Lance Berkman is the New Jeff Bagwell

If Berkman follows the examples set forth by Baggs and Craig Biggio, and stays with the 'Stros his entire career, he may very well equal Bagwell, but he'll have to stay healthy and productive.  As I said, I hope he does.

While looking at how many years it'd take Berkman to get to landmark  at-bats, I saw over two seasons to get 5000 at bats; and suddenly I thought "Craig Biggio has 3000 hits and it'll more than 2 years for Berkman to have career at-bats twice that."

Then I noticed your projected hits for Berkman and the actual for Bagwell leave them 700 hits shy of Craig Biggio's 3000+.

We could go on, like Berkman would have to bat .300 for the rest of his career and even if did not go on the DL he'd have to play until he's 43 years old to approach 3000 hits.

And Berkman arguably is the best hitter on the team (okay -arguments can be made for Hunter Pence and Carlos Lee).

mind boggling.

G=1748
R=1123
H=1832
HR=392
RBI=1238

and James projects the standard error in his estimating at plus or minus 4%.  His formulas would suggest that Berkman has very little, if any, chance of achieving the 2000 hit plateau.  Unfortunately for those of us who really enjoy watching him, he has, according to James, only about 5 more years before he will have achieved 90% of his output.  And this also assumes no major time lost to injuries.

Why is that, I'm wondering?  

Well, because Bagwell has a greater ab/g ratio than Berkman, 3.62 to 3.48.  Bagwell averaged more at bats per game than Berkman.

OK, but why is that?

the first thing you think of is that Berkman walks (slightly) more than Bagwell did, so as walks go up, AB's go down.  

They do, but Bagwell still holds an advantage in pa/g, where you account for the walks, and the hits by pitches and all the rest.  The numbers there are closer, at 4.38 for Baggy to 4.20 for Puma, but still.

My thinking is that both players spent the majority of their careers batting third, so lineup position doesn't explain it.

The difference becomes even more pronounced when you consider that the Astros averaged fewer plate appearances overall during Bagwell's tenure than they have in Berkman's.  The average yearly PA's for the Astros  since 1999 when Berkman debuted has been 6308.  During Bagwell's tenure, 1991 - 2005, they were 6134, a difference of 174.  So all other things being equal, Berkman should have had 174/9 or approximately 20 MORE plate yearly appearances than Bagwell.  

This might be all trivial BS, except for the one explanation I can think of:  that Bagwell was a Gold Glove first baseman, and would not be removed late in games for a defensive replacement.  We know Lance is a pretty good defensive player, but he's not Gold Glove either, and we know he is removed late in games, we see it.

In trying to figure the legacy of both players, this is probably something that should be factored in.  Lance is an offensive force, but even beyond the park factors mentioned above, there are reasons to suggest Bags is the better player, and I hope you found this as interesting as I did, coz I know it was long.