Talk:List of Major League Baseball career batting average leaders

Creation date

Page and talk page been created by myself on August 3, 2015 Taffe316 (talk) 06:42, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Two lists for career batting average

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball#Two_lists_for_career_batting_average_leaders. Thanks. —Bagumba (talk) 00:26, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Major League Baseball career batting average leaders. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111215001150/http://www.baseballlibrary.com/ballplayers/player.php?name=ed_delahanty_1867 to http://www.baseballlibrary.com/ballplayers/player.php?name=ed_delahanty_1867

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Small sample size

This addition doesn't seem to add anything to the article. Phenomenal batting averages due to small sample sizes are surely a moot point given that the list criterion is clearly stated as 3,000 or more plate appearances. --Jameboy (talk) 22:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree. I'm going to revert and if he wants to discuss he can do so here.Taffe316 (talk) 23:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Major League Baseball which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:48, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024 discussion

With Major League baseball having incorporated some new statistics into its official record, discussion began at WikiProject baseball about updating this page and included some discussion of a BOLD edit and revert here. Since the right place to discuss specific articles is on the page for those articles I'm starting a discussion here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Barkeep49!. I'll echo my comments from the project talk. The table showing the top 100 players should include the newly recognized major league players. I would recommend modifying the table to add a column for the league that they played. That would be a useful reference. Nemov (talk) 15:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

In terms of my substantive opinion, I think we need to reflect the consensus of reliable sources somewhere. This article makes more sense to me than Batting average (baseball) because a table there should be more global in nature than just US focused and since it's really hard to compare the highest level of baseball leagues across countries, there should probably be no such table there. But if we can find a different sensible place to reflect the consensus of sources about batting average leaders, I would have no issue limiting this article's entries to just teams that played in the National and American leagues as part of MLB and not any of the other recognized major leagues (that is we, as Wikipedians, could reasonably define a narrower scope). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I 100% agree with @Nemov's idea of adding a league column (though there's a potential argument that all 2000–present players mention "MLB" and not "NL" or "AL", as NL & AL ceased to be separate legal entities in 2000. Players who played before and after 2000 could have, for example, "NL, MLB").

It helps that the table is specifically under the "Major League Baseball" subsection. There could just as easily be a table under Nippon Professional Baseball and KBO League subsections.

As for limiting this article's entries to just National and American Leagues, especially now with the second phase of intermixing records (the first being 1969 with the AA, UA, PL, & FL), it may be difficult to cite players who have careers under multiple leagues outside of the NL & AL, namely the late-1800s players who additionally played in the NL, 1914/1915 Federal League players who previously and later played on NL & AL teams, and for players who initially played on Negro Major league teams but played in the NL & AL later. 1914/1915 Federal League stats have been intermixed with NL/AL stats for over 50 years at this point. To a broader point, "Major League Baseball", in its proper noun/legal form, has only existed since 2000. There was no "Major League Baseball" before that. Any limiting in scope would arguably cause this page to be renamed "List of National League and American League career batting average leaders"... so it may be simpler to just mass incorporate the new official statistics.

It's worthwhile to note that MLB's website and Baseball-Reference have already intermixed the new official statistics, while Baseball Almanac & ESPN have not (yet?). Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 16:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I think we need to reflect the consensus of reliable sources somewhere: I don't see any discussion here yet of how we apply WP:WEIGHT regarding who and how the leaders are presented. For example, why is it important to list a player's league now, if we didn't list it before?—Bagumba (talk) 01:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

What about following the pattern of List of NFL career passing yards leaders and showing the teams each played for, rather than just the leagues ? Jhn31 (talk) 18:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I'd rather know the league the players played in than the team. NFL is a single league, but we're dealing with multiple leagues in this case. Nemov (talk) 17:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Will that be unwieldy for players who played in multiple leagues, potentially switching back and forth? Jhn31 (talk) 18:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Not at all, the column can accommodate the abbreviations of multiple leagues if necessary. Players switching between teams is far more common. Nemov (talk) 18:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

If we want to get unruly, we could do seasons, teams & leagues!

