I don't think you understand what "type errors" means if you are making that assertion; or your multi-contributor codebase has such excellent test coverage that your tests are doing for you what a modern type system can do for you.

In a dynamically-typed codebase, it's near impossible to have rare type-error occurrence because you're off-loading the type system into into the programmers head (which is subject to human fallibility - even when countered with excellent unit testing!)

To be specific, I was talking only of a specific sort of errors that the JIT compiler allows e.g. applying numerical operators to strings, or combinations of string and int.

Issues with null are much more common.

In JS, I see things like methods called with incorrect number of parameters, or wrong parameter types, on a reasonably regular basis, especially when things get refactored every now and then.

I frequently see methods incorrectly overidden. For example, the ancestor method effectively has a variadic argument list, but the descendant doesn't have as sophisticated argument handling and doesn't do the appropriate superFunc.apply(this, Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments, 0)) etc.