Rodney Woodward’s suggestion for WCW made me giggle just a bit. It’s Red Ruffing of the 1927 Boston Red Sox.
Eventual Hall of Fame pitcher Ruffing is graded a D RXW pitcher on the 2012 release of his 1927 card. That’s the first (and probably last time) I’ll see that grade. For the record, Red Ruffing struck out 77 batters in 158 1/3 innings and 703 batters faced.
Since the R rating turns strikeouts into fielding outs and the X rating does just the opposite, I am assuming it is an error. My guess is that the R rating is on target. This does beg the question… What would happen if diametrically opposed ratings appear on the same card? A W and a Z, for example? Or like in this case, an X and an R?
Also I happened to note that there is an errant blank space just before the “R” on Ruffing’s card.
thanks, Rodney!!
Update:
In further email conversation with Rodney, he suggests that Ruffing may deserve the X rating. Rod says…
I think it’s supposed to be an "X". I’ve noticed with these 20s and 30s sets that the K/9 is much, much lower in receiving an "X" or even a "K". I faced him last night in my 27 Yankees replay and treated him as an "X". Not sure if I was right but seemed to be what the status quo is during that time period.
What do you all think?
For further reference:
1927 Ruffing 158 IP, 77K “X”
1927 Welzer 171 IP, 56K “Y”
1927 Moore 213 IP, 75K “Y”
1927 Pipgras 166 IP, 81K “XY”
1927 Grove 262 IP, 174K “K”
So as you can see, Lefty Grove’s 6K/9 which LED the league, warranted a “K” as it was the top of the bell curve ( I know the formula is compared to league average, just simplifying things a bit), Ruffing’s 4.4K/9 would suggest he is an “X” rather than an “R” in this instance, IMO.
Except for Ruth, Gehrig and Lazzeri all striking out 80+ times, no other batter in the AL struck out as many as 60. So I’d assume 13s are infrequent enough and the X is warranted.