[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well wasn't one of the main reasons Bonds's average was so high precisely because of the fact he walked 200 times?

[/ QUOTE ]

Average has nothing to do with the Bonds triple crown equasion. He couldn't win because it's impssible to lead the league in RBI when you are walked virtually every time there is an RBI opportunity. Losing those AB's doesn't help his average nearly as much (if at all) as it hurts his ability to hit HR's and knock in runs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with everything you said. But I wasn't talking about his HR/RBI totals at all. I was just responding to Clark's contention that he would have won it if he hadn't been walked 200 times. His average was high because of the walks. If he didn't walk as much, his HR/RBI totals would surely have increased, at the expense of some batting average points.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not enough BA points to cost him the crown that year. He had a massive BA lead and a miniscule HR RBI deficit.