Thread: 36 Triples
View Single Post
Old 04-28-2008, 01:37 PM   #7 (permalink)
Grandstander
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Parts Unknown Northern California
Posts: 5,946
Grandstander has a spectacular aura aboutGrandstander has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via AIM to Grandstander
Default

jtur:
Quote:
In modern times, there is generally a team that hits as much as 50% more triples than the league average, and that team varies from year to year, suggesting it is not a park factor
Aren't percentage disparities greatly enhanced when the overall sampling base is reduced? Last season, the Phillies led the NL with 41 team triples. In 2007 it was the Dodgers with 58. In 1995, 43 triples by the Braves was good enough to lead the league. 1985 it was 58, 1975..54, 1965.. 61, 1955..55, 1945...71..and in 1935 it would have been 68 by the Reds, except that those triple happy Pirates hit 90.

In the 1900's and 1910's, generally, 90 to 100 triples were needed to lead the league and the last place clubs were putting up totals that in many modern years, would have lead the league.

So, with fewer triples being hit overall, it stands to reason that it is easier for one club to have a larger percentage advantage.
Grandstander is offline   Reply With Quote