Seriously though, I'm more a fan of the centered formatting with darker and bold rankings for the NFL table mentioned above, and making the table sortable if if any of the season, team, and/or leagues are added. Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 20:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Good discussion. My random comments:

• I am in favor of removing the table found at Batting average (baseball)#Major League Baseball. The link to List of Major League Baseball career batting average leaders and the brief discussion mentioning Josh Gibson and Ty Cobb should suffice there.
• A point made above, "'Major League Baseball', in its proper noun/legal form, has only existed since 2000." is worth keeping in mind. Use of, for example, "major-league player" (not capitalized) should be used in favor of "Major League Baseball player" when writing about players such as Babe Ruth, Josh Gibson, Ty Cobb, Ted Williams, etc.
• I am in favor of maintaining a single table at List of Major League Baseball career batting average leaders that reflects the career batting average leaders as recognized by Major League Baseball. Most of the players in such a list had careers that ended well before Major League Baseball came to exist in 2000, so further highlighting which league(s) the batters played in seems relevant and helpful. I don't see a need to cease recognizing the difference between AL and NL past 2000, as clearly the American League and National League still exist as definable entities from a statistical point of view, and there are still independent award winners (e.g. Cy Young and MVP) for many awards on an annual basis.
• There may still be some differences (discrepancies) between sources as currently noted at List of Major League Baseball career batting average leaders due to "primarily due to differences in minimums needed to qualify (number of games played or plate appearances), or differences in early baseball records." The article should be clear on what source(s) have been used for the table (Baseball-Reference.com is currently cited).

Thanks. Dmoore5556 (talk) 19:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I have put together a couple of possible table formats based on suggestions from earlier. We also need to work out what the intro should say, and whose photo(s) should appear at the top.: Jhn31 (talk) 00:57, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I've now added a fourth potential table, which keeps the same format, but indicates the players who played in the Negro Leagues. The text of the article could give additional context to state when and why these players were added to the leaderboard. I don't necessarily advocate for this, because I still think it may imply that these players are less authentically "MLB" as the others on the list, but it's worth consideration. Jhn31 (talk) 03:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I think the order of importance for the three possible category additions is seasons played, teams played, then league. Maybe use the 1st table (with "Team (League abbr.)",) but season has its own row, whether that's per team, or it's simply overall (for ex. Josh Gibson's would say "1930, 1933–1940, 1942–1946").

Also, having each team in a different box (rather than multiple lines in one box) can enable the ability to sort by team if we make the table sortable. Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 05:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't think teams is necessary at all. It's certainly not as important as leagues if one wants to understand the eras and leagues for which the player participated. Nemov (talk) 12:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Honestly, I think the best bet is to keep it like it is, but update it to match the official MLB top 100. Readers can click on player articles if they want more context on what specific teams and leagues. Jhn31 (talk) 05:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Collapsing long back and forth

