The Potential Highest Home Run On Record
This is a weird home run, that Yoenis Cespedes hit off Trevor Bauer Monday night:
It’s weird for a few reasons. The pitch was down. Cespedes hit it to the other side of center field. It was a low rocket, and the majority of these low-rocket dingers tend to hug the lines. Pretty good demonstration of Cespedes’ strength, or bat speed, if you think of those as different things. Things that are weird make me curious. Alas, I found a recent home run that was even weirder. It happened just this past weekend.
I hear you guys. You’re sick of reading about the Red Sox. You’re sick of reading about Hanley Ramirez. It’s totally understandable, but let me assure you — this isn’t being written because it’s about Hanley Ramirez on the Red Sox. That’s a coincidence. This would’ve been written about, I don’t know, Shin-Soo Choo on the Rangers, if that had been what’d happened. But there was a weird home run, and Hanley Ramirez hit it, and, dammit, it’s going to get words.
Video of the home run in question, slugged against a Chris Young fastball:
Maybe nothing really stands out to you. It’s not an immediately remarkable home run, aside from it just having been a home run, off a home-runnable pitch. It’s obvious that the ball hung up for a while. This is the real key of it. That ball took a while to come down. Which means it achieved an awfully high height. An awfully high height.
You’re familiar with the ESPN Home Run Tracker. The ESPN Home Run Tracker isn’t based on Statcast data, but it matches up fairly well with what’s available, and it stretches all the way back to 2006. For each home run, the tracker calculates an estimated apex. The site’s definition:
Apex – the highest point reached by the ball in flight above field level, in feet.
Simple concept. Every home run is hit on an arc. The apex is the highest point on the arc. It isn’t measured directly, but there are math-y formulas to figure it out. I’m not smart enough, but somebody is. According to the site, Hanley’s home run off Young reached an apex of 180 feet above the playing field.
Problem: we don’t know what that means. Not by itself. So, how about some useful context? This year, the average apex for the average home run is 89 feet above the playing field. In other words, half of the Hanley homer apex. The second-highest apex this season: 154 feet, done three times. That’s a difference of 26 feet. That’s a big difference!
Which makes you wonder about any data errors. But while we’re here, why not examine the archives? The ESPN Home Run Tracker goes back to the start of 2006. Here are the highest home runs on record:
| Date | Hitter | Pitcher | Speed | Angle | Apex |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6/21/2015 | Hanley Ramirez | Chris Young | 111.3 | 40.2 | 180 |
| 5/24/2006 | Carlos Lee | Brandon Claussen | 118.3 | 35.6 | 177 |
| 5/24/2009 | Ian Kinsler | Mike Hampton | 108.1 | 39.9 | 172 |
| 9/16/2014 | Corey Dickerson | Dan Haren | 107.0 | 41.9 | 171 |
Playoffs, of course, are included. Doesn’t matter. On the site, there are four home runs with an apex of at least 170 feet. There’s one with an apex of at least 180 feet. It was just hit a few days ago. I love to talk about extraordinary events. This seems like it was absolutely an extraordinary event, even if it only seems extraordinary upon deeper analysis.
I mentioned the possibility of data errors. Maybe the ESPN Home Run Tracker just got something wrong. It calculated a speed off the bat of 111 miles per hour, and a launch angle of about 40 degrees. Well, would you look at that? Gameday’s input, based on Statcast:
Perfect agreement on speed off the bat. And according to Statcast, the ball left the bat at an even more extreme angle. Trying a third route, here’s manual confirmation.
You can just see the ball, as a blur, which means it’s possible to measure the launch angle with just a few coordinates (or a protractor on your screen). Based on this replay, the launch angle was…44.7 degrees. So, 45 degrees. So, what Statcast said. Everything’s making sense, and while there’s no confirmation of the calculated apex, the inputs aren’t wrong. Meaning this is less likely to be a mistake.
For a good idea of how unusual this was, here are all 2015 home runs, with launch angle and batted-ball speed. Hanley’s home run is clearly marked, and note that this doesn’t use the Statcast launch angle. Trying to be consistent.
That yellow dot doesn’t want to play with those gray dots. It’s not even trying to fit in. Kind of like Hanley Ramirez himself! There are some other weird home runs, but none quite like this one. By apex, the second-highest homer this year is 3.2 standard deviations from the mean. Hanley’s home run comes in at 4.5. It’s crazy enough you don’t want to completely write off the possibility of a calculation error, but we know the angle and we know the speed. Calculating the apex ought to be the easy part.
Side view:
You can see how aggressively Hanley loads. You get a sense of the uppercut, by watching Hanley’s back as he swings through the baseball. The pitch he hit wasn’t that high, but against Chris Young, it makes sense to prepare yourself for a pitch up. Hanley might’ve already been thinking about finishing his swing high. With the pitch in the middle of the zone, vertically, that might’ve led to his swing path. He obviously didn’t sacrifice anything in the way of bat speed or force.
Which, hey, that’s good news for Hanley Ramirez. From Baseball Savant, his average batted-ball speeds by week:
He was trying to recover from a shoulder injury. Before getting hurt, his average exit velocity was 98 miles per hour. Over the next month, it dropped to 87. This past week, he’s at 97. Maybe this is Hanley getting right. Or maybe this is just a hot week. I don’t know. This is more about the homer than the hitter, and the homer was apparently insane.
Noted Royals broadcaster Rex Hudler during a replay:
This ball was hit as high as it was long.
It wasn’t, exactly. Really wasn’t close, if you want to be literal about it. But, if you want to be literal about it, rare is the home run that comes closer.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.




You mean the highest home run wasn’t by Jon Singleton?
