data.3news-bydate.test.rec.sport.baseball.102620 Maven / Gradle / Ivy
From: [email protected] (David Robert Walker)
Subject: Re: Bo was a good player, you shorts (plus idiots)
Organization: University of Virginia
Lines: 35
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Roger Lustig) writes:
>> In article <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:
BO JACKSON 1963
1988 KCR 437 106 16 4 23 28 29 7 .253 67 .243 .288 .455
1989 KCR 517 134 19 5 33 41 27 10 .274 92 .259 .314 .507
1990 KCR 405 110 17 1 27 44 16 9 .286 77 .272 .343 .519
1991 CWS 71 16 3 0 3 12 0 1 .240 10 .225 .337 .394
MAJ 1430 366 55 10 86 125 72 27 .270 246 .256 .316 .489
MAJ 598 153 23 4 36 52 30 11
This is what Jackson looked like in 88-91, with everything converted
to a neutral park, on the basis of run production. His equivalent
average started at .253 in 88, was up to .274 in 89 and 286 in 90. So
let us say he had established, in his last two seasons, a .280 level
of play.
That is good. Very good, in fact. But it probably doesn't make the top
ten in the league. The 10th best EQA in the AL in 1992 was Dave
Winfield's .296; Thomas was first at .350. First in the NL was Bonds,
an incroyable .378; tenth was Bip Roberts, .297. But .280 is better
than any season in the past five years by Joe Carter; it is about what
Mattingly had in 1988 (.285); what Felix Jose had the last two years;
just ahead of Time Raines' five-year average; better than Ryan
Klesko's MLEs.
He got more attention from the media than was warranted from his
baseball playing, though; his hype was a lot better than his hitting.
That is the basis for the net.comments about him being overrated. The
media would have you beleive he was a great hitter. I think he was a
good, maybe very good hitter. He was IMO, something like the 30th best
hitter in the majors.
Clay D.