The non-team team is a lot cleaner and I don't think there needs to be a seperate NL and AL unless we're talking about the NL before the World Series. The NL and AL are MLB. Nemov (talk) 01:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC) All of these leagues are "MLB" according to the primary and secondary sources though. We shouldn't imply that the players from the major Negro Leagues are less authentically "MLB" than the American League and National League players, since that is not the position of the sources, and I think labeling AL/NL players as "MLB" and Negro Leaguers with a different label makes that implication. Jhn31 (talk) 01:50, 30 May 2024 (UTC) I'm not implying anything is less authentic. Again, quit putting words in other editor's mouths. MLB is a baseball league that plays for the World Series. It is a major league as are several other leagues that have played for other titles. MLB is a major league that just happens to be named "Major League Baseball." Nemov (talk) 02:06, 30 May 2024 (UTC) I am not putting words in anyone's mouths. If we list American and National Leaguers as "MLB" and Negro Leaguers by the name of their specific leagues, many readers would infer (better?) that Gibson, Charleston, etc., aren't really Major Leaguers, but that is not the position of the source material - those sources used across all of the MLB articles now present those players as MLB players in the same sense that Cobb, Hornsby, and Jackson were MLB players. I believe Wikipedia rules require us to align the pages here to that source material. Jhn31 (talk) 02:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC) I don't agree with your speculation. Readers would simply see the leagues that the players have played in over the years. By definition all of these leagues are considered major. All of which are major league which matches the sources. Your solution is confusing. Nemov (talk) 02:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC) Here is an example. Go to MLB.com (1926). If you choose "MLB" you see 32 teams listed, not just AL and NL. So rolling up only AL and NL into "MLB" while using ECL and NNL for the other leagues recognized as "major" is out of sync with the source material and is likely to confuse some readers. I do think it would be appropriate to clearly state that MLB only decided to consider these leagues as part of MLB in 2020 and did not formally add them to the records book until 2024, so that readers get the full context of why the records are shown like this now when they previously were not. We really don't seem like we're that far apart in our suggestions here - I just don't think we should roll up only AL and NL into "MLB" while leaving the others separate. I have no objection to rolling up all of the leagues, or rolling up none of the leagues. We could also implement the Baseball Reference method of just labeling it "Major Leagues" through 1999 and only using "MLB" at all for 2000 and later, if we think that's not overly pedantic. Jhn31 (talk) 02:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC) The 2000 thing just muddies the waters even more. If we don't match how their build a table it doesn't mean we aren't aligned with sources. It just means we made a less confusing table. Nemov (talk) 02:42, 30 May 2024 (UTC) I added a third table down there that shows your suggestion as I understand it. Do I have it right? And if so, do you really think readers will not infer that Gibson and Charleston's status as MLB players is less legitimate than Cobb and Hornsby? To be clear - I'm not putting words in your mouth or attacking you or attributing any motivation to you (and it was never my intention to do that to you or anyone else), I just think that I would probably infer that if I saw the table. Jhn31 (talk) 02:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC) I modified the label to spell out "Major league. We maintain this project to educate readers and it's important for us to be correctx. MLB has elevated these other leagues as major professional leagues, but "MLB" is the name of the league where the NL and AL play. Nemov (talk) 03:00, 30 May 2024 (UTC) If you'll bear with me a minute, I would like to present an example from another sport: List of New Orleans Pelicans seasons and List of Charlotte Hornets seasons. The Charlotte Hornets moved to New Orleans in 2002 and became the New Orleans Hornets. In 2004, a new Charlotte team, the Bobcats was founded. Back in the 2000s, these articles existed, and the New Orleans Hornets seasons article included the history in Charlotte, and the Charlotte Bobcats seasons article only went back to 2004. Then in 2014, after the New Orleans Hornets changed its name to the Pelicans, and the Charlotte Bobcats became the Hornets, it was decided that the Charlotte Hornets would inherit take over the records and history of the previous Charlotte Hornets, and the New Orleans Pelicans history would only start in 2002. So even though the original Charlotte Hornets franchise is the same entity that is now the New Orleans Hornets, the NBA pretends (I don't mean that in a loaded way, but I think it's accurate) that there is a single New Orleans franchise once called the Hornets and now called the Pelicans, and a single Charlotte franchise once called the Hornets, was inactive for 2 years, called the Bobcats for a while, and is now called the Hornets again. So why did I type all of that? Because I think it's a similar situation. The NBA has decided to "change history" (again, I don't mean that in a loaded way) and retroactively recognize the original Charlotte Hornets as part of the modern Charlotte Hornets history, rather than part of the New Orleans Hornets history. And Wikipedia goes along with it, because that's what the official NBA records say. No, the original Charlotte Hornets were initially not considered to be a part of the modern Charlotte franchise's history, but the NBA made that change retroactively, and Wikipedia followed the source. Similarly, MLB for many years did not consider the Negro Leagues part of its official history, but now it does, and I think Wikipedia should follow the source. Again, I think we're basically in agreement here - unless I'm mistaken, I don't think either of us is arguing against the inclusion of Gibson, Charleston, etc., from this page altogether like some people are - we're just ironing how the details of how it's going to be presented. As long as MLB.com and Baseball Reference consider the NNL, ECL, ANL, etc., to under the umbrella of "MLB" in the same sense that the American and National Leagues were back then, I think Wikipedia not only should go along with, but Wikipedia has to, because there is no source that says otherwise. Jhn31 (talk) 03:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC) I went to school in Charlotte and I'm familiar with that situation which isn't at all like this situation. No one is pretending. Each of these major leagues has a name. Calling each league by its proper name is logical. Nemov (talk) 03:30, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

All well and good, but Josh Gibson's page lists his overall Negro League batting average as .359 (and he didn't reach the 3,000 at-bats required for the list). How did this get moved up to .373? Randy Kryn (talk) 12:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

