Better Than DiMaggio's 56-Game Streak?

We all say (I do ) that the 56-game hitting streak record will never be broken.

Which, though , is more impressive?

Joe D's streak where he hit .408 over those 56?

Or Rogers Hornsby hitting .476 over 56 games in '24?

Or George Brett hitting .480 over 56 games in '80?

Or even Ted Williams in the same year as Joe D hitting .412 over 56 games?

If you could only pick one as the best 56 games which would you pick?

Brett, raking close to .500 is amazing over that length of time.

I wonder what Vottos best 56 game stretch was last year. He was a beast in the 2nd half.

I wonder what Vottos best 56 game stretch was last year. He was a beast in the 2nd half.

Hit .394 in the 56 games ending one game before the last game of the season..

I'm on my phone so I didn't check other 56 game stretches, I'll try to in the morning to see if it got any better.

G Brett was SAVAGE!!!

The difference between 480 over 408 looks big and impressive, but it ain't. In a 56 game stretch it is less than 16 hits.

Look at it this way. For George Brett to hit 480 going 4-4 every game, he'd get the required # hits for 480 in 56 games after 26 games. It would take Joe DiMaggio going 4-4 every game get to the required # hits for 408 in 56 after just 23 games. Not that big of a difference. In my eyes the numbers become an optical illusion when your sample size is smaller than the full season.

Another way to look at it is per game batting efficiency, not batting average. Joe got at least one hit in 100% of those 56 games. The others did not. It would be interesting to see those percentages and compare.

Therefore, my vote is DiMaggio, because he got a hit in every one of the 56. The others didn't. Joe also accomplished that feat with 16 fewer hits, too.

We all say (I do ) that the 56-game hitting streak record will never be broken.

 

Which, though , is more impressive?

 

Joe D's streak where he hit .408 over those 56?

 

Or Rogers Hornsby hitting .476 over 56 games in '24?

Or George Brett hitting .480 over 56 games in '80?

Or even Ted Williams in the same year as Joe D hitting .412 over 56 games?

 

If you could only pick one as the best 56 games which would you pick?

Why just pick 56 games from Ted Williams in 1941? He hit .406 for the entire season that year.

The difference between 480 over 408 looks big and impressive, but it ain't. In a 56 game stretch it is less than 16 hits.

 

Look at it this way. For George Brett to hit 480 going 4-4 every game, he'd get the required # hits for 480 in 56 games after 26 games. It would take Joe DiMaggio going 4-4 every game get to the required # hits for 408 in 56 after just 23 games. Not that big of a difference. In my eyes the numbers become an optical illusion when your sample size is smaller than the full season.

 

Another way to look at it is per game batting efficiency, not batting average. Joe got at least one hit in 100% of those 56 games. The others did not. It would be interesting to see those percentages and compare.

 

Therefore, my vote is DiMaggio, because he got a hit in every one of the 56. The others didn't. Joe also accomplished that feat with 16 fewer hits, too.

But you are giving him credit for doing something that is rare vs overall accomplishments over 56 games, correct?

Why just pick 56 games from Ted Williams in 1941? He hit .406 for the entire season that year.

56 was picked simply because of the Joe D hit streak.

But you are giving him credit for doing something that is rare vs overall accomplishments over 56 games, correct?

Absolutely, because that rare thing he did is, in and of itself, is the most impressive accomplishment over 56 games of all.

You're taking a segment of the season defined by Joe DiMaggio and attempting to compare it with other hitters in, what I can only assume is, an attempt to show that they were better hitters over his defined stretch. They were not, simply because they did not accomplish what he did in that defined stretch.

My point is that those batting averages being used in the comparison are not as impressive as they appear, and they pale in comparison to the streak.

Give me George Brett. He did it during a season when the Royals were battling for the AL West Division title, he had numerous injuries that season. I'll take him.

The Clipper did his w/ his team winning the pennant by 17 games.

Hornsby, who may be one of the most underrated players ever, did his when hitting .400 was very common. The pitchers stayed in longer and had more starts.

Give me George Brett. He did it during a season when the Royals were battling for the AL West Division title, he had numerous injuries that season. I'll take him.

The Clipper did his w/ his team winning the pennant by 17 games.

Hornsby, who may be one of the most underrated players ever, did his when hitting .400 was very common. The pitchers stayed in longer and had more starts.

When Dimaggio's streak started the Yankee's were in 4th place, 4 1/2 games out. By the end of the streak they were in first 6 games up. It's hard to argue Dimaggio was less important to the Yankees winning the pennant that year.

That being said, I'd take Brett as well.

I think the streak and Brett's accomplishments are both great, but for different reasons. In theory, a player could go 1-4 every night and accomplish what DiMaggio did. A .250 average doesn't look that good, unless you put it in context. The average was never the highlight of that record anyway.

So when you go to compare averages, obviously Brett has a higher one to begin with, so he's got that going. But as @mexitucky has already pointed out, there's other contributing factors that, even if everything else was equal, would still give him the nod, in my opinion. Night games, further travel (west coast teams) and the increasing popularity of using relievers from the bullpen are just a few that make hitting in 1980 much, much tougher than in 1924 or 1941. And the fact that there were only 7 teams that DiMaggio played against really allowed him to face a lot of the same pitchers over and over again.

All are great hitters , Joe's record has never been broken , always loved Brett , Ted was what he was , Hornsby was a great one .... I know he is not in the conversation but I would take Pete Rose over all of them !!! But that's just me ... wouldn't mind any one of them to be in my lineup every day !!!

Joe D had 91 hits during his streak and got only one hit in 34 of the 56 games, hitting .408, DiMaggio for the season went hitless in 25 games.

Brett had 106 hits during a 56 game streak while getting only one hit 19 games and 0 hits in 4 games (23 games of 1 hit or less), hitting .469 and for the season Brett went hitless in just 23 games.

Williams had 82 hits during his best 56 game period of '41 while getting one hit in 19 games and 0 hits in 12 games (31 games of 1 hit or less), hitting .418 during the best 56 game stretch and Williams for the season went hitless in 30 games.