[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Part of the explanation for the lack of .400 hitters is the distibution of talent. The overall talent of all players in the league looks like a bell curve. During the Deadball Era, the curve was somewhat flat with the great players being far superior in talent to the worst players in the league. Move forward to today and the bell curve have a very steep slope to it with the great players in the same position on the graph for each era, but the worst players moving closer to the great players because the players today are more talented. If you have any questions or doubts about this, Bill James goes into this in detail in one of historical abstract books. I think Pete Palmer also covers it in one of his books.

Deadball Era hitters benefited from facing the same pitchers over and over again during the season, rarely having to face a reliever, thus giving them a huge advantage in the quest to hit .400.

If anyone read Jason Stark's article earlier this year about Bonds chances of hitting .400, he goes into detail why Bonds can do it. I have to agree. The biggest advantage Bonds has is the huge number of walks he get, thus keeping his ABs down. That, along with his great plate disapline, gives hima good shot at .400 this year. And with having endured the media attention of the HR record chase, he's proven that the media will not be a distraction to him.

As to why DiMaggio's streak isn't considered unbreakable is because it's a streak. Granted, the next best is 44 games, but streaks like that are more a fluke than anything.

Jay