Posted By:
Ted Zanidakis"....A long time passing...."
The complete List....the Number in parenthesis = Walks
1876 Barnes......429 (20)
1884 Dunlap......412 (29)........Stovey......412 (26)
1887 O'Neill......435 (50)........Browning...402 (55)
1894 Duffy........438 (66).......Thompson..404 (40)
1894 Delahanty..400 (60)........Turner......416 (23)
1895 Burkett......423 (74)
1896 Burkett......410 (49)
1897 Keeler.......432 (35).........Clarke.....406 (45)
1899 Burkett......402 (67)......Delahanty..408 (55)
1901 Lajoie.......422 (24)
1911 Cobb.........420 (44)........Jackson....408 (56)
1912 Cobb.........410 (43)
1920 Sisler........407 (46)
1922 Sisler........420 (49).........Cobb.......401 (55)
1922 Hornsby.....401 (65)
1923 Heilmann...403 (74)
1924 Hornsby.....424 (89)
1925 Hornsby.....403 (83)
1930 Terry.........401 (57)
1941 Williams....406 (145)
In 1980 George Brett ended the season with a .390 Batting Avg.
He made a very interesting comment to the media regarding as
to why he did not achieve .400...."I didn't have enough Walks".
The importance of Walks in trying to attain a .400 BA nowadays
is very under-reported. Brett in 1980 needed only 9 more Walks
to attain a .400 BA.
A great example of the significance of the "walks factor" is in
1941 when Ted Williams hit .406....he had 145 Walks.
The closest Ruth came to 400 was in 1923 with a .393 BA; he had
a record-setting 170 Walks that year.
Conversely, it is very interesting that Duffy, Keeler, Cobb,
LaJoie, Sisler, and some of the real Oldtimers did not require
many walks to help them get over the .400 level. They did it
with sheer hitting power.
We know that theoretically, all a batter has to do is have the
minimum official 400 At Bats and only 160 hits = .400; and to
accomplish this presently he needs a lot of walks. I conclude
it will be a very long time before we have a .400 hitter again
because none of the present day hitters have the discipline, or
perhaps the desire....."to work the count out".