MLB has different requirements than Baseball-Reference, which uses the 3,000 at-bats requirement. MLB is considering the fact that the Negro Leagues had, per season, roughly 60–80 games per season, as opposed to the NL & AL's 154/162. MLB's current standard is actually 5,000 at-bats and 2,000 innings pitched for career leaderboards, which in their logic, is roughly equivalent to 10 full qualifying seasons (so 5,020 at-bats and 1,620 innings). For the Negro League players, they're scaling this to what 10 full qualifying, 60-game seasons of Negro Leagues would be, which they've set the standard to 1,800 at-bats and 600 innings. The logic they use to establish 60-games as the standard, is the 2020 COVID season, as well as the NL 1877 & 1878 seasons. This is a good read on MLB's website to get an idea of their logic. Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 13:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Spesh531. Even if the games and at-bats are adjusted, the batting average wouldn't be changed. On Jose Gibson's Wikipedia page there are two different lifetime batting averages (.362 in the text and .359 in the stats table), both a long way from .373. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

MLB career batting average leaders

Rank	Player	BA	Team(s)
1	Josh Gibson *	.373	Memphis Red Sox (NNL), 1930 Pittsburgh Crawfords (NNL), 1933–1936 Homestead Grays (NNL), 1937–1940, 1942–1946
2	Ty Cobb *	.366	Detroit Tigers (AL), 1905–1926 Philadelphia Athletics (AL), 1927–1928
3	Oscar Charleston *	.364	Indianapolis ABCs (NNL), 1920, 1922–1923 St. Louis Giants (NNL), 1921 Harrisburg Giants (ECL), 1924–1927 Hilldale Club (ANL), 1929 Homestead Grays (ANL), 1929 Pittsburgh/Toledo/Indianapolis Crawfords (NNL / NAL), 1933–1940 Philadelphia Stars (NNL), 1941
4	Rogers Hornsby *	.358	St. Louis Cardinals (NL), 1915–1926, 1933 New York Giants (NL), 1927 Boston Braves (NL), 1928 Chicago Cubs (NL), 1929–1932 St. Louis Browns (AL), 1933–1937
5	Shoeless Joe Jackson	.3556	Philadelphia Athletics (AL), 1908–1909 Cleveland Naps/Indians (AL), 1910–1915 Chicago White Sox (AL), 1915–1920

MLB career batting average leaders

Rank	Player	BA	League(s)
1	Josh Gibson *	.373	NNL1, NNL2
2	Ty Cobb *	.366	AL
3	Oscar Charleston *	.364	NNL1, ECL, ANL, NNL2, NAL
4	Rogers Hornsby *	.358	NL, AL
5	Shoeless Joe Jackson	.356	AL

Major league career batting average leaders

Rank	Player	BA	League(s)
1	Josh Gibson *	.373	NNL1, NNL2
2	Ty Cobb *	.366	MLB
3	Oscar Charleston *	.364	NNL1, ECL, ANL, NNL2, NAL
4	Rogers Hornsby *	.358	MLB
5	Shoeless Joe Jackson	.356	MLB

Rank	Rank among leaders in career batting average. A blank field indicates a tie.
Player	Name of the player.
BA	Total career batting average.
*	Denotes elected to National Baseball Hall of Fame.
Bold	Denotes players who only played in the Negro Leagues between 1920 and 1948.
Bold	Denotes active player.

Rank	Player	BA
1	Josh Gibson *	.372
2	Ty Cobb *	.367
3	Oscar Charleston *	.363
4	Rogers Hornsby *	.358
5	Jud Wilson *	.350
6	Turkey Stearnes *	.348
7	Ed Delahanty *	.346
8	Buck Leonard *	.345
9	Tris Speaker *	.345
10	Ted Williams *	.344

Supposed "ties" within the table

I've noticed several players are listed as having the same, 4 digit batting average, so they're listed as tied (such as Billy Hamilton and Ted Williams being tied for 10th). I can see it's from the Baseball-Reference source, as they show these ties, but we have the hits & at-bat data to determine tie-breakers here, using Baseball-Reference's own data:

Rank	Player	BA
10	Billy Hamilton *	.3444
11	Ted Williams *	.3444

Billy Hamilton has 2164 hits and 6283 at-bats, resulting in a .34442145 batting average.
Ted Williams has 2654 hits and 7706 at-bats, resulting in a .34440696 batting average.

This should result in Billy Hamilton at 10th and Ted Williams at 11th. Can we go ahead and make these changes? For those that look tied at 4 digits, we could add a hover with the number of digits needed to show the tie-breaker. Spesh531^{(talk, contrib., ext.)} 13:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)