Over at the Hardball Times there was an interesting look at some baseball numbers. They estimated the number of games that it takes for a stat to become significant. Or, in their words....

"...'When is it real?' That is, how many games does it take to know that a player's surprising stats are for real instead of a statistical fluke? Here's his answer:

Stat Games to significance
Runs 100
HR 50
RBI 50
SB 30
BA N/A

Now, David used a simple measure to calculate his significance threshold (an R-squared of 50%), but at least there was a method behind his madness. And the interesting thing is how few games it takes for a stolen base total to become a leading indicator, yet how long it takes big changes in batting average to become meaningful. In a word: never."

I found it interesting that big changes in BA are almost impossible. A player may have a standout year, but overall he will fall back to his career average. Remember John Olerud, and his run at .400 in 1994? That year he batted .363, he is a career .295 hitter. Other than '94 and '98, his BA was somewhere in that .295 range.

There has been some talk about Jeter's slow start. Of course its Celizic saying it so....anyway, Jeter is a career .317 hitter, so I expect that once the season is over, his batting average will be somewhere in that range. After all batting average is just that, the average number of times a player will hit safely. There is a lot of luck involved in having a good BA, if you can put the ball into play a lot, luck will go your way sooner or later. Jeter has only struck out 5 times in 63 at bats this season, and he IS hitting .323 with a .391 OBP. So...I guess he is not off to such a slow start after all. Maybe compared to ARod he is, but then so is the entire league.