Waaaaahwwaaaaaah
Haha like Singleton is the only MLB player who smokes reefer.
Your username is fitting.
I’m looking at hit tracker and it says the true distance was 414 and the standard distance was 363, which would mean he got an incredible 51 extra feet due to conditions.
It’s extremely tough to hit a homer with a 45 degree angle off the bat unless you get some help (generally a tail wind). A 10mph tail wind could easily have added 40-50 feet on the ball Ramirez hit.
I was at a day game in Anaheim several years back where Mike Napoli hit the highest ball I ever saw. Obviously not a homerun, but it was a triple that landed shallow in the outfield grass just behind the third base bag.
That is how high it went, so high that not only could no one catch it, but also so high that Mike Napoli, of all people, could run all the way to third on the play.
Terrible outfield defense.
http://m.mlb.com/video/v6059817/tblaa-napoli-legs-out-a-triple-to-score-morales/?query=napoli%2Btriple
Nice find! Not a defense’ finest moment but that ball was so far up there and the sky so bright I was not surprised they couldn’t make the play.
And that’s Carl Crawford out there in LF that couldn’t get it, too — pretty wild.
Hangtime on that is about 7.5 seconds
So, a high launch angle (> 45 degrees) would likely result in reduced launch speed? I always thought launch angle was fairly independent of bat speed.
Pop-ups have a relatively low launch speed, right? (Also, in a naively Newtonian world, with no drag, pop-ups can be home runs.)
http://www.hardballtimes.com/the-physics-of-the-pop-up/
Generally it means you didn’t square the ball up as much. A high launch angle + high velocity generally requires that you be hacking up at a pitch.
This article made me wonder if, for all intents and purposes, it’s impossible to hit a homer above 45 degrees.
Last night Hud explained what a koozie was to to the TV audience (you put your drink in it, but it’s not a cooler), so his description of the ball being hit as high as it was long was downright erudite.
Anyone know whose HR is the point farthest over on the x-axis, at over 120 mph?
I’m guessing Giancarlo, but I don’t know for sure. I think he has the fastest speed off the bat in 2015 (Baseball Savant) and it was ~ 120 mph.
Josh Donaldson: http://hittrackeronline.com/index.php?sortm=sob&sort=desc
Gameday segment you quoted says ball traveled 481 feet, which it plainly did not. Seems at least some chance of a data error.
The broadcast mentions, at some point, that there was a strong wind blowing out to left.
It says the ball *traveled* 481 feet, not that it landed 481 feet from home plate.
Indeed, this is the only logical explanation. ESPN Home Run Tracker tracked the HR at 414 feet, at a 40.2 degree angle. However, when I did some calculations as to how far the ball actually traveled along the curve, I got a distance of 550-570 feet. For a ball that traveled very high into the air, 481 feet seemed way too low. (I took into account that the ball was caught approximately 24 feet above ground level.) And if you consider that the angle was actually closer to 45 degrees, then it should have traveled farther along the curve, still (as a lower angle gives the ball a more direct path to its target).
Based on my simulation of the HR, the ball traveled 555 feet along the curve, when it was caught (second red dot):
(link is on where it says “my simulation of the HR”)
http://i1257.photobucket.com/albums/ii502/sj10689/HR%20Graph.png~original
Wait a minute…Mike Hampton pitched in the MLB in 2009?
This is what caught my attention as well
I have no love for the Red Sox, and am tired of reading about what Hanley can’t do, but I have no problem with reading about what he can do. Especially when it is as strange and subtly remarkable as the pitcher he was facing.
Are you sure the yellow dot is the one you want to highlight? Text says that the angle was 44.7 degrees, but the yellow dot appears on the line elevation = 40 degrees.
I used the angles shown on the ESPN Home Run Tracker.
But if you read the chart, the highlighted marker isn’t at the value y = 45 nor is it the highest y value shown on the graph. By the naked eye there are what, at least six, markers representing home runs with higher angles.
Shouldn’t the home run in question be represented by the marker that just grazes the y = 45 reference line? (Which looks like it came off the bat at a speed of appx. 97 mph.)
The espn data gave a launch angle of 40 degrees. Stratcast data gave a launch angle of 45 degrees. All the data on the graph come from espn. Therefore, this home run is “correctly” shown as having a launch angle of only 40 degrees.
I would be interested to learn more about how the measured angles could possibly be so disparate.
I don’t know how sensitive the cameras are, but depending on how things are calibrated, 5 degrees might be well within the margin of error for each system. I think there’s a fair amount of overconfidence about how precise some of these measurement systems are.
Perhaps the 40 degree measurement is subtracting the angle of the pitch’s descent, while 45 degrees is the normal measurement of angle?
I was wondering if hang time could be used as a metric for this. As stated in the article, it took longer than a usual home run takes to come down.
When I heard that Hanley had hit the highest home run on record I was almost certain it was going to be over the green monster.
That homerun by Carlos Lee must have traveled a mile! It has the highest exit velocity and lowest angle, yet still rises to 177 feet…must have been absolutely smoked…
Surprisingly, the true distance was only 415 feet according to ESPN’s Home Run Tracker.
That was a well hit ball with a lot of backspin, which is extra fun, but the breeze was blowing out. If that breeze were blowing in it’s going to turn around and come right back. Maybe he coulda hit it twice.
You could also measure the face angle of the players in the dugout from the side GIF view. (In case you can’t see the ball).
Just think of what the speed would have been if he had squared it up on contact.
I’ve seen a few bounce off the catwalks in Tampa; I always wondered how often that took away homers. Now, it makes me wonder if any of those could have challenged these “highest homers”.