August 25, 2016

Sometimes Chass is Right

Murray Chass makes an excellent point in his latest column. He chides an article that indicates defensive shifts will prevent another .400 hitter:

How could any baseball executive say that, and how could any baseball writer write it without stating the obvious? Do Wallace Matthews and the unnamed Yankees executive know when someone last hit .400? Have they ever heard of Ted Williams? Do they know when he hit .400? Do they know it was 75 years ago, in 1941? Do they know that no one has hit .400 since? Do they think defensive shifts have had anything to do with no one hitting .400 since Williams hit .406?

In fact, as long as Matthews was writing about shifts, he might have mention that Williams was probably the first player against whom a shift was employed. But to say or write that shifts will be the end of the .400 hitter when baseball hasn’t had such an animal for 75 years is ludicrous.

It’s not about the shifts, it’s about the strikeouts. Williams struck out 27 times in 1941, one of the lowest full season totals for his career. He put the ball in play hard, and he put it in play often. Players are becoming smarter about how the game works. At some point, I suspect, some high BABIP player will realize that by cutting down on strike outs he might be able to hit .400. I’m looking at you, Mike Trout and Jose Altuve.

1 thought on “Sometimes Chass is Right

  1. pft

    There are many reasons nobody will hit 400 again. The strike outs are important of course, but they are just an offshoot to better pitching due to a larger talent pool due to inclusion of blacks and foreigners and better training and optimum usage, and smaller parks which mean there is less territory for balls to fall in, and perhaps better defense.

    However, its interesting that BABIP in 1941 was 283 in the AL and 299 in 2016. Shifts don’t seem to be preventing hits that much . In 2011 when shifts were just gaining popularity BABIP was 295.

    I keep going back to the talent pool as the main reason. I suspect MLB in 1941 was probably not much better overall than AAA today, so the best hitters just put up better numbers facing many more pitchers who would be considered replacement level today. The SD of the talent distribution was much larger. The average pitcher today is just so much better than the average pitcher in 1941

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *