Alex Rodriguez: If this post were written following 1996 I would've likely said he'll be there by now.

Really??? I'm not sure the writer realizes just how improbable .400 is.

As previously mentioned, a .400+ BABIP is not necessary to possess a .400 batting average if a player can maintain a good homerun rate and fend off enough strikeouts.

People actually put up BAs higher than their BABIP? This is blowing my mind. It seems stupid now, but until reading this article, I though HRs were part of BABIP, but even without that, wouldn't a player's HR-(K + foul outs) > 0 in order for this to work? How could that possibly happen?

Well, Elston, a player would just need HR/(K+foul outs) to be higher than .4 in order to be able to hit .400 with a BABIP lower than .4. I don't have access to foul out data, but I'd have to assume Dimaggio, Berra, and Williams all had years where they did it. Of course, the fact that the 3 of them did it does not means it's easy to do.

Of the current players, really only Pujols seems like a reasonable bet to put up a HR/(K+foul outs) better than .4 in a given season. It's hard to picture any current player other than Pujols actually finishing a season at .400

Of the current players, really only Pujols seems like a reasonable bet to put up a HR/(K+foul outs) better than .4 in a given season.

Doesn't this happen all the time? I honestly have no idea what percentage of ABs turn into foul outs (anyone know where I can find this?), but Vlad (an extreme example, but still) has a career HR/K ratio of 0.48. Quentin this year was at 0.45. Carlos Lee was at 0.57.

The high BABIP seems much rarer than a high HR/(K+foul outs) ratio.

Ah, yes. I am stupid.

You are correct, plink, but that's just because my equation was incorrect. It should be HR/(HR+K+foul outs), which makes it harder to accomplish.

Quentin and Lee both fall short using the correct method, as does Guerrero every year of his career.

That is my mistake though :)

Ah - good point! That'll teach me to take your statements at face value.

OK, previous year's leaders in HR/(HR + K), 0.4 cut-off. "Just misses" means .370-ish

2007: Pujols (0.4)
2006: Pujols (0.49), Garciaparra (0.4), Crede, Bonds, A Ramirez just miss
2005: Guerrero (0.4), Pujols just misses
2004: Bonds (0.52), Pujols (0.47), Sean Casey (0.4), A Ramirez just misses
2003: Bonds (0.44), Sheffield (0.41), Pujols just misses
2002: Bonds (~.45), Randall Simon just misses
2001: Lo Duca (0.45), Bonds, (0.44), Luis Gonzalez (0.401)

That's revealing. It's Bonds, Pujols, and a bunch of peak years.

That's revealing. It's Bonds, Pujols, and a bunch of peak years.

Not a huge surprise. Power hitters who don't K are a pretty rare breed, especially these days. (They've always been a rare breed relative to league average but when you figure that Babe Ruth struck out at a rate that was much better than today's average ...) I suspect if you did a longer list for a few more years, you'd see a lot of Vlad and Sheff in 3rd and 4th. And, yeah, ARAM has gotten pretty good at it too.

Bill Buckner did it once (18/43), there were probably a few others like that back in the old days. (that one's for HW :-) Gwynn was 12/31 in his big BA year (and that was 94 with the short season) and he had 16/34 and 10/24 late in his career.

Really, it was Gwynn's own fault -- if he had traded 8 Ks for BIP, he'd have hit 400. :-)

But to have a BABIP near or above 400 is the harder part. You're certainly never going to have a HR/(HR+K) that adds enough to your BA to make up for a paltry 380 BABIP!

It's not that today's players aren't able to maintain batting averages on balls in play over .400....

Doesn't this assertion by the author argue against his earlier claim that the superior fielding in today's game is a major factor preventing the recurrence of a .400 hitter? That is, if today's fielding is so superior to that of years past, then shouldn't it be close to impossible for today's players to maintain a BABIP above .400?

Personally, in my opinion the two major reasons why there hasn't been a .400 hitter since Williams are: 1) luck; and, 2) strategy. As was mentioned in the article, Tony Gwynn missed .400 by just three hits. If I remember correctly, Wade Boggs once hit .400 over a twelve month period that overlapped seasons (i.e. July 1 of one year through June 30 of the next). I'm sure there are other instances over the past sixty-seven years when a few breaks here or there could have put someone over the magic .400 mark.

As regards strategy, there are fewer basehits in today's game than there would be if the game was still played the way it once was, with a de-emphasis on homeruns. More players going for the home run in more at bats in today's game means fewer players trying to slap singles just over an infielder's head. That's not to say that players should play the game today like they did in the 1930's and 1940's; but just to make the point that they don't, which has a profound effect on batting average (just as it does on all other stats, like strikeout-to-walk ratios, saves, wins, innings pitched, etc.).

Are foul outs not considered balls in play? I could have sworn they were.

OK, looked it up, and by B-R's definition of "in play", only K's and HR's are "not" in play. Foul balls are considered "in play" and count towards the IFFB/OFFB stats, depending on where it is caught.

It's not that today's players aren't able to maintain batting averages on balls in play over .400....

Well, but that assertion is wrong ... or maybe he means it as "they have the talent to do so but choose to hit HR instead" which might be possible.

Too lazy to figure it now, but Gwynn & Boggs had career BABIPs in the 340s, I think Carew was around 360, Cobb was in the 370s I think (there's not K data back that far). Cobb and Hornsby and maybe Williams probably had a string of seasons with BABIP>400 but nobody's done it consistently (OK, I haven't checked, but I'd be stunned).

For that matter, almost nobody has maintained an on-contact BA (that one includes HRs) over 400 even for a few seasons. That's the part of the article that just leaves me scratching my head -- maybe the guy is just mixing up his terminology.

It will happen.................eventually. Just as someone will eventually beat JD's 56 game hitting streak.

I cannot believe it. I am in full agreement with Beano.

Without my bothering to look it up, are sacrifices subtracted in BABIP, or are they treated just like a normal fly out or bunt?

You know it's 1:37 in the morning when my immediate response to #12 is..."when did JD Drew put together a hitting streak like that?"

I will now go kill myself in an equally emabrassing way, if such a thing exists

You know it's 1:37 in the morning when my immediate response to #12 is..."when did JD Drew put together a hitting streak like that?"

I will now go kill myself in an equally emabrassing way, if such a thing exists

I bet something involving mayonnaise and a life-size Minnie Mouse would suffice.

You know, it took me about three seconds to figure out he wasn't talking about Drew too. And it's only 12:33 my time.