1958 and 1980 AL examples: qualifier for BA lead explored.

This post is an extension of the two previous posts, which were interrupted by two posts to deal with commissioner Manfred, the A-Rod Slayer, going off the rails on player conduct.

1958 AL Home Run race. Who "led the league in hitting" ... home runs?  Thursday, March 31, 2016

In 1958 the batter who "led the league in hitting" was Ted Williams, who had the highest batting average (BA) with .328. But Nellie Fox, White Sox second baseman, had the most hits; Williams was not even in the top ten. So why wasn't Fox regarded as the best hitter? If the best rate or average of something defines the best, then why wasn't Rocky Colavito the Home Run King in 1958, instead of Mickey Mantle. The old phrase "led the league in hitting" has faded but not completely. But looking at HR rate has never taken hold. We still deal with HR as totals.

Today's smarties are into WAR (Wins Above Replacement) as a unifying theory. WAR is a total. So, how far have we come?
______________________________

Qualifying for Batting Average makes no sense. It doesn't use the denominator.  Sunday, April 3, 2016

Denominator. You know. The bottom of an equation...

Rule 9.22(a) Comment: For example, if a Major League schedules
162 games for each club, 502 plate appearances qualify
(162 times 3.1 equals 502) a player for a batting, slugging or
on-base percentage championship...

... at bats (AB) as the denominator, NOT plate appearances (PA). It's pretty basic...

... qualification should be based on opportunities (AB) or accomplishments (Hits, Total Bases, etc.) or some combination. However, opportunity qualification should NOT be based on PA.
_______________________________

Top ten? Ted Williams was number 19 in Hits and qualified for the BA championship in 1958 with only 517 PA. 154 games multiplied by 3.1 equals a measly 477 PA to qualify. Of the top 19 in Hits in the AL in 1958 Williams had by far the fewest AB (411), which should have been the qualifier and the required number of AB should have been a lot more than 411.

1958

nameFirst	nameLast	teamID	AB	H	HR	BA	HRrate	PA
Nellie	Fox	CHA	623	187	0	.300	#Div/0!	698
Frank	Malzone	BOS	627	185	15	.295	41.8	672
Pete	Runnels	BOS	568	183	8	.322	71.0	666
Harvey	Kuenn	DET	561	179	8	.319	70.1	619
Al	Kaline	DET	543	170	16	.313	33.9	607
Minnie	Minoso	CLE	556	168	24	.302	23.2	638
Frank	Bolling	DET	610	164	14	.269	43.6	681
Roy	Sievers	WS1	550	162	39	.295	14.1	614
Mickey	Mantle	NYA	519	158	42	.304	12.4	654
Bob	Cerv	KC1	515	157	38	.305	13.6	572
Jackie	Jensen	BOS	548	157	35	.286	15.7	655
Rocky	Colavito	CLE	489	148	41	.303	11.9	578
Luis	Aparicio	CHA	557	148	2	.266	278.5	604
Tony	Kubek	NYA	559	148	2	.265	279.5	597
Hector	Lopez	KC1	564	147	17	.261	33.2	631
Albie	Pearson	WS1	530	146	3	.275	176.7	610
Jim	Landis	CHA	523	145	15	.277	34.9	593
Norm	Siebern	NYA	460	138	14	.300	32.9	533
Ted	Williams	BOS	411	135	26	.328	15.8	517

So by any common sense or fairness standard Ted Williams should not have qualified for the lead in BA or Slugging average. Lets see what might have made sense.

Pete Runnels was in his first season on the Boston Red Sox and a teammate of Williams. Officially, Runnels finished 1958 with the second highest BA. Runnels had 568 AB and 666 PA, numbers which dwarfed those of Williams. Runnels should have been considered the BA champion and the "league's leading hitter" using the logic and parlance of the time. Runnels would go on to have the highest AL BA in 1960 and 1962. Runnels played for three teams with these AB and BA:
Washington: 3,817  .274
Boston: 3,004  .320
Houston: 508  .246

George Brett is considered to have the highest BA since Ted Williams hit .406 in 1941. In 1990 Brett hit .390 but in only 515 PA and 449 AB. Brett played in 117 of 162 games. That's ridiculous. Cecil Cooper batted .352 in 687 PA, 622 AB, 153 games. However, Brett had 175 Hits, more than one per scheduled game. Brett was tied for number 15 in Hits.

1980

nameFirst	nameLast	teamID	AB	H	HR	BA	HRrate	PA
Willie	Wilson	KCA	705	230	3	.326	235.0	745
Cecil	Cooper	ML4	622	219	25	.352	24.9	678
Mickey	Rivers	TEX	630	210	7	.333	90.0	661
Al	Oliver	TEX	656	209	19	.319	34.5	709
Al	Bumbry	BAL	645	205	9	.318	71.7	738
Eddie	Murray	BAL	621	186	32	.300	19.4	683
Miguel	Dilone	CLE	528	180	0	.341	#Div/0!	566
Ben	Oglivie	ML4	592	180	41	.304	14.4	660
Rick	Burleson	BOS	644	179	8	.278	80.5	718
Rod	Carew	CAL	540	179	3	.331	180.0	612
Rickey	Henderson	OAK	591	179	9	.303	65.7	722
Robin	Yount	ML4	611	179	23	.293	26.6	647
Mike	Hargrove	CLE	589	179	11	.304	53.5	720
Ken	Singleton	BAL	583	177	24	.304	24.3	680
Tony	Armas	OAK	628	175	35	.279	17.9	666
George	Brett	KCA	449	175	24	.390	18.7	515

1. Opportunities: The denominator should be used in any average stat. That's basic common sense. BA = Hits/AB. Let's consider the low threshold of 3.1 per game. That's applied to PA and it yields a threshold that's ridiculously low. In 154 games it would be 477 PA. I would use 500 AB even for 154 games and higher for 162.

2. Accomplishment: Looking at the 1958 table above Rocky Colavito had a lot more Hits (148) and AB (489) than Williams. But using only opportunities as the qualifier, Colavito would not be considered. What if we used the number of Hits, maybe the top 10 or 15? Maybe that in conjunction with AB? Maybe Hits relative to scheduled games.

I'd lean towards the top 15 in Hits. Using PA makes no sense. It's just lazy thinking that's a holdover from long ago when they simplified things by having the same standard for a bunch of average stats, some of which they incorrectly called percentages, such as On Base Percentage (OBP), which not show as a percentage but as an average. It's just lazy.