There are some special benchmark numbers in baseball that have come to have special meaning. For a career, such numbers might be 300 wins for a pitcher or 3000 hits for a position player; for a single season, the benchmark numbers might be a .400 batting average or 50 homeruns.

How sharply does our awe disappear when a player is just slightly short of these magical plateau numbers? For example, is 2% under the benchmark most significant for

So I ask you:

How sharply does our awe disappear when a player is just slightly short of these magical plateau numbers? For example, is 2% under the benchmark most significant for

**(.392 average instead of .400); or for***batting average***(49 instead of 50);or for***homeruns in a season***for position player (2940 instead of 3000) or***career hits***for a pitcher (294 instead of 300)?***career wins*So I ask you:

**For which of these metrics is a 2% shortfall from a "holy standard" perceived to be most significant?**
## Comment