Posted By:
Ted Zanidakiscmoking
I am studying these numbers and trying to make some sense of
them. This list at first glance appears to be a set of "cold numbers"
that have no meaningful relationship to the game of Baseball. They
are unlike the "warm numbers" that us avid baseball "junkies" are
constantly looking up in our BB Encyclopedias, Daily Sports News,
or Sports Mags. Numbers which actually represent a ballplayer's
performance yesterday, last year, or 100 years ago.
Now, if I am understanding this list properly, these numbers tell us
that in the first half century of baseball the wide disparity between
the superstars and the average player "yielded" many 400+ hitters.
I am not sure why this is so ?
By the 1920's this so-called disparity was approaching a level
state. Therefore, the number of 400+ hitters started diminishing.
If we look at the "400+ list", from the 1870's to 1920, there were
19 - 400+ hitters. During the 1920's there were only 7 who hit
400+.
In 1930 there was just one; and, in 1941 just one. And, note that
the CoV term from this list had exponentially leveled off to a factor
of 12.
Furthermore, it remains constant at this number for at least 3 more
decades and so to this day (if you allow me extrapolate). So, my point,
after all this "gobblygook", is framed in the form of a QUESTION......
WHY HAVEN'T WE HAD AT LEAST ONE 400+ HITTER IN EACH OF
THESE SUBSEQUENT DECADES ?
That is if we are to accept this author's theories as represented
in this list of coefficients.