Right now, Freddie Freeman is leading the league with a .302 average. The National League has been in existence since 1876, and the lowest batting average for a league leader has been .313 (1988, Tony Gwynn).
.302 would not be the MLB record for the lowest by any league leader. Yaz led the American League with .301 in 1968. In that 1968 AL season, .274 was good enough to make the top ten. As low as current batting averages have fallen, it still takes about .290 to make the top ten.
Despite the decline of contact hitting, major league teams still score more runs (4.44 per team per game) than they did in the “second deadball era” from 1963 to 1992. Batting averages are lower now than in that era, despite the fact that pitchers no longer bat 1, but slugging averages are higher now, and the base-stealing game is more efficient.
Footnote #1:
In that era, pitchers batted:
1963-1992 in the NL
1963-1972 in the AL
It’s all about power and getting on base. The more you get on base, the more runs you score. Power gives you multiple runs with one swing. And yes, the rule changes allowing stolen bases to be had easier has led to more runs also.
Sports are about power. In baseball it’s homeruns and doubles. Football is about explosive plays (20+yards), which is why it’s very hard to win at the highest levels without good to great Wide Reciever play. Basketball is about the 3-point shot. I don’t know what the hockey equivalent would be, if there is one.
Tennis is all about power serves and spin. All golfers drive the ball well over 300 yards off the tee.
It should be about both of those things in theory, but really it has been all about power. People give lip service to OBP, but if you compare today to the second deadball era, you find that more runs are scored now simply because of slugging (and another less significant factor I’ll get to below).
1969 .248/.320/.369 runs 4.07 singles 6.11 walks 3.45
2025 .246/.316/.404 runs 4.44 singles 5.40 walks 3.18
The decline in walks is entirely due to the nearly complete disappearance of the intentional walk as a strategy
Non-intentional walks:
1969 3.08
2025 3.06
It is indeed about doubles and homers. Comparing those same two years, doubles are up about 30%, homers more than 40%. Since the total number of hits is nearly identical in those two years, those missing singles have been replaced by doubles and homers. The measurement that Bill James calls “isolated power” (slugging average minus batting average) has risen from .121 to .158. That 30% increase has completely altered the character of the game. Isolated power is higher in recent years than it was in the high-scoring 1920s and 30s. Even the crazy years like 1894, 1930 and 1961 did not approach that level. (That stat peaked in 2019. 2025 is the 14th highest of all time. All of the top 26 have occurred since the end of “second deadball.”)
You’ll note that run-scoring is up about 9% compared to 1969, but the OPS is only up 4.5%, although they are supposed to be closely correlated. Why is that?
Two reasons.
One of the reasons is simply a mathematical flaw in OPS. OPS is a handy stat that was created because addition is easier than multiplication. In reality, the number of runs scored is directly correlated to on-base TIMES slugging, not on-base PLUS slugging. OxS is up 8.1% from 1969 to 2025, thus accounting for almost all of the increase in run scoring.
The remaining one percent comes from other things that avoid giving up outs. In addition to the obvious benefits of converting singles into extra-base hits, there is a hidden, ancillary offensive benefit to the decline in singles and intentional walks: double plays are at the lowest point since that became an official stat. That, coupled with the decline in the number of runners caught stealing, and the decline of sacrifice bunts, means that the number of runs scored was able to rise faster than it would from OxS alone. Compared to 1969, those three factors save an additional half of an out per team per game.
But really, ignoring all the minor factors, you hit the nail on the head when you said it’s all about doubles and homers.
I’d disagree with your assessment of golf. More than the other games you mentioned, golf is about accuracy, not power. Accurate drives, accurate approaches, accurate chips and putts. (And, of course, strategic angles.)
Frankly, almost everyone can hit the ball about the same distance, even random mid-handicap amateurs. Even old men. That’s not where scoring happens. When I was a mediocre golfer in my prime, I could hit the ball as far as the average PGA tour pro (although not as far as Tiger or Daly). YouTuber Micah Morris recently beat Rory in a driving contest. Scottie was 70th on the tour in driving distance last year, but is clearly dominating the game.
Oh, how I know this myself. I have always outdriven my friends by 30 yards or more, only to hand over a few bucks at the end of the round. Many is the par five I’ve made in two, only to tie the hole to somebody still chipping on his fourth shot.
That’s not to say that power is unimportant. Bryson is often hitting two or three less clubs into the green than the average pro. That doesn’t guarantee a W, but it sure doesn’t hurt!
Fair point about golf