	1993	23	171	0
Eddie Mathews	171	1953	21	172	1
Stan Musial*	174	1944	23	183	9
Ty Cobb	193	1909	22	206	13
Mickey Mantle	180	1955	23	210	30

*The next year for Williams and Musial in these cases was actually after they returned from military duty. Williams had three years in between and Musial had one.

There are 18 players on this list. 13 are in the Hall of Fame. Those not in the Hall are Albert Pujols, Harper, Mike Trout, Boog Powell and Joe Jackson. Trout and Pujols both have good chances to make it. Jackson might be in if not for the 1919 World Series scandal.

Boog Powell is probably not Hall worthy but he still hit over 300 career HRs and won an MVP award later in his career. He had a couple of seasons with an OPS+ in the 160s and two more in the 150s. He had a total of six seasons in the top 10 in OPS+, including the 176 at age 22. So a good career.

Powell, along with Reggie Jackson, are the only two guys here to see a drop off of 60 or more in OPS+. Jackson is in the Hall and, as seen above, Powell had a pretty good career. So even with the big decline so far this year, Harper's future still looks pretty good.