.304 and a Batting Champion?

DGS49

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
19,659
Reaction score
20,819
Points
2,415
Location
Pittsburgh

The explanation for the relatively low averages this year is better pitching, but is something else the main reason?

In my opinion, most batters are now swinging for the fences. Not only that, but they don't cut back on their swing with two strikes, which has been the custom forever. Everyone bows to the "gold standard" of OPS, knowing that that is the universal standard for hitting now, and a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.

Note later in the article where they make a very big deal about that Kurtz kid, for his 1.000 OPS, and saying that he only the 8th rookie to achieve such an accomplishment since the Dead Ball Era (or something like that). This in spite of the fact that nobody had even heard of OPS before a relatively few years ago.

While the pitching does appear to be better now than it was in the past, batters are better prepared as well, with good coaching from the time they are in T-ball, so pitching and hitting should be elevating at approximately the same pace. What is different now is the pursuit of OPS rather than batting average, as was the case for more than a hundred years.

Prove me wrong.
 
[/URL]

The explanation for the relatively low averages this year is better pitching, but is something else the main reason?

In my opinion, most batters are now swinging for the fences. Not only that, but they don't cut back on their swing with two strikes, which has been the custom forever. Everyone bows to the "gold standard" of OPS, knowing that that is the universal standard for hitting now, and a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.

Note later in the article where they make a very big deal about that Kurtz kid, for his 1.000 OPS, and saying that he only the 8th rookie to achieve such an accomplishment since the Dead Ball Era (or something like that). This in spite of the fact that nobody had even heard of OPS before a relatively few years ago.

While the pitching does appear to be better now than it was in the past, batters are better prepared as well, with good coaching from the time they are in T-ball, so pitching and hitting should be elevating at approximately the same pace. What is different now is the pursuit of OPS rather than batting average, as was the case for more than a hundred years.

Prove me wrong
a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.
yes it does....1/2 of the OPS number is the OBP number were a single is just as good as a home run....
 

The explanation for the relatively low averages this year is better pitching, but is something else the main reason?

In my opinion, most batters are now swinging for the fences. Not only that, but they don't cut back on their swing with two strikes, which has been the custom forever. Everyone bows to the "gold standard" of OPS, knowing that that is the universal standard for hitting now, and a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.

Note later in the article where they make a very big deal about that Kurtz kid, for his 1.000 OPS, and saying that he only the 8th rookie to achieve such an accomplishment since the Dead Ball Era (or something like that). This in spite of the fact that nobody had even heard of OPS before a relatively few years ago.

While the pitching does appear to be better now than it was in the past, batters are better prepared as well, with good coaching from the time they are in T-ball, so pitching and hitting should be elevating at approximately the same pace. What is different now is the pursuit of OPS rather than batting average, as was the case for more than a hundred years.

Prove me wrong.
Phillies haven't won a batting title since Richie Ashburn in 1958. I don't care.
 

The explanation for the relatively low averages this year is better pitching, but is something else the main reason?

In my opinion, most batters are now swinging for the fences. Not only that, but they don't cut back on their swing with two strikes, which has been the custom forever. Everyone bows to the "gold standard" of OPS, knowing that that is the universal standard for hitting now, and a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.

Note later in the article where they make a very big deal about that Kurtz kid, for his 1.000 OPS, and saying that he only the 8th rookie to achieve such an accomplishment since the Dead Ball Era (or something like that). This in spite of the fact that nobody had even heard of OPS before a relatively few years ago.

While the pitching does appear to be better now than it was in the past, batters are better prepared as well, with good coaching from the time they are in T-ball, so pitching and hitting should be elevating at approximately the same pace. What is different now is the pursuit of OPS rather than batting average, as was the case for more than a hundred years.

Prove me wrong.
It is not just the pitching, it is AI and the scouting on how to pitch to a players specific weaknesses.

It is so good now, they even have a lot of information on players coming up from the minors and are ready on how to pitch to them.
 

The explanation for the relatively low averages this year is better pitching, but is something else the main reason?

In my opinion, most batters are now swinging for the fences. Not only that, but they don't cut back on their swing with two strikes, which has been the custom forever. Everyone bows to the "gold standard" of OPS, knowing that that is the universal standard for hitting now, and a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.

Note later in the article where they make a very big deal about that Kurtz kid, for his 1.000 OPS, and saying that he only the 8th rookie to achieve such an accomplishment since the Dead Ball Era (or something like that). This in spite of the fact that nobody had even heard of OPS before a relatively few years ago.

While the pitching does appear to be better now than it was in the past, batters are better prepared as well, with good coaching from the time they are in T-ball, so pitching and hitting should be elevating at approximately the same pace. What is different now is the pursuit of OPS rather than batting average, as was the case for more than a hundred years.

Prove me wrong.
in 1968 yastremski hit .301 and won the title.....while rose hit .335 in the nat....
 
It is not just the pitching, it is AI and the scouting on how to pitch to a players specific weaknesses.

It is so good now, they even have a lot of information on players coming up from the minors and are ready on how to pitch to them.
You know you'd think the year the overshift ended, averages would be higher.
 

The explanation for the relatively low averages this year is better pitching, but is something else the main reason?

In my opinion, most batters are now swinging for the fences. Not only that, but they don't cut back on their swing with two strikes, which has been the custom forever. Everyone bows to the "gold standard" of OPS, knowing that that is the universal standard for hitting now, and a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.

Note later in the article where they make a very big deal about that Kurtz kid, for his 1.000 OPS, and saying that he only the 8th rookie to achieve such an accomplishment since the Dead Ball Era (or something like that). This in spite of the fact that nobody had even heard of OPS before a relatively few years ago.

While the pitching does appear to be better now than it was in the past, batters are better prepared as well, with good coaching from the time they are in T-ball, so pitching and hitting should be elevating at approximately the same pace. What is different now is the pursuit of OPS rather than batting average, as was the case for more than a hundred years.

Prove me wrong.
Everybody throws 100 now. Used to be a rarity.
 
I wonder what inning by inning batting averages used to be and what effect the advent of part-game pitching has had on those statistics.
 

The explanation for the relatively low averages this year is better pitching, but is something else the main reason?

In my opinion, most batters are now swinging for the fences. Not only that, but they don't cut back on their swing with two strikes, which has been the custom forever. Everyone bows to the "gold standard" of OPS, knowing that that is the universal standard for hitting now, and a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.

Note later in the article where they make a very big deal about that Kurtz kid, for his 1.000 OPS, and saying that he only the 8th rookie to achieve such an accomplishment since the Dead Ball Era (or something like that). This in spite of the fact that nobody had even heard of OPS before a relatively few years ago.

While the pitching does appear to be better now than it was in the past, batters are better prepared as well, with good coaching from the time they are in T-ball, so pitching and hitting should be elevating at approximately the same pace. What is different now is the pursuit of OPS rather than batting average, as was the case for more than a hundred years.

Prove me wrong.
It's not just that but I agree that the love of the long ball has contributed to lower batting averages. What manager wouldn't want to have another Tony Gwynn in their lineup?
 

The explanation for the relatively low averages this year is better pitching, but is something else the main reason?

In my opinion, most batters are now swinging for the fences. Not only that, but they don't cut back on their swing with two strikes, which has been the custom forever. Everyone bows to the "gold standard" of OPS, knowing that that is the universal standard for hitting now, and a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.

Note later in the article where they make a very big deal about that Kurtz kid, for his 1.000 OPS, and saying that he only the 8th rookie to achieve such an accomplishment since the Dead Ball Era (or something like that). This in spite of the fact that nobody had even heard of OPS before a relatively few years ago.

While the pitching does appear to be better now than it was in the past, batters are better prepared as well, with good coaching from the time they are in T-ball, so pitching and hitting should be elevating at approximately the same pace. What is different now is the pursuit of OPS rather than batting average, as was the case for more than a hundred years.

Prove me wrong.


304 is not the issue. The number is relative to all other players with min AB=500? That was the highest.

Yes, its sabernetrics, launch angle etc. But then when they need to get on? Many cant adapt like old wiley ****** Herzog players.

Unlimited Strikeouts became acceptable if you hit one HR every 20AB?
 
304 is not the issue. The number is relative to all other players with min AB=500? That was the highest.

Yes, its sabernetrics, launch angle etc. But then when they need to get on? Many cant adapt like old wiley ****** Herzog players.

Unlimited Strikeouts became acceptable if you hit one HR every 20AB?


Ain't that something. The board wont let you post "******" Herzog? Thats his name as far as I know?

What a bunch of pantyliner BS.
 

The explanation for the relatively low averages this year is better pitching, but is something else the main reason?

In my opinion, most batters are now swinging for the fences. Not only that, but they don't cut back on their swing with two strikes, which has been the custom forever. Everyone bows to the "gold standard" of OPS, knowing that that is the universal standard for hitting now, and a single does almost nothing for your OPS compared to an extra-base hit.

Note later in the article where they make a very big deal about that Kurtz kid, for his 1.000 OPS, and saying that he only the 8th rookie to achieve such an accomplishment since the Dead Ball Era (or something like that). This in spite of the fact that nobody had even heard of OPS before a relatively few years ago.

While the pitching does appear to be better now than it was in the past, batters are better prepared as well, with good coaching from the time they are in T-ball, so pitching and hitting should be elevating at approximately the same pace. What is different now is the pursuit of OPS rather than batting average, as was the case for more than a hundred years.

Prove me wrong.
No, youre on it. Power hitters produce more runs than high BA, slappy hitters.
 
15th post
No, youre on it. Power hitters produce more runs than high BA, slappy hitters.

And yet...Wade Boggs was regularly in the top 5 (led MLB twice) in runs scored. He led the league in OPS twice. He led MLB in WAR hitting 5 and 8 home runs and with a sub-.500 slugging.
 
And yet...Wade Boggs was regularly in the top 5 (led MLB twice) in runs scored. He led the league in OPS twice.
Right, because he had people behind him who could hit. Note he batted in 58 and 54 runs, respectively, in those two years. And that to his runs scored each season, and his run production is not even in the top 10 in 2025 MLB, for either total.

Oh, and he was an easy first ballot HOFer.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom