Is the Pursuit of Home Runs Killing Batting Average? Join the Debate! 

Kenny Lofton recently sparked a debate about the current state of baseball and the value placed on batting averages versus home runs. He argues that the financial incentives in the game are skewed towards power hitters, which discourages young players from focusing on hitting for average. This raises an interesting question: should MLB teams start rewarding players who excel in batting average and on-base percentage as much as they do for home runs?

Lofton suggests that if a player could command a $20-$30 million salary for hitting .340, it might shift the focus back to a more balanced approach to hitting. But is that realistic in today's game? With the current emphasis on launch angles and power, can we expect a resurgence of the contact hitter?

Moreover, how do you think this trend affects the overall strategy of teams? Are we witnessing a shift towards a more one-dimensional game where strikeouts and home runs dominate, or is there still room for the classic small ball approach?

Let’s also consider the implications for fantasy baseball. If batting average becomes more valued, how should we adjust our draft strategies? Are there under-the-radar players who could benefit from this potential shift in focus?

I’d love to hear your thoughts on Lofton’s perspective. Do you agree with his assessment? What bold predictions do you have for the future of hitting in MLB? Let’s discuss!