Freddie Freeman

Carolina Speed

Carolina Speed

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
6,226
After running across an interesting stat/stats on Freddie Freeman, I came to the realization that his own thread is way overdue! Freeman a World Series MVP, a regular season MVP, and 10 time All Star will be a first ballot HOF inductee.
The stat or stats I'm speaking of are: Freddie Freeman is MLB active career stat leader in Runs Scored-1358, Hits-2393, Doubles-539, RBI-1301, Total Bases-4070, and IBB-140. The MLB active career leader in six stats!! Amazing! You could say he's had a better career than the great Mike Trout. Trout is the career active leader in WAR-87. and Triples-55. Obviously, Trout would be the career active leader in other stats if not for all of his injuries. I don't believe there's another player the active career leader in this many stats.
....and of course Freeman is under the radar this year and is having another fine season-. 301 BA, 15 HR's, 69 RBI's, 31 Doubles
Tonight he's 2-3, a double, 2 runs, and an RBI, thus adding to his active career lead totals.
 
Last edited:
Freddie Freeman is currently hitting .300 for his career **! Incredible, 16 years and 2,979 at bats. Hopefully, he never dips below .300, as being a career .300 hitter would be an insane feat. My guess is he won't, as most players stick around too long. Happened to Keith Hernandez, was a career .300 hitter after like 15 years, but his final two seasons tanked his quest for .300.

**https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/f/freemfr01.shtml
 
Truthteller said:
Freddie Freeman is currently hitting .300 for his career **! Incredible, 16 years and 2,979 at bats. Hopefully, he never dips below .300, as being a career .300 hitter would be an insane feat. My guess is he won't, as most players stick around too long. Happened to Keith Hernandez, was a career .300 hitter after like 15 years, but his final two seasons tanked his quest for .300.

**https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/f/freemfr01.shtml
Click to expand...
Freeman actually has 7,977 career at bats, and 117 players have finished with a career .300 or better batting average (could be more, a search shows upwards of over 200), so while it is a great accomplishment it doesn't qualify as "insane."
 
How many of those players competed in the modern era? Or the last 30 years. I'd assume not a lot. Tony Gwynn, at the end? Ichiro Suzuki, who broke in around 2000? Sure, in the Ty Cobb, Lou Gehrig, Ted Williams era, it wasn't as unique. Maybe even in the Brett, Carew era?

Average for a MLB hitter these days is like .245? That's how far the game has fallen. Only 7 (or so) current MLB hitters are over .300 and 3 are total fringe/flukey types (Aranda, Edwards, Pena) that will never come close to .300 career?
 
Last edited:
Truthteller said:
How many of those players competed in the modern era? Or the last 30 years. I'd assume not a lot. Tony Gwynn, at the end? Ichiro Suzuki, who broke in around 2000? Sure, in the Ty Cobb, Lou Gehrig, Ted Williams era, it wasn't as unique. Maybe even in the Brett, Carew era?

Average for a MLB hitter these days is like .245? That's how far the game has fallen. Only 7 (or so) current MLB hitters are over .300 and 3 are total fringe/flukey types (Aranda, Edwards, Pena) that will never come close to .300 career?
Click to expand...
My guess is that you're 50 years old give or take. Just in your lifetime the following players have finished with a career batting average of .300 or better:

Tony Gwynn - .338
Wade Boggs - .328
Rod Carew - .328
Kirby Puckett - .318
Vlad Guerrero - .318
Roberto Clemente - .317 (maybe a little before your time)
Todd Helton - .316
Larry Walker - .313
Manny Ramirez - .312
Edgar Martinez - .312
Ichiro - .311
Derek Jeter - .310
Mike Piazza - .308
Don Mattingly - .307
Miguel Cabrera - .306
Joe Mauer - .306
Paul Molitor - .306
Ralph Garr - .306
George Brett - .305
Bill Madlock - .305
Chipper Jones - .303
Will Clark - .303
Mark Grace - .303
Pete Rose - .303
Mike Greenwell - .303
Harvey Kuehn - .303
Sean Casey - .302
Frank Thomas - .301
Robinson Cano - .301
Roberto Alomar - .300
Pedro Guerrero - .300

So yes, a great accomplishment if Freeman finishes with a career batting average of .300 or better, but not an "insane feat."
 
I guess we'll just have to "agree to disagree". Others are free to think as they will, also. No big deal? I still think, in this era, getting to .300 lifetime is "insane". Or insanely difficult. Freddie is the best "pure-hitter" in his generation and he's barely clinging to .300 lifetime.

