Baseball History Comes Alive Now Ranked #2 by Feedspot Among All Internet Baseball History Websites and Blogs!
Guest Submissions from Our Readers Always Welcome!
Please note: As we compose new blog entries, we will now send each one out to all our subscribers as we post them. Here’s a link to see the entire Blog Archives -GL
THE BASEBALL HISTORY COMES ALIVE BLOG
Please note: As we compose new blog entries, we will now send each one out to all our subscribers as we post them. Here’s a link to see the entire Blog Archives -GL
New Blog Topic: THE .400 HITTER – GONE BUT NOT FORGOTTEN
March 30, 2021
It’s one of baseball’s magical, yet elusive numbers. So elusive that it hasn’t been achieved in 80 years, not since the great Ted Williams finished the 1941 season with a .406 batting average. Yep, that’s the number, .400, and it’s considered one of baseball’s supreme achievements. Yet in the long history of the game, since the National League was formed in 1876, that number has only appeared in season-ending statistics 28 times and reached by just 20 ballplayers. I’ll say it again. In the long history of the game.
A further breakdown of those numbers indicates just how difficult it is to reach that number over a full baseball season. In the pre-modern era, from 1876 to 1899, an era of changing rules and a lack of stability in franchises, 12 different players hit .400 or better 15 times, topped by Hugh Duffy’s .440 average for the Boston Beaneaters in 1894. Duffy, who was a .326 lifetime hitter, had a miraculous season in which he played in 125 games yet had 237 hits in 539 at-bats, including 51 doubles, 18 home runs, and 145 RBIs. A good number of his homers were of the inside-the-park variety. Still, truly amazing and by far his best season.
There were some other great players, Hall of Famers, from that early group. Ed Delahanty reached the magic mark three times, in 1894, 1895, and 1899, while the great Wee Willie Keeler hit .424 in 1897. Jesse Burkett also recorded two seasons of plus .400 averages. All three are in the Hall of Fame.
Once the so-called modern era began with the formation of the American League in 1901, the .400 mark has been reached just 13 times by only eight different players. Hall of Famer Nap Lajoie began it all with a .426 mark for the Philadelphia Athletics in 1901. It was no fluke. The Hall of Famer won five batting titles during his career. Ten years later Ty Cobb joined the club with a .420 average, and that same year Shoeless Joe Jackson batted .408. A year later, Cobb was right back with a .409 mark. But perhaps surprisingly, those were the only .400 marks during the Dead Ball Era which, in a way, was more conducive to high batting averages with mostly huge outfield dimensions and not very many home runs.
But it was in the early 1920s when the .400 hitter really thrived. Rogers Hornsby three times, George Sisler twice, Cobb again and Harry Heilmann all topped the .400 mark between 1920 and 1925. Hornsby was especially lethal, also winning the Triple Crown twice and averaging .400 over five consecutive seasons with a high of .424 in 1924. Far from a punch-and-judy hitter, he had 42 and 39 homers in his Triple Crown years and drove home 152 and 143 runs in those respective seasons. He proved that a .400 hitter could also be a slugger and run producer.
But after that, the run of .400 hitters all but stopped. In 1930, the Giants’ Bill Terry batted .401 in a year that everyone in the National League hit amid stories the ball had changed. And then came the great Ted Williams, the last player to reach the coveted mark with his .406 season of 1941. Everyone pretty much knows the story of how Ted was hitting .3995 going into the final doubleheader of the season. It would have been recorded as .400 if he chose to sit, but the Splendid Splinter opted to play and got six hits in eight trips in the double bill to finish at .406. A complete hitter if there ever was one, Ted also had 37 homers and 120 RBIs that season. Pitchers feared him so much that they walked him 147 times. And in 606 plate appearances, he struck out just 47 times, another key to reaching the .400 mark. And, oh yes, in 1957 at the age of 38, Ted Williams won his fifth batting title with a .388 average. He was just five hits shy of yet another .400 season.
But no one has done it since. There have certainly been other great hitters. Why not .400 then. And will it ever be done again?
My guess is that it’s not likely. Let’s look at the last three players who have come close. In 1977, Rod Carew of the Twins hit a sizzling .388. It was no fluke. Carew was a great, all-around hitter who went to all fields and was also the best bunter in the game then. He won seven batting titles and in 1977 had 239 hits as well as 14 homers and 100 runs batted in. And he only struck out 55 times in 694 plate appearances. Just eight more hits and he would have joined the .400 club.
Then in 1980 the Royals George Brett, always a fine hitter, had a huge season in which he batted .390. The problem was that Brett was limited to 117 games by injury. Still, the three-time American League batting champ had 175 hits, 24 home runs, and 118 RBIs. That’s an RBI a game. With just five more hits he would have had claim to being a .400 hitter. And that year Brett struck out just 22 times in 515 plate appearances. Had he not been hurt would he have hit .400? Good question and one without an answer. But he sure had the chance.
And finally, there’s Tony Gwynn of the San Diego Padres, one of the finest pure hitters ever with a .338 lifetime average and eight batting titles to his credit. In 1994 Gwynn was hitting a robust .394 after 110 games when the baseball season came to a sudden halt due to the players’ strike. He already had 165 hits in 419 at-bats, 12 homers, and 64 RBIs and, amazingly, had fanned just 19 times. With only three more hits he would have been credited with a .400 season. And had there been no strike there’s a good chance he could have done it. His batting style was almost slump-proof and he hit all kinds of pitchers. During his career he also had batting averages of .372, .370, .368, .358, .353 and .351. Sounds like a guy who played in Cobb’s era.
As for today, I just don’t think it will be done. There are very few pure hitters left. D.J. LeMahieu is one I can think of, but most are free swingers going for home runs and with high strikeout totals. Even Mike Trout, considered the best player in the game over the last 10 years, never hit higher than .326 and once fanned 184 times in a season. No one player will ever come close to .400 again while taking all those slow walks to the dugout.
Yes, the .400 hitter is gone, but definitely will not be forgotten. It’s still a magic number.
Bill Gutman
As always, we enjoy reading your comments
Here’s a link to see the entire Blog Archives
Thanks Bill
Once again, you have nailed it.
Thanks, Ed. Certainly ain’t gonna happen unless the philosophy of the way the game is played changes radically. And I don’t think MLB wants that. Certainly the analytics guys don’t.
I remember in 1990, Lenny Dykstra was flirting with the .400 mark a little over halfway through the season. He went on a talk show and said, “The world will end before someone hits .400 again.” He finished the season at .325.
I believe Dykstra was right, Dave. He certainly wasn’t going to do it. It’s a shame that the 1994 season ended with the strike. Tony Gwynn might very well have made it. The way the game is played now really precludes anyone ever hitting .400 again. I’d be shocked if it happens.
Great post Bill. It’s also true that in 1941 Ted Williams had the highest On Base Average .553 for a single season, that is until Barry Bonds exceeded that twice at .582 in 2002 and an amazing .609 in 2004. Williams did it at age 22. Bonds at ages 37 & 39. I’ve heard the comment Dave mentioned from Lenny Dykstra (always one for a memorable quote) and agree .400 seems almost unattainable. Maybe someone could scare the record if the hitter had just about the minimum PAs (3.1 for each of his team’s games I think). Would be a great late-season chase to watch a bit reminiscent of Maris’ chase and even McGwire’s & Sosa’s in 1998.
Hey Mark. It sure would be a great late-season chase if a player was flirting with .400. I just don’t think it will happen due to the way the game is played today and the willingness of even the best hitters to trade a lot of strikeouts for more home runs. I think the age difference between Williams and Bonds when they had those great on base percentages tells the story. Bonds was certainly a great ballplayer, but we all know what led to his almost impossible late-career resurgence. I have a good friend, and a longtime baseball fan from our age bracket who tends to ignore what steroids did for Bonds, Clemens, McGwire and others. I simply cannot take their records at face value knowing how they did it. To me, Williams achievement was much more remarkable.
Bill
Thanks Bill. I think the story of Ted going 6 for 8 on the last day of the season is one of the best parts of it as there have been players before and since that have sat out the last game to maintain a batting title lead. I respect how you and others feel about players and performance enhancing substances but feel much as your good friend does. Ted Williams was as special as they come in many ways but in my view so were Bonds, Clemens, McGwire and a few others. As ballplayers on the field they were all-time greats and that’s how I have always judged players. I can’t understand a HOF that does not include the all-time hit leader even if he is and was his own worst enemy!
Hi again Mark. I agree that Pete Rose does belong in the Hall, especially now that baseball has joined the other sports in getting a piece of the gambling action. And for that matter, so does Joe Jackson belong in. I have to admit I’m conflicted about the so called steroid boys. Both Bonds and Clemens were obvious on a Hall of Fame track before the Roids came into play. If you recall, between 1993 and 1996, Clemens had records of 11-14, 9-7, 10-5 and 10-13. Then he’s off to Toronto at age 34 and has two straight 20-win seasons. He also goes 20-3 for the Yankees at age 38 and 18-4 for Houston at age 41. Not a normal progression. And Barry Bonds’ age 35-39 seasons were otherworldly, and they came after a very mediocre age 34 season. I think it’s apparent what both were doing. I’m not saying they don’t belong in the Hall of Fame, because there are certainly PED users already enshrined. I just don’t think those huge, late-career seasons can be looked upon in the same way knowing that they cheated the game, broke the rules to do what they did. I remember Hank Aaron saying that when you age it isn’t so much that the skills erode, it’s more a matter of recovering between games and not being able to put forth the same effort day after day. PEDs obviously helped these guys through that. Just find it difficult to turn the other cheek and heap praise on them for their late-career accomplishments.
Bill
Hi Bill,
Conflicted is a good word for it.This is a sidebar to your good post on hitting .400 and maybe some other time it would be interesting to delve more deeply into how damaging the steroid era has been and will be in the long haul. In my view it’s very easy for non-MLB players to say never. Staying in the game, at the top of the game is clearly very difficult and players have done what they could to get an edge for nearly MLB’s entire existence.
