which is harder: Hitting .400 vs 62 HRs in a season?

[hazenuts]

Which of these two feats, in your opinion, is the most difficult one to achieve in modern game:

- hitting .400 batting average or
- hitting 62 home runs (without PED obviously).

the last clean players who came close to these figures were Tony Gwynn in 1994 batting .394, and "clean" Ken Griffey smashing 56 home runs in 1997 and 1998 (correct me if he isn't the last clean player who hit the most HR since Maris)

[HOFAutoRookies]

Easily .400 for me, and it's not close.

[cwgross144]

62HR without PEDs has never been done, so it's gotta be that, for me.

[Jblaw1]

62 home runs. No one has EVER hit 62 HR clean. Gwynn and Brett and Carew all came close to 400.

Griffey's 56 is the closest I can think of as clean for sure.

[Skipscards]

Originally Posted by Jblaw1

62 home runs. No one has EVER hit 62 HR clean. Gwynn and Brett and Carew all came close to 400.

Griffey's 56 is the closest I can think of as clean for sure.

Forget those who have come close. Plenty of players have actually hit .400 including Ted Williams and Bill Terry. The answer is pretty obvious.

[hazenuts]

Originally Posted by cwgross144

62HR without PEDs has never been done, so it's gotta be that, for me.

I see your point but one thing to consider is that all the .400 hitters in the history has been pre-modern era, without modern pitching rotation, relief pitching, closer, etc.

[Skipscards]

Originally Posted by hazenuts

I see your point but one thing to consider is that all the .400 hitters in the history has been pre-modern era, without modern pitching rotation, relief pitching, closer, etc.

Yes, but they exist.

[markinca]

I think .400 would be doable if you had a very fast hitter (to gain some extra infield hits) with exceptional plate discipline. The problem with hitting .400 isn't necessarily hitting .400. It's doing it with as few at bats as possible.

Even Ted Williams when he hit .406, what helped him immensely was that he only had 456 at bats. He also led the league in 1957 with a .388 average, and that was, not coincidentally, done in only 420 at bats. George Brett's .390 season was also only 449 at bats. Gwynn's .394 was only 419 at bats.

I doubt a 550+ AB season hitting .400 is even possible with all the pitchers throwing filth these days. But a speedster riding a wave of good variance and hitting .400 with a minimal number of at bats seems possible to me.

[daeve]

Originally Posted by Skipscards

Yes, but they exist.

its probably a bigger advantage than a guy using PED's though.

[mainerunr]

Originally Posted by markinca

I think .400 would be doable if you had a very fast hitter (to gain some extra infield hits) with exceptional plate discipline. The problem with hitting .400 isn't necessarily hitting .400. It's doing it with as few at bats as possible.

Even Ted Williams when he hit .406, what helped him immensely was that he only had 456 at bats. He also led the league in 1957 with a .388 average, and that was, not coincidentally, done in only 420 at bats. George Brett's .390 season was also only 449 at bats. Gwynn's .394 was only 419 at bats.

I doubt a 550+ AB season hitting .400 is even possible with all the pitchers throwing filth these days. But a speedster riding a wave of good variance and hitting .400 with a minimal number of at bats seems possible to me.

The only reason Ted Williams had so few at bats that year was because he took 147 walks (which led the league). His OBP that year was .553 (which, was the highest OBP ever until Baroid Bonds was walked all those times to keep him from roiding a ball over the wall). It wasn't that he made fewer trips to the plate, he just was not a free swinger.

Oh, and the two years that Bonds had a higher OBP than Williams...he hit .370 and .362.

I think plate discipline is more important than speed.

(Also, Gwynn and Brett's seasons they played in less than 120 games.).

[sjorgen5]

Small, quick comment to note/remind regarding Williams in addition to his total PAs, teams also didn't play 162 games a year until 1961/2 for the AL and NL respectively.

[HeritageKing]

You can't count Gwynn's 94 season as they went on strike that year. Closest was George Brett and he wasn't really that close.

Another Stat that hasn't been sniffed in a long time...100 extra base hits in a season. That list is shorter than the .400 list

[seabass97166]

I don't think I will see either, but if a I had to pick I would say hitting .400 would be more difficult

Some of these guys are on pace for 62 HRs for almost 1/2 a season, so a guy like Stanton would just have to go nuts for 162 games.

Doubt either will happen though....

[mainerunr]

Originally Posted by HeritageKing

You can't count Gwynn's 94 season as they went on strike that year. Closest was George Brett and he wasn't really that close.

Another Stat that hasn't been sniffed in a long time...100 extra base hits in a season. That list is shorter than the .400 list

Brett only played 7 games more in 1980 than Gwynn did in 1994.

[Jopeal]

Great comparable in terms of milestones.

I feel like we'll see another 62 Hr season before we see a .400 season.

Even with PEDs, nobody could hit .400 not even Bonds.

[whitesoxfan3579]

What a great question. IMO you must consider two different types of hitters for each milestone. The .400 hitter should have the speed to beat out infield hits, plate discipline to not chase bad pitches, and just do all the things right to get that average up and keep it there. The homerun hitter can do so many things wrong, but just has to worry about one type of hit, where skill and power are certainly required.

It is interesting to note that from 1940 to 1990 the following players hit 50 or more homruns:

Kiner & Mize - 51 in '47
Kiner - 54 in '49
Mays - 51 in '55
Mantle - 52 in '56
Maris -61 in '61
Mays - 52 in '65
Foster - 52 in '77
Fielder (51 in '90)

We all know that the last hitter to hit ..400 or better was Ted Williams in '41.

[Thinking]

Originally Posted by Jblaw1

62 home runs. No one has EVER hit 62 HR clean. Gwynn and Brett and Carew all came close to 400.

Griffey's 56 is the closest I can think of as clean for sure.

Ryan Howard hit 58 in 2006.

[markinca]

Originally Posted by mainerunr

The only reason Ted Williams had so few at bats that year was because he took 147 walks (which led the league). His OBP that year was .553 (which, was the highest OBP ever until Baroid Bonds was walked all those times to keep him from roiding a ball over the wall). It wasn't that he made fewer trips to the plate, he just was not a free swinger.

Oh, and the two years that Bonds had a higher OBP than Williams...he hit .370 and .362.

I think plate discipline is more important than speed.

(Also, Gwynn and Brett's seasons they played in less than 120 games.).

I agree - that was my point. I wasn't saying they had low AB's because they played fewer games - they had low AB's because they had tremendous plate discipline. Plate discipline is definitely more important than speed. It's certainly not impossible to hit .400 if you're a plate discipline master with lumbering speed, but it would definitely make things a lot easier if you did.

Lowering at bats + squeezing out infield hits = pretty decent chance at .400

[babybull]

Originally Posted by HOFAutoRookies

Easily .400 for me, and it's not close.

This ^^^^^^^^^

[babybull]

Originally Posted by whitesoxfan3579

What a great question. IMO you must consider two different types of hitters for each milestone. The .400 hitter should have the speed to beat out infield hits, plate discipline to not chase bad pitches, and just do all the things right to get that average up and keep it there. The homerun hitter can do so many things wrong, but just has to worry about one type of hit, where skill and power are certainly required.

It is interesting to note that from 1940 to 1990 the following players hit 50 or more homruns:

Kiner & Mize - 51 in '47
Kiner - 54 in '49
Mays - 51 in '55
Mantle - 52 in '56
Maris -61 in '61
Mays - 52 in '65
Foster - 52 in '77
Fielder (51 in '90)

We all know that the last hitter to hit ..400 or better was Ted Williams in '41.

Hank Aaron, who is the greatest power hitter of all time, not named Babe Ruth, never hit 50 in a season.

[lindeman79]

If you are clean you can not choose.

[jrinne17]

Give Pollock 2 more good years and he'll be hitting 400.

[GradyM333]

Originally Posted by babybull

This ^^^^^^^^^

Totally agree... Hands down .400

The plate discipline to hit .400... amazing

Next year (Sep 28th 1941) Will be the 75th anniversary of Ted Williams doing it. Could make for a great card!

[edhou1]

Another thing to consider is that if anyone ever got close to 60 HRs, they would probably be IBB'd (a la Bonds style) to death under most circumstances

[PejaD]

Probably .400. Pitching is much better and more specialized than the last time someone hit .400.

Strikeouts are becoming more acceptable, so I would not be surprised if a hard swinging/power first guy reaches 62 one day.