Jeff McNeil of the Mets won a MLB batting title in 2022, age 30. Was over .300 for his first 6 years (into 2023). Up to Age 31 he was hitting over .300? Suddenly, he's 33 and about .15 points below that. Players just don't hit for average anymore. Even the "great Aaron Judge" is "only" at .293 lifetime, and he was hitting around .400 into June. He's 33 and with almost 4,000 AB's. He's got a steep climb to get .300 lifetime. Not to mention his perpetual injuries.

Bryce Harper is well below .300; almost no chance to get there. Mike Trout, generational talent, is 34 and hitting .295 lifetime. He has a chance, but considering he is currently hitting .238, hit .220 last year and hasn't hit over .300 since 2021, he's a long-shot. Shohei Ohtani is 31 and currently well below .300. Again, all 3 players hi-lighted in this paragraph, along with Aaron Judge are generational talents. Only Aaron has a (slim) chance to get there.

Mookie Betts, media star, is hitting .243 currently, and hitting .290 lifetime. He's almost 33 and his body seems to be broken down. Even
young "superstars" like Juan Soto (highest paid athlete ever?) are well below .300 lifetime, and barely over .249 this year? Jazz Chisholm is hitting .238 and made the All-Star team. That was, about, his average when he was named to the A.S. team.

The list you provided above pretty much makes my point, with a lot of players being from a different era. Kuehn and Garr are way-backs, can't even comment. Similar with Madlock and others. Most didn't even make it to 2000, let only play in Freddie's era.

I thought Todd Helton might be one of the younger ones on the list, but he was born in 1973. Him and Larry Walker both padded their stats at Coors Field.

Robinson Cano was born in 1982, but he was busted/suspended twice for steroids, as was Manny Ramirez. Roberto Alomar, was strongly suspected, as was Piazza, a former 45th round pick. Why are Steroids pertinent? The "media" tells us 'roids were taken out of the game by Bud Selig, about 15 years ago?

Tell that small fry Jose Altuve, currently 35, who is hitting .304 lifetime. Something tell's me Selig might not be right about steroids being out the game, considering Altuve was signed as a "try-out" player.
 
Last edited:
Truthteller said:
I guess we'll just have to "agree to disagree". Others are free to think as they will, also. No big deal?
Click to expand...
Where did I state it was "no big deal"??? I called it a "great accomplishment" both times. You discredit yourself right there, the rest of your post is a lol, I "forced" you to do some research.

Yes, I let you back here, but as with all other posters, whether I'm posting in a particular forum or not, I keep a close eye on my discussion forum. I will judge your posts objectively, and you have contributed some excellent posts, and though you are off base in this particular thread, it's not a big deal. Carry on.
 
I guess we'll just have to "agree to disagree". Others are free to think as they will, also. No big deal?


You totally misconstrued the meaning of my words, which I re-posted above. I meant, it was no big deal that we merely disagreed with each other. That's the truth. No harm in differing opinions, as long as things are kept civil. That's all I meant; nothing else. Unfortunate you read it that way, but I can now see why. Did not mean it as a slight.

Probably my fault, as I should've placed the next sentence in a new paragraph and clearly wrote No big deal we differ? Then written, next paragraph: However, I still think, in this era, getting to .300 lifetime is "insane".

That would've avoided the confusion, as I can now see how it could've interpreted the way you did.

Again, it is "No big deal", that we have differing opinions and meant we should simply "agree to disagree" and move forward. Then wait to read how others feel about it? I have no problem with your take on this issue and I'm sure others would agree with you.
 
Truthteller said:
You totally misconstrued the meaning of my words, which I re-posted above. I meant, it was no big deal that we merely disagreed with each other. That's the truth. No harm in differing opinions, as long as things are kept civil. That's all I meant; nothing else. Unfortunate you read it that way, but I can now see why. Did not mean it as a slight.

Probably my fault, as I should've placed the next sentence in a new paragraph and clearly wrote No big deal we differ? Then written, next paragraph: However, I still think, in this era, getting to .300 lifetime is "insane".

That would've avoided the confusion, as I can now see how it could've interpreted the way you did.

Again, it is "No big deal", that we have differing opinions and meant we should simply "agree to disagree" and move forward. Then wait to read how others feel about it? I have no problem with your take on this issue and I'm sure others would agree with you.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct I misconstrued the meaning of your words (the "totally" was superfluous), but the rest of my post and my other posts in this thread stand for themselves. You like to put many things in bold and use question marks at the end of declarative sentences instead of periods, which indicates weakness of belief.

Your post #2 was overstated and ill-informed to put it kindly. Period. Unless of course you are incapable of error, which only a propagandist would believe.
 
Carolina Speed said:
After running across an interesting stat/stats on Freddie Freeman, I came to the realization that his own thread is way overdue! Freeman a World Series MVP, a regular season MVP, and 10 time All Star will be a first ballot HOF inductee.
The stat or stats I'm speaking of are: Freddie Freeman is MLB active career stat leader in Runs Scored-1358, Hits-2393, Doubles-539, RBI-1301, Total Bases-4070, and IBB-140. The MLB active career leader in six stats!! Amazing! You could say he's had a better career than the great Mike Trout. Trout is the career active leader in WAR-87. and Triples-55. Obviously, Trout would be the career active leader in other stats if not for all of his injuries. I don't believe there's another player the active career leader in this many stats.
....and of course Freeman is under the radar this year and is having another fine season-. 301 BA, 15 HR's, 69 RBI's, 31 Doubles
Tonight he's 2-3, a double, 2 runs, and an RBI, thus adding to his active career lead totals.
Click to expand...

 
Don Wassall said:
My guess is that you're 50 years old give or take. Just in your lifetime the following players have finished with a career batting average of .300 or better:

Tony Gwynn - .338
Wade Boggs - .328
Rod Carew - .328
Kirby Puckett - .318
Vlad Guerrero - .318
Roberto Clemente - .317 (maybe a little before your time)
Todd Helton - .316
Larry Walker - .313
Manny Ramirez - .312
Edgar Martinez - .312
Ichiro - .311
Derek Jeter - .310
Mike Piazza - .308
Don Mattingly - .307
Miguel Cabrera - .306
Joe Mauer - .306
Paul Molitor - .306
Ralph Garr - .306
George Brett - .305
Bill Madlock - .305
Chipper Jones - .303
Will Clark - .303
Mark Grace - .303
Pete Rose - .303
Mike Greenwell - .303
Harvey Kuehn - .303
Sean Casey - .302
Frank Thomas - .301
Robinson Cano - .301
Roberto Alomar - .300
Pedro Guerrero - .300

So yes, a great accomplishment if Freeman finishes with a career batting average of .300 or better, but not an "insane feat."
Click to expand...
Mark Grace was hugely underrated. Most hits of any player in the 90s
 
Carolina Speed said:
After running across an interesting stat/stats on Freddie Freeman, I came to the realization that his own thread is way overdue! Freeman a World Series MVP, a regular season MVP, and 10 time All Star will be a first ballot HOF inductee.
The stat or stats I'm speaking of are: Freddie Freeman is MLB active career stat leader in Runs Scored-1358, Hits-2393, Doubles-539, RBI-1301, Total Bases-4070, and IBB-140. The MLB active career leader in six stats!! Amazing! You could say he's had a better career than the great Mike Trout. Trout is the career active leader in WAR-87. and Triples-55. Obviously, Trout would be the career active leader in other stats if not for all of his injuries. I don't believe there's another player the active career leader in this many stats.
....and of course Freeman is under the radar this year and is having another fine season-. 301 BA, 15 HR's, 69 RBI's, 31 Doubles
Tonight he's 2-3, a double, 2 runs, and an RBI, thus adding to his active career lead totals.
Click to expand...
Great thread Carolina! I kind of lost interest in baseball for about 10 years, paying nominal attention and a friend told me about Freeman. I'd heard of him and knew he was good, but I had no idea HOW good he was. He has a really good shot at 400 HR / 3000 hits. Just needs a few more good years. Seems like he's another white star that's been 'under the radar'...
 
I would say that Freeman hitting .300 for his career is more impressive than many of those other guys listed because he’s a run producing, power hitting cleanup type. Not a contact approach, singles and lead off type. Guys like Vlad, Puckett, Brett and so on impress me a bit more than a Jeter or Ichiro. Hitting for power and average is tough and the guys who can do both are elite.

I do think that TT raises a good point about the number of players achieving the .300 mark is in serious decline. Here’s a helpful chart showing the total number of .300 hitters each season from the 1970s until now.

1755715955722.png
As we can see, the average was consistently in the low 20s until the Steroid Era, when the hitters gained a huge advantage over pitchers. Coming out of that, we’ve seen a steady decline, but now they’ve barreled past the “norm” from the 70s, 80s and early 90s. 2023 only had 9 players and this season sits at 8. Freeman is one of those 8 so he sort of is a last of a dying breed. At least for this “cycle” of baseball.
 
Truthteller wrote that Freeman has 2,979 career at bats when the number is actually 7,977. I corrected his mistake.

He also wrote that having a career batting average of exactly .300 is "incredible" and an "insane feat." I twice wrote that having a career .300 batting average is a great accomplishment, which is the proper perspective to give to it. But an "insane feat"? I would say having a career average of .340 or .350 or higher might be viewed as an "insane feat." But .300 when literally hundreds of others have done it, including over 30 during the last half century??? If you think that's an "insane feat" we have starkly different opinions of what constitutes an "insane feat."

Only 58 players have finished their careers with at least 400 homeruns, versus hundreds who have averaged .300 or better for their career. By Truthteller's definition, hitting 400 homeruns must be well beyond an "insane feat".

I pointed out Freeman's actual number of career at bats, and also gave some perspective on how rare hitting .300 for a career is. If you disagree and think Freeman is trying to accomplish an "insane feat" and not just a "great accomplishment," then defend that rather than reiterate what's already been written. And btw, your graph shows .300 hitters, not career .300 hitters. Carl Yastrzemski led the AL in hitting in 1968 with a .301 batting average. No one else hit over .290 that year. Only five hitters in the NL finished with a .300 average in '68, led by Pete Rose at .335. Not sure that that's relevant at all when it comes to career batting average.

I simply wrote "Freeman actually has 7,977 career at bats, and 117 players have finished with a career .300 or better batting average (could be more, a search shows upwards of over 200), so while it is a great accomplishment it doesn't qualify as 'insane,'" an accurate and innocuous statement. There was no need for it to become an ongoing argument rather than being left at that. That's on Truthteller, not me.
 
I think it’s interesting that the 1960s (or part of them?) had low amounts of .300 hitters similar to now. I think that’s why it’s relevant to compare guys and achievements vs their era of baseball. Freeman has thrived in the last decade plus, when hitting for average appears to be tougher. Same for Yaz and Rose in the late 60s. Maybe both are periods of tough pitching, or some other factors (the infield shift)? If Freeman finishes above .300 for his career, I would personally value it more than guys like Jeter, Ramirez, Piazza, Martinez or other guys who played in the 1990s through the 2000s, as .300 hitters were a dime a dozen each year. Not saying these guys cheated even, just that played in an era where hitters were given huge advantages. Juiced balls, lax enforcement of performance enhancers, smaller dimensioned stadiums opening, etc.

Anyway not looking to argue with anyone. Just trying to explain why I really appreciate the career Freddie has had. A future HOFer and a great from these last 20 years!
 
After the 1968 season, which featured historically low batting averages, MLB lowered the pitching mound from 15 inches to 10 to help hitters. The addition of the expansion Padres, Expos, Pilots (who moved from Seattle to Milwaukee after just one season), and Royals also resulted in more hitting, just as the expansion teams added in 1961 had (that was the year Roger Maris hit 61 homers and Mickey Mantle had his career high of 54). For reasons not entirely clear, expansion has helped hitters more than pitchers. Changes in the composition of the ball has happened periodically over time in order to "fine tune" the balance between hitting and pitching. So has tinkering with the strike zone.

I don't follow baseball much any longer so can't say much about recent years, but there has always been reliable .300 hitters. At one time there were some .400 hitters and pitchers who won 30 games, but now winning 20 games has become almost as rare as winning 30 used to be. The decline in innings pitched, starts, and thus wins by pitchers bothers me a lot more than periodic fluctuations in the number of .300 hitters, which going by your graph has been relatively steady in number except for during the height of the steroid years.
 
Don Wassall said:
After the 1968 season, which featured historically low batting averages, MLB lowered the pitching mound from 15 inches to 10 to help hitters. The addition of the expansion Padres, Expos, Pilots (who moved from Seattle to Milwaukee after just one season), and Royals also resulted in more hitting, just as the expansion teams added in 1961 had (that was the year Roger Maris hit 61 homers and Mickey Mantle had his career high of 54). For reasons not entirely clear, expansion has helped hitters more than pitchers. Changes in the composition of the ball has happened periodically over time in order to "fine tune" the balance between hitting and pitching. So has tinkering with the strike zone.

I don't follow baseball much any longer so can't say much about recent years, but there has always been reliable .300 hitters. At one time there were some .400 hitters and pitchers who won 30 games, but now winning 20 games has become almost as rare as winning 30 used to be. The decline in innings pitched, starts, and thus wins by pitchers bothers me a lot more than periodic fluctuations in the number of .300 hitters, which going by your graph has been relatively steady in number except for during the height of the steroid years.
Click to expand...
Good points and info!

The Steroid Era really messed up a lot of the hitting statistical norms, and of course skewed the record books. I really hate that period as a “baseball purist”. Guess you are right that the tinkering has basically brought us back into somewhat of a norm with BA. However you are right that pitching now is so skewed that it’s impossible to compare to past eras. Another great discussion but don’t want to go further off topic….
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
American Freedom News
Back
Top