goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
I think batting average is going to start getting to be much more important in the future actually.
how?
I think batting average is going to start getting to be much more important in the future actually.
how?
I've explained it already sir.
Just not intelligently.
But the second player is most likely not knocking anyone in from first while the other player most likely is. Perfect example is Stella! vs Justin. Stella! led the team with RBIs per at-bat w/RISP, but he didn't knock in a single person from first. Justin knocked in 25.
The answer is scappy white guys that put the ball in play!
We will see where baseball goes.
Again, I've never said it was going to be an end all stat. My claim is that its going to be valued more moving forward than it was the last 15-20 years.
Why are we discussing RBI like it's some important stat? Players with more RBI chances tend to have more RBI. Averages with RISP are flukey from year to year and over time will generally reflect a persons average as a whole. Good hitters are good hitters and bad hitters are bad hitters regardless if they are lucky or not in one given situation for a year.
All I said was, flukey or not, Upton was poor with RISP and it hurt us at least a little bit. Someone that lucked into hitting .300 at the 4 spot instead of .228 and .243 would have helped.
Good offense is still going to be good offense regardless of where it comes from or how it happens. A 260/350/510 player will still be more valuable than a 300/350/425 player. You just may see more players with a higher average if the league shifts in that direction.
I think consistency is going to be the big thing now. Which teams can consistently string together more productive AB's. I'm really just not sure anymore. I think the statline that you quoted may be a player that flames out real quick after 30 because they lose some bat speed. The shift in baseball is dramatic and I think everything we've "known" from the last 15 years will have to be re-learned.
Braves went to the WS 6 times in the 90's, backed mostly by a dominant pitching staff and a not so great offense (for the most part). Yankees made the WS at least 5 times from 96 to 2003. Cards and Giants have made the WS probably a combined what like 7 or 8 times over the last 9 years? Not mention, how many more LCS's have these teams played in over those spans? How the A's of the late 80s and early 90s? Or the Dodgers in the 80's? The Big Red Machine in the 70's?
That level consistency is more than a simple roll of the dice. Pretty much every decade in baseball history has been filled with multiple WS winners and multiple WS appearances from at least 1 or 2 teams. So there are most certainly ways to build your team for consistently deep playoff runs. History proves that.
Small sample size noise is always possible. Lets wait to see where baseball goes in the next five years.