Hey Mark: Your so right about players looking get an edge over the years. Coffee, sporting drinks, anything heavy with caffeine have been used for years. Then there were the greenies. I remember Kevin Kennedy telling me that when he got to the minor leagues a jar full of greenies was always on the table. Of course, there’s a difference between that stuff an anabolic steroids, which without a doubt enhance performance. The fact that MLB declared their use illegal puts them in a whole different category. And it can be seen in the numbers of certain players. You have to wonder what they did in earlier days when so many players stayed in the lineup for almost the entire season unless they were really hurt. And, of course, so many of the greats began an obvious decline in their early thirties. Jimmie Foxx, for example, hit just 42 home runs after his age 32 season, in which he hit 36. Some say he drank himself out of the league, but he hung around until 1945 when he was 37. Like I said, I’m somewhat conflicted because some of them obviously belong in the Hall of Fame. But I can’t, in all honesty, look at Barry Bonds as the all time home run king. He had help.
Thanks Bill for the good back and forth. The all-time HR king is easier for me to quibble with than Bonds’ HOF credentials. I imagine you might feel that Bonds was a HOFer before he even became what was with the SF Giants. Whatever he took or did likely did contribute to his being able to produce at the latest stages of his career. Here’s the other thing I think, if Ted Williams, Mantle, and a host of others had the same access to PED’s, many probably would have tried taking them too! MLB did a lousy and delayed job in coming up with a cogent policy which for better or worse is what they have now.
You’re right, I don’t think that there will be another. 400 hitter. In order to achieve a .400 batting average, you can’t have any long slumps. And pitchers will not give in to you, they would rather walk you than to give up a hit. You would have to sustain a .400 batting average the whole year. In a baseball season there many ups and downs, to maintain a .400 batting average is almost impossible. Napoleon Lajoie had the advantage of watered down pitchers and has beens and never was in the brand new American League. Today the pitchers are bigger, stronger, and throw much harder, and the movement on their pitches are things that some of these .400 hitters would have difficulty hitting. Joe Jackson’s .408 is still the rookie record.
Hey Sean. Pretty much agree with what you are saying. The game and certainly the pitching were much different in the early 20th century and through the 1920s. But most of the guys who hit .400 were the great hitters of the day. Hornsby’s five-year run was nothing short of amazing. And you’re right, you can’t do it with long or even short slumps thrown in. That’s why I think Tony Gwynn had the best chance of hitting .400 in ’94 if the strike hadn’t cancelled the season. And, of course, Ted Williams was a special hitter and all of those guys simply didn’t strike out a lot, which most of today’s hitters do. And, yes, the pitching today makes it even more difficult. So does the emphasis on home runs and launch angles, and analytics saying that batting average doesn’t really matter that much. The way the game has evolved now makes it almost impossible for a hitter to rise above all the obstacles and hit .400.
Bill
Hey Mark:
There’s no reply button on your last comment, but I’m answering anyway and hope you see it. I agree 100 percent that if PEDs were available years ago the players would have taken them. Even the Babe probably would have gulped them down between hot dogs and a beer. MLB turned the other cheek because they felt the sudden burst of home runs was good for business after the disastrous strike of 1994. So Selig buried his head in the sand and let the sluggers slug and subsequently the pitchers throw harder. And for that, he was elected to the Hall of Fame. Who knows what the players are still taking today with the masking agents they now have. And some guys still get caught taking the old school roids. Oh well, it’s good for an old-fashioned baseball discussion or debate. I won’t say argument because that’s not what we’re doing.
Bill
Hey Bill,
I saw it and yes on this we totally agree! We put Robinson Cano in the category of a guy who was on a HOF track, and on numbers is right there even now. But the 240+ games he will miss is costly in terms of the additional stats he would put up. For some voters he could fall short on the numbers because he took PED’s! I am ok with that argument too.
Mark
Mark. There are some HOF voters who flat out refuse to vote for an admitted PED user (Mark McGwire), or an obvious though never caught user (Bonds, Clemens) or a highly suspected user (Sammy Sosa). These voters feel they cheated the game. Some feel that as the steroid era recedes into the background, younger voters may have a different take on the users. But guys like Bonds & Clemens have one more year on the ballot and who knows how the various old timers committees, or whatever they’re called now, will look upon them. I would think that guys like Bonds & Clemens will eventually make it. Alex Rodriguez, with what he did, is another question. His first year on the ballot should be interesting. Then there’s the question whether the HOF is for the elite or also for the very good. But that’s a discussion for another time.
Bill
I wonder how Gaylord Perry voted all those years?
Good one, Dave. Too bad he doesn’t have a vote. But the writers voted him in so apparently didn’t hold the spitball against him.
According to John Thorn, Official Historian of Major League Baseball, in 1941 the sacrifice fly did not exist but Ted Williams actually hit 8 that season that would be counted today; therefore, he would have batted .413 instead of .406.
Real good point, Chaz. A fly ball that drove in a run back then was still an out in 1941. Guess if they were sac flies then he wouldn’t have had the drama of playing that final doubleheader of the season to solidify his .400 average. But .413 would have been something. Wonder how the sac fly would have affected some of the other batting averages from the old days? Be interesting to find out if that information is available.