Comments on: 20+ HR with a SLG under .400

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:10:09 +0000

Glad to have you back....just pace yourself! 🙂

By: vonhayes

vonhayes — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:31:14 +0000

I was becoming obsessed with baseball stats and I had to take a temporary leave of absence.

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:51:05 +0000

Hey vonhayes! Nice to see you back here.

By: vonhayes

vonhayes — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:42:27 +0000

I know it's not exactly on topic, since he was 4 whole points above .400, but check out Marquis Grissom's 2001. Taking league averages into account, I think it was the worst ever. Maybe his glove was still good then...

By: vonhayes

vonhayes — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:38:36 +0000

Worst ever was Dale Murphy.

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 19:06:44 +0000

Well it can't be that easy, or it would have been done a lot more often.

By: mike orourke

mike orourke — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 19:02:08 +0000

I don't think it is really that difficult. You just need to have some pop, a really lousy batting average .. and a manager desperate enough to keep sending you out there ...

By: Johnny Twisto

Johnny Twisto — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:19:09 +0000

Interesting how many of these guys were really good players, just having subpar seasons. Eyeballing it, the overall BA looks to be about .225. Appears that for some reason they just weren't hitting the ball as consistently that year, but if they did get hold of one, they could still put it out.

It looks like all the seasons are since 1947. I think that's right around the time when there was a big improvement in the gloves. Fielding percentages improved and maybe doubles and triples were reduced somewhat. HR became a bigger percentage of extra-base hits post-war, and have continued to increase.