If a pitcher and batter both have twenty year careers, which is a better feat: 3.15 era, or .315 average?

Question

These are lifetime stats, and disregard other stats like hits, rbis, wins, and so forth

Answer 1

I think the batting average, the 3.15 ERA is nothing to sneeze at but 'll go with the .315 batting average

Answer 2

Very good question. If we look at how many players active and historical have accomplished this over a career, 52 players have a career average greater than .315. There are however 101 pitchers with a career ERA at or below 3.15. A closer number for pitchers would be at 2.75 ERA. So based on your questions the .315 BA is a better feat.

Answer 3

Depends on the era the player played in.

A total of 72 players had career averages over .315. A slew of players from the late 1890's, early 1900's had .315 averages, but .315 wasn't exceptional back then. For modern players who played most of their career after 1950 (when the major leagues were opened to blacks and Latin American players), only 7 players playing mostly in the last 56 years have finished their careers with a batting average of .315 or better (Ted Wiliams, Tony Gwynn, Stan Musial, Wade Boggs, Rod Carew, Kirby Puckett, and Roberto Clemente). 5 current players have career averages over .315, but some of those are for very few years (Todd Helton, Albert Pujols, Ichiro Suzuki, Vladimir Guerrero, and Nomar Garciaparra).

When it comes to pitchers, 3.15 wouldn't get you anywhere near the top. But most of those incredibly low ERA's are from the "dead ball" era prior to 1920. Modern starting pitchers under 3.15 are Pedro Martinez, Whitey Ford, Sandy Koufax, Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, Greg Maddux, Tom Seaver, Sal Maglie, Jim Palmer, John Tudor, Juan Marichal, plus others (sub-3.00 ERA's were pretty cheap in the 60's, as well).

All in all, I'd say the .315 batting average is better.

Answer 4

Not enough information. You are asking to disregard other factors relative to the players' performance. A pitcher might have a 3.15 era, but may have only been a reliever, playing in only half of the games in his season. A batter might have .315 batting average, but be totally unable to catch a ball, or to throw it accurately to the basemen in a clutch play.

Answer 5

The .315 average

Answer 6

The .315 average - a player could've played with incredible defense as a pitcher and kept his era reasonably low as a result.
The average is more a result of his individual efforts and consistency.

Answer 7

I honestly think that the average of .315 is better, because a 3.15 ERA is not that good.

Answer 8

well it depends on what teams they were on because if one of their teams was very succesful with that player then it means he was more valuable to the team. Opposed to a good player on a crappy team then it doesnt really matter about his stats because the team didnt accomplish anything because of him.

but to answer your question i think the 3.15 era is a better feat because pitchers can single handedly win the game and for hitting usually everyone has to contribute to produce runs

Answer 9

315 average and to answer the relief pitcher question not too many relievers have 20 year carrers

Answer 10

315 BA will get you in the hall,3.15 era don't mean anything.good QUESTION