Quote:
Originally posted by AngelinOF
You might want to check that statement:
1905-New York 1st in Walks & SLG
1906-Chicago (A) 1st in walks to make up for their paulty .230 ba
1907-Chicago (N) 3rd in walks
1908-Chicago (N) 3rd in walks & SLG, 2nd in OBP
1909-Pittsburgh 3rd in walks, 1st in OBP, & SLG
1910-Philadelphia (A)--6th in walks but 1st in OBP & SLG
1911-Philadelphia (A)--6th in walks 1st in SLG, 2nd in OBP
1912-Boston (A)-1st in Walks, OBP, & SLG
1913-Philadelphia (A)-1st in Walks, OBP, & SLG
1914-Boston (N)-1st in walks
1915-Boston (A)-4th in walks, 3rd in OBP & SLG
1916-Boston (A)-first bad team was 6th in walks & OBP and 5th in SLG
1917-Chicago (A)-2nd Walks & SLG, 1st in OBP
1918-Boston (A)-3rd walks & Slg
1919-Cincinnati-1st Walks & OBP, 2nd in SLG
1920-Cleveland-1st walks & OBP, 3rd SLG
And one pretty common factor is that the team that was last in walks usually finished last in the standings.
|
Good research. I agree that walks have always been important. The more people on base the more runs you score (that might sound like a duh?) But I have had leagues where a guy hits 50 solo hrs, and leagues where guys have hit 20-30 2-run, 3-run homers. The team where the guy hits 50 hrs but doesn't have a good lead off always finished last. It is important to get people on base, I don't care how, homeruns aren't that important if they are all solo shots. Some people even say Homeruns kill rallies (sometimes). Because if pitcher gives up a homerun he has chance to settle down and deal with the guy at the plate. If there is still somebody on after a hit, he still has to worry about